Chap. 1Ki 11:1-8<\/span>. Strange wives turn away Solomon’s heart (Not in Chronicles)<\/p>\n 1<\/strong>. Solomon loved many strange women<\/em> ] Where polygamy was common there would be a great temptation to a powerful king to connect himself by marriage with all the nations about him. At the same time a large harem was an element in Oriental pomp. Most of these women were heathen, and their worship would be practised in the harem. In all the nations of antiquity women had special religious observances which they practised without the assistance of the priests. But Solomon built temples for foreign worship. It seems from 1Ki 11:8<\/span> that these were for the women. If this were so they must have come, under attendance no doubt, from the harem to the Temple. In taking Pharaoh’s daughter Solomon had joined to him a mighty but somewhat distant monarch. The other nations mentioned in this verse were close at hand. Edom bordered on the south of Palestine, Moab and Ammon were on the east, and Sidon and the Hittite kingdom on the north. The LXX. ( Vat<\/em>.) adds Syrian and Amorite wives to the number, and incorporates part of 1Ki 11:3<\/span> with this verse.<\/p>\n Of this part of Solomon’s conduct and character no mention is made in the books of the Chronicles.<\/p>\n In noticing successively Solomons excessive accumulation of silver and gold 1Ki 10:14-25<\/span>, his multiplication of horses 1Ki 10:26-29<\/span>, and his multiplication of wives, the writer has in mind the warning of Moses against these three forms of princely ostentation, all alike forbidden to an Israelite monarch (marginal reference).<\/P> Zidonians – <\/B>i. e., Phoenician women. A tradition states that Solomon married a daughter of Hiram, king of Tyre.<\/P> <\/p>\n 1Ki 11:1-13<\/span><\/p>\n But King Solomon loved many strange women.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n Solomons sin<\/strong><\/p>\n A few years ago two paintings were exhibited in this country, which attracted wide attention. One of them represented Rome in the height of her splendour, and the other in the depths of her decay. The contrast was melancholy and instructive. One could not repress the question as he turned from one scene to the other, What led to this mighty change? It was the old story, which every great nation thus far in history has illustrated sooner or later, that of a secret, slow-moving moral decay, preceding and occasioning social upheaval and ruin. We might fancy that a similar picture might be drawn between two periods in the history of Israel–one, that of the latter part of Solomons reign, when there was an unsurpassed wealth and glory and power in the holy city; and the other, only a few years later, when the kingdom was rent and the sceptre had departed.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>It was not, primarily, sensuality. That was only the outworking of an inner and far deeper evil. The simple and honest historian tells us that he loved many strange women, thus breaking an explicit command to the chosen people. Now the ultimate evil against which Moses was led to legislate in this particular was not polygamy nor licentiousness, but the idolatry which the foreigner would inevitably introduce. Among these women he found an intellectual stimulus and gratification. They were more brilliant than Jewish maidens, and their culture was a distinct and <\/strong>attractive element in the royal pursuit of wisdom. For in that great experiment of life Solomon commanded the most costly and varied forms of pleasure and of learning. All the world–all there was in man–was made tributary to the object held up in view.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>Nor was it pure and simple idolatry. That also was a symptom of inner disorder and weakness. It was like polygamy, a form only of heart-wandering from God. He built high places for his wives, which burned incense and offered sacrifices to their gods. There is not the slightest evidence that he ever abandoned the worship of Jehovah, or set up images of him as Jeroboam did, or that he ever lost faith in Jehovah as the one and only true God. But his heart was not perfect; and this was the sin beneath his sensuality and idolatry. He began to waver by tolerating the false religions of his wives. He was liberalised in religion. If people were only sincere, he may have said, no matter what they worship. If they live up to their light, it is well enough without letting in more light. Who knows absolute truth? Who can say, Thus saith the Lord? Who, thought this king, sets himself up to say that there is only one narrow way of life? The religious world of to-day finds its most subtle and powerful temptation in the general revolt against restraint and constraint. It takes now one form and now another. It comes as a protest against what is called narrowness, even in construing the terms of the gospel upon which men enter into life. The world has always seen the insolence of greatness against the law of God. It sees now the same insolence under cover of the grace of God. But whatever we may <\/strong>discover in science or art, whatever gains we may make in the domain of reason, there can be nothing essentially new in the way of life by Jesus Christ. The data of theology are all furnished, and have been for ages. The path of life is just as narrow and just as broad as ever. God demands the whole heart, because anything less <\/strong>is nothing at all to Him. Half even of Solomons great soul is worthless in the kingdom of heaven.<\/p>\n Solomons sin<\/strong><\/p>\n Solomon had come to the throne of the most important kingdom then on the earth at the youthful age of twenty. Proud of his sublime eminence and flattered by the obsequious attentions of foreign nations, he formed matrimonial alliances with the royal families of them all until a harem of seven hundred wives disgraced the Holy City. These heathen wives required their heathen chapels and chaplains, and the complaisant king surrounded Jerusalem with temples for the enactment of pagan idolatries. To the king, prematurely old, at length comes the prophetic voice declaring the wrath of Jehovah upon the apostate kingdom, the doom, however, softened in two particulars for the sake of David, who, though long dead, still benefited the land by the effects of his piety. The rending of the kingdom from the Solomonian line should not take place till Solomon himself had passed away, and then a remnant (Judah) should remain with the regular succession.<\/p>\n Solomons fall<\/strong><\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>It was gradual. No man becomes wholly abandoned or altogether depraved at once; formation of character is, both in its construction and destruction, a gradual process.<\/p>\n (1)<\/strong> Because of the power of conscience.<\/p>\n (2)<\/strong> Because the Spirit strives.<\/p>\n (3)<\/strong> Because the Mediator pleads, Let it alone this year also.<\/p>\n (4)<\/strong> Because a warning is oftentimes given.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>It was sure. From bad to worse, like a stone rolling down a hill.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>The mixing of self-interest with Gods service. He chose wives from nations with whom God had forbidden His people to intermarry; hence contagion from such a bad example.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>The union of piety and superstition.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>It brought down God s displeasure.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>It brought ruin on his kingdom. Even the sins of obscure men pass in their effects beyond the power of their perpetrators (as no man <\/strong>liveth, no man dieth, so no man sinneth to himself) but how much more the sins of the great ones of the earth!<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>Great opportunities bring great responsibilities, and such cannot be neglected with impunity.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>Riches hinder access into the kingdom of God. Wealth applied to selfish ends carries no blessing, but hardens the heart and causes it to lose its hold upon God<\/em>.<\/em> (C. E. E. Appleyard, B. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n CHAPTER XI <\/P> Solomon’s attachment to strange women, and consequent idolatry<\/I>,<\/P> 1, 2.<\/P> Number of his wives and concubines<\/I>, 3.<\/P> In his old age they turn away his heart from God<\/I>, 4.<\/P> He builds temples to idols, burns incense and sacrifices to<\/I><\/P> them<\/I>, 5-8.<\/P> The Lord is angry with him, and threatens to deprive him of the<\/I><\/P> kingdom, but will leave one tribe for David’s sake<\/I>, 9-13.<\/P> The Lord stirs up Hadad, the Edomite, to be his enemy; the<\/I><\/P> history of this man<\/I>, 14-22.<\/P> He stirs another adversary against him, Rezon the son of<\/I><\/P> Eliadah. He and Hadad plague Israel<\/I>, 23-25.<\/P> Jeroboam also becomes his enemy, and the reason why<\/I>, 26-28.<\/P> Ahijah the prophet meets Jeroboam, and promises, in the name of<\/I><\/P> the Lord, that God will rend Israel from the family of Solomon,<\/I><\/P> and give him ten tribes<\/I>, 29-39.<\/P> Solomon, hearing of this, seeks to put Jeroboam to death, who<\/I><\/P> escapes to Egypt, where he continues till the death of Solomon<\/I>,<\/P> 40.<\/P> Solomon dies, after having reigned over Israel forty years; and<\/I><\/P> his son Rehoboam reigns in his stead<\/I>, 41-43. <\/P> NOTES ON CHAP. XI<\/P> <\/P> Verse 1<\/span>. Many strange women<\/B><\/I>] That is, idolaters; together with<\/I> the daughter of Pharaoh<\/I>: she was also one of those strange women and an idolater. But many think she became a proselyte to the Jewish religion; of this there is no evidence.<\/P> <\/p>\n He loved them inordinately and lustfully, and he sinned against Gods known law, both in their number, Deu 17:17<\/span>, and in their quality. <\/P> <\/p>\n 1, 2. But King Solomon loved manystrange women<\/B>Solomon’s extraordinary gift of wisdom was notsufficient to preserve him from falling into grievous and fatalerrors. A fairer promise of true greatness, a more beautiful pictureof juvenile piety, never was seen than that which he exhibited at thecommencement of his reign. No sadder, more humiliating, or awfulspectacle can be imagined than the besotted apostasy of his old age;and to him may be applied the words of Paul (Ga3:3<\/span>), of John (Re 3:17<\/span>),and of Isaiah (Isa 14:21<\/span>). Alove of the world, a ceaseless round of pleasure, had insensiblycorrupted his heart, and produced, for a while at least, a state ofmental darkness. The grace of God deserted him; and the son of thepious Davidthe religiously trained child of Bath-sheba (Pr31:1-3<\/span>), and pupil of Nathan, instead of showing the stability ofsound principle and mature experience became at last an old andfoolish king (Ec 4:13<\/span>). Hisfall is traced to his “love of many strange women.”Polygamy was tolerated among the ancient Hebrews; and, although inmost countries of the East, the generality of men, from convenienceand economy, confine themselves to one woman, yet a number of wivesis reckoned as an indication of wealth and importance, just as anumerous stud of horses and a grand equipage are among us. Thesovereign, of course, wishes to have a more numerous harem than anyof his subjects; and the female establishments of many Orientalprinces have, both in ancient and modern times, equalled or exceededthat of Solomon’s. It is probable, therefore, that, in conformitywith Oriental notions, he resorted to it as a piece of statemagnificence. But in him it was unpardonable, as it was a direct andoutrageous violation of the divine law (De17:17<\/span>), and the very result which that statute was ordained toprevent was realized in him. His marriage with the daughter ofPharaoh is not censured either here or elsewhere (see on 1Ki3:1<\/span>). It was only his love for many strange women; for women,though in the East considered inferiors, exert often a silent butpowerful seductive influence over their husbands in the harem, aselsewhere, and so it was exemplified in Solomon.<\/P><\/p>\n But King Solomon loved many strange women<\/strong>,…. His love was a lustful and not a lawful one, and of women who were not only of foreign countries, but not his lawful wives, and these many:<\/p>\n together with the daughter of Pharaoh<\/strong>; besides her, or as he loved her, and perhaps more; his sin was not that he loved her who was his lawful wife, but others with her; it is very probable she was a proselytess, and had no hand in turning him to idolatry, since we read not of any high place built for an Egyptian idol:<\/p>\n women of the Moabites, Anmonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites<\/strong>; all of the neighbouring nations. Some think he did this with political views, to get intelligence of the state of those countries, or to abate and extinguish their enmity; but it rather seems to be the fruit of lust or pride.<\/p>\n The idolatry into which Solomon fell in his old age appears so strange in a king so wise and God-fearing as Solomon showed himself to be at the dedication of the temple, that many have been quite unable to reconcile the two, and have endeavoured to show either that Solomon’s worship of idols was psychologically impossible, or that the knowledge of God and the piety attributed to him are unhistorical. But great wisdom and a refined knowledge of God are not a defence against the folly of idolatry, since this has its roots in the heart, and springs from sensual desires and the lust of the flesh. The cause assigned in the biblical account for Solomon’s falling away from the Lord, is that he loved many strange, i.e., foreign or heathen, wives, who turned his heart from Jehovah to their own gods in his old age. Consequently the falling away did not take place suddenly, but gradually, as Solomon got old, and was not a complete renunciation of the worship of Jehovah, to whom he offered solemn sacrifices three times a year, and that certainly to the day of his death (1Ki 9:25<\/span>), but consisted simply in the fact that his heart was no longer thoroughly devoted to the Lord (1Ki 11:4<\/span>), and that he inclined towards the idols of his foreign wives and built them altars (1Ki 11:5-8<\/span>); that is to say, it consisted merely in a syncretic mixture of Jehovah-worship and idolatry, by which the worship which should be paid solely and exclusively to the true God was not only injured, but was even turned into idolatry itself, Jehovah the only true God being placed on a level with the worthless gods of the heathen. – Love to foreign wives no doubt presupposed an inclination to foreign customs; it was not, however, idolatry in itself, but was still reconcilable with that sincere worship of Jehovah which is attributed to Solomon in the earlier years of his reign. At the same time it was a rock on which living faith and true adherence to the Lord might at last suffer shipwreck. And we may even infer from the repeated warnings of God (1Ki 3:14<\/span>; 1Ki 6:12<\/span>; 1Ki 9:4<\/span>), that from the earliest years of his reign Solomon was in danger of falling into idolatry. This danger did, indeed, spring in his case from his inclination to foreign customs; but this inclination was again influenced by many of the circumstances of his reign, which we must regard as contributing more remotely to his eventual fall. And among the first of these we must place the splendour and glory of his reign. Through long and severe conflicts David had succeeded in conquering all the enemies of Israel, and had not only helped his people to peace and prosperity, but had also raised the kingdom to great power and glory. And Solomon inherited these fruits of his father’s reign. Under the blessings of peace he was not only able to carry out the work of building a splendid temple, which his father had urged upon him, but was also able, by a wise use of the sources already existing and by opening new ones, still further to increase the treasures which he had collected, and thereby to exalt the splendour of his kingdom. The treaty with Hiram of Tyre, which enabled him to execute the intended state buildings in Jerusalem, was followed by alliances for the establishment of a widespread commerce both by sea and land, through which ever increasing treasures of gold and silver, and other costly goods, were brought to the king. As this accumulation of riches helped to nourish his inclination to a love of show, and created a kind of luxury which was hardly reconcilable with the simplicity of manners and the piety of a servant of God, so the foreign trade led to a toleration of heathen customs and religious views which could not fail to detract from the reverence paid to Jehovah, however little the trade with foreigners might be in itself at variance with the nature of the Old Testament kingdom of God. And again, even the great wisdom of king Solomon might also become a rock endangering his life of faith, not so much in the manner suggested by J. J. Hess ( Gesch. Dav. u. Sal<\/em>. ii. p. 413), namely, that an excessive thirst for inquiry might easily seduce him from the open and clearer regions of the kingdom of truth into the darker ones of the kingdom of lies, i.e., of magic, and so lead him to the paths of superstition; as because the widespread fame of his wisdom brought distinguished and wise men from distant lands to Jerusalem and into alliance with the king, and their homage flattered the vanity of the human heart, and led to a greater and greater toleration of heathen ways. But these things are none of them blamed in the Scriptures, because they did not of necessity lead to idolatry, but might simply give an indirect impulse to it, by lessening the wall of partition between the worship of the true God and that of heathen deities, and making apostasy a possible thing. The Lord Himself had promised and had given Solomon wisdom, riches, and glory above all other kings for the glorification of his kingdom; and these gifts of God merely contributed to estrange his heart from the true God for the simple reason, that Solomon forgot the commandments of the Lord and suffered himself to be besotted by the lusts of the flesh, not only so as to love many foreign wives, but so as also to take to himself wives from the nations with which Israel was not to enter into any close relationship whatever.<\/p>\n 1Ki 11:1-2<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> Solomon’s Love of Many Wives and Idolatry. – 1Ki 11:1<\/span>, 1Ki 11:2<\/span>.<\/p>\n “Solomon loved many foreign wives, and that along with the daughter of Pharaoh.” , standing as it does between and , cannot mean “and especially the daughter of P.,” as Thenius follows the earlier commentators in supposing, but must mean, as in 1Ki 11:25<\/span>, “and that with, or along with,” i.e., actually beside the daughter of Pharaoh. She is thereby distinguished from the foreign wives who turned away Solomon’s heart from the Lord, so that the blame pronounced upon those marriages does not apply to his marriage to the Egyptian princess (see at 1Ki 3:1<\/span>). All that is blamed is that, in opposition to the command in Deu 17:17<\/span>, Solomon loved (1) many<\/em> foreign wives, and (2) Moabitish, Ammonitish, and other wives, of the nations with whom the Israelites were not to intermarry. All that the law expressly prohibited was marriage with Canaanitish women (Deu 7:1-3<\/span>; Exo 34:16<\/span>); consequently the words “of the nations,” etc., are not to be taken as referring merely to the Sidonian and Hittite women (J. D. Mich.); but this prohibition is extended here to all the tribes enumerated in 1Ki 11:2<\/span>, just as in Ezr 9:2<\/span>., 1Ki 10:3<\/span>; Neh 13:23<\/span>; not from a rigour surpassing the law, but in accordance with the spirit of the law, namely, because the reason appended to the law, ne in idololatriam a superstitiosis mulieribus pellicerentur <\/em> (Clericus), applied to all these nations. The Moabites and Ammonites, moreover, were not to be received into the congregation at all, not even to the tenth generation, and of the Edomites only the children in the third generation were to be received (Deu 23:4<\/span>, Deu 23:8-9<\/span>). There was all the less reason, therefore, for permitting marriages with them, that is to say, so long as they retained their nationality or their heathen ways. The words … are connected in form with Jos 23:12<\/span>, but, like the latter, they really rest upon Exo 34:16<\/span> and Deu 7:1-3<\/span>. In the last clause is used with peculiar emphasis: Solomon clave to these nations, of which God had said such things, to love, i.e., to enter into the relation of love or into the marriage relation, with them. is used of the attachment of a man to his wife (Gen 2:4<\/span>) and also to Jehovah (Deu 4:4<\/span>; Deu 10:20<\/span>, etc.).<\/p>\n 1Ki 11:3-8<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> 1Ki 11:3-8<\/span> carry out still further what has been already stated. In 1Ki 11:3<\/span> the taking of many<\/em> wives is first explained. He had seven hundred , women of the first rank, who were exalted into princesses, and three hundred concubines. These are in any case round numbers, that is to say, numbers which simply approximate to the reality, and are not to be understood as affirming that Solomon had all these wives and concubines at the same time, but as including all the women who were received into his harem during the whole of his reign, whereas the sixty queens and eighty concubines mentioned in Son 6:8<\/span> are to be understood as having been present in the court at one time. Even in this respect Solomon sought to equal the rulers of other nations, if not to surpass them.<\/p>\n (Note: Nevertheless these numbers, especially that of the wives who were raised to the rank of princesses, appear sufficiently large to suggest the possibility of an error in the numeral letters, although Oriental rulers carried this custom to a very great length, as for example Darius Codomannus, of whom it is related that he took with him 360 pellices<\/em> on his expedition against Alexander (see Curtius, iii. 3, 24; Athen. Deipnos<\/em>. iii. 1).<\/p>\n – These women “inclined his heart,” i.e., determined the inclination of his heart.<\/p>\n 1Ki 11:4<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> In the time of old age, when the flesh gained the supremacy over the spirit, they turned his heart to other gods, so that it was no longer wholly with Jehovah, his God. , integer<\/em>, i.e., entirely devoted to the Lord (cf. 1Ki 8:61<\/span>), like the heart of David his father, who had indeed grievously sinned, but had not fallen into idolatry.<\/p>\n 1Ki 11:5-7<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> He walked after the Ashtaroth, etc. According to 1Ki 11:7<\/span>, the idolatry here condemned consisted in the fact that he built altars to the deities of all his foreign wives, upon which they offered incense and sacrifice to their idols. It is not stated that he himself also offered sacrifice to these idols. But even the building of altars for idols was a participation in idolatry which was irreconcilable with true fidelity to the Lord. , Astarte, was the chief female deity of all the Canaanitish tribes; her worship was also transplanted from Tyre to Carthage, where it flourished greatly. She was a moon-goddess, whom the Greeks and Romans called sometimes Aphrodite<\/em>, sometimes Urania<\/em>, , Coelestis<\/em>, and Juno<\/em> (see the Comm. on Jdg 2:13<\/span>). , which is called (without the article) in 1Ki 11:7<\/span>, and in Jer 49:1<\/span>, Jer 49:3<\/span>, and Amo 1:15<\/span>, the abomination of the Ammonites, must not be confounded with the Molech<\/em> ( , always with the article) of the early Canaanites, to whom children were offered in sacrifice in the valley of Benhinnom from the time of Ahaz onwards (see the Comm. on Lev 18:21<\/span>), since they had both of them their separate places of worship in Jerusalem (cf. 2Ki 23:10<\/span>, 2Ki 23:13<\/span>), and nothing is ever said about the offering of children in sacrifice to Milcom; although the want of information prevents us from determining the precise distinction between the two. Milcom<\/em> was at any rate related to the Chemosh<\/em> of the Moabites mentioned in 1Ki 11:7<\/span>; for Chemosh is also described as a god of the Ammonites in Jdg 11:24<\/span>, whereas everywhere else he is called the god of the Moabites (Num 21:29<\/span>; Amo 1:15<\/span>, etc.). Chemosh<\/em> was a sun-god, who was worshipped as king of his people and as a god of war, and as such is depicted upon coins with a sword, lance, and shield in his hands, and with two torches by his side (see at Num 21:29<\/span>). The enumeration of the different idols is incomplete; Chemosh being omitted in 1Ki 11:5<\/span>, and Astarte, to whom Solomon also built an altar in Jerusalem, according to 2Ki 23:13<\/span>, in 1Ki 11:7<\/span>. Still this incompleteness does not warrant our filling up the supposed gaps by emendations of the text. \/ .txe , as in Jdg 2:11<\/span>; Jdg 3:7<\/span>, etc. , a pregnant expression for , as in Num 14:24<\/span>; Num 32:11-12<\/span>, etc. – These places of sacrifice ( , see at 1Ki 3:2<\/span>) Solomon built upon the mountain in front, i.e., to the east, of Jerusalem, and, according to the more precise account in 2Ki 23:13<\/span>, to the right, that is to say, on the southern side, of the Mount of Corruption, – in other words, upon the southern peak of the Mount of Olives; and consequently this peak has been called in church tradition from the time of Brocardus onwards, either Mons Offensionis<\/em>, after the Vulgate rendering of in 2Ki 23:13<\/span>, or Mons Scandali<\/em>, Mount of Offence (vid., Rob. Pal<\/em>. i. 565 and 566).<\/p>\n 1Ki 11:8<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> “So did he for all his foreign wives,” viz., built altars for their gods; for instance, in addition to those already named, he also built an altar for Astarte. These three altars, which are only mentioned in the complete account in 2Ki 23:13<\/span>, were sufficient for all the deities of the foreign wives. For the Hittites and Edomites do not appear to have had any deities of their own that were peculiar to themselves. The Hittites no doubt worshipped Astarte in common with the Sidonians, and the Edomites probably worshipped Milcom. In the whole of the Old Testament the only place in which gods of the Edomite are mentioned is in 2Ch 25:20<\/span>, and there no names are given. Of course we must except Pharaoh’s daughter, according to 1Ki 11:1<\/span>, and the remarks already made in connection with that verse; for she brought no idolatrous worship to Jerusalem, and consequently even in later times we do not find the slightest trace of Egyptian idolatry in Jerusalem and Judah.<\/p>\n (Note: From the fact that these places of sacrifice still existed even in the time of Josiah, notwithstanding the reforms of Asa, Jehoshaphat, Joash, and Hezekiah, which rooted out all public idolatry, at least in Jerusalem, Movers infers ( Phniz<\/em>. ii. 3, p. 207), and that not without reason, that there was an essential difference between these sacred places and the other seats of Israelitish idolatry which were exterminated, namely, that in their national character they were also the places of worship for the foreigners settled in and near Jerusalem, e.g., the Sidonian, Ammonitish, and Moabitish merchants, which were under the protection of treaties, since this is the only ground on which we can satisfactorily explain their undisturbed continuance at Jerusalem. But this would not preclude their having been built by Solomon for the worship of his foreign wives; on the other hand, it is much easier to explain their being built in the front of Jerusalem, and opposite to the temple of Jehovah, if from the very first regard was had to the foreigners who visited Jerusalem. The objection offered by Thenius to this view, which Bertheau had already adopted ( zur Gesch. der. Isr<\/em>. p. 323), has been shown by Bttcher ( N. exeg. Aehrenl<\/em>. ii. p. 95) to be utterly untenable.) <\/p>\n Burning incense ( ) is mentioned before sacrificing ( ), because vegetable offerings took precedence of animal sacrifices in the nature-worship of Hither Asia (vid., Bhr, Symbolik<\/em>, ii. pp. 237ff.).<\/p>\n 1Ki 11:9-13<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> Through this apostasy from the Lord his God, who had appeared to him twice (1Ki 3:5<\/span>. and 1Ki 9:2<\/span>.) and had warned him against idolatry ( is a continuation of the participle ), Solomon drew down upon himself the anger of Jehovah. The emphasis lies upon the fact that God had appeared to him Himself for the purpose of warning him, and had not merely caused him to be warned by prophets, as Theodoret has explained. In consequence of this, the following announcement is made to him, no doubt through the medium of a prophet, possibly Ahijah (1Ki 11:29<\/span>): “Because this has come into thy mind, and thou hast not kept my covenant, … I will tear the kingdom from thee and give it to thy servant; nevertheless I will not do it in thy lifetime for thy father David’s sake: howbeit I will not tear away the whole kingdom; one tribe I will give to thy son.” In this double limitation of the threatened forfeiture of the kingdom there is clearly manifested the goodness of God ( – Theodoret); not, however, with reference to Solomon, who had forfeited the divine mercy through his idolatry, but with regard to David and the selection of Jerusalem: that is to say, not from any special preference for David and Jerusalem, but in order that the promise made to David (2 Sam 7), and the choice of Jerusalem as the place where His name should be revealed which was connected with that promise, might stand immoveably as an act of grace, which no sin of men could overturn (vid., 1Ki 11:36<\/span>). For see the Comm. on 1Ki 11:31<\/span>, 1Ki 11:32<\/span>.<\/p>\n Solomon’s Defection and Degeneracy.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/I><\/span><\/P> <\/TD> B. C.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN> 983.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> <\/TABLE> 1 But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and<\/I> Hittites; 2 Of the nations concerning<\/I> which the LORD<\/B> said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for<\/I> surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love. 3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart. 4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that<\/I> his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD<\/B> his God, as was<\/I> the heart of David his father. 5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. 6 And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD<\/B>, and went not fully after the LORD<\/B>, as did<\/I> David his father. 7 Then did Solomon build a high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is<\/I> before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon. 8 And likewise did he for all his strange wives, which burnt incense and sacrificed unto their gods.<\/P> This is a sad story, and very surprising, of Solomon’s defection and degeneracy.<\/P> I. Let us enquire into the occasions and particulars of it. Shall Solomon fall, that was the beauty of Israel, and so great a blessing of his generation? Yes, it is too true, and the scripture is faithful in relating it, and repeating it, and referring to it long after, Neh. xiii. 26<\/span>. There was no king like Solomon who was beloved of his God, yet even him did outlandish women cause to sin.<\/I> There is the summary of his apostasy; it was the woman that deceived him,<\/I> and was first in the transgression.<\/I><\/P> 1. He doted on strange women, many strange women.<\/I> Here his revolt began. (1.) He gave himself to women, which his mother had particularly cautioned him against. Prov. xxxi. 3<\/span>, Give not thy strength unto women<\/I> (perhaps alluding to Samson, who lost his strength by giving information of it to a woman), for it is that which, as much as any thing, destroys kings. His father David’s fall began with the lusts of the flesh, which he should have taken warning by. The love of women has cast down many wounded<\/I> (Prov. vii. 26<\/span>) and many<\/I> (says bishop Hall) have had their head broken by their own rib.<\/I> (2.) He took many women, so many that, at last, they amounted to 700 wives and 300 concubines, 1000 in all, and not one good one among them, as he himself owns in his penitential sermon (Eccl. vii. 28<\/span>), for no woman of established virtue would be one of such a set. God had, by his law, particularly forbidden the kings to multiply either horses or wives, Deu 17:16<\/span>; Deu 17:17<\/span>. How he broke the former law, in multiplying horses, and having them out of Egypt<\/I> too (which was expressly prohibited in that law) we read ch.<\/I><\/span> x. 29<\/span>, and here we are told how he broke the latter (which proved of more fatal consequence) in multiplying wives. Note, Less sins, made gold with, open the door to greater. David had multiplied wives too much, and perhaps that made Solomon presume it lawful. Note, If those that are in reputation for religion in any thing set a bad example, they know not what a deal of mischief they may do by it, particularly to their own children. One bad act of a good man may be of more pernicious consequence to others than twenty of a wicked man. Probably Solomon, when he began to multiply wives, intended not to exceed his father’s number. But the way of sin is down-hill; those that have got into it cannot easily stop themselves. Divine wisdom has appointed one woman for one man, did so at first; and those who do not think one enough will not think two or three enough. Unbridled lust will be unbounded, and the loosened hind will wander endlessly. But this was not all: (3.) They were strange women, Moabites, Ammonites, c., of the nations which God had particularly forbidden them to intermarry with, <i>v.<\/span> 2<\/span><\/U><\/span>. Some think it was in policy that he married these foreigners, by them to get intelligence of the state of those countries. I rather fear it was because the daughters of Israel were too grave and modest for him, and those foreigners pleased him with the looseness and wantonness of their dress, and air, and conversation. Or, perhaps, it was looked upon as a piece of state to have his seraglio, as his other treasures, replenished with that which was far-fetched; as if that were too great an honour for the best of his subjects which would really have been a disgrace to the meanest of them–to be his mistresses. And, (4.) To complete the mischief, Solomon clave unto these in love,<\/I> v.<\/span> 2<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. He not only kept them, but was extravagantly fond of them, set his heart upon them, spent his time among them, thought every thing well they said and did, and despised Pharaoh’s daughter, his rightful wife, who had been dear to him, and all the ladies of Israel, in comparison of them. Solomon was master of a great deal of knowledge, but to what purpose, when he had no better a government of his appetites?<\/P> Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
I. <\/strong>Solomons sin. This was no ordinary transgression of an ordinary evil-doer. It was not the general unworthiness of his life–an unworthiness that pertains to every child of Adam. It was a distinct thing. It had an historical character–Solomons sin. We now ask briefly in what did it consist?<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>Solomons punishment. We observe at once that it was of a character to be peculiarly felt by one of his great endowments and brilliant opportunities. It came very slowly In the first place, although we do not find it here recorded, he lived long enough to see that his splendid experiment in life had been a miserable failure. Vanity of vanities, all is vanity, was his sad verdict. His world passed away and the lust of it. He ceased to desire. Punishment came in another form. He was unable to transmit the kingdom to his posterity; and such men have an eye to the future, in which their greatness will come to be fully seen and honoured. They are above the narrowest lines of an ignorant selfishness. They would make coming ages tributary to themselves. To Solomon, who had been made acquainted with the mind of God towards Israel, there must have been a profound sorrow in the certainty that his failure carried the nation down with himself. Those in authority hold a peculiar place in the divine economy, because their defections entail such widespread disasters. Hence God rightly exacts extraordinary punishments of them. (Monday Club Sermons.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
I. <\/strong>A life of luxury is perilous to the soul. God intended man to labour even when he was in Paradise. The idler is practically opposing a fundamental law of the Most High. An abundance of wealth tempts a man to a life of pleasure, which is selfish idleness, and when official power is added to the wealth the flood-gates of sin are opened in the soul in almost all cases. He who, if busy in an honest trade or profession, would readily throw off the approaches of gross sin by his preoccupation. Solomon was a luxurious idler. He was not a statesman busying himself for the good of his country. The young man who has independent resources is in a very hazardous position. He is tempted to play the Solomon on his own small scale. The sin, however, is just as great, and the ruin as profound. He seeks associates who will amuse him, and, instead of growing in spiritual wisdom and strength, he descends rapidly to the plane of stupid carnality.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>The way of wickedness is a steep descent. Solomon found the step from Pharaohs daughter to Pharaohs god a very easy one. Youth flatters itself with an idea of its own strength, and plans a descent into sin only a short distance, when it will return and walk in the path of righteousness. It is the silly bird caught in the fowlers net. Association with evil blunts the perception of the evil, and the young man is soon found apologising for the wickedness he formerly condemned.<\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>The wrath of God is a dread reality. Men of loose life love to harp on the truth that God is love, and then interpret love as amiable weakness. It was the Divine anger with Solomon and his corrupted people which rent Israel asunder and raised up formidable foes to destroy the prosperity of the land. Our text is perfectly plain on that head<\/p>\n
IV. <\/strong>The source of the false life is in the false heart. Solomons heart was not perfect with the Lord God. The word perfect here is not to be understood as referring to the character, but to the motive and intent. A perfect character never existed on earth since man fell, except the Lord Jesus. Solomon s religion was a political and fashionable affair. A heart devoted to God had nothing to do with it. He would pay outward respect to the religion of the land, but with the grand liberality of a worldly heart he would be so broad in his views and so free in his charity as to welcome all religious into his realm and capital. It is simply the heart that is not perfect with God pursuing its course of nature. It is the heart that can indulge in sin to any extent, and yet speak eloquently on universal love and the excellent glory of humanity in general. The so-called philosophy of the day is brimful of it, destroying the idea of the personality of God in order that it may make room for a universal righteousness, sin being eliminated as an old wifes fable. It is the religion that is lauded on the stage by depraved men and women, because it finds no fault with their defilement. This is the Solomonian religion, which is set over against the Davidic religion in our text. (H. Crosby, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
I<\/strong>.<\/em><\/strong> <\/strong>The nature of Solomons fall.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>The causes of Solomons fall.<\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>The consequences of Solomons fall.<\/p>\n
IV. <\/strong>The lessons of Solomons fall.<\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n