Notes on

1 Kings
2 0 0 2 E d i t i o n
Dr. Thomas L. Constable

Introduction
TITLE

The Books of 1 and 2 Kings received their names because they document the reigns of
the 40 kings of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah following David.1

In the Hebrew Bible 1 and 2 Kings were one book until the sixteenth century. The
ancients regarded them as the continuation of the narrative begun in Samuel. The
Septuagint (Greek) translation of the Hebrew text, dating from about 250 B.C., was the
first to divide Kings into two books. That division has continued to the present day. The
Septuagint translators, however, called these two books 3 and 4 Kingdoms. First and 2
Kingdoms were our 1 and 2 Samuel. Jerome's Vulgate (Latin) translation, which dates
about A.D. 400, changed the name from Kingdoms to Kings.

"The English Bible presents the books primarily as historical accounts.

Their placement next to 1, 2 Chronicles demonstrates the collectors'
interest in detailing all the events of Israel's history. In contrast, the
Hebrew Bible places Joshua-Kings with the prophets, which highlights
their common viewpoints. This decision implies that 1, 2 Kings are being
treated as proclamation and history."2

WRITER AND DATE

Most Old Testament scholars today believe several different individuals wrote and edited
Kings because of theories concerning textual transmission that have gained popularity in
the last 150 years. However, many conservatives have continued to follow the older
tradition of the church that one individual probably put Kings together.3 This view finds
support in the stylistic and linguistic features that run through the whole work and make
it read like the product of a single writer. Some of these features are the way the writer

1
There was also one queen, Athaliah.
2
Paul R. House, 1, 2 Kings, p. 70.
3
E.g., D. J. Wiseman, 1 & 2 Kings: An Introduction and Commentary, pp. 16, 53. House, pp. 38-39,
believed the same writer composed Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings. The father of the Deuteronomistic
theory of authorship, Martin Noth, The Deuteronomistic History, pp. 75-78, believed in single authorship
but in an author who lived in the mid-sixth century B.C. The Deuteronomistic theory is that the writer of
Kings, as well as the writers of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel, wrote using Deuteronomy as the standard by
which they evaluated what Israel and its leaders did during the years those books record. Even though
many advocates of this view were and are liberal in their theology, the text supports the basic thesis of this
theory.

Copyright 2002 by Thomas L. Constable, published by Sonic Light, www.soniclight.com

2 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

described and summarized each king's reign, the consistent basis on which he evaluated
all the kings, and recurring phrases and terms.

The identity of the writer is unknown today and has been for centuries. Ancient Jewish
tradition suggested Ezra or Ezekiel as possible writers since both of these men were
biblical writers who lived after the Babylonian exile. The record of King Jehoiachin's
release from Babylonian captivity (2 Kings 25:27-30) points to a date of final
composition sometime after that event. Jeremiah has traditional Talmudic support as well
though he never went to Babylon but died in Egypt. Of course, someone else may have
written Kings. Scholars have suggested these men only because they were famous writers
who lived when Kings reached its final form.

Most non-conservatives date Kings considerably later than the sixth or fifth centuries.4

SCOPE

The historical period Kings covers totals about 413 years. The events that frame this
period were Solomon's coronation as co-regent with David (973 B.C.) and Jehoiachin's
release from Babylonian exile (560 B.C.).

However, most of Kings deals with the period that spans Solomon's coronation and the
destruction of Jerusalem in 586 B.C., a period of 387 years. In terms of the temple, at the
beginning we see the temple built and at the end the temple burnt.

". . . 1, 2 Kings present Israel's history as a series of events that describe

how and why the nation fell from the heights of national prosperity to the
depths of conquest and exile."5

"More specifically, 1, 2 Kings explain how and why Israel lost the land it
fought so hard to win in Joshua and worked so hard to organize in Judges
and 1, 2 Samuel."6

"Plot relates the causes and effects in a story. Thus, the story line in 1, 2
Kings may be that Israel went into exile, but the plot is Israel went into
exile because of its unfaithfulness to God. To make cause and effect
unfold, plots normally have at least two basic aspects: conflict and
resolution. A plot's conflict is the tension in a story that makes it an
interesting account, while a plot's resolution is the way the conflict is
settled. How the author develops these two components usually decides
the shape and effectiveness of the plot."7

4
For further discussion of their theories, see Gleason Archer Jr. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction,
pp. 289-91, and other Old Testament Introductions.
5
House, p. 15.
6
Ibid., p. 28.
7
Ibid., pp. 61-62.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 3

This historical period is more than twice that of the one the Books of Samuel covered,
which was about 150 years in length. The Book of Judges covers about 300 years of
Israel's history.

The dates of the kings of Israel and Judah that I have used in the following notes are
those of Edwin Thiele.8 He has worked out the many problems regarding these dates
more satisfactorily than anyone else in the opinion of most scholars.9

MESSAGE10

The fact that this book opens and closes with death should be a clue as to its message.

It opens with David's death, and it closes with Ahab's death. The intervening period of
about a century and a half is a story of national decline, disruption, disintegration, and
disaster. Israel and Judah passed from affluence and influence to poverty and paralysis.

There is an emphasis in this book on thrones.

Obviously there were the thrones of Judah and Israel on earth with their kings who
succeeded one another. However there is also the throne in heaven with its one King.
Rehoboam and Jeroboam had their successors, the kings who replaced one another.
Yahweh also in a sense had His successors, the prophets who replaced one another as His
messengers to the people. While the kings remind us of the thrones on earth, the prophets
remind us of the throne in heaven.

The thrones on earth present a story of disruption, disintegration, and disaster in both
kingdoms, Judah and Israel. This trend continued despite changes in the methods the
various rulers employed to govern their people.

Solomon's method of government was oppression. He taxed the people greatly and
conscripted them into government service. The result was material magnificence. He
multiplied riches and manifested great displays in the temple, the palace, and throughout
his kingdom. He increased the military strength of the nation. Nevertheless in the process
he ground down the people. The state became more important than the people. The
testimony to this appears in 12:4. The result was dissatisfaction with Solomon's method
of government.

8
Edwin Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings. Thiele clarified that Judah and Israel
counted the beginning of reigns differently. Normally Judah began counting a king's reign with the first of
the calendar year in which his accession to the throne fell. Israel reckoned its kings' reigns from the time
those reigns actually began. However, during one period both kingdoms used the same system (pp. 21, 44).
A further complication was that these kingdoms began their calendar years six months apart (p. 45).
Another phenomenon was coregencies, in which the reigns of two or more kings of the same kingdom
overlapped. For an update of Thiele's work, see Leslie McFall, "A Translation Guide to the Chronological
Data in Kings and Chronicles," Bibliotheca Sacra 148:589 (January-March 1991):3-45. See another
revision of Thiele's dates in Wiseman, pp. 28-29.
9
See ibid., p. 27.
10
Adapted from G. Campbell Morgan, Living Messages of the Books of the Bible, 1:176-90.
4 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

In reaction to this method Rehoboam chose a new method of government: autocracy. He

decided to tighten his grip on the people so he could control them (12:14). He believed
the people should trust in their rulers, but he did not trust in God. Consequently he failed.
Autocracy led to revolution (12:16).

Jeroboam chose a third method of government: democracy. He let the people determine
how they would live. While this resulted in more pleasant conditions for the people, it
also resulted in ultimate disaster for his nation. Notice what democracy produced in
Jeroboam's day: 12:27-29. People cannot rule themselves effectively. We need God to
govern us. Jeroboam believed rulers should trust in the people, but he did not trust in
God. Consequently he failed. He made religion convenient, and the people became
corrupt (12:30-31).

Rehoboam's successors in Judah chose a method of government we could call

government by policy. That is, they chose to follow precedent, the pattern of their
predecessors, rather than getting and following God's direction for their nation. There
were some exceptions to this approach, but on the whole this was Judah's method of
government.

Jeroboam's successors in Israel, however, chose a different method of government:

selfishness. The kings of Israel cared little for the people of Israel. What concerned them
primarily was what they could get out of being king for themselves. That is why the story
of the kingdom of Israel is a story of intrigue, assassinations, and much bloodshed.

In summary, every form of human government results in disastrous failure if people do

not acknowledge God's sovereignty. People cannot govern themselves effectively. The
result is always decline, disruption, and disintegration. This is one of the great revelations
of 1 Kings.

However there is another throne in view in this book: the throne in heaven. Whereas 1
Kings reveals that human government always fails, it also reveals that God's government
never fails. There are two ways God exercised His kingship over His people during
Israel's monarchy.

First, He broke in on human life with messages that the prophets delivered. Ahijah
announced the division of the kingdom (11:26-39). Later he announced the death of
Jeroboam's son (14:4-16). Shemaiah directed Rehoboam not to fight against Jeroboam
(12:21-24). An unnamed prophet announced the fate of Jeroboam's altar (13:1-10). Jehu
announced Baasha's doom (16:1-4). Elijah vindicated Yahweh in the days of Ahab's
apostasy (chs. 17—21). Another unnamed prophet rebuked Ahab for allowing Ben-
Hadad to escape (20:35-43). Micaiah foretold Israel's scattering (22:8-28). These are all
evidences that God was governing His people independently of the kings when they
forgot Him. The heavenly throne ruled in spite of the earthly thrones.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 5

The second way God exercised His rule, in addition to sending messages by the prophets,
was by directly and indirectly intervening in the lives of His people. He appeared and
spoke directly to Solomon, which resulted in the building of the temple. He raised up an
adversary to Solomon, namely Jeroboam. He slew Abijah. He withheld rain and brought
famine. He sent fire from heaven on Mt. Carmel. He sent rain. He appeared to Elijah in
an earthquake. He enticed Ahab into battle through the mouths of lying prophets.

In short, God ruled by exercising direct and indirect influence over people, by directly
intervening and by controlling circumstances occasionally. He manipulated history. God
sits in perfect control and continuity over all the human chaos that peoples' failure to rule
themselves causes.

The message of the book, therefore, is that when people exclude God, every method of
human government will fail; but even so God is still on His throne and is in control.

If people exclude God, every method of government ends in disaster. Even though in
Solomon's reign the king emphasized religious forms and ceremonies, internal
development, foreign treaties, and intellectual attainment, his oppression did not bring
stability and peace. Autocracy will end in revolution eventually. Democracy that locks
God out can result in the most terrible consequences for the people whose interests it
professes to advocate. Government by policy can only deteriorate. Selfish rulers will only
rape their nations.

Man cannot govern himself because he does not know himself apart from God's Word.
How can he govern others about whom he knows even less? If people do not submit to
the throne in heaven, no matter what method of government they choose, they will fail.
As Christians, we must remember who is in control. We must look beyond our
government to our God.

First Kings also reveals God's method in the midst of human failures.

First, when a throne on earth rebels against the throne in heaven God abandons that
throne on earth. He separated Himself from it. He allowed the evil choices of the rulers to
work themselves out to their inevitable consequences. Departure leads to disaster.
Apostasy results in awful consequences (cf. Rom. 1).

Second, God keeps some consciousness of Himself and His government alive in the
hearts and minds of a remnant. The prophets spoke. All Christians exercise that ministry
today. We should speak for God to our generation.

Third, God maintains ultimate control. He controls history directly and indirectly so His
purposes get accomplished. The Christian never needs to panic. God has revealed His
plan for history. Knowledge of the Word should give us stability in uncertain times.

What I have said is true on the national scale is also true on the individual level. If a
person excludes God from his or her life, no matter how the person may live, he or she
6 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

will fail. We can resist God's authority, but we cannot overcome it. People only break
themselves by refusing to submit to the throne in heaven. People need reminding of the
throne in heaven. These principles have worked out throughout history. God's plan moves
ahead.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 7

OUTLINE

I. The reign of Solomon chs. 1—11

A. Solomon's succession to David's throne 1:1—2:12

1. David's declining health 1:1-4

2. Adonijah's attempt to seize the throne 1:5-53
3. David's charge to Solomon 2:1-9
4. David's death 2:10-12

B. The foundation of Solomon's reign 2:13—4:34

1. Solomon's purges 2:13-46

2. Solomon's wisdom from God ch. 3
3. Solomon's political strength ch. 4

C. Solomon's greatest contribution chs. 5—8

1. Preparations for building ch. 5

2. Temple construction ch. 6
3. Solomon's palace 7:1-12
4. The temple furnishings 7:13-51
5. The temple dedication ch. 8

D. The fruits of Solomon's reign chs. 9—11

1. God's covenant with Solomon 9:1-9

2. Further evidences of God's blessing 9:10-28
3. Solomon's greatness ch. 10
4. Solomon's apostasy ch. 11

II. The divided kingdom 1 Kings 12—2 Kings 17

A. The first period of antagonism 12:1—16:28

1. The division of the kingdom ch. 12

2. Jeroboam's evil reign in Israel 12:25—14:20
3. Rehoboam's evil reign in Judah 14:21-31
4. Abijam's evil reign in Judah 15:1-8
5. Asa's good reign in Judah 15:9-24
6. Nadab's evil reign in Israel 15:25-32
7. Baasha's evil reign in Israel 15:33—16:7
8 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

8. Elah's evil reign in Israel 16:8-14

9. Zimri's evil reign in Israel 16:15-20
10. Omri's evil reign in Israel 16:21-28

B. The period of alliance 1 Kings 16:29—2 Kings 9:29

1. Ahab's evil reign in Israel 16:29—22:40

2. Jehoshaphat's good reign in Judah 22:41-50
3. Ahaziah's evil reign in Israel 1 Kings 22:51—2 Kings 1:18

(Continued in notes on 2 Kings)

One writer observed that a chiastic structure marks the Books of Kings.11

A Solomon/United Monarchy — 1 Kings 1:1—11:25

B Jeroboam/Rehoboam; the division of the kingdom — 1 Kings
11:26—14:31
C Kings of Judah/Israel — 1 Kings 15:1—16:22
D The Omride dynasty; the rise and fall of the Baal
cult in Israel and Judah — 1 Kings 16:23—2 Kings
12
C' Kings of Judah/Israel — 2 Kings 13—16
B' The fall of the Northern Kingdom — 2 Kings 17
A' The Kingdom of Judah — 2 Kings 18—25.

11
George Savran, "1 and 2 Kings," in The Literary Guide to the Bible, p. 148.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 9

Exposition
I. THE REIGN OF SOLOMON CHS. 1—11

The Holy Spirit led the writer of Kings to give an interpretation of history, not just a
chronologically sequential record of events. This is true of all the writers of the Old
Testament historical books. Some of the events in Kings are not in chronological order.
They appear in the text as they do to make a point that was primarily theological (i.e., to
reveal a spiritual lesson from history). The writer chose the historical data he included for
this purpose under the superintending inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The lesson that
Kings teaches is that failure to honor the revealed will of God results in ruin and
destruction.12 For Israel the revealed will of God was the Mosaic Law and the later
revelations of the prophets.

"By way of contrast with the other two books covering the historical
details of the united and divided kingdoms, one might say that whereas
Samuel's author uses a biographical style and Chronicles is written from a
theological standpoint, the author of Kings employs a largely narrative-
annalistic approach."13

All three major sections of Kings emphasize many theological lessons, but each one
repeats and reinforces the main motif, the importance of obeying the Mosaic Law to
succeed. This motif stands out clearly in the first major section dealing with Solomon's
reign (chs. 1—11). The nation of Israel reached the height of its power and prestige in
Solomon's day. It began to decline because of Solomon's unfaithfulness and failure to
honor the Mosaic Covenant.

One writer observed that the structure of the record of Solomon's reign is as follows.
Chapters 1—2 and 11:14-43 draw a frame around the whole history of Solomon's rule.
Within this frame two similar sections form the body of the revelation. The first (3:1—
8:66) is favorable to Solomon and the second (9:1—11:13) is critical of him.14 Each of
these sections begins with a dream (3:1-15; 9:1-10a), and each ends with a revelation of
Solomon's attitude toward God (chs. 6—8; 11:1-13). The first section has two parts. Part
one reveals Solomon's domestic policy with sub-sections on women and wisdom (3:16-
28), and administration and wisdom (4:1—5:14). Part two deals with Solomon's labor
relations and has sub-sections on the contract with Hiram (5:15-27) and the corvée (5:28-
33). The second section also has two parts. Part one gives more information about
Solomon's labor relations and has sub-sections on the contract with Hiram (9:10b-14) and
the corvée (9:15-28). Part two explains Solomon's foreign policy with sub-sections on

12
John Gray, I & II Kings, pp. 4-5.
13
R. D. Patterson and Herman J. Austel, "1, 2 Kings," in 1 Kings-Job, vol. 4 of The Expositor's Bible
Commentary, p. 8.
14
This is the same historiographic pattern that the writer of Samuel used in describing the reigns of Saul and
David.
10 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

women and wisdom (10:1-13), and wealth and wisdom (10:14-29). Thus there is both a
chiastic and an unfolding structure in chapters 1—11.15

Favorable Unfavorable
Introduction

Domestic Labor Labor Foreign

Conclusion
Policy Relations Relations Policy

Attitude

Attitude
Dream

Dream
Administration
& Wisdom

Women &

Wealth &
Hiram

Corvée

Wisdom
Wisdom
Women &

Hiram

Corvée
Wisdom

A. SOLOMON'S SUCCESSION TO DAVID'S THRONE 1:1—2:12

The first segment of the writer's story (1:1—2:12) continues the history of Israel's
monarchy where 2 Samuel ended. It records the final events in David's reign that led to
Solomon's succession to the throne. It answers the question raised in 2 Samuel 9—20,
namely, "Who will succeed David?"

1. David's declining health 1:1-4

It was customary in ancient times to warm an elderly person not only by covering him or
her with blankets, but also by putting a healthy person in bed with him or her.16 The body
heat of the well person would keep the older person warmer. David's physicians chose
Abishag to provide nursing care for David as well as to warm him.17 Since David was the
king, they sought and found a beautiful nurse for him.

"Shunammite" is an alternate reading of "Shulammite," a resident of Shunem in Issachar.

There is no way of telling if Abishag was the Shulammite Solomon loved and wrote of in
the Song of Solomon (Song of Sol. 6:13). The fact that David did not have sexual
relations with this "very beautiful" young woman (v. 4) is significant because it shows
that his physical powers were now weak. David had been sexually active, but now his
vigor had departed. This shows that it was time for a more energetic man to reign.

15
Kim Ian Parker, "Repetition as a Structuring Device in 1 Kings 1—11," Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament 42 (October 1988):19-27.
16
Wiseman, p. 67.
17
Gene Rice, Nations under God, p. 8, and Simon DeVries, 1 Kings, p. 12, deduced from David's symptoms
that he suffered from arteriosclerosis.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 11

2. Adonijah's attempt to seize the throne 1:5-53

Adonijah was David's fourth son (2 Sam. 3:4) and the eldest one living at this time.
Evidently he believed it was more important that the eldest son succeed David, as was
customary in the Near East, than that the king of Yahweh's anointing occupy that
position. God had identified Solomon as David's successor even before Solomon was
born (1 Chron. 22:9-10). Adonijah's revolt was primarily against the revealed will of
God, secondarily against David, and finally against Solomon.

"His father had never interfered with him or 'crossed him' (NASB) is more
descriptive than 'displeased him' (RSV), for this comment by the author
(cf. vv. 8, 10) betrays David's weakness in his unwillingness to cause his
children any physical or mental discomfort . . ."18

Adonijah prepared to seize David's throne as Absalom had attempted to do (cf. 2 Sam.
15:1). Joab had long since demonstrated his disregard for God's will in many instances (2
Sam. 3:22-30; 20:8-10; 18:5-15). He evidently sided with Adonijah now because he
realized he was out of favor with David. If Solomon succeeded to the throne, he would
probably demote Joab at least.

Abiathar had been the leading priest in Israel until David began to give Zadok priority.
He had fled from Nob after Saul massacred the priests there to join David in the
wilderness (1 Sam. 22:18-20). He had also offered sacrifices at David's tabernacle in
Jerusalem while Zadok served at the Mosaic tabernacle at Gibeon. However, David had
been showing increasing favor to Zadok (cf. 1 Chron. 15:11; 2 Sam. 15:24; 20:25).
Abiathar was one of Eli's descendants whom God had doomed with removal from the
priesthood (1 Sam. 2:30-36; cf. 1 Kings 2:27). Probably Abiathar saw in Adonijah's
rebellion a promising opportunity to retain his position that he must have seen he would
lose if Solomon came to power.

Shimei (v. 8; cf. 2 Sam. 16:5-13; 19:16-23) may have been truly loyal to David at this
time, or he may have gone along for the sake of personal advantage (cf. 2:36-38).

Adonijah's banquet (barbecue?) at En-rogel, just a few hundred yards southeast of the
City of David, was probably a covenant meal at which his supporters pledged their
allegiance to David's eldest living son. If David's other supporters had attended and eaten
with Adonijah, custom would have bound them to support and protect one another.19

As a prophet, Nathan spoke for God. Evidently God moved him to do what he did here. It
was certainly in harmony with God's will (cf. 2 Sam. 12:1). Adonijah had become king
(v. 11) only in the sense that he was the people's choice at that moment. Perhaps Nathan
was trying to shock Bathsheba and David by referring to Adonijah as the king.

18
Wiseman, p. 69.
19
Gray, p. 87.
12 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

David had undoubtedly assured Bathsheba that Solomon would succeed him after God
had revealed that to David (1 Chron. 22:9-10). Nathan wanted to make sure at least two
witnesses would hear David's promise (cf. Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15). This was
especially important since Adonijah's rebellion against the Lord's anointed was a capital
offense.

We should probably interpret Bathsheba's request (v. 20) as a desire that David would
appoint Solomon co-regent rather than that he should step down and let Solomon rule in
his place.20

Normally in the ancient Near East a new king would purge his political enemies when he
came to power (cf. 2:13-46). This was the basis for Bathsheba's fear (v. 21). Nathan's
news that Adonijah's feast was taking place at that very moment (v. 25) would have
encouraged David to act at once. Nathan's words to David (vv. 24-27) were very
diplomatic and appropriate for a man in his position.

The clause, "May the king live forever," (vv. 31, 34; et al.) occurs often in the Old
Testament. It expresses the wish that because the king had acted or would act righteously
God would bless him with long life. God had promised righteous Israelites long life
under the Mosaic Law. It also expressed the desire that David might live forever through
the lives of his descendants.

Zadok, Nathan, and Benaiah were the highest ranking priest, prophet, and soldier
respectively. Their leadership in the events David ordered (vv. 32-35) would have shown
the people that they were acting as King David's representatives. Kings often rode on
mules in the Near East symbolizing their role as servants of the people (v. 33). The Gihon
spring (v. 33) was the other main water source for Jerusalem beside En-rogel. It was one-
half mile north of En-rogel on the eastern side of Zion, and it was visible from En-rogel.

Zadok the high priest anointed (consecrated) Solomon king of Israel there (vv. 34, 39)
with oil from David's tabernacle (v. 39) symbolizing Solomon's endowment with God's
Spirit for service (cf. 1 Sam. 10:1; 16:3, 12). At the same time someone anointed Zadok
as high priest (1 Chron. 29:22), probably before Solomon. A trumpet blast (vv. 34, 39)
often announced God's activity in Israel throughout its history (Exod. 19:16; et al.).

"Two terms are used for the royal office: 'king' (1 Kgs. 1:34, 35a) and
'ruler' (v. 35b). 'King' (melek) had a long history of usage and carried with
it associations of autocracy and despotism from the practice of kingship
among Israel's neighbors. 'Ruler' (nagid, translated elsewhere as 'prince' or
'leader'), a term unique to Israelite tradition, emphasizes that one rules at
God's appointment and pleasure (cf. 1 Sam. 9:16; 10:1; 13:14; 25:30; 2
Sam. 7:8; 1 Kgs. 14:7; 16:2). These two terms anticipate the long struggle
between the ideal and the practice of kingship in Israel."21

20
E. Ball, "The Co-Regency of David and Solomon (1 Kings 1)," Vetus Testamentum 27:3 (July 1977):269.
Cf. Gray, p. 88.
21
Rice, p. 15.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 13

By anointing Solomon (v. 39, in 973 B.C.) the high priest identified him as David's
successor. Solomon now took his seat on Israel's throne as David's co-regent (v. 46).
David thanked God for allowing him to live to see Solomon's coronation (v. 48).

"The placing of Solomon on the throne signals the beginning of the

Davidic dynasty, a royal lineage that will eventually produce Jesus Christ.
God has begun to keep the promises made to David in 2 Sam 7:7-17."22

Some commentators believe this was Solomon's second anointing when he became the
sole king over Israel (in 971 B.C.).23 It seems more likely, however, that David did not
die for some time after the events described in chapter 1 (i.e., for two years; cf. 2:10-12).

Adonijah fled to the sanctuary courtyard, evidently the one in Jerusalem, and took hold of
the horns on the brazen altar. In the ancient Near East and in Israel the people
customarily regarded the central sanctuary as a place of refuge (Exod. 21:14; cf. Ezek.
21:13-14).24 The idea behind this custom seems to have been that God had been gracious
to people by accepting their offerings. Consequently people should be gracious to the
refugee who had offended his fellowman. Solomon, like David and like Yahweh, showed
mercy (v. 52).25

"The central truth for the throne-succession historian is that Yahweh was
at work to frustrate Adonijah and to establish Solomon."26

3. David's charge to Solomon 2:1-9

David's words here state succinctly the philosophy of history the writer of Kings set forth
in this book.27 It is the philosophy David had learned and now commended to his son
Solomon. Careful obedience to the Law of Moses would yield success in all areas of his
son's life (v. 2). That obedience would constitute his manhood (v. 1). Since God made
man in the image of God, man can realize his manhood only by placing himself under
God's authority. "Statutes," "commandments," "ordinances," and "testimonies" are all
different kinds of precepts in the Law. Solomon's faithful obedience would also insure an
unbroken line of rulers (v. 4; implied in 1 Sam. 7:12-16).

David also gave Solomon advice concerning certain men. Solomon should execute Joab
for his murders (2 Sam. 3:22-30; 20:8-10). David had been merciful to Joab. He was
living on borrowed time because of his service to David. Nevertheless he deserved to die

22
House, p. 93.
23
E.g., H. C. M. Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles, pp. 186-87.
24
The name "sanctuary" to describe a church originated in the Middle Ages. Wiseman, p. 74.
25
For an interesting study of chapter 1 as a complete story containing background, complication, climax,
and denouement, see Burke O. Long, "A Darkness Between Brothers: Solomon and Adonijah," Journal for
the Study of the Old Testament 19 (February 1981):79-94.
26
DeVries, p. 22.
27
Compare other important farewell addresses such as those by Jacob (Gen. 47:29—49:33) and Joshua
(Josh. 23:1-16) as well as God's charge to Joshua (Josh. 1:1-9).
14 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

so justice would prevail. Evidently David had reason to believe Shimei the Benjamite
would threaten the throne again (cf. 2 Sam. 16:11). If he did, Solomon was to execute
him (v. 9; cf. vv. 36-46). We see here (vv. 1-9) another instance of the theme that
punishment comes on those who resist the Lord's anointed and blessing follows those
who serve him.

"David was wrong in passing on responsibility to Solomon to execute the

judgment he himself should have ordered at the time. This was to cause
his son and successors much trouble and feuding."28

4. David's death 2:10-12

David and Saul each reigned for 40 years (cf. Acts 13:21). The differences in their
personal lives and administrations were not due to any natural difference in the time they
ruled. These differences sprang from God's response to them that their response to
Yahweh's will determined. David experienced God's blessing as a warrior, poet,
musician, military commander, administrator, and man of God. His most significant
characteristic, I believe, was his heart for God.

David was 70 years old when he died (2 Sam. 5:4). Saul may have been 80 when he
died.29 However the deaths of these two kings as well as their lives contrast dramatically.
David died in peace, Saul in battle. David died in victory, Saul in defeat. When David
began to reign, the Philistines dominated Israel. When Solomon began to reign, Israel
was at peace and in control of her neighbors (v. 12).

This section (1:1—2:12) provides a bridge between David and Solomon's reigns.30 Much
in it is transitional dealing with the transfer of power. When Solomon began to reign as
sole king in 971 B.C., he had a strong foundation on which to build because of the
blessing God had brought to Israel for David's commitment to God and His Law.

B. THE FOUNDATION OF SOLOMON'S REIGN 2:13—4:34

1. Solomon's purges 2:13-46

Solomon wrote that the fear of Yahweh is the beginning of knowledge (Prov. 1:7; cf.
Eccles. 12:13; Ps. 111:10). At the very beginning of his reign he gave evidence of being
wise by the way he dealt with his political enemies. His wise decisions at this time
resulted in peace and prosperity for Israel for the next 40 years (971-931 B.C.).

28
Wiseman, p. 77.
29
See my comments on 1 Sam. 13:1.
30
For an extended treatment of the two halves of chapter 2, see Jeffrey S. Rogers, "Narrative Stock and
Deuteronomistic Elaboration in 1 Kings 2," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 50:3 (July 1988):398-413.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 15

Adonijah's execution 2:13-25

Adonijah's professed acceptance of Solomon's succession overcame Bathsheba's initial

fear of him. He convinced her that he only wanted permission to marry King David's
former nurse. But Solomon saw deeper into Adonijah's intent. Even though David had
not had sexual relations with Abishag, she was part of his harem, one of the women who
ministered to his most intimate needs.

"Although Abishag had been only David's nurse, in the eyes of the people
she passed as his concubine; and among the Israelites, just as with the
ancient Persians (Herod. iii. 68), taking possession of the harem of a
deceased king was equivalent to an establishment of the claim to the
throne . . ."31

Adonijah would also have found popular support among the people because he was
David's oldest living son (cf. v. 22). Solomon correctly regarded Adonijah's request as an
act of treason worthy of death.

Verse 24 makes it very clear that Solomon, like David, had a proper view of his role
under God as Israel's king. Adonijah's rebellion was not just against Solomon personally
but against the Lord and His anointed whom He had placed on the throne.

Abiathar's dismissal 2:26-27

Solomon granted Abiathar a parole for participating in Adonijah's rebellion. By removing

him from his office he cut off Eli's last descendant thereby fulfilling God's prophecy to
Eli (1 Sam. 2:27-36). Eli's fertility ended because he had not obeyed God's Law
faithfully. The writer of Kings drew special attention to God's bringing this to pass (v.
27).

Joab's execution 2:28-35

Perhaps because Solomon had shown Adonijah mercy when he fled to the altar (1:50-52)
Joab sought refuge from Solomon for participating in Adonijah's rebellion there too.
Joab, however, was a murderer as well as a rebel. Consequently Solomon had him
executed in obedience to the Mosaic Law (Exod. 21:14). Manslayers, but not murderers,
received sanctuary at the altar. David's house shared the guilt for Joab's murders as long
as he remained alive (v. 31). By executing him Solomon cleared the way for God to bless
him and his throne. God would punish Joab's house but bless David's house (v. 33).
Solomon honored Joab for his service to David by burying him in his own land in Judah
(v. 34; cf. 2 Sam. 2:32).

31
C. F. Keil, The Books of the Kings, p. 32.
16 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Shimei's execution 2:36-46

David had warned Solomon to keep Shimei under close observation and to put him to
death (vv. 8-9). Evidently David realized because of Shimei's past actions that it would
only be a matter of time before he would do something worthy of death, probably rebel
against Solomon's authority. Solomon made Jerusalem Shimei's prison. Jerusalem was
only "a small acropolis city, whose circumference has been estimated at 4500 feet."32
Solomon kept Shimei from reuniting with the other Benjamites. When Shimei left the
city he flagrantly rebelled against Solomon's authority. Leaving the city in itself was no
great crime, but the fact that Solomon had specifically forbidden it made it very serious.
Thus Shimei's disregard for and disobedience to the will of the Lord's anointed resulted in
his death.

All of Solomon's dealings with these enemies who had conspired against the Lord's
anointed and violated the Mosaic Law show that the new king had a firm commitment to
keeping that Law. Moreover Solomon was also merciful and wise, traits of God Himself,
who blessed Solomon with these characteristics as His son because of Solomon's
commitment to Him. This section also vividly portrays the fate of people who oppose
God: disenfranchisement (in the case of Abiathar) and death (in the cases of Adonijah,
Joab, and Shimei).

"Taken as a whole, 2 Sam. 9—20; 1 Kgs. 1—2 is one of the most

powerful indictments of sin in the Bible. But this material has to do with
more than judgment. Running parallel to the nemesis of judgment are the
grace and providence of God. The child born of the adulterous union died,
but another son was born to David and Bathsheba (2 Sam. 12:15-25).
David almost lost his kingdom to Absalom, but God defeated the counsel
of Ahithophel and David regained his throne (2 Sam. 16:15—17:14). The
ultimate good in this tangle of events was the accession of that son of
David whom the LORD loved (2 Sam. 12:24-25), who ended the disruption
in David's family and established the kingdom in strength and peace.
Good and evil mingle together in these events. But God is able to achieve
his purposes in the midst of and in spite of evil. Even that which is meant
for evil God can turn to good (Gen. 45:8; 50:20; Ps. 76:9). The supreme
example of this, of course, was the turning of Good Friday into Easter."33

"The major canonical and theological issue this section raises is the
fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant."34

"Historically, Israel is at a crossroads. From this moment on one sees a

drastic shift from semidemocratic tribal rule (maintained to some extent in
David's administration) to a typical despotic city-state."35

32
James A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings, p. 96.
33
Rice, pp. 27-28. For a good discussion of the "succession narrative" that begins in 2 Samuel 9—20 and
concludes with 1 Kings 1—2, see Patterson and Austel, p. 38.
34
House, p. 103.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 17

2. Solomon's wisdom from God ch. 3

The flowing narrative of chapters 1—2 now gives way to reports and lists that catalogue
facts about Solomon's reign.

The writer constructed the Solomon narrative (chs. 3—11), like so many others in the Old
Testament, to draw attention to the fulfillment or lack of fulfillment of prophecies made
earlier.36 The prophecy lies in 3:3-14, and we can trace the fulfillment through chapter
11.

This chapter emphasizes one of the chief blessings God bestowed on Solomon for his
commitment and submission to Yahweh. By giving Solomon unusual wisdom God also
blessed the nation he served as king.

"The characteristics of Solomon's wisdom and glory were not selected just
to continue the picture of an ideal king by showing him in a favourable
[sic] light. Throughout, and in the epilogue on his reign (11:1-13, 33), the
history comments on its deficiencies in theological terms. A similar
appraisal will be used to judge successive rulers against the reigns of
David and Solomon."37

Solomon's attitudes 3:1-3

Should Solomon have married Pharaoh's daughter? In view of 11:1-2 and 2 Chronicles
8:1 there is no way we can say yes. Furthermore Solomon already had a wife when he
married Pharaoh's daughter (14:21; cf. Gen. 2:24). Why then did the writer not point out
this sin here? He may have not done so because his purpose in this part of his history was
to show the greatness of Solomon. In chapter 11 he emphasized Solomon's failures. Here
it is the fact that he could marry such a person as an Egyptian princess that shows the
social and political height to which God had elevated him. A descendant of former
Egyptian slaves now became Pharaoh's son-in-law!

"Under Solomon, the relationship between Egypt and Israel reached an

apex with the marriage alliance between the two nations (1 Kgs 3:1)."38

At this time Israel was stronger than Egypt.

"That this is the case is clear from his [Pharaoh Siamun's, 978-959 B.C.]
willingness to provide his own daughter as a wife for Solomon, a
35
DeVries, p. 44.
36
Bezalel Porten gave a detailed analysis of the structure of this section that substantiates this claim in "The
Structure and Theme of the Solomon Narrative (1 Kings 3-11)," Hebrew Union College Annual 38
(1967):93-128.
37
Wiseman, p. 81.
38
James K. Hoffmeier, "Egypt As an Arm of Flesh: A Prophetic Response," in Israel's Apostasy and
Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, p. 81.
18 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

concession almost without parallel in Egyptian history since it was a

candid admission to the world of Egypt's weakness and conciliation.
Normally Egyptian kings took foreign princesses but did not give up their
own daughters to foreign kings."39

Solomon housed his bride in the City of David until he completed a special palace for her
nearby (7:8).

The Israelites were offering sacrifices to Yahweh on the "high places" that the Ras
Shamra tablets describe as open-air sanctuaries throughout the land.40 These sites were
normally on hilltops. The Israelites evidently took them over from the Canaanites and
converted them into centers of Yahweh worship. The Law forbade offering sacrifices at
places other than those God approved and especially at sites of Canaanite altars (Deut.
12:1-21). Evidently the people justified their disobedience on the ground that they did not
have a permanent palace where Yahweh could dwell (i.e., a temple). Another possibility
is that they did not consider worship at high places wrong until the king reunited the ark
and a tabernacle in a central sanctuary (i.e., the temple; cf. 1 Sam. 9:11-25).41

The only deviation from the Law that the writer ascribed to Solomon at this early time in
his reign was his worship at the high places (v. 3). Otherwise Solomon followed God
faithfully, except for his polygamy.

"Silently, invisibly, like an incubating virus, sin was at work throughout

Solomon's reign and in the end broke out in violent, destructive force.
Such is the nature of sin."42

Love here (v. 3) does not express a feeling only but more fundamentally a commitment to
Yahweh that manifests itself in obedience to His Word (cf. 1 John 5:3). Solomon's
commitment, like David's, accounted for much of the blessing that came on the king and
through him to the people.

Solomon's petition for wisdom 3:4-15

A tabernacle, evidently the Mosaic tabernacle, and the Mosaic tabernacle's bronze altar
still stood at Gibeon (lit. little hill; 1 Chron. 16:39- 40; 21:28-29; 2 Chron. 1:3, 5-6).
Gibeon was one of the so-called high places where the people offered sacrifices to
Yahweh. Burnt offerings symbolized the dedication of the worshipper's person to God
(Lev. 1). By offering 1,000 of these sacrifices Solomon was expressing his personal
allegiance to Yahweh (cf. Rom. 12:1-2).

39
Eugene Merrill, Kingdom of Priests, p. 292. Cf. Alan Schulman, "Diplomatic Marriage in the Egyptian
New Kingdom," Journal of Near Eastern Studies 38 (1979):190-91. See also Alberto Green, "Israelite
Influence at Shishak's Court?" Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 233 (1979):59-62, for
evidence of the immense influence and prestige that Solomon enjoyed in his day.
40
Gray, p. 120. See Wiseman, pp. 82-83, for an extended note on the high places.
41
Patterson and Austel, p. 44.
42
Rice, p. 31.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 19

God responded by blessing Solomon in a way that He would not have had the king failed
to dedicate himself to God. God's revelation to him was in response to his offerings.
God's offer constituted a test for Solomon (v. 5). Would he request something for his own
glory or for God's glory? He showed his heart for God by asking something for God's
glory (v. 9). His words show that he viewed himself as dependent on God, not self-
sufficient (v. 7), God's servant (vv. 8-9), and a servant of God's people rather than his
own people (v. 9). He acknowledged God's past action, asked for His continuing favor,
expressed humility, and requested the ability to carry out his duties.43

"'To go out and to come in' [v. 7] refers to life beyond the doors of one's
household and the city gate in the discharge of one's duties (Deut. 31:2; 1
Sam. 18:16)."44

This is an idiom that refers to the skills of leadership (cf. Num. 27:17; Josh. 14:11; 1
Sam. 29:6; 2 Kings 11:8).45 Solomon also requested an understanding (lit. a listening or
obedient) heart (v. 9).46 Furthermore Solomon viewed God as lovingly loyal, just, and
gracious (v. 6), his God (v. 7), and the true King of Israel (vv. 8-9).47

"The heart (leb) in Israelite thought is the center of the psychic self. It
includes especially mental activity but is broader in scope than English
'mind,' embracing the feelings and will as well. The heart is susceptible to
become hardened, to be made fat (Isa. 6:10), and to dwell on evil (Gen.
6:5; 8:21); indeed, it is 'deceitful above all things' (Jer. 17:9). It is over
against these capabilities of the heart that Solomon's request is to be
understood. A 'hearing heart' [v. 9] is one that is open, receptive, teachable
(Isa. 50:4). That to which the heart of the king should be open above all
else is God's torah. The king ideally rules not on the basis of his own
understanding but administers his realm in the light of God's revealed
will."48

"The king was the supreme judge and final arbiter. Within his domain, the
ideal king sought to achieve what was right, to vindicate the just, to
protect the rights of the weak. And this was achieved in practice by a
series of shrewd and just decisions or verdicts or judgments (mishpatim in
the plural) all of which are examples of what our text calls 'right' (mishpat
in the singular)."49

43
Wiseman, pp. 84-85.
44
Rice, p. 33.
45
House, p. 110.
46
Significantly in Hebrew "hearing" and "obeying" come from the same word.
47
For a good explanation of the meaning of hesed ("lovingkindness," v. 6), see Patterson and Austel, p. 47.
48
Rice, p. 34.
49
A. Graeme Auld, I and II Kings, p. 23. Baxter, 2:99, distinguished between spiritual wisdom (insight into
divine things) and practical wisdom (administrative discernment, sagacious judgment, intellectual grasp,
aptitude for the acquisition of knowledge, and prudence in the directing of affairs). He claimed, and I
agree, that Solomon asked for and received less of the first kind but more of the last kind.
20 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

God promised to bless Solomon for putting His interests before Solomon's (cf. Matt.
6:33). He gave him much more than he asked (v. 13). Furthermore, He promised to give
Solomon long life if he continued to obey His Law (v. 14).

Solomon's expression of gratitude included more offerings. He presented these before the
ark in Jerusalem. They expressed further personal dedication (the burnt offerings) and
gratitude for fellowship with God (the peace offerings). They probably accompanied a
covenant renewal ceremony that involved the commitment of his servants (i.e.,
government officials) to the Mosaic Law (v. 15).

Notice that this section ends as it began: with a journey and sacrifices.

God's provision of wisdom 3:16-28

This incident demonstrates that God did indeed give Solomon the unusual wisdom He
had promised (v. 28).50 The writer did not specify when during Solomon's reign this
event took place, but probably it occurred shortly after God appeared to the king at
Gibeon (vv. 4-15).

"The chronology of the reign of Solomon does not pose nearly the
difficulty as does that of David. With the exception of the narrative
passages, which appear as usual to be inserted topically, the order found in
both 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles reflects the general flow of events. It does
seem, however, that Solomon's alliance with Siamun of Egypt (1 Kings
3:1) did not come to pass until after he had begun negotiations with the
Tyrians to help on the temple. This in turn presupposes Solomon's having
sought and been granted wisdom, for Hiram takes note of that fact (1
Kings 5:7)."51

Solomon demonstrated insight into basic human nature, here maternal instincts. This
insight enabled him to understand why people behave as they do and how they will
respond. This was a gift from God and is an aspect of wisdom.

"The fact that the two mothers were prostitutes is important in this story
. . . because it shows how the wise king would act on behalf of the very
lowest of his subjects . . ."52

This incident resulted in the Israelites having great respect for their king (v. 31). Solomon
became a blessing to the people because he related properly to Yahweh.

Wisdom in Israel and the ancient Near East was not synonymous with knowledge or
education. It involved the ability to live life in a skillful way so at the end one's life would

50
Wiseman, pp. 85-86, wrote a short note on the wisdom that is in view here.
51
Merrill, p. 290.
52
DeVries, p. 61.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 21

amount to something worthwhile. To the Israelites this was possible only if a person
knew and responded appropriately to (i.e., feared) Yahweh.53

3. Solomon's political strength ch. 4

God also blessed Israel through Solomon by giving him wisdom to organize and
administer the political affairs of the nation effectively, as this chapter records.

Solomon's chief officials 4:1-6

Delegation of authority is a mark of wisdom. Azariah (v. 2) was apparently Zadok's

grandson (1 Chron. 6:8-9). "The priest" is a common designation for the high priest.
Secretaries (v. 3) prepared official documents and records while recorders (v. 3)
maintained diaries of daily events in the kingdom. Even though Solomon had dismissed
Abiathar (v. 4) from his official duties he retained his title and honor. Zabud (v. 5) was
probably the king's personal chaplain and adviser.54 Forced laborers (corvée, v. 6) were
non-Israelites whom the king conscripted to work for the government (cf. 5:13-14; 9:15;
1 Chron. 2:2; 8:8).

Solomon's district governors 4:7-19

These men were responsible for providing for the needs of Solomon's large household,
including his courtiers, and for his thousands of horses (v. 28). Two were Solomon's
sons-in-law (vv. 11, 15). The district arrangement seems designed to move Israel away
from tribal independence to cooperation under the new centralized government, though
the district boundaries approximated the tribal boundaries.55

". . . this was a radical and decisive step, and that not only because it
imposed upon the people an unprecedented burden. It meant that the old
tribal system, already increasingly of vestigial significance, had been, as
far as its political functioning was concerned, virtually abolished. In place
of twelve tribes caring in turn for the central shrine were twelve districts
taxed for the support of Solomon's court!"56

Note that Solomon did not include Judah and Jerusalem. This gave Judah a great
advantage economically. Perhaps Solomon favored Judah because it was his tribe. This
favoritism may have been a factor in the revolt of the northern tribes later (12:4).

Solomon's throne exercised four spheres of political influence. First, there was the
homeland. This was the geographical area Joshua had assigned to the 12 tribes. In

53
See James L. Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom: An Introduction.
54
See A. Van Selms, "The Origin of the Title 'The King's Friend,'" Journal of Near Eastern Studies 16
(1957):118-23.
55
See the map "Solomon's 12 Districts and Surrounding Nations" in The Bible Knowledge Commentary:
Old Testament, p. 496.
56
John Bright, A History of Israel, pp. 221-22.
22 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Solomon's day Israel occupied only this area. Second, there were adjacent provinces (i.e.,
Damascus, Ammon, Moab, Edom, et al.). Solomon taxed these and conscripted them for
military service. They enjoyed protection and the benefits of Israel's central government.
Third, there were the vassal states (i.e., Zobah, Hamath, Arabia, possibly Philistia, et al.)
that Israel controlled. These enjoyed some autonomy such as native rulers and internal
fiscal policies. They recognized Solomon's authority, however, provided some tribute,
and pledged loyalty to him. Israel in return defended them from alien forces when
necessary. Fourth, there were the allied states (i.e., Phoenicia, Egypt, et al.). These
countries enjoyed equality with Israel. They defended each other as needed, traded with
each other, and generally cooperated with one another.57

Clearly Solomon's kingdom had a large bureaucracy.

Solomon's prosperity 4:20-28

We can explain the writer's unusual reference to Judah and Israel at this time, before the
division of the kingdom. When he wrote Kings the nation had split, so probably the
writer was using the designation that was common in his day. Moreover years before the
formal division took place northern and southern factions had already developed (cf. 1
Sam. 11:8; 15:4; 17:52; 1 Kings 1:35; et al.).

Solomon's kingdom was very populace (cf. Gen. 22:17) and peaceful (v. 25; cf. Micah
4:4; Zech. 3:10).

Usually when a great king died the nations subject to his leadership would withhold taxes
and rebel against his successor. This forced the new king to attack those nations to
establish his sovereignty over them. However, Solomon did not have to do this. God gave
him a peaceful reign in which he could concentrate on building projects.58

"To live in safety, in reliance on God (LXX elpizo, 'hope'), echoes

Deuteronomy 12:10. God alone can provide this (Ps. 4:8; Pr. 1:33; Dt.
33:12, 28)."59

Even though Solomon controlled the land area promised to Abraham's descendants in
Genesis 15:18-20, his control did not fulfill these promises completely in his day. This
territory did not lie within the geographic borders of Israel.60 Israel's geographic extent
was only about 150 miles long, from Dan to Beersheba (v. 25).

The figure of 4,000 stalls of horses (2 Chron. 9:25) appears to be the correct one rather
than 40,000 (v. 26). Horses and chariots were military machines at this time. These were
Solomon's weapons.

57
Merrill, pp. 300-302.
58
Patterson and Austel, p. 53.
59
Wiseman, p. 94.
60
See Gwileym Jones, 1 and 2 Kings, 1:146.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 23

Solomon's skill 4:29-34

Here is more evidence that God gave Solomon wisdom (Heb. hokmah) as He had
promised (3:12). He was one of the outstanding sages of the ancient world.61 What
Solomon received was the ability to make correct decisions. Even though he possessed
this ability he did not always choose to use it. He made some very foolish decisions in his
lifetime.

The men of the East (cf. Job 1:3) and Egypt (v. 30) were famous for their wisdom in the
ancient world.

Solomon's literary output was prolific (v. 32). His name appears on two of the psalms in
the Book of Psalms (Ps. 72; 127), and he also evidently wrote the Books of Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon.

This chapter shows God's response to Solomon's dedication to Yahweh (3:6-13). Even
though Solomon was God's elect he had the opportunity either to respond properly to
God's grace and experience further blessing or to respond improperly to it and experience
chastening. This is a choice God gives all His elect. Solomon made the wise choice.
Remember also the perfect response of Solomon's descendant Jesus Christ.

C. SOLOMON'S GREATEST CONTRIBUTION CHS. 5—8

Solomon's outstanding contribution to the nation of Israel, I believe, was the provision he
made for her spiritual strength. The writer of Kings gave this much emphasis in his book.

People generally regarded their king as the representative, son, and vice-regent of their
chief god in the ancient Near East.62 This was really the true relation of Israel's king to
Yahweh. People also viewed the temples of the gods as the palaces of those beings and
regarded the magnificence of their houses as a reflection of their personal greatness. The
temple represented the god.63 Therefore Solomon wanted to portray the greatness of
Yahweh by building Him the most glorious temple in the ancient Near East. This would
have enabled Israel to fulfill the purpose for which God had raised her up better, namely,
to bring people to God (Exod. 19:6; cf. Isa. 42:6-7).

61
See John E. Johnson, "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity," Bibliotheca Sacra
152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.
62
Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions, 2:282-83.
63
For an explanation of how ancient Near Easterners viewed their temples, see John M. Lundquist,
"Temple, Covenant, and Law in the Ancient Near East and in the Old Testament," in Israel's Apostasy and
Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, pp. 293-305.
24 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

1. Preparations for building ch. 5

Solomon's request of Hiram 5:1-6

Hiram probably reigned from about 980-947 B.C.64 Most scholars agree that his reign
overlapped David's by about nine years and Solomon's by about 24 (cf. 2 Sam. 5:11).
Tyre was an important Mediterranean Sea port in Phoenicia north of Israel. Sidon (v. 6),
another Phoenician port city, stood a few miles north of Tyre.

"A house for the name of the Lord" (v. 3) means a house for Yahweh that would
communicate His reputation to the world. Cedar (v. 6) is still a favored building material
because of its durability and beauty.

Solomon's treaty with Hiram 5:7-12

The fact that Hiram cooperated with and even blessed Yahweh (v. 7) shows how God
brought blessing to Gentiles as well as to the Israelites through David and Solomon's
godly dedication to the Lord. The covenant between Israel and Phoenicia (v. 12) resulted
in peace for many years.

Solomon's conscription of laborers 5:13-18

Solomon's forced laborers were non-Israelites (1 Chron. 8:7-8). Israelites also served, but
they were not slaves (9:22). Solomon's method of providing workers for state projects
became very distasteful to the people eventually, perhaps because of how he administered
it (cf. 12:18). Solomon's temple rested on massive limestone blocks that he had quarried
out of the hills north of Jerusalem (v. 17). The Gebelites (v. 18) lived in Byblos, 13 miles
north of modern Beirut and 60 miles north of Tyre.

The main emphasis in this chapter is on the favorable response of the Phoenician king,
Hiram, with which God blessed Israel through Solomon's wisdom (v. 7). Solomon wrote
that when a person's ways please the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace
with him (Prov. 16:7). Such was God's blessing on Solomon at this time.

2. Temple construction ch. 6

After arrangements for building the temple were in order, construction began. This
building took seven years to complete (v. 38).

The outside of the temple 6:1-10

Verse 1 is one of the most important verses in the Old Testament chronologically. The
dates of Solomon's reign (971-931 B.C.) are quite certain. They rest on references that
other ancient Near Eastern king lists coroborate. Solomon began temple construction

64
Frank M. Cross, "An Interpretation of the Nora Stone," Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research 208 (December 1972):17. Cf. Merrill, p. 239.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 25

about 966 B.C. According to this verse the Exodus took place in 1445 or 1446 B.C. Most
conservative scholars who take statements in Scripture like this verse seriously hold this
date for the Exodus. The more popular date of about 1280 B.C. rests primarily on the
assumption that Ramses II was the pharaoh of the Exodus. Those who hold this view
believe historical similarities between conditions during Ramses' reign and the biblical
description of the Exodus support their theory.

Why did the writer of Kings tie the building of the temple to the Exodus? It was evidently
for the reason explained above. With the building of the temple Israel would have an
opportunity as never before in her history to realize the purpose for which God had
formed and freed the nation. That purpose was to draw all people to Himself.

Even though we have some information about the general specifications and appearance
of the temple, the omission of other data makes the reproduction of a detailed model
impossible. Essentially it followed the pattern of both the Mosaic tabernacle and other
ancient Near Eastern temples.65

Stands with Basins

Inner Courtyard

Rooms Boaz
Ark Lampstands
Altar of Bronze
Incense Altar
Showbread
Jakin
Bronze
Sea

Outer Courtyard

SOLOMON'S TEMPLE

The temple was 90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high. It had about 2,700 square
feet of floor space. Its large open front porch added 15 more feet to its length. It faced
65
See. William F. Albright, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, pp. 142-56. V. Hurowitz, I Have Built
You an Exalted House: Temple Building in the Bible in Light of Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic
Writing, is a thorough survey of ancient temple buildings. See also B. Halpern, The Constitution of the
Monarchy in Israel, pp. 19-24.
26 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

east as did the tabernacle and other ancient Near Eastern temples.66 Its exterior was
limestone, cedar, and gold. It must have been extremely beautiful.

On two or three sides there were narrow

clerestory windows above the three stories
of side rooms that projected from the outer Rooms
Stairs &
walls. The priests used these side rooms Hallways
for storage and service purposes. They
were smallest on the first floor where there
were also hallways and stairways, larger CROSS SECTION OF
on the second floor that also had halls and SIDE ROOMS
stairs, and largest on the third floor. The
offset ledges were apparently supports for
the upper floors that fastened to the walls of this surrounding structure. Measurements in
the text are probably inside dimensions.

Evidently Solomon wanted to preserve the sanctity of the temple even while it was under
construction by eliminating as much noise as possible (v. 7; cf. Deut. 27:5-6).

God's promise to bless Solomon's obedience 6:11-13

Evidently this word from the Lord came to Solomon during temple construction. Note
that this was a conditional promise based on obedience to the Mosaic Covenant. God
would establish Solomon's kingdom forever (i.e., it would remain in tact; 2 Sam. 7:13).
He would also continue to dwell among the Israelites and not forsake them.
Unfortunately because Solomon did not continue to obey the covenant completely God
divided his kingdom. Because the nation forsook the covenant God ceased to dwell
among the people and forsook them temporarily to captivity (cf. Matt. 28:20).

"Throughout the Solomon stories the author presents an activity, then

waits until later to state God's approval or disapproval of it. For example,
3:1-15 expresses approval of Solomon's rise to power in chaps. 1—2, and
5:12 explains that the decisions in 5:1-7 demonstrate God-given wisdom.
This strategy continues here, where, through some unspecified manner,
Solomon receives God's word about the temple."67

The writer evidently inserted this section of text (vv. 11-13) in his description of
Solomon's building activities to emphasize the centrality of obedience to the overall
success of the project.

66
Solomon's temple was similar to other ancient Near Eastern temples in both size and design. See
Hurowitz, pp. 251-546.
67
House, pp. 127-28.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 27

The inside of the temple 6:14-36

The altar (vv. 19, 22) refers to the altar of incense (cf. 7:48). This altar evidently stood in
the west end of the holy place (cf. Exod. 30:6; 40:5; Lev. 16:2; Heb. 9:4, 7).

The cherubim were figures of angels sculptured out of olive wood (vv. 23-28). They may
have resembled "winged sphinxes."68 In addition to the inner courtyard (v. 36), there was
also an outer one (2 Chron. 4:9) that was slightly lower in elevation (Jer. 36:10).69

One problem that continues to puzzle scholars is the difference in height between the
holy place (30 cubits or 45 feet, v. 2) and the most holy place (20 cubits or 30 feet, v. 20).
Was the floor of the most holy place higher, and were there steps up to it from the holy
place? Was the ceiling of the most holy place lower than that of the holy place? Was the
most holy place a room within the holy place?70 We do not know.

Scholars also debate what relationship the row of cedar beams had to the rows of cut
stone (v. 36).71 The cedar beams may have been cedar coping on top of the stone. They
may have been cedar that lined the stone interior of the temple. Possibly cedar beams
alternated with rows of stone. All of these are possibilities.

Summary of the construction 6:37-38

Seven years is a round number (966-959 B.C.). Actually completion took seven and one-
half years since Ziv (lit. flowers) is late March and early April and Bul (lit. moisture) is
late October and early November. Probably since most ancient Near Easterners regarded
seven as a number symbolic of perfection the Israelites viewed their temple as a perfect
structure.

All that the writer recorded of the temple tells us two things about it. We have enough
information about the structure so we can find our way around it as we continue reading.
Furthermore its magnificence as a fitting house for Yahweh, the only true and great God,
should impress us.

Archaeologists have never been able to pinpoint the exact location of Solomon's temple.
Since Herod built his temple on the site of Nehemiah's temple, and since Nehemiah built
his temple on the site of Solomon's temple, there is little question about the general site.
It must have been somewhere on the esplanade on which the Dome of the Rock (Mosque
of Omar) now stands. Modern Jews pray at the wailing (western) wall because they
believe it is the closest site to the holy of holies that is accessible to them. One writer

68
Auld, p. 44.
69
For more detailed explanation of these verses, see Thomas L. Constable, "1 Kings," in The Bible
Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, p. 501.
70
Jean Ovellette, "The Solomonic Debir according to the Hebrew Text of I Kings 6," Journal of Biblical
Literature 89:3 (September 1970):338-43.
71
H. C. Thomson, "A Row of Cedar Beams," Palestinian Exploration Quarterly 92 (1960):57-63.
28 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

believed the site of the second temple was just north of the Dome of the Rock.72 He
concluded that the site of the holy of holies corresponds to that of the present Dome of
the Tablets (also called the Dome of the Spirits).73

3. Solomon's palace 7:1-12

Solomon's palace complex took longer to build than the temple because it was much
larger. The king evidently completed the temple and then began work on his palace (cf.
9:10). Solomon seems to have built several separate but interconnected buildings. A large
common courtyard evidently surrounded the temple and the palace (v. 12). The
geographical proximity of the temple and palace visualized the fact that the king was
acting for God. We do not know exactly where Solomon placed the palace buildings in
relation to each other or to the temple.74 In the ancient world people regarded a king's
palace as some indication of his greatness as well as the greatness of his god.

"Palace and temple complexes are the most important visual symbols of
royal power and indicate more precisely the location of the center within a
stratified society."75

"It [the temple] was not in the midst of the city, like most heathen temples
of the time. Its isolation symbolized the uniqueness of the deity to whom it
was dedicated."76

Certainly Solomon's palace must have been extremely impressive.

"He did everything imaginable to show that, as Yahweh was a great God,
he was a great king. What is displayed here is far more Solomon's 'riches
and honor' than his 'wisdom.' His was undoubtedly the piety of worldly
success."77

"The Pillared Hall (called the Palace of the Forest of Lebanon) was used
as an audience chamber or throne hall, and . . . was larger than the temple.
It also served as a state treasury, displaying selected precious objects
received as tribute (cf. 10:16-17)."78

72
The "second temple" refers to Nehemiah's temple, which Herod renovated, in contrast to the first or
Solomonic temple.
73
Asher Kaufman, "Where the Ancient Temple of Jerusalem Stood," Biblical Archaeology Review 9:2
(March-April 1983):40-59.
74
See David Ussishkin, "King Solomon's Palaces," Biblical Archaeologist 36 (1973):78-105, for similar
temple palace complexes in the ancient Near East.
75
Keith Whitelam, "The Symbols of Power," Biblical Archaeologist 49:3 (September 1986):170.
76
DeVries, p. 97.
77
Ibid., p. 103.
78
Wiseman, p. 111.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 29

Ancient Near Easterners did not view a king's sovereignty as established until he had
built a palace for himself.79 Solomon's palace, therefore, further enhanced his prestige.
God blessed Solomon and Israel by allowing him to built it.

4. The temple furnishings 7:13-51

The people also saw the glory of Yahweh reflected in the furnishings of the temple.
These furnishings came from several sources but all contributed to the proper worship of
Yahweh.

Furnishings outside the temple 7:13-47

This Hiram was obviously a different person from the King of Tyre (5:1). God evidently
guided him as he fashioned the furnishings (cf. Exod. 31:1-11).80

The two pillars on the temple porch were common features that flanked the main
entrances to temples in Syria, Phoenicia, Cyprus, Assyria, and elsewhere in the ancient
Near East at this time.81 Some of these pillars supported the porch roof, but others were
free-standing, as these probably were.82 In various countries they symbolized various
things.83 In Israel their purpose seems to have been to remind the Israelites of Yahweh's
establishment of Israel and strength for Israel. Jachin means "He shall establish," and
Boaz "In Him is strength" (v. 21).84 The lily and pomegranate designs probably
symbolized the fertility and fruitfulness of God's blessing and presence.

The "sea" (vv. 23-26) was a reservoir for the temple courtyard. It had a total capacity of
17,500 gallons (2 Chron. 4:5), but it normally held 11,500 gallons (v. 26). It rested on
symbols of strength and service (cf. the priests), and symbols of fertility adorned it (v. 24;
cf. 6:18).85 The 12 bulls may have represented the 12 tribes or Solomon's 12
administrative districts.86

The priests evidently used the 10 movable stands (vv. 27-40a) when they butchered
sacrificial animals. Each was six feet square, five and one-half feet high, and held up to
230 gallons of water.

79
A. Leo Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia, pp. 95-98.
80
See Allen S. Maller, "Hiram from Tyre," Journal of Reform Judaism 29:2 (Spring 1982):41-42.
81
Volkmar Fritz, "Temple Architecture," Biblical Archaeology Review 13:4 (July-August 1987):38-49.
82
Albright, p. 144.
83
Idem, "Two Cressets From Marisa and the Pillars of Jachin and Boaz," Bulletin of the American Schools
of Oriental Research 85 (February 1942):18-27.
84
Cf. Auld, pp. 52-53. Gray, p. 175, suggested that the pillars symbolized the presence and permanence of
Yahweh and the king, whereas Jones, 1:183, argued that they stood for the covenant between Yahweh and
His people, especially between Him and the Davidic dynasty.
85
See Albert Zuidhof, "King Solomon's Molten Sea and (pi)," Biblical Archaeologist 45:3 (Summer
1982):179-84.
86
Jones, 1:184.
30 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

The amount of detail the writer included gives us some appreciation of the external
beauty, symmetry, glory, and value of the temple. All of this contributed to the greater
glory of Yahweh and helped the Israelites appreciate Him.

Furnishings inside the temple 7:48-50

As in the Mosaic tabernacle, the metals used expressed the glory of God also. The closer
to the ark, the throne of Yahweh, the more valuable was the metal. Everything inside the
temple was gold or gold plated. Outside the temple there was bronze. While the average
Israelite did not see the inside of the temple, he or she would have known of its glory.
Perhaps this section (vv. 48-50) is shorter than the former one (vv. 13-47) because the
majority of the people, who were not priests, did not see these furnishings.

"The candelabra were arranged down the length of the main sanctuary to
give light on these tables (ex. 25:31-40)."87

David's accessories 7:51

The priests probably placed the treasures David had collected in the rooms of the
structure that surrounded the temple (6:5-6) for use in Israel's worship as needed. The
temple, then, became the treasury (bank) of Israel in that it housed the nation's greatest
treasures.

The writer gave us extensive information about the temple furnishings to increase our
awe not only of the temple itself but also of Yahweh's greatness. The temple and all it
contained reflected the God who abode there.

5. The temple dedication ch. 8

This chapter climaxes the writer's emphasis on the greatness of Yahweh as Israel's God. It
is the most detailed account of a dedication service in the Bible.88 It is also one of the
most theologically significant texts in 1 and 2 Kings.89

The entrance of the ark 8:1-11

The Israelites regarded the ark as the throne of Yahweh. It was the place where He
manifested His presence in a localized way and where He received the blood that atoned
for the Israelites' sins on the day of Atonement. The ark had rested in David's tabernacle
in Zion since David had brought it from the house of Obed-edom (2 Sam. 6:17). It was
the only item in the temple that was not new. Perhaps God did not change it to help the
people realize that He, symbolized by the ark, had not changed. His person and methods
of dealing with them at the mercy seat were the same as they had been.

87
Wiseman, p. 116.
88
Rice, p. 58.
89
House, p. 135.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 31

The ceremony of installing the ark in Solomon's temple took place during the feast of
Tabernacles. This was one of the feasts that the Mosaic Law specified that all Israelite
males had to attend (Lev. 23:33-36). This feast was a commemoration of the Lord's
faithfulness during His people's wilderness wanderings. It looked back to their slavery in
Egypt and forward to their establishment in the Promised Land. The bringing of the ark
into the temple symbolized the fulfillment of that hope. Evidently Solomon waited for
this feast to celebrate the dedication of the temple and used the months following the
completion of construction to furnish it and to prepare for the celebration.90

What verses 3-8 picture is the symbolic enthronement of Yahweh as Israel's King. Israel's
God now entered into His house. The people did not regard the sovereignty of a human
king as firmly established until he built a palace for himself. Now they saw the
sovereignty of the divine King established over Israel. "To this day" (v. 8) shows that the
writer wrote this part of Kings before 586 B.C. when the Babylonian army destroyed this
temple.

The ark housed the tablets of the Decalogue (Heb. 9:4). The sole presence of the Law in
the ark reemphasized the importance of the Israelites submitting to the Mosaic Covenant,
which these tablets represented. That obedience would be the key to Israel's success
(Josh. 1:8).91

The shekinah (from the Hebrew root translated "to dwell") cloud (Exod. 19:9; 34:5; 35
al.), symbolic of Yahweh's presence, filled the temple. It had also filled the tabernacle at
its dedication (Exod. 40:34-35).92 The Israelites perceived that their God had come to
dwell among them and to bless them with His presence. Even priestly ministry was
impossible during this glorious revelation of Yahweh. All that the people could do was
worship.

Solomon's address to the people 8:12-21

God previously said He would dwell in the cloudy pillar (Lev. 16:2). Solomon hoped
God would now dwell in the temple forever (i.e., from then on).

Solomon emphasized the desire of David's heart to build the temple (vv. 17-18). God
raised up Solomon to do that as He had promised. The temple was a house for the
reputation (name) of Yahweh. It made a statement about Him. "Name" occurs 14 times in
verses 16-20. The Mosaic Covenant was the basis of Israel's ongoing fellowship with
God (v. 21). Solomon demonstrated humility and gratitude in what he said.

90
Gray, p. 193.
91
Formerly a pot of manna, symbolizing God's faithful provision of the needs of His people, and Aaron's
rod that budded, symbolizing God's confirmation of the Aaronic priesthood, had rested near the ark in the
tabernacle.
92
See George R. Berry, "The Glory of Yahweh and the Temple," Journal of Biblical Literature 56
(1937):115-17.
32 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

"This statement reflects the strong emphasis placed on justice in the

theology of the Old Testament. Since God is just, He expects His
representatives to be just also. The Temple was to be a place where this
was recognized."93

Solomon's prayer of dedication 8:22-53

This great prayer centers on the Mosaic Covenant. That is its heart. Solomon introduced
seven petitions with a backward look emphasizing God's faithfulness (vv. 23-26). He
concluded with a forward look stressing God's mercy (vv. 52-53).

Solomon's posture of kneeling with open hands uplifted to heaven (v. 52) symbolized his
heart attitude, as posture often does in prayer. He, the earthly king, placed himself in a
supplicant's position before the heavenly King dependent and eager to receive the
blessings he requested.

Seven petitions follow a general request that God would hear the prayers of His people
(vv. 27-30). In these verses Solomon voiced the truth that Yahweh did not really live on
earth but in heaven (v. 27). He did not confuse the symbols of God's presence with God
Himself (cf. 1 Sam. 4:3). He referred to himself often as God's servant (vv. 28-39, et al.).

Then he requested God's mercy when His people turned to Him in situations involving
violations of the covenant. These included personal sins (vv. 31-32), defeat in battle (vv.
33-34), drought (vv. 35-36), and famine (vv. 37-40). He then asked for God's grace on
God-fearing foreigners (vv. 41-43) as well as on the Israelites in battle (vv. 44-45) and
after captivity (vv. 46-51; cf. Dan. 6:10). All the calamities Solomon mentioned in his
prayer are curses God promised to send on Israel if she broke the Mosaic Covenant (cf.
Lev. 26; Deut. 28:22, 25, 38, 42, 59; 31:17, 29; 32:24).

As Hannah's prayer (1 Sam. 2:1-10) set the tone for all that followed in 1 and 2 Samuel,
so Solomon's prayer here does the same for 1 and 2 Kings. The remainder of 1 and 2
Kings shows how God answered Solomon's prayer. The possibilities that the king
mentioned here eventually took place in Israel's history culminating in Babylonian
captivity.

"Solomon's prayer is essential to comprehend the message of the book.

The author of the Book of Kings intended for the words of Solomon to be
heard at a key point in the relationship between God and His people, that
is, at the time the temple in Jerusalem was dedicated. The following words
of Solomon's prayer [vv. 47-48] would appeal to the exiles and would be a
specific plea for repentance because of the hope of returning to the
motherland. This is the essence of the book's message."94

93
Homer Heater Jr., "A Theology of Samuel and Kings," in A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, p.
128.
94
Gershon Galil, "The Message of the Book of Kings in Relation to Deuteronomy and Jeremiah,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 158:632 (October-December 2001):408.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 33

Solomon's benediction on the people 8:54-61

This benediction began with a review of God's past faithfulness (v. 56). Solomon then
voiced three wishes (vv. 57-59) with an explanation concerning his motive (v. 60). He
concluded with a challenge for the future (v. 61). The three desires of Solomon's heart
were, first, that God would bless his generation with His divine presence (v. 57). Second,
he asked that He would give His people the will to walk in obedience to His covenant (v.
58). Third, he prayed that God would keep Solomon's requests dear to His heart (v. 59).
Solomon's final appeal to the people was that they would devote themselves to Yahweh
wholeheartedly and express that commitment by obeying His Law (v. 61). Unfortunately
Solomon himself failed to do this completely.

Solomon's sacrifices 8:62-66

As a royal priest Solomon led the nation of priests in making an immense sacrifice to
Yahweh. The sacrifices were all offerings of worship. The burnt offering represented the
dedication of the worshipper's person to God. The grain offering pictured the dedication
of his work to God. The peace offering expressed the joy that resulted from the
fellowship God had made possible with Himself and with the worshipper's fellowman
(Lev. 1—3).

The number of offerings seems incredibly large, but contemporary extrabiblical records
of other sacrifices that involved thousands of animals are extant. Perhaps the priests made
sacrifices at other places outside the temple courtyard. People came from the far
Northeast (Hamath) and the extreme Southwest (the Wadi el-Arish) to this feast.
Solomon extended the celebration an extra week (v. 65).

Verse 66 is very significant because it shows that because of Israel's rededication in this
covenant renewal ceremony King Solomon enjoyed blessing from his people on whom he
had brought blessing. The result was joy and gladness of heart for everyone. These are
what God had promised in the Mosaic Law as consequences of commitment to His will.
God blessed Solomon personally, and he became a channel of blessing to the nation he
served because he committed himself to obeying God's Word.

This was the biggest event in Israel, in terms of its theological significance, since God
gave Israel the Law at Mount Sinai. Israel was finally in the Promised Land with her God
enthroned in a place of great honor. Now Israel was in position to fulfill her calling as a
nation in the world as never before in her history (cf. Exod. 19:5-6).95

95
The significance of this chapter becomes clearer when we read the Prophets section of the Old Testament.
The writing prophets alluded to it often.
34 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

D. THE FRUITS OF SOLOMON'S REIGN CHS. 9—11

1. God's covenant with Solomon 9:1-9

God responded to Solomon's dedication of himself and his nation as He had responded to
David (2 Sam. 7) and to Solomon earlier (ch. 3). He offered Solomon continued blessing
for continued dedication.

First, God promised He would do what Solomon had petitioned in his dedicatory prayer
(8:22-53; 9:3). Second, He said He would provide a continuous line of descendants from
Solomon to sit on Israel's throne if Solomon would continue to follow God faithfully. The
alternative would have been cutting off Solomon's descendants and replacing them with
descendants from another branch of David's family (cf. the fate of Eli's house). God
maintained Solomon's line because over all Solomon remained faithful to the Lord.
Third, if Solomon, the subsequent kings, or the people abandoned the Lord's covenant,
He would do three things. He would remove the people from their land, abandon the
temple, and make Israel a byword instead of a blessing. This, too, God did for Israel
because over all Israel did not remain faithful.

"The rest of Kings will be preoccupied with the blessing which follows
obedience and the curses enacted after any failure to obey. The reference
point will be to God's revealed word and the language is that of
Deuteronomy."96

2. Further evidences of God's blessing 9:10-28

Somewhat after the mid-point of Solomon's 40-year reign God was blessing him for his
faithfulness. What the writer described in this section took place after Solomon had
completed his major building projects in Jerusalem that took about 20 years.

Solomon's gifts to Hiram 9:10-14

Solomon mortgaged 20 Galilean towns (settlements) bordering Phoenicia to Hiram. This

brought the border of Phoenicia farther south. This arrangement compensated Hiram for
all the lumber and 9,000 pounds of gold he had sent Solomon for his building projects.
Hiram may have called them Cabul, a word that sounds like the Hebrew word for "good
for nothing" (v. 13), because they were not in a productive region. This cheap gift did not
contribute to ongoing good relations between Israel and Phoenicia.

"The border villages may have been fortified for defence [sic] purposes
and seem to have been redeemed later (2 Ch. 8:2), perhaps following
successful trade (v. 14) or tribute brought from Sheba (cf. 10:10)."97

"This episode shows a conniving side of Solomon."98

96
Wiseman, p. 125.
97
Ibid., p. 126.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 35

Solomon's public works 9:15-19

Solomon was powerful enough to conscript laborers to build the Millo and a wall around
Jerusalem. The Millo (lit. filling) evidently refers to the terraces on the east side of Mt.
Zion (cf. 2 Sam. 5:9). Solomon enlarged these so they connected the City of David with
the temple and palace site. He also expanded the wall that encircled the City of David so
it included the temple and palace complex to the north thus doubling the size of the city
(v. 15).

Present wall
of old Jerusalem

Solomon's
Walls

N
Temple

Ophel Mount of
Olives
Hinnom
Valley

Kidron
Valley

Gihon
Spring
+
Tyropean
Valley

City
of
David

Hinnom
Valley

+ En-rogel

JERUSALEM IN
SOLOMON'S TIME

98
House, p. 157.
36 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Solomon also rebuilt and fortified three large strategic defense centers: Hazor in the
North (cf. Josh. 11:1), Megiddo in the Jezreel Valley (cf. Josh. 17:11), and Gezer in the
Southwest (v. 15). Lower Beth-horon stood on a major western approach route to
Jerusalem. He also fortified Baalath (site uncertain) and Tamar, south of the Salt (Dead)
Sea, in Judah,99 and he strengthened other towns (2 Chron. 8:2-6). Solomon developed
these towns to defend Jerusalem and Israel and to control the major routes into and
through his empire. Were these projects partially flawed by dependence on the flesh?
Possibly they were. David had evidently built defensive border cities during his reign as
well.100

Solomon's forced labor 9:20-23

SOLOMON'S MAIN
Solomon put the defeated native FORTIFICATIONS
Canaanites to work on government
projects (cf. Gen. 9:25-26). Nevertheless
this plan proved to be a source of major
dissatisfaction in Israel (cf. 12:4). Hazor *

There was a distinction in Solomon's day

between Israelites whom the king *
Megiddo
conscripted for temporary service and
non-Israelites who were permanent slave
laborers. The former served as military
supervisors over civil forced labor gangs,
for example. The latter were the native
Canaanites who enjoyed no rights as free Lower
Gezer Beth-horon
persons.101 * *
* *
Baalath?
Jerusalem
Solomon's house for Pharaoh's
daughter 9:24

Solomon was able to provide lavishly for

his Egyptian wife. He probably should not Tamar
have married her in the first place (cf.
11:1-2).

99
See Rudolph Cohen, "The Fortresses King Solomon Built to Protect His Southern Border," Biblical
Archaeology Review 11:3 (May-June 1985):56-70; and idem., "Solomon's Negev Defense Line Contained
Three Fewer Fortresses," Biblical Archaeology Review 12:4 (July-August 1986):40-45.
100
Y. Aharoni, "The Building Activities of David and Solomon," Israel Exploration Journal 24:1
(1974):13-16.
101
J. Alberto Soggin, "Compulsory Labor Under David and Solomon," in Studies in the Period of David
and Solomon and Other Essays, p. 266.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 37

Solomon's annual offerings 9:25

The king offered sacrifices of worship three times annually, probably at the required
feasts of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost (also called Harvest or Weeks), and Tabernacles
(also called Booths or Ingathering).

"Solomon officiates at the three major festivals because in ancient Israel

the king was a religious as well as a political leader. The king was God's
son by adoption (Ps. 2:7), a priest after the order of Melchizedek (Ps.
110:4), and his chief responsibilities were to defend the powerless and to
maintain justice, righteousness, and peace (e.g., Ps. 72; Isa. 9:7; 11:2-
5)."102

Solomon's navy 9:26-28

God blessed Solomon with an effective navy that brought added wealth from the South
and the East. Ophir (v. 28) evidently was in southwest Arabia (10:11; Job 22:24; 28:16).

The writer documented in this section further evidence of God's blessing on Solomon that
came to him for his dedication to God. The fertility motif stands out strongly here.
Blessing in many different forms came to Solomon and Israel.

However, "Solomon's defense works and monumental buildings drained

the nation's wealth while providing only a temporary appearance of
strength and grandeur [cf. 12:4]."103

3. Solomon's greatness ch. 10

This chapter summarizes with illustrations and statistics the wisdom, acceptance, and
riches with which God blessed Solomon.

The Queen of Sheba's visit 10:1-13

The writer seems to have included this event here to support his claim that Solomon's
reign was so glorious that rulers came from all over the world to meet him (4:34; cf. 3:16-
18). It also shows that some of Solomon's wealth came to him as voluntary gifts from
admirers. Jesus used this queen's example to challenge His hearers to listen to God's
wisdom through someone greater than Solomon, namely, Himself (Matt. 12:42).

The site of Sheba was about 1,200 miles southeast of Israel (present Yemen). This
country had come to dominate the spice and incense trade that had made that region of
Arabia famous.104 The queen's primary purpose in visiting Solomon seems to have been

102
Rice, p. 76.
103
DeVries, p. 133.
104
Bright, p. 215; G. W. Van Beek, "Frankincense and Myrrh," Biblical Archaeologist 23:3 (September
1960):70-95.
38 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

to see if he really was as wise and rich as she had heard. Testing with questions was a
challenging sport among ancient Near Eastern monarchs.105

"The hard ('enigmatic', REB) questions (hidot) were not just 'riddles', as in
Judges 14:12, but included difficult diplomatic and ethical questions.
According to Josephus, Hiram had made similar approaches. The test was
not an academic exercise but to see if he would be a trustworthy business
partner and a reliable ally capable of giving help."106

She noted that God had made Solomon a blessing to those around him (v. 8) as God had
promised He would do for those who obeyed His covenant. She also blessed Yahweh (v.
9), the God under whom Solomon reigned. Her gifts, which included four and one-half
tons of gold, appear to have been part of a covenant treaty she negotiated with Israel for
her country (cf. v. 13). In her visit we see Israel fulfilling its God-given purpose of
bringing the Gentiles to Yahweh. The name of this queen in Arabian history is Balkir.

"The Jewish romantic legend that the queen desired and received a son
fathered by Solomon is unsubstantiated, as is the Ethiopic tradition that the
royal Abyssinian line was founded by the offspring of Solomon and the
queen of Sheba."107

Solomon's wealth 10:14-29

This pericope summarizes Solomon's wealth as the previous one summarized his
wisdom.

God brought much wealth to Solomon, almost 25 tons of gold a year (v. 14), plus many
other riches.

"Those who would consider his income of 666 talents (ca. 21.6 tons) of
gold exaggeration should compare this with amounts registered in ancient
Egypt about this time, 'where gold is like dust in the land' and Osorkon I in
his first four years (ca. 924-920 BC) accumulated eighteen tons of gold, to
which some of the loot taken by his father Shishak from Jerusalem should
be added (cf. 14:25-27). Similar large-scale acquisition and use of gold in
temple building is attested from Mesopotamia."108

105
See Harry Torcszyner, "The Riddle in the Bible," Hebrew Union College Annual 1 (1924):125-49; Gray,
p. 241.
106
Wiseman, p. 129.
107
Patterson and Austel, p. 102. For a survey of the traditions connected with the Queen of Sheba, see
Edward Ullendorff, "The Queen of Sheba," Bulletin of John Rylands Library 45:2 (1963):486-504. Flavius
Josephus called her "the queen of Egypt and Ethiopia" in Antiquities of the Jews 8:6:2, 5-6, but that
identification is incorrect. This tradition is the reason modern Ethiopians claim that the royal line of
Emperor Haile Selassie descends without interruption from the dynasty of Menelik I, the alleged son of the
Queen of Sheba and Solomon. See Rice, p. 81.
108
Wiseman, pp. 131-32.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 39

I do not believe we should criticize Solomon simply for being wealthy since God
promised to make him rich (3:13). We should not blame a person who receives a fortune
as an outright gift for having money. It was the accumulation of riches and ornaments to
become materially secure and independent that God forbade. To the extent that Solomon
did this—and he evidently did it somewhat—he was guilty of violating God's Law.

Solomon served as an international broker. He capitalized on Israel's strategic geographic

location as the land bridge that connected three continents. He made Israel a
clearinghouse through which merchandise passed and charged custom taxes as goods
entered and left his country.109 "Traders" probably refers to business people who passed
through Israel and "merchants" to those who did business in Israel.110 Solomon was
probably history's most successful Jewish businessman.

The gold shields he hung in the palace armory were evidently for parade use. Gold is a
very soft metal and would have been inappropriate for shields that soldiers used for
defense in battle (v. 17). Perhaps the 12 lions surrounding Solomon's throne represented
Israel's 12 tribes (v. 20). Tarshish (v. 22; cf. Jonah 1:3) was probably Spain or Sardinia.

Kue (v. 28) was Cilicia (the Apostle Paul's home province) in modern Turkey. God
forbade Israel's kings from multiplying chariots (v. 26), the most effective and dreaded
military machines of their day (Deut. 17:16). God wanted His people to depend on Him
primarily for their protection. Material prosperity and security often lead people to
conclude that they have no needs when really our need for God never diminishes.
Solomon fell into this trap. Wealth is not sinful in itself, but it does bring temptations
with it (cf. James 5:1-6).

Though Solomon experienced great blessings from his faithful God, he fell prey to the
sins these blessings make easier, as the writer explained in the next chapter.

4. Solomon's apostasy ch. 11

The writer brought Solomon's weaknesses and sins, to which he only hinted previously,
into the light in this chapter. Solomon had sown some seeds of departure from God and
His Word early in his reign. They bore bitter fruit as he grew older.

Solomon's foreign wives 11:1-8

The writer's condemnation of Solomon in verses 1-2 rests on Deuteronomy 23:3-9 as well
as Deuteronomy 7:3-4. The phraseology goes back to 23:3-9 and the motive to 7:3-4 (cf.
Exod. 23:31-33; 34:15-16; Ezra 9:1; Neh. 13:26). Solomon's foreign wives were of two
categories: Canaanites prohibited in Deuteronomy 7, and women from other nations

109
See Carl Rasmussen, "The Economic Importance of Caravan Trade for Solomon's Empire," in A Tribute
to Gleason Archer, pp. 153-66.
110
Rice, p. 82.
40 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

prohibited in Deuteronomy 23.111 Furthermore, God specifically forbade the multiplying

of wives by Israel's kings (Deut. 17:17). Solomon violated both the letter and the spirit of
the Law.112

Solomon's harem of 700 wives and 300 concubines (secondary wives, not mistresses, v.
3) was the largest of any Israelite king. The next largest was Rehoboam's 18 wives and 60
concubines (2 Chron. 11:21). David had 15 wives (2 Sam. 3:2-5; 5:13-16; 11:27; 1
Chron. 3:1-9) and several concubines (2 Sam. 15:16). Apparently only one of David's
wives was a foreigner (2 Sam. 13:37; 1 Chron. 3:2).

"The large number resulted from political alliances, sealed by marriage,

with neigbouring [sic] states: Moab, Ammon and Edom to the east; Sidon,
through the treaty with Hiram (5:1), and Syria ('Hittites' and Arameans,
10:22) to the north. . . . These are cited as examples . . ."113

Solomon did not abandon Yahweh, but he worshipped the gods of the nations along with
Him (syncretism; vv. 4, 6). His sin was that his heart (affections) went after false gods (v.
4). He did not follow Yahweh fully (exclusively, v. 6; cf. Exod. 20:3; Deut. 30:15-20).
Solomon was noteworthy for his love for God when he began reigning (3:3), but at the
end of his reign love for women characterized him (v. 1).

Ashtoreth was the Canaanite fertility goddess whose worship involved licentious rites
and the worship of the stars. Molech worship included human sacrifice, even the sacrifice
of children (cf. Lev. 18:21; 20:1-5). Chemosh worship was equally cruel. Solomon at
least tolerated idolatrous worship if he did not actively promote it. The mountain east of
Jerusalem to which verse 7 refers was traditionally south of the Mount of Olives.
However it could have been the Mount of Olives in view of what the text says. Evidently
Solomon felt compelled to support the worship of his foreign wives whom he had
married to secure political alliances. One sin led to others as always happens.

"In the ancient world polytheists tended to worship the gods of nations
who had conquered their armies or at least the gods of countries more
powerful than their own. Ironically, Solomon worships the gods of people
he has conquered and already controls. What could he possibly gain from
such activity? The whole episode makes no sense, just as idolatry itself
makes no sense."114

111
See Shaye Cohen, "Solomon and the Daughter of Pharaoh: Intermarriage, Conversion, and the Impurity
of Women," Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 16-17 (1984-85):23-27.
112
Some writers argued that because God gave legislation in the Mosaic Law governing the conduct of
polygamous Israelite men (Deut. 25:18) He approved of polygamy. Yet God had made His will concerning
monogamy clear from the beginning of human history (Gen. 2:24). Both Jesus (Matt. 19:5; Mark 10:7-8)
and Paul (1 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 5:31) reaffirmed monogamy. The legislation cited in Deuteronomy is only one
example of many laws that regulated the conduct of disobedient Israelites.
113
Wiseman, p. 134.
114
House, p. 167.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 41

Solomon's sentence from God 11:9-13

Solomon's sin in going after other gods was the quintessence of covenant infidelity.
David had sinned against God deliberately (2 Sam. 11), but his heart remained devoted to
Yahweh. His sin was not as serious as Solomon's was (cf. Deut. 6:5).

The one tribe Solomon's heir would retain was Judah. Judah had absorbed the tribe of
Simeon almost entirely by this time, though some Israelites from Simeon had moved
north (2 Chron. 15:9; 34:6).

Solomon's external adversaries 11:14-25

Hadad hated Solomon because of Joab's severe treatment of the Edomites. He may have
been a relation of Solomon's by marriage. Pharaoh Siamun apparently gave his daughter
to Solomon in marriage and his sister-in-law to Hadad (v. 19).

Rezon also had reason to oppose Solomon (vv. 23-25). The Lord raised up both these
men to bring judgment on Solomon (v. 14).

KINGS OF ARAM IN 1 KINGS115

Kings Dates References

Rezon (Hezion) ca. 940-915 B.C. 1 Kings 11:23, 25; 15:18

Tabrimmon ca. 915-900 B.C. 1 Kings 15:18

Ben-Hadad I ca. 900-860 B.C. 1 Kings 15:18, 20

Ben-Hadad II ca. 860-841 B.C. 1 Kings 20; 2 Kings 6:24; 8:7, 9, 14

Solomon's internal adversary 11:26-40

Jeroboam, who would become the first king of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, was from
Ephraim, the most prominent tribe in the North (v. 26).

Part of Benjamin affiliated voluntarily with Judah eventually (v. 32; cf. 12:21; 2 Chron.
11:1, 10; 15:2, 9; Ezra 4:1). Really parts of two tribes joined the kingdom of Judah:
Simeon and Benjamin.116 The reference to 10 northern tribes evidently included the nine
remaining tribes plus either Benjamin or Simeon, whichever provided the majority of its
tribe to support the Northern Kingdom. This appears to have been Simeon (cf. 2 Chron.
15:9; 34:6). Levi did not figure in either group.
115
Adapted from The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, p. 509.
116
Leon Wood, Israel's United Monarchy, p. 333.
42 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

"Ten as the number of completeness and totality is placed in contrast with

one, to indicate that all Israel was to be torn away from the house of
David, as is stated in ch. xii. 20 . . ."117

David's lamp (v. 36) refers to his descendant on the throne (cf. 2 Sam. 21:17).118

God's conditional promise to Jeroboam was similar to His promises to Saul (1 Sam.
13:13), to David (2 Sam. 7:11, 27), and to Solomon (9:4-7).

God would afflict the descendants of David (v. 39) until He raised up Messiah when all
Israel would come under His authority as it had been under David and Solomon's
authority.119

The reference to Shishak king of Egypt (v. 40) is the first to identify a Pharaoh by name
in the Bible. Shishak later invaded Jerusalem during Rehoboam's reign (14:25-26).

Solomon's death 11:41-43

The writer of Kings referred to other ancient records (v. 41; cf. 14:19, 29). The Acts of
Solomon was the first of these.120 It is no longer extant.

Solomon's long reign of 40 years (971-931 B.C.) ended with the king in decline both
spiritually and politically.

"What is the image of Solomon which emerges from the narrative? He

was the divinely chosen descendent (8:20) of a divinely chosen ruler
(8:16), reigning in a divinely chosen city (8:44, 48). He was a righteous
judge (chap. 3) and an efficient administrator (chap. 4). He ruled extensive
territory and promoted the peace of his realm and the prosperity of his
people (4:20-5:8 [4:20-28]). His building projects were on a grand scale,
encompassing sanctuary and palace (chap. 6), fortress and store-city (9:15-
19). He pursued an active commercial policy and indulged in a
conspicuous display of wealth (chap. 10). The key to his success was his
divinely endowed wisdom. He was wiser than all men and all came to see
and behold and leave their tribute (5:9-14 [4:29-34], chap. 10)."121

Solomon, Saul, and David each reigned 40 years. Saul was God's anointed only because
the people demanded a king. David and Solomon were God's anointed because the Lord
elected them as His sons. Saul never really appreciated his role as Yahweh's servant.
117
Keil, p. 179.
118
Ibid., p. 181; Gray, p. 297.
119
For a good literary analysis of the chiastic structure of the Jeroboam narrative (11:26—14:20), see
Robert L. Cohn, "Literary Techniques in the Jeroboam Narrative," Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft 97 (1985):23-35.
120
J. Liver, "The Book of the Acts of Solomon," Biblica 48:1 (1967):75-101.
121
Porten, pp. 113-114.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 43

David and Solomon both did, but Solomon acted as though he did less than David did.
David had a heart for God that he maintained throughout his lifetime. Solomon also had a
heart for God, but he failed to maintain it. Saul's reign was a tragedy, David's was a
triumph, and Solomon's was both.

"If he [Solomon] partly escapes Saul's condemnation, he quite fails of

David's commendation."122

In the lives of all three men the writers of Scripture have carefully pointed out how their
responses to God's grace and His Law determined their destinies. Because they were the
leaders of the nation, what befell them also affected their kingdoms.

The man best qualified to live life successfully, Solomon, chose not to do so. Success in
life from God's viewpoint does not come automatically with the gift of wisdom but when
one applies wisdom to one's life. Spiritual success depends on choices as well as
understanding.

II. THE DIVIDED KINGDOM 1 KINGS 12—2 KINGS 17

The second major part of the Book of Kings records the histories of the Northern
Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah.123 During this era of 209 years
(931-722 B.C.) the two kingdoms experienced differing relations with one another. For
57 years (931-874 B.C.) they were antagonistic (12:1—16:28). Then for the next 33 years
(874-841 B.C.) they were allies (1 Kings 16:29—2 Kings 9:29). Then renewed
antagonism erupted and continued for the final 119 years (841-722 B.C.; 2 Kings 9:30—
17:41).

122
J. Sidlow Baxter, Explore the Book, 2:87.
123
See the chart "Kings of Judah and Israel and the Preexilic Prophets" in The Bible Knowledge
Commentary: Old Testament, p. 513 See also the map "The Divided Monarchy" in Merrill, Kingdom of . .
., p. 317, for the locations of many places referred to in the text.
44 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

THE FIRST PERIOD OF ANTAGONISM

931-874 B.C. (57 years)
1 Kings 12:1—16:28

Nadab Elah Zimri Tibni Omri

Jeroboam I Baasha

ISRAEL
931 874
JUDAH

Rehoboam Asa

Abijam

Bad King Good King Reformer

Throughout this history the writer's purpose continued to be what it had been: to
demonstrate that failure to honor the Mosaic Covenant brings ruin and destruction, but
obedience brings blessing. This is clear from the material he chose to record. While he
gave a basic historical record of the period, he departed often from official matters to
record events that have theological significance.

"In the books of Kings in general there are some forty instances where a
prophet or prophetess plays a part in the narrative or delivers a message
from Yahweh."124

A. THE FIRST PERIOD OF ANTAGONISM 12:1—16:28

1. The division of the kingdom ch. 12

Rehoboam's dilemma 12:1-5

It is not clear why the northern tribes had invited Rehoboam to the northern town of
Shechem. They may have done so for a coronation over Israel separate from his
coronation over Judah.125 On the other hand the northern tribes may have invited him to
go there for his coronation over the entire nation. Jerusalem was the natural coronation
site. Perhaps Rehoboam chose to hold the ceremony at Shechem to accommodate and
perhaps placate the northern tribes. In any case, Shechem was an understandable site

124
N. H. Wallace, "The Oracles Against the Israelite Dynasties in 1 and 2 Kings," Biblica 67:1 (1986):21.
125
Jacob Myers, II Chronicles, p. 65; Bright, p. 210.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 45

because of its historical significance and earlier covenant renewal ceremonies (cf. Gen.
12:6-7; 33:18-20; Josh. 8; 24).

The heavy yoke Solomon had imposed on the Israelites consisted of taxation, forced
labor, and other burdens. If Solomon had exempted Judah from these,126 the spokesmen
were probably speaking for the northern tribes rather than for all the Israelites and were
demanding similar favors.127

Rehoboam's decision 12:6-15

Rehoboam's choice was whether he would regard himself as the people's servant under
Yahweh's authority, as David and Solomon had done, or as the supreme authority in
Israel, as Saul had done. His pride led to his downfall.

The "scorpion" (v. 11) was a particularly cruel kind of whip that contained sharp pieces
of metal (1 Macc. 6:51).

"Rehoboam chooses slogans over wisdom, machismo over

servanthood."128

Rehoboam's decision resulted in what God had predicted to Solomon (11:11-13), Ahijah,
and Jeroboam (11:31-39).

Israel's secession 12:16-20

The dissatisfaction with the rule of David's house that had been brewing for years (cf. 2
Sam. 20:1) finally boiled over.

Perhaps Rehoboam sent Adoram to pacify the angry mob (v. 18). Whatever his reason,
this proved to be "the straw that broke the camel's back." Rehoboam lacked wisdom
because he did not give God the place He deserved in his life. Because he revolted
against God, the people revolted against him. In rebelling against Rehoboam, however,
the Israelites were rebelling against God's anointed king. That action could only and did
bring divine discipline on them. This rebellion continued throughout the history of the
divided kingdom and accounts for much of the misery that nation experienced.129

Rehoboam's coronation turned into a bloody lynching and the coronation of his rival (v.
20).

126
See my note on 4:7-19.
127
Moshe Weinfeld, "The Counsel of the 'Elders' to Rehoboam and Its Implications," MAARAV 3:1
(January 1982):27-53.
128
R. D. Nelson, First and Second Kings, p. 79.
129
On verse 19, see my comment at 8:8.
46 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Rehoboam's reprisal 12:21-24

Rehoboam's pride led him into further trouble. He wanted to start a civil war to recapture
the throne. Benjamin joined with Judah at this time and remained allied from then on (cf.
2 Sam. 19:16-17). God had to intervene through a prophet to get Rehoboam to turn back
(vv. 22-24).130 To his credit Rehoboam obeyed God.

"Shemaiah's message goes against the perceived national interest, opposes

a popular cause, and stifles the impulse to avenge wounded pride. But
Shemaiah was a man of God before he was a man of Judah. His loyalty to
God transcended that to king and country. His identity came from his
relationship to God, not from society. He served God rather than the state.
In short, he was a prophet."131

"Rehoboam is harsh, despotic, and autocratic, but the worst part is that he
is also stupid and incompetent."132

There were several reasons for the division of the kingdom. The primary one was
Solomon's apostasy. However tribal jealousy, sectionalism, and Solomon's exploitation of
the people were contributing causes.133

2. Jeroboam's evil reign in Israel 12:25—14:20

Jeroboam was the first of 20 kings who ruled the Northern Kingdom during its 209 year
history. He reigned for 22 years (931-910 B.C.). Not one of the kings of Israel, the
Northern Kingdom, turned the people to a serious recommitment to the Mosaic Covenant.
Consequently the writer judged all of them evil.

Jeroboam's idolatry 12:25-33

During its history the Northern Kingdom had three capitals: first Shechem (v. 25), then
Tirzah (14:17; 15:33), and finally Samaria (16:23-24). Perhaps the king strengthened
Penuel in west-central Gilead as a Transjordanian provincial center. Like Shechem,
Penuel was an important site in patriarchal times (Gen. 32:30). By strengthening these
sites Jeroboam appears to have been trying to get the residents of his kingdom to view
their nation as the continuation of what God had begun in patriarchal days.

130
The term "man of God" is synonymous with prophet (cf. 13:18; 2 Kings 5:8; 2 Chron. 12:5). See
Wiseman, pp. 142-43, for a short note on the term as it appears in Scripture.
131
Rice, p. 103.
132
DeVries, p. 159.
133
Wayne Brindle, "The Causes of the Division of Israel's Kingdom," Bibliotheca Sacra 141:563 (July-
September 1984):223-33.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 47

One writer suggested that Jeroboam may

have abandoned Shechem and moved to THE
Penuel because Shechem was a divided EARLY

CIA
DIVIDED ARAMEA
city. Levitical priests who would have

ENI
Dan *
KINGDOM
opposed his religious reforms lived

PHO
there.134

Jeroboam's fears that his subjects would

kill him and return to Rehoboam (v. 27)
were due to disbelief in God's promises ISRAEL
that the prophet Ahijah had announced to Tirzah
* GILEAD
him (11:31, 37-38). Samaria *
* *Penuel
Shechem
Jeroboam seems to have designed his AMMON
Bethel
substitute religious system (vv. 28-33) to *
offer the Israelites convenient *
Jerusalem

A
"improvements" in the Mosaic system that

TI
IS
IL
tied in with certain events in their history.
PH
The golden calves, for instance, recall the
golden calf in the wilderness. The apis bull JUDAH
was a common religious symbol in Egypt.
MOAB
The golden calf in the wilderness and
these calves may have been similar
symbols. There is some question among
scholars whether the people regarded
calves of this type as idols or as pedestals
on which the gods stood.135 One writer
made a good case for their having been idols (cf. 14:9).136 They certainly became idols to
the Israelites in the North.137 However it seems more likely that Jeroboam conceived of
them as the symbols and supporters of Yahweh.

"With the division of the kingdom, the chief symbol of God's presence, the
ark and the cherubim, was left to Judah. Needing a comparable symbol for
his new state, Jeroboam chose the bull, universally admired for its strength
and procreative power (Deut. 33:17; Isa. 10:13; 34:7; Ps. 68:30; 1 Kings
7:25). It is probable that Jeroboam meant the bull to serve the same
function as the ark and cherubim, that is, as the throne or footstool of the
invisibly present God.

134
Nigel Allen, "Jeroboam and Shechem," Vetus Testamentum 24:3 (July 1974):353-57.
135
William Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan, pp. 197-98; Stephen Von Wyrick, "Israel's Golden
Calves," Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):3, 9-12.
136
John Oswalt, "The Golden Calves and the Egyptian Concept of Deity," Evangelical Quarterly 45
(1973):13-20.
137
Archaeologists have discovered the remains of a high place at Dan that they date from the time of
Jeroboam I. See Wiseman, p. 144..
48 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

"The adoption of the bull as a cult object may have been an effort to adapt
the ark and cherubim to the culture of the northern tribes, especially since
the bull was an indigenous symbol to the Canaanite element of the
population. Archaeological finds in Palestine-Syria of statues depicting a
god astride a bull point to a function for the bull similar to that of the ark
and cherubim (ANEP [The Ancient Near East in Pictures, ed. James B.
Pritchard], nos. 470-501, 522-538)."138

After making the calves, Jeroboam said exactly the same thing Aaron had said (v. 28; cf.
Exod. 32:4). Jeroboam also followed up the making of the calves with a feast similar to
the one at Sinai (vv. 32-33; cf. Exod. 32:5). Furthermore Jeroboam followed Aaron's
example of setting himself up as covenant mediator, in Moses' absence, and as head of
the cult (formal worship). In this he was quite clearly identifying his cult with the
Exodus.139 Jeroboam also assumed the role of the Davidic monarch who was the Lord's
anointed and as such both the political and the religious leader of Israel.140

How could Jeroboam have hoped to win the support of the Israelites since he revived the
practice of worshipping a calf?

"I suggest that the motivation behind Jeroboam's action may have been an
intense animosity toward the Levites. It was the Levites who had taken
sword in hand to slay the worshippers of Aaron's golden calves. Jeroboam
now bypassed the Levites by appointing his own priests and, in a supreme
irony, manufactured his own golden calves as a symbol of his disdain for
the Levitical priesthood. Had not Moses' own grandson, Jonathan,
anticipated Jeroboam by serving as the first priest of the competing shrine
at Dan [Judg. 17—18]? Besides according a measure of legitimacy to Dan,
this story revealed that even within Moses' family there was room for
diversity in religious practice. How could Jeroboam be faulted for his
golden calves when Moses' own grandson had officiated over a cult at Dan
which worshipped idols having no connection at all with the exodus?"141

This may also explain Jeroboam's choice of Dan as one of his cultic centers, but why did
he select Bethel? Jacob had met God at Bethel twice (Gen. 28:10-22; 35:1-7). Perhaps
Jeroboam promoted it as the birthplace of Israel's faith. Geographically Bethel stood on
the main highway that led into Judah just north of the border. It was a convenient
gathering place for Israelites who lived in the southern and central parts of the Northern
Kingdom. Since they would have had to pass through Bethel if they wanted to go south to
worship in Jerusalem, Jeroboam's priests could have discouraged them from doing so
there.

138
Rice, pp. 106, 107.
139
Baruch Halpern, "Levitic Participation in the Reform Cult of Jeroboam I," Journal of Biblical Literature
95:1 (1976):39-40.
140
See Gray, pp. 315-18.
141
Merrill, p. 328.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 49

The feast Jeroboam set up (v. 32) took place one month later than the day of Atonement
when the Levitical priests offered sacrifice to atone for the sins of the nation for the past
year (Lev. 16).

Thus it seems that Jeroboam had no regard for the will of God as expressed in the
commands of the Mosaic Covenant. He viewed himself as a king like all the other kings
of the ancient Near East. To establish himself and the Northern Kingdom as independent
from Judah, he combined commonly accepted religious concepts that the surrounding
pagan nations held with elements from Israel's history.142

". . . Jeroboam's sins are so far-reaching and repulsive that the author uses
him as the example of how to define a morally deficient king (cf. 1 Kgs
16:7, 9, 26)."143

The prophecy of judgment on Jeroboam's religious system 13:1-32

God sent a young Judahite prophet to Bethel to announce a prophecy that God would
judge Jeroboam for his apostasy. When he arrived, the king was exercising his priestly
function at the Bethel altar (v. 1). The prophet predicted Josiah by name 290 years before
he became king of Judah (v. 2; cf. Isa. 44:28; 45:1). God fulfilled this prophecy when
Josiah destroyed Jeroboam's religious system (2 Kings 23:15-20).

The sign God gave was a miracle designed to prove the truthfulness of the prophecy to
those who heard it (v. 3). According to the Mosaic Law the priests were to carry the ashes
from the altar away carefully to a clean place for disposal (Lev. 1:16; 4:12; 6:10-11). The
pouring out of them there, along with the destruction of this altar, symbolized God's
rejection of this sacrificial system. Jeroboam stretched out his hand in a gesture of
authority (v. 4). By incapacitating his hand, a symbol of power, God showed He had
greater authority than the king and was sovereign over him (v. 4).

We can see that Jeroboam had no regard for Yahweh when he called the Lord the
prophet's God rather than his own God (v. 6). By offering the prophet a reward, Jeroboam
was seeking to compromise him. If the prophet had accepted the reward, there would
have been a question in the minds of onlookers concerning whether he was really in
Yahweh's service or in Jeroboam's (v. 7). The young man wisely declined even to eat
with the king, which in that culture implied mutual affection and protection (v. 8).

The old prophet living in Bethel was a compromiser, as verses 11-32 make clear. If he
had been faithful to Yahweh, he probably would have left Bethel and Israel when
Jeroboam brought his nation under a humanly devised system of worship. Many of the
faithful in Israel did this (v. 11; cf. 2 Chron. 11:13-17). He, too, tried to turn the young
prophet away from what God had told him to do (v. 15). He lied about God's revelation to

142
For further discussion, see Eva Danelius, "The Sins of Jeroboam Ben-Nebat," Jewish Quarterly Review
58 (1967-68):95-114 and 204-23.
143
House, p. 178.
50 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

him (v. 18). Like Jeroboam (12:28), the young man listened to bad counsel rather than
obeying a direct word from the Lord.

However the old prophet did receive some revelations from God (v. 20). He predicted
that because he had not been completely faithful to God the young prophet would have a
dishonorable burial (v. 22). A person's burial made a statement about whether his life was
honorable or not in the ancient Near East. Since the lion did not eat the prophet or maul
his donkey it was clear that this was an unusual slaying. God had sent the lion to judge
the young prophet (v. 24).

"Lions were attested in Palestine until at least the thirteenth century

AD."144

If God had not judged His own prophet for his disobedience, there might have been some
doubt about whether God would judge Jeroboam for his.

In spite of his own unfaithfulness, the old prophet admired his young friend and gave him
as honorable a burial as was possible (v. 30).

"Whatever his motives, and it is impossible to know them for sure, the old
man is a mixture of curiosity, dishonesty, accuracy, and conviction."145

This incident illustrates the importance of complete obedience to God's Word. God used
it to impress this truth on Jeroboam, the Israelites, and all who heard about it, as well as
us.

"From beginning to end, the story dwells on a single theme—the

fulfillment of the word of the Lord in its due time, having transcended the
weakness of its bearer and converted its violators into its confirmants."146

Jeroboam's continued apostasy 13:33-34

The prophecy of God's judgment on Jeroboam and its signs (vv. 4-5) did not lead the king
to repentance. The most serious aspect of his apostate system was his disregard for what
God had required concerning Israel's priesthood (v. 33). By instituting his new priestly
system Jeroboam became responsible for its continuing practice in Israel that eventually
resulted in the Assyrian captivity of Israel (v. 34).

144
Wiseman, p. 147.
145
Ibid., p. 189. Cf. W. Gross, "Lying Prophet and Disobedient Man of God in 1 Kings 13: Role Analysis
as an Instrument of Theological Interpretation of an OT Narrative Text," Semeia 15 (1979):122.
146
Uriel Simon, "I Kings 13: A Prophetic Sign—Denial and Persistence," Hebrew Union College Annual
47 (1976):115.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 51

The prophecy of judgment on Jeroboam's dynasty 14:1-18

Whereas the prophecy of the young prophet from Judah dealt with Jeroboam's religious
cult, this one predicted the fate of his descendants.

Jeroboam probably sent his wife to see Ahijah because that prophet had previously given
a favorable prophecy to him (11:29-39). He probably hoped his gift (v. 3) would win the
prophet's favor as Jeroboam had won the favor of the old prophet of Bethel.

Ahijah's ability to recognize the queen should have convinced her that what he said was
from the Lord. Yahweh was still the God of Israel (v. 7) even though Jeroboam refused to
acknowledge Him as such. David's viewing himself as Yahweh's servant, keeping His
commandments, and following Him with all his heart (v. 8) contrast with Jeroboam's
views and practices.

Jeroboam was extremely evil (v. 9) because he set up a new cult. In judgment God would
cut off Jeroboam's descendants so he would not have a continuing dynasty. This is what
the Lord had done to Eli and Saul for their similar disregard of God. His descendants
would not even enjoy burial. Wild animals would eat them, a terrible disgrace in the
minds of ancient Semites (v. 11; cf. 16:4; 21:24; Deut. 28:26).147 The sign this would
happen would be the death of Jeroboam's sick child (v. 12). His death at this time was
really a divine blessing in view of what he would have experienced had he lived (v. 13).
The king God raised up (v. 14) was Baasha (15:27-29). God compared Jeroboam's Israel
to a shaky reed planted in unstable water (v. 15) like the papyrus reeds Jeroboam had
seen in Egypt when he lived there. God gave up Israel to captivity eventually but only
temporarily (v. 16).

Evidently Jeroboam had moved his capital from Shechem to Tirzah, seven miles to the
northeast, and was living there (v. 17).148

Jeroboam's death 14:19-20

The writer wrote that the reigns of 18 of Israel's 20 kings stood recorded in "The
Chronicles of the Kings of Israel" (all except those of Tibni and Hoshea). This document
is different from the canonical books of 1 and 2 Chronicles and is not extant.

Jeroboam was a strong leader. He separated Israel from Judah and reigned a long time.
Nevertheless his lack of commitment to Yahweh resulted in him and Israel experiencing
discipline from the Lord. During his reign Israel lost control of the area around Damascus
that became an independent Aramean state. Ironically it was this area that produced
enemies of Israel for many years. The Philistines also recovered some of their territory
and became stronger (cf. 15:27). Moreover Israel appears to have lost control over Moab.
King Abijah of Judah also defeated Jeroboam in battle (2 Chron. 13:13-20). All of these
losses are evidences of God's punishment for apostasy.

147
Patterson and Austel, p. 123.
148
See "Tirzah: An Early Capital of Israel," Buried History 22:1 (March 1986):14-24.
52 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

3. Rehoboam's evil reign in Judah 14:21-31

"The narrator introduces a new format and style at this point that enables
him to state the essence of a king's reign with an economy of words. The
introduction and conclusion of the account of each reign conform to a
fixed pattern with only slight variations. The following information is
regularly given in the introduction to the reigns of the kings of Judah: (1)
date of beginning of reign, (2) age at beginning of reign (not noted
consistently at first), (3) length and place of reign, (4) name of the queen
mother, and (5) a theological evaluation. The pattern for the Israelite kings
is the same except that their ages and the names of their mothers are not
given. The reign of each king, both Judahite and Israelite, is normally
concluded in this manner: (1) summary of reign and referral to the royal
annals for additional information, (2) notice of death and place of burial,
and (3) name of successor."149

Rehoboam succeeded Solomon and reigned over Judah for 17 years (931-913 B.C.).

Jerusalem was the only capital the Southern Kingdom ever had. In contrast to Israel's
capitals, Jerusalem was God's chosen center for national life politically and religiously (v.
21).

Rehoboam permitted the re-establishment of pagan worship as it had existed in Israel

before Joshua conquered the land (vv. 23-24).150 Perhaps the king's Ammonite mother
was responsible for some of this.

"Essentially, the religion of Canaan was based on the assumption that the
forces of nature are expressions of divine presence and activity and that
the only way one could survive and prosper was to identify the gods
responsible for each phenomenon and by proper ritual encourage them to
bring to bear their respective powers. This is the mythological approach to
reality. Ritual involves human enactments, particularly by cultic personnel
such as priests, of the activity of the gods as described in the myths."151

Asherah (v. 23) was the mother goddess of the Canaanite pantheon. However the word
Asherah (pl. Asherim) also described a cult object: a tree, a grove of trees, or a pole.152

Pharaoh Shishak (Shoshenq I, 945-924 B.C.) was the king who had given Jeroboam
refuge (11:40). He was a very powerful and effective ruler.153 The campaign that brought
149
Rice, p. 125. See also Wiseman, pp. 46-52.
150
See Helmer Ringgren, Religions of the Ancient Near East, pp. 158-69.
151
Merrill, p. 159.
152
John Day, "Asherah in the Hebrew Bible and Northwest Semitic Literature," Journal of Biblical
Literature 105:3 (September 1986):385-408.
153
I. E. S. Edwards, "Egypt: From the Twenty-second to the Twenty-fourth Dynasty," in Cambridge
Ancient History 3:1:539-49.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 53

him into Judah netted him 156 cities in Judah, Israel, Edom, and Philistia.154 His invasion
diminished much of the glory of the temple and of Yahweh (vv. 26-28). Shishak's
offensive was the first serious attack against Judah by any foreign power since Saul's
days.

The writer footnoted "The Chronicles of the Kings of Judah" when he wrote of 14 of
those 19 kings (v. 29). Again, this document is not our 1 and 2 Chronicles. The war that
kept flaring up between Rehoboam and Jeroboam (v. 30) was a consequence of their
turning away from Yahweh. Rebellion against God brought war, but submission would
have resulted in peace.

4. Abijam's evil reign in Judah 15:1-8

Abijam (or Abijah, lit. my father is Yah[weh]) reigned from 913-911 B.C. while
Jeroboam ruled over Israel.155

"The accession formulae from this reign onwards make cross-references

between Judah and Israel. It is not clear whether this was to correlate the
sources for the reader or to emphasize the essential unity which should
have marked both peoples."156

The king's mother was a descendant of "Absalom," a variant spelling of "Abishalom" (v.
2). According to 2 Chronicles 13:2, Maacah was the daughter of Uriel and therefore the
granddaughter of Absalom. Abijam continued to tolerate the pagan worship reintroduced
to Judah during his father's reign (14:23-24). He experienced chastening from the Lord
because his heart did not fully belong to Yahweh (vv. 3, 6; cf. 2 Chron. 13:2-20). God's
patience with Abijam was due to His promises to David more than to Abijam's own
character (vv. 4-5; cf. 2 Sam. 21:17; 1 Kings 11:36).157

5. Asa's good reign in Judah 15:9-24

Asa was the first of eight kings of Judah whom the writer of Kings judged as good. Four
were reformers who sought to bring the nation back to the Mosaic Covenant, and Asa
was the first of these. The writer of Chronicles described his reforms more fully in 2
Chronicles 14—16.

Asa's godliness 15:9-15

Asa came to power close to the end of Jeroboam's reign over Israel in 910 B.C. Asa
reigned from 911-870 B.C., 41 years, an unusually long reign that probably began when
154
Benjamin Mazar, "The campaign of Pharaoh Shishak to Palestine," Vetus Testamentum Supplements 4
(1957):57-66.
155
Various charts of the kings visualize their overlapping reigns.
156
Wiseman, p. 154.
157
For the full biblical accounts of the reigns of these kings, consult the harmonies of Samuel, Kings, and
Chronicles listed in the bibliography of these notes. The histories of Israel listed in the bibliography give
this information plus data from extrabiblical sources pertaining to their reigns.
54 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

he was quite young (cf. 15:2). It was his grandmother (NIV), not his mother (NASB),
who bore the name Maacah (cf. 15:2). The queen mother (dowager), not the king's wife,
was the first lady in the kingdom.158

The rightness of Asa's acts is clear from his removing the pagan worship practices of
Rehoboam and Abijam (vv. 12-13; cf. Deut. 9:21). He did away with some of the high
places (2 Chron. 14:3), but not all of them (v. 14). However his heart was true to Yahweh
all his days (v. 14) even though he became somewhat self-reliant later in his life (2
Chron. 16:7-10).

Asa's victory over Israel 15:16-22

Antagonism continued between Israel and Judah in Asa's day. Ramah was a border town
just north of Judah. Many Israelites were leaving Israel to live in Judah, an indication of
God's blessing on the Southern Kingdom (cf. 2 Chron. 11:13-17). Baasha may have been
building a Berlin wall type of structure at Ramah. Asa's plan to divert Baasha's attention
to Ben-Hadad (ca. 900-860 B.C.) worked. His treaty evidenced some lack of trust in
Yahweh (2 Chron. 16:7-9). Asa's strategy was one God blessed, however, and it enabled
him to break down Baasha's fortifications that he used to rebuild two towns on Judah's
side of the border (v. 22).

"Tabrimmon (v. 18) means 'good is Rimmon', the Thunderer-god, a title of

Baal."159

Asa's death 15:23-24

Asa experienced some personal discipline for his trust in the flesh (v. 23; 2 Chron.
16:12). It may have been because of his ill health that Asa's son, Jehoshaphat, became
coregent with him late in his reign (873-870 B.C.).160 When Asa died, Ahab was reigning
in Israel (874-853 B.C.).

Asa's heart was right with God all his reign (v. 14) as David's had been. Nevertheless like
David he also sinned. He experienced personal blessing in the form of a long reign and
victory over his enemies because of his commitment to Yahweh. He also became a
source of blessing to Judah.

6. Nadab's evil reign in Israel 15:25-32

Nadab ruled Israel from 910-909 B.C. Evidently Baasha assassinated him during a battle
with the Philistines. Gibbethon stood three miles west of Solomon's stronghold city of
Gezer near the border where Israel, Philistia, and Judah met. Baasha not only killed

158
Gray, p. 106.
159
Wiseman, p. 156.
160
See Edwin Thiele, "Coregencies and Overlapping Reigns Among the Hebrew Kings," Journal of Biblical
Literature 93 (1974):174-200. McFall, p. 45, believed Jehoshaphat's coregency began in 872 or 871.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 55

Nadab but also all of Jeroboam's male descendants (v. 29). This was a fulfillment of
Ahijah's prophecy that God would cut off Jeroboam's dynasty (14:14).

"Nothing is more characteristic of the northern state than its extreme

internal instability."161

The writer of Kings noted carefully the prophecies of the blessings and cursings of the
kings because of their obedience or disobedience to Yahweh's authority. This is one of
the major motifs in Kings.162

7. Baasha's evil reign in Israel 15:33—16:7

Baasha's 24-year reign (909-886 B.C.), the third longest of any king of the Northern
Kingdom, fell within that of Asa's rule over Judah (911-870 B.C.).

Baasha had an outstanding opportunity to lead Israel back to true covenantal worship
after he had killed Nadab and terminated Jeroboam's dynasty. However, he chose not to
do so. He evidently regarded his elevation from a lowly origin (v. 2) to Israel's throne as
an opportunity to fulfill personal ambition rather than to glorify Yahweh. For his failure
God announced that He would cut off his line as He had Jeroboam's (vv. 3-4; cf. 14:11).

God ended Baasha's reign for two primary reasons: his continuation of Jeroboam's cult,
and the motive and manner with which he assassinated Nadab (v. 7).

"Besides providing information on Baasha's death, these verses [16:5-7]

reemphasize the author's theological approach to history. Three issues
deserve mention. First, God's word dictates history, a fact Jehu's prophetic
rebuke and prediction divulges. Second, Jeroboam and Baasha are judged
unfavorably because they use their God-given political authority to
preserve their own position rather than to glorify God among the people.
Third, the text stresses cause and effect, not fatalistic determinism. God
gives both Jeroboam and Baasha the opportunity to follow the covenant.
Baasha eliminates Jeroboam's family, as God said would happen, yet
becomes like Jeroboam, which makes him a murderer, not a reformer."163

8. Elah's evil reign in Israel 16:8-14

The dynasties that Jeroboam and Baasha established were alike in several respects. Both
were only two generations long. The first king in each dynasty reigned for a fairly long
time, Jeroboam 29 years and Baasha 24. Assassins who were apparently confidants the
kings trusted terminated both dynasties. Each assassin not only killed the king but also all
his male descendants, as was customary. Perhaps the most significant difference is that

161
Bright, p. 238.
162
See Ziony Zevit, "Deuteronomistic Historiography in 1 Kings 12—2 Kings 17 and the Reinvestiture of
the Israelian Cult," Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 32 (1985):57-73.
163
House, p. 200.
56 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Baasha, the first assassin, successfully established his own dynasty and ruled for many
years. The second, Zimri, could not do so. He committed suicide seven days after he
became king.

Elah reigned from 886-885 B.C. His assassin, Zimri, was one of his chariot commanders.
As the prophet had foretold (v. 3), Baasha's dynasty ended with Elah's death (v. 11).

9. Zimri's evil reign in Israel 16:15-20

Zimri's seven-day reign in 885 B.C. was the shortest in the history of the Northern
Kingdom.

Omri was commander-in-chief of Israel's army. He outranked Zimri. When word of

Zimri's assassination of Elah reached the soldiers at Gibbethon (cf. 15:27), they
immediately sided with their general and marched back to the capital to claim the throne
for Omri. Zimri realized he could not oppose Omri successfully and chose suicide over
execution. He also destroyed the palace in the process.

It was because of his sins in following Jeroboam's ways that God permitted Zimri to fail
in his coup and to die (v. 20).

"Out of the chaos portrayed in this section will come Omri, a man who
will stabilize the Northern Kingdom, establish a new capital, and begin a
new dynasty. His family will rule through 2 Kings 10. They will therefore
occupy more of the story than any other northern dynasty. Omrides will
also serve as active opponents of the prophets and as patrons of idolatry,
especially of Baal worship."164

10. Omri's evil reign in Israel 16:21-28

Controversy over who should succeed to Israel's throne raged for six years (885-880
B.C.) in Israel and threatened to consume the nation. Civil war followed Zimri's death
(vv. 21-22). Omri finally overpowered Tibni and probably executed him (v. 22). One
writer argued that Tibni did not necessarily die but simply passed off the scene.165 The
text seems to contradict this view.

For the last six years of his 12-year reign (880-874 B.C.), Omri reigned from Samaria.
This was the new capital he built on a centrally located and easily defended hilltop 12
miles west of Tirzah.

Omri was probably the most capable king Israel had enjoyed since the division of the
kingdom. Assyrian records refer to Israel as "the land of Omri."166 His influence extended

164
Ibid., p. 199.
165
J. Max Miller, "So Tibni Died," Vetus Testamentum 18 (1968):392-94.
166
T. C. Mitchell, "Israel and Judah Until the Revolt of Jehu (931-841 B.C.)," in Cambridge Ancient
History, 3:1:467.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 57

far. He defeated the Moabites the record of which constitutes one of the inscriptions on
the famous Moabite Stone. He also made a treaty with Ethbaal, king of Tyre and Sidon
(887-856 B.C.), that involved the marriage of his son, Ahab, and Ethbaal's daughter,
Jezebel.

Still the writer of kings did not mention these strengths, only the fact that he was the
worst king Israel had had spiritually (v. 25). He was very bad because he personally
followed Jeroboam's cult and caused the people to sin by allowing it to flourish in Israel.

". . . Omri, the builder of Samaria and a man of high international fame, is
dismissed in eight verses (1 Kgs 16:21-28). Why? Probably because he
plays no particularly significant role in Israel's decline. Again,
characterization is based largely on its role in plot development, not on
how it will or will not satisfy modern historians."167

The first period of antagonism between Israel and Judah ended about 874 B.C. when
Ahab made a treaty with King Jehoshaphat of Judah.

"Comparing the political histories of the two kingdoms [during this first
period of antagonism], one is struck by the turmoil in Israel and the
stability in Judah. There were three violent disruptions of government and
a civil war in Israel. In Judah, by contrast, the succession was orderly and
routine.

"The reasons for the differences are geographical, political, and

theological. Judah was relatively isolated, cut off from the coastal plain by
the Philistines and from Transjordan by the Dead Sea. Israel, on the other
hand, was neighbor to Syria and Phoenicia, and the major thoroughfares of
Palestine passed through its territory, linking Israel to the larger biblical
world and making it vulnerable to political developments there. Ethnically
and culturally Judah was comparatively homogeneous. Israel with its ten
tribes and large Canaanite population (Judg. 3:1-5) had a history of tribal
rivalries (Judg. 8:1-3; 12:1-6) and had to contend with differing culture
patterns. There were also basic differences in the understanding of
kingship."168

B. THE PERIOD OF ALLIANCE 1 KINGS 16:29—2 KINGS 9:29

King Jehoshaphat of Judah made peace with King Ahab of Israel (22:44). He did so by
contracting a marriage between his son, Jehoram, and Ahab's daughter, Athaliah (2
Chron. 18:1). This ended the first period of antagonism between the two kingdoms (931-
874 B.C.) and began a 33-year period of alliance (874-841 B.C.).

167
House, p. 66.
168
Rice, pp. 130-31.
58 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

1. Ahab's evil reign in Israel 16:29—22:40

Ahab ruled Israel from Samaria for 22 years (874-853 B.C.). During the first of these
years Asa ruled alone in Judah. Then for three years Asa and Jehoshaphat shared the
throne. For the remainder of Ahab's reign Jehoshaphat ruled alone.

Ahab's wickedness 16:29-34

Verses 30 and 33 bracket and set forth Ahab's unusual wickedness with special emphasis.
The writer had just written that Omri was the worst king so far (v. 25), but now he said
Ahab exceeded him in wickedness. For Ahab, the fact that Jeroboam's cult deviated from
the Mosaic Law was "trivial" (v. 31).169

The writer held Ahab responsible for THE PERIOD OF ALLIANCE

marrying Jezebel. This was fair 874-841 B.C. (33 years)
because even in arranged marriages in 1 Kings 16:29—2 Kings 9:29
the ancient world the candidates,
especially the son, in most cases had Ahaziah
the right of refusal. Ahab and Jezebel
became the most notorious husband
and wife team in Scripture.170 Ahab Jehoram

Ahab's greatest sin, however, was that ISRAEL

he brought the worship of Baal—the 874 841
worship of the native Canaanites JUDAH
whom God has commanded Israel to
Asa Jehoshaphat
exterminate—under the official
protection of his government.
Jeroboam had already refashioned Jehoram
Yahweh worship departing from what
Moses had prescribed. Ahab went one
step further. He officially replaced the Bad King Good King
worship of Yahweh with idolatry (cf.
18:4). This was a first in Israel's Reformer
history.

"This represents a quantum

leap in the history of
apostasy."171

The temple and altar to Baal that Ahab erected in Israel's capital symbolized his official
approval of this pagan religion. Remember the importance of David's bringing the ark
into Jerusalem and Solomon's building a temple for Yahweh and what that symbolized?

169
A granddaughter of Ethbaal, Dido, founded Carthage (Wiseman, p. 163).
170
Jezebel means dunghill. This must have been a name the Israelites gave her.
171
Rice, p. 138.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 59

Verse 34 may at first seem to have no connection with anything in the context. Perhaps
the writer included it to show that as God had fulfilled His word about Jericho, so it
would be in Ahab's case. Ahab was establishing paganism that God had already said He
would judge. Similarly Hiel had tried to set up a city that God had previously said the
Israelites should not rebuild (cf. Josh. 6:26). The building of Jericho is also a tribute to
Ahab's apostasy since he must have ordered or permitted Hiel to rebuild the city in spite
of Joshua's long-standing curse.

"The foundation sacrifice, revealed by modern archaeology, is probably

what was involved. The children named were probably infants, dead or
alive, placed in jars and inserted into the masonry, propitiating the gods
and warding off evil."172

Elijah's announcement of God's judgment 17:1-7

Again God raised up a prophet to announce what He would do. Evidently Ahab's
apostasy had been going on for 14 years before God raised up His prophetic challenge.173
Normally God gives sinners an opportunity to judge themselves and repent before He
sends judgment on them (cf. 1 Cor. 11:31; 2 Pet. 3:9-10).

The three scenes in the Elijah narrative (chs. 17—19) form one story in which we can see
the rising powers of the prophet. In each succeeding episode of the story he confronted an
increasingly difficult problem. In this way God developed his faith.

". . . cutting across the linear story are parallel patterns which unify the
narrative in another way. Specifically, if the narrative is divided into its
three major divisions, corresponding basically to the present chapter
divisions, one can discern the same sequence of events in each. The
corresponding events in each chapter are linked by verbal, thematic, and
structural repetitions which create a texture of foreshadows and echoes, of
balances and contrasts, of rising and falling action. This parallel patterning
gives the narrative a dimension of depth which supports and enriches its
linear logic. The following chart outlines the phenomena which we shall
proceed to interpret.

"A. Announcement
by Elijah (17:1) by God (18:1) by Jezebel (19:2)
B. Journey
from Israel (17:2-5) to Israel (18:2) from Israel (19:3-4)
C. Two encounters
ravens (17:6-7) Obadiah (18:7-16) an angel (19:5-6)
widow (17:8-16) Ahab (18:17-20) the angel of the Lord (19:7)
D. Miracle
resuscitation (17:17-23) fire (18:21-38) theophany (19:9-18)

172
DeVries, p. 205.
173
Merrill, p. 346.
60 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

E. Conversion
widow (17:24) Israel (18:39-40) Elisha (19:19-21)
Ahab (18:41—19:1)

"The parallel elements may be briefly summarized. Each act in the

narrative begins with an announcement (A) which initiates the action and,
thereby, precipitates a crisis. The announcement propels Elijah to a new
locale (B). In the new setting he has two successive encounters or
confrontations (C). The second encounter results in a challenge which
requires Yahweh's intervention to resolve (D). Finally, in response to this
intervention, individuals are 'converted' and declare or exhibit their loyalty
to Yahweh (E)."174

This dramatic story opens with Elijah bursting onto the scene in Ahab's palace.

"'Before whom I stand' (v. 1) is his claim to authority: it is a technical

phrase used of a king's first or 'prime' minister—his confidant and chief
executive."175

Elijah's name means "Yahweh is my God." He could promise severe drought because
God had said this is what He would bring on the land if His people forsook Him (Lev.
26:18-19; Deut. 11:16-17; 28:23-24; 33:28). This would have been a challenge to Baal
since Baal's devotees credited him with providing rain and fertility. Some representations
of Baal that archaeologists have discovered picture him holding a thunderbolt in his hand.

"Why choose a drought? Why emphasize that Yahweh lives? Elijah

determines to attack Baalism at its theological center. Baal worshipers
believed that their storm god made rain, unless, of course, it was the dry
season and he needed to be brought back from the dead. To refute this
belief Elijah states that Yahweh is the one who determines when rain falls,
that Yahweh lives at all times, and that Yahweh is not afraid to challenge
Baal on what his worshipers consider his home ground."176

God sent Elijah to Cherith (exact site unknown) to provide for his needs, to hide him
from Ahab, and to teach him a lesson (cf. 18:10).177 Ravens do not even feed their own
young (cf. Job 38:41). God provided miraculously for Elijah to build the prophet's faith in
view of the conflicts he would face. "Bread" (v. 6) is literally food (Heb. lehem) and
could include berries, fruit, nuts, eggs, etc. Elijah was learning experientially that
Yahweh was the only source of food, fertility, and blessing. As God had promised,
drought soon began to grip the nation (v. 7).

174
Robert L. Cohn, "The Literary Logic of 1 Kings 17—19," Journal of Biblical Literature 101:3
(September 1982):343-44. This article has several good insights into the major motifs and structure of
these chapters.
175
Auld, pp. 109-10.
176
House, p. 213.
177
See the map "Elijah's Travels" in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, p. 523.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 61

MIRACLES INVOLVING ELIJAH178

Miracle Reference Elements

Elijah fed by ravens 1 Kings 17:6 Water and food

Widow's food multiplied 1 Kings 17:15 Flour and oil
Widow's dead son raised to life 1 Kings 17:22 Life
Elijah's altar and sacrifice consumed 1 Kings 18:38 Water and fire
Ahaziah's 102 soldiers consumed 2 Kings 1:10-12 Fire
Jordan River parted 2 Kings 2:8 Water
Elijah's transport to heaven 2 Kings 2:11 Fire and wind

God's revelation of His power 17:8-24

God had a very unusual ministry for Elijah to perform in which he would stand alone
against hundreds of opponents (18:16-40). This section reveals how the Lord prepared
him for it.

The site of Zarephath was between Tyre and Sidon in Phoenicia, the stronghold of the
cult that Ahab had imported into Israel (cf. 16:31). Widows were poor in the ancient Near
East and would have been the first to run out of food in a drought.179 Elijah's request for
water and then bread (vv. 10-11) evidently identified the widow God had in mind (cf.
Gen. 24:10-21). Her response revealed a Gentile believer in Yahweh (v. 12; cf. v. 1; Luke
4:26). Elijah asked the widow to put God's interests—represented by himself, a prophet
of Yahweh—before her own as the condition for her blessing (v. 13; cf. Matt. 6:33; Mark
12:41-44). She responded obediently to the word Elijah gave her from God showing she
really believed that Yahweh, not Baal, was the God who could provide food and fertility
(v. 14). God honored her faith. He provided her need for food (vv. 15-16).

"In the absence of Baal who lies impotent in the Netherworld, Yahweh
steps in to assist the widow and the orphan, and this is even done in the
heartland of Baal, Phoenicia."180

This situation undoubtedly strengthened Elijah's faith in God's power and faithfulness as
well as the faith of the woman.

"The fact that Elijah had to sustain the widow and boy points not only to
YHWH as provider for the needy but also as one who 'trained' his prophet,
as it were, to be obedient to him. Flour and oil signify life; they are the

178
Adapted from ibid., p. 541.
179
See Richard D. Patterson, "The Widow, the Orphan, and the Poor in the Old Testament and the Extra-
Biblical Literature," Bibliotheca Sacra 130:519 (July-September 1973):223-34.
180
F. C. Fensham, "A Few Observations on the Polarisation between Yahweh and Baal in I Kings 17—19,"
Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 92:2 (1980):234.
62 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

two common staples in any ancient, as well as modern, Near Eastern

household."181

The sickness of the widow's son corresponded to Israel's spiritual condition at this time
(v. 17). The widow incorrectly blamed herself for her son's predicament (v. 18; cf. John
9:2-3). Elijah realized that only God could bring the boy back to life, so he called on God
in prayer to do so (vv. 20-21). Often in cases of miraculous restoration God's servant
placed his hand on the afflicted one. He did so to indicate that the power of God in him
was passing to the needy individual (cf. Matt. 8:3). In this instance Elijah placed his
whole body against the boy's body for the same reason (v. 21; cf. 2 Kings 4:34; Acts
9:31-43; 20:10). This is the first restoration to life of a dead person that Scripture records.
Elijah prayed persistently, one of the fundamental requisites for obtaining one's petitions
in difficult cases (v. 21; cf. Matt. 7:7-8; Luke 11:5-13). God restored the lad's life (v. 22).
In the process Elijah learned the power of God and the power of prayer. He applied both
of these lessons in his contest with the Baal prophets (18:16-46). His confidence in his
own ability as a channel of God's blessing and word received added strength from the
widow's confession (v. 24).

"The best proof of the effectiveness of Elijah's preparation is that he was

verified as an authentic man of God and the bearer of God's word by a
daughter of the very people he opposed (v. 24)."182

If God could raise a dead Gentile boy back to life in response to believing prayer, He
could also revive the chosen people of Israel who had become spiritually dead.

". . . the emphasis in this text [17:17-24] is not so much on Elijah as on the
word of the Lord which is in Elijah's mouth."183

Verses 17-24 display a chiastic structure that highlights Elijah's control and his intimate
relationship with Yahweh that resulted in the miraculous resuscitation of the boy.

181
James R. Battenfield, "YHWH's Refutation of the Baal Myth through the Actions of Elijah and Elisha,"
in Israel's Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, p. 22.
182
Rice, p. 145.
183
Marion Soards Jr., "Elijah and the Lord's Word: A Study of I Kings 17:17-24," Studia Biblica et
Theologica 13:1 (April 1983):39-40.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 63

"A 'What have you against me, O man of God?'

B 'Give me your son!'
C And he took him and brought him up
D And he cried to the Lord and said, 'O Lord my God.'
E And he stretched upon the boy
D' And he called to the Lord and said, 'O Lord my
God.'
E' And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah
C' And Elijah took the child and brought him down
B' 'See your son lives!'
A' 'Now I know that you are a man of God.'"184

"The whole point of the story, however, seems to be paramountly a

demonstration that YHWH, not Baal, has the power of life over death."185

God's revelation of His people 18:1-16

Elijah would next learn from God how the Israelites would respond to his ministry as
God's servant.

Evidently God made the famine especially severe in Samaria (v. 2) because Ahab and
Jezebel were the causes of it and lived there. As a believer in Yahweh, Obadiah had been
a blessing to 100 of God's prophets even in the famine (vv. 3-4). Surveyors have counted
over 2,000 caves in the Mount Carmel area.186

When Obadiah met Elijah, he voiced his submission to the man of God and to Yahweh.
He did so by calling Elijah his "master" (v. 7). However, Obadiah served two masters.
Elijah pointed this out by referring to Ahab as Obadiah's master (v. 8). To rise as high as
he had in Ahab's government Obadiah had to have lived a double life of external support
for Ahab while internally following Yahweh.

Obadiah's confession that Yahweh lived presents him as a genuine believer (v. 10). This
is exactly the same profession that both the widow (17:12) and Elijah had made (17:1).
Obadiah went to great pains to convince Elijah that he was a believer in Yahweh. He
must have felt this explanation was necessary because of his position in Ahab's cabinet
(v. 13). He obviously struggled with whether he could believe Elijah when the prophet
told him he would speak to Ahab (vv. 11-12, 14). Having received a second promise from
Elijah that he would not disappear (v. 15), Obadiah finally obeyed the prophet's
command (v. 8) and went to Ahab (v. 16).

"Why Obadiah should be so featured is, at first, puzzling. Yet the episode
appears to have two major purposes. First, Obadiah's speech reveals to
Elijah the gravity of the crisis in Samaria during his absence . . .

184
Cohn, "The Literary . . .," p. 336.
185
Battenfield, p. 23.
186
Patterson and Austel, p. 142.
64 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

"Second, through the use of irony, Obadiah's scene establishes the unique
authority of Elijah."187

Obadiah was similar to many believers in Yahweh who were living in Israel then. They
had divided allegiances, their faith in God was weak, they were fearful for their own
safety, and they were slow to respond to God's word. What a contrast Obadiah was to the
Gentile widow of Zarephath (cf. Matt. 15:21-28). Elijah saw beforehand, in Obadiah's
response to him, how believers in Israel would respond to what he would soon do on
Mount Carmel. Elijah would call on the people to do essentially what he had commanded
Obadiah to do: obey the Lord's word through His prophet.

The vindication of Yahweh 18:17-40

Ahab had a problem of perception similar to Obadiah's (v. 17; cf. v. 7). The real source of
Israel's troubles was Ahab and Omri's disregard of the Mosaic Covenant and their
preference for idolatry (Deut. 6:5).

"This was a crime against the state worthy of death (like that of Achan,
Jos. 6:18; 7:25; and Jonathan in 1 Sa. 14:24-29)."188

Probably hundreds if not thousands of people gathered since Elijah summoned all Israel
to Mount Carmel. Elijah probably chose this mountain, as God led him, because it stood
between Israel and Phoenicia geographically, neutral ground between Yahweh's land and
Baal's. Furthermore the Phoenicians regarded Carmel as Baal's sacred dwelling place.
Storms with lightning and thunder were common on Mount Carmel, and Baal
worshippers viewed them as manifestations of their deity. The name "Carmel" means
"the garden land," and it was famous for its fertility. In the minds of many, Baal had the
advantage in this contest. Elijah ordered Ahab around (v. 19) as was appropriate since the
prophet was the representative of the true King of Israel. Surprisingly Ahab obeyed. His
weak will becomes even more obvious later in 1 Kings.

"To eat at the table of the king or queen was to be subsidized by the state
(cf. 2 Sam. 9:9-11; 1 Kgs. 2:7). So aggressive is Jezebel that she promotes
at state expense the worship of Baal and Asherah."189

Interestingly this was a contest of prophets, not priests. The priests in Israel had long
since lost their influence in Israel. Apparently the prophets in Phoenicia were more
powerful too. Perhaps God accepted Elijah's offering as a non-priest because there were
no faithful priests in the Northern Kingdom at this time (cf. Num. 18; Deut. 18).

The Israelites had been straddling the spiritual fence just as Obadiah had (v. 21).

187
Cohn, "The Literary . . .," pp. 338-39.
188
Wiseman, p. 168.
189
Rice, p. 149.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 65

"The issue is not that Israel wanted to reject Yahweh and choose Baal, but
rather to serve them both. Elijah called for an either/or decision."190

"Here is the Martin Luther of old-time Israel, who singlehanded

challenged the whole priesthood of the state religion, and all the people of
the realm, to the decisive test on Mount Carmel."191

Elijah realized that he was not the only prophet of Yahweh who remained in Israel (v. 22;
cf. v. 13), but in this situation the odds were one against 450.192 He felt alone. His victory
would require a supernatural act of God. The oxen as symbols of service may have
represented the people of Israel (cf. Num. 7:3). Elijah would sacrifice them as a burnt
offering of worship (v. 23). Which people would their respective deities accept, those the
pagan priests symbolically offered to Baal or those Elijah offered to Yahweh? Aaron had
previously conducted a similar test (Lev. 9). The deity who brought fire down would be
the true God. By coming in fire God illustrated His power to judge (Lev. 10:1-2).

Even though Baal worshippers thought the thunder represented Baal's voice they did not
hear his voice on this occasion (v. 26). This was not a rain-making dance but a wild
dance in worship of Baal.193 Elijah did something that must have shocked everyone
present. He mocked Baal. In the ancient East even if a person did not worship an idol he
at least took its status as a god for granted.194 However, Elijah refused to acknowledge
that Baal was a god at all. He suggested that Baal might be "occupied" (v. 27; lit.
relieving himself).195 His devotees also thought Baal accompanied the Phoenician sailors,
so Elijah suggested he might be on a journey (v. 27). All of these possibilities exposed
Baal's limited powers. Pagan worship has always proved destructive to humanity, as the
priests' cutting themselves illustrated (v. 28). For six hours the priests of Baal ranted and
raved to no avail (v. 29).

Yahweh's altar at that site (one of the high places?) had fallen into disrepair (v. 30).
Elijah rebuilt it, as the Mosaic Covenant specified, with 12 uncut stones symbolic of
Israel's 12 tribes. There was still only one Lord, one covenant, and one nation with one
destiny in the plans and purposes of God even though the nation had split into two parts.

"As Moses built an altar at Sinai and set up twelve stones for the twelve
tribes (Exodus 24:4), and Joshua erected the twelve stones at Gilgal in the
190
B. S. Childs, Old Testament Theology in a Canonical Context, p. 65.
191
Baxter, pp. 111-12.
192
There are several similarities between Judges 4 and 7 and 1 Kings 18. All three encounters with Israel's
enemies took place on the south side of the Jezreel Valley. The Kishon figured in both Barak and Elijah's
victories over the Canaanites. Gideon faced odds of 450 to one as Elijah did, and both men experienced
miraculous deliverances. In the future Israel's enemies will again assemble against her in this valley at
Armageddon. Then Jesus Christ will be the hero and will bring an even more spectacular victory to His
chosen people.
193
Wiseman, p. 169.
194
Rice, p. 150.
195
Gray, p. 398; Gary A. Rendsburg, "The Mock of Baal in 1 Kings 18:27," Catholic Biblical Quarterly
50:3 (July 1988):415. For other interpretations of this verse, see Leo Hayman, "A Note on I Kings 18:27,"
Journal of Near Eastern Studies 10 (1951):57-58.
66 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Gilgal covenant festival (Joshua 4:3), so Elijah built an altar of twelve

stones 'according to the number of the tribes' of Israel (I Kings 17:31)."196

The 12 pitchers of water (vv. 33-34) likewise represented Israel, probably as God's
instrument of refreshment to the world. Elijah may have obtained the water from a spring
or perhaps from the Great (Mediterranean) Sea that is not far from some parts of Mount
Carmel.

Elijah prayed a simple prayer for God's glory at 3:00 p.m., the time of Israel's sacrifice
that illustrated its daily commitment to Yahweh (vv. 36-37).197 Emphasizing the fact that
Yahweh had been Israel's God since patriarchal times, Elijah prayed that the Lord would
reveal Himself as Israel's God. He also asked that the people would perceive that He had
accepted His servant Elijah's offering that he had presented in harmony with God's Law.
The heart of the people needed turning back to God, and Elijah prayed for evidence of
that as well (v. 37).

God revealed Himself as He had earlier in Israel's history (Lev. 10:1-2). He accepting the
sacrifice of the nation symbolized by the 12 stones, the dust out of which He had created
the people, and the 12 pitchers of water (v. 38). The Israelites did turn back to God. They
demonstrated their repentance with obedience to the Mosaic Law and God's prophet by
slaying the false prophets as the Law prescribed (v. 40; cf. Exod. 22:20; Deut. 13:1-18;
17:2-7; 18:20). The Kishon Wadi lay just north of Mount Carmel in the Jezreel Valley
below.

Elijah's actions on Mount Carmel were a strong polemic against Canaanite religion.198

"The contest on Carmel is not, as often billed, between Elijah and the
prophets of Baal: it is between his Lord Yahweh himself and Lord
Baal."199

". . . the whole chapter . . . is seen to have a single motive from beginning
to end: the bringing of rain, that Yahweh's supremacy may be established
in Israel, not by a barren Pyrrhic victory through a supernatural fire-bolt,
but by meeting the crying need of His people for water . . ."200

196
Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, p. 192.
197
Josephus, 14:4:3. Cf. Acts 3:1.
198
George Saint-Laurent, "Light from Ras Shamra on Elijah's Ordeal upon Mount Carmel," in Scripture in
Context, pp. 123-39; Leah Bronner, The Stories of Elijah and Elisha; Robert B. Chisholm Jr., "The Polemic
against Baalism in Israel's Early History and Literature," Bibliotheca Sacra 151:603 (July-September
1994):267-68.
199
Auld, p. 118.
200
D. R. Ap-Thomas, "Elijah on Mt. Carmel," Palestine Exploration Quarterly 92 (1960):155.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 67

The end of the drought 18:41-46

Evidently thunder accompanied the falling of the fire (lightning?) from heaven (v. 41).201
Elijah told Ahab, who had personally witnessed the contest, that he could celebrate by
eating (v. 41). Perhaps he had been fasting to end the drought. Ahab evidently went up
Mount Carmel from the Jezreel Valley below to eat, but Elijah went up higher to pray for
rain (v. 42). His posture evidenced humility and mourning as well as prayer.

Rain normally came on Carmel from the west, from the Mediterranean Sea (v. 43). Elijah
persisted in prayer doubtless basing his request on the people's repentance and God's
promise to bless with rain (Deut. 28:12). Perhaps the cloud shaped like a man's hand (v.
44) represented God's hand returning to the land to bless His people again (cf. v. 46).
Jezreel (v. 45) was Ahab's winter palace that stood 10 to 20 miles southeast of Carmel,
depending on where on Mount Carmel these events took place, in the Jezreel Valley.
Perhaps Elijah ran along the ridge of Mount Carmel while Ahab's chariot got bogged
down in the muddy valley below (v. 46).

This concludes the account of Israel's three and one-half year drought (17:1—18:46; cf.
Luke 4:25; James 5:17; ca. 860-857 B.C.).202 The major motifs of this section are
Yahweh's superiority over Baal and His faithfulness to withhold blessing (rain) as a
punishment and to send it in response to repentance.

"Often in the history of the world great issues have depended on lone
individuals, without whom events would have taken a wholly different
turn. Yet few crises have been more significant for history than that in
which Elijah figured, and in the story of the Transfiguration he rightly
stands beside Moses. Without Moses the religion of Yahwehism as it
figured in the Old Testament would never have been born. Without Elijah
it would have died. The religion from which Judaism, Christianity and
Islam all in varying ways stemmed would have succumbed to the religion
of Tyre. How different the political history of the world might have been it
is vain to speculate. But it is safe to say that from the religion of [Baal]
Melkart mankind would never have derived that spiritual influence which
came from Moses and Elijah and others who followed in their train."203

"Without question Elijah is one of the most distinctive and diversely

talented individuals in the Bible. He is prophet, preacher, political
reformer, and miracle worker all at the same time. At the heart of this
multifaceted person, though, rests one overriding conviction. Elijah hates

201
John Ruthven, "A Note on Elijah's 'Fire from Yahweh,'" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
12:2 (1969):111-15.
202
This drought was a foreview of the three and one-half year Great Tribulation in which God will punish
Israel even more severely for her apostasy in the future (cf. Rev. 8—18).
203
H. H. Rowley, "Elijah on Mount Carmel," Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 43:1 (September
1960):219. R. P. Carroll, "The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in Ancient
Israel," Vetus Testamentum 19:4 (October 1969):408-14, drew attention to the Mosaic parallels and office
depicted in the Elijah-Elisha sagas (1 Kings 17—2 Kings 13).
68 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Baalism as much as Jezebel loves the cult, and he desires to magnify

Yahweh over Baal and defeat the interloping religion once and for all. He
makes it his mission to teach that Yahweh lives, that Baal does not exist,
and that ethical standards flow from a commitment to the living God."204

Elijah's disillusionment 19:1-8

Elijah was surprised that the revival he had just witnessed was not more effective in
eliminating Baal worship. Apparently Jezebel's threat drove the lessons of God's power
and provision that he had been learning at Cherith, Zarephath, and Carmel out of his
memory.

"Probably Elijah had played into Jezebel's hand. Had she really wanted
Elijah dead, she surely would have seized him without warning and slain
him. What she desired was that Elijah and his God be discredited before
the new converts who had aided Elijah by executing the prophets of Baal.
Without a leader revolutionary movements usually stumble and fall away.
Just when God needed him the most, the divinely trained prophet was to
prove a notable failure."205

Beersheba was the southernmost town in the Southern Kingdom. Perhaps the fact that
Elijah dismissed his servant there and then went farther alone indicates that he was giving
up his ministry.206 Elijah proceeded farther south into the wilderness where the Israelites
had wandered for 40 years because of their unbelief. He did not get much refreshment
from the natural provisions of the wilderness such as the juniper (broom) tree (v. 4). He
said he was no better than his predecessors in purging Israel from idolatry (v. 4) implying
that he had expected to see a complete revival. God provided supernaturally for His
servant in the wilderness 40 days and 40 nights as He had provided for the Israelites for
40 years. The trip from Beersheba to the traditional site of Horeb (Mount Sinai) took only
14 days by foot. It seems that Elijah was experiencing the same discipline for his weak
faith and the same education that God had given the Israelites years earlier. God
sustained Elijah faithfully as He had preserved the nation. The Hebrew text has "the"
cave rather than "a" cave (v. 9) suggesting that this may have been the very spot where
God had placed Moses before He caused His glory to pass before him (Exod. 33:21-23).

"Elijah's 'pilgrimage' to Sinai was a search for the roots of Yahwism.

There Yahweh had appeared to Moses when he was herding sheep, and
there He appeared to him when he gave the law. Elijah needed
reaffirmation. What he thought he saw happening on Mt. Carmel did not
happen, namely, the repentance of Israel. So he went to Mount Sinai (also
known as Mount Horeb) to chide Yahweh for forsaking him."207

204
House, p. 212.
205
Patterson and Austel, p. 148.
206
DeVries, p. 235.
207
Heater, p. 134.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 69

God's revelation of His methods 19:9-21

Elijah's zeal for God's covenant, altars, and prophets was admirable, but he became too
discouraged because he underestimated the extent of commitment to Yahweh that existed
in Israel.208 He was not alone in his stand for Yahweh (v. 10; cf. 18:13). God asked him
what he was doing there (vv. 9, 13) because He had not sent him to Horeb as He had to
Cherith, Zarephath, and Samaria (cf. 17:3, 9; 18:1). Elijah had fled to Horeb out of fear.
God proceeded to reproduce demonstrations of His power that He had given Israel at Mt.
Sinai (Exod. 19:16-18) and to Elijah at Mt. Carmel (18:38, 45). Nevertheless God was
not in these in the sense that they were not His methods now. Rather, God was in the
gentle blowing (v. 12).209 Moses had spent 40 days and nights on the mountain fasting
while he waited for a new phase of his ministry to begin (Exod. 34:28). Jesus spent 40
days and nights in a wilderness at the beginning of His public ministry too (cf. Matt. 4:1-
2). Elijah covered his face because he realized that He could not look at God and live (v.
13), as Moses also realized (Exod. 33:20-22; cf. Gen. 32:30). Elijah was to learn that
whereas God had revealed Himself in dramatic ways in the past, He would now work in
quieter ways. Instead of Elijah continuing to stand alone for God, God would now put
him into the background while the Lord used other people.210 Elijah evidently got the
message, but he still felt depressed (v. 14). God was dealing with him gently too.

"His [Elijah's] God-given successes had fostered an inordinate pride (cf.

vv. 4, 10, 14) that had made him take his own importance too seriously.
Moreover, Elijah had come to bask in the glow of the spectacular. He may
have fully expected that because of what had been accomplished at Mount
Carmel, Jezebel would capitulate and pagan worship would come to an
end in Israel—all through his influence!"211

Yahweh next redirected Elijah to return to Israel to do three things (vv. 15-16). Elijah
anointed only Elisha personally (vv. 19-21). He anointed Hazael and Jehu indirectly
through his successor, Elisha (2 Kings 8:7-14; 9:1-3). Through these three men God
would complete the purge of Baal worship that Elijah had begun (v. 17). God also had
7,000 other faithful followers in Israel through whom He could work (v. 18). The writer
mentioned some of these loyal people in the chapters that follow.

Elisha was a prosperous farmer who lived near Abel-meholah (v. 16) in the Jordan
Valley, 23 miles south of the Sea of Chinnereth (Galilee). Throwing a prophet's cloak
around a person symbolized the passing of the power and authority of the office to that

208
Ronald B. Allen, "Elijah the Broken Prophet," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 22:3
(1979):202.
209
J. Lust, "A Gentle Breeze or a Roaring Thunderous Sound?" Vetus Testamentum 25:1 (January
1975):115, suggested that we should understand the Hebrew words translated "a gentle blowing" (NASB)
or "a gentle whisper" (NIV) as "a roaring and thundrous voice." This view has not found popular
acceptance.
210
For helpful insights into verses 9-14, see William Dumbrell, "What Are You Doing Here? Elijah at
Horeb," Crux 22:1 (March 1986):12-19.
211
Patterson and Austel, p. 148.
70 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

individual.212 "What have I done to you" (v. 20) is an idiom that means, "Do as you
please." Elisha terminated his former occupation and from then on served as a prophet
(cf. Luke 9:62). His sacrifice of his oxen as a burnt offering to Yahweh symbolized his
total personal commitment to God (v. 21). Perhaps his 12 pairs of oxen (v. 19)
represented the 12 tribes of Israel whom Elisha would now lead spiritually.

"Elijah recruits his attendant and successor at the workplace, as Jesus was
to do with many of his followers."213

This closes the so-called Elijah cycle or narrative (chs. 17—19), one of the richest
portions of the Old Testament for preaching and teaching.

God's deliverance of Samaria 20:1-25

God dealt gently (cf. 19:12) with the Northern Kingdom to continue to move His people
back to Himself. This pericope records the first of three battles the writer recorded in 1
Kings between Ahab and the kings of Aram, Israel's antagonistic neighbor to the
northeast. The first of these evidently took place early in Ahab's reign (ca. 874).214 Ahab's
adversary would have been Ben-Hadad I (900-860 B.C.). The political reasons for these
encounters were of no interest to the writer of Kings, but we know what they were.215

The danger Ben-Hadad posed as his demands on Ahab continued to escalate made the
Israelite king receptive to the directives of Yahweh's prophet. The prophet presented
Yahweh as Israel's real deliverer (v. 13). The deliverance would demonstrate Yahweh's
power and superiority over Baal (v. 13). Ahab willingly followed God's orders since he
had no other hope (v. 14). God's strategy resulted in victory for Israel (v. 21). The Lord
further directed Ahab to prepare for the Aramean army's return the next spring (v. 22).
Late spring and early summer were seasons for military expeditions because then in the
Middle East grass was readily available for the horses. Victory was certain, though
perhaps not known to Ahab, because of the Arameans' limited view of Yahweh's power
(vv. 23, 28).

God's deliverance of Israel 20:26-30

The battle of Aphek (873 B.C.) took place on the tableland east of the Sea of Chinnereth
(Galilee), the modern Golan Heights. The Arameans greatly outnumbered Israel (v. 27),
but God promised Ahab victory so he and all Israel, as well as the Arameans, would
know that Yahweh was the true God (v. 28). God enabled the soldiers of Israel to defeat
their enemy (v. 29), but He also used supernatural means to assist them (v. 30; cf. Josh. 6;

212
House, p. 225.
213
Auld, p. 128. In many ways Elijah, Israel's savior, prefigured Jesus Christ's ministry.
214
See D. D. Luckenbill, "Benhadad and Hadadezer," American Journal of Semitic Languages 27
(1911):279; and Julian Morgenstern, "Chronological Data of the Dynasty of Omri," Journal of Biblical
Literature 59 (1940):392.
215
See Merrill Unger, Israel and the Aramaeans of Damascus; and Merrill, pp. 346-47.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 71

et al.). One hundred casualties a day in ancient warfare was considered heavy,216 but God
gave His people 100 times that number that day.

"The striking parallels to the conquest of Jericho, as the interval of seven

days before the battle and the falling of the city walls, clearly identified
the battles at Samaria and Aphek as holy war."217

Ahab's unfaithfulness to Yahweh and his sentence 20:31-34

This section is similar to the one that recorded Saul's failure to follow Yahweh's
command that also resulted in God cutting him off as His vice-regent (1 Sam. 13:13-14).
The parallels between Saul and Ahab are remarkable throughout this record of Ahab's
reign.

Archaeology has confirmed that other ancient Near Eastern kings were more brutal in
war than Israel's were (v. 31). Sackcloth and ropes expressed remorse and servitude (vv.
31-32).218 Ben-Hadad's servants called their king Ahab's "servant" (v. 32) because that is
what Ben-Hadad was willing to become if Ahab would have mercy on him. Ben-Hadad
was not Ahab's blood brother (v. 32). Ahab was willing to regard him as such rather than
as a servant if Ben-Hadad agreed to make a treaty and concessions to him. Ahab's plan
was contrary to God's Law that called for the deaths of Israel's enemies (Deut. 20:10-15).
Ahab welcomed Ben-Hadad into his chariot (v. 33). This was an honor. The Aramean
king was quick to make concessions in return for his life (v. 34).219 The covenant the two
men made involved the return of Israelite cities that Aram had previously taken and trade
privileges for Israel with Damascus (v. 34). Ahab figured that it would be better for him
and Israel to make a treaty than to obey God's Law (cf. Exod. 23:32). Perhaps the reason
Ahab was so eager to make this treaty was that the Assyrian Empire was expanding
toward Israel from the northeast.

What happened to the man who refused to strike the prophet (vv. 35-36) was exactly
what would happen to Ahab and for the same reason, disobedience to the word of the
Lord.220 Again a lion was God's agent of execution (cf. 13:24). The prophet's parable
recalls the one Nathan told David (2 Sam. 12:1-7). Ahab condemned himself by what he
said. God would kill Ahab for not killing Ben-Hadad (22:37). He would also cause Israel,
which Ahab headed and represented, to suffer defeat rather than the Arameans (v. 42; cf.
1 Sam. 15:22-29). Ahab foolishly chose to follow his own plan instead of obeying the
Lord. Obedience probably would have terminated the conflict with the Aramean army.

216
Wiseman, p. 178.
217
Rice, p. 172.
218
See Gray, pp. 429-30.
219
Compare Saul's refusal to execute Agag.
220
Compare Samuel's first sentence against Saul for his disobedience (1 Sam. 13).
72 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Ahab's disregard for Yahweh's authority 21:1-16

Even though Jezebel was behind the murder of Naboth, God held her husband Ahab
responsible (v. 19). Jezebel's evil influence over her husband stands out in this story.221
Ahab was willing to murder a godly Israelite to obtain a mere vegetable garden.

"A vineyard, like an olive-orchard, is not just land that may have been in
the family for a long time: it represents a high investment in many years of
unfruitful care before it reaches maturity."222

Naboth sought to live by the Mosaic Law (v. 3; cf. Lev. 25:23-28; Num. 36:7). Ahab's
"sullen and vexed" feelings (v. 4; cf. 20:43) were the result of his perception that
Naboth's position was unassailable legally.223

Jezebel believed Ahab was the supreme authority in Israel (v. 7), an opinion he shared
(cf. 20:42). This was the root of many of Ahab and Jezebel's difficulties (cf. Saul and
Michal, and Ahab and Jezebel's daughter Athaliah). They failed to acknowledge
Yahweh's sovereignty over Israel. Jezebel obviously knew the Mosaic Law (v. 10). It
required two witnesses in capital offense cases (Deut. 17:6-7). Cursing God was a capital
offense (Lev. 24:16). Jezebel elevated cursing the king to a crime on the same level with
cursing Yahweh (v. 10). This was inappropriate but consistent with her concept of Israel's
king. She formed her plot in conscious disobedience to God's revealed will.

The elders and nobles of Jezreel were under Jezebel's thumb (v. 11). They were not
faithful to Yahweh. They probably could not have been to have stayed in office under
Ahab. Jezebel also executed Naboth's sons (2 Kings 9:26). When Ahab heard what his
wife had done, he did not reprove her but took advantage of her actions and in doing so
approved them (v. 16).224

"The most heinous act of Ahab came in the matter of Naboth. A king's
primary responsibility was to render justice in the land. Ahab egregiously
violated this requirement by stealing from a man he had murdered
(through Jezebel)."225

221
Alexander Rofe, "The Vineyard of Naboth: The Origin and Message of the Story," Vetus Testamentum
38:1 (January 1988):102.
222
Auld, p. 137.
223
Francis I. Andersen, "The Socio-Juridical Background of the Naboth Incident," Journal of Biblical
Literature 85 (1966):47. Compare Saul's moodiness following his disobedience and sentence.
224
B. D. Napier, "The Omrides of Jezreel," Vetus Testamentum 9 (1959):366-78, helped us understand the
confusing references to Jezreel and Samaria in the Naboth story. Naboth's vineyard was in Jezreel, not
Samaria.
225
Heater, p. 134. Compare Saul's unjustified attempts to kill David.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 73

Ahab's judgment for his rebellion against Yahweh 21:17-29

Again God told Elijah to "go" (v. 18; cf. 17:3, 9; 18:1; 19:15). As a faithful servant, he
went to confront the king again.226 Ahab was not in Samaria then (v. 18) but in Jezreel (v.
19). The mention of Samaria was evidently an ironical reference to Ahab's capital.
Murdering someone and taking possession of his property was a capital offense under the
Law of Moses (cf. 2 Sam. 11; 12:13). It would be a great shame for Ahab to have his
blood flow in the streets of his winter capital. It would be an even greater disgrace to
have it licked up by wild scavengers as Naboth's blood had been (v. 19; cf. Gal. 6:7). God
did not punish him exactly this way because Ahab repented (vv. 27-29; cf. 2 Kings 9:25-
26).

Elijah was Ahab's enemy because the prophet was God's representative whom the king
had decided to oppose (v. 20). Ahab had sold himself (v. 20) in that he had sacrificed his
own life and future to obtain what he wanted (cf. Saul). The wages God would pay him
for this would be trouble and death (cf. Rom. 6:23). God would remove all human
support from Ahab and would sweep him away like so much filth (v. 21). He would also
cut off his dynasty for the same reasons He terminated Jeroboam and Baasha's houses (v.
22). As for Jezebel, wild dogs that normally lived off the garbage in the city would eat
her (v. 23). Furthermore all of Ahab's descendants would experience ignoble deaths (v.
24; cf. 14:11; 16:4).

The writer's assessment of Ahab was that he was the worst ruler in Israel yet (v. 25; cf.
16:30). He was as bad as the Canaanites whom God drove out because of their
wickedness (v. 26; cf. Lev. 18:25-30). Nevertheless he was a king over God's chosen
people.

Ahab's genuine repentance when he heard his fate from Israel's true King resulted in God
lightening his sentence (vv. 27-29). Not he but his son Joram (i.e., Jehoram) would bleed
on Naboth's land in Jezreel (v. 19; 2 Kings 9:25-26). There is no indication here or
elsewhere that Jezebel ever repented.

"The story of Naboth warns against the use of piety and legality to cloak
injustice. It teaches that those who support the plots of a Jezebel, whether
by silent acquiescence or overt complicity, share her crime. It is a
resounding affirmation that injustice touches God, that 'as you did it to one
of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me' (Matt. 25:40, 45), that
in the cosmic order of things there is a power at work that makes for
justice. And the story attests that there is awesome power in the
conscience and protest of the individual servant of God."227

226
Compare Samuel's second announcement of God's judgment on Saul (1 Sam. 15).
227
Rice, p. 181.
74 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Yahweh's plan to terminate Ahab 22:1-28

Another significant battle occurred between the battle of Ramoth-gilead that the writer
recorded in chapter 22 (853 B.C.) and the battles he recorded in chapter 20. Ahab and his
Aramean ally Ben-Hadad II (860-841 B.C.) defeated their mutual foe King Shalmaneser
III of Assyria at Qarqar on the Orontes River in Aram (also in 853 B.C.).228 The writers
of Scripture did not refer to this battle, but a record of it that Shalmaneser wrote has
survived and is now in the British Museum.229 Perhaps it was this victory that encouraged
Ahab to challenge his ally at Ramoth-gilead.

Jehoshaphat had come to Judah's throne in 873 B.C. and had allied himself by marriage
to Ahab (2 Chron. 18:1). He had undoubtedly come down from Jerusalem
(topographically and symbolically) to Samaria at Ahab's invitation. Verses 1 and 2 seem
to introduce the events in verses 3-40 as they read in the text. However several years
passed between Jehoshaphat's visit in verse 2 and Ahab's invitation to him in verse 4 (cf.
2 Chron. 18:1-2).230 Evidently the three years of peace mentioned in verse 1 followed the
Battle of Aphek (20:26-30; 873 B.C.). Ahab's invitation to Jehoshaphat to join him in
battle against the Arameans at Ramoth-gilead (vv. 3-4) must have taken place in 854 or
853 B.C.

Ramoth-gilead had been one of the chief cities in Gad, east of Jezreel about 33 miles, but
the Arameans had captured it. Jehoshaphat was a devotee of Yahweh. It was typical of
him to inquire concerning the Lord's will (v. 5) though Ahab could not have cared less to
do so. The 400 prophets Ahab assembled may have been apostate prophets of Yahweh
since Baal prophets would probably have been unacceptable to Jehoshaphat (v. 6; cf. vv.
11, 12, 24). We should therefore interpret Jehoshaphat's request for a prophet of Yahweh
(v. 7) as a request for a faithful prophet. Ahab hated Micaiah because he always told the
king the truth. Ahab wanted to feel good more than he wanted to know the truth. This is
another evidence of Ahab's continuing antagonism toward Yahweh and His
representatives (cf. 21:20).

Like Elijah, Micaiah was willing to stand alone for God (v. 14; cf. 18:22). Micaiah had
stood before Ahab many times before (v. 8). This time he told the king what he wanted to
hear sarcastically (v. 15). Ahab's reply was also sarcastic (v. 16). He had never had to tell
Micaiah to speak the truth in Yahweh's name. Micaiah's vision of Israel was of
defenseless sheep without a human shepherd, namely, Ahab. They would come home
after the battle peacefully (v. 17). The king responded to this prophecy of his death glibly
(v. 18). He could not have believed the Lord's word and gone into battle.231 Micaiah

228
William H. Shea, "A Note on the Date of the Battle of Qarqar," Journal of Cuneiform Studies 29
(1977):240-42. R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 733, wrote that Assyrian records set
the date for this battle making it one of the clear benchmarks in Old Testament chronology. See also the
map "The Assyrian Empire" in Merrill, Kingdom of . . ., p. 362.
229
See James Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, pp. 278-79.
230
Morgenstern, pp. 385-96.
231
Saul had done the same thing (1 Sam. 31).
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 75

proceeded to explain that Ahab was the target of God's plan. He would lure him into
battle. Still Ahab remained unbelieving. God was Ahab's real enemy, not Aram.232

"Foolishly, Ahab thought Elijah and Micaiah were his enemies when,
quite the contrary, they were his only links to a future worth living.
Today's readers of Scripture have the same option that was offered Ahab:
they may hear and repent, or they may sulk and resent the messenger."233

The identity of the spirit that stood before the Lord and offered to entice Ahab (v. 21, cf.
v. 6) is problematic. This "spirit" may be a personified spirit of prophecy, or it may have
been a demon or Satan.

". . . God Himself instigated and authorized the deception of Ahab, as

indicated by the Lord's initial question to the assembly (22:20), His
commission to the spirit (v. 22), and Micaiah's willingness to prophesy a
lie after he had vowed to speak only the word of the Lord (vv. 14-15). If
the spirit of verses 20-23 can be identified with the divine spirit that
energizes prophecy (v. 24), this thesis is further corroborated. The
introduction of the truth, rather than ameliorating the deception, shows
how effective it was. Even when faced with the truth, Ahab insisted on
charging into battle, for the lying spirit working through the prophetic
majority had convinced him he would be victorious."234

". . . God is truthful in that He keeps His unconditional promises to His

people and fulfills His sovereign decrees and oaths. God's commitment to
truthfulness, however, does not mean that He never uses deceit as a
method of judgment on sinners. But He does so without compromising His
truthful character and commitment to righteousness."235

Another view is that Satan initiated and superintended demonic activity, which God
permitted (cf. 2 Sam. 24:1; 1 Chron. 21:1; Job 1:13-22; 2:7; Zech. 3:1; Matt. 12:24; John
8:44).236

Striking on the cheek (v. 24) was a much greater insult then than it is now. Zedekiah was
bluffing to the very end. Ahab proved to be hard to the point of insensibility instead of
repenting at this prophetic word of judgment, as he had previously done (vv. 26-27; cf.
21:27). Time would tell that Micaiah's words were from the Lord (v. 28).

"The comment in verses 25-26 [about Ahab's wickedness] certainly makes

Ahab to be the worst of all twenty kings of Israel."237
232
On Micaiah's heavenly vision in verses 19-22, see Allen McNicol, "The Heavenly Sanctuary in Judaism:
A Model for Tracing the Origin of an Apocalypse," Journal of Religious Studies 13:2 (1987):69-71.
233
House, p. 249. Similarly Saul regarded David as his enemy.
234
Robert B. Chisholm Jr., "Does God Deceive?" Bibliotheca Sacra 155:617 (January-March 1998):16-17.
235
Ibid., p. 12.
236
See Richard L. Mayhue, "False Prophets and the Deceiving Spirit," Master's Seminary Journal 4:2 (Fall
1993):135-63, who evaluated six possible identifications of this spirit.
76 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Ahab's death 22:29-40

Ahab probably disguised himself (v. 30) since he was Ben-Hadad's primary target. He
had broken their treaty (v. 31). However his plan to thwart God's will failed. He could not
fool or beat Yahweh. One arrow providentially guided was all God needed (v. 34).
Wounded Ahab watched the battle from his chariot until he died that evening (v. 35).
Israel lost the battle (v. 36; cf. v. 17). Ahab became the source of much discipline rather
than a source of great blessing to Israel because he disregarded God's word and will (cf.
Saul).

The fact that the Israelites buried Ahab at all is a tribute to God's grace. Notwithstanding
he suffered the ignominy of having the dogs lick his blood and that at the pool where the
despised and unclean prostitutes bathed (v. 38). Perhaps this was fitting since he too had
sold himself.

Ahab was really a capable ruler in spite of his gross spiritual idolatry, which the writer of
Kings emphasized. He was generally successful militarily because of the native abilities
God had given him and because God showed mercy to Israel. His alliance with
Jehoshaphat began the period of peace between Israel and Judah that lasted 33 years.
Archaeologists have discovered more than 200 ivory figures, bowls, and plaques in only
one storeroom of Ahab's Samaria palace, a tribute to the wealth he enjoyed (cf. v. 39). He
also fortified several cities in Israel (v. 39). However in spite of all his positive
contributions, his setting up of Baal worship as the official religion of the nation
weakened Israel as never before. His reign took the Northern Kingdom to new depths of
depravity. Because he did not acknowledge Yahweh as Israel's King and did not submit
to Him, Ahab's personal life ended in tragedy, even a violent death (cf. Saul; 1 Sam. 31).
Furthermore the nation he represented experienced God's chastening instead of His
blessing. Agricultural infertility and military defeat marked Ahab's reign as we read of it
in 1 Kings.

2. Jehoshaphat's good reign in Judah 22:41-50

Jehoshaphat began ruling over Judah as coregent with his father Asa (873-870 B.C.).
When Asa died, he reigned alone for 17 more years (870-853 B.C.). He concluded his 25-
year reign with another period of coregency with his son Jehoram that lasted eight years
(853-848 B.C.). For all but Jehoshaphat's first year on Judah's throne, Ahab ruled over
Israel. Jehoshaphat became Judah's sole ruler in Ahab's fourth year (v. 41).

Jehoshaphat was one of the eight good kings of Judah and one of the four reforming
kings. He was better than his father Asa but not as highly acclaimed by the writers of
Scripture as Hezekiah and Josiah, the other reforming kings who followed him years
later. Especially in his earlier years Jehoshaphat walked with Yahweh. He removed
idolatry from Judah (v. 46) except for the high places (v. 43). Evidently earlier in his

237
Wiseman, p. 184.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 77

reign he removed these (2 Chron. 17:6), but when the people rebuilt them he let them
stand (2 Chron. 20:33).

The peace that existed between Israel and Judah (v. 44) gained strength through the
marriage of Jehoshaphat's son, Jehoram, and Ahab's daughter, Athaliah (2 Kings 11). A
prophet rebuked Jehoshaphat for his alliance with Israel (2 Chron. 19:2).

Edom (v. 47) had been under Judah's control but revolted during Jehoshaphat's reign. It
may well have been the Edomites who destroyed his ships at Edom's port of Ezion-geber
(v. 48).238

Jehoshaphat submitted to Yahweh's sovereignty, but he relied on human wisdom and

resources at crucial moments in his life. This resulted in mixed blessing and discipline for
both himself and Israel.

3. Ahaziah's evil reign in Israel 1 Kings 22:51—2 Kings 1:18

A short summary of Ahaziah's two-year term as king (853-852 B.C.) concludes 1 Kings.
The events of his reign follow in 2 Kings 1. Ahaziah was the elder son of Ahab and
Jezebel.

238
John Bartlett, "The Moabites and Edomites," in Peoples of Old Testament Times, p. 236. For
Jehoshaphat's other achievements, see 2 Chron. 17—20.
78 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Bibliography
Aharoni, Yohanan. "The Building Activities of David and Solomon." Israel Exploration
Journal 24:1(1974):13-16.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonahl. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed.,
New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William F. Archaeology and the Religion of Israel. 5th ed. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins Press, 1968.

_____. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949 Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series.
Harmondsworth, Middlesex, Eng.: Penguin Books, 1956.

_____. "Two Cressets From Marisa and the Pillars of Jachin and Boaz." Bulletin of the
American Schools of Oriental Research 85 (February 1942):18-27.

_____. Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1969.

Allen, Nigel. "Jeroboam and Shechem." Vetus Testamentum 24:3(July1974):353-57.

Allen, Ronald B. "Elijah the Broken Prophet." Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society 22:3(1979):193-202.

Andersen, Francis I. "The Socio-Juridical Background of the Naboth incident." Journal

of Biblical Literature 85(1966):46-57.

"Annotated Bibliography on I Kings." Biblical Viewpoint 17:1 (April 1973):57-63.

Ap-Thomas, D. R. "Elijah on Mount Carmel." Palestine Exploration Quarterly

92(1960):146-55.

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. "Old Testament History and Recent Archaeology From Solomon
to Zedekiah." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:507 (July-September 1970):195-211.

_____. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press,
1974.

Auld, A. Graeme. I & II Kings. Daily Study Bible Series. Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1986.

_____. "Prophets and Prophecy in Jeremiah and Kings." Zeitschrift für die
Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 96:1(1984):66-82.

B., J. G. Short Meditations on Elisha. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 79

Ball, E. "The Co-Regency of David and Solomon (1 Kings 1). Vetus Testamentum 27:3
(July 1977):268-79.

Bartlett, John R. "The Moabites and Edomites." In Peoples of Old Testament Times, pp.
229-258. Edited by D. J. Wiseman. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973.

Battenfield, James R. "YHWH's Refutation of the Baal Myth through the Actions of
Elijah and Elisha." In Israel's Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of
Roland K. Harrison, pp. 19-37. Edited by Avraham Gileadi. Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1988.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, n.d.;
reprint ed., 6 vols. in 1, Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1966.

Berlin, Adele. "Characterization in Biblical Narrative: David's Wives." Journal for the
Study of the Old Testament 23 (July 1982):69-85.

Berry, George Ricker. "The Glory of Yahweh and the Temple." Journal of Biblical
Literature 56(1937):115-17.

Bright, John A. A History of Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1959.

Brindle, Wayne A. "The Causes of the Division of Israel's Kingdom." Bibliotheca Sacra
141:563 (July-September 1984):223-33.

Bronner, Leah. The Stories of Elijah and Elisha. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1968.

Burney, C. F. Judges and Kings. Reprint ed. New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1970.

Bury, J. B.; S. A. Cook; and F. E. Adcock, eds. The Cambridge Ancient History. 12 vols.
2nd ed. reprinted. Cambridge, Eng.: University Press, 1928.

Carroll, R. P. "The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in

Ancient Israel." Vetus Testamentum 19:4 (October 1969):408-14.

Childs, Brevard S. Old Testament Theology in a Canonical Context. Philadelphia:

Fortress Press, 1986.

Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. "Does God Deceive?" Bibliotheca Sacra 155:617 (January-
March 1998):11-28.

_____. "The Polemic against Baalism in Israel's Early History and Literature."
Bibliotheca Sacra 151:603 (July-September 1994):267-83.

Cohen, Rudolph. "The Fortresses King Solomon Built to Protect His Southern Border."
Biblical Archaeology Review 11:3 (May-June 1985):56-70.
80 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

_____. "Solomon's Negev Defense Line Contained Three Fewer Fortresses." Biblical
Archaeology Review 12:4 (July-August 1986):40-45.

Cohen, Shaye J. D. "Solomon and the Daughter of Pharaoh: Intermarriage, Conversion,

and the Impurity of Women." Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 16-17
(1984-85):23-27.

Cohn, Robert L. "The Literary Logic of 1 Kings 17—19." Journal of Biblical Literature
101:3 (September 1982):333-50.

_____. "Literary Technique in the Jeroboam Narrative." Zeitschrift für die

Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 97 (1985):23-35.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books—Old Testament." Paper submitted for

course 685 Analysis of Bible Books—Old Testament. Dallas Theological
Seminary, January 1967.

_____. "1 Kings." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 483-536.
Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press
Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

Crenshaw, James L. Old Testament Wisdom: An Introduction. Atlanta: John Knox, 1981.

Crockett, William Day. A Harmony of the Books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles.
Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1973.

Cross, Frank M, Jr. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1973.

_____. "An Interpretation of the Nora Stone." Bulletin of the American Schools of
Oriental Research 208 (December 1972):13-19.

Danelius, Eva. "The Sins of Jeroboam Ben-Nebat." Jewish Quarterly Review 58:(1967-
68):95-114 and 204-23.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York:
Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Davis, John J., and John C Whitcomb. A History of Israel. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1980.

Day, John. "Asherah in the Hebrew Bible and Northwest Semitic Literature." Journal of
Biblical Literature 105:3 (September 1986):385-408.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 81

de Vaux, Roland. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. 2 vols. Translated by John
McHugh. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961.

DeVries, Simon. 1 Kings. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco: Word Books, 1985.

Dumbrell, William J. "What Are You Doing Here? Elijah at Horeb." Crux 22:1 (March
1986):12-19.

Edwards, I. E. S. "Egypt: From the Twenty-second to the Twenty-fourth Dynasty." In

Cambridge Ancient History. 3rd ed. Edited by John Boardman, et al. Cambridge,
Eng.: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Farrar, F. W. The First Book of Kings. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Klock and Klock, 1981.

Fensham, F. C. "A Few Observations on the Polarisation between Yahweh and Baal in I
Kings 17—19." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 92:2
(1980):227-36.

Fritz, Volkmar. "Temple Architecture." Biblical Archaeology Review 13:4 (July-August

1987):38-49.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and
New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Galil, Gershon. "The Message of the Book of Kings in Relation to Deuteronomy and
Jeremiah." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:632 (October-December 2001):406-14.

Gates, John T., and Harold Stigers. "First and Second Kings." In The Wycliffe Bible
Commentary, pp. 307-66. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison.
Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Gray, John. I & II Kings. Old Testament Library series. London: SCM Press, 1964;
revised ed., Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970.

Green, Alberto R. "Israelite Influence at Shishak's Court." Bulletin of the American

Schools of Oriental Research 233 (1979):59-62.

Gross, Walter. "Lying Prophet and Disobedient Man of God in 1 Kings 13: Role Analysis
as an Instrument of Theological Interpretation of an OT Narrative Text." Semeia
15 (1979):97-135.

Gunn, David M. "David and the Gift of the Kingdom (2 Samuel 2-4, 9-20, 1 Kings 1-2)."
Semeia 3 (1975):14-45.

Halpern, Baruch. The Constitution of the Monarchy in Israel. Harvard Semitic

Monograph 25. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1981.
82 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

_____. "Levitic Participation in the Reform Cult of Jeroboam I." Journal of Biblical
Literature 95:1 (1976):31-42.

Harrison, Roland K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1969.

Harton, George M. "Fulfillment of Deuteronomy 28—30 in History and in Eschatology."

Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981.

Hayman, Leo. "A Note on I Kings 18:27." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 10(1951):57-
58.

Heater, Homer, Jr. "A Theology of Samuel and Kings." In A Biblical Theology of the Old
Testament, pp. 115-55. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Hendricks, Howard G. Taking A Stand. Portland: Multnomah Press, 1983.

Herrmann, Siegfried. A History of Israel in Old Testament Times. Philadelphia: Fortress

Press, 1975.

Hickman, D. "The Chronology of Israel and Judah." Catastrophism and Ancient History
7:2 (July 1985):57-70; 8:1 (January 1986):5-23.

Hoffmeier, James K. "Egypt As an Arm of Flesh: A Prophetic Response." In Israel's

Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, pp. 79-97.
Edited by Avraham Gileadi. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.

House, Paul R. 1, 2 Kings. New American Commentary series. N.c.: Broadman &
Holman Publishers, 1995.

Hurowitz, V. I Have Built You an Exalted House: Temple Building in the Bible in Light
of Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic Writing. Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament Supplement 115. Sheffield, Eng.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity."
Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Jones, Gwilym H. 1 and 2 Kings. 2 vols. New Century Bible Commentary series. Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan, and
Scott, 1984.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston.

Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 83

Kaufman, Asher S. "Where the Ancient Temple of Jerusalem Stood." Biblical

Archaeology Review 9:2 (March-April 1983):40-59.

Keil, C. F. The Books of the Kings. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on
the Old Testament. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
n.d.

Kitchen, K. A. The Bible In the World. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 4 The Twin Kingdom, Judah and Assyria (c.
930-640 BC)." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 62 (1972):2-10.

Klein, Ralph W. "Jeroboam's Rise to Power." Journal of Biblical Literature 89:2 (June
1970):217-18.

_____. "Once More: 'Jeroboam's Rise to Power.'" Journal of Biblical Literature

92:4(December 1973):582-84.

Krummacher, F. W. Elijah the Tishbite. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, n.d.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand
Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 3: Samuel-Kings, by Chr. Fr.
David Erdmann and Karl Chr. W. T. Bahr. Translated, enlarged, and edited by C.
H. Toy, John A. Broadus, Edwin Harwood, and W. G. Sumner.

Liver, J. "The Books of the Acts of Solomon." Biblica 48:1(1967):75-101.

Long, Burke O. "A Darkness Between Brothers: Solomon and Adonijah." Journal for the
Study of the Old Testament 19 (February 1981):79-94.

Luckenbill, D. D. "Benhadad and Hadadezer." American Journal of Semitic Languages

27(1911):267-84.

Lundquist, John M. "Temple, Covenant, and Law in the Ancient Near East and in the Old
Testament." In Israel's Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K.
Harrison, pp. 293-305. Edited by Avraham Gileadi. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1988.

Lust, J. "A Gentle Breeze or a Roaring Thunderous Sound?" Vetus Testamentum

25:1(January 1975):110-15.

Maller, Allen S. "Hiram from Tyre." Journal or Reform Judaism 29:2(Spring 1982):41-
42.
84 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Mayhue, Richard L. "False Prophets and the Deceiving Spirit." Master's Seminary
Journal 4:2 (Fall 1993):135-63.

Mazar, Benjamin. "The Campaign of Pharaoh Shishak to Palestine." Vetus Testamentum

Supplements 4 (1957):57-66.

McFall, Leslie. "A Translation Guide to the Chronological Data in Kings and
Chronicles." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:589 (January-March 1991):3-45.

McNeely, Richard I. First and Second Kings. Everyman's Bible Commentary series.
Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

McNicol, Allan J. "The Heavenly Sanctuary in Judaism: A Model for Tracing the Origin
of an Apocalypse." Journal of Religious Studies 13:2 (1987):66-94.

Meyer, F. B. Elijah and the Secret of His Power. Chicago: Fleming H. Revell, n.d.

Mitchell, T. C. "Israel and Judah Until the Revolt of Jehn (931-841 B.C.)." In Cambridge
Ancient History. 3rd ed. Edited by John Boardman, et al. Cambridge, Eng.:
Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Miller, J. Max. "So Tibni Died." Vetus Testamentum 18(1968):392-94.

Monson, James M. The Land Between. Jerusalem: By the author, P.O. Box 1276, 1983.

Montgomery, James A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings.

International Critical Commentary series. Edited by Henry Snyder Gehman.
Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1967.

_____. "Archival Data in the Books of Kings." Journal of Biblical Literature

53(1934):46-52.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York:
Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morgenstern, Julian. "Chronological Data of the Dynasty of Omri." Journal of Biblical

Literature 59(1940):385-96.

Myers, Jacob. II Chronicles. Anchor Bible series. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965.

Napier, B. D. "The Omrides of Jezreel." Vetus Testamentum 9 (1959):366-78.

Nelson, R. D. First and Second Kings. Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for

Preaching and Teaching series. Louisville: John Knox, 1987.
2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 85

Newsome, James D., Jr. ed. A Synoptic Harmony of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles.
Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1986.

Noth, Martin. The Deuteronomistic History. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
Supplement Series, 15. Sheffield, Eng.: JSOT Press, 1981.

Oppenheim, A. Leo. Ancient Mesopotamia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.

Oswalt, John N. "The Golden Calves and the Egyptian Concept of Deity." Evangelical
Quarterly 45 (1973):13-20.

Ovellette, Jean. "The Solomonic Debir according to the Hebrew Text of I Kings 6."
Journal of Biblical Literature 89:3 (September 1970):338-43.

Parker, Kim Ian. "Repetition as a Structuring Device in 1 Kings 1—11." Journal for the
Study of the Old Testament 42 (October 1988):19-27.

Patterson, Richard D. "The Widow, the Orphan, and the Poor in the Old Testament and
the Extra-Biblical Literature." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:519 (July-September
1973):223-34.

Patterson, Richard D., and Hermann J Austel. "1, 2 Kings." In 1 Kings—Job. Vol. 4 of
The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and
Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988.

Payne, J. Barton. The Theology of the Older Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1962.

Pfeiffer, Charles F., and Howard F. Vos. The Wycliffe Historical Geography of Bible
Lands. Chicago: Moody Press, 1967.

Porten, Bezalel. "The Structure and Theme of the Solomon Narrative (1 Kings 3-11)."
Hebrew Union College Annual 38 (1967):93-128.

Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 2nd
ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955.

Rasmussen, Carl G. "The Economic Importance of Caravan Trade for the Solomonic
Empire." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer, pp. 153-66. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser
Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Rendsburg, Gary A. "The Mock of Baal in 1 Kings 18:27." Catholic Biblical Quarterly
50:3 (July 1988):414-17.
86 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Rice, Gene. Nations under God. International Theological Commentary series. Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Edinburgh: The Handsel Press
Ltd., 1990.

Ringgren, Helmer. Religions of the Ancient Near East. Philadelphia: Westminster Press,
1973.

Rofe, Alexander. "The Vineyard of Naboth: The Origin and Message of the Story." Vetus
Testamentum 38:1 (1988):89-104.

Rogers, Jeffrey S. "Narrative Stock and Deuteronomistic Elaboration in 1 Kings 2."

Catholic Biblical Quarterly 50:3 (July 1988):398-413.

Rowley, H. H. "Elijah on Mount Carmel." Bulletin of the Johns Rylands Library 43:1
(September 1960):190-219.

Ruth, Richard L. "The Doctrine of Dreams." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:500 (October-

December 1968):360-64.

Ruthven, Jon. "A Note on Elijah's 'Fire from Yahweh.'" Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 12:2 (1969):111-15.

Saint-Laurent, George. "Light from Ras Shamra on Elijah's Ordeal upon Mount Carmel."
In Scripture in Context, pp. 123-39. Edited by Carl D. Evans, et al. Pittsburgh:
Pickwick, 1980.

Savran, George. "1 and 2 Kings." In The Literary Guide to the Bible, pp. 146-64. Edited
by Robert Alter and Frank Kermode. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987.

Schulman, Alan R. "Diplomatic Marriage in the Egyptian New Kingdom." Journal of

Near Eastern Studies 38 (1979):177-193.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1965.

Selms, A. Van. "The Origin of the Title 'The King's Friend.'" Journal of Near Eastern
Studies 16 (1957):118-23.

Shea, William H. "A Note on the Date of the Battle of Qarqar." Journal of Cuneiform
Studies 29 (1977):240-42.

Simon, Uriel. "I Kings 13: A Prophetic Sign—Denial and Persistence." Hebrew Union
College Annual 47 (1976):81-117.

Slotki, I. W. Kings. London: Soncino Press, 1950.

2002 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 87

Smith, James E. "Prolegomena to the Study of Kings." Seminary Review 21:3 (September
1975):77-115.

Soards, Marion L., Jr. "Elijah and the Lord's Word: A Study of I Kings 17:17-24." Studia
Biblica et Theologica 13:1 (April 1983):39-50.

Soggin, J. Alberto. "Compulsory Labor Under David and Solomon." In Studies in the
Period of David and Solomon and Other Essays, pp. 259-67. Edited by Tomoo
Ishida. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1983.

Smith, Morton. "The So-Called 'Biography of David' in the Books of Samuel and Kings."
Harvard Theological Review 44 (1951):167-69.

Smith, J. M. P. "The Character of King David." Journal of Biblical Literature 52

(1933):1-11.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive (Near Eastern History) Est., 1979.

Thiele, Edwin R. A Chronology of the Hebrew Kings. Contemporary Evangelical

Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

_____. "Coregencies and Overlapping Reigns Among the Hebrew Kings." Journal of
Biblical Literature 93 (1974):174-200.

_____. The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1965.

Thomsom, H. C. "A Row of Cedar Beams." Palestinian Exploration Quarterly 92

(1960):57-63.

"Tirzah: An Early Capital of Israel." Buried History 22:1 (March 1986):14-24.

Torcszyner, Harry. "The Riddle in the Bible." Hebrew Union College Annual 1
(1924):125-49.

Tromp, Nicholas J. "Water and Fire on Mount Carmel." Biblica 56:4 (1975):480-502.

Ullendorff, Edward. "The Queen of Sheba." Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 45:2
(1963):486-504.

Unger, Merrill F. Israel and the Aramaeans of Damascus. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1980.

Ussishkin, David. "King Solomon's Palaces." Biblical Archaeologist 36 (1973):78-105.

88 Dr. Constable's Notes on 1 Kings 2002 Edition

Van Beek, Gus W. "Frankincense and Myrrh." Biblical Archaeologist 23:3 (September
1960):70-95.

Von Wyrick, Stephen. "Israel's Golden Calves." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):3, 9-
12.

Wallace, N. H. "The Oracles Against the Israelite Dynasties in 1 and 2 Kings." Biblica
67:1 (1986):21-40.

Weinfeld, Moshe. "The Counsel of the 'Elders' to Rehoboam and Its Implications."
MAARAV 3:1 (January 1982):27-53.

Whitelam, Keith W. "The Defence of David." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
29 (June 1984):61-87.

_____. "The Symbols of Power." Biblical Archaeologist 49:3 (September 1986):166-73.

Williamson, H. G. M. 1 and 2 Chronicles. New Century Bible Commentary series. Grand

Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1982.

Wiseman, Donald John. 1 & 2 Kings: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old
Testament Commentaries series. Downers Grove, Ill.. and Leicester, Eng.: Inter-
Varsity Press, 1993.

Wood, Leon. Elijah, Prophet of God. Des Plaines, Ill.: Regular Baptist Press, 1968.

_____. Israel's United Monarchy. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979.

_____. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Zevit, Ziony. "Deuteronomistic Historiography in 1 Kings 12—2 Kings 17 and the

Reinvestiture of the Israelian Cult." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 32
(1985):57-73.

Zuidhof, Albert. "King Solomon's Molten Sea and (pi)." Biblical Archaeologist 45:3
(Summer 1982):179-84.