F. Solomon’s Wives and Adversaries (11:1-43)

As has been implied in the previous discussion, Solomon’s reign is complicated and difficult to evaluate. It was a prosperous time, at least for some, but in spite of the fact that Solomon controlled such a vast region and therefore the trade routes that went with it, his income could not keep pace with his lavish expenditures. As a result, his people faced burdensome policies that included severe taxation and forced labor.

Religiously, several factors indicate a sense of commitment on Solomon’s part to the God of Israel. His initial prayer for wisdom and subsequent prayer to dedicate the temple suggest spiritual sensitivity, and his connection with the ark reveals at least some concern for Israel’s religious traditions. Yet his reign clearly ends on a negative note, and his kingdom is far from unified when he dies. What happened?

As mentioned in the introduction, the book of Kings reflects the theological perspective presented in the book of Deuteronomy. With that in mind, Dt 17:14-17 clearly suggests Solomon’s shortcomings. According to this passage, three things were to be avoided by Israel’s king: (1) marrying many wives, (2) accumulating large amounts of silver, and (3) acquiring great numbers of horses.

Yet in precisely these three areas Solomon is found wanting. First, Solomon married many wives who in turn led him away from Yahweh (11:1-13). To be sure, David also had several wives, but his wives were typically not foreigners who were married for international political reasons as were Solomon’s. Beyond that, however, Solomon clearly did not marry all of these women at once, in spite of the fact that the problem goes unmentioned prior to ch. 11. These marriages denote a gradual shift rather than a sudden alteration; Solomon increasingly sought the political security that such alliances offered. In the process, he accommodated the gods that foreigners worshiped. Besides building a temple for Yahweh, therefore, Solomon erected many temples dedicated to various gods from throughout the ancient world (vv.7-8).

Second, Solomon accumulated great amounts of silver (1Ki 10:27). To be sure, the promise of wealth was included in God’s earlier address (1Ki 3:13). But the context of 10:27 makes it clear that Solomon’s riches were not so much the product of divine generosity as they were of human achievement. Solomon, in other words, accumulated great wealth on his own initiative and often at the expense of those under him. The point is the same as that expressed by Jesus in Mt 6:33. When one seeks first the kingdom of God, other things will be added. However, the presence of other things, as the psalmist attests to (Ps 73:3), does not necessarily indicate that the kingdom was actually sought first. The presence of wealth, therefore, must not be taken as a sign of God’s approval.

Third, Solomon acquired large numbers of chariots and horses, the majority of which were obtained from Egypt (1Ki 10:26, 28-29). Here, the taskmaster has now become the provider! In earlier periods in Israel’s history, war was carried out by the infantry, and the outcome clearly rested upon God. Stories such as the conquest of Jericho (Jos 6) and the battles of Gideon (Jdg 7) reinforced the notion in the Israelite mind that victory was dependent on God rather than on military excellence. Yet just as he sought political and financial security, so too did Solomon strive for military security. In the process his commitment to God naturally diminished. With Solomon, what on the surface appears to be a time of remarkable vitality and achievement turns out to be what Mendenhall and others have referred to as the “paganization of Israel” (Brueggemann, 31; Mendenhall, 160). The quest for self-security and a lasting trust in God are, as we see here, mutually exclusive.

As a result, Solomon’s reign ends in disarray. 1Ki 11:14-43 briefly records several of those individuals and nations who caused trouble during Solomon’s last days. Internationally, Edom and Aram were noteworthy nemeses (vv.14-25). On the local scene, a northerner named Jeroboam received a message from the prophet Ahijah that he would gain a considerable portion of Solomon’s kingdom (11:29-39). Apparently unwilling to wait for such an event to occur, Jeroboam rebelled and was exiled for a time in Egypt (11:40). Although Solomon retained somewhat tenuous control of his kingdom, the end was clearly in sight. The facts that the destruction of Solomon’s kingdom was delayed until after his death and that such a destruction would affect only a portion of the actual kingdom are attributed by the editor to God’s faithfulness to David, the positive example of kingship in Israel (vv.13, 32, 36). Had Solomon followed that example, these difficulties would have been averted (v.33). As Clarke aptly concludes:

How few proofs does [Solomon’s] life give that the gracious purpose of God was fulfilled in Him! He received much, but he would have received much more, had he been faithful to the grace given (p. 395).

However, probably due either to his relationship to David or to his connection with the temple, Solomon is at least spared the embarrassment of serving as the negative example of kingship. That role will soon be delegated to Jeroboam.