The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 259

Ver. 6-ll.-Is1·ael's Mag71,11, Ckarta. The question submitted to Rehoboam at Shecbem concerned the constitution of the monarchy. Hitherto there had been no constitution defining the rights of the people and limiting the power of the crown. Reboboe.m t-0ok three de.ye to deliberate upon the people's Bill of Rights, and in tha.t interval took counsel. The old men who stood before Solomon advised concession, while the young ones, who had grown up with him, recommeuded resistance. Wisdom was with the ancients. I. LIMITED MONARCHY IS BEST FOR THE PEOPLE. 1. Because it recognises tkevr r-ights. (l) The people do pot exist for the king. They may be governed as a repnblic without a kin!l'. (2) But the k~g exists for the people. Where no -people a.re there can be no king. (3) For a kwg, therefore, to use the people simply for his own aggrandisement and ignore their rights is preposterons (Jer. ii 14). 2. It respects their happiness. (1) Since the people collectively are of more importance than an indindua.l monarch, the haughty bearing of a monarch is out of place. So the sages counselled Rehoboam to "serve" the people and "speak good words to them." (2) The interests of a good king will be bound up with the happiness of his subjects, and he cannot reason.ably object to a constitution that will recognise this community of interests. II. IT rs BEST ALSO FOR THE PRINCE. 1. It encowr-ages his virflues. (1) It does this by limiting his extravagance. Solomon would have been far happier bad his people been saved the charge of building pa.laces for, and snstaining in state, seven hundred princesses and three hundred concubines. (2) For what would be neces- sa.ry to sustain his rank a constitutional king might trust the good sense of hie people. At Sbechem they did not seek exemption from taxation, bnt relief from its excesses. They knew that it .would not be to the credit of a great people to pauperise their prince. 2. It gives stability to kia throne. (1) "They will be thy servants for ever." Such was the manner in which this was expressed by the sages. It will be their interest to be so. GTatiflude also will bind them. The loyalty of love is stronger and more endnring than that of fear. This is the loyalty which the gospel claims, and the constancy of the subjects of the kingdom of Christ is witnessed in 11, million martyrdoms. (2) Who rules over a loving people may be tranquil. He need not fear the poniard of the assassin. (Thie is the paradise of tyrants I) He will have the joy of ruling over 11, happy nation. The typical con- stitntiona.l monarch is the father of his people. IIL ADVOCATES OF TYRANNY SCORN TO REASON. 1. Tke yown,g cownsellors give no reasons. (1) This method they leave to the ancients. For reasons they substitute smart speech. " Thus shalt thou say unto them, My little finger shall be thicker than my father's loins." Pertness too often has displaced reason. (2) Why should reasons be given by one who claims a Divine right to act a.a he pleases? 2. But may there not be a benevolent Q//J,tocracy J (1) Certainly. And if this can be guaranteed, together with competent wisdom, then there is no better government. For is not this the very idea of the government of God? (2) But who can guarantee this in human kingdoms? The people certainly are as likely to know what is for their welfare as the majority of their kings. (3) What if the autocrat should prove a fool? What if he should prove a devil 'I Would not a kingdom in this case be a hell upon earth? (4) Rehoboam seems to have combined the satanic and the foolish. Lost the greater part of hie kingdom; reigned over the remnant wickedly. Christians should pray for their rulers. They should bless God fur their liberties.-M. Vers. 12-15.-Infatuatwn. "Whom the gods mean to destroy they firs1 infatuate." Such was the observation of a heathen philosopher ; and it is true, ouly that the infatuators are devils, and God permits. The text furnishes a case in point. What but infatuation could have prompted Behoboam to have acted so 111Sanely 'I It is seen- I. 1H ms REFUSAL TO HEARXBN TO TBB PEOPLE. 1. They aa,emble<l to honowr him. (1) He was invited to Shechem to meet them that they m.ighi crown him. (l) They promised to serve him as they had served his father. They had a, reserv• 08, :lII, 1-24.) THE FIRST BOOK OF KINOH. ---------------------------- ---- tion, but-2. Their re,ervation wa, mt wnrel1,3onable. (1) They had suffered what they ca,lled a '' grievous yoke" of taxation and servitude, of which they desired e. relaxa.tion. Had they not a right to demand this? Did the people exist to be the slaves of their kings 'l (2) They did not ask to be released from all taxation and service. They acknowled~ed the duty of sustaining the legitimate bmdene of the state. Why, then, did he not hearken ? II. IN TlIE ANSWER lIE GAVE THEM. 1. Respecting his father's administration. (1) He owned that hie father had ruled with rigour ; that be had made their yoke heavy. He put it even stronger than the complainants; that he bad "chastised them with whips." (2) Might be not rather have softened it to them 'l He could have reminded them that Solomon bad created their commerce; that their commerce had so enriched them that they might bear the taxes; that bis wisdom had made the nation great and respected; that he bad built their temple; that they bad something for their taxes in great public works. (3) But he lacked, not only the wisdom of his father, but also the feelings of a good son. 2. Respecting his own. (1) He declares that be will rule them more oppressively than his father did; that he will increase their burdens and sting them with "scorpions "-knotted whips armed with iron points. (2) Theae rough and hard words were paraded and ren- dered more offensive by the rough and bard manner (ver. 13). (3) How gratnitons was this insolence I What but infatuation could have prompted it? It is eeen- III. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES ATTENDING THE ANSWER. 1. It was deliberately given. (1) It could not claim the excuse of being uttered thoughtlessly in baste, for he bad taken three days to consider it. (2) In taking these three days the tyrant betrayed the fool. It gave the people time to confer and agree upon a policy. 2. It was advisedly given. (1) Be did not speak without counsel. He had taken the advice of the wits with whom be had been brought up. (2) He had also consulted the sages who bad been schooled in the wisdom of Solomon, and he might have acted upon it but did not. (3) He left God out of bis counsels, though bis Shecbinab was still in the temple. 3. He trusted in hia fortune. (1) He was the son of Solomon. Probably the only son. We read of no other; had there been one he would probably have been mentioned as a rival who would keep the nation united. (Note: population is not increased by polygamy. Hosea iv. 10.) Rehoboa.m, therefore, presumed upon the strength of bis claim to the throne. (2) Even the presence of Jeroboam at the head of the remonstrants did not shake bis confidence in his fortune. He could scarcely ha.ve been ignorant of the message of God to his father, and the corresponding prophecy of Abijah. But what are the words of Jebove.b to this son of Ne.a.mah the Am.monitess, whose national god was Molech 'l (3) But the Providence be ignored is seen in the infatuation that ignored it. The cause, the (i1::lC) revolution, was from the Lord (ver. 15.) "They that lose the kingdom of bee.van throw it away as Reboboam did his, by their own wil- fulness and folly " (Matthew Henry). Miserable is the infatu11,tion that imperils the salvation of the eonl-M. Vers. 15-20.-The Revolution. The unaonciliatory, insulting, insane conduct of Rel·oboam in rejecting the Bill of Rights of the people of Israel provoked a revolution in the state. This is recorded in the text, in which we learn that- I. IT COMMENCED WITH THE REJECTION Oli' THE KING. 1. Thia act was done in h(l,IJte. (1) By his hesitation at such a time, under such circumstances, to listen to their grievances, the people saw that Rehoboam was a tyrant. They accordingly availed themselves of the three days be took to consiuer his reply, to concert their measures, and were therefore ready for action. (2) They soon "sa.w thnt the king hearkened not." He lefl them in no doubt, for he took high ground nt once. And they were as prompt in their resolution. 2. It was do-ne in (]111,ger. (1) This is seen in the manner in which the leaders of the people mingle thei:r advice to their constituents with their answer to the king (ver. 16). (2) Also in the promptness with which the people acted upon the advice. " So Israel departed unto their tents." 8. But their anger carried them too far. (1) Why include David in their resentment ? Had tMJJ no inheritance in the son of Jesse 'l Would  262 THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. [ea. xu. 1-24,