The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 276

we shall infallibly forfeit the kingdom of heaven. 2. But he was moved by am- bition ,·a.ther than piety. (1) Had he complied with the holy conditions, instead of apprehending mischief to his throne from the visits of his subjects to Jerusalem, it would be the other way. For the more they learnt to love and serve God, the more loyal must they be to a godly king. (2) But he felt in his soul that he had not so complied : nor had he any disposition to repent ; therefore, instead of seeking help in God, ns he should have done, he trusted to his own wicked policy. There is no real happiness without God. The very pinnacle of human ambition is o. throne : yet without God is there no happiness here. "Who.t sheJl it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul? "-M. Ver. 28.-Jeroboam'a Calves. Unbelief is the root of o.ll mischief. Had the king of Israel believed God, he would have obeyed Him ; then he would have been under no temptation to set up a spurious religion to the confusion of his family and people. But what did he mean by these calves? I. THEY WERE INTENDED TO BE IMAGES OF THE Goo OF ISRAEL. 1. So he describes tkem in the tezt. (1) "These are thy Elobim, 0 Israel." Our English Bibles give the word" God" without the capital G, as though the purpose of Jeroboam wer1:1 to lead the people away from the true God. This, indeed, was the effect, but tho.t it was the design may well be doubted. (2) He further identifies the Elobim repre- sented in them as having brought them up out of the land of Egypt. This expres- sion is equivalent to saying that the Elohim he would remind them of in these figures was the same who wrought all the miracles of the Exodus. (3) We must not be misled by the words, "Behold thy Elohim," or" These are thy Elohim," as though he wished to impose these calves upon them as the very Elohim who wrought o.ll the wonders of their miraculous history. For this is a Hebraism for similitud,ea (see Gen. xli. 27; Dan. ii. 38; 1 Cor. x. 4). Note: Romanists impose their monstrous transubstantiation upon those who have not discerned this. 2. His error was a reproduction of .Aaron's. (1) This will be clear from a comparison of the text with Exod. xxxii. 4. (2) Aaron could not, under the very shadow of the Shekinah, and within hearing of the voice of thunder from Sinai, have intended to substitute his calf for the very Elobim. (3) But that he only intended it as an emblem of the true God is placed very clearly before us in the words following (Exod. xx.xii. 5, 6), in which the feast celebrated before bis calf is called a "feast of Jehovah." 3. Yet this was idolatry. (1) Idolatry may consist of worshipping the creature instead of the Creator. 'l'his the Romanist does when he worships the wafer. (2) Or it may be S11bstitnting some imagination of his heart for the God who has mira.culo11Sly revealed Himself, and whose revelations concerning Himself are written in Holy Scripture. Such were the idealizations of the ancient (and also modern) bee.then. (3) Or it may consist in attempting to worship the true God through una.uthorised images (see Exod. xx. 4). This was the case with Aaron, also with Jeroboam. It is likewise the case with the Romanist, who uses crucifix.ea, and images and pictures of the Persona of the Trinity. II. BuT WHY nm HE MAKE CALVES? 1. He had the cherubim in his mind. (1) These had the visage of a calf. They had, indeed, also the visages of a lion, of a man, and of an eagle. But the whole figure terminated in the foot of o. calf (Ezek. i. 7). (2) Jeroboam's calf probably had also associated with it the other visages of the cherubim; so probably had Aaron's, for they respectively call their image by the plural name Elohim (C 1n,t-e). The single image at Bethel is also called calves (C 1J,v) in the plural, which suggests a plurality of visages, though not necessarily visages of calves, for the whole emblem appears to have been designated by this name. 2 But the cherubim were emblems of the Holy Trinity, (1) 'l'he calf or young bull, v.hich by the ancients was taken for an emblem of fire, stood here for the first Person of the Godhead. (See Bate's "Critic:i. Hebrrea,n under ?W and ~,,::i ; also hie learned "Inquiry into the Occasional and Standing Siw.ilitudes of the Lord God in the Old and New Testaments.'') (2) The lion was lh.e symbol of light, and stood for the second Person. With the face of the lion the.ta  CH. XlL 26-88,l TlIE FIRf,T BOOK OF KINGS. 279