2 CHRO�ICLES 10 COMME�TARYEDITED BY GLE�� PEASE

Israel Rebels Against Rehoboam

1 Rehoboam went to Shechem, for all Israel had gone there to make him king.

CLARKE, "Rehoboamwent to Shechem - This chapter is almost word for word the same as 1 Kings 12:1-19, to the notes on which the reader is referred.

HE�RY 1-11, "We may observe here, 1. The wisest and best cannot give every body content. Solomon enriched and advanced his kingdom, did all (one would think) that could be done to make then happy and easy; and yet either he was indiscreet in burdening them with the imposition of taxes and services, or at least there was some colour of reason to think him so. No man is perfectly wise. It is probable that it was when Solomon had declined from God and his duty that his wisdom failed him, and God left him to himself to act in this impolitic manner. Even Solomon's treasures were exhausted by his love of women; and probably it was to maintain them, and their pride, luxury, and idolatry, that he burdened his subjects. 2. Turbulent and ungrateful spirits will find fault with the government, and complain of grievances, when they have very little reason to do so. Had they not peace in Solomon's time? They were never plundered by invaders, as formerly, never put in fear by the alarms of war, nor obliged to hazard their lives in the high places of the field. Had they not plenty - meat enough, and money enough? What would they more? O fortunatos nimium, sua si bona norint! - O happy, if they knew their happy state! And yet they complain that Solomon made their yoke grievous. If any complain thus of the yoke of Christ, that they might have a pretence to break his bands in sunder and cast away his cords from them, we are sure that he never gave them any cause at all for the complaint, whatever Solomon did. His yoke is easy, and his burden is light. He never made us serve with an offering, nor wearied us with incense. 3. Many ruin themselves and their interests by trampling upon and provoking their inferiors. Rehoboam thought that because he was king he might assume as much authority as his father had done, might have what he would, and do what he would, and carry all before him. But, though he wore his father's crown, he wanted his father's brains, and ought to have considered that, being quite a different man from what his father was, he ought to take other measures. Such a wise man as Solomon may do as we will, but such a fool as Rehoboam must do as he can. The high-mettled horse may be

kicked and spurred by him that has the art of managing him; but, if an unskilful horseman do it, it is at his peril. Rehoboam paid dearly for threatening, and talking big, and thinking to carry matters with a high hand. It was Job's wisdom, as well as his virtue, that he despised not the cause of his man-servant or maid-servant, when they argued with him (Job_31:13), but heard them patiently, considered their reasons, and gave them a soft answer. And a similar tender consideration of those in subjection, and a forwardness to make them easy, will be the comfort and praise of all in authority, in the church, in the state, and in families. 4. Moderate counsels are generally wisest and best. Gentleness will do what violence will not do. Most people love to be accosted mildly. Rehoboam's old experienced counsellors directed him to this method (v. 7): “Be kind to this people, and please them, and speak good words to them, and thou art sure of them for ever.” Good words cost nothing but a little self-denial, and yet they purchase good things. 5. God often fulfils the counsels of his own wisdom by infatuating men, and giving them up to the counsels of their own folly. No more needs to be done to ruin men than to leave them to themselves, and their own pride and passion.

JAMISO�, "2Ch_10:1-15. Rehoboam refusing the old men’s good counsel.

Rehoboam went to Shechem— (See on 1Ki_12:1). This chapter is, with a few verbal alterations, the same as in 1Ki_12:1-19.

K&D, "This event is narrated in our chapter, except in so far as a few unessential differences in form are concerned, exactly as we have it in 1 Kings 12:1-19; so that we may refer for the exposition of it to the commentary on 1 Kings 12, where we have both treated the contents of this chapter, and have also discussed the deeper and more latent causes of this event, so important in its consequences.

BE�SO�, "2 Chronicles 10:1. Rehoboam, went to Shechem, &c. — See 1 Kings 12.,

where this chapter is explained, so that little need be added here.

ELLICOTT, "(iii) HISTORY OF THE KI�GS WHO REIG�ED I� JERUSALEM,

FROM REHOBOAM TO THE EXILE (2 Chronicles 10:1-19).

(1) The Revolt of the Ten Tribes. The Reign of Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 10-12.).

(a) The Revolt of the Ten Tribes against the Dynasty of David (2 Chronicles 10:1 to

2 Chronicles 11:4). Comp. the parallel narrative in 1 Kings 12:1-24.

Considered by itself, this section might be pronounced a transcript of 1 Kings 12:1-

24. Such differences as appear in the Hebrew text are mostly unimportant,

consisting of merely verbal modifications and omissions not affecting the general

sense. (See Intro.

Verse 1

(1) To Shechem.—Sh’kémah, with accusative ending; Kings, Sh’kem. “Were come,”

pf. plural; Kings, singular.

COKE, "All Israel intreat Reboboam to lighten the yoke laid upon them by

Solomon. Rehoboam, despising the court of the old men, follows that of the young

ones. Ten tribes separate themselves from him.

Before Christ 975.

REFLECTIO�S.—1st, After what has been said on this chapter in 1 Kings 12 we

have only to add, (1.) That men are readier to complain of the least expence which

the wants of government call for, than to acknowledge how much indebted they are

for the mercies and protection that they enjoy. (2.) Young heads are too hot to be

wise counsellors. (3.) A soft answer disarms those whom opposition makes only

more furious.

2nd, The ill effects of Rehoboam's severity appear in the revolt of the ten tribes.

They who drive too furiously overturn themselves. He rejected good advice, and

deserved to be given up to his folly. God's counsel thus was fulfilled, though

Rehoboam had only himself to blame for his lost. It was a mercy that God left him

yet a part of his father's dominions, and that all had not revolted. But God in wrath

still remembers mercy, and does not give us all the chastisements which our

iniquities deserve.

POOLE, "Rehoboam made king. The Israelites by Jeroboam request a relaxation, 2

Chronicles 10:1-5. Rehoboam refusing the old men’s counsel, by the advice of young

men, answereth them roughly, 2 Chronicles 10:6-15. Ten tribes revolting, kill

Hadoram, and make Rehoboam to flee, 2 Chronicles 10:16-19.

The contents of this chapter are in 1Ki 12$, where see the note

EBC, "Verses 1-19

REHOBOAM A�D ABIJAH: THE IMPORTA�CE OF RITUAL

2 Chronicles 10:1-19; 2 Chronicles 11:1-23; 2 Chronicles 12:1-16; 2 Chronicles 13:1-

22

THE transition from Solomon to Rehoboam brings to light a serious drawback of

the chronicler’s principle of selection. In the history of Solomon we read of nothing

but wealth, splendor, unchallenged dominion, and superhuman wisdom; and yet the

breath is hardly out of the body of the wisest and greatest king of Israel before his

empire falls to pieces. We are told, as in the book of Kings, that the people met

Rehoboam with a demand for release from "the grievous service of thy father," and

yet we were expressly told only two chapters before that "of the children of Israel

did Solomon make no servants for his work; but they were men of war, and chief of

his captains, and rulers of his chariots and of his horsemen." (2 Chronicles 8:9)

Rehoboam apparently had been left by the wisdom of his father to the

companionship of headstrong and featherbrained youths; he followed their advice

rather than that of Solomon’s grey-headed counselors, with the result that the ten

tribes successfully revolted and chose Jeroboam for their king. Rehoboam

assembled an army to re-conquer his lost territory, but Jehovah through the

prophet Shemaiah forbade him to make war against Jeroboam.

The chronicler here and elsewhere shows his anxiety not to perplex simple minds

with unnecessary difficulties. They might be harassed and disturbed by the

discovery that the king, who built the Temple and was specially endowed with

Divine wisdom, had fallen into grievous sin and been visited with condign

punishment. Accordingly everything that discredits Solomon and detracts from his

glory is omitted. The general principle is sound; an earnest teacher, alive to his

responsibilities, will not wantonly obtrude difficulties upon his hearers; when

silence does not involve disloyalty to truth, he will be willing that they should

remain in ignorance of some of the more mysterious dealings of God in nature and

history. But silence was more possible and less dangerous in the chronicler’s time

than in the nineteenth century. He could count upon a docile and submissive spirit

in his readers; they would not inquire beyond what they were told: they would not

discover the difficulties for themselves. Jewish youths were not exposed to the

attacks of eager and militant skeptics, who would force these difficulties upon their

notice in an exaggerated form, and at once demand that they should cease to believe

in anything human or Divine.

And yet, though the chronicler had great advantages in this matter, his own

narrative illustrates the narrow limits within which the principle of the suppression

of difficulties can be safely applied. His silence as to Solomon’s sins and misfortunes

makes the revolt of the ten tribes utterly inexplicable. After the account of the

perfect wisdom, peace, and prosperity of Solomon’s reign, the revolt comes upon an

intelligent reader with a shock of surprise and almost of incredulity. If he could not

test the chronicles narrative by that of the book of Kings and it was no part of the

chronicler’s purpose that his history should be thus tested-the violent transition

from Solomon’s unbroken prosperity to the catastrophe of the disruption would

leave the reader quite uncertain as to the general credibility of Chronicles. In

avoiding Scylla, our author has fallen into Charybdis; he has suppressed one set of

difficulties only to create others. If we wish to help intelligent inquirers and to aid

them to form an independent judgment, our safest plan will often be to tell them all

we know ourselves and to believe that difficulties, which have no way marred our

spiritual life, will not destroy their faith.

In the next section the chronicler tells how for three years Rehoboam administered

his diminished kingdom with wisdom and success; he and his people walked in the

way of David and Solomon, and his kingdom was established, and he was strong. He

fortified fifteen cities in Judah and Benjamin, and put captains in them, and store of

victuals, and oil and wine, and shields and spears, and made them exceeding strong.

Rehoboam was further strengthened by deserters from the �orthern Kingdom.

Though the Pentateuch and the book of Joshua assigned to the priests and Levites

cities in the territory held by Jeroboam, yet their intimate association with the

Temple rendered it impossible for them to remain citizens of a state hostile to

Jerusalem. The chronicler indeed tells us that "Jeroboam and his sons cast them off,

that they should not execute the priest’s office unto Jehovah, and appointed others

to be priests for the high places and the he-goats and for the calves which he had."

It is difficult to understand what the chronicler means by this statement. On the face

of it, we should suppose that Jeroboam refused to employ the house of Aaron and

the tribe of Levi for the worship of his he-goats and calves, but the chronicler could

not describe such action as casting "them off that they should not execute the

priest’s office unto Jehovah." The passage has been explained to mean that

Jeroboam sought to hinder them from exercising their functions at the Temple by

preventing them from visiting Judah; but to confine the priests and Levites to his

own kingdom would have been a. strange way of casting them off. However,

whether driven out by Jeroboam or escaping from him, they came to Jerusalem and

brought with them from among the ten tribes other pious Israelites, who were

attached to the worship of the Temple. Judah and Jerusalem became the home of all

true worshippers of Jehovah; and those who remained in the �orthern Kingdom

were given up to idolatry or the degenerate and corrupt worship of the high places.

The chronicler then gives us some account of Rehoboam’s harem and children, and

tells that he dealt wisely, and dispersed his twenty-eight sons "throughout all the

lands of Judah and Benjamin, unto every fenced city." He gave them the means of

maintaining a luxurious table, and provided them with numerous wives, and trusted

that, being thus happily circumstanced, they would lack leisure, energy, and

ambition to imitate Absalom and Adonijah.

Prosperity and security turned the head of Rehoboam as they had done that of

David: "He forsook the law of Jehovah, and all Israel with him." "All Israel" means

all the subjects of Rehoboam; the chronicler treats the ten tribes as cut off from

Israel. The faithful worshippers of Jehovah in Judah had been reinforced by the

priests, Levites, and all other pious Israelites from the �orthern Kingdom; and yet

in three years they forsook the cause for which they had left their country and their

father’s house. Punishment was not long delayed, for Shishak, king of Egypt,

invaded Judah with an immense host and took away the treasures of the house of

Jehovah and of the king’s house.

The chronicler explains why Rehoboam was not more severely punished. Shishak

appeared before Jerusalem with his immense host: Ethiopians, Lubim or Lybians,

and Sukiim, a mysterious people only mentioned here. The LXX and Vulgate

translate Sukiim "Troglodytes," apparently identifying them with the cave-dwellers

on the western or Ethiopian coast of the Red Sea. In order to find safety from these

strange and barbarous enemies, Rehoboam and his princes were gathered together

in Jerusalem. Shemaiah the prophet appeared before them and declared that the

invasion was Jehovah’s punishment for their sin, whereupon they humbled

themselves, and Jehovah accepted their penitent submission. He would not destroy

Jerusalem, but the Jews should serve Shishak, "that they may know My service and

the service of the kingdoms of the countries." When they threw off the yoke of

Jehovah, they sold themselves into a worse bondage. There is no freedom to be

gained by repudiating the restraints of morality and religion. If we do not choose to

be the servants of obedience unto righteousness, our only alternative is to become

the slaves "of sin unto death." The repentant sinner may return to his true

allegiance, and yet he may still be allowed to taste something of the bitterness and

humiliation of the bondage of sin. His Shishak may be some evil habit or propensity

or special liability to temptation, that is permitted to harass him without destroying

his spiritual life. In time the chastening of the Lord works out the peaceable fruits of

righteousness, and the Christian is weaned forever from the unprofitable service of

sin.

Unhappily the repentance inspired by trouble and distress is not always real and

permanent. Many will humble themselves before the Lord in order to avert

imminent ruin, and will forsake Him when the danger has passed away. Apparently

Rehoboam soon fell away again into sin, for the final judgment upon him is, "He did

that which was evil, because he set not his heart to seek Jehovah." David in his last

prayer had asked for a "perfect heart" for Solomon, but he had not been able to

secure this blessing for his grandson, and Rehoboam was "the foolishness of the

people, one that had no understanding, who turned away the people through his

counsel." (Sirach 47:23)

Rehoboam was succeeded by his son Abijah, concerning whom we are told in the

book of Kings that "he walked in all the sins of his father, which he had done before

him; and his heart was not perfect with Jehovah his God, as the heart of David his

father." The chronicler omits this unfavorable verdict; he does not indeed classify

Abijah among the good kings by the usual formal statement that "he did that which

was good and right in the eyes of Jehovah," but Abijah delivers a hortatory speech

and by Divine assistance obtains a great victory over Jeroboam. There is not a

suggestion of any evil-doing on the part of Abijah; and yet we gather from the

history of Asa that in Abijah’s reign the cities of Judah were given up to idolatry,

with all its paraphernalia of "strange altars, high places, Asherim, and sun-images."

As in the case of Solomon, so here, the chronicler has sacrificed even the consistency

of his own narrative to his care for the reputation of the house of David. How the

verdict of ancient history upon Abijah came to be set aside we do not know. The

charitable work of whitewashing the bad characters of history has always had an

attraction for enterprising annalists; and Abijah was a more promising subject than

�ero, Tiberius, or Henry VIII The chronicler would rejoice to discover one more

good king of Judah; but yet why should the record of Abijah’s sins be expunged,

while Ahaziah and Amon were still held up to the execration of posterity?

Probably the chronicler was anxious that nothing should mar the effect of his

narrative of Abijah’s victory. If his later sources had recorded anything equally

creditable of Ahaziah and Amon, be might have ignored the judgment of the book of

Kings in their case also.

The section to which the chronicler attaches so much importance describes a

striking episode in the chronic warfare between Judah and Israel. Here Israel is

used, as in the older history, to mean the �orthern Kingdom, and does not denote

the spiritual Israel-i.e., Judah-as in the previous chapter. This perplexing variation

in the use of the term "Israel" shows how far Chronicles has departed from the

religious ideas of the book of Kings, and reminds us that the chronicler has only

partially and imperfectly assimilated his older material.

Abijah and Jeroboam had each gathered an immense army, but the army of Israel

was twice as large as that of Judah: Jeroboam had eight hundred thousand to

Abijah’s four hundred thousand. Jeroboam advanced, confident in his

overwhelming superiority and happy in the belief that Providence sides with the

strongest battalions. Abijah, however, was nothing dismayed by the odds against

him; his confidence was m Jehovah. The two armies met in the neighborhood of

Mount Zemaraim, upon which Abijah fixed his camp. Mount Zemaraim was in the

hill-country of Ephraim, but its position cannot be determined with certainty; it was

probably near the border of the two kingdoms. Possibly it was the site of the

Benjamite city of the same name mentioned in the book of Joshua in close

connection with Bethel. [Joshua 18:22] If so, we should look for it in the

neighborhood of Bethel, a position which would suit the few indications of place

given by the narrative.

Before the battle, Abijah made an effort to induce his enemies to depart in peace.

From the vantage-ground of his mountain camp he addressed Jeroboam and his

army as Jotham had addressed the men of Shechem from Mount Gerizim. [ 9:8]

Abijah reminded the rebels-for as such he regarded them-that Jehovah, the God of

Israel, had given the kingdom over Israel to David forever, even to him and to his

sons, by a covenant of salt, by a charter as solemn and unalterable as that by which

the heave-offerings had been given to the sons of Aaron. [�umbers 18:19] The

obligation of an Arab host to the guest who had sat at meat with him and eaten of

his salt was not more binding than the Divine decree which had given the throne of

Israel to the house of David. And yet Jeroboam the son of �ebat had dared to

infringe the sacred rights of the elect dynasty. He, the slave of Solomon, had risen

up and rebelled against his master.

The indignant prince of the house of David not unnaturally forgets that the

disruption was Jehovah’s own work, and that Jeroboam rose up against his master,

not at the instigation of Satan, but by the command of the prophet Abijah. [2

Chronicles 10:15] The advocates of sacred causes even in inspired moments are apt

to be one-sided in their statements of fact.

While Abijah is severe upon Jeroboam and his accomplices and calls them "vain

men, sons of Belial," he shows a filial tenderness for the memory of Rehoboam. That

unfortunate king had been taken at a disadvantage, when he was young and tender-

hearted and unable to deal sternly with rebels. The tenderness which could threaten

to chastise his people with scorpions must have been of the kind-

"That dared to look on torture and could not look on war";

it only appears in the history in Rehoboam’s headlong flight to Jerusalem. �o one,

however, will censure Abijah for taking an unduly favorable view of his father’s

character.

But whatever advantage Jeroboam may have found in his first revolt, Abijah warns

him that now he need not think to withstand the kingdom of Jehovah in the hands

of the sons of David. He is no longer opposed to an unseasoned youth, but to men

who know their overwhelming advantage. Jeroboam need not think to supplement

and complete his former achievements by adding Judah and Benjamin to his

kingdom. Against his superiority of four hundred thousand soldiers Abijah can set a

Divine alliance, attested by the presence of priests and Levites and the regular

performance of the pentateuchal ritual, whilst the alienation of Israel from Jehovah

is clearly shown by the irregular orders of their priests. But let Abijah speak for

himself:

"Ye be a great multitude, and there are with you the golden calves which Jeroboam

made you for gods." Possibly Abijah was able to point to Bethel, where the royal

sanctuary of the golden calf was visible to both armies: "Have ye not driven out the

priests of Jehovah, the sons of Aaron and the Levites, and made for yourselves

priests in heathen fashion? When any one comes to consecrate himself with a young

bullock and seven rams, ye make him a priest of them that are no gods. But as for

us, Jehovah is our God, and we have not forsaken Him; and we have priests, the

sons of Aaron, ministering unto Jehovah, and the Levites, doing their appointed

work: and they burn unto Jehovah morning and evening burnt offerings and sweet

incense: the shewbread also they set in order upon the table that is kept free from all

uncleanness; and we have the candlestick of gold, with its lamps, to burn every

evening; for we observe the ordinances of Jehovah our God; but ye have forsaken

Him. And, behold, God is with us at our head, and His priests, with the trumpets of

alarm, to sound an alarm against you. O children of Israel, fight ye not against

Jehovah, the God of your fathers; for ye shall not prosper."

This speech, we are told, "has been much admired. It was well suited to its object,

and exhibits correct notions of the theocratical institutions." But like much other

admirable eloquence, in the House of Commons and elsewhere, Abijah’s speech had

no effect upon those to whom it was addressed. Jeroboam apparently utilized the

interval to plant an ambush in the rear of the Jewish army.

Abijah’s speech is unique. There have been other instances in which commanders

have tried to make oratory take the place of arms, and, like Abijah, they have

mostly been unsuccessful; but they have usually appealed to lower motives.

Sennacherib’s envoys tried ineffectually to seduce the garrison of Jerusalem from

their allegiance to Hezekiah, but they relied on threats of destruction and promises

of "a land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land of oil olive and

honey." There is, however, a parallel instance of more successful persuasion. When

Octavian was at war with his fellow-triumvir Lepidus, he made a daring attempt to

win over his enemy’s army. He did not address them from the safe elevation of a

neighboring mountain, but rode openly into the hostile camp. He appealed to the

soldiers by motives as lofty as those urged by Abijah, and called upon them to save

their country from civil war by deserting Lepidus. At the moment his appeal failed,

and he only escaped with a wound in his breast; but after a while his enemy’s

soldiers came over to him in detachments, and eventually Lepidus was compelled to

surrender to his rival. But the deserters were not altogether influenced by pure

patriotism. Octavian had carefully prepared the way for his dramatic appearance in

the camp of Lepidus, and had used grosser means of persuasion than arguments

addressed to patriotic feeling.

Another instance of a successful appeal to a hostile force is found in the history of

the first �apoleon, when he was marching on Paris after his return from Elba. �ear

Grenoble he was met by a body of royal troops. He at once advanced to the front,

and exposing his breast, exclaiming to the opposing ranks, "Here is your emperor; if

any one would kill me, let him fire." The detachment, which had been sent to arrest

his progress, at once deserted to their old commander. Abijah’s task was less

hopeful: the soldiers whom Octavian and �apoleon won over had known these

generals as lawful commanders of Roman and French armies respectively, but

Abijah could not appeal to any old associations in the minds of Jeroboam’s army;

the Israelites were animated by ancient tribal jealousies, and Jeroboam was made of

sterner stuff than Lepidus or Louis XVIII Abijah’s appeal is a monument of his

humanity, faith, and devotion; and if it failed to influence the enemy, doubtless

served to inspirit his own army.

At first, however, things went badly with Judah. They were outgeneraled as well as

outnumbered: Jeroboam’s main body attacked them in front, and the ambush

assailed their rear. Like the men of Ai, "when Judah looked back, behold, the battle

was before and behind them." But Jehovah, who fought against Ai, was fighting for

Judah, and they cried unto Jehovah; and then, as at Jericho, "the men of Judah

gave a shout, and when they shouted, God smote Jeroboam and all Israel before

Abijah and Judah." The rout was complete, and was accompanied by terrible

slaughter. �o fewer than five hundred thousand Israelites were slain by the men of

Judah. The latter pressed their advantage, and took the neighboring city of Bethel

and other Israelite towns. For the time Israel was "brought under," and did not

recover from its tremendous losses during the three years of Abijah’s reign. As for

Jeroboam, Jehovah smote him, and he died; but "Abijah waxed mighty, and took

unto himself fourteen wives, and begat twenty-and-two sons and sixteen daughters."

His history closes with the record of these proofs of Divine favor, and he "slept with

his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David, and Asa his son reigned in his

stead."

The lesson which the chronicler intends to teach by his narrative is obviously the

importance of ritual, not the importance of ritual apart from the worship of the true

God; he emphasizes the presence of Jehovah with Judah, in contrast to the Israelite

worship of calves and those that are no gods. The chronicler dwells upon the

maintenance of the legitimate priesthood and the prescribed ritual as the natural

expression and clear proof of the devotion of the men of Judah to their God.

It may help us to realize the significance of Abijah’s speech, if we try to construct an

appeal in the same spirit for a Catholic general in the Thirty Years’ War addressing

a hostile Protestant army. Imagine Wallenstein or Tilly, moved by some unwonted

spirit of pious oratory, addressing the soldiers of Gustavus Adolphus:-

"We have a pope who sits in Peter’s chair, bishops and priests ministering unto the

Lord, in the true apostolical succession. The sacrifice of the Mass is daily offered;

matins, lauds, vespers; and compline are all duly celebrated; our churches are

fragrant with incense and glorious with stained glass and images; we have

crucifixes, and lamps, and candles; and our priests are fitly clothed in ecclesiastical

vestments; for we observe the traditions of the Church, but ye have forsaken the

Divine order. Behold, God is with us at our head; and we have banners blessed by

the Pope. O ye Swedes, ye fight against God; ye shall not prosper."

As Protestants we may find it difficult to sympathies with the feelings of a devout

Romanist or even with those of a faithful observer of the complicated Mosaic ritual.

We could not construct so close a parallel to Abijah’s speech in terms of any

Protestant order of service, and yet the objections which any modern denomination

feels to departures from its own forms of worship rest on the same principles as

those of Abijah. In the abstract the speech teaches two main lessons: the importance

of an official and duly accredited ministry and of a suitable and authoritative ritual.

These principles are perfectly general, and are not confined to what is usually

known as sacerdotalism and ritualism. Every Church has in practice some official

ministry, even those Churches that profess to owe their separate existence to the

necessity for protesting against an official ministry. Men whose chief occupation is

to denounce priestcraft may themselves be saturated with the sacerdotal spirit.

Every Church too, has its ritual. The silence of a Friends’ meeting is as much a rite

as the most elaborate genuflection before a highly ornamented altar. To regard

either the absence or presence of rites as essential is equally ritualistic. The man

who leaves his wonted place of worship because "Amen" is sung at the end of a

hymn is as bigoted a ritualist as his brother who dare not pass an altar without

crossing himself. Let us then consider the chronicler’s two principles in this broad

sense. The official ministry of Israel consisted of the priests and Levites, and the

chronicler counted it a proof of the piety of the Jews that they adhered to this

ministry and did not admit to the priesthood any one who could bring a young

bullock and seven rams. The alternative was not between a hereditary priesthood

and one open to any aspirant with special spiritual qualifications, but between a

duly trained and qualified ministry on the one hand and a motley crew of the

forerunners of Simon Magus on the other. It is impossible not to sympathies with

the chronicler. To begin with, the property qualification was too low. If livings are

to be purchased at all, they should bear a price commensurate with the dignity and

responsibility of the sacred office. A mere entrance fee, so to speak, of a young

bullock and seven rams must have flooded Jeroboam’s priesthood with a host of

adventurers, to whom the assumption of the office was a matter of social or

commercial speculation. The private adventure system of providing for the ministry

of the word scarcely tends to either the dignity or the efficiency of the Church. But,

in any case, it is not desirable that mere worldly gifts, money, social position, or even

intellect should be made the sole passports to Christian service; even the traditions

and education of a hereditary priesthood would be more probable channels of

spiritual qualifications.

Another point that the chronicler objects to in Jeroboam’s priests is the want of any

other than a property qualification. Any one who chose could be a priest. Such a

system combined what might seem opposite vices. It preserved an artificial ministry;

these self-appointed priests formed a clerical order; and yet it gave no guarantee

whatever of either fitness or devotion. The chronicler, on the other hand, by the

importance he attaches to the Levitical priesthood, recognizes the necessity of an

official ministry, but is anxious that it should be guarded with jealous care against

the intrusion of unsuitable persons. A conclusive argument for an official ministry is

to be found in its formal adoption by most Churches and its uninvited appearance

in the rest. We should not now be contented with the safeguards against unsuitable

ministers to be found in hereditary succession; the system of the Pentateuch would

be neither acceptable nor possible in the nineteenth century: and yet, if it had been

perfectly administered, the Jewish priesthood would have been worthy of its high

office, nor were the times ripe for the substitution of any better system. Many of the

considerations which justify hereditary succession in a constitutional monarchy

might be adduced in defense of a hereditary priesthood. Even now, without any

pressure of law or custom, there is a certain tendency towards hereditary succession

in the ministerial office. It would be easy to name distinguished ministers who were

inspired for the high calling by their fathers’ devoted service, and who received an

invaluable preparation for their life-work from the Christian enthusiasm of a

clerical household. The clerical ancestry of the Wesleys is only one among many

illustrations of an inherited genius for the ministry.

But though the best method of obtaining a suitable ministry varies with changing

circumstances, the chronicler’s main principle is of permanent and universal

application. The Church has always felt a just concern that the official

representatives of its faith and order should commend themselves to every man’s

conscience in the sight of God. The prophet needs neither testimonials nor official

status: the word of the Lord can have free course without either; but the

appointment or election to ecclesiastical office entrusts the official with the honor of

the Church and in a measure of its Master.

The chronicler’s other principle is the importance of a suitable and authoritative

ritual. We have already noticed that any order of service that is fixed by the

constitution or custom of a Church involves the principle of ritual. Abijah’s speech

does not insist that only the established ritual should be tolerated; such questions

had not come within the chronicler’s horizon. The merit of Judah lay in possessing

and practicing a legitimate ritual, that is to say in observing the Pauline injunction

to do all things decently and in order: The present generation is not inclined to

enforce any very stringent obedience to Paul’s teaching, and finds it difficult to

sympathize with Abijah’s enthusiasm for the symbolism of worship. But men today

are not radically different from the chronicler’s contemporaries, and it is as

legitimate to appeal to spiritual sensibility through the eye as through the ear;

architecture and decoration are neither more nor less spiritual than an attractive

voice and impressive elocution. �ovelty and variety have, or should have, their

legitimate place in public worship; but the Church has its obligations to those who

have more regular spiritual wants. Most of us find much of the helpfulness of public

worship in the influence of old and familiar spiritual associations, which can only be

maintained by a measure of permanence and fixity in Divine service. The symbolism

of the Lord’s Supper never loses its freshness, and yet it is restful because familiar

and impressive because ancient. On the other hand, the maintenance of this ritual is

a constant testimony to the continuity of Christian life and faith. Moreover, in this

rite the great bulk of Christendom finds the outward and visible sign of its unity.

Ritual, too, has its negative value. By observing the Levitical ordinances the Jews

were protected from the vagaries of any ambitious owner of a young bullock and

seven rams. While we grant liberty to all to use the form of worship in which they

find most spiritual profit, we need to have Churches whose ritual will be

comparatively fixed. Christians who find themselves most helped by the more quiet

and regular methods of devotion naturally look to a settled order of service to

protect them from undue and distracting excitement.

In spite of the wide interval that separates the modern Church from Judaism, we

can still discern a unity of principle, and are glad to confirm the judgment of

Christian experience from the lessons of an older and different dispensation. But we

should do injustice to the chronicler’s teaching if we forgot that for his own times

his teaching was capable of much more definite and forcible application.

Christianity and Islam have purified religious worship throughout Europe,

America, and a large portion of Asia. We are no longer tempted by the cruel,

loathsome rites of heathenism. The Jews knew the wild extravagance, gross

immorality, and ruthless cruelty of Phoenician and Syrian worship. If we had lived

in the chronicler’s age and had shared his experience of idolatrous rites, we should

have also shared his enthusiasm for the pure and lofty ritual of the Pentateuch. We

should have regarded it as a Divine barrier between Israel and the abominations of

heathenism, and should have been jealous for its strict observance.

PARKER 1-3, "1. And Rehoboam went to Shechem: for to Shechem [the chief city

of Ephraim, of ancient dignity, even from patriarchal times, as of singular beauty

and position] were all Israel come to make him king.

2. And it came to pass, when Jeroboam the son of �ebat, who was in Egypt, whither

he had fled from the presence of Solomon the king, heard it, that Jeroboam

returned out of Egypt.

3. And they sent [i.e, "they had sent." This is given as the reason why he had

returned] and called him [to the assembly. (Comp. 1 Kings 12:20)]. So Jeroboam

and all Israel came and spake to Rehoboam, saying,

PARKER, "Rehoboam

"And Rehoboam went to Shechem: for to Shechem were all Israel come to make

him king. And it came to pass, when Jeroboam the son of �ebat, who was in Egypt,

whither he had fled from the presence of Solomon the king, heard it, that Jeroboam

returned out of Egypt. And they sent and called him. So Jeroboam and all Israel

came and spake to Rehoboam, saying, Thy father made our yoke grievous; now

therefore ease thou somewhat the grievous servitude of thy father, and his heavy

yoke that he put upon us, and we will serve thee" ( 2 Chronicles 10:1-4).

A CAUSE so stated must succeed. There will be difficulty, but the end is assured.

The reasonable always triumphs, due time being given for the elucidation of its

purposes, and the manifestation of its real spirit. Violence can have but a short day;

the tempest cries itself to rest. The speech of this man was a speech strong in

reason.—"Ease thou somewhat the grievous servitude of thy father, and his heavy

yoke that he put upon us, and we will serve thee." They wanted ease for service, for

loyalty. Where there is no ease how can there be homage, thankfulness, devotion, or

any of the high qualities of patriotism? How tempted men are, who are not

themselves disquieted, to tell other people to bear their burdens uncomplainingly!

We ought to hear what they have to say who feel the iron. Our inquiry should be,

How does it suit you? What is the effect of the piercing iron upon the soul? How

does manhood bear the heel of oppression? The sufferers should sometimes be

admitted to the witness-box. There is a danger lest our personal comfortableness

should disqualify us for judging the case of downtrodden men. Wherever there is

weakness the Christian Church should be found; wherever there is reasonableness

the Christian sanctuary should offer hospitality. The Christian sanctuary ceases to

be the tabernacle of God amongst men when it shuts its door upon the cries of

reason, the petitions of weakness, the humble supplications of those who ask for

nothing exaggerated, but simply ask to have their misery mitigated somewhat, that

their loyalty may be of a larger and better quality. The names are ancient, but the

circumstances may be painfully modern. It is the peculiarity of the Bible that it is

always getting in our way. It has a word upon every subject. Is there anything more

detestable than that a man who has his own way seven days a week, whose footsteps

are marked by prosperity, whose very breathing is a commercial success, should

stand up and tell men who are bleeding at every pore to be quiet and contented, and

not create disturbance in the body politic? If Jeroboam had come with a petition

conceived in another tone it ought to have been rejected; it would have been

irrational, violent, contemptuous: but the reasonableness of the request will insure

its victory in the long run. How easy it is to think of Rehoboam as the foolish son of

a wise father! But are we not unjust to the son in so regarding him? Was Solomon

the wise man he is often made out to be? The answer would be Yes—and �o. There

was no greater fool than Solomon; and he attained his supremacy in folly because

there was no man so wise. "If the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that

darkness!" "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" If he

had not been son of the morning some shallow pit might have held him; but being

son of the morning, and detaching himself from the gravitation of God, the pit into

which he falls is bottomless. Pliny says no man can be always wise. That is true

philosophically, and experimentally; for all men have vulnerable heels, or are

exposed to temptations to lightness of mind, amounting in some instances almost to

frivolity; they are also the subjects of a singular rebound, which makes them appear

the more frivolous because when we last saw them they were absorbed in the

solemnity of prayer. Solomon himself is not wise in this matter of government. The

history shows that the people were appealing, not against Rehoboam, who had yet

had no opportunity of proving his quality as a king, but against his father—"Thy

father made our yoke grievous." We are prone to copy the defects of our ancestors

and our idols rather than their excellences. We are tempted in wrong directions.

Folly has often more charms for us than wisdom. When Diogenes discoursed of

philosophy the people turned away from him—but when he began to play frivolous

music, or to sing frivolous Song of Solomon , the crowds thronged upon him, and he

said, "Ye gods! how much more popular is folly than wisdom!" Even there he spoke

as a philosopher. A man may crowd the hugest building on the earth by folly: it is

impossible in the overwhelming majority of cases to fill a church with a prayer-

meeting. "Ye gods! how much more popular is folly than wisdom!" must be the

verdict of many a sad-hearted Prayer of Manasseh , whose words are light, whose

discourses are Revelation , but who is not listened to by the folly-adoring mob.

Rehoboam made a cautious reply, and therein he began well; he said to the

petitioners: "Come again unto me after three days." This looked hopeful. King

Rehoboam utilised the interval by taking "counsel with the old men that had stood

before Solomon his father while he yet lived, saying, What counsel give ye me to

return answer to this people? And they spake unto him,"—as old men ought to

speak, with a quaintness that amounted to pathos,—"saying, If thou be kind to this

people, and please them, and speak good words to them, they will be thy servants

for ever." Rich is the king whose old men talk in such a strain! They were patriots

and philanthropists and philosophers; they were Christians before the time.

Marvellous is the power of kindness. They will do most in life who are most

considerate. They may be charged with sentimentalism by those who do not

understand the power of human feeling, but they will be credited with philosophy

by men who understand the genius of sympathy. What a message would this have

been to return to the complaining people! When a king speaks "good words" they

seem to be better than if spoken by other lips; when a king is kind he seems to add

to his kindness by his very kingliness; the stoop of his condescension redoubles the

value of his benefaction. If, when the people returned after three days, Rehoboam

had spoken Song of Solomon , the welkin would have rung with the resonant cheers

of a delighted, thankful, because emancipated, people. We have opportunities of this

kind: let every man know that in proportion to his kindness will be the quality and

the durableness of his influence. Kindness is not weakness. It takes omnipotence to

be merciful, in the largest degree and fullest quality of the term. He to whom power

belongs holds in his other hand the angel whose name is Mercy.

GUZIK, "2 CHRO�ICLES 10 - THE REIG� OF REHOBOAM

A. Rehoboam and the nation at Shechem.

1. (2 Chronicles 10:1-5) The elders of Israel offer Rehoboam the throne of Israel.

And Rehoboam went to Shechem, for all Israel had gone to Shechem to make him

king. So it happened, when Jeroboam the son of �ebat heard it (he was in Egypt,

where he had fled from the presence of King Solomon), that Jeroboam returned

from Egypt. Then they sent for him and called him. And Jeroboam and all Israel

came and spoke to Rehoboam, saying, “Your father made our yoke heavy; now

therefore, lighten the burdensome service of your father and his heavy yoke which

he put on us, and we will serve you.” So he said to them, “Come back to me after

three days.” And the people departed.

a. Rehoboam went to Shechem, for all Israel had gone to Shechem to make him

king: This was a logical continuation of the Davidic dynasty. David was succeeded

by his son Solomon, and now Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, was assumed to be the

next king.

i. Rehoboam was the only son of Solomon that we know by name. Solomon had 1000

wives and concubines, yet we read of one son he had to bear up his name, and he

was a fool. This demonstrates that sin is a bad way of building up a family.

ii. “It is difficult to believe that he had no other sons; yet it is a fact that Rehoboam

is the only one mentioned (1 Chronicles 3:10).” (Knapp)

iii. Shechem was a city with a rich history. Abraham worshipped there (Genesis

12:6). Jacob built an altar and purchased land there (Genesis 33:18-20). Joseph was

buried there (Joshua 24:32). It was also the geographical center of the northern

tribes. All in all, it showed that Rehoboam was in a position of weakness, having to

meet the ten northern tribes on their territory, instead of demanding that

representatives come to Jerusalem.

b. When Jeroboam the son of �ebat heard it: Jeroboam was mentioned previously

in 1 Kings 11:26-40. God told him through a prophet that he would rule over a

portion of a divided Israel. �aturally, Jeroboam was interested in Solomon’s

successor. He was specifically part of the group of elders that addressed Rehoboam.

c. Your father made our yoke heavy; now therefore, lighten the burdensome service

of your father: Solomon was a great king, but he took a lot from the people. The

people of Israel wanted relief from the heavy taxation and forced service of

Solomon’s reign, and they offered allegiance to Rehoboam if he agreed to this.

i. God warned Israel about this in 1 Samuel 8:10-19, when through Samuel He

spoke of what a king would take from Israel. After the warning the people still

wanted a king, and now they knew what it was like to be ruled by a taking king.

ii. Sadly, the elders of Israel made no spiritual demand or request on Rehoboam.

Seemingly, the gross idolatry and apostasy of Solomon didn’t bother them at all.

PULPIT, "This chapter begins the fourth and last great division of the work once

called in its unity, "The Chronicles." This fourth and last division, therefore, will

see us to the end of our 2 Chronicles 36:1-23; where we find, by an historical

anticipation of above fifty years, the memorable proclamation of Cyrus, which

authorized the return of the captive Jews, and sanctioned the rebuilding of the

temple. This stretch of history, divided in our Authorized Version into twenty-seven

chapters, covers, therefore, a period of about four hundred and fifty years; it

ignores almost totally the career of Israel, and, in clearest accord with its post-

captive and prophetic objects, abides uninterruptedly by that of the sacred dynasty

of Judah. The kings are in number twenty, beginning with Rehoboam, ending with

Zedekiah, of whom, however, the last four can be credited with but little semblance

of independent authority, for they were the alternate vassals of the rival and

antagonistic powers of Egypt and Assyria. The longest reigns of the twenty were

those of Manasseh; of Uzziah or Azariah; of Asa; of Jehoash; of Josiah; of

Hezekiah; of Amaziah (twenty-nine years, b.c.838-809); of Jehoshaphat; and of

Rehoboam. The last of the mournful procession was Zedekiah, who was mocked

with the title for eleven years. In the dates of this chronology, though slight

differences are found, there is little room for variation when once the initial and, in

consequence, final dates are fixed. The line of succession is hereditary throughout,

and almost entirely of strict lineal descent, i.e. from father to son, if we except, first,

the interruption caused by the Queen Athaliah, mother of her predecessor Ahaziah;

secondly, Joash, her grandson and successor, who was son of Ahaziah; thirdly,

Jehoiachim (so named by the King of Egypt, but formerly named Eliakim), who was

brother of his predecessor Jehoahaz; and, fourthly, Zedekiah (or Mattaniah), who

was the paternal uncle (2 Kings 24:17) of his predecessor Jehoiachin, and who was

put on the throne by �ebuchadnezzar, against whom he in due time rose in

rebellion, and by whom he was sent captive to Babylon, after seeing his sons slain,

and having thereupon his own eyes put out. After him them was no more a king in

Judah. It will be obvious that, if the years marking the duration of the succeeding

reigns be summed up, we shall obtain too large a result, as they often or always

overlapped one another, and, of course, did not fall into exact years. The initial date

we take as b.c. 979, and the final date at the end of Zedekiah's eleven years,

culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem, as b.c. 587. Some chronologies quote

these dates, however, b.c. 975-588. Side by side with these preliminary notes

respecting Judah, it may be stated that the initial and final dates for the separate

kingdom of the ten tribes, Israel, with their nineteen kings, were b.c. 979 (975) to the

date of Samaria taken, b.c. 719, or (as some would date the overthrow of Israel) b.c.

722 or 721. It need scarcely be said that, if forty years are added for the reign of

Solomon, and forty years for that of David, we shall be conducted to the date of

either b.c. 1059 or 1055 as the beginning of the Davidic royal line, and may count

the duration of that royal line as numbering about 472 years. An interesting table,

showing some slight differences of date, may be found in pp. 53, 54 of the second

edition of Conder's 'Handbook to the Bible.'

The verses of this chapter, nineteen in number, correspond with those of 1 Kings

12:1-19. They so correspond as to convince us that both writers took from one

original, or, at any rate, one former source. But they are particularly instructive also

in another direction. Our 1 Kings 12:2 and 1 Kings 12:3 are in order, and quite

intelligible. 1 Kings 12:2 and 1 Kings 12:3 of the parallel are not so, and convince us

either that the carelessness of copyists was more than usual (even when our

Authorized Version "of it" is cancelled) or, which is a by far less acceptable

supposition, that the carelessness of the compiler or writer was great. Though these

two lengths of nineteen verses each so closely correspond as to show both indebted

to one former source, they also evince clearly that neither writer absolutely bound

himself by the exact words of his pattern, but took the meaning, and slightly altered,

so to say, grammar and syntax of sentences.

2 Chronicles 10:1

This verse would have been far better placed last in the previous chapter, but now,

left without note of time, it purports to tell us that (whereas by the last clause of the

previous chapter "Rehoboam reigned in his" father Solomon's "stead," and had

been presumably accepted as his heir and successor in Jerusalem and all Judaea)

Rehoboam, now somewhat later on, repairs to Shechem (the ancient capital, and the

prized position of the high-spirited tribe of Ephraim) to receive some final

recognition as king from "all Israel." Rehoboam. Solomon's son by �aaraah; an

Ammonite princess (1 Kings 14:21, 1 Kings 14:31). Eurydemus may be considered

as a close reproduction in Greek of the Hebrew name Rehoboam. To his son Abijah,

by his favourite wife Maachah, who was the third of the wives that belonged to the

house of Jesse, he bequeathed the kingdom. Wanting any positive Scripture

statement of the matter of Rehoboam going to Shechem, we believe the explanation

given above is the most probable, and that it was not any designed stroke of policy,

with the view of conciliating or flattering Ephraim. Though no formal statement of

it be made here, yet it is quite intelligible that the opinions, feelings, and readiness to

express them on the part of Ephraim and "Israel" were well enough known, and

had to be reckoned for. Shechem. For many reasons one of the most interesting

geographical names in all the Old Testament. It was the ancient capital, as Shiloh,

near to it, was the ancient seat of the national worship. It was situate in Ephraim,

with Ebal to the immediate north, and Gerizim to the immediate south. Its upper

slopelands (its position on which is possibly the origin of the name, ֶׁשֶכם, "a

shoulder" commanded a view of the Mediterranean. It was the half-way resting-

place, at the end of the second day's journey, for travellers from Galilee to

Jerusalem, and hence bore the name in later times, it is thought, of Mabertha, or

Mabartha ( ַמֲעַבְרָּתא ), Pliny's Mamortha. Vespasian subsequently named it �eapolis,

the modern �ablous. The Authorized Version synonyms of Shechem appear as

Sichem, Sychem, Sychar (John 4:5, John 4:20). In post-Captivity times, a new

temple on Gerizim was the cathedral of Samaritan worship, which was levelled by

John Hyrcanus, B.C. 129. Jacob's well is a hall: mile south-east, and Joseph's tomb

two miles east (Joshua 24:32). Almost every one of the references to Shechem are of

great interest on one account or another, and to turn to each of them in order is to

read the Scripture narrative of the place. The leading references are subjoined

(Genesis 12:6; Genesis 33:18, Genesis 33:19; Genesis 34:1-31.; Genesis 35:1-4;

Genesis 37:12, Genesis 37:28; Genesis 43:22; Genesis 49:5-7; Deuteronomy 27:11;

Joshua 9:1-27 :33-35; Joshua 20:7; Joshua 21:20, Joshua 21:21; Joshua 24:1, Joshua

24:25, Joshua 24:32; 9:7, 9:22, 9:34-45; 21:1; 2 Kings 17:5, 2 Kings 17:6, 2 Kings

17:24; 2 Kings 18:9; 1 Chronicles 6:67; 1 Chronicles 7:28; Ezra 4:2; Jeremiah 41:5;

John 4:5; Acts 7:16; Acts 8:5). The article "Shechem," by Dr. Hackett, in Dr.

Smith's 'Bible Dictionary,' vol. 3. pp. 1234-1240, is of exceptional interest. All Israel.

�o doubt this expression may mean even here the assemblage of the federated

twelve tribes. Considering the immediate recurrence of the expression in verse 3, it

must be, however, that the Jeroboam party of the ten tribes (headed by the strong

and self-conscious Ephraimites) are especially in view; in point of fact, of course, all

the twelve tribes were represented in the gathering of verse 1. There can be no

division of opinion about this, though the meeting be represented as one demanded

or occasioned by the attitude of Israel, in the lesser comprehension of the name.

2 When Jeroboam son of �ebat heard this (he was in Egypt, where he had fled from King Solomon), he returned from Egypt.

BAR�ES, "

CLARKE, "

GILL, "

HE�RY, "

JAMISO�, "

K&D, "

ELLICOTT, "(2) Who was in Egypt.—Really a parenthesis, “And it came to pass,

when Jeroboam the son of �ebat heard (now he was in Egypt, whither he had fled

from the face of Solomon the king), that Jeroboam returned from Egypt.” The

chronicler has omitted to say he was still in Egypt (‘ôdennû, Kings), because he has

not alluded before to his flight thither. (See 1 Kings 11:26-40.)

That Jeroboam returned out of Egypt.—Kings continues the parenthesis, “and

Jeroboam dwelt in Egypt.” The words dwelt and returned are spelt with the same

letters in Hebrew, the difference being one of pointing only.

HAWKER, "This event is narrated in our chapter, except in so far as a few unessential differences in form are concerned, exactly as we have it in 1 Kings 12:1-19; so that we may refer for the exposition of it to the commentary on 1 Kings 12, where we have both treated the contents of this chapter, and have also discussed the deeper and more latent causes of this event, so important in its consequences.

PULPIT, "2 Chronicles 10:2, 2 Chronicles 10:3

In these verses the compiler brings up lost time. He has not mentioned before the

name of Jeroboam, just as he has not mentioned the lustful sins of Solomon that led

to idolatry, and these sequel idolatries of his, that heralded the shattering of his

kingdom immediately on his decease. So we are now told all in one how Jeroboam,

in his refuge-retreat in Egypt (1 Kings 11:26-40), "heard" of Solomon's demise, and

apparently (see first clause of our third verse) heard of it in this wise, that "they,"

i.e. the "all Israel" (of our first verse) "had sent and called him" Probably the

growing sense of discontent and the rankling in those tribes that were not closely

breathing the atmosphere of Jerusalem and the one home county, because of their

burdens and taxation, and possibly also Ephraim's ancient and famed rivalry, knew

instinctively that this hour of Solomon's death was the hour, if any, of their

redemption. The lacunae in the history speak for themselves; for though the tribes,

after the long seething of their com-plainings and sufferings, needed but short time

for deliberation, Solomon's death must have been an accomplished fact before they

(whoever the "they" were) sent to Egypt to Jeroboam; and that sending and his

returning or otherwise, at any rate his hearing and consequent returning, must have

taken time. Considering all this, it is remarkable that no note of time is found. But

had only our first verse been placed as the last of the foregoing chapter, the

ambiguity would have been less. For the strange variations on the history of

Jeroboam (a name, together with that of Rehoboam, new to Solomon's time,

meaning "many-peopled," while Rehoboam signifies "increaser of people"), as

found in the Hebrew texts, and additions to it, see the Septuagint Version, 1 Kings

11:43; 1 Kings 12:24; and A. P. Stanley's article, "Jeroboam," in Dr. Smith's 'Bible

Dictionary,' 1. 979, 980; and comp. again 1 Kings 11:26-40; 1 Kings 12:25; 1 Kings

14:13, 1 Kings 14:17, 1 Kings 14:18. Stanley's faith in the Septuagint

notwithstanding, its variations and additions are not reconcileable enough with

either the Hebrew text or themselves to command anything like unfeigned

acceptance. One thing may be considered to come out without much obscurity or

uncertainty—that Jeroboam was the acknowledged rather than tacit leader of an

opposition that was tacit at present rather than acknowledged; nor is it at all

improbable, under all the circumstances, that the Rehoboam party in, knowing well

how the ground really lay, were as content to let the coronation, so to call it, at

Shechem linger awhile for Jeroboam's return, as Jeroboam's opposition party out

desired and perhaps compelled the delay. Of course, Jeroboam knew well, none

better than he, as of old the overseer of the forced labour and taxation of Ephraim

(1 Kings 11:28; 1 Kings 9:15), how grievous the service and how heavy the yoke to

his people, even when he had acquitted himself as the most "industrious" of

taskmasters.

3 So they sent for Jeroboam, and he and all Israel went to Rehoboam and said to him:

JAMISO�, "This event is narrated in our chapter, except in so far as a few unessential differences in form are concerned, exactly as we have it in 1 Kings 12:1-19; so that we may refer for the exposition of it to the commentary on 1 Kings 12, where we have both treated the contents of this chapter, and have also discussed the deeper and more latent causes of this event, so important in its consequences.

BE�SO�, "2 Chronicles 10:3. And they sent and called him — Or rather, as the

Targum properly translates it, For they sent, assigning a reason why he returned

from Egypt.

ELLICOTT, "(3) And they sent and called him.—To the assembly. (Comp. 1 Kings

12:20.)

All Israel.—Chron. omits assembly of. “Came,” singular; Kings, plural.

4 “Your father put a heavy yoke on us, but now lighten the harsh labor and the heavy yoke he put on us, and we will serve you.”

BE�SO�, "2 Chronicles 10:4. Thy father made our yoke grievous — It is probable,

when Solomon had declined from God, that God left him to himself to act thus

impoliticly.

ELLICOTT, "(4) Made . . . grievous . . . ease thou.—Made hard . . . lighten.

�ow therefore.—And now. Kings and the Syriac here, “and thou now”—w’attah

‘attah: an assonance which the chronicler has avoided, at the expense of the proper

emphasis, which lies on thou. (Some Hebrew MSS. and the Vulgate and Arabic

read, and thou.) (Comp. 2 Chronicles 10:10,

PARKER 4-6, "4. Thy father made our yoke grievous: now therefore ease thou

[lighten] somewhat the grievous servitude of thy father, and his heavy yoke that he

put upon us, and we will serve thee [they were acting within their right. To demand

a removal, or alleviation of their burdens, was perfectly compatible with a loyal

willingness to "serve" the new king].

5. And he said unto them, Come again unto me after three days. And the people

departed.

6. And king Rehoboam took counsel with the old men that had stood before

Solomon his father while he yet lived, saying, What counsel give ye me to return

answer to this people?

PULPIT, "The grievous servitude … heavy yoke. These may, for conciseness' sake,

be supposed to correspond with the naturally enough hated "forced labour" (1

Kings 4:6, 1 Kings 4:7; 1 Kings 5:13-16; 1 Kings 11:27, 1 Kings 11:28) and the

burdensome "taxes" (1 Kings 4:19-28) which had not failed to become more odious

to the people as familiarity with them grew. The refreshing �ew Testament contrast

to all this (Matthew 11:28-30) will occur to every memory.

5 Rehoboam answered, “Come back to me in three days.” So the people went away.

ELLICOTT, "(5) Come again unto me after three days.—Hob., Yet three days and

return unto me. The verb go ye (Kings) seems to have fallen out before the first

words. The LXX., Syriac, and Arabic have it.

Departed.—Singular; Kings, plural. Contrast 2 Chronicles 10:1.

PULPIT, "This first reply of Rehoboam was not necessarily inauspicious. Yet

sometimes, as it proved now, the caution that takes time to consider heralds fatal

mistake. This is when either a generous, instinctive impulse, asking an instantaneous

obedience, is chilled by some self-regard; or yet worse, when the offended Spirit is

restrained, and no inner guiding voice is heard, as Saul found, to his ruin.

6 Then King Rehoboam consulted the elders who had served his father Solomon during his lifetime. “How would you advise me to answer these people?” he asked.

ELLICOTT, "(6) Before Solomon.—“Liphnê Sh’lomoh” the common formula for

“‘eth-p’nê Sh’lomoh” (Kings).

To return answer to . . .—Literally, to return to this people a word; Kings, “to

return this people a word” (double accusative)—a construction preserved in 2

Chronicles 10:9 below.

GUZIK, "2. (2 Chronicles 10:6-7) The counsel from Rehoboam’s older advisors.

Then King Rehoboam consulted the elders who stood before his father Solomon

while he still lived, saying, “How do you advise me to answer these people?” And

they spoke to him, saying, “If you are kind to these people, and please them, and

speak good words to them, they will be your servants forever.”

a. Rehoboam consulted the elders who stood before his father Solomon while he still

lived: Wisely, Rehoboam asked the counsel of these older, experienced men. They

seemed to advise Solomon well, so it was fitting that Rehoboam asked for their

advice.

b. If you are kind to these people . . . they will be your servants forever: The elders

knew that Rehoboam was not Solomon, and could not expect the same from the

people that Solomon did. Rehoboam had to relate to the people based on who he

was, not on who his father was. If he showed kindness and a servant’s heart to the

people, they would love and serve him forever. This was good advice.

PULPIT, "The old men who had stood before Solomon his father while he yet lived.

The first practical step now taken by Rehoboam, if he delay at all, is the right and

far from inauspicious step. O si sic omnia that followed after! The "old men" here

spoken of, and not before distinctly spoken of, need not necessarily be regarded as

professional advisers of Solomon, nor as a privy council of slate; they may designate

those of like age with him, or but little his juniors, and with whom he had chiefly

associated for his own society.

7 They replied, “If you will be kind to these people and please them and give them a favorable answer, they will always be your servants.”

JAMISO�, "If thou be kind to this people, and please them, and speak good words to them— In the Book of Kings [1Ki_12:7], the words are, “If thou wilt be a servant unto this people, and wilt serve them.” The meaning in both is the same, namely, If thou wilt make some reasonable concessions, redress their grievances, and restore their abridged liberties, thou wilt secure their strong and lasting attachment to thy person and government.

SBC, "If thou be kind to this people, and please them, and speak good words to them— In the Book of Kings [1Ki_12:7], the words are, “If thou wilt be a servant unto this people, and wilt serve them.” The meaning in both is the same, namely, If thou wilt make some reasonable concessions, redress their grievances, and restore their abridged liberties, thou wilt secure their strong and lasting attachment to thy person and government.

BE�SO�, "2 Chronicles 10:7. If thou be kind to this people — Moderate counsels

are generally best. Gentleness will do what violence will not do. Good words cost

nothing but a little self-denial, and yet they purchase great things.

ELLICOTT, "(7) If thou be kind to this people.—A free paraphrase of, “If to-day

thou become a servant to this people and serve them” (Kings)—words which may

have seemed inappropriate to the redactor, in connection with the king, but which

form a pointed antithesis to the last clause of the verse, “they will be thy servants for

ever.”

And please them.—Be propitious to them, receive them graciously (raçah). (Genesis

33:10.) Kings, “answer them.”

PARKER 7-9, "7. And they spake unto him, saying, If thou be kind to this people,

and please them, and speak good words to them, they will be thy servants for ever.

8. But he forsook the counsel which the old men gave him, and took counsel with the

young men that were brought up with him, that stood before him.

9. And he said unto them, What advice give ye that we may return answer to this

people, which have spoken to me, saying, Ease somewhat the yoke that thy father

did put upon us?

PULPIT, "2 Chronicles 10:7, 2 Chronicles 10:8

Rehoboam was now (1 Kings 14:21; 2 Chronicles 12:13; but cf. 2 Chronicles 13:7)

forty-one years of age; he was just too old to find any excuse for inability to gauge

either the experience, and value of it, of the "old," or the inexperience, and

foolishness of it, of the immature human heart. According to the modern phrase, he

was just ripe to have known and bethought himself of this. But all rashly Rehoboam

casts the die. The sound judgment, real knowledge, opportune and practical advice

of the "old men," uttered evidently off so kind a tongue, should have been indeed

now "as good as an inheritance; yea, better too". The reading of the parallel is well

worthy to be noted (1 Kings 11:7), with its manifestly pleasantly and skilfully

worded antithesis, "If thou this day will be a servant to this people … then they will

be thy servants for ever." Our words, however, have their own exquisite beauty

about them, If thou wilt be kind to this people, and please them, and speak good

words to them. One might fancy that Saul, and David, and Solomon, and angels

themselves bended over the scene, and looked and listened and longed for wisdom

and love and right to prevail. The young men that had grown up with him. While

this expression throws light as above on that which speaks of Rehoboam's old men

counsellors, it wakens the question how men of forty-one years of age can be called

"young," as Rehoboam was not living in patriarchal aged times. And the question is

emphasized by the language applied to Rehoboam in 2 Chronicles 13:7, where he is

described as "young and tenderhearted," and unable, for want of strength of

character and of knowledge, to "withstand vain men" (as he surely shows too

clearly now). It has been suggested ('Speaker's Commentary,' 2.562, �ote C) that כא

)21 ) should be read for 41(מא ) in the two passages quoted above (1 Kings 14:21; 2

Chronicles 12:13). The suggestion seems good, and it is certainly reasonable for the

requirements of both matter and manner.

8 But Rehoboam rejected the advice the elders gave him and consulted the young men who had grown up with him and were serving him.

SBC, "If thou be kind to this people, and please them, and speak good words to them— In the Book of Kings [1Ki_12:7], the words are, “If thou wilt be a servant unto this people, and wilt serve them.” The meaning in both is the same, namely, If thou wilt make some reasonable concessions, redress their grievances, and restore their abridged liberties, thou wilt secure their strong and lasting attachment to thy person and government.

COFFMA�, ""The young men that had grown up with him" (2 Chronicles 10:8).

This whole chapter is virtually identical with 1 Kings 12:1-20; and in both accounts,

mention is made of Rehoboam's associates, referring to them in these words. This is

the only hint in the Bible that Solomon had any other sons besides Rehoboam.

Evidently these were other children brought up in Solomon's godless harem.

PARKER 8-11, ""But he [Rehoboam] forsook the counsel which the old men gave

him, and took counsel with the young men that were brought up with him, that

stood before him. And he said unto them, What advice give ye that we may return

answer to this people, which have spoken to me, saying, Ease somewhat the yoke

that thy father did put upon us?" [Showing that he understood the message of the

people perfectly: he correctly represented the popular will, and therefore he

increased his own responsibility, because he was not the victim of ignorance.] "And

the young men that were brought up with him spake unto him, saying, Thus shalt

thou answer the people that spake unto thee, saying, Thy father made our yoke

heavy, but make thou it somewhat lighter for us; thus shalt thou say unto them, My

little finger shall be thicker than my father"s loins. For whereas my father put a

heavy yoke upon you, I will put more to your yoke: my father chastised you with

whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions" ( 2 Chronicles 10:8-11).

Woe to the nation whose young men talk so! A young oppressor is an infant devil.

Young men talking so will ruin any occasion. This may appear to be a very

advanced policy, a very spirited policy, home and foreign. It is a spirited policy: but

what is the name of the spirit that inspires it? There are many spirits. "Beloved,

believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God." Yet there is

something inspiring about this tone of the young men. This is making the nation

take its proper place at the council-board of empires; this is making the country

bloated in its ambition. What will the end be? Does a controversy of this kind begin

in a question, and end in an answer? Or is there a reply? Are there such things in

history as retorts, reprisals, rebounds, consequences? Let it be known, and laid

down as the basis-principle of all action, social, ecclesiastical, and imperial, that

there is no right of tyranny. Oppression has no veritable and reputable credentials.

Men are not at liberty to take counsel whether they shall be gentle or ungentle. The

law is unwritten, because eternal, that even righteousness must be administered in

mercy. It might be supposed that the king had taken a most patriotic course in

consulting the old and the young. He had done nothing of the kind: he had omitted

to consult him who had called his house to the royalty. Rehoboam should have

consulted the Kingmaker whose throne is on the circle of the earth, and whose

sceptre toucheth the horizon, and whose will is the law of monarchy and

commonwealth. All human consultation is a species of under-counsel, valuable

within proper limits, and right as recognising the education, the intelligence, and the

political instinct of the times; but all consultation to result in profoundest wisdom

must be intensely, almost exclusively, religious. Kings should talk to their King. The

greater the man the nearer should he stand to God; yea, he should be within

whisper-reach of the Lord of lords, asking him in every crisis of national history

what Israel ought to do, what the country ought to answer, what is the will of

heaven. Rehoboam answered the people roughly, and forsook the counsel of the old

men—"So the king hearkened not unto the people." The gospel never gives liberty

to oppression. Employers may adopt this course if they please, but they will find it

end in ruin. We must recognise the difference between employing cattle and

employing men. A parent may adopt this course if he pleases, but his children will

chastise him, sting him, with many a disappointment; or if he live not to see the

wreck of their manhood, they will execrate his unfragrant memory. We ought to

admit nothing into our policy, social, commercial, ecclesiastical, national, that does

not live by virtue of its righteousness and nobleness; then we may face the light of

day, and abide the coming of the great audit with perfect calmness, knowing that

with what judgment we have judged we shall be judged. If we were in circumstances

such as Jeroboam represented, if we were bearing heavy yokes, if we were steeping

our pillows in our tears, if sleep forsook us because of pain, and if we heard that

Christian ministers had been made aware of our distress, and had risen to say, We

will inquire for you, and sympathise with you, and do what we can to mitigate your

pain,—should we answer, Keep to your praying and your hymn-singing, and let our

sufferings alone? �ever! We would thank God that Christian ministers were so like

their Master who came to undo heavy burdens and let the oppressed go free. The

Christian minister who meddles with every thing but humanity is—a phenomenon.

GUZIK, "3. (2 Chronicles 10:8-11) The counsel from Rehoboam’s younger advisors.

But he rejected the advice which the elders had given him, and consulted the young

men who had grown up with him, who stood before him. And he said to them,

“What advice do you give? How should we answer this people who have spoken to

me, saying, ‘Lighten the yoke which your father put on us’?” Then the young men

who had grown up with him spoke to him, saying, “Thus you should speak to the

people who have spoken to you, saying, ‘Your father made our yoke heavy, but you

make it lighter on us’; thus you shall say to them: ‘My little finger shall be thicker

than my father’s waist! And now, whereas my father put a heavy yoke on you, I will

add to your yoke; my father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with

scourges!’”

a. But he rejected the advice which the elders had given him, and consulted the

young men: Before Rehoboam ever consulted with the younger men he rejected the

advice of the elders.

i. This is a common phenomenon today - what some call “advice shopping.” The

idea is that you keep asking different people for advice until you find someone who

will tell you what you want to hear. This is an unwise and ungodly way to get

counsel. It is better to have a few trusted counselors you will listen to even when

they tell you what you don’t want to hear.

b. And consulted the young men who had grown up with him: These men were

much more likely to tell Rehoboam what he already thought. By turning to those

likely to think just as he did, it shows that Rehoboam only asked for advice for the

sake of appearances

i. Their unwise advice shows the wisdom of seeking counsel from those outside our

immediate situation and context. Sometimes an outsider can see things more clearly

than those who share our same experiences.

ii. “The ‘young men’ to who Rehoboam preferred to turn were probably some of

Solomon’s many sons, rendered callous by upbringing in the luxurious harem and

court at Jerusalem.” (Payne)

c. And now, whereas my father put a heavy yoke on you, I will add to your yoke:

The younger men offered the opposite advice to the elders. They suggested an

adversarial approach, one that would make Rehoboam more feared than Solomon

was.

i. Solomon asked a lot of Israel, in both taxes and service. Yet we don’t have the

impression that Israel followed Solomon out of fear, but out of a sense of shared

vision and purpose. They believed in what Solomon wanted to do, and were willing

to sacrifice to accomplish it. Rehoboam did not appeal to any sense of shared vision

and purpose - he simply wanted the people to follow his orders out of the fear of a

tyrant.

ii. “He attempted to continue the despotism of his father, though he lacked his

father’s refinement and ability to fascinate.” (Morgan)

iii. “With a dozen rash words, Rehoboam, the bungling dictator, opened the door

for four hundred years of strife, weakness, and, eventually, the destruction of the

entire nation.” (Dilday)

iv. My little finger shall be thicker than my father’s waist! A targum translates this,

“My weakness shall be stronger than the might of my father.” (Clarke)

9 He asked them, “What is your advice? How should we answer these people who say to me, ‘Lighten the yoke your father put on us’?”

10 The young men who had grown up with him replied, “The people have said to you, ‘Your father put a heavy yoke on us, but make our yoke lighter.’ �ow tell them, ‘My little finger is thicker than my father’s waist.

CLARKE, "If thou be kind to this people, and please them, and speak good words to them— In the Book of Kings [1Ki_12:7], the words are, “If thou wilt be a servant unto this people, and wilt serve them.” The meaning in both is the same, namely, If thou wilt make some reasonable concessions, redress their grievances, and restore their abridged liberties, thou wilt secure their strong and lasting attachment to thy person and government.

ELLICOTT, "(10) Spake unto him.—Heb., with him; probably a mistaken

repetition. Kings, “unto him,” and so LXX.; but Syriac, “with him.”

Answer.—Say to.

The people.—This people (Kings).

But make thou it somewhat lighter for us.—Literally, And thou lighten from upon

us. LXX., well: καὶ σὺ ἄφες ἀφ᾿ ἡµῶν.

Thus shalt thou say.—Kings, “speak.”

My little finger.—The word “finger” should not be italicised. The word qôten means

“little finger.”

PARKER 10-12, "10. And the young men that were brought up with him spake unto

[Heb. with] him, saying, Thus shalt thou answer [The advice of the young men is the

language of the arrogant self-confidence which mistakes obstinacy for vigour] the

people that spake unto thee, saying, Thy father made our yoke heavy, but make

thou it somewhat lighter for us [Literally, "And thou lighten from upon us"]; thus

shalt thou say [speak] unto them, My little finger shall be thicker than my father"s

loins.

11. For whereas my father put a heavy yoke [Heb. laded] upon you, I will put more

to your yoke: my father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with

scorpions [Probably (like the Roman flagellum) a whip, the lash of which is loaded

with weights and sharp points].

12. So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam on the third day, as the king

bade, saying, Come again to me on the third day.

11 My father laid on you a heavy yoke; I will make it even heavier. My father scourged you with whips; I will scourge you with scorpions.’”

ELLICOTT, "(11) For whereas . . .—Literally, And now, my father . . . and I, I will

add to your yoke.

Whips . . . scorpions.—The whips . . . the scorpions.

I will chastise you.—These words are found in the text of Kings, both here and in 2

Chronicles 10:14.

12 Three days later Jeroboam and all the people returned to Rehoboam, as the king had said, “Come back to me in three days.”

HE�RY 12-19, "We may learn here, 1. That when public affairs are in a ferment violent proceedings do but make bad worse. Rough answers (such as Rehoboam here gave) do but stir up anger and bring oil to the flames. The pilot has need to steer steadily in a storm. Many have been driven to the mischief they did not intend by being too severely dealt with for what they did intend. 2. That, whatever the devices and designs of men are, God is, by all, doing his own work, and fulfilling the word which he has spoken, no iota or tittle of which shall fall to the ground. The cause of the king's obstinacy and thoughtlessness was of God, that he might perform the word which he spoke by Ahijah,2Ch_10:15. This does not at all excuse Rehoboam's folly, nor lessen the guilt of his haughtiness and passion, that God was pleased to serve his own ends by them. 3. That worldly wealth, honour, and dominion, are very uncertain things. Solomon reigned over all Israel, and, one would think, had done enough to secure the monarchy entire to his family for many ages; and yet he is scarcely cold in his grave before ten of the twelve tribes finally revolt from his son. All the good services he had done for Israel were now forgotten: What portion have we in David? Thus is the government of Christ cast off by many, notwithstanding all he has done to bind the children of men for ever to himself; they say, We will not have this man to reign over us. But this rebellion will certainly be their ruin. 4. That God often visits the iniquities of the fathers upon the children. Solomon forsakes God, and therefore not he, but his son after him, is forsaken by the greatest part of his people. Thus God, by making the penal consequences of sin to last long and visibly to continue after the sinner's death, would give an indication of its malignity, and perhaps some intimation of the perpetuity of its punishment. He that sins against God not only wrongs his soul, but perhaps wrongs his seed more than he thinks of. 5. That, when God is fulfilling his threatenings, he will take care of that, at the same time, promises do not fall to the ground. When Solomon's iniquity is remembered, and for it his son loses ten tribes, David's piety is not forgotten, nor the promise made to him; but for the sake of that his grandson had two tribes preserved to him. The failings of the saints shall not frustrate any promise made to Christ their Head. They shall be chastised, but the covenant not broken, Psa_89:31-34.

GUZIK, "4. (2 Chronicles 10:12-15) Rehoboam answers Jeroboam and the elders of

Israel harshly.

So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam on the third day, as the king had

directed, saying, “Come back to me the third day.” Then the king answered them

roughly. King Rehoboam rejected the advice of the elders, and he spoke to them

according to the advice of the young men, saying, “My father made your yoke

heavy, but I will add to it; my father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise

you with scourges!” So the king did not listen to the people; for the turn of events

was from God, that the LORD might fulfill His word, which He had spoken by the

hand of Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of �ebat.

a. So the king did not listen to the people: In this case, Rehoboam clearly should

have listened to the people. This is not to say that a leader should always lead by

popular vote, but a leader needs the wisdom to know when what the people want is

best for them.

i. Rehoboam was a fool. Ironically, his father Solomon worried about losing all he

worked for under a foolish successor: Then I hated all my labor in which I had

toiled under the sun, because I must leave it to the man who will come after me. And

who knows whether he will be wise or a fool? Yet he will rule over all my labor in

which I toiled and in which I have shown myself wise under the sun. This also is

vanity. (Ecclesiastes 2:18-19)

ii. “Rehoboam was a fool; and through his folly he lost his kingdom. He is not the

only example on record: the Stuarts lost the realm of England much in the same

way.” (Clarke)

iii. “Livy saith, when a state is ripe for ruin, all wholesome counsels are fatally but

foolishly slighted.” (Trapp)

b. For the turn of events was from God: God managed this whole series of events,

but He did not make Rehoboam take this unwise and sinful action. God simply left

Rehoboam alone and allowed him to make the critical errors his sinful heart wanted

to make.

i. “It seemed to be altogether a piece of human folly and passion; but now we are

suddenly brought into the presence of God, and told that beneath the plottings and

plannings of man He was carrying out His eternal purpose. . . . He makes the wrath

of man to praise Him, and weaves the malignant work of Satan into his plans.”

(Meyer)

ii. “�otice also, dear friends, that God is in events which are produced by the sin

and the stupidity of men. This breaking up of the kingdom of Solomon into two

parts was the result of Solomon’s sin and Rehoboam’s folly; yet God was in it: “This

thing is from me, saith the Lord.” God had nothing to do with the sin or the folly,

but in some way which we can never explain, in a mysterious way in which we are to

believe without hesitation, God was in it all.” (Spurgeon)

PULPIT, "It may be worth observing that the history is silent of what of hope and

fear or other thought and feeling transpired with Jeroboam and his party these

three critical days of suspense, as also it was so silent as to what transpired with

them during the three days, three weeks, three months, before the first interview

with Rehoboam at Shechem.

13 The king answered them harshly. Rejecting the

advice of the elders,

BAR�ES, "

CLARKE, "

GILL, "

HE�RY, "

JAMISO�, "

K&D, "

ELLICOTT, "(13) Them.—Kings, “the people.”

Roughly.—Hardly.

King Rehoboam.—�ot in Kings, which adds, “that they counselled him

PARKER 13-16, "13. And the king answered them roughly [hardly]; and king

Rehoboam forsook the counsel of the old men.

14. And answered them after the advice of the young men, saying, My father made

your yoke heavy, but I will add thereto: my father chastised you with whips, but I

will chastise you with scorpions.

15. So the king hearkened not unto the people: for the cause was of God [Literally,

"it was a turning or turning-point (of events) from with God"], that the Lord might

perform his word, which he spake by the hand of Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam

the son of �ebat.

16. ¶ And when all Israel saw ["�ow all Israel had seen"] that the king would not

hearken unto them, the people answered [returned] the king, saying, What portion

have we in David? and we have none inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man to

your tents [this war cry was not new. ( 2 Samuel 20:1)], O Israel: and now, David,

see to thine own house. So all Israel went to their tents. [In these words, with which

the Benjamite Sheba had proclaimed sedition and rebellion against David in the

land ( 2 Samuel 20:1), is expressed the deep-rooted aversion to the royal house of

David so strongly, that it is manifest the revolt had a deeper cause than the

pretended oppression of Song of Solomon , since it had its proper ground only in the

old jealousy of Judah, suppressed indeed under Song of Solomon , but still not

utterly extinguished, which resulted again from the untheocratic disposition of these

tribes, from their disloyalty to Jehovah.—Keil.]

14 he followed the advice of the young men and said, “My father made your yoke heavy; I will make it even heavier. My father scourged you with whips; I will scourge you with scorpions.”

ELLICOTT, "(14) And answered them.—And spake unto them.

Advice.—Counsel.

My father made your yoke heavy.—The Targum and a large number of Hebrew

MSS. read, “I will make heavy.” This appears to be an error arising out of a fusion

of the two words ‘abî hikhbîd into ’ahhbîd. All the versions have the reading of the

text.

Thereto.—“To your yoke” (Kings).

COFFMA�, ""My father chastised you with whips" (2 Chronicles 10:14). This is a

somewhat sour note in that sweet symphony of The Glory of Solomon. Furthermore,

right here is the contradiction of the opinions of many that Solomon did not enslave

any Israelites, but only the foreigners. If Solomon had been whipping only the

descendants of the Canaanites, there is hardly any possibility that Jeroboam and the

other Israelites would have been at all concerned about it.

(See my commentary on 1Kings (pp. 151-158) for further comment on the events of

this chapter.)

15 So the king did not listen to the people, for this turn of events was from God, to fulfill the word the Lord had spoken to Jeroboam son of �ebat through Ahijah the Shilonite.

CLARKE, "For the cause was of God - “For there was an occasion Divinely given.” - Targum.

JAMISO� 15-17, "the king hearkened not unto the people, for the cause was of God— Rehoboam, in following an evil counsel, and the Hebrew people, in making a revolutionary movement, each acted as free agents, obeying their own will and passions. But God, who permitted the revolt of the northern tribes, intended it as a punishment of the house of David for Solomon’s apostasy. That event demonstrates the immediate superintendence of His providence over the revolutions of kingdoms; and thus it affords an instance, similar to many other striking instances that are found in Scripture, of divine predictions, uttered long before, being accomplished by the operation of human passions, and in the natural course of events.

K&D, "

ELLICOTT, "(15) The cause was of God.—It was brought about by God. Literally,

it was a turn or turning-point (of events) from with God. The word n’sibbah is

equivalent to sibbah of Kings. Both are isolated in the Old Testament. The latter is

the common word for “cause” in Rabbinic, as sibbath sibbôth—causa causarum.

That the Lord might perform his word.—The chronicler does not deviate from the

text of Kings here, although he has not mentioned Ahijah’s prophecy to Jeroboam

before. (Comp. 2 Chronicles 9:29. )

PARKER, "The world has been educated by oppression. The Lord himself has used

it as an instrument in his hands. A curious expression occurs to this effect in the

fifteenth verse,—

"For the cause was of God." ( 2 Chronicles 10:15)

Rehoboam had not taken him into account, but the Lord took the matter into his

own hand: the Lord sent a strong delusion upon the man that he might believe a lie.

If the Lord were working within four measurable corners the whole proportion of

his ministry upon the earth would be altered, and everything related to it would

undergo appropriate changes; but the Lord is working upon an infinite circle; all

things work, together; the ministry of the universe is a ministry co-operative, and is

not to be understood in parts and sections, but can only be understood by those who

take in the whole circumference on which the Almighty operates: and that cannot be

done here and now, it can only be seen when we are taken to a sufficient altitude,

and he alone can take us to that altitude, and give us the vision we need, in order to

complete our judgment. Meanwhile, here is a history in human development—"the

cause was of God." Joseph was sent down to Egypt by the Lord. The Saviour of the

world was not murdered by the Jews, except in a secondary and transient sense; he

was delivered up from before the foundation of the world that he might make on the

universe an infinite impression and reveal to the universe the law of life and the law

of sacrifice. The Lord sends judicial blindness upon people even now, so that they

claim to be sincere, upright, patriotic: but the Lord is working his own end and

purpose. It is not for us to say who is or is not judicially blinded; there we should

perpetrate a great mistake; it is for us to recognise the operation of the law, and in

proportion as we feel that it may be ourselves who are infatuated, we ought to

pause, and wonder, and pray. There Isaiah , however, one standard by which we

may come to a judgment all but infallible: if we are impelled towards persecution,

towards the impoverishment of others, towards contempt in relation to the weak

and the helpless, we may lay it down as certain that we are not inspired by the spirit

of love, which is the Spirit of God. If our movement is towards trust, liberty,

leniency, philanthropy, beneficence, we are entitled to believe that this is the very

logic of love, the rigorous reasoning of piety itself. This will apply to nations, to

families, to employers, to all men to whom is remitted the question, Shall the policy

be severe, or shall it be clement and hopeful?

Rehoboam will be punished: have no fear of that. "With what measure ye mete, it

shall be measured to you again." You can make your whips thongs of scorpions, but

upon your own back shall the lacerating lash be laid; you can play the fantastic

trick before high heaven and make the angels weep, but the bitterness shall be

yours; the triumphing of such a policy is short, the end of it is everlasting

punishment. What could we do without such laws as these? They are the very ribs of

the universe, the very security of society, the corner-stone on which God"s fabric

rests. We are not the subjects of accidents, the changing whims of statesmen; we are

not dependent upon general elections for the grand issue of things: the Lord

reigneth! Let us be true, and calm. One thing is certain amid all the conflicts of

history, all the attritions and collisions of most vehement controversy, and that

Isaiah , that the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ alone can rectify all relations, bring

into rulership and eternal dominion the spirit of truth and love and mercy. We can

but daub the wall with untempered mortar; we can but say, Peace, peace, where

there is no peace. Only the gospel of Jesus Christ can get at the heart of things; deal

with causes, fountains, origins, and purify the spring of all life. Here the Saviour is

gentle in his might, mighty in his gentleness; he says, "Marvel not that I said unto

thee, Ye must be born again": you must start afresh; there must not only be new

doings, there must be a new doer; there must not only be an improvement in habit,

there must be a regeneration in soul. When the soul is right the hands will take to

the new policy with skill that might have been learned in heaven and that is inspired

by the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ.

PULPIT, "So the king hearkened not … for the cause was of God … his word,

which he spake by … Ahijah (see, as before, 1 Kings 11:29-31, also 9-39). Rehoboam

hearkened not, as Pharaoh hearkened not, but hardened his heart. The Divine word

foretold, as the Divine mind foreknew, the inevitable course of the stream, that took

its source in and from Solomon's faithless heart and life. Solomon "being dead yet"

bears his full share of the responsibility of what Rehoboam was, and shortly came to

show he was. Everything must fall out as God foretells it shall fall out, not because

"the cause is from him" in this sense that he has made it, but in the sense that he has

pronounced it, through knowing it with an absolute knowledge. It were but a thing

to be expected also, that just in the measure that the Bible is the Word of God, it

shall exhibit and pronounce plainly the phenomena of his own ultimate fiats, rather

than linger to track or describe the uncertainties of human morality or conduct. Let

but that result appear, which God has with his sure and abiding Word declared,

and the practical attitude and language of Scripture are that it is vain to fight

against it; for the thing is of God. It was known of him and said of him. And it

carries its punishment or its recompense in it, as of him. It will be noticed, again,

how our compiler refers to the incident of Ahijah, as though he had recorded it,

which he had not done.

16 When all Israel saw that the king refused to listen to them, they answered the king:

“What share do we have in David, what part in Jesse’s son?To your tents, Israel! Look after your own house, David!”So all the Israelites went home.

CLARKE, "To your tents, O Israel - “To your cities, O Israel.” - Targum.

Now, David, see to thine own house - “Now, David, rule over the men of thy own house.” - Targum.

HAWKER 16-19, "If we read this spiritually, and with an eye to Jesus, is not the language of every unawakened man similar to this, We have none inheritance in the son of Jesse. Alas! how was this fulfilled in the instance of the Jews at the crucifixion of Jesus! precious Lord Jesus! how did thy prayer bring down mercy to turn many of them from the error of their ways, when those among them who had been most clamorous, crying out, Crucify, crucify him! at the day of Pentecost, were pricked at the heart, and then their language was, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Act_2:37.

BE�SO�, "2 Chronicles 10:16. �ow, David, see to thine own house — When public

affairs are in a ferment, violent proceedings do but make ill worse. Many have been

driven to the mischief they did not intend, by being too severely dealt with.

ELLICOTT, "(16) And when all Israel saw.—�ow all Israel had seen. Kings: “And

all Israel saw.” The chronicler makes a new start. (The word “saw” is wanting in

very many Hebrew MSS., and in LXX., Vulg., and Targ., and some Hebrew

editions.)

Answered.—Returned the king—scil., a word, which Kings supplies.

Every man to your tents, O Israel.—Literally, A man (’îsh) to thy tents, &c. The

word “man” is probably spurious, being due to a repetition of the letters of the

preceding proper name Jesse (Heb., Yishai or Ishai). Kings, LXX., Vulg. are without

it, but Syriac has it.

See to thine own house—i.e., govern Judah, thine own tribe. Vulg., “pasce domum

tuam.”

GUZIK, "B. The revolt against Rehoboam.

1. (2 Chronicles 10:16-17) Jeroboam leads those leaving Rehoboam’s rule.

�ow when all Israel saw that the king did not listen to them, the people answered

the king, saying: “What share have we in David? We have no inheritance in the son

of Jesse. Every man to your tents, O Israel! �ow see to your own house, O David!”

So all Israel departed to their tents. But Rehoboam reigned over the children of

Israel who dwelt in the cities of Judah.

a. What share have we in David? Rehoboam’s foolishness made Israel reject not

only Rehoboam, but also the entire dynasty of David. They rejected the descendants

of Israel’s greatest king.

b. Rehoboam reigned over the children of Israel who dwelt in the cities of Judah:

This signals the division of the twelve tribes into two kingdoms; a northern kingdom

made up of 10 tribes and a southern kingdom made up of Judah and Benjamin.

PULPIT, "What portion have we in David? (see 2 Samuel 20:1). To your tents, O

Israel; i.e. there is nothing more to be done here; all may as well go home. The use,

and especially repeated use, of the names, David, Jesse, David, plainly speaks tribe

rivalry, if not jealousy.

17 But as for the Israelites who were living in the

towns of Judah, Rehoboam still ruled over them.

CLARKE, "Stoned him - When he endeavored to collect the tribute which Solomon had imposed on them. - Jarchi.

PARKER 17-19, "13. And the king answered them roughly [hardly]; and king

Rehoboam forsook the counsel of the old men.

14. And answered them after the advice of the young men, saying, My father made

your yoke heavy, but I will add thereto: my father chastised you with whips, but I

will chastise you with scorpions.

15. So the king hearkened not unto the people: for the cause was of God [Literally,

"it was a turning or turning-point (of events) from with God"], that the Lord might

perform his word, which he spake by the hand of Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam

the son of �ebat.

16. ¶ And when all Israel saw ["�ow all Israel had seen"] that the king would not

hearken unto them, the people answered [returned] the king, saying, What portion

have we in David? and we have none inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man to

your tents [this war cry was not new. ( 2 Samuel 20:1)], O Israel: and now, David,

see to thine own house. So all Israel went to their tents. [In these words, with which

the Benjamite Sheba had proclaimed sedition and rebellion against David in the

land ( 2 Samuel 20:1), is expressed the deep-rooted aversion to the royal house of

David so strongly, that it is manifest the revolt had a deeper cause than the

pretended oppression of Song of Solomon , since it had its proper ground only in the

old jealousy of Judah, suppressed indeed under Song of Solomon , but still not

utterly extinguished, which resulted again from the untheocratic disposition of these

tribes, from their disloyalty to Jehovah.—Keil.]

PULPIT, "To the tribe of Judah the family of David belonged. There was less

inclination on this ground, to begin with, among them to go to the length of

revolting. Though they too are pressed with burden and taxation, yet royal

expenditure, residence, magnificence, are all near them, and are some solarium

doubtless to them. God said that this tribe and (as is abundantly evident from

Ahijah's forcibly dramatic parable of the rent garment) Benjamin also should be

saved to Rehoboam and for ever to David's line, and again it is evident that he

works in the midst of human event, and moral cause and effect. Israel would not

have revolted but that Jeroboam was of Ephraim, and Judah would not have

remained steadfast but that, with other determining influences also, to Judah

belonged Rehoboam and Solomon and David.

18 King Rehoboam sent out Adoniram,[a] who was in charge of forced labor, but the Israelites stoned him to death. King Rehoboam, however, managed to get into his chariot and escape to Jerusalem.

CLARKE, "Stoned him - When he endeavored to collect the tribute which Solomon had imposed on them. - Jarchi.

ELLICOTT, "(18) Hadoram.—Kings, “Adoram.” LXX. (Vat.), Adoniram. (Comp. 1

Kings 4:6.)

The tribute.—The levy (ha-mas).

The children of Israel.—Kings, “all Israel.”

Made speed.—Had made speed.

His chariot.—The (royal) chariot.

COFFMA�, ""Hadoram ... over the men subject to task-work" (2 Chronicles

10:18). This is merely the Chronicler's polite word for, "Hadoram ... the slave-

driver," the most hated man in Solomon's kingdom, the same as Adoram in the First

Kings narrative. Rehoboam could not possibly have made a more serious mistake

than asking Hadoram to accompany him in his negotiations with Israel. �ot only

did they stone Hadoram, but they would also have stoned Rehoboam if he had not

escaped. Thus Rehoboam lost the greater part of his kingdom by one idiotic

acceptance of the foolish advice of his harem-born associates.

GUZIK, "2. (2 Chronicles 10:18-19) Israel rebels against the house of David.

Then King Rehoboam sent Hadoram, who was in charge of revenue; but the

children of Israel stoned him with stones, and he died. Therefore King Rehoboam

mounted his chariot in haste to flee to Jerusalem. So Israel has been in rebellion

against the house of David to this day.

a. King Rehoboam sent Hadoram, who was in charge of the revenue; but all Israel

stoned him with stones: Apparently, Rehoboam did not take the rebellions seriously

until this happened. When his chief tax collector was murdered, he knew that the

ten tribes were serious about their rebellion.

i. Hadoram was the wrong man for Rehoboam to send. He was famous for his harsh

policy of forced labor (1 Kings 4:6 and 1 Kings 5:14). “He was probably one of the

most hated figures in the land, an embodiment of oppression.” (Payne) Rehoboam

probably sent Adoram because he wanted to make good on his promise to punish

those who opposed him. His tough-guy policy didn’t work.

ii. “Rehoboam makes one pathetic effort to restore unity, perfectly illustrating the

poverty of his policy.” (Selman)

b. So Israel has been in rebellion against the house of David to this day: From this

point on in the history of Israel, the name “Israel” referred to the 10 northern tribes

and the name “Judah” referred to the southern tribes of Benjamin and Judah.

i. There was a long-standing tension between the ten northern tribes and the

combined group of Judah and Benjamin. There were two earlier rebellions along

this line of potential division, in the days after Absalom’s rebellion (2 Samuel 19:40-

43), which developed into the rebellion of Sheba (2 Samuel 20:1-2).

ii. “Rehoboam ought to have been thankful that God’s love to David had left him

even two tribes.” (Knapp)

PULPIT, "Hadoram that was over the tribute … stoned him … Rehoboam made

speed … to flee. Hadoram was perhaps the same as Adoniram, son of Abda (1 Kings

4:6; 1 Kings 5:14), but on the arbitrament of age this is less likely, and certainly it is

very unlikely that he was one with Hadoram of 2 Samuel 20:24. Rehoboam must be

supposed to have sent Hadoram either to make some "tribute" summons, or try

some arrangement respecting it, or respecting conciliatory steps. The reception he

met warns Rehoboam to make the quickest escape possible, and no doubt opens his

eyes fully to what he has done. It was the remanet of his delusive self-confidence to

send this collector of taxes to those who had begged some remission of taxation.

19 So Israel has been in rebellion against the house of David to this day.

CLARKE, "Israel rebelled - A few soft words, and the removal of a part of the oppressive taxes, (for they said, Ease thou Somewhat the grievous servitude), would have secured this people to the state, and prevented the shedding of a sea of human blood, which was the consequence of the separation of this kingdom. Rehoboam was a fool; and through his folly he lost his kingdom. He is not the only example on record: the Stuarts lost the realm of England much in the same way; and, by a different mode of treatment, the House of Brunswick continues to fill the British throne. May the thread of its fortune, woven by the hand of God, never be undone! and may the current of its power glide on to the latest posterity!

Talia secla, suis dixerunt, currite, fusisConcordes stabili fatorum numine Parcae.

Virg. Ecl. iv., ver. 46.

“God’s firm decree, by which this web was spun,Shall ever bless the clue, and bid it smoothly run.”

Labitur, et labetur in omne volubilis Aevum.Horat. Epist., l. i., c. 2, v. 43.

“Still glides the river, and shall ever glide.”Amen! Amen!

HAWKER, "REFLECTIONS

IF in perusing the page of Rehoboam’s folly we stand amazed to see the blindness and infatuation of such conduct; how much more may we be astonished at the folly and infatuation of sinners in rejecting the counsel of God against their own souls, and preferring the pleasures of sin for a season. Oh! ye simple ones (is the language of wisdom in the streets of the city) how long will ye love simplicity, and scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge! Surely the sinner that slights Jesus and his salvation is simple to the utmost possibility of simplicity. He hath no true knowledge to guide him. He prefers the hollow and empty husks of the world to durable riches and righteousness. The sinful pleasures of the earth are to him preferable to Jesus and his grace and glory. Could a man make a mock at sin, if he were not a fool? Could he sport with that which must end in ruin if he were not blind, and ignorant, and senseless, and stupid? Precious Jesus! thou that art wisdom itself. Oh! give us to see, to know, to appreciate rightly thy value, and to be thoroughly convinced of this, that Happy is the man that findeth thee; for thy merchandise is better than the merchandise of silver, and the gain of thee more than fine gold.

ELLICOTT, "(19) Unto this day.—�either the compiler of Kings nor the chronicler

saw fit to alter a phrase which no longer applied to the political circumstances of

their own day. (Comp. 1 Chronicles 4:41; 1 Chronicles 4:43; 1 Chronicles 5:26.)

PULPIT, "Unto this day. So our compiler of Captivity and post-Captivity date

transcribes the literal words of his copy.