The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 273

or "horrors," or "statues." We entirely misconceive Jeroboam's purpose, and discredit his sago.city, if we think that he had the worship of Apia or Mne,is or a.ny similo.r idol in bis mind. The last thing that would occur to him would be to set up a purely pagan system amongst sucJ:i a people as the Jews. His was not the sin of idol worship. What, then, was it ? I. IT WAS THE sm OF HERESY. For " heresy" in the origi.nl\l meaning of the word simply implied an arbitrary selection of doctrines or practices-a,pe11,~ = a choosing-instead of dutifully accepting those which God has enjoined. This is precisely what Jeroboam did. Instead of taking and handing down to his suc- cessors, whole and undefiled, the" faith once delivered," he presumed to modify it; to adapt it, as he thought, to the new order of things, &c. His heresy was threefold. 1. He chose hi8 own pla,ces of worahip. God had ordained that there should be one sanctuary for the whole nation. Both the law of Moses and the history of Israel alike taught that the religious centre of the nation should be one. From a.n early age it was predioted that God would choose Himself a place to put His name there (Deut. xii. 13, 14; xiv. 23). And this Divine choice had been recently and unmistakably made. He "chose not the tribe of Ephraim, but chose the tribe o1 Judah, the Mount Zion which He loved." And He built His" sanctuary," &c. (Psa. lxxviii. 67-69; cf. Pea. c:n:rii. 13, 14). At the dedication of this sanctuary this choice had been publicly proclaimed (eh. viii. 10, 11 ; 2 Chron. vii. 2, 12, 16). The whole nation then understood that God had " chosen J eruse.lem to put His no.me there." And Jeroboam was aware of this, and was also a.ware that the division of the kingdom wa.e to make no difference as to the oneness or the position of the so.nctua.ry. To prevent misconception he was twice reminded in the message of Ahijah, his charter to the crown, that Jerusalem was" the city which God had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel" (eh. xi. 32, 36). It was to be in the future, as it had been in the past, the one place of incense and sacrifice. And that J ero- boam knew it, his own thoughts (eh. xii. 26, 27) reveal to us. "If this people go up to do sacrifice in the house of the Lord at Jerusalem." He is quite clea.r, then -indeed, he could not be otherwise-as to the place of God's choice. But that place, he argues, will not do for him. Political considere.tions deme.nd that he shall find a religious centre elsewhere. So he '' takes counsel," and decrees ez 11U1ro arbitrio that Israel shall have three holy places instead of one, and that Bethel and Dan shall henceforward divide the hono1u·s hitherto enjoyed by Jerusalem. 2. He chose hi8 own modes of worship. Though the way in whioh God should be approached had been prescribed, though every detail of the Divine ser- vice had been ordered beforehand, and though he had been warned against adding aught to it or diminishing aught from it (Deut. iv. 2; xii. 32), yet he decided other- wise. Perhaps he persuaded himself that he had good reasons for it ; but all the so.me he chose otherwise than God had chosen. Though Exod. xx. 4, &c., forbade the making o.f graven images, yet he "made molten images" (ch.xiv.9). Though the law decreed th11t the sons of Aaron alone should offer sacrifice 11.ncl burn in- sense, yet he determined to play the priest himself, and also " made him priests of the lowest of the people." Sic volo, sic jubeo, &c. 3. He chose his own times of worship. Nothing could have been more positively fixed than the date of the Feast of the Tabernacles. It was to be " the fifteenth day of the seventh month ·• (Levit. xxiii. 84, 39). But this was not the day of Jeroboam's "choice.'' He "devised" a month "of his own heart; "ha cons~ted, perhaps he thought, his people's convenience ; but was there ever heretic yet that was not full of arguments, when all God asks is obedienoe? " In religion Wbo.t dangerous error, but some sober brow Will bless it o.nd approve it with n text, Hiiling the grossness with fair ornament." II. IT WAS THE SIN OF SCHISM. It is not without reason that in the Lit::i.ny 11 here1:1y and schism '' are coupled together, for the latter springs out of tho forn1er (Justin Martyr quotes as one of the sayings of our Lord iaoVTa, axial'a"a ical 276 THE FlHST BOOK OF KINGS, [oe. XIL 211-88.