Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary1 Kings 11

Many strange women. Thus far in the record of Solomon’s wealth and glory many indications of moral weakness have become apparent. The excessive accumulation of silver and gold and the multiplication of horses were in violation of the warnings given by Moses (Deut. 17:16, 17). Solomon’s shortcomings along these lines have not been specifically mentioned as such. Facts are simply set forth as facts, to be interpreted by the reader as evidences of success and glory, or as winnings of trouble to come. But in regard to the multiplication of wives, the excesses of Solomon were so outstanding that particular attention is called to the monarch’s failings along this line. The multiplication of wives is mentioned by Moses in the same connection with the multiplication of horses and silver and gold (Deut. 17:16, 17). Though the defection of Solomon here is distinctly

traced to “strange women,” the part played by other factors in bringing his downfall must not be overlooked.

Ellen G. White

Concerning which. The Lord had given explicit instructions to the effect that there should be no intermarriage with the peoples of the land (Ex. 34:11–16; 7:1–4). Solomon, who should have set the highest example of obedience to this command and of enforcement of the law, became its most flagrant violator. The man who had been of all men most wise became of all men most foolish. It is never the course of wisdom to go contrary to an explicit command of the Lord.

Turned away his heart. This is exactly what the Lord had said would be the result of foreign marriages (Ex. 34:16; Deut. 7:4). Solomon was acquainted with this instruction, and there was no excuse for his violation of the explicit command.

Not perfect. What a pity that a man who had begun so well in his youth should make such a sad spectacle of himself in his later years. He who had been a master of men now became a profligate and a slave to his own passions. Undoubtedly Solomon kept up the formalities of his own religion, but his heart was far from perfect in the sight of God.

Ellen G. White

Ashtoreth. The goddess of love and fertility, whose worship was one of license and impurity. Milcom. Chief god of the Ammonites. Abomination. The worship of these native gods involved rites too horrible to mention. So monstrous were the crimes committed in the service of these gods that the Lord commanded that the native peoples of Canaan engaged in the worship of these deities should be utterly destroyed (Deut. 7:2–5).

An high place. Not only did Solomon allow his heart to be drawn out after these heathen gods, but he went so far as to establish centers for their worship. Infatuated with the beauty of his heathen wives, he united with them in their idol worship. The hill. The Mt. of Olives, where many and beautiful buildings were erected as idolatrous shrines (see PK 57). Molech. Probably in this verse to be read “Milcom,” which occurs in vs. 5 and 33 as likewise the god, or abomination, of the Amorites. Dropping the final m could change Milcom to Molech. They are almost identical (mlkm and mkl) in the voweless Hebrew script, because the points indicating vowel sounds were added long after Bible times. There is another reason to see Milcom in this verse, which connects his high place with that of Chemosh, on a hill “before” (east of) Jerusalem. That is exactly where Milcom’s was, whereas Molech’s place of human sacrifice was in the Valley of Hinnom (2 Kings 23:13, 10).

Was angry. The young man who began life with so great promise, who had been shown such high favors of the Lord and had been so honored with manifestations of God’s presence, now, in later life, strayed so far away from right that the Lord became angry with him and withdrew His blessing.

Ellen G. White

Rend the kingdom. Solomon had grievously sinned, but God deigned to speak with him. The message was different now from what it was in the days of his youth and innocence. Then the Lord appeared with a promise of blessing; this time it was with a stern warning of the ills that disobedience must bring. He would lose the kingdom given to his father.

For David. The Lord remembers His own, and out of kindness to them, extends mercies to some whose shameful course deserves no mercy. God is “merciful and

gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy” (Ps. 103:8). In wrath He remembers mercy. For David’s sake the threatened judgment was deferred.

One tribe. Except for David’s sake, the whole kingdom would have been taken away from Solomon’s son. As it was, only one tribe, Judah (ch. 12:20), was reserved to the house of David. Benjamin and Levi (2 Chron. 11:12, 13), were to be with Judah, and were included with Judah to make one nation.

An adversary. The writer of Kings now presents the various troubles of Solomon’s reign. It must not be thought that these were reserved solely for the last years of his life, for as Solomon kept going ever deeper into sin he found his troubles increasing. God’s continued presence cannot abide forever with those who despise His grace. A stubborn rejection of the Lord’s mercy and love causes God at length to withdraw His restraining arm and His protecting grace, with the result that the evil one moves in to rend and destroy. Affliction and woe come from Satan. Solomon had opportunity to see in the woes that came upon him the true nature of the one he had chosen to obey. Hadad. A common Semitic name. It occurs in the list of Edomite kings of Gen. 36:31–39, and is also found as a designation of the Syrian kings, “Ben-hadad” (1 Kings 15:18; Jer. 49:27), and “Hadadezer” (2 Sam. 8:3–6).

In Edom. We have here a valuable historical note. David had conquered Edom (2 Sam. 8:14; 1 Chron. 18:12, 13), but little is known of the campaign, which must have included many interesting details. This account of Solomon’s adversities brings to light a story that might not otherwise have been preserved. Evidently an attempt was made by David to wipe out this hated race to the south (1 Kings 11:15, 16), with the result that certain servants fled with the young prince, Hadad, to Egypt. It is not known who the Egyptian king was that granted asylum to Hadad, for this was a period of great uncertainty and unrest in Egypt. But to receive the royal exile was both proper Oriental etiquette and excellent politics, as in the case of Jeroboam (1 Kings 11:40). Upon the death of David, Hadad returned to Edom to be a thorn in the flesh to Solomon. Such records as this throw helpful light upon the international politics of the times.

Rezon. David had engaged in successful wars against the Syrian kings (2 Sam. 8:3–13; 10:6–19). The crushing of Hadadezer, king of Zobah, left the country in confusion, with the result that the leader of one of the armed bands, Rezon, was able to establish himself at Damascus as king, to be an adversary of Solomon. This is the first king of Damascus whose name is known.

Jeroboam. The first mention of the man whose name was to become proverbial for wickedness. The wicked kings of Israel henceforth are regularly likened to him and his “sin wherewith he made Israel to sin” (1 Kings 15:26; cf. 1 Kings 16:2, 19, 26; 21:22; 22:52; 2 Kings 3:3; 10:29, 31; 13:2, 6, 11; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 17:21, 22). He was from the tribe of Ephraim, which had an ancient and irrepressible jealousy of Judah, for the Lord had “refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim: but chose the tribe of Judah” (Ps. 78:67, 68). Lifted up his hand. This phrase signifies rebellion (2 Sam. 20:21).

Built Millo. Solomon’s work on the Millo was apparently done after he had completed his work on the Temple and palace (see 1 Kings 9:15, 24). David had previously done much to strengthen this area in the ancient Jebusite city captured by him (2 Sam. 5:9; 1 Chron. 11:8).

Man of valour. Jeroboam was a man who was alert and capable, able and courageous in the making of decisions and in the execution of them. Seldom was so much involved in raising an individual to a position of trust as there was in Solomon’s selection of Jeroboam for a post of responsibility. Solomon no doubt looked at the external characteristics of the young man without being able to judge what was in his heart. Jeroboam’s natural talents of leadership, if dedicated to God, would enable him to do much in the cause of right, but if not, he would do much in the cause of wrong. The charge. Solomon made Jeroboam superintendent of all the forced labor exacted of the tribe of Ephraim for the building of Millo and the fortifying of the City of David.

The new garment. The garment was worn by the prophet (see v. 29). The English word “caught” almost implies that the prophet seized hold of Jeroboam’s garment, but the Hebrew simply says, “laid hold of.” The new garment represented the new kingdom so recently established, but which was about to be rent in pieces. Symbolical acts are frequent in prophecy (Jer. 13:1–11; 19:1; 27:2; Eze. 4:1–14, 9; 12:3–7; 24:3–12, 15–24), and were an effective means for bringing home in a forceful way the messages of the Lord.

I will rend. The united monarchy was to be torn in pieces, and ten of its tribes were to give their allegiance to a new lord not from the house of David. The lesson was taught that “the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will” (Dan. 4:17).

One tribe. Whereas ten tribes were to go to Jeroboam (v. 31), only two would go to the house of David. But Judah’s “one tribe” included Benjamin (2 Chron. 11:12, 13). The kingdom of Judah also became an asylum for the Levites, who refused to endorse Jeroboam’s apostate religion.

For David my servant’s sake. This phrase, often repeated, makes clear God’s great mercy toward His children. Kept my commandments. It was because David was obedient to the Lord, keeping His commandments and statutes, that God extended great favors to him. This commendation of David is remarkable in view of David’s grievous errors, as in the matter of Uriah, the Hittite (2 Sam. 11) and in the act of numbering Israel (2 Sam. 24). Of both of these failings David sincerely repented, and through the provisions of grace was accepted as if he had never committed these infractions. Character is not finally determined by occasional deeds or misdeeds, but by the habitual tendency of the life.

A light. God intends that the path of the just shall be like a “shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day” (Prov. 4:18). Thus it should have been with the light of David. It should never have gone out, but should have increased in brilliance in his posterity (1 Kings 15:4; 2 Kings 8:19; cf. 2 Sam. 14:7). The very opposite was the case. In Rehoboam the brilliance of the light was greatly diminished. It continued dim through the centuries until at last it flickered and went out when the remnant of Judah was carried captive into Babylon (2 Kings 25).

If thou. Jeroboam was a young man of promise. He had outstanding abilities that would make him a powerful leader and a strong influence for good, if he would walk in the ways of the Lord. God is not partial, but grants His blessings to all who are faithful to Him. A sure house. The promise was conditional, and inasmuch as the condition was not met, it did not take effect. Disobedience is a foundation of sand, and no house built upon

it can stand (Matt. 7:24–27). Jeroboam’s dynasty came to an end with his son Nadab (1 Kings 15:25, 28).

Not for ever. The Lord’s afflictions are temporal, not eternal; His mercies endure forever (Ps. 103:8, 9, 17). Because of the failure of David’s descendants, the promises to David were to meet their complete fulfillment in the spiritual house of the NT church and in Christ, the Son of David, the Head of the church.

To kill Jeroboam. There may have been good cause for Solomon to turn against his servant, for Jeroboam had “lifted up his hand” against him (v. 26). The overt acts of Jeroboam that incurred the king’s displeasure are not related, but undoubtedly Jeroboam was ambitious, and took measures to secure for himself the crown. He belonged to one of the leading tribes, which, in the partition of Palestine, had been given the best position in the land, at once its choicest region and its very heart and center. The Ephraimites were sensitive about their alleged superiority and felt that when important decisions were made, they should be consulted (Judges 8:1; 12:1). Undoubtedly it was the ambition and pride of Jeroboam that brought him into disfavor with the king. Shishak king of Egypt. This is the first king of Egypt mentioned in the Bible by name. He was the first king of a new dynasty. Shishak has been identified with the vigorous and able Sheshonk I, founder of the Twenty-second Dynasty. He was a Libyan, and had been a commander of mercenary troops before he seized the throne. His capital was at Bubastis in the Delta. It was customary for ancient nations who were not bound together by treaty obligations, to grant asylum to political refugees.

The book of the acts. The Hebrews kept official records of state. Thus David had a scribe and recorder (2 Sam. 8:16, 17; 20:24, 25), with the records of his reign preserved in “the account of the chronicles of king David” (1 Chron. 27:24). The accounts of the later rulers of Israel were kept in a volume known as “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel” (1 Kings 14:19; 15:31; 22:39; 2 Kings 10:34), and those of Judah in “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” (1 Kings 14:29; 15:7, 23; 2 Kings 8:23). Other records for the reign of Solomon were “the book of Nathan the prophet,” “the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite,” and “the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat” (2 Chron. 9:29). For the prophet Iddo there was yet another volume entitled “Iddo the seer concerning genealogies” (2 Chron. 12:15). The prophets here appear in the character of annalists. The narrative as given in Kings is evidently a compilation drawn from various sources. Every confidence can be placed in the historical accuracy of the material in Kings, based as it is on complete, original, and official sources, and brought into final form under divine inspiration.

Forty years. From David on, the OT preserves the lenghts of reign of the various kings of Israel and Judah. Josephus gives the length of Solomon’s reign as 80 years (Antiquities viii. 7. 8). This demonstrates that the figures of Josephus often differ widely from the Biblical figures, and cannot always be depended upon.

Slept with his fathers. Verses 41 to 43 present an official formula henceforth to be followed in recording the accounts of the kings. This formula includes a statement as to the official record from which the account was taken, states the fact that the king slept with his fathers, names the place of burial, and gives the name of the successor (see 1 Kings 14:29, 31; 15:7, 8, 23, 24; 2 Kings 8:23, 24; 12:19, 21; etc.). City of David. This was henceforth the regular burial place for the kings of Judah. In a few instances burial was in a private sepulcher (see 2 Kings 21:18, 26; 23:30). Under

special circumstances burial was in the City of David but not in the royal sepulcher (see 2 Chron. 21:20; 24:25; 26:23; 28:27). As a token of respect Jehoiada the priest was buried in the royal tombs (2 Chron. 24:16). Of Hezekiah it is said that “they buried him in the chiefest of the sepulchres of the sons of David” (2 Chron. 32:33).