1 Kings 11:1–43

11:4 The narrator provides the additional piece of information that Solomon’s rapid slide into idolatry takes place when he is “old.” At the very least, this means that Solomon has reached an age of maturity, when he really should know better (cf. Job 32:6). The word for “wholly” has the same root as Solomon’s own name; however, this king cannot live up to his own billing. His heart is not like “the heart of David his father.” It is true that David himself put his kingdom and dynasty in jeopardy by sleeping with Solomon’s mother, Bathsheba, and acting in hubris by conducting a census (2 Samuel 11; 24). Despite these moral failings, however, David remained true to the one and only God and, in particular, never fell into idolatry. By comparison, the extent of his son’s departure from the divine ideal is staggering.

11:5–8 The nature of Solomon’s infidelity is now spelled out. He “went after” other gods. The verb is “to walk,” used to denote a “lifestyle choice” in the OT. In particular, he worshiped “Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians” and “Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites.” Astarte was a Canaanite goddess of fertility, described in the Ras Shamra texts as the consort of Baal. Her name is here (and routinely) combined with the Hebrew word for shame (boshet) to make a theological point. There is some discussion about whether “Milcom” (v. 5) and “Molech” (v. 7) are two different Ammonite gods or two names for the national deity (if the latter is true, it may be that “Molech” is a Hebrew distortion of “Milcom” that again plays on the word “shame”). Either way, the verdict is beyond doubt: “Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the Lord and did not wholly follow the Lord, as David his father had done.” Wisdom clearly does not protect one from sinful behavior.

However, Solomon’s idolatry has not yet reached its conclusion. He also “built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites.” In 3:2 the propensity of the people to worship at high places was identified as a problem flowing from the absence of a temple. Now the one who solved that problem has created a whole new set of issues with his continued building program. The fact that he establishes this (or these) high place(s) on “the mountain east of Jerusalem,” the Mount of Olives, is doubly galling, as the view from the temple he had built would now be dominated by shrines to other gods, which presumably even looked down on the temple. Nor is his sponsorship of idolatry limited to these two gods, but “so he did for all his foreign wives, who made offerings and sacrificed to their gods.” Once more, Solomon’s own idolatrous tendencies (which include but are not exhausted by worshiping foreign gods) are fuelled by those of the wives he has chosen.

11:9–10 God’s verdict on Solomon’s departure from the ways of his father is both blunt and revealing. “The Lord was angry with Solomon” is an unusual and particularly intense expression, packed with emotion (cf. Deut. 1:37; 4:21; 9:8; 2 Kings 17:18). The explanation follows in the rest of verses 9–10. Solomon’s “heart had turned away from the Lord, the God of Israel” to follow this assortment of pagan deities, which is bad enough in itself. But it is especially wicked given the fact that God had “appeared to him twice” (1 Kings 3:5–15; 9:2–9) and both times had explicitly “commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods.” Indeed, the gifts and privileges Solomon has received serve to increase his culpability and thus the intensity of God’s anger. The fact that the most privileged of kings is also the one who sins most spectacularly may well hold a particular resonance for the readers of Kings in the latter part of exile, as both Judah and Israel had been the recipients of almost endless generosity from Yahweh and yet chose to walk away from him.

11:11 Even in the light of Solomon’s blameworthiness, the announcement of Yahweh’s judgment still comes as a crashing shock. Because this has been the pattern of Solomon’s life (“your practice”), and he has failed abjectly to keep both the “covenant and my statutes that I have commanded you,” God’s verdict is that “I will surely tear the kingdom from you and will give it to your servant.” The emphatic words God spoke to Saul in 1 Samuel 15:28 are now repeated to Solomon. There is no suggestion (yet) concerning the identity of this servant. The primary emphasis falls on the fact that even the wisest man in history has fallen under the condemnation of God and has now been rejected. Israel’s history is essentially the history of Solomon writ large.

11:12–13 The most worrying feature of verse 11 is the implication that, like the dynasty of Saul before it, the line of Solomon is about to come to an end. This raises the question of the fulfillment of the promises made to David in 2 Samuel 7. However, God is quick to point out that he will find a way to discipline Solomon while still keeping his promises to Solomon’s father, and his long-term kingdom plans, on track: “Yet for the sake of David your father I will not do it in your days, but I will tear it out of the hand of your son.” The punishment will be delayed, demonstrating that this is not, in fact, the end of David’s line. This is developed further in the assurance that even Solomon’s yet-to-be-named son will not lose the kingdom in its entirety: “I will not tear away all the kingdom, but I will give one tribe to your son.” Why does God do this? Why does he persist with this “line”? The answer is clear: “For the sake of David my servant and for the sake of Jerusalem that I have chosen.” God’s plans are linked both to a particular dynasty and to a particular place. It is in Jerusalem that God will reveal his presence to his people, as time will make clear. Even amid catastrophic judgment, grace is held out to God’s people. The hope of the nation remains the seed of David.

11:14 In 5:4 Solomon’s reign was described in idyllic terms (“there was neither adversary [Hb. satan] nor misfortune”). But in the rest of this chapter God “raise[s] up an adversary” three times as he disciplines his wayward son and rolls out his judgment. The first of these adversaries is “Hadad the Edomite.” Hadad is a traditional Edomite throne name (cf. Gen. 36:35), and so it is no surprise to learn that this Hadad is of the “royal house in Edom.”

11:15–22 Hadad’s antipathy to the house of David stretches back to childhood. During David’s campaign in Edom (2 Sam. 8:11–14), Joab had “struck down every male in Edom.” As in 1 Kings 1, the unfinished business of the father comes back to bite the son. In the case of Hadad, he survived by fleeing to Egypt with a few of the royal servants. The fact that they received a warm welcome (“Pharaoh king of Egypt . . . gave him a house and assigned him an allowance of food and gave him land”) is ominous, and an alliance quickly formed. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Hadad’s new alliance trumps Solomon’s own attempts at diplomacy by marriage (1 Kings 3:1), as “Pharaoh . . . gave him in marriage the sister of his own wife, the sister of Tahpenes the queen.” Hadad’s connection with the court is now at least as intimate as Solomon’s.

Hadad then settled down in the court and had a son, presumably living as part of the royal court. The son’s name, “Genubath,” sounds like a Hebrew word for “stolen,” which may reflect Hadad’s perspective on what David and his descendants did with regard to his inheritance in Edom. When the news of David’s death reached Hadad, he lost no time in setting out for revenge: “Hadad said to Pharaoh, ‘Let me depart, that I may go to my own country’” (11:21). Once more, an adopted member of the Egyptian court asks a pharaoh for release, but this time not to secure the freedom of God’s people but to exact revenge. Neither the protests of Pharaoh nor the attempts of Solomon to secure peace with Egypt and Edom through marriage could stop Hadad. The memories of his childhood and the humiliation of his nation drove him to seek out Solomon: “And he said to him, ‘Only let me depart.’” The sense of impending doom is palpable.

11:23–25 Before we hear any more of Hadad, we are introduced to the next “adversary . . . , Rezon the son of Eliada.” Like Hadad, Rezon had fled, but this time not from David and Joab but from “his master Hadadezer king of Zobah.” David, however, was involved in his story. Second Samuel 8:3–11 explains how David overthrew Hadadezer and his forces (the “killing” in 1 Kings 11:24 refers to the massacre of 22,000 Assyrians and capture of up to 20,000 of Hadadezer’s men, presumably including the king). This created the conditions for Hadadezer’s rebellious servant Rezon to step in, gathering “men about him” and becoming “leader of a marauding band.” Through his attacks on David’s regime, he became the obvious focus of resistance and was soon made “king in Damascus.” Rezon then joined Hadad in a long-term campaign to attack and undermine Solomon at every turn. “He was an adversary of Israel all the days of Solomon, doing harm as Hadad did. And he loathed Israel and reigned over Syria.” Notice how the writer has carefully crafted his account of events, holding back the information that, actually, Solomon has faced low-level opposition throughout his reign until now. This is designed to help us to see that, while God did bless Solomon richly, even during this golden age all was not straightforward. These narratives create a sense of gathering gloom, as the kingdom of even this most blessed of kings starts to crumble at the edges.

11:26 Surprisingly, the introduction to the third “adversary” does not follow the pattern. In fact, were it not for the fact that he is described as “a servant of Solomon” (see foreshadowing in 11:11), the entry of “Jeroboam the son of Nebat” may seem quite innocuous. But when this man “lifted up his hand against the king,” we know that the consequences will be severe. Listing the name of a man’s mother is elsewhere in the book a sign that the man is a pretender to the throne (cf. 1 Kings 1:5).

11:27–28 Unlike Hadad and Rezon, Jeroboam is neither an outsider nor displaced. He is, in many ways, a model Israelite. He rebels against Solomon because of the intervention of God through his prophet. Jeroboam is involved in Solomon’s city works in Jerusalem (mentioned in 9:24), and “Solomon saw that the young man was industrious.” The accolade “industrious” can have many nuances but is always used of an impressive figure, fitted for leadership (cf. the descriptions of Jephthah [Judg. 11:1]; Boaz [Ruth 2:1]; and David [1 Sam. 16:18]). On seeing Jeroboam’s potential, the king “gave him charge over all the forced labor of the house of Joseph.” Solomon is using Jeroboam against his own people (the tribes of Joseph) as part of his scheme to use his own people (all of Israel) to further his kingdom.

11:29–40 At this point, “the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite” seeks Jeroboam out in a private location and performs a deeply shocking prophetic action (vv. 30–31). There has been a striking absence of prophetic activity since chapter 1 (and even then, Nathan’s intervention was more political than strictly prophetic), but now a prophet comes from the ancient worship center of Shiloh (cf. 1 Samuel 1). When “Ahijah laid hold of the new garment that was on him” (1 Kings 11:30), it is not entirely certain whether the prophet or Jeroboam himself was wearing the new coat.² On balance, it seems more likely that Jeroboam was wearing the garment. The word for “garment” is an unusual one (Hb. salmah) but is chosen here because of its similarity to Solomon’s name. The language describing the prophet’s actions is striking, as he grabbed the coat and “tore it into twelve pieces. And he said to Jeroboam, ‘Take for yourself ten pieces, for thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, “Behold, I am about to tear the kingdom from the hand of Solomon and will give you ten tribes.”’” The Hebrew reads “the ten tribes,” implying that “Israel,” as it will be known, is already a definite entity. As the one nation is broken up, old tribal identities come back into focus.

Once more it is stated that Solomon’s successor “shall have one tribe,” but no effort is made to address the rather obvious mathematical problem that ten plus one does not equal twelve! Various suggestions have been made to explain the “missing tribe.” Is Judah, Solomon’s own tribe, assumed to remain loyal? Has Benjamin already been subsumed into Judah? Or has Simeon been swallowed up by Judah, which surrounds it? Is this a reference to the “neutrality” of Levi? It is impossible to be certain, but the fate of the nation is clear, as is the fact that Jeroboam will take ten tribes from Solomon’s son. There is also no doubt as to the reason for this turn of events. Once more it is spelled out that idolatry flowing from a failure to walk in the ways of the Lord, as David did, has settled Israel’s fate (v. 33), although this time the verbs are plural, underlining that the people have followed their leader into disobedience.

At this point Ahijah speaks to Solomon’s own future: “Nevertheless, I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand, but I will make him ruler all the days of his life, for the sake of David my servant whom I chose, who kept my commandments and my statutes.” As will happen again (notably with Hezekiah and Manasseh), there is a deferral of action until after the reign of the incumbent has come to an end. It will be Solomon’s son who will suffer the loss of the united kingdom. The fact that Solomon will remain as “ruler” (or “prince”), however, could imply that he has forfeited the right to be God’s king in Jerusalem. But even then, Yahweh will ensure that “David my servant may always have a lamp before me in Jerusalem, the city where I have chosen to put my name.” David himself was once referred to as a “lamp” by his troops (2 Sam. 21:17; cf. Ps. 132:17), and this language is often used of the continuation of a dynasty (cf. 1 Kings 15:4; 2 Kings 8:19). It seems that Yahweh is not finished with the house of David (as is made explicit in 1 Kings 11:39).

As for Jeroboam himself, he receives an extravagant commitment from God through the prophet: “I will take you, and you shall reign over all that your soul desires, and you shall be king over Israel.” Jeroboam is to take the kingdom but also to acknowledge that the real “taking” is done by God. He is then charged in terms typical of Deuteronomy that match exactly the areas in which Solomon has been indicted. If Jeroboam manages to conform to the Davidic pattern, God says that “I will be with you and will build you a sure house, as I built for David, and I will give Israel to you.” The language consciously echoes 2 Samuel 7:3, 9, 16. Yes, God is using Jeroboam to punish both king and people for their apostasy, but he also shows incredible grace to Jeroboam.

By the closing verse we have come full circle. The Solomon narrative opened with the new king settling his father’s old scores “according to his wisdom.” Now there is no wisdom in sight, as he attempts to take matters into his own hands: “Solomon sought therefore to kill Jeroboam.” Solomon is thwarted by the Egyptians, with his first marriage apparently proving useless politically. “But Jeroboam arose and fled into Egypt, to Shishak king of Egypt, and was in Egypt until the death of Solomon.” Disaster does not strike at once, but it is clearly only a matter of time.

11:41–43 This paragraph sets the tone for the “death notices” to follow in the rest of the book of Kings. In Solomon’s case, however, it begins with the affirmation, “The rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the Book of the Acts of Solomon?” As the ultimate ancient wise man, Solomon’s output is substantial. His literary legacy is well known.³ In addition, he has an entire annal devoted to him. The question remains, however, if in his “wisdom” he is actually wise. Despite his unique privileges, his forty-year reign marks the end of the united monarchy, and the seeds of its demise are to be found in his actions. Given all that we have learned (through Ahijah), the note that “Solomon slept with his fathers and was buried in the city of David his father” and that “Rehoboam his son reigned in his place” is deeply ominous. The prospects for the people of God post-Solomon are not bright.