The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 269

exact meaning of the original is doubtfnl " ages, or, we might add, even at the present (Ro.wlinson), for n study of the po.ssagee day. He can hardly have cle.imetl, that is to so.y, to be reintroducing the calf-worship, where this phro.se, 0 1~-:iJ occurs (see, e.g., which God had so emphatically reprobated, Deut. i. 6; ii. 3 ; iii. 26 ; e.nd cf. Gen. xlv. unless he designed an open defiance of the 28 ; Exod. ix. 28; 2 Sam. xxiv. 16; Most High, and wished to shock all the reli- 1 Kings xix. 4) will convince the reader gious instincts and convictions of hie people. that it must be rendered here, "It is It is much more natural, consequently, to enough "-i.e., " you have gone long enough suppose, considering the very frequent recur- to a city which only owes its present posi- rence, though sometimes in slightly different tion to the e.mbition of the tribe of J uda.h, shapes, of the formula " the Lord thy God, and which is a ste.nding testimony to your which brought thee out of the land of own inferiority; henceforth, desist." We Egypt" (Exod. xx. 2; nix. 45, 46 ; Levit. have an eimct pare.llel in Ezek. xliv. 6 ; xix. 36; xxiii. 43; xxv. 38; xxvi. 13, 45; where the Authorized Version renders, "Let Nu.m. xv. 41; xvi. 13; xx. 16; Deut. v. it suffice you." The LXX. supports this 6, 15; vi. 12; viii. 14; ix. 26; Josh. xxiv. view by rendering i,cavovo-0w vµiv through- 6, 17; Judg. vi. 8; 1 Sam. viii. 8; x. 18; out. Vulgate, rwlite ultra ascendere, &c.] to 1 Kings viii. 21, &c.) that the correspon- go up to Jerusalem: behold thy gods dence is accidental, the more so as J ero- _[rather "god," for Jeroboam had no idea boam does not quote the exact words, and of introducing polytheism. It is true he that he has used a phrase which was con- me.de two calves because of his two sanctu- stantly in their ears, insisting thereby that aries, but each was designed to represent his co.Ives were emblems of the God of their the same object-the one God of Israel. re.ce, the God whose great g1ory it was that The word is translated "gods " in Exod. He had taken their nation out of the midst xxxii. 1, 4, 8, 23, 31 ; but as tbe reference of another nation, &c. (Deut. iv. 3-1), and is in every case to the one calf, it should be delivered them from a thraldom with which, translated" god" there also. In Nehemiah's perhaps, the tyranny of Rehoboam is in- citation of the words (eh. ix. 18), the word directly compared. Or if there was any is unmistakably singular. " This is thy reference to the golden calf, it must have god," &o. The words are not" exactly the been deprecie.tory, as if to say," That was same as the people used when setting up rank idolatry, and e.s such it we.s punished. the golden calf" (Bahr). _Jeroboam says, That calf was an image of Apis. My calves "Behold," &c.], 0 Israel, which brought a.re cherubic s:;mbols, symbols such as Ha thee up out of the land of Egypt. [It is at ho.a Himself appointed, of the Great De- first sight somewhat difficult to resist the liverer of our race. Behold thy God, which view, whioh is generally entertained, that reo.lly bronght thee up," &o.J Jeroboam, of set purpose, cited the ipsissima Ver. 29.-Andhe settheoneinBethel, and verba of the Israelites in the desert (Exod. the other put he in Dan. [Two considera- xxxii. 4). But a little reflection will show tions seem to he.ve influenced Jeroboam in that it is much more difficult to believe that his choice of these sites. First, both these a mone.rch, circumst:i.nced e.s Jeroboam ple.ces were in some sort sBDctuo.ries al.ready. was, could at the very outset of his career Bethel was al.ready a makom, or holy plo.ce, have acted in the teeth of history, and have in the days of Abraham; was consecrated co=itted the gross blunder, not to say by the visions and alto.r of Jacob (Gen. w_anton outre.g1:, of deliberately oonnecting xxviii. 11-19 ; xxxi. 13; n.xv. 1, 7, 15), his new cult with the calf-worship of the and by the ark ho.ving been there (Judg. desert. He can hardly have dared, that is, xx. 26-28, Heb.; cf. Jos., Ant., v. 2. 10). to say," This is no new religion, for this And though Dan (Josh. ili. 47; Juclg. very form of worship our fathers used xviii. 29; xx. 1) can hardly have had as formerly in the desert, under the guidance sacred a charaoter as the " house of God of Aa~on himself" (Seb. Soh.midt, followed and the gate of heaven" (Gen. xxviii. 17) b)'. Keil, a!.) U?le~s both he and his people had, still it had its shrine and its schis- a.like-which 1s mconceivo.ble-were igno- matio priesthood. A grandson of Moses re.nt of their nation's history recorded in (Judg. xviii. 13, true reading) had minis- Exod. xxxii. 19----35. It has been argued tered there, and his sons were the priests by some that this action of Jeroboam BDd of Dan still. Secondly, these localities the ready complie.noe of the ten tribes, would suit the convenience of his subjeots, prove that the Pentateuch oannot then have being respectively at the southern and been written. But, as Hengstenberg (cited northern extremities of the kingdom. And by Wordsworth) rejoins, the same argument this, no doubt, was one reason why Dan would lead to the conclusion that the Bible was chosen in preference to other places. oould not ho.ve been written in the dark such o.s Shiloh, which, though more nored  27la THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. [ea. xu. 26--83,