1 Kings 3
Tap any word to open its Greek or Hebrew word and Strong’s lexicon entry right here, and any name to open its Bible Dictionary entry. Read this chapter with JFB commentary · Search the Bible
THY WORD IS TRUTH
The Law
History
Poetry & Wisdom
The Prophets
The Gospels & Acts
The Letters
Prophecy
“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” — John 5:39
1 Kings 3
Solomon's Alliance with Egypt
1And Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh king of Egypt, and took Pharaoh’s daughter, and brought her into the city of David, until he had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the LORD, and the wall of Jerusalem round about.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
CHAPTER 3
1Ki 3:1. Solomon Marries Pharaoh's Daughter.
1. Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh--This was a royal title, equivalent to "sultan," and the personal name of this monarch is said to have been Vaphres. The formation, on equal terms, of this matrimonial alliance with the royal family of Egypt, shows the high consideration to which the Hebrew kingdom had now arisen. Rosellini has given, from the Egyptian monuments, what is supposed to be a portrait of this princess. She was received in the land of her adoption with great eclat; for the Song of Solomon and the forty-fifth Psalm are supposed to have been composed in honor of this occasion, although they may both have a higher typical reference to the introduction of the Gentiles into the church.
and brought her into the city of David--that is, Jerusalem. She was not admissible into the stronghold of Zion, the building where the ark was (De 23:7, 8). She seems to have been lodged at first in his mother's apartments (So 3:4; 8:2), as a suitable residence was not yet provided for her in the new palace (1Ki 7:8; 9:24; 2Ch 8:11).
building ... the wall of Jerusalem round about--Although David had begun (Psa 51:18), it was, according to Josephus, reserved for Solomon to extend and complete the fortifications of the city. It has been questioned whether this marriage was in conformity with the law (see Ex 34:16; De 7:3; Ezr 10:1-10; Ne 13:26). But it is nowhere censured in Scripture, as are the connections Solomon formed with other foreigners (1Ki 11:1-3); whence it may be inferred that he had stipulated for her abandonment of idolatry, and conforming to the Jewish religion (Psa 45:10, 11).
1Ki 3:2-5. High Places Being in Use, He Sacrifices at Gibeon.
CHAPTER 3
1Ki 3:1. Solomon Marries Pharaoh's Daughter.
1. Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh--This was a royal title, equivalent to "sultan," and the personal name of this monarch is said to have been Vaphres. The formation, on equal terms, of this matrimonial alliance with the royal family of Egypt, shows the high consideration to which the Hebrew kingdom had now arisen. Rosellini has given, from the Egyptian monuments, what is supposed to be a portrait of this princess. She was received in the land of her adoption with great eclat; for the Song of Solomon and the forty-fifth Psalm are supposed to have been composed in honor of this occasion, although they may both have a higher typical reference to the introduction of the Gentiles into the church.
and brought her into the city of David--that is, Jerusalem. She was not admissible into the stronghold of Zion, the building where the ark was (De 23:7, 8). She seems to have been lodged at first in his mother's apartments (So 3:4; 8:2), as a suitable residence was not yet provided for her in the new palace (1Ki 7:8; 9:24; 2Ch 8:11).
building ... the wall of Jerusalem round about--Although David had begun (Psa 51:18), it was, according to Josephus, reserved for Solomon to extend and complete the fortifications of the city. It has been questioned whether this marriage was in conformity with the law (see Ex 34:16; De 7:3; Ezr 10:1-10; Ne 13:26). But it is nowhere censured in Scripture, as are the connections Solomon formed with other foreigners (1Ki 11:1-3); whence it may be inferred that he had stipulated for her abandonment of idolatry, and conforming to the Jewish religion (Psa 45:10, 11).
1Ki 3:2-5. High Places Being in Use, He Sacrifices at Gibeon.
The Pulpit Commentary
And Solomon made affinity [Not "alliance" (as some have supposed) but relationship. Lit; made himself son-in-law] with Pharaoh king of Egypt [which of the Pharaohs this was, it is impossible to say with certainty. As, however, Shishak (1Ki_11:40; 1Ki_14:25) is undoubtedly the Sheshonk who succeeded to the throne of Egypt in the 26th year of Solomon (Poole), and who was the first king of the 22nd dynasty of Manetho, we may safely identify this Pharaoh with "a late king of the 21st dynasty." It has been assumed (Bunsen, Ewald, Brugsch, al.) that it was Psusennes II; the last king of that house, on the supposition that he reigned 35 years, (as stated by Eusebius), but according to Africanus, his reign was limited to 14 years. It is wiser to say, therefore, with Mr. Poole (Dict. Bib; "Pharaoh") that this Pharaoh "cannot yet be identified on Manetho's list." It is also impossible to decide whether the alliance was first sought by Solomon with a view to win over a powerful and dangerous neighbour (Thenius), to whose inroads his northern border was exposed, and especially to counteract the influence (1Ki_11:21) of Hadad (Plumptre), or whether the marriage was proposed by Pharaoh because the 21st dynasty "had then become very weak" (Rawlinson) and its head desired "friendly relations with the kingdom of Israel, which had grown into a power to be dreaded" (Keil). But we may reasonably suppose that the alliance "must have been to most Israelites a very startling one" (Plumptre.) Egypt (Rahab, Psa_89:10; Isa_51:9) was to every Israelite a name both of triumph and dread. The Pharaohs were their ancestral foes], and took Pharaoh's daughter [A marriage such as this was not without precedent (Gen_41:45; Exo_2:21; Num_12:1; Mat_1:5; Rth_4:13), nor was it condemned by the Law, which only forbade intermarriage with the nations of Canaan (Exo_34:16; Deu_7:3), and sanctioned the union of an Israelite with a captive taken in war (Deu_21:13; cf. Deu_20:14). "At the same time, it was only when the foreign wives renounced idolatry, that such marriages were in accordance with the spirit of the law" (Keil). As Solomon at this period of his life faithfully observed the law, as he is never blamed for this marriage, and as there is no trace whatever of the introduction of Egyptian rites into Israel, it is a fair presumption that the Egyptian princess conformed to the religion of her adopted country], and brought her into the city of David [2Ch_8:11 speaks of her dwelling in "the house of David," i.e; it would seem, the palace which David had occupied] until he had made an end [this hardly shows that he had begun to build, as Keil infers. He did not begin building the Temple until the fourth (1Ki_6:1), nor his own house until the eleventh year (1Ki_7:1) after his accession, and the marriage, though not at the very commencement of his reign, can hardly have been delayed to the eleventh year, and may have taken place before the death of Shimei] of building his own house [cf. 1Ki_7:7] and the house of the Lord [cf. 1Ki_6:1-38.; 1Ki_7:51] and the wall of Jerusalem round about. [Probably, he both strengthened and extended the city walls, as Josephus (Ant. 8.6. 1) affirms. Acc. to the LXX. addition to 1Ki_12:1-33; it was on this task that Jeroboam was employed (1Ki_11:27; cf. 1Ki_9:15). David had fortified a part of the city (2Sa_5:9).
And Solomon made affinity [Not "alliance" (as some have supposed) but relationship. Lit; made himself son-in-law] with Pharaoh king of Egypt [which of the Pharaohs this was, it is impossible to say with certainty. As, however, Shishak (1Ki_11:40; 1Ki_14:25) is undoubtedly the Sheshonk who succeeded to the throne of Egypt in the 26th year of Solomon (Poole), and who was the first king of the 22nd dynasty of Manetho, we may safely identify this Pharaoh with "a late king of the 21st dynasty." It has been assumed (Bunsen, Ewald, Brugsch, al.) that it was Psusennes II; the last king of that house, on the supposition that he reigned 35 years, (as stated by Eusebius), but according to Africanus, his reign was limited to 14 years. It is wiser to say, therefore, with Mr. Poole (Dict. Bib; "Pharaoh") that this Pharaoh "cannot yet be identified on Manetho's list." It is also impossible to decide whether the alliance was first sought by Solomon with a view to win over a powerful and dangerous neighbour (Thenius), to whose inroads his northern border was exposed, and especially to counteract the influence (1Ki_11:21) of Hadad (Plumptre), or whether the marriage was proposed by Pharaoh because the 21st dynasty "had then become very weak" (Rawlinson) and its head desired "friendly relations with the kingdom of Israel, which had grown into a power to be dreaded" (Keil). But we may reasonably suppose that the alliance "must have been to most Israelites a very startling one" (Plumptre.) Egypt (Rahab, Psa_89:10; Isa_51:9) was to every Israelite a name both of triumph and dread. The Pharaohs were their ancestral foes], and took Pharaoh's daughter [A marriage such as this was not without precedent (Gen_41:45; Exo_2:21; Num_12:1; Mat_1:5; Rth_4:13), nor was it condemned by the Law, which only forbade intermarriage with the nations of Canaan (Exo_34:16; Deu_7:3), and sanctioned the union of an Israelite with a captive taken in war (Deu_21:13; cf. Deu_20:14). "At the same time, it was only when the foreign wives renounced idolatry, that such marriages were in accordance with the spirit of the law" (Keil). As Solomon at this period of his life faithfully observed the law, as he is never blamed for this marriage, and as there is no trace whatever of the introduction of Egyptian rites into Israel, it is a fair presumption that the Egyptian princess conformed to the religion of her adopted country], and brought her into the city of David [2Ch_8:11 speaks of her dwelling in "the house of David," i.e; it would seem, the palace which David had occupied] until he had made an end [this hardly shows that he had begun to build, as Keil infers. He did not begin building the Temple until the fourth (1Ki_6:1), nor his own house until the eleventh year (1Ki_7:1) after his accession, and the marriage, though not at the very commencement of his reign, can hardly have been delayed to the eleventh year, and may have taken place before the death of Shimei] of building his own house [cf. 1Ki_7:7] and the house of the Lord [cf. 1Ki_6:1-38.; 1Ki_7:51] and the wall of Jerusalem round about. [Probably, he both strengthened and extended the city walls, as Josephus (Ant. 8.6. 1) affirms. Acc. to the LXX. addition to 1Ki_12:1-33; it was on this task that Jeroboam was employed (1Ki_11:27; cf. 1Ki_9:15). David had fortified a part of the city (2Sa_5:9).
2Only the people sacrificed in high places, because there was no house built unto the name of the LORD, until those days.
The Pulpit Commentary
Only [The word perhaps signifies "that there was one exception to the flourishing condition of things which the writer has been describing" (Rawlinson), though the people are nowhere blamed for sacrificing on the high places, and Solomon's sacrifice at "the great high place "was full of blessing. The idea rather is that just as he was obliged to bring his Egyptian wife into the city of David, because his palace was not yet finished, so the people were compelled to sacrifice on the high places, because the temple was not yet built (Keil), and "the place" where God would put His name had only just been chosen (1Ch_22:1)] the people sacrificed [Heb. were sacrificing, i.e; habitually, constantly] in high places [All nations have chosen hill tops for act of worship, perhaps as being nearer heaven. "Even Abraham built an altar to the Lord on a mountain near Bethel (Gen_12:7, Gen_12:8; cf. Gen_22:2, Gen_22:9; Gen_31:54)." And the use of high places for this purpose was not distinctly condemned in the Law. It is true the Hebrews were commanded to have but one place of sacrifice (Le 17:9; Deu_12:5, Deu_12:11, Deu_12:13, Deu_12:26, Deu_12:27; cf. Jos_22:29), and this no doubt was, if not an indirect prohibition, a discouragement of such sanctuaries. It has been held, however, that this command was purely prospective, and it is certainly remarkable that even when the Israelites were settled in the promised land, and the tabernacle was set up (Jos_18:1), altars were constantly built and sacrifices offered on high places, and sometimes, as in the case of Gideon (Jdg_6:26), and Manoah (Jdg_13:19, Jdg_13:20), by express Divine command. Later on we find Samuel (1Sa_7:9, 1Sa_7:10; 1Sa_11:15; 1Sa_16:5), Saul (Heb_13:9; 14:35), David (1Ch_21:26), Solomon and Elijah (1Ki_18:30), offering sacrifices in various places, which they could not possibly have done had it seemed to them that this was condemned beforehand by the Law. It is highly probable, therefore, that though the contemporaries of Joshua took a different view (as Jos_22:15-31 proves), the men of a later age excused themselves on the ground stated in the text, that "there was no house built unto the name of the Lord." It has been held by some that "had they not sacrificed and burnt incense on high places, they could not have sacrificed or burnt incense at all" (Bp. Horsley); but this seems to overlook the fact that there was one place provided for sacrifices—the door of the tabernacle -- and that for some reason or other they sacrificed elsewhere. And the reason, no doubt, was the one assigned by the historian. It should be added that this term "high place" (בָּמָה) came to be used of all places of worship, not only on heights, but even those in valleys (2Ki_17:9; Jer_7:31; Jer_32:35). The Bamah sometimes consisted of an altar only, but as a rule, there was a shrine or sanctuary, erected hard by (1Ki_13:32; 2Ki_17:29; 2Ki_23:19), the Beth-Bamah, for which the word Bamah is sometimes loosely employed (1Ki_11:7; 1Ki_14:23; 2Ki_21:3)], because there was no house built unto the name of the Lord until those days.
Only [The word perhaps signifies "that there was one exception to the flourishing condition of things which the writer has been describing" (Rawlinson), though the people are nowhere blamed for sacrificing on the high places, and Solomon's sacrifice at "the great high place "was full of blessing. The idea rather is that just as he was obliged to bring his Egyptian wife into the city of David, because his palace was not yet finished, so the people were compelled to sacrifice on the high places, because the temple was not yet built (Keil), and "the place" where God would put His name had only just been chosen (1Ch_22:1)] the people sacrificed [Heb. were sacrificing, i.e; habitually, constantly] in high places [All nations have chosen hill tops for act of worship, perhaps as being nearer heaven. "Even Abraham built an altar to the Lord on a mountain near Bethel (Gen_12:7, Gen_12:8; cf. Gen_22:2, Gen_22:9; Gen_31:54)." And the use of high places for this purpose was not distinctly condemned in the Law. It is true the Hebrews were commanded to have but one place of sacrifice (Le 17:9; Deu_12:5, Deu_12:11, Deu_12:13, Deu_12:26, Deu_12:27; cf. Jos_22:29), and this no doubt was, if not an indirect prohibition, a discouragement of such sanctuaries. It has been held, however, that this command was purely prospective, and it is certainly remarkable that even when the Israelites were settled in the promised land, and the tabernacle was set up (Jos_18:1), altars were constantly built and sacrifices offered on high places, and sometimes, as in the case of Gideon (Jdg_6:26), and Manoah (Jdg_13:19, Jdg_13:20), by express Divine command. Later on we find Samuel (1Sa_7:9, 1Sa_7:10; 1Sa_11:15; 1Sa_16:5), Saul (Heb_13:9; 14:35), David (1Ch_21:26), Solomon and Elijah (1Ki_18:30), offering sacrifices in various places, which they could not possibly have done had it seemed to them that this was condemned beforehand by the Law. It is highly probable, therefore, that though the contemporaries of Joshua took a different view (as Jos_22:15-31 proves), the men of a later age excused themselves on the ground stated in the text, that "there was no house built unto the name of the Lord." It has been held by some that "had they not sacrificed and burnt incense on high places, they could not have sacrificed or burnt incense at all" (Bp. Horsley); but this seems to overlook the fact that there was one place provided for sacrifices—the door of the tabernacle -- and that for some reason or other they sacrificed elsewhere. And the reason, no doubt, was the one assigned by the historian. It should be added that this term "high place" (בָּמָה) came to be used of all places of worship, not only on heights, but even those in valleys (2Ki_17:9; Jer_7:31; Jer_32:35). The Bamah sometimes consisted of an altar only, but as a rule, there was a shrine or sanctuary, erected hard by (1Ki_13:32; 2Ki_17:29; 2Ki_23:19), the Beth-Bamah, for which the word Bamah is sometimes loosely employed (1Ki_11:7; 1Ki_14:23; 2Ki_21:3)], because there was no house built unto the name of the Lord until those days.
Solomon Loves the LORD
3And Solomon loved the LORD, walking in the statutes of David his father: only he sacrificed and burnt incense in high places.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
3. And Solomon loved the Lord--This declaration, illustrated by what follows, affords undoubted evidence of the young king's piety; nor is the word "only," which prefaces the statement, to be understood as introducing a qualifying circumstance that reflected any degree of censure upon him. The intention of the sacred historian is to describe the generally prevailing mode of worship before the temple was built. The
high places were altars erected on natural or artificial eminences, probably from the idea that men were brought nearer to the Deity. They had been used by the patriarchs, and had become so universal among the heathen that they were almost identified with idolatry. They were prohibited in the law (Le 17:3, 4; De 12:13, 14; Jr 7:31; Eze 6:3, 4; Ho 10:8). But, so long as the tabernacle was migratory and the means for the national worship were merely provisional, the worship on those high places was tolerated. Hence, as accounting for their continuance, it is expressly stated (1Ki 3:2) that God had not yet chosen a permanent and exclusive place for his worship.
3. And Solomon loved the Lord--This declaration, illustrated by what follows, affords undoubted evidence of the young king's piety; nor is the word "only," which prefaces the statement, to be understood as introducing a qualifying circumstance that reflected any degree of censure upon him. The intention of the sacred historian is to describe the generally prevailing mode of worship before the temple was built. The
high places were altars erected on natural or artificial eminences, probably from the idea that men were brought nearer to the Deity. They had been used by the patriarchs, and had become so universal among the heathen that they were almost identified with idolatry. They were prohibited in the law (Le 17:3, 4; De 12:13, 14; Jr 7:31; Eze 6:3, 4; Ho 10:8). But, so long as the tabernacle was migratory and the means for the national worship were merely provisional, the worship on those high places was tolerated. Hence, as accounting for their continuance, it is expressly stated (1Ki 3:2) that God had not yet chosen a permanent and exclusive place for his worship.
The Pulpit Commentary
And Solomon loved the Lord [thus keeping the first and great commandment, the "Shema Israel" (Deu_6:5; cf. Deu_30:16; Mat_22:1-46 :87; Luk_10:27], walking in the statutes of David his father [i.e; those which David had kept (Luk_10:6,Luk_10:14) and commanded him to keep (Luk_2:4)]: only he sacrificed and burnt incense in high places. [These words clearly show that the worship of the high places, although condoned, and indeed accepted, by God (Luk_10:5) was not strictly lawful and right. It was an ignorance that God winked at. The historian, remembering what the worship of the high places became, notices this as an imperfection of Solomon's early reign, though he does not say that such worship was sinful.
And Solomon loved the Lord [thus keeping the first and great commandment, the "Shema Israel" (Deu_6:5; cf. Deu_30:16; Mat_22:1-46 :87; Luk_10:27], walking in the statutes of David his father [i.e; those which David had kept (Luk_10:6,Luk_10:14) and commanded him to keep (Luk_2:4)]: only he sacrificed and burnt incense in high places. [These words clearly show that the worship of the high places, although condoned, and indeed accepted, by God (Luk_10:5) was not strictly lawful and right. It was an ignorance that God winked at. The historian, remembering what the worship of the high places became, notices this as an imperfection of Solomon's early reign, though he does not say that such worship was sinful.
4And the king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there; for that was the great high place: a thousand burnt offerings did Solomon offer upon that altar.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
4. the king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there--The old tabernacle and the brazen altar which Moses had made in the wilderness were there (1Ch 16:39; 21:29; 2Ch 1:3-6). The royal progress was of public importance. It was a season of national devotion. The king was accompanied by his principal nobility (2Ch 1:2); and, as the occasion was most probably one of the great annual festivals which lasted seven days, the rank of the offerer and the succession of daily oblations may help in part to account for the immense magnitude of the sacrifices.
4. the king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there--The old tabernacle and the brazen altar which Moses had made in the wilderness were there (1Ch 16:39; 21:29; 2Ch 1:3-6). The royal progress was of public importance. It was a season of national devotion. The king was accompanied by his principal nobility (2Ch 1:2); and, as the occasion was most probably one of the great annual festivals which lasted seven days, the rank of the offerer and the succession of daily oblations may help in part to account for the immense magnitude of the sacrifices.
The Pulpit Commentary
And the king went to Gibeon [Jos_9:3; Jos_10:2; Jos_18:25; Jos_21:17; 2Sa_21:1. Now known as El-Jib, a commanding eminence (as the name implies) some six miles north of Jerusalem. Strictly, it consists of two heights, on one of which, it is conjectured, the town stood, while the other was the high place. Solomon was accompanied to Gibeon by "all the congregation," including the captains, judges, governors, etc., after the precedent of 1Sa_11:15; cf. 2Sa_6:2. His object was also to supplicate the Divine blessing on his undertakings. If his visit served at the same time as a farewell, or "honourable funeral to the tabernacle" (Wordsw.) this was an accident]; for that was the great high place [being the place of the tabernacle and brazen altar. In 1Sa_21:6 we find the tabernacle at Nob, though without the ark (1Sa_4:2). After the massacre of the priests it lost the ephod (1Sa_22:20; 1Sa_23:6). It could hardly remain in a spot stained by so much blood; but how or when it found its way to Gibeon, we do not know. See 1Ch_16:37, 1Ch_16:39; 2Ch_1:3-6]: a thousand burnt offerings [such numbers were not infrequent at festivals. See on 1Ki_8:62, and cf. 2Ch_29:33, 2Ch_29:34. Rawlinson reminds us that "Xerxes offered 1000 oxen at Troy" (Herod. 7:43).] did Solomon offer [not, of course, personally, as some (Ewald. e.g.) have sup. posed. He is said to have "offered" them, because he (together with the congregation, perhaps) provided them. The immense number alone shows that he cannot have offered in person. The festival probably lasted for seven or eight days,but even then a thousand victims can hardly have been offered whole (עֹלוֹת) unless the altar was greatly enlarged, or additional temporary altars were erected. This latter supposition is not negatived by the next words. See on 1Ki_8:63, 1Ki_8:64.] upon that altar.
And the king went to Gibeon [Jos_9:3; Jos_10:2; Jos_18:25; Jos_21:17; 2Sa_21:1. Now known as El-Jib, a commanding eminence (as the name implies) some six miles north of Jerusalem. Strictly, it consists of two heights, on one of which, it is conjectured, the town stood, while the other was the high place. Solomon was accompanied to Gibeon by "all the congregation," including the captains, judges, governors, etc., after the precedent of 1Sa_11:15; cf. 2Sa_6:2. His object was also to supplicate the Divine blessing on his undertakings. If his visit served at the same time as a farewell, or "honourable funeral to the tabernacle" (Wordsw.) this was an accident]; for that was the great high place [being the place of the tabernacle and brazen altar. In 1Sa_21:6 we find the tabernacle at Nob, though without the ark (1Sa_4:2). After the massacre of the priests it lost the ephod (1Sa_22:20; 1Sa_23:6). It could hardly remain in a spot stained by so much blood; but how or when it found its way to Gibeon, we do not know. See 1Ch_16:37, 1Ch_16:39; 2Ch_1:3-6]: a thousand burnt offerings [such numbers were not infrequent at festivals. See on 1Ki_8:62, and cf. 2Ch_29:33, 2Ch_29:34. Rawlinson reminds us that "Xerxes offered 1000 oxen at Troy" (Herod. 7:43).] did Solomon offer [not, of course, personally, as some (Ewald. e.g.) have sup. posed. He is said to have "offered" them, because he (together with the congregation, perhaps) provided them. The immense number alone shows that he cannot have offered in person. The festival probably lasted for seven or eight days,but even then a thousand victims can hardly have been offered whole (עֹלוֹת) unless the altar was greatly enlarged, or additional temporary altars were erected. This latter supposition is not negatived by the next words. See on 1Ki_8:63, 1Ki_8:64.] upon that altar.
Solomon Asks for Wisdom
5In Gibeon the LORD appeared to Solomon in a dream by night: and God said, Ask what I shall give thee.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
5. In Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream--It was probably at the close of this season, when his mind had been elevated into a high state of religious fervor by the protracted services. Solomon felt an intense desire, and he had offered an earnest petition, for the gift of wisdom. In sleep his thoughts ran upon the subject of his prayer, and he dreamed that God appeared to him and gave him the option of every thing in the world--that he asked wisdom, and that God granted his request (1Ki 3:9-12). His dream was but an imaginary repetition of his former desire, but God's grant of it was real.
1Ki 3:6-15. He Chooses Wisdom.
5. In Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream--It was probably at the close of this season, when his mind had been elevated into a high state of religious fervor by the protracted services. Solomon felt an intense desire, and he had offered an earnest petition, for the gift of wisdom. In sleep his thoughts ran upon the subject of his prayer, and he dreamed that God appeared to him and gave him the option of every thing in the world--that he asked wisdom, and that God granted his request (1Ki 3:9-12). His dream was but an imaginary repetition of his former desire, but God's grant of it was real.
1Ki 3:6-15. He Chooses Wisdom.
The Pulpit Commentary
In Glbeon the Lord appeared unto Solomon in a dream [cf. Num_12:6. A vision is not necessarily implied (as in Gen_28:12; cf. Gen_15:12), though he may have seen some angelic form (angelus in Dei nomine ei apparuit loquens. Grotius)—of course, only in his dream. Cf. Mat_1:20; Mat_2:12. Probably "appeared" is the equivalent of "revealed Himself." Bähr] by night; and God said, Ask what I shall give thee [cf. Mat_7:7. This was the answer to the sacrifices. The night was probably that which followed the last day on which they were offered (Mat_7:15).]
In Glbeon the Lord appeared unto Solomon in a dream [cf. Num_12:6. A vision is not necessarily implied (as in Gen_28:12; cf. Gen_15:12), though he may have seen some angelic form (angelus in Dei nomine ei apparuit loquens. Grotius)—of course, only in his dream. Cf. Mat_1:20; Mat_2:12. Probably "appeared" is the equivalent of "revealed Himself." Bähr] by night; and God said, Ask what I shall give thee [cf. Mat_7:7. This was the answer to the sacrifices. The night was probably that which followed the last day on which they were offered (Mat_7:15).]
6And Solomon said, Thou hast shewed unto thy servant David my father great mercy, according as he walked before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with thee; and thou hast kept for him this great kindness, that thou hast given him a son to sit on his throne, as it is this day.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
6. Solomon said--that is, had dreamed that he said.
6. Solomon said--that is, had dreamed that he said.
The Pulpit Commentary
And Solomon said, Thou hast shewed unto [Heb. wrought with] thy servant David my father great mercy [marg; favour] according as he walked Before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with thee [cf. 2Ki_20:3, where Hezekiah uses much the same language of himself. Also 2Ki_11:4], and thou hast kept for him this great kindness [Heb. favour; same word as above. David himself had regarded this as a singular mercy (1Ki_1:48)], that thou hast given him a son to sit [Heb. sitting] upon his throne, as it is this day. [Same expression Deu_6:24; Deu_8:18; 1Sa_22:8.; Ezr_9:7.]
And Solomon said, Thou hast shewed unto [Heb. wrought with] thy servant David my father great mercy [marg; favour] according as he walked Before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with thee [cf. 2Ki_20:3, where Hezekiah uses much the same language of himself. Also 2Ki_11:4], and thou hast kept for him this great kindness [Heb. favour; same word as above. David himself had regarded this as a singular mercy (1Ki_1:48)], that thou hast given him a son to sit [Heb. sitting] upon his throne, as it is this day. [Same expression Deu_6:24; Deu_8:18; 1Sa_22:8.; Ezr_9:7.]
7And now, O LORD my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father: and I am but a little child: I know not how to go out or come in.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
7. I am but a little child--not in age, for he had reached manhood (1Ki 2:9) and must have been at least twenty years old; but he was raw and inexperienced in matters of government.
7. I am but a little child--not in age, for he had reached manhood (1Ki 2:9) and must have been at least twenty years old; but he was raw and inexperienced in matters of government.
The Pulpit Commentary
And now, O Lord my Cod, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father; and I am but [Heb. and I … ] a little child: [These words are generally understood as indicating Solomon's humility rather than his age. No doubt, there is some exaggeration in the expression, which manifestly is not to be taken au pied de la lettre; at the same time it is questionable whether such words would be used of himself by a young man of twenty, which Solomon is commonly supposed to have been. See on 1Ki_2:2, and 1Ki_12:8] I know not how to go out or come in. [The same phrase is found in the Pentateuch, Deu_28:6; Deu_31:2. Also in 1Sa_18:13; 2Sa_3:25; Psa_121:8. It is the formula for expressing behaviour, conduct, the outward life of man.]
And now, O Lord my Cod, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father; and I am but [Heb. and I … ] a little child: [These words are generally understood as indicating Solomon's humility rather than his age. No doubt, there is some exaggeration in the expression, which manifestly is not to be taken au pied de la lettre; at the same time it is questionable whether such words would be used of himself by a young man of twenty, which Solomon is commonly supposed to have been. See on 1Ki_2:2, and 1Ki_12:8] I know not how to go out or come in. [The same phrase is found in the Pentateuch, Deu_28:6; Deu_31:2. Also in 1Sa_18:13; 2Sa_3:25; Psa_121:8. It is the formula for expressing behaviour, conduct, the outward life of man.]
8And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude.
The Pulpit Commentary
And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen [see Deu_7:6], a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude. [The promises of Gen_13:16; Gen_15:5, lived in the thoughts and language of the Jews, and were doubtless the original of this expression. Cf. also Num_23:10.]
And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen [see Deu_7:6], a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude. [The promises of Gen_13:16; Gen_15:5, lived in the thoughts and language of the Jews, and were doubtless the original of this expression. Cf. also Num_23:10.]
9Give therefore thy servant an understanding heart to judge thy people, that I may discern between good and bad: for who is able to judge this thy so great a people?
The Pulpit Commentary
Give therefore thy servant an understanding [Heb. hearing. Cf. verse 11 (Heb. "to hear judgment.") The idea is not docility, as the Vulg. (cor docile), but discrimination, penetration. Cf. 2Sa_14:17 (Heb.); Php_1:9, Php_1:10 (marg.)] heart [i.e; a judicial mind. The "hearing heart" was desired, not that it might "give heed to the law" (Keil), but to qualify him] to Judge thy people [The Hebrew king, like most ancient monarchs, was supreme judge as well as governor ("prince and judge," Exo_5:14; and cf. Exo_18:16). The Jews desired a king that he might judge them (1Sa_8:5). Their rulers so far had been purely "Judges" (שֹׁפְטִים; compare the Carthaginian name, suffetes.) When they desired one who should, lead their armies, they still put his judicial functions in the first place (loc. cit. verse 20). And what were the duties of a king in this respect, Absalom's words (2Sa_15:4) show. In verses 16-28 we see Solomon sitting as Chief Justice], that I may discern between good and bad [i.e; right and wrong, true and false; cf. Heb_5:14): for who is able to judge this thy so great [Heb. heavy, i.e; numerous; compare graves greges] a people. [The number of the Israelites at this period is referred to in 1Ki_4:20.]
Give therefore thy servant an understanding [Heb. hearing. Cf. verse 11 (Heb. "to hear judgment.") The idea is not docility, as the Vulg. (cor docile), but discrimination, penetration. Cf. 2Sa_14:17 (Heb.); Php_1:9, Php_1:10 (marg.)] heart [i.e; a judicial mind. The "hearing heart" was desired, not that it might "give heed to the law" (Keil), but to qualify him] to Judge thy people [The Hebrew king, like most ancient monarchs, was supreme judge as well as governor ("prince and judge," Exo_5:14; and cf. Exo_18:16). The Jews desired a king that he might judge them (1Sa_8:5). Their rulers so far had been purely "Judges" (שֹׁפְטִים; compare the Carthaginian name, suffetes.) When they desired one who should, lead their armies, they still put his judicial functions in the first place (loc. cit. verse 20). And what were the duties of a king in this respect, Absalom's words (2Sa_15:4) show. In verses 16-28 we see Solomon sitting as Chief Justice], that I may discern between good and bad [i.e; right and wrong, true and false; cf. Heb_5:14): for who is able to judge this thy so great [Heb. heavy, i.e; numerous; compare graves greges] a people. [The number of the Israelites at this period is referred to in 1Ki_4:20.]
10And the speech pleased the LORD, that Solomon had asked this thing.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
10. the speech pleased the Lord--It was Solomon's waking prayers that God heard and requited, but the acceptance was signified in this vision.
10. the speech pleased the Lord--It was Solomon's waking prayers that God heard and requited, but the acceptance was signified in this vision.
The Pulpit Commentary
And the speech [Heb. thing; same word as below] pleased the Lord, that Solomon had asked this thing, [Though in a dream the judgment and will were not suspended. Our dreams accord with our waking thoughts. This would have been Solomon's choice at any time.]
And the speech [Heb. thing; same word as below] pleased the Lord, that Solomon had asked this thing, [Though in a dream the judgment and will were not suspended. Our dreams accord with our waking thoughts. This would have been Solomon's choice at any time.]
11And God said unto him, Because thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgment;
The Pulpit Commentary
And God said unto him. Because thou hast asked this thing and hast not asked for thyself long life [Heb. many days]; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life [i.e; destruction in battle] of thine enemies [not so much personal enemies, like Hadad and Rezon, (Rawlinson) as military foes. The meaning is explained by the corresponding word, "honour" (כָבוֹד glory) in verse 13]; but hast asked [The word is repeated, according to Hebrew usage, now for the sixth time] for thyself understanding to discern [Heb. hear; see on verse 9] Judgment.
And God said unto him. Because thou hast asked this thing and hast not asked for thyself long life [Heb. many days]; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life [i.e; destruction in battle] of thine enemies [not so much personal enemies, like Hadad and Rezon, (Rawlinson) as military foes. The meaning is explained by the corresponding word, "honour" (כָבוֹד glory) in verse 13]; but hast asked [The word is repeated, according to Hebrew usage, now for the sixth time] for thyself understanding to discern [Heb. hear; see on verse 9] Judgment.
12Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee.
The Pulpit Commentary
Behold, I have done according to thy words [i.e; granted thy prayer, as the next words show]: lo [Heb. behold] I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart, so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee. [Cf. 1Ch_29:25; 2Ch_9:22. But there is no need to restrict the reference to kings and princes.]
Behold, I have done according to thy words [i.e; granted thy prayer, as the next words show]: lo [Heb. behold] I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart, so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee. [Cf. 1Ch_29:25; 2Ch_9:22. But there is no need to restrict the reference to kings and princes.]
13And I have also given thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches, and honour: so that there shall not be any among the kings like unto thee all thy days.
The Pulpit Commentary
And I have also given thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches and honour [Heb. glory]; so that there shall not be any among the kings lure unto thee all thy days.
And I have also given thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches and honour [Heb. glory]; so that there shall not be any among the kings lure unto thee all thy days.
14And if thou wilt walk in my ways, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as thy father David did walk, then I will lengthen thy days.
The Pulpit Commentary
And if thou wilt walk in my ways, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as thy father David did walk [1Ki_3:6; 1Ki_15:4. This is the Divine confirmation of David's words to his son (1Ki_2:3, 1Ki_2:4) and of the son's description of his father's piety (1Ki_15:6 supra)], then I will lengthen thy days [Solomon's days were not of an unusual length, as he can hardly have been more than sixty (if so much), although called זִקֵן.
And if thou wilt walk in my ways, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as thy father David did walk [1Ki_3:6; 1Ki_15:4. This is the Divine confirmation of David's words to his son (1Ki_2:3, 1Ki_2:4) and of the son's description of his father's piety (1Ki_15:6 supra)], then I will lengthen thy days [Solomon's days were not of an unusual length, as he can hardly have been more than sixty (if so much), although called זִקֵן.
15And Solomon awoke; and, behold, it was a dream. And he came to Jerusalem, and stood before the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and offered up burnt offerings, and offered peace offerings, and made a feast to all his servants.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
15. behold, it was a dream--The vivid impression, the indelible recollection he had of this dream, together with the new and increased energy communicated to his mind, and the flow of worldly prosperity that rushed upon him, gave him assurance that it came by divine inspiration and originated in the grace of God. The wisdom, however, that was asked and obtained was not so much of the heart as of the head--it was wisdom not for himself personally, but for his office, such as would qualify him for the administration of justice, the government of a kingdom, and for the attainment of general scientific knowledge.
1Ki 3:16-28. His Judgment between Two Harlots.
15. behold, it was a dream--The vivid impression, the indelible recollection he had of this dream, together with the new and increased energy communicated to his mind, and the flow of worldly prosperity that rushed upon him, gave him assurance that it came by divine inspiration and originated in the grace of God. The wisdom, however, that was asked and obtained was not so much of the heart as of the head--it was wisdom not for himself personally, but for his office, such as would qualify him for the administration of justice, the government of a kingdom, and for the attainment of general scientific knowledge.
1Ki 3:16-28. His Judgment between Two Harlots.
The Pulpit Commentary
And Solomon awoke; and, behold, it was a dream [That is to say, this passed while Solomon slept; but it was more than a dream. The same words are used of Pharaoh (Gen_41:7) when God showed him what He was about to do (1Ki_3:25, 1Ki_3:28, cf. Gen_40:8), and this was such a dream as Pharaoh's and as Joseph's (Mat_1:20; Mat_2:19). It was a dream, i.e; in which a Divine revelation was made to him. Wordsw. refers to Solomon's words, "I sleep, but my heart waketh" (Son_5:2), and "He giveth to his beloved (Jedidiah) in sleep" (Psa_127:2)]. And he came to Jerusalem, and stood before the ark of the covenant [the other sanctuary of that period (2Sa_6:17; 1Ch_16:37-40)] and offered up burnt offerings [probably in continuation of the sacrifices of Gibeon, 1Ki_3:4], and offered peace offerings [in testimony of his thankfulness for the signal favour recently vouchsafed to him] and made a feast [lit; a drinking. After the example of David, 1Ch_16:3. Cf. 1Ki_8:65. It was not exclusively a symposium. The flesh of the animals offered in sacrifice was eaten by the worshippers and their guests (Le 1Ki_7:15, 1Ki_7:31; 1Sa_2:16; 1Co_8:13). This was "a sacrificial meal of the שְׁלָמִים" (Keil). See on ch. 1Ki_8:63] to all his servants.
IN this section we see how remarkably the gracious promise of Gibeon (1Ki_3:12) was fulfilled. The "understanding to discern judgment" has been richly bestowed. And this, no doubt, is the reason why the story is related here. Ἐπιδεῖξαί τὴν τοῦ βασιλεως ἐβουλήθη σοφίαν (Theodoret). It is just possible, as Thenius maintains, that the narrative was handed down to a succeeding age by tradition, and was not incorporated into any of the documents from which our historian compiled his narrative; but this argues nothing against its authenticity or its inspiration. It is, as Bähr observes, a thoroughly Oriental story.
And Solomon awoke; and, behold, it was a dream [That is to say, this passed while Solomon slept; but it was more than a dream. The same words are used of Pharaoh (Gen_41:7) when God showed him what He was about to do (1Ki_3:25, 1Ki_3:28, cf. Gen_40:8), and this was such a dream as Pharaoh's and as Joseph's (Mat_1:20; Mat_2:19). It was a dream, i.e; in which a Divine revelation was made to him. Wordsw. refers to Solomon's words, "I sleep, but my heart waketh" (Son_5:2), and "He giveth to his beloved (Jedidiah) in sleep" (Psa_127:2)]. And he came to Jerusalem, and stood before the ark of the covenant [the other sanctuary of that period (2Sa_6:17; 1Ch_16:37-40)] and offered up burnt offerings [probably in continuation of the sacrifices of Gibeon, 1Ki_3:4], and offered peace offerings [in testimony of his thankfulness for the signal favour recently vouchsafed to him] and made a feast [lit; a drinking. After the example of David, 1Ch_16:3. Cf. 1Ki_8:65. It was not exclusively a symposium. The flesh of the animals offered in sacrifice was eaten by the worshippers and their guests (Le 1Ki_7:15, 1Ki_7:31; 1Sa_2:16; 1Co_8:13). This was "a sacrificial meal of the שְׁלָמִים" (Keil). See on ch. 1Ki_8:63] to all his servants.
IN this section we see how remarkably the gracious promise of Gibeon (1Ki_3:12) was fulfilled. The "understanding to discern judgment" has been richly bestowed. And this, no doubt, is the reason why the story is related here. Ἐπιδεῖξαί τὴν τοῦ βασιλεως ἐβουλήθη σοφίαν (Theodoret). It is just possible, as Thenius maintains, that the narrative was handed down to a succeeding age by tradition, and was not incorporated into any of the documents from which our historian compiled his narrative; but this argues nothing against its authenticity or its inspiration. It is, as Bähr observes, a thoroughly Oriental story.
Solomon's Wise Judgment Between Two Mothers
16Then came there two women, that were harlots, unto the king, and stood before him.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
16. Then came there two women--Eastern monarchs, who generally administer justice in person, at least in all cases of difficulty, often appeal to the principles of human nature when they are at a loss otherwise to find a clue to the truth or see clearly their way through a mass of conflicting testimony. The modern history of the East abounds with anecdotes of judicial cases, in which the decision given was the result of an experiment similar to this of Solomon upon the natural feelings of the contending parties.
16. Then came there two women--Eastern monarchs, who generally administer justice in person, at least in all cases of difficulty, often appeal to the principles of human nature when they are at a loss otherwise to find a clue to the truth or see clearly their way through a mass of conflicting testimony. The modern history of the East abounds with anecdotes of judicial cases, in which the decision given was the result of an experiment similar to this of Solomon upon the natural feelings of the contending parties.
The Pulpit Commentary
Then came there two women that were harlots [The Jewish writers here, as in the case of Rahab (Jos_2:1), would understand "hostess," "innkeeper" (פונדקיתא, not פונדקן, as Bähr, which=, πανδοκεῖον, "inn"). In support of which it is alleged that prostitutes never have children, or if they have are not solicitous about them. The meaning "hostess," however (as if from זוּן, to feed), is not to be entertained for a moment, but we may readily admit that these children, though born out of wedlock, were not necessarily the offspring of professed harlots, though the fact that their mothers dwelt together and alone (1Ki_3:17) is certainly suspicious; and see Gesen. s.v. זָנָה. Grotius, from Deu_23:17, concludes that they must have been foreigners. But it is equally probable that the law was constantly violated] unto the king [as supreme judge] and stood before him.
Then came there two women that were harlots [The Jewish writers here, as in the case of Rahab (Jos_2:1), would understand "hostess," "innkeeper" (פונדקיתא, not פונדקן, as Bähr, which=, πανδοκεῖον, "inn"). In support of which it is alleged that prostitutes never have children, or if they have are not solicitous about them. The meaning "hostess," however (as if from זוּן, to feed), is not to be entertained for a moment, but we may readily admit that these children, though born out of wedlock, were not necessarily the offspring of professed harlots, though the fact that their mothers dwelt together and alone (1Ki_3:17) is certainly suspicious; and see Gesen. s.v. זָנָה. Grotius, from Deu_23:17, concludes that they must have been foreigners. But it is equally probable that the law was constantly violated] unto the king [as supreme judge] and stood before him.
17And the one woman said, O my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child with her in the house.
The Pulpit Commentary
And the one woman said, O my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child with her in the house.
And the one woman said, O my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child with her in the house.
18And it came to pass the third day after that I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also: and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house.
The Pulpit Commentary
And it came to pass the third day after that I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also: and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house. [Emphasis is laid on this fact, as showing the possibility of the fraud and the impossibility of producing proof. Hebrew women have always required but little assistance in childbearing. That which is written in Exo_1:19 is true to this day.
And it came to pass the third day after that I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also: and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house. [Emphasis is laid on this fact, as showing the possibility of the fraud and the impossibility of producing proof. Hebrew women have always required but little assistance in childbearing. That which is written in Exo_1:19 is true to this day.
19And this woman’s child died in the night; because she overlaid it.
The Pulpit Commentary
And this woman's child died in the night; because she overlaid it.
And this woman's child died in the night; because she overlaid it.
20And she arose at midnight, and took my son from beside me, while thine handmaid slept, and laid it in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my bosom.
The Pulpit Commentary
And she arose at midnight [rather, in the middle, i.e; dead of the night. The sleeper could not know it was midnight], and took my son from beside me, while thine handmaid slept, and laid it in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my besom.
And she arose at midnight [rather, in the middle, i.e; dead of the night. The sleeper could not know it was midnight], and took my son from beside me, while thine handmaid slept, and laid it in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my besom.
21And when I rose in the morning to give my child suck, behold, it was dead: but when I had considered it in the morning, behold, it was not my son, which I did bear.
The Pulpit Commentary
And when I rose in the morning [while it was still dusk] to give my child suck, behold it was dead: but when I had considered it in the morning [i.e; in broad daylight; Vulg. clara luce] behold [this second "behold" marks a second discovery] it was not my son which I did bear.
And when I rose in the morning [while it was still dusk] to give my child suck, behold it was dead: but when I had considered it in the morning [i.e; in broad daylight; Vulg. clara luce] behold [this second "behold" marks a second discovery] it was not my son which I did bear.
22And the other woman said, Nay; but the living is my son, and the dead is thy son. And this said, No; but the dead is thy son, and the living is my son. Thus they spake before the king.
The Pulpit Commentary
And the other woman said, Nay, but the living is my son and the dead is thy son. And this said, No, but the dead is thy son and the living is my son. [It is somewhat difficult to account for the pertinacious claim to the child, preferred even before the king by the pretended mother. The most probable explanation is, that having taken the child in the first instance on the spur of the moment, in order to avoid the reproach of having killed her offspring by her clumsiness and neglect, she found it difficult to draw back from her false position—which indeed she could not do without owning herself both child stealer and liar—and so she put on a bold face and maintained the imposture even before the monarch himself. That she did not really care for the child is evident from 1Ki_3:26.] Thus they spake [Heb. "And they spake," i.e; affirmed and contradicted] before the king.
And the other woman said, Nay, but the living is my son and the dead is thy son. And this said, No, but the dead is thy son and the living is my son. [It is somewhat difficult to account for the pertinacious claim to the child, preferred even before the king by the pretended mother. The most probable explanation is, that having taken the child in the first instance on the spur of the moment, in order to avoid the reproach of having killed her offspring by her clumsiness and neglect, she found it difficult to draw back from her false position—which indeed she could not do without owning herself both child stealer and liar—and so she put on a bold face and maintained the imposture even before the monarch himself. That she did not really care for the child is evident from 1Ki_3:26.] Thus they spake [Heb. "And they spake," i.e; affirmed and contradicted] before the king.
23Then said the king, The one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living.
The Pulpit Commentary
Then [promptly, without hesitation] said the king, The one saith [Heb. "this is saying," i.e; keeps saying] This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead; and the other saith, Nay, but thy son is the dead and my son is the living.
Then [promptly, without hesitation] said the king, The one saith [Heb. "this is saying," i.e; keeps saying] This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead; and the other saith, Nay, but thy son is the dead and my son is the living.
24And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king.
The Pulpit Commentary
And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a [Heb. the; the sword, i.e; of the executioner, or the sword for which he asked] sword before the king.
And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a [Heb. the; the sword, i.e; of the executioner, or the sword for which he asked] sword before the king.
25And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other.
The Pulpit Commentary
And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one and half to the other [Heb. one].
And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one and half to the other [Heb. one].
26Then spake the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.
The Pulpit Commentary
Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.
"The Word of God is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." The judgment of Solomon is a striking commentary on this passage; indeed, it is possible that the writer had this incident in his mind when he penned these words. For assuredly the word of Solomon, "Divide," etc; was sharper than the sword they had just brought him£ in wounding the mother's heart (Cf. Luk_2:35); while not more surely would the king's sword, had it not been stayed, have pierced to the "dividing asunder of the joints and marrow" of the child, than did the king's word distinguish between the true and the false, revealing both the tenderness and yearning love of the real mother, and also the thoughts and intents and workings of heart of the pretender. It is probably, in part at least, because of their revelation of character that they are recorded here. Let us now, therefore, consider the character and motives of the pseudo mother, as disclosed to us in her words and conduct. And first, let us ask, what can have led to this cruel and unnatural speech? Here is a woman who has recently become a mother, and who claims to be the mother of the child, having no pity on a helpless babe. At one moment, she strenuously contends before the king for its possession, and at the next she connives at, and indeed clamours for, its murder. She has surreptitiously taken it from one who would have guarded and cherished it; she loudly protests that it is hers; she is so anxious to have it that she will plead for it before the royal tribunal, and yet, when it is gravely proposed to cut the hapless child in two, she is loud in her approval of the plan. How can we account for such strange inconsistency? The usual explanation is that she was impelled to do and say what she did by spite, by jealousy. And, without doubt, there was an element of spite in her conduct. If she was to be denied the child, she was resolved that none else should have it. She would never submit to the humiliation of leaving the judgement seat with the character of an impostor, while that other one carried off the babe in her arms in triumph. But while the feeling of "dog in the manger" explains much, it does not explain all. It does not account, for example, for her having cumbered herself with the care of the child in the first instance; and it hardly explains her proceeding to the extremity of judicial murder. Nor even if we combine with spite the desire to flatter the youthful king, do we find a sufficient explanation of her inconsistency. No doubt she thought it would be a compliment to her prince readily to acquiesce in his proposal. It is not the first time or the last that men have readily assented to wrong-doing because a crowned head suggested it. We see in her cry, "Divide it," a cringing, fawning desire to ingratiate herself into Solomon's favour, or if not that, at least to play the courtier; but we do not see in this desire alone a sufficient explanation of this clamour for the life of a puling and innocent babe. No, if we are to get at the very root of her strange and shameful conduct, we must first ask another question, viz; What led her to steal this child from its mother's arms and to claim it for her own? What induced her when she woke in the night and found her own child dead, to creep in the darkness to her companion's couch and take a changeling for her son. For this was surely a strange thing to do. We could more readily understand her rejoicing in the death of her own child of shame than this eager desire to burden herself with a bastard that she had not borne.
Now, it is quite possible that there were special circumstances connected with this case, which, if we knew them, would offer a complete and certain explanation of her conduct. For example, to pass by other possibilities, hers may have been such case as Tamar's (Gen_38:1-30.) But as we do not and cannot know what these peculiar circumstances were, if there were any, we can only collect her motives, as best we may, from the record of facts which we possess.
It is clear, then, that she was not actuated by love for the child. It is unlikely that a woman such as she was could have love for a child such as this was; while it is inconceivable that if she really loved it, she would have consented to and counselled its death. Nor can it have been the pride and joy of having a man child to call her son (1Jn 16:21). For the child was not hers, and no one knew this better than herself. No doubt the Jewish mother had special reasons for desiring offspring and for cherishing her children, but this was the child of stranger.
What then were her motives? Were they not these? First, the fear of reproach, and secondly, jealousy of her more fortunate companion. Fear of reproach; for no woman, in any age of the world, or under any circumstances, can fail to be mortified and humbled and ashamed at having occasioned, by her maladroitness, the death of her child. She knew what the tongues of the neighbours would say: she could see them, perhaps, even mocking her as a murderess. For they could not know that the death was accidental and some of them, she feared, might think, if they did not say, that there had been foul play on her part. These thoughts, as they rushed through her mind in the black and dark night, would be accentuated and made well nigh intolerable by the thought that her companion had been more careful or more fortunate. What may have passed between these two women we cannot say. For aught we know, each may have boasted of her child, or the one may have disparaged the child of the other. There must almost have been something of the kind—and it may have been something extremely simple—to account for this act of child stealing.
It is quite possible, of course, that this woman, had she been interrogated after the fraud was detected, would have found it difficult to say what led her to play this false part. For we may rest assured she did not argue about it, did not stop to parley with herself or to weigh the consequences. She acted on a blind, hasty, unreasoning impulse. But all the same it is not difficult for us to see that these must have been among the springs of her conduct. And when the fatal move was once made, the rest of her sin is easily explained. There was then nothing for her to do but to brazen it out. It was impossible for her to stop, without proclaiming herself both liar and thief. As she had lied to her companion, so she must lie to the neighbours, and as she had lied to the neighbours, so she must lie even before the king. There was no help for it. Vestigia nulla retrorsum! She must go on to the bitter end.
But it is easy to see how terribly trying and painful her position would at last become. The constant fear of detection, or the fear lest she should betray herself, must have made it almost insupportable. Any moment something might ooze out which would reveal the deceit and cover her with infamy. Bitterly must she have regretted that she had ever embarked on this course of fraud; eagerly must she have cast about for any chance of escape.
And so when the king proposed to cut the Gordian knot; when he proposed, that is, to extricate her from the toils which she had woven round herself, is there any wonder that she caught eagerly at the first chance that offered, and that without a moment's reflection as to the morality of the remedy, and without the least perception of the snare that was spread for her. All she thought was that it promised an honourable retreat from ground which was every moment becoming more insecure; that it opened to her, in her despair and dread of detection, a door of escape. It is this accounts for the cry, "Divide it." The murder would cover her multitude of lies, the blood of the innocent would efface the traces of her guilt.
The lessons taught by this history must be very briefly indicated. Among them are these:
1. Impurity almost inevitably leads to deceit. The root of all the mischief here was the unchastity. The sin against the body makes other sins comparatively easy. "It is only the first step that costs." And what a step is that!
2. Moral cowardice may lead to murder. The fear which prompted the hasty resolve to possess herself of the living child, led this miserable woman to stealing, lying, persistent falseness, and to murder, in thought and will. Facilis descensus Averni, etc.
3. Falsehood leads to falsehood. The proverb says, "If we tell one lie we must tell twenty more to bury it." "One lie must be thatched with another or it will soon rain through."
"O what a tangled web we weave
When once we venture to deceive."
4. Jealousy dries up the milk of human kindness. It is "cruel as the grave."
"Fiercer than famine, war, or spotted pestilence;
Baneful as death, and horrible as hell."
It led this woman to act like a fiend; to desire the butchery of an innocent babe.
5. Sin overreaches itself. The pretender was caught in her own toils. She had no sooner said, "Divide it," than she saw she was undone. She had proclaimed her own falseness. "Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee."
6. When the sinner is most secure, then sudden destruction comes upon him. This woman had never breathed freely till Solomon said, "Divide it." That seemed such a certain deliverance that she echoed the cry. Now she began to feel safe. The next moment she was disgraced, condemned, ruined. Cf. Mat_24:50; Mat_25:44; 1Th_5:8, etc.
(1Ki 3:17) One woman said to him, "Sir, this woman and I live in the same house. I gave birth to a son while she was with me in the house.
(1Ki 3:18) Two days later this woman also gave birth to a son. We were alone. No one else was with us. Just the two of us were in the house.
(1Ki 3:19) That night this woman's son died because she rolled over on top of him.
(1Ki 3:20) So she got up during the night and took my son, who was beside me, while I was asleep. She held him in her arms. Then she laid her dead son in my arms.
(1Ki 3:21) When I got up in the morning to nurse my son, he was dead! I took a good look at him and realized that he wasn't my son at all!"
(1Ki 3:22) The other woman said, "No! My son is alive-your son is dead." The first woman kept on saying, "No! Your son is dead-my son is alive." So they argued in front of the king.
(1Ki 3:23) The king said, "This one keeps saying, 'My son is alive-your son is dead,' and that one keeps saying, 'No! Your son is dead-my son is alive.'"
(1Ki 3:24) So the king told his servants to bring him a sword. When they brought it,
(1Ki 3:25) he said, "Cut the living child in two. Give half to the one and half to the other."
(1Ki 3:26) Then the woman whose son was still alive was deeply moved by her love for the child. She said to the king, "Please, sir, give her the living child. Please don't kill him!" But the other woman said, "He won't be mine or yours. Cut him in two."
(1Ki 3:27) The king replied, "Give the living child to the first woman. Don't kill him. She is his mother."
(1Ki 3:28) All Israel heard about the decision the king made. They respected the king very highly, because they saw he possessed wisdom from God to do what was right.
1Kings 4
(1Ki 4:1) When King Solomon was the king of all Israel,
(Pulpit Commentary)
Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.
"The Word of God is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." The judgment of Solomon is a striking commentary on this passage; indeed, it is possible that the writer had this incident in his mind when he penned these words. For assuredly the word of Solomon, "Divide," etc; was sharper than the sword they had just brought him£ in wounding the mother's heart (Cf. Luk_2:35); while not more surely would the king's sword, had it not been stayed, have pierced to the "dividing asunder of the joints and marrow" of the child, than did the king's word distinguish between the true and the false, revealing both the tenderness and yearning love of the real mother, and also the thoughts and intents and workings of heart of the pretender. It is probably, in part at least, because of their revelation of character that they are recorded here. Let us now, therefore, consider the character and motives of the pseudo mother, as disclosed to us in her words and conduct. And first, let us ask, what can have led to this cruel and unnatural speech? Here is a woman who has recently become a mother, and who claims to be the mother of the child, having no pity on a helpless babe. At one moment, she strenuously contends before the king for its possession, and at the next she connives at, and indeed clamours for, its murder. She has surreptitiously taken it from one who would have guarded and cherished it; she loudly protests that it is hers; she is so anxious to have it that she will plead for it before the royal tribunal, and yet, when it is gravely proposed to cut the hapless child in two, she is loud in her approval of the plan. How can we account for such strange inconsistency? The usual explanation is that she was impelled to do and say what she did by spite, by jealousy. And, without doubt, there was an element of spite in her conduct. If she was to be denied the child, she was resolved that none else should have it. She would never submit to the humiliation of leaving the judgement seat with the character of an impostor, while that other one carried off the babe in her arms in triumph. But while the feeling of "dog in the manger" explains much, it does not explain all. It does not account, for example, for her having cumbered herself with the care of the child in the first instance; and it hardly explains her proceeding to the extremity of judicial murder. Nor even if we combine with spite the desire to flatter the youthful king, do we find a sufficient explanation of her inconsistency. No doubt she thought it would be a compliment to her prince readily to acquiesce in his proposal. It is not the first time or the last that men have readily assented to wrong-doing because a crowned head suggested it. We see in her cry, "Divide it," a cringing, fawning desire to ingratiate herself into Solomon's favour, or if not that, at least to play the courtier; but we do not see in this desire alone a sufficient explanation of this clamour for the life of a puling and innocent babe. No, if we are to get at the very root of her strange and shameful conduct, we must first ask another question, viz; What led her to steal this child from its mother's arms and to claim it for her own? What induced her when she woke in the night and found her own child dead, to creep in the darkness to her companion's couch and take a changeling for her son. For this was surely a strange thing to do. We could more readily understand her rejoicing in the death of her own child of shame than this eager desire to burden herself with a bastard that she had not borne.
Now, it is quite possible that there were special circumstances connected with this case, which, if we knew them, would offer a complete and certain explanation of her conduct. For example, to pass by other possibilities, hers may have been such case as Tamar's (Gen_38:1-30.) But as we do not and cannot know what these peculiar circumstances were, if there were any, we can only collect her motives, as best we may, from the record of facts which we possess.
It is clear, then, that she was not actuated by love for the child. It is unlikely that a woman such as she was could have love for a child such as this was; while it is inconceivable that if she really loved it, she would have consented to and counselled its death. Nor can it have been the pride and joy of having a man child to call her son (1Jn 16:21). For the child was not hers, and no one knew this better than herself. No doubt the Jewish mother had special reasons for desiring offspring and for cherishing her children, but this was the child of stranger.
What then were her motives? Were they not these? First, the fear of reproach, and secondly, jealousy of her more fortunate companion. Fear of reproach; for no woman, in any age of the world, or under any circumstances, can fail to be mortified and humbled and ashamed at having occasioned, by her maladroitness, the death of her child. She knew what the tongues of the neighbours would say: she could see them, perhaps, even mocking her as a murderess. For they could not know that the death was accidental and some of them, she feared, might think, if they did not say, that there had been foul play on her part. These thoughts, as they rushed through her mind in the black and dark night, would be accentuated and made well nigh intolerable by the thought that her companion had been more careful or more fortunate. What may have passed between these two women we cannot say. For aught we know, each may have boasted of her child, or the one may have disparaged the child of the other. There must almost have been something of the kind—and it may have been something extremely simple—to account for this act of child stealing.
It is quite possible, of course, that this woman, had she been interrogated after the fraud was detected, would have found it difficult to say what led her to play this false part. For we may rest assured she did not argue about it, did not stop to parley with herself or to weigh the consequences. She acted on a blind, hasty, unreasoning impulse. But all the same it is not difficult for us to see that these must have been among the springs of her conduct. And when the fatal move was once made, the rest of her sin is easily explained. There was then nothing for her to do but to brazen it out. It was impossible for her to stop, without proclaiming herself both liar and thief. As she had lied to her companion, so she must lie to the neighbours, and as she had lied to the neighbours, so she must lie even before the king. There was no help for it. Vestigia nulla retrorsum! She must go on to the bitter end.
But it is easy to see how terribly trying and painful her position would at last become. The constant fear of detection, or the fear lest she should betray herself, must have made it almost insupportable. Any moment something might ooze out which would reveal the deceit and cover her with infamy. Bitterly must she have regretted that she had ever embarked on this course of fraud; eagerly must she have cast about for any chance of escape.
And so when the king proposed to cut the Gordian knot; when he proposed, that is, to extricate her from the toils which she had woven round herself, is there any wonder that she caught eagerly at the first chance that offered, and that without a moment's reflection as to the morality of the remedy, and without the least perception of the snare that was spread for her. All she thought was that it promised an honourable retreat from ground which was every moment becoming more insecure; that it opened to her, in her despair and dread of detection, a door of escape. It is this accounts for the cry, "Divide it." The murder would cover her multitude of lies, the blood of the innocent would efface the traces of her guilt.
The lessons taught by this history must be very briefly indicated. Among them are these:
1. Impurity almost inevitably leads to deceit. The root of all the mischief here was the unchastity. The sin against the body makes other sins comparatively easy. "It is only the first step that costs." And what a step is that!
2. Moral cowardice may lead to murder. The fear which prompted the hasty resolve to possess herself of the living child, led this miserable woman to stealing, lying, persistent falseness, and to murder, in thought and will. Facilis descensus Averni, etc.
3. Falsehood leads to falsehood. The proverb says, "If we tell one lie we must tell twenty more to bury it." "One lie must be thatched with another or it will soon rain through."
"O what a tangled web we weave
When once we venture to deceive."
4. Jealousy dries up the milk of human kindness. It is "cruel as the grave."
"Fiercer than famine, war, or spotted pestilence;
Baneful as death, and horrible as hell."
It led this woman to act like a fiend; to desire the butchery of an innocent babe.
5. Sin overreaches itself. The pretender was caught in her own toils. She had no sooner said, "Divide it," than she saw she was undone. She had proclaimed her own falseness. "Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee."
6. When the sinner is most secure, then sudden destruction comes upon him. This woman had never breathed freely till Solomon said, "Divide it." That seemed such a certain deliverance that she echoed the cry. Now she began to feel safe. The next moment she was disgraced, condemned, ruined. Cf. Mat_24:50; Mat_25:44; 1Th_5:8, etc.
(1Ki 3:17) One woman said to him, "Sir, this woman and I live in the same house. I gave birth to a son while she was with me in the house.
(1Ki 3:18) Two days later this woman also gave birth to a son. We were alone. No one else was with us. Just the two of us were in the house.
(1Ki 3:19) That night this woman's son died because she rolled over on top of him.
(1Ki 3:20) So she got up during the night and took my son, who was beside me, while I was asleep. She held him in her arms. Then she laid her dead son in my arms.
(1Ki 3:21) When I got up in the morning to nurse my son, he was dead! I took a good look at him and realized that he wasn't my son at all!"
(1Ki 3:22) The other woman said, "No! My son is alive-your son is dead." The first woman kept on saying, "No! Your son is dead-my son is alive." So they argued in front of the king.
(1Ki 3:23) The king said, "This one keeps saying, 'My son is alive-your son is dead,' and that one keeps saying, 'No! Your son is dead-my son is alive.'"
(1Ki 3:24) So the king told his servants to bring him a sword. When they brought it,
(1Ki 3:25) he said, "Cut the living child in two. Give half to the one and half to the other."
(1Ki 3:26) Then the woman whose son was still alive was deeply moved by her love for the child. She said to the king, "Please, sir, give her the living child. Please don't kill him!" But the other woman said, "He won't be mine or yours. Cut him in two."
(1Ki 3:27) The king replied, "Give the living child to the first woman. Don't kill him. She is his mother."
(1Ki 3:28) All Israel heard about the decision the king made. They respected the king very highly, because they saw he possessed wisdom from God to do what was right.
1Kings 4
(1Ki 4:1) When King Solomon was the king of all Israel,
(Pulpit Commentary)
27Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother thereof.
The Pulpit Commentary
Then the king answered and said [He simply echoes the exact words of the mother. This is clear from the fact that the word יָלוּד—natus, "the one born," here and in 1Ki_3:26 rendered "child," is a very unusual one], Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it [The LXX; which reads "Give the child to her who said, Give it to her," etc; obscures the evidently designed repetition] she is the mother thereof [Heb. she, his mother].
Then the king answered and said [He simply echoes the exact words of the mother. This is clear from the fact that the word יָלוּד—natus, "the one born," here and in 1Ki_3:26 rendered "child," is a very unusual one], Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it [The LXX; which reads "Give the child to her who said, Give it to her," etc; obscures the evidently designed repetition] she is the mother thereof [Heb. she, his mother].
28And all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged; and they feared the king: for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do judgment.
The Pulpit Commentary
And an Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged, and they feared the king [i.e; were impressed and awed by his almost supernatural penetration. Bähr refers to Luk_4:36; Luk_8:25], for they saw that the wisdom of God [for which he asked (Luk_8:9) and which God gave
; before him the two harlots and the helpless child—carries our thoughts to a day of storm and cloud, a day of darkness and dread, when the "Son of Man shall sit upon the throne of His glory," with "the holy angels" around Him and "all nations" before Him (St. Mat_25:31). Let us see in this first judgment, then, an outline of the last. Observe:
I. THE JUDGE. It is
(1) the Son of David. We do not read of David's judgments. This a duty which he was apparently remiss in discharging (2Sa_15:1-37.) He devolved the duty of judging and punishing upon his son (1Ki_2:1-10). Even so, the "Eternal Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment to the Son." Because He is the Son of David, i.e; the Son of Man, our Lord will judge the sons of men. The Judge is, therefore, one who knows us, one who feels for us. It is
(2) the wisest of men. "He was wiser than all men" (1Ki_4:31). The wisdom of God was in him to do judgment (1Ki_3:28). But the Judge of men and angels not only has, but is the Wisdom of God (Pro_9:1-18; 1Co_1:24). The Supreme, the Essential Wisdom will sit upon the great white throne. His judgments, therefore, must be "just and true." Now consider
II. THE JUDGED. They were
(1) of two classes. There was the innocent babe and the impure women. And of the latter one was true, the other false; one right, the other wrong. There will be two classes, and only two, in the judgment to come: sheep and goats, wheat and tares, good fish and bad, the righteous and the sinner.
(2) Both were harlots. "Whoremongers and adulterers GOD will judge." Men cannot, or do not. Our pleasant vices are often undetected; or, if known, are not reprobated. But see 1Co_5:11; 1Co_6:9-19; Gal_5:19-21.
III. THE JUDGMENT. Thereby
(1) a sin was brought to light. No eye saw that midnight theft. They two were alone. But the deed is now dragged to the light of day. And the Lord "will bring to light the hidden things of darkness." What was "whispered in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops."
(2) A wrong was redressed. The pretended mother probably held the child when they came before the king. The true mother carried it in her arms when they left the judgement seat. Restitution, i.e; was enforced. And the judgement seat of Christ shall accomplish the restitution of all things. There every wrong shall have its remedy. Now the "foundations of the earth are out of course." Might stands for right. Possession is nine points of the law. But in that day "suum cuique." It is related of one of the Wesleys that on paying an account which was a gross imposition, he wrote upon the bill, "To be readjusted in that day."
(3) Character was revealed. The true mother and the pretended alike proclaim themselves. A word from each decides the question, and reveals their inmost thoughts. So shall it be at the end of the world. "Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee." "By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." The Son of Man shall "make manifest the counsels of the heart."
IV. THE REWARD AND PUNISHMENT. To the one the tribunal brought justification, joy, peace. To the other, condemnation, shame, contempt. But notice especially
(1) the difference it made in their emotions and
(2) the difference in their reputations.
(1) The joy of the mother who had received her child again may be better imagined than described. The same may be said of the vexation, confusion, remorse, of the pretender when her villainy was made manifest. And in these emotions we may see a faint image of the unspeakable joy of the saved: of the weeping and gnashing of teeth of the lost.
(2) The true mother would have the sympathy of bystanders, the congratulations of her friends, etc.; the other would be pointed at with scorn and reproach. Here, too, we have a picture, albeit an imperfect one, of the issues of the day of judgment. To the saint, the "Come ye blessed" of the Judge will lead to "pleasures forevermore;" to the sinner, "Depart ye cursed" will be the beginning of "shame and everlasting contempt."
And an Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged, and they feared the king [i.e; were impressed and awed by his almost supernatural penetration. Bähr refers to Luk_4:36; Luk_8:25], for they saw that the wisdom of God [for which he asked (Luk_8:9) and which God gave
; before him the two harlots and the helpless child—carries our thoughts to a day of storm and cloud, a day of darkness and dread, when the "Son of Man shall sit upon the throne of His glory," with "the holy angels" around Him and "all nations" before Him (St. Mat_25:31). Let us see in this first judgment, then, an outline of the last. Observe:
I. THE JUDGE. It is
(1) the Son of David. We do not read of David's judgments. This a duty which he was apparently remiss in discharging (2Sa_15:1-37.) He devolved the duty of judging and punishing upon his son (1Ki_2:1-10). Even so, the "Eternal Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment to the Son." Because He is the Son of David, i.e; the Son of Man, our Lord will judge the sons of men. The Judge is, therefore, one who knows us, one who feels for us. It is
(2) the wisest of men. "He was wiser than all men" (1Ki_4:31). The wisdom of God was in him to do judgment (1Ki_3:28). But the Judge of men and angels not only has, but is the Wisdom of God (Pro_9:1-18; 1Co_1:24). The Supreme, the Essential Wisdom will sit upon the great white throne. His judgments, therefore, must be "just and true." Now consider
II. THE JUDGED. They were
(1) of two classes. There was the innocent babe and the impure women. And of the latter one was true, the other false; one right, the other wrong. There will be two classes, and only two, in the judgment to come: sheep and goats, wheat and tares, good fish and bad, the righteous and the sinner.
(2) Both were harlots. "Whoremongers and adulterers GOD will judge." Men cannot, or do not. Our pleasant vices are often undetected; or, if known, are not reprobated. But see 1Co_5:11; 1Co_6:9-19; Gal_5:19-21.
III. THE JUDGMENT. Thereby
(1) a sin was brought to light. No eye saw that midnight theft. They two were alone. But the deed is now dragged to the light of day. And the Lord "will bring to light the hidden things of darkness." What was "whispered in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops."
(2) A wrong was redressed. The pretended mother probably held the child when they came before the king. The true mother carried it in her arms when they left the judgement seat. Restitution, i.e; was enforced. And the judgement seat of Christ shall accomplish the restitution of all things. There every wrong shall have its remedy. Now the "foundations of the earth are out of course." Might stands for right. Possession is nine points of the law. But in that day "suum cuique." It is related of one of the Wesleys that on paying an account which was a gross imposition, he wrote upon the bill, "To be readjusted in that day."
(3) Character was revealed. The true mother and the pretended alike proclaim themselves. A word from each decides the question, and reveals their inmost thoughts. So shall it be at the end of the world. "Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee." "By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." The Son of Man shall "make manifest the counsels of the heart."
IV. THE REWARD AND PUNISHMENT. To the one the tribunal brought justification, joy, peace. To the other, condemnation, shame, contempt. But notice especially
(1) the difference it made in their emotions and
(2) the difference in their reputations.
(1) The joy of the mother who had received her child again may be better imagined than described. The same may be said of the vexation, confusion, remorse, of the pretender when her villainy was made manifest. And in these emotions we may see a faint image of the unspeakable joy of the saved: of the weeping and gnashing of teeth of the lost.
(2) The true mother would have the sympathy of bystanders, the congratulations of her friends, etc.; the other would be pointed at with scorn and reproach. Here, too, we have a picture, albeit an imperfect one, of the issues of the day of judgment. To the saint, the "Come ye blessed" of the Judge will lead to "pleasures forevermore;" to the sinner, "Depart ye cursed" will be the beginning of "shame and everlasting contempt."
THE HOLY BIBLE
1 Kings
Chapter 3
Translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised.
KING JAMES VERSION
HOLY
BIBLE
BIBLE
KING JAMES VERSION
TAP THE BIBLE TO OPEN IT
“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” — PSALM 119:105