Deeper Commentary
1Ki 11:1 Now king Solomon loved many foreign women, together with the
daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians,
and Hittites-
Solomon's desire for such a huge number of women, especially
foreign women, must be understood in the context of why kings or great men
married many wives. They did so in order to build up their own "house",
and in Solomon's case he clearly desired to have a huge multi-national
house / family to continue his name. He totally and willfully
misunderstood the promises to David, and wished to establish himself as
the Messianic seed who would build a huge and eternal "house" of people.
But that seed was to be God's begotten Son, born after David "slept with
his fathers". Solomon's plan failed. We read of only one son of his,
Rehoboam. No other sons are mentioned. We read of two sons-in-law. And
that's it. That's all we hear of his [possibly] 2000 kids. Each of the
1000 women must have produced at least one child. We note that Rehobam his
son had eighteen wives and sixty concubines and fathered
twenty-eight sons and sixty
daughters; an average of over one child / wife (2 Chron. 11:21). The amount of food
required for the palace per day, listed earlier in the account, is
appropriate for a king with 1000 wives and say 2000 children. But this
"house" he was building came to nothing. The countries of origin of his
wives, especially Egypt, turned against Israel. And his wives turned him
away from Yahweh.
We read of how he married women from Egypt and the other surrounding nations; LXX adds Syrian and Amorite wives. But we will go on to read how it was exactly all those nations that supported his adversaries and were a thorn in his side throughout his reign. His marriages didn't succeed politically, and certainly they didn't enable him to establish a multi-ethnic eternal kingdom of God with him as the ruler. His entire attempt to establish such a kingdom is portrayed here as a miserable failure- just as all attempts to get the kingdom now will fail. We are living now for the future Kingdom, not trying to create it through our own houses or achievements. 1 Kings 11:24,25 shows that Solomon was surrounded by enemies, he lost Damascus and Hadad an anti-Solomon king reigned there; "and he was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon", which means right from the start of Solomon's reign. So what then are we to make of the descriptions of Solomon as reigning peacefully over the land promised to Abraham? I suggest this is a case of focalization and perspective. We are being told that this was how Solomon made it appear. Just as the function of the Queen of Sheba's visit is to show us how Solomon made things appear. This was all how he wanted to perceive it; but the record leaves us to join the dots and see a quite different picture in reality. And so with all those for whom it seems it all worked out to have a fantastic 'kingdom of God' style life now- they present it as if it did, it might appear to have worked out for them, whilst most admit they wasted their lives trying to attain it. But even for those for whom it appeared to work out- it didn't. Just as it didn't for Solomon. It never does and never can do.
We ponder how it can be stressed that Solomon "loved" his 1000
wives. This is just psychologically impossible. I suggest again this is a
case of perspective and focalisation. This is what Solomon liked to think
and the appearance he gave.
Yet at the very time he was marrying them, he wrote in his wisdom that
the words of wisdom would preserve / keep / defend a Jewish man from being
damaged by them (Prov. 2:16; 6:24; 7:5). The connection would seem to
suggest that Solomon reasoned that because he had wisdom, because he had
'the truth', he could therefore enjoy these "strange women" without them
corrupting his heart; because
he had wisdom. Thus he
thought that mere possession of Divine truth was some kind of insurance
policy against moral sin being counted to him. And so many have gone down
this road; so many who knew more true theology than many have at the same
time made an awful mess of their personal lives, just as Solomon did. This
is why the higher one goes in the echelons of Christian organizations, the
greater the learning and knowledge a person has, the more powerful is the
tendency towards gross hypocrisy in moral terms. The point is, of course,
that all the knowledge of God which we quite rightly seek after must be
personally applied. The very possession of it and teaching of it
to others can of itself make a man or woman demotivated to personally
apply it.
1Ki 11:2 of the nations concerning which Yahweh said to the children of
Israel, You shall not go among them, neither shall they come among you; for
surely they will turn away your heart after their gods. Solomon joined to
these in love-
The implication is that Solomon took
those wives thinking 'Well, I know the law says they will surely turn away
my heart, but actually they won't, I can handle it'; and he didn't handle
it. Solomon seems to have realized, in the bitterness of Ecclesiastes,
that he had made the same mistake as Samson: "I find more bitter than
death [i.e. it would be better to be dead than be in this position] the
woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso
pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her"
(Ecc. 7:26). The Song of Solomon has Solomon admitting that
he has been "taken" by the beauty of that Gentile girl. He utterly refuses
to personalize God's truth. These were surely Samson's thoughts in those eyeless weeks in
Gaza: better to have died than to have been snared by Gentile women.
Solomon "clave unto these in love", surely alluding to God's definition of marriage as a leaving father and
mother and cleaving to a wife. Solomon really loved
those women; they weren't just political strings to his bow. They would
not have turned away his heart if they were only
political relationships. 1000 seems a rather exorbitant
number of political alliances to have in any case. And Ecc.
2:8 RV says that Solomon sought “the delights of the sons of men,
concubines of all sorts”. He took sex to its maximum extent- he had every
possible type of woman in his harem. Every hair colour, size, type.
“Whatsoever mine eyes desired [this is language elsewhere used about
sexual desire] I kept not from them” (Ecc. 2:10). And yet still, he never
found one… counting one by one, as he put it: "Behold, this have I
found, saith the preacher, counting one by one, to find out the
account: Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a
thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found" (Ecc.
7:27,28). If ever there is a warning
against immorality, it is here. The more relationships one has- and our
world glorifies this- the less ultimate satisfaction there can be. God’s
way has to be best.
1Ki 11:3 He had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred
concubines; and his wives turned away his heart-
"Princesses" means they were all of noble birth. International
marriages were nearly always limited to royal families. Solomon married
into the nobility of the surrounding nations, and yet he actually "loved"
them in that he was also emotionally involved with them. Yet this didn't
work out politically, because those nations all attacked Israel soon
afterwards. This lack of self examination and confidence that he could not
spiritually fail is reflected in 1 Kings 11:2,3, where we are reminded
that God had said that foreign wives would "surely... turn away your heart
after their gods". How "surely" this would happen was not believed by
Solomon. "He had seven hundred wives... and his wives turned away his
heart". He started marrying these foreign wives when he was young;
presumably he reasoned that they could never turn away his heart
because he was the Son of David, the Messianic King. In Prov. 6:27 he
soberly warns against the strange (i.e. Gentile) woman, observing that a
man cannot take this kind of fire into his bosom and not be burned by it.
Yet this is exactly what he was doing at the time he wrote that. His
public removal of his Egyptian wife from the house of David " because the
places are holy" (2 Chron. 8:11) is therefore to be seen as spiritual
pride, appearing to do the right thing, when his heart was far from it.
Solomon's heart was "turned away", or 'influenced' by his wives towards
idols (1 Kings 11:3). Yet Solomon uses this very idea of the heart being
turned or influenced in Prov. 2:2; 22:17 about the need to turn our hearts
towards God's word. He taught, but did the very opposite. And perhaps
Prov. 21:1 explains why he did this- he says there that Yahweh turns the
heart of the King wherever He wishes- and so perhaps he thought that
control of our thinking and inclinations is unnecessary, because somehow
God will do it for us. And there's a lesson there for us, who may assume
at times that God will somehow control our hearts for us, rather than our
making a conscious effort towards mind control.
1Ki 11:4 For it happened, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away
his heart after other gods; and his heart was not perfect with Yahweh his
God, as was the heart of David his father-
"Turned away" is the word used by Solomon in warning his son about the
dangers of bad women: "With persuasive words she led him astray" (Prov.
7:21).
"Led him astray" is the very term used of how Solomon's wives turned
his heart astray from God (1 Kings 11:4,9). The more Solomon knew Divine
truth, the more he seems to have considered himself free to ignore it and in
fact do the very opposite. He clearly thought that mere possession of that
truth was the basis for his justification, and dismissed any idea of self
examination or awareness that he might in fact personally fail in obedience.
God said that He accepted the temple not so much as a place to dwell in (as Solomon assumed it was) but as a place facilitating sacrifice, prayer etc., for the glorification of His Name through these things; He emphasized that He dwelt amongst His people (1 Kings 6:13; 2 Chron. 7:12-16). There are several other places where God’s response to Solomon’s words seems to be corrective rather than affirmatory. Thus Solomon says that God will hear the prayers of His people because the temple is called by God’s Name; but God’s response is that “my people, which are called by my name” would pray to Him themselves and be heard, quite apart from the temple (2 Chron. 6:33 cp. 7:14). He sees them as bearing His Name rather than the temple building, as Solomon perceived it. God goes on to parallel the temple and His people in 2 Chron. 7:21,22, saying that if He punishes the temple He will punish the people. Solomon seems to have thought that the temple would still stand favourably in God’s eyes even if the people were punished. The record records that the temple was “perfected” whereas Solomon’s heart wasn’t perfect [s.w.] (1 Kings 11:4 cp. 2 Chron. 8:16).
There are copious connections between Solomon's writings:
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song; and also between
then and the historical record of his life. These serve to
demonstrate how he clearly contradicted the principles of the Gospel
which he taught both to Israel and the world. One of the
clearest examples of this is in
Prov. 7:16,17,
which describes the bed of the strange (i.e. Gentile) woman with which she
allures the simple young Israelite: "I have decked my bed with
coverings of tapestry, with carved works, with fine linen of
Egypt. I have perfumed my bed with
myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon". Yet these are
the very descriptions of the bed Solomon shared
with Miss Egypt (Song 3:6-10). The young man's heart was made
to go astray because of her (Prov. 7:25), and her house led him to
death (Prov. 7:27). Miss Egypt caused Solomon's heart to go
astray (1 Kings 11:1-4), he built her a house, and her house became an
idol temple which destroyed Solomon's faith. Yet Solomon
warned the young men of Israel all about this in Prov. 7; and
he even pointed out that such a woman would have all the outward
trappings of Yahweh worship; she would claim an
enthusiasm for keeping peace offerings and vows
(Prov. 7:14). Solomon was the young man whose picture he
was painting. In Ecc. 9:12 he says that he suffered the
fate of all men in that soon he would die, he would suddenly be
caught like a bird in a snare, although he knew not his time.
These are the very ideas of Prov. 7:23 concerning the snaring
of the simple young man by the Gentile woman: "As a bird hasteth to
the snare, and knoweth not that it is for his life".
1Ki 11:5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians,
and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites-
Solomon went off to other gods because his heart was not "perfect", not
at peace [Heb.- not at
shalom] with the one true God- so says 1 Kings
11:4,5. We see here the upward spiral of spirituality- knowing we are
forgiven, being comfortable and at peace with God, means we will not go
after the idols of this world. For there is an endless searching for peace
in the human heart. If we don't accept the forgiveness and peace that can
from God alone, we will seek peace in false ways. And that's just what
Solomon did- for all his wisdom, he didn't personally know peace with God.
Head knowledge doesn't give peace- for that is experiential.
1Ki 11:6 Solomon did that which was evil in the sight of Yahweh, and
didn’t go fully after Yahweh, as did David his father-
Solomon didn't go "fully" after Yahweh (1 Kings 11:6)- and yet this
same Hebrew word is often on his lips in describing how God has
"fulfilled" His promises to David through Solomon. Thus he saw the
promises of God as some kind of unconditional offer of blessing- rather
than grasping that their fulfillments to us actually demand a 'fulfillment'
from us. So for all Solomon's references to the promises to David, he
didn't see that they required something from him. And we can be so very
similar, knowing God's promises and rejoicing in their fulfillment,
without perceiving that this of itself requires response from us.
Having spoken of the need to tolerate our brother, the Lord Jesus
repeated His common theme: that there is no third road: "For a good tree
brings not forth corrupt fruit; neither does a corrupt tree bring forth
good fruit" (Lk. 6:41-43). There's no third position. Either we love our
brother, and bring forth good fruit; or we don't get down to it, and bring
forth bad fruit. We can't sometimes bring forth good, sometimes bad. At
heart, we are either loving or selfishly hateful. Anything less than
following Yahweh with all our heart is seen as doing evil in His eyes (1
Kings 11:6).
1Ki 11:7 Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of
Moab, on the mountain that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech the
abomination of the children of Ammon-
Solomon could calmly warn others in
Prov. 5:8 "don't go near the house of the Gentile woman". But he built his
Gentile woman a house and then a house for her gods.
The mount "before Jerusalem" is how the mount of Olives is
elsewhere described. Hence it is called "the Mount of Corruption" (2 Kings
23:13). The mount of Olives faces the temple mount, so Solomon was as it
were provoking Yahweh by this.
What a contrast with Ps. 125:2 "As the mountains surround Jerusalem, so Yahweh surrounds His people from this time forth and forever". The hills around Jerusalem are not huge mountains. They are small hills, and this is the picture of God's protection; not hugely visible, but there. But the mountains around Jerusalem became the "high places" of idolatry (1 Kings 11:7; 2 Kings 23:13; 2 Chron. 21:11); what should have been the symbols of Yahweh's protection became perverted.
1Ki 11:8 So he did for all his foreign wives, who burnt incense and
sacrificed to their gods-
1Ki 11:9 Yahweh was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned away
from Yahweh, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice-
As noted on Ps. 119:36; 141:4, David believed
that God could act deep within the psychology or heart of man, to incline
us toward righteousness and away from evil. This is how the Holy Spirit
works today. Solomon believed the same (s.w. 1 Kings 8:58), but only in
theory; for his Gentile wives inclined or turned away his heart from God
(s.w. 1 Kings 11:3,9). God will not turn our hearts anywhere we ourselves
don't want to go. Solomon often appeals for us to incline our hearts to
wisdom (s.w. Prov. 2:2; 4:20; 5:1; 22:17), but he himself was inclined to
apostasy (s.w. 1 Kings 11:3,9). All his emphasis is upon the need to
incline ourselves, whereas his father David trusted in the work of the
Spirit to incline his heart to good and away from evil (Ps. 141:4; 119:36
etc.).
1Ki 11:10 and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not
go after other gods: but he didn’t keep that which Yahweh commanded-
God is clearly stating that Solomon had failed to meet the conditions
required for him to be the Messianic son of David according to the
promises of 2 Sam. 7. This made all Solomon's reasoning about the nature
of the temple null and void. Not keeping that which was commanded by
Yahweh is the language of the breaking of the covenant in Dt. 28:45, and
therefore "all these curses shall come upon you". But by grace they didn't
come upon Solomon, because of God's great respect for his father David.
Considering the extent of God's wrath with Solomon (:9), this of itself
reflects the high opinion God had of David. His various out of character
failures did not ultimately change God's very high and fond opinion of a
man who gave his heart to Him.
1Ki 11:11 Therefore Yahweh said to Solomon, Because this is done by you,
and you have not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded
you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you, and will give it to your
servant-
The same punishment which came upon Saul was to come upon Solomon
(s.w. 1 Sam. 15:28). And yet Solomon's Proverbs are full of indirect
allusions to Saul, presenting him as the archetypical fool. Now, Solomon
is told that he will suffer the same fate as Saul.
Solomon's prophetic sonship of David was conditional upon him preserving or observing Yahweh's ways (1 Kings 2:4; 1 Chron. 22:13; 2 Chron. 7:17); but he didn't preserve nor observe them (1 Kings 11:10,11); despite David praying that Solomon would be given a heart to observe them (1 Chron. 29:19). We can pray for God to work upon the hearts of others, but He will not force people against their own deepest will and heart position. Solomon stresses overmuch how God would keep or preserve the righteous (Prov. 2:8; 3:26), without recognizing the conditional aspect of this. Why did Solomon go wrong? His Proverbs are true enough, but he stresses that obedience to his wisdom and teaching would preserve his hearers (Prov. 4:4; 6:22; 7:1; 8:32; 15:5), preservation was through following the example of the wise (Prov. 2:20); rather than stressing obedience to God's ways, and replacing David his father's simple love of God with a love of academic wisdom: "Yahweh preserves all those who love Him" (Ps. 145:20).
Solomon muses in Ecclesiastes as to how he has seen servants as kings, as an example of how futile life is. He surely alludes to this threatened judgment upon him- that much of his own kingdom will be given to his servant. But he shrugs it off, just like people shrug off judgment to come and hide behind 'life is pointless, nothing really matters' in their weak moments, and as is glorified in popular art.
There is a Hebraism whereby something being 'with' someone means they have an intention to do something. Thus "This is done by you" (1 Kings 11:11) is literally "Forasmuch as this is with you". Job 10:13 likewise: "And these things hast thou hid in thine heart, I know that this is with thee" (see too Job 9:35). Likewise in Jn. 1:2, the word was "with" God not literally but in the sense of a plan and intention being "with" a person.
1Ki 11:12 Notwithstanding I will not do it in your days, for David your
father’s sake; but I will tear it out of the hand of your son-
As observed on :10, this reflects God's abiding high opinion of
David. As we try to attach meaning to event in life, we soon perceive that
everything is so multi factorial. There are so many factors involved.
Solomon's reaping the results of his sins was ameliorated for him in this
life, because of his father. Rehoboam his son suffered the effects of his
father's sins, whereas Solomon suffered the effects of his father's
righteousness. The ultimate equilibrium in each human life is not
ultimately discernible; and things are this way in order to humble us and
exercise our faith in the simple fact that God is the judge, and He is
ultimately just. Even if that justice is not immediately discernible in
life. There was a similar postponement of judgment for Ahab (1
Kings 21:29).
The delay was surely because God desperately hoped Solomon would repent,
and gave him his whole life to do so.
1Ki 11:13 However I will not tear away all the kingdom; but I will give
one tribe to your son, for David My servant’s sake, and for Jerusalem’s
sake which I have chosen-
The extent of grace explains countless apparent contradictions and
paradoxes throughout God's relationships with men- e.g. God repeatedly
said that He would leave David with “one tribe” (1 Kings 11:13). But
actually by grace He gave David and Judah two and a half tribes.
1Ki 11:14 Yahweh raised up an adversary to Solomon, Hadad the Edomite: he
was of the king’s seed in Edom-
1Ki 11:15 For it happened, when David was in Edom, and Joab the captain of
the army was gone up to bury the slain, and had struck every male in Edom-
Psalm 60 speaks of this campaign- there was a great defeat of
Israel and then a victory once they turned to God. The extent of the
initial defeat may be hinted at in 1 Kings 11:15,16: "When David was in
Edom, and Joab the captain of the army was gone up to bury the slain, and
had struck every male in Edom (for Joab and all Israel remained there six
months, until he had cut off every male in Edom)". This seems to say that
Joab went to bury the slain of Israel, and at that slain in a great
defeat, and at that time he remained six months subduing the Edomites with
the victory which Psalm 60 later celebrates.
1Ki 11:16 (for Joab and all Israel remained there six months, until he had
cut off every male in Edom)-
The cutting off of every male must be understood in the context of :14,
which says that Hadad was of the king's seed in Edom. I suggest it means
that all the royal family of Edom were cut off, but Hadad was the only one
who managed to escape. So "every male", rather like "all Israel", is not
to be read as globally "every" and "all".
1Ki 11:17 that Hadad fled, he and certain Edomites of his father’s
servants with him, to go into Egypt, Hadad being yet a little child-
"His father's servants" suggests Hadad was the son of the king of Edo
m who had been killed by David's men. The flight to Egypt could be seen as
looking ahead to the experience of the Lord Jesus, because as explained on
:28, Jeroboam was set up as a potential Messianic figure. Had he succeeded
as intended, then the flight to Egypt would have become clear in its
typical significance. We marvel at the detailed effort God puts in to
setting up so much potential which so often comes to nothing.
1Ki 11:18 They arose out of Midian-
This would be better read as "Maon", the area where Nabal was from (1
Sam. 25:2), and is near Paran. Nabal's people were perhaps like him,
against David.
And came to Paran; and they took men
with them out of Paran, and they came to Egypt, to Pharaoh king of Egypt,
who gave him a house, and appointed him food, and gave him land-
Even in the time of David, when the Edomites were subdued, Pharaoh
was very open to supporting the enemies of Israel. This is why Solomon's
marriage to his daughter at the start of his reign, not so long after
Hadad's establishment in Egypt, was foolhardy. At best it put his wife in
an impossibly compromised position of conflicting loyalties, which we
sense beginning even during their romance as recorded in the Song of
Solomon. For there she so wishes that she and Solomon could live together
in Egypt, and decide wholeheartedly for the sake of their romance to be
Egyptians and live there in her homeland.
1Ki 11:19 Hadad found great favour in the sight of Pharaoh, so that he
gave him as wife the sister of his own wife, the sister of Tahpenes the
queen-
Solomon had married Pharaoh's daughter, and so Hadad may have ended
up related to Solomon by marriage. This would have put Solomon's wife in
an impossible position of conflicted loyalties. That may be one reason
Solomon moved her out of the palace area and built her a separate house.
See on :18.
1Ki 11:20 The sister of Tahpenes bore him Genubath his son, whom Tahpenes
weaned in Pharaoh’s house; and Genubath was in Pharaoh’s house among the
sons of Pharaoh-
This was very high honour, meaning that Hadad's son was effectively
amongst the contenders for the Egyptian throne as one of the "sons of
Pharaoh". None less than the queen Tahpenes had performed the weaning
ceremony which was seen as so significant (Gen. 21:8).
Solomon was crazy to fall in love with the daughter of Pharaoh, and to
hope that this would be a powerful political alliance.
1Ki 11:21 When Hadad heard in Egypt that David slept with his fathers, and
that Joab the captain of the army was dead, Hadad said to Pharaoh, Let me
depart, that I may go to my own country-
Hadad wanted to return to Edom and revive Edomite nationalism, so as
to become king again once he had thrown off the yoke of Israel in that
area. He did much "mischief" to Israel and Solomon (:25). And yet it was
at this very time around the death of David and Joab that Solomon was
marrying Pharaoh's daughter. This was clearly Pharaoh using marriage for
political means. And on Solomon's side, it was following his passions for
the Egyptian woman, when both spiritually and politically this was not
going to be a good move. Hence Pharaoh was supporting the Edomite
insurrection against Solomon, because his son was leading it, at the same
time as entering relationship with Solomon. And Solomon's unwisdom
therefore resulted in the Hadad issue being a problem for him throughout
his life.
1Ki 11:22 Then Pharaoh said to him, But what have you lacked with me, that
behold, you seek to go to your own country? He answered, Nothing, however
please only let me depart-
Pharaoh had just married off his daughter to Solomon and so he was
not initially enthusiastic for his adopted son's desire to lead an
insurrection against Solomon in Edom. All this complex web is the stuff of
human politics and not love marriage.
1Ki 11:23 God raised up an adversary to him, Rezon the son of Eliada, who
had fled from his lord Hadadezer king of Zobah-
The later king of Syria Benhadad was the grandson of Hezion (1 Kings
15:18), a name which uses similar characters to Rezon who led the first
attempted revival of Zobah and Damascus (1 Kings 11:23) after David's
victories against them in 2 Sam. 8:3-8. Rezon perhaps didn't so much as
flee from Hadadezer, but rather fled from the area at the time when David
had conquered Hadadezer.
1Ki 11:24 He gathered men to him, and became captain over a troop, when
David killed them of Zobah: and they went to Damascus, and lived therein,
and reigned in Damascus-
2 Sam. 8:3-8 says that David had subdued both Zobah and Damascus, to
the point of placing a garrison in Damascus (2 Sam. 8:6). But for all his
worship of his father and attempt to give the impression of a territory
totally under his control, Solomon failed to maintain what David had done.
For he had clearly lost control of Damascus and the Israelite garrison had
had to retreat. The loss of Damascus meant that northern Israel
was under threat from the Syrians. But we never read of Solomon fortifying
the area much. Instead, all the massive program of fortification and
security was done around Jerusalem and Judah. Solomon is never recorded as
even trying to recover Damascus. He was solely focused upon himself in
Jerusalem; and thus set up the desire of the northern tribes to secede
from his rulership.
1Ki 11:25 He was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon, besides
the mischief of Hadad: and he abhorred Israel, and reigned over Syria-
When reviewing the references to ha-Satan ("the adversary") in
the Old Testament, it's significant that a number of them occur in the
context of the life of David. There was an incident where David behaved
deceitfully with the Philistines with whom he once lived, and he is
described as being "a Satan" to them (1 Sam. 29:4). That's another example
of where the word 'Satan' doesn't necessarily have an evil connotation- a
good man can be an adversary, just as Peter was (Mt. 16:21-23) and God
Himself can be (2 Sam. 22:4). But we find that David and his dynasty were
afflicted with Satans, adversaries, from then on. The word is used about
human beings who were adversarial to them in 2 Sam. 19:22; 1 Kings 5:4,18;
11:14-22,25; Ps. 109:6,20 (Heb. "They say, "Appoint a wicked man against
him, let an accuser [Satan] stand on his right hand"". David's
enemies are described by a word related to ‘satan’ in Ps. 38:20; 71:13;
109:4. Note that it is stated that God stirred up men to be
'Satans' to David and Solomon- whatever view we take of 'Satan', clearly
it or he is under the direct control of God and not in free opposition to
Him.
1Ki 11:26 Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an Ephraimite of Zeredah-
Zarethan where Solomon cast the lavers for the temple with their
pagan motifs (1 Kings 7:46) is called Zaredathah in 2 Chron. 4:17, which
is a form of Zeredah (1 Kings 11:26), the birthplace of Jeroboam son of
Nebat. It doesn't therefore have good connections. We wonder if the golden
calves were cast there too.
A servant
of Solomon, whose mother’s name was Zeruah, a widow, he also opposed the
king-
1Ki 11:27 This was the reason why he opposed the king: Solomon built
Millo, and repaired the breach of the city of David his father-
Jeroboam may have fallen out with Solomon over these building
projects because he saw that the northern tribes were being forced to
provide tax and labour which they couldn't afford. He therefore garnered
the support of the northern tribes for his position. Yet Rehoboam sent the
hated Adoniram, the chief gatherer of these taxes, to try to bring the
northern tribes again under him. The whole situation was set up for
division. And Solomon was the prime cause of it.
Solomon began repairing the breaches (cp. Jud. 21:15), but this contrasts with how Solomon's later behaviour led to the rending apart of David's kingdom. Perhaps the breaches in the wall David had built had happened during some unrecorded invasion or attack upon Jerusalem. "Millo" means 'rampart' and refers to the fortifications built around the citadel where David's palace was. But "the breach" is singular, and "repair" can be 'to close up'. The reference may be to Solomon building a wall between the mounts of Zion and Moriah, i.e. across the Tyropean valley, extending David's city walls in order to include the temple within them.
"Opposed" is Heb. 'lifted up his hand against'. It is the same word translated "exalted" when we read that God exalted / lifted up Jeroboam (1 Kings 14:7), so that ultimately he became king of the ten tribes. His opposition or lifting up his hand against Solomon was therefore of God and confirmed by God.
1Ki 11:28 The man Jeroboam was a brave man; and Solomon saw the young man
that he was industrious, and he put him in charge of all the labour of the
house of Joseph-
That is, the tribe of Ephraim, the largest tribe, who would have been
the most resentful and resistant to sending their men to work on the new
capital of Judah. And so this largest and most difficult group of workers
were put under Jeroboam's control, indicating the senior nature of his
role.
The final comment upon Jeroboam is that he was not as God’s servant
David (1 Kings 14:7-9). And yet he was set up with that potential
possibility. Consider:
Jeroboam (1Kings 11) - David
Man of valour v. 28- As David 1 Sam. 16:18 RV;
Young man v. 28 - 1 Sam. 17:58
Ruler over all v. 28 - 1 Sam. 18:5
I will take you and you shall reign over Israel v. 37 - 2 Sam. 7:8
Build a house v. 38 - 2 Sam. 7:11
v. 40 - 1 Sam. 19:2,10
1Ki 11:29 It happened at that time, when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem,
that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the way; now Ahijah had
put on a new garment; and they two were alone in the field-
God never essentially recognized that division; for
there was one Israel, one body. Indeed, He said that the division was the
greatest tragedy to come upon His people (Is. 7:17). The way the new
garment of Ahijah was torn up to symbolize the division, reflects the
utter waste (1 Kings 11:29). For an outer cloke was a garment a man could
wear for life; to have a new one was something significant. Significantly,
the road to Jericho which features in the parable of the good Samaritan
was the very dividing line between Judah and Ephraim (Josh. 16:1). The
significance of this may be in the implication within the parable that
Israel fell among thieves, needing the Messianic grace and rescue, as a
result of their division into two kingdoms. And so many other spiritual
lives have been shipwrecked over the rocks of division. Indeed, the Greek
words for "division" and "stumbling block" are related; divisions are a
stumbling block to so many, even if they externally remain within their
faith communities.
1Ki 11:30 Ahijah laid hold of the new garment that was on him, and tore it
in twelve pieces-
If we read the "him" as Ahijah [the LXX make this explicit],
which seems logical seeing he had dressed himself with that garment (:29),
then this gives the impression of mourning. For tearing ones' garment
meant mourning. God truly sorrowed at the judgment of Solomon and the
division of the kingdom- a division which Solomon had created by taxing
the north to fund the south, and thereby causing disillusion with the
temple as a place of worship. So the Divine judgment of division was in
fact only confirming Solomon in what he had himself done and set up. All
Divine judgment and condemnation is really only giving men what they
themselves lived out in their lives. This is why 2 Kings 17:21 says that
it was Israel who tore away from David, whereas Ahijah gives the
perspective that it was God who tore them away: "For Israel [tore] away
from the House of David, and they made Jeroboam son of Nebat king”. The
same word is used as in 1 Kings 11:30 for the tearing of Ahijah's garment. "Garment" is shalmah and
"Solomon" is shlomo- the same consonants in each word. The
rending of the garment / kingdom was a rending of Solomon. It was judgment
for what he had done. His huge efforts to create a massive kingdom / house
had come to nothing and in fact the kingdom would be torn.
We ask why the robe was torn into twelve rather than into two. Possibly Solomon's twelve taxation districts are alluded to. Or perhaps the twelve sons of Jacob- the family was now to be divided.
The Lord’s robe was not to be
torn, schizein. There was to be no schism in it. Ahijah tore his
garment into twelve pieces to symbolize the division of Israel (1 Kings
11:30,31). The Lord’s coat being unrent may therefore be another
reflection of how His death brought about unity amongst His people (Jn.
11:52; 17:21,22). Before Him, there, we simply cannot be divided amongst
ourselves. Likewise the net through which the Lord gathers His people was
unbroken (Jn. 21:11). Note how all these references are in John- as if he
perceived this theme of unity through the cross.
1Ki 11:31 He said to Jeroboam, Take ten pieces; for thus says Yahweh the
God of Israel, ‘Behold, I will tear the kingdom out of the hand of
Solomon, and will give ten tribes to you-
The word "tear" is used several times in this chapter, and it is the
word used multiple times when describing the rending of garments in grief
and distress. The same idea is in view; but whose was the grief, and who
as it were rent their garments? It was God. His intense grief was
because of the division of His people. This judgment hurt Himself,
and was not simply thrown by Him at His people without personal grief. And
His grief about the division of His people continues to this day.
Jeroboam is asked to take the ten pieces, to accept the gift of
the Kingdom from God. But the prophet Abijah condemns Jeroboam for this:
"Jeroboam... rebelled against his master” (2 Chron. 13:6), which was a sin
because "the Lord God of Israel gave David kingship over Israel forever—to
him and his sons—by a
covenant of salt” (2 Chron. 13:5). His kingdom was “the kingdom of the
Lord, which is in the charge of the sons of David” (2 Chron. 13:8). We
have a window here into the complex way God works. He gave the kingship to
David's line "for ever", but conditionally. It was His intention that it
would only be an eternal line in that a future descendant of David, God's
begotten Son the Lord Jesus, would reign eternally. But David and Solomon
liked to interpret this as meaning that their line of kings would endure
eternally. God went along with this by telling Solomon that this was
conditional upon his perfect obedience and not turning away from Him.
Solomon failed in this. So God gave the kingdom to Jeroboam, but Jeroboam
also sinned in taking it... And so God works oftentimes with man.
1Ki 11:32 (but he shall have one tribe, for My servant David’s sake and
for Jerusalem’s sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes
of Israel)-
As noted earlier, by grace, David was given not just one tribe but
two and a half tribes.
The whole Bible is really the story of God's endless grace in
ameliorating the just judgments He has given; perhaps partly because, as
explained on :31, they are so painful to Himself.
1Ki 11:33 because they have forsaken Me, and have worshiped Ashtoreth the
goddess of the Sidonians, Chemosh the god of Moab, and Milcom the god of
the children of Ammon. They have not walked in My ways, to do that which
is right in My eyes, and to keep My statutes and My ordinances, as David
his father did-
Notice the "they", of Israel, who were effectively guilty of the very
same apostacy as Solomon.
Solomon was fully representative of Israel (1 Kings 11:1,5-7 cp. 33; 8:52;
and note the ye... thee confusion of 1 Kings 9:4-7 AV); his prayer was their
prayer (2 Chron. 6:21); his worship was theirs (2 Chron. 1:3,5).
1Ki 11:34 However I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand; but I
will make him prince all the days of his life, for David My servant’s sake
whom I chose, who kept My commandments and My statutes-
"Make him prince" suggests that in God's eyes, Solomon was demoted
from king to prince. Solomon of course acted as if he were still king, as
if God's appearance to him hadn't really happened; but his status changed
in God's sight.
1Ki 11:35 but I will take the kingdom out of his son’s hand, and will give
it to you, even ten tribes-
If Rehoboam had listened to the advice of the older men and relaxed
Solomon's oppressive taxation system, then Israel would likely have
remained loyal to him. But he didn't take that good advice, because it was
"of the Lord" to fulfill prophecies like this (1 Kings 12:15). There is a
hand greater than our own, a factor beyond our freewill receipt and
processing of information, which works to fulfil God's will. And that is
why we cannot judge human behaviour, because it reflects such a complex of
factors which only God knows.
1Ki 11:36 To his son will I give one tribe, that David My servant may have
a lamp always before Me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen for Me
to put My name there-
"That David may have..." can mean to the effect 'So
that potentially David may have...'. This was God's intended purpose, but its fulfilment was precluded by
the unfaithfulness of the seed. He did not chose Jerusalem for ever;
because it was to be destroyed, and was only to be chosen "again" at the
restoration
(Zech. 2:12).
The lamp in Jerusalem was the budding of the horn of David (Ps.
132:17). And this was to finally come true in the resurrection of the Lord
Jesus, David's great son. But that lamp could have "always" burned in
Jerusalem- potentially. But the various potential fulfillments failed to
realize the potential.
1Ki 11:37 I will take you, and you shall reign according to all that your
soul desires, and shall be king over Israel-
This seems to be saying that Jeroboam had absolute freewill, he could
reign as he wished- but God had set him up with the amazing potential of
being the seed through whom He would rule Israel (:38).
1Ki 11:38 It shall be, if you will listen to all that I command you, and
will walk in My ways, and do that which is right in My eyes, to keep My
statutes and My commandments, as David My servant did; that I will be with
you, and will build you a sure house, as I built for David, and will give
Israel to you-
This indicates the presence of some basic spirituality within him. In 1
Kings 11:35 God tells Jeroboam that He would take the ten tribes from the
house of David, and give them to Jeroboam. This is exactly the language of
God speaking about righteous David, who was given the Kingdom which God
took away from Saul. So initially, Jeroboam had some of David's
characteristics; it seems rather strange for God to take away the ten
tribes from one sinner and give them to another sinner. At that time,
Jeroboam's potential spirituality was reasonably to the fore. If Jeroboam
had continued in God's ways, God would have established Jeroboam as king
over His Kingdom (1 Kings 11:38). So Jeroboam was being given a chance to
make the right choices. He had the potential to do so. This echoes God
saying to Moses 'I will make of you a great nation' because of the
apostasy of others. Thus Jeroboam is faintly connected with Moses.
However, as noted on 1 Kings 12:27, Jeroboam simply didn't have the faith
to believe in this wonderful grace; that he, son of a whore (1 Kings 12:24
LXX) could be empowered by God to be the Divinely chosen king of Israel
and the fulfilment of the promises to David.
1Ki 11:39 I will for this afflict the seed of David, but not forever’-
This could imply that Jeroboam would only rule as the king of Israel
for the period during which God would afflict David's seed. Or we could
take this as meaning that the seed of David would be afflicted "for this",
for the sake of Solomon's sin. But in this case we wonder why they are
called "the seed of David". I suggest that "the seed of David" therefore
refers to Solomon specifically, and that this final prophecy doesn't
chronologically follow :38. It could be that God's potential plan was that
Solomon was to be afflicted for a period, during which Jeroboam and not
Rehoboam was to reign, and then Solomon would repent and be fit to rule.
But Solomon refused to respond, as did Jeroboam, and so this potential
plan wasn't realized.
1Ki 11:40 Solomon sought therefore to kill Jeroboam-
Solomon's response to the message about the kingdom being
rent from him was apparently to cynically comment that there is a time to
rend... but he couldn't care less (Ecc. 3:7). We see here how little Solomon respected God's word. He though that
by murdering someone he could stop the fulfilment of the prophecies. He
was acting just like Saul, who tried to kill David when told that David
was to have the kingdom.
But Jeroboam arose,
and fled into Egypt, to Shishak king of Egypt, and was in Egypt until the
death of Solomon-
Even politically, his marriages with all those Gentile women didn't
seem to achieve him the support he desired from their home countries;
Egypt gave refuge to Jeroboam, Solomon's main rival (1 Kings 11:40), even
though he always acquiesced to his wives and even in his very old age he
still didn’t destroy the idol temples he built for them (2 Kings 23:13).
1Ki 11:41 Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and
his wisdom, aren’t they written in the book of the acts of Solomon?-
This book may have been a compilation from various prophetic
writings, for the equivalent in 2 Chron. 9:29 is "the history of Nathan
the prophet, the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and the visions of Iddo
the seer concerning Jeroboam".
1Ki 11:42 The time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel was
forty years-
Saul, David and Solomon are all said to have reigned for "forty
years", but the similarity is such that we wonder whether this isn't a
symbolic period. For numbers were not used in Semitic literature in the
precise way which we are accustomed to. Thus three consecutive kings of
Babylon, Saosduchinus, Chiniladanus, and Nabopolassar are each recorded as
having reigned 21 years.
1Ki 11:43 Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of
David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his place-
The description of death as sleeping with fathers is clear evidence that
death is seen as a sleep, unconsciousness, and not as the start of an
immortal soul going to heaven or 'hell'. Good and bad, David and Solomon,
are gathered together in death. The division between them will only
therefore come at the resurrection of the dead, and the granting of
immortality at the judgment seat of the Lord Jesus.
Previous Chapter
