AT THE END of twenty years, during which Solomon built these two buildings—the temple of the LORD and the royal palace—11King Solomon gave twenty towns in Galilee to Hiram king of Tyre, because Hiram had supplied him with all the cedar and pine and gold he wanted. 12But when Hiram went from Tyre to see the towns that Solomon had given him, he was not pleased with them. 13“What kind of towns are these you have given me, my brother?” he asked. And he called them the Land of Cabul, a name they have to this day. 14Now Hiram had sent to the king 120 talents of gold.
15Here is the account of the forced labor King Solomon conscripted to build the LORD’s temple, his own palace, the supporting terraces, the wall of Jerusalem, and Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer. 16(Pharaoh king of Egypt had attacked and captured Gezer. He had set it on fire. He killed its Canaanite inhabitants and then gave it as a wedding gift to his daughter, Solomon’s wife. 17And Solomon rebuilt Gezer.) He built up Lower Beth Horon, 18Baalath, and Tadmor in the desert, within his land, 19as well as all his store cities and the towns for his chariots and for his horses—whatever he desired to build in Jerusalem, in Lebanon and throughout all the territory he ruled.
20All the people left from the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites (these peoples were not Israelites), 21that is, their descendants remaining in the land, whom the Israelites could not exterminate—these Solomon conscripted for his slave labor force, as it is to this day. 22But Solomon did not make slaves of any of the Israelites; they were his fighting men, his government officials, his officers, his captains, and the commanders of his chariots and charioteers. 23They were also the chief officials in charge of Solomon’s projects—550 officials supervising the men who did the work.
24After Pharaoh’s daughter had come up from the City of David to the palace Solomon had built for her, he constructed the supporting terraces.
25Three times a year Solomon sacrificed burnt offerings and fellowship offerings on the altar he had built for the LORD, burning incense before the LORD along with them, and so fulfilled the temple obligations.
26King Solomon also built ships at Ezion Geber, which is near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea. 27And Hiram sent his men—sailors who knew the sea—to serve in the fleet with Solomon’s men. 28They sailed to Ophir and brought back 420 talents of gold, which they delivered to King Solomon.
10:1When the queen of Sheba heard about the fame of Solomon and his relation to the name of the LORD, she came to test him with hard questions. 2Arriving at Jerusalem with a very great caravan—with camels carrying spices, large quantities of gold, and precious stones—she came to Solomon and talked with him about all that she had on her mind. 3Solomon answered all her questions; nothing was too hard for the king to explain to her. 4When the queen of Sheba saw all the wisdom of Solomon and the palace he had built, 5the food on his table, the seating of his officials, the attending servants in their robes, his cupbearers, and the burnt offerings he made at the temple of the LORD, she was overwhelmed.
6She said to the king, “The report I heard in my own country about your achievements and your wisdom is true. 7But I did not believe these things until I came and saw with my own eyes. Indeed, not even half was told me; in wisdom and wealth you have far exceeded the report I heard. 8How happy your men must be! How happy your officials, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom! 9Praise be to the LORD your God, who has delighted in you and placed you on the throne of Israel. Because of the LORD’s eternal love for Israel, he has made you king, to maintain justice and righteousness.”
10And she gave the king 120 talents of gold, large quantities of spices, and precious stones. Never again were so many spices brought in as those the queen of Sheba gave to King Solomon.
11(Hiram’s ships brought gold from Ophir; and from there they brought great cargoes of almugwood and precious stones. 12The king used the almugwood to make supports for the temple of the LORD and for the royal palace, and to make harps and lyres for the musicians. So much almugwood has never been imported or seen since that day.)
13King Solomon gave the queen of Sheba all she desired and asked for, besides what he had given her out of his royal bounty. Then she left and returned with her retinue to her own country.
14The weight of the gold that Solomon received yearly was 666 talents, 15not including the revenues from merchants and traders and from all the Arabian kings and the governors of the land.
16King Solomon made two hundred large shields of hammered gold; six hundred bekas of gold went into each shield. 17He also made three hundred small shields of hammered gold, with three minas of gold in each shield. The king put them in the Palace of the Forest of Lebanon.
18Then the king made a great throne inlaid with ivory and overlaid with fine gold. 19The throne had six steps, and its back had a rounded top. On both sides of the seat were armrests, with a lion standing beside each of them. 20Twelve lions stood on the six steps, one at either end of each step. Nothing like it had ever been made for any other kingdom. 21All King Solomon’s goblets were gold, and all the household articles in the Palace of the Forest of Lebanon were pure gold. Nothing was made of silver, because silver was considered of little value in Solomon’s days. 22The king had a fleet of trading ships at sea along with the ships of Hiram. Once every three years it returned, carrying gold, silver and ivory, and apes and baboons.
23King Solomon was greater in riches and wisdom than all the other kings of the earth. 24The whole world sought audience with Solomon to hear the wisdom God had put in his heart. 25Year after year, everyone who came brought a gift—articles of silver and gold, robes, weapons and spices, and horses and mules.
26Solomon accumulated chariots and horses; he had fourteen hundred chariots and twelve thousand horses, which he kept in the chariot cities and also with him in Jerusalem. 27The king made silver as common in Jerusalem as stones, and cedar as plentiful as sycamore-fig trees in the foothills. 28Solomon’s horses were imported from Egypt and from Kue—the royal merchants purchased them from Kue. 29They imported a chariot from Egypt for six hundred shekels of silver, and a horse for a hundred and fifty. They also exported them to all the kings of the Hittites and of the Arameans.
THE TEMPLE IS the focus of the grandeur of Solomon’s kingdom. The account of that kingdom began with a description of its administration (4:1–34), listing the officials and governors, the provisions of the kingdom, and details on Solomon’s wisdom. The concluding sections on the kingdom describe Solomon’s vast trading relations and international influence (9:26–10:25); they end with summary statements of his military power, prosperity, and extensive trade relations (10:26–29).
The theme of the temple is continued in chapter 9, as is evident by a second notation that Solomon completed all the work of the house (9:25b). Though the content of 9:10–25 may seem to be disparate, it is all related to building projects with the temple as its focal point.1 The displeasure of Hiram in his contract with Solomon (vv. 10–14) is related to the provision of materials for the royal buildings. A second section (vv. 15–23) reports on the labor provisions; it lists the various locations of building projects in Jerusalem and elsewhere (vv. 15–19), the divisions of labor (vv. 20–22), and finally the supervisors of the labor force (v. 23). This section concludes with a summary notation on the function of palace and temple (vv. 24–25).
The unit on Solomon’s trade relations and international influence begins and ends with a report on his mercantile arrangements with Hiram (9:26–28; 10:22–25). The various references to Hiram have different points of interest; the first has to do with trade for gold (9:26–28), the second is part of the queen of Sheba story (10:11–12), and the third refers to a partnership in a trading empire to the west (10:22). The whole section on Solomon’s grandeur has a focus on gold (9:28; 10:14–21; 22), which is complemented by his fame for wisdom in the queen of Sheba account. A concluding summary emphasizes Solomon’s incomparable wealth and wisdom (10:23–25), tying together the threads that are interwoven throughout. The final summary reports (10:26–29) make Solomon’s empire so grand that precious metals and articles are regarded as common household items.
Labor Provisions for Building Projects (9:10–25)
HIRAM WAS AN active partner in the building of the temple. Solomon’s payment of cities to Hiram (9:10–14) is complementary to the report on labor provisions for temple building (cf. 9:15). At first there was harmony between Hiram and Solomon (5:7, 12), but as often happens in commercial relations, dissatisfaction develops. The building of the temple and Solomon’s palaces takes a total of twenty years (6:38; 7:1). As part of the settlement at the end of that time Solomon allots to Hiram twenty settlements in Galilee. Hiram is displeased with them, so he named them Cabul. The digression provides an etymology for the name of a well-known territory, but the meaning of the name is not known.
It is not clear why Solomon gives territory to Hiram. Most translations make the cities a payment for timber and gold (e.g., NIV, RSV), but this creates two problems. Payment for building materials and wages of the workers was made in annual contributions of grain and oil (5:11); there is no indication Solomon has defaulted on his contract. Further, why does Hiram give Solomon gold if he felt cheated in a payment made by allotment of property (9:14)?
Solomon’s payment of twenty settlements is not expressed as a sequel to the material contributions of Hiram (9:11). The temporal adverb introducing his compensation of cities in Galilee (ʾāz) expresses no chronological sequence with the preceding.2 The main clause explains Hiram’s displeasure when the transactions are completed at the end of twenty years (v. 12). This dissatisfaction is not a comment on the desirability of the property, which was fertile agricultural land readily annexed to Tyre. Hiram apparently thinks twenty settlements in northern Galilee are a miserly remuneration for the amount of gold given. The weight of a talent varied in different systems and times, but at minimum Hiram has given Solomon several tons of gold.
The city of Cabul is named in the boundary description of Asher (Josh. 19:27). An Arabic village called Kabul is located in lower Galilee, about eight miles south east of Akko. An historical, geographical, and chronological survey of the area of southern Galilee by Zvi Gal located a series of sites that correspond to the biblical description of the boundary between Asher and Zebulun.3 The biblical Cabul may be identified with an Iron Age site called “the ruin of the head of the olive” (Hurvat Rosh Zayit), located on a narrow ridge less than a mile from the Arabic village. The site is an impressive fort, apparently built by Hiram to serve as an administrative center for the region.4 Storage rooms contained hundreds of storage jars; carbonized remains show some were used to distribute grain; other jars were probably used to distribute olive oil and wine.
The account of conscripted labor (vv. 15–23) has a long introduction (vv. 15–19), which enumerates the various projects that form a part of Solomon’s building activities. These include the fortifications of Jerusalem and strategic points in the provinces. Fortifications in Jerusalem include “supporting terraces” (v. 15, NIV), likely meaning embankments filled in to support retaining walls and buttresses for the buildings on the steep slopes of the southeast hill (the city of David).
Six cities are named as part of the fortifications: Hazor, Meggido, Gezer, Lower Beth Horon, Baalath, and Tamar. These form a line of defense from north to south. Hazor was a major northern fortification conquered by Joshua (Josh. 11:1), southwest of Lake Huleh. Megiddo was a fortress guarding one of the passes to the valley of Jezreel. Gezer was in the Judean foothills and served as protection against the Philistines to the south and west. Lower Beth Horon, to the northwest of Jerusalem, protected the road from the coast to the mountains west of Jordan. “Tadmor in the desert, within his land” (NIV) paraphrases a faulty text. Tadmor is found in the versions and in Chronicles (cf. 2 Chron. 8:4), but the Masoretic text reads Tamar, a city in Judah, located in the desert south of the Dead Sea on the border with Edom. This must be the location of the city intended in a north to south listing of fortifications.5 Baalath might be Bealoth (cf. Josh. 15:24), but its identity remains uncertain.
The mention of Gezer includes a note about Solomon’s relationship with the Egyptians (v. 16). Gezer is one of the cities named in the Merneptah Stele, a commemoration of Egyptian victories in Canaan that includes the earliest reference to Israel outside the Bible. It was in the interest of the Egyptians to control the Philistines, just as it was to Solomon. It would make perfectly good sense for the Egyptians to put Gezer under control of a loyal ally in Canaan. The list concludes with an inclusive reference to all centers developed for administrative and defensive purposes (v. 19). Excavations at cities like Lachish have revealed large buildings with long, narrow rooms that served for storage.
Conscripted labor that Solomon uses to maintain his building projects consists of native Canaanite peoples who lived as subordinates after the Conquest (vv. 20–21). These are to be distinguished from the temporary conscriptions that Solomon laid on the Israelites to construct the buildings (5:13). The Israelites were never subject to continuous servitude. They serve as military officers in charge of soldiers and chariotry.
A concluding summary on the temple (vv. 23–25) notes three disparate items: the number of the chief supervisors, the move of Pharaoh’s daughter, and the three annual festivals (cf. Ex. 23:14–17). The offerings Solomon makes are not to suggest he is acting as a priest, but rather to show he makes provision for daily and yearly rituals of the temple. The translation “fulfilled the temple obligations” (v. 25b) interprets the Hebrew šlm in the context of temple maintenance; normally the verb conveys nothing more than the idea of completion (cf. 7:51).6 “So he finished the house” (RSV) is the logical conclusion to the topic of temple building.
International Fame and Fortune (9:26–10:25)
IN ADDITION TO internal administration of his kingdom, Solomon has extensive involvement in foreign affairs. These include trade with distant lands, which he carries out in cooperation with Hiram (9:26–28; 10:22). Solomon’s seaport is located at Ezion Geber on the Gulf of Aqaba (9:26); the length of time the ships travel is an indication of both the distance they go and they difficulties of the journey (10:22). The Phoenicians were experienced mariners, whose vocation was to ply the seas. They had ships and expertise, so it is natural for Solomon to rely on his alliance with Hiram to obtain imports. Gold, fine wood, and ivory are named as some of the chief imported items that were necessary for the artifacts of the temple and palace complex.
Ophir (9:28) is traditionally thought to be southwest Arabia. It is associated with the Queen of Sheba (10:11–12) and is located there in the Table of Nations (Gen. 10:28–29). Mention of ivory and exotic animals (10:22) has led to a search for Ophir in India or east Africa; Josephus locates Ophir in India. Tarshish7 has been located on the coast of the Red Sea in Africa, an area rich with precious stones of the same name (e.g., Ex. 28:20; 39:13; Ezek. 28:13). Tarshish is also the name of a port on the Mediterranean known from Assyrian inscriptions and other biblical references (Gen. 10:4–5; Jonah 1:3); it is probably to be identified with Tharsis in southwestern Spain. It was colonized by the Phoenicians and was well known for its metals and precious stones.
“Ships of Tarshish” designates the cargo these ships carry rather than the destiny of their travels.8 The expression extends to indicate the kind of ship used to transport the cargo. This type of ship was distinguished by its strength, large size, and peculiar shape, which allowed them to sail long distances in the open sea (cf. Ps. 48:7; Isa. 2:16; Ezek. 27:25). The shipbuilders of Tyre had access to many types of wood and imported materials for sails and ornamentation.9 Solomon used magnificent “ships of Tarshish” for voyages to fetch the treasures of Ophir.
The identity of the imports is uncertain (10:22). “Ivory” (NIV) translates a rare term (šenhabbîm), which is associated with a Sanskrit word meaning “elephant.” This identification is suspicious in a language that regularly uses the common word šēn for ivory (v. 18). The reference may be to ebony (hobnîm; cf. Ezek. 27:15), a black wood highly valued for carving from trees in southern India and Sri Lanka. “Apes” (NIV) translates the Hebrew qōpîm, which appears in late Akkadian but may ultimately be derived from Egypt. The final item (tûkkiyyîm) may be a loanword of Indian origin meaning “peacocks” (RSV). “Baboons” (NIV) is based on an Egyptian etymology.
The account of the queen of Sheba further illustrates the fame, wisdom, and wealth of Solomon (10:1–13). A distinguished monarch as far away as southern Arabia is impressed by reports of his accomplishments. Southwestern Arabia was an important territory, controlling trade routes between India, east Africa, and the Mediterranean. The queen of Sheba controlled an enormous amount of wealth, as indicated in the size of the caravan that attended her (v. 2). She comes to test the wisdom of Solomon with riddles (v. 1), obscure metaphorical references like the kind Samson used to test the Philistines (cf. Judg. 14:14). His answers and accomplishments are enough to take away her breath (1 Kings 10:5).
Solomon’s wealth is indicated by the enormous gifts the queen needs to give in order to be significant (v. 10); the gold alone is equivalent to what Solomon has received from Hiram (cf. 9:14). The ships of Hiram also bring almugwood (10:11), used to make supports for the temple (possibly pillars or balustrades) and musical instruments. Almug is well known in ancient writings (Ugaritic and Akkadian); its exact identity is uncertain, but it was a hard reddish brown wood. With the mention of Hiram, wealth is stressed as much as wisdom in the visit of the queen of Sheba.
The gold Solomon receives in one year may have been the income in one particular year rather than an annual income (10:14). Solomon also collects taxes from foreign traders and local merchants (v. 15). “Arabian kings” are probably merchant princes who use the routes from Edom to Damascus, and “governors of the land” are district officials.
Solomon makes two hundred large shields covered with gold and three hundred small shields (10:16–17).10 Large shields were body length, possibly three sided; small shields were a light protection worn on the arm. The weight of gold in each small shield is three “minas,” equal to about 150 “shekels” (just over three and a half pounds, just under two kilos). The weight measure of the large shields is not given, but shekel is likely to be inferred, a weight four times that of the small shields. The “bekah” (NIV, 10:16) is only half the weight of the shekel, which would have been double the small shield. Guards display the shields as the king goes up to the temple (cf. 14:27–28), a sight that appropriately impresses even the queen of Sheba.
The throne of Solomon is a work of grandeur. The six steps may indicate that the throne is situated on a platform, which constitutes the seventh step (10:19). Babylonian temple towers were built in seven stages to represent the entire cosmos; perhaps the ascent to the throne provided assurance that order in the world will prevail. Lion figures stand at the sides of each step and beside each armrest (vv. 19–20). The throne has ivory inlays and is covered with gold.
Prosperity and Security in Jerusalem (10:26–29)
THE WEALTH OF Solomon provides for a strong military, security, and spectacular luxury in the capital city. The enumeration of horses, chariots, and military cities summarizes information given earlier (4:26; 9:19). Solomon obtains his horses from Kue, located on the Cappadocian seacoast in Asia Minor near the Taurus Mountains (10:28). The Masoretic text says that Solomon also imports horses from Egypt, but the text is doubtful. The area of muṣri in Anatolia just north of the Taurus has likely been confused with the term for Egypt (miṣrāyîm) in the Hebrew text (cf. NIV). This area was rich in wood for chariots and was known as the home of horse breeders. Egypt was not a land for timber and was not known for the export of horses.
Solomon’s merchants buy horses and chariots and trade them along the way with the Hittite and Aramean kings (10:29). Egypt may have been a recipient in the trade of horses and chariots. Jones suggests that Solomon may have controlled trade between Egypt and Syria.11 As in the previous verse, the text may only be referring to the area of Cappadocia known as muṣri.
Bridging Contexts
THE GLORIFICATION OF GOD. An important phrase is included in the introduction of the visit of the queen of Sheba: She has heard of the fame of Solomon “for the sake of the name of the LORD” (lit. trans., 10:1). Though the phrase is often regarded as secondary, it expresses well the sentiments of the author.12 The queen is compelled to acknowledge the fulfillment of God’s promise to Solomon (cf. 3:12–13); his wisdom and great fortune are without parallel. The Gibeonites express a similar disposition in coming to Joshua (Josh. 9:9); Jeremiah says that the revival of Jerusalem will bring all the nations to acknowledge the fame of Yahweh (Jer. 3:17).
The kingdom of Solomon gives testimony to God’s choice of David and Jerusalem; that kingdom becomes the occasion for the whole world to seek Solomon and bring him tribute (10:24–25). Their homage gives honor to God; the success of Solomon is entirely God’s work. The concluding summary of Solomon’s wealth and wisdom reinforces the accolades of the queen of Sheba, drawing to a conclusion the theme that has characterized his rule (10:23–25; cf. 10:6–7 and 4:29, 34). The world comes to seek Solomon, but the kingdom of Solomon makes the name of God known to the world.
The tribute brought to Solomon is often compared to the pompous lists of booty in Assyrian inscriptions.13 Those lists boast of the achievements of the monarch in the rapacious pillaging undertaken in expansion of Assyrian control. But the greatness of Solomon’s kingdom is not a tribute to Solomon and his military exploits. Unlike Assyrian annals, the memory of Solomon is not to immortalize a great king. The narrative will go on to make Solomon responsible for the failure of his kingdom. The greatness of Solomon is integrated with his building of the temple, particularly by the repeated reference to Hiram. Hiram was involved in providing materials, a skilled labor force, and a trade alliance that gives the empire international status. The temple is confirmation that God has fulfilled his promise to David in establishing his throne. The objective of the account is to show the kingdom established by God is not inferior to the greatest empires of its time.
Gold and other opulence. Royal status and divine favor are demonstrated by wealth and international influence. Gold is a constant topic of discussion; it serves to introduce the involvement of Hiram (9:14; 10:11, 22) and links together a series of short notes on Solomon’s wealth. Solomon receives annual revenues of gold (10:14–15); gold shields hang in the great meeting hall (vv. 16–17); gold covers the ivory throne (vv. 18–20). Gold is so plentiful that silver is considered inferior in the days of Solomon (v. 21). The amount of gold received in one year is approximately equal to the total of the payment of Hiram, gold brought by the ships of Hiram, and the enormous gift of the queen of Sheba (cf. 9:14, 28; 10:10).
The amounts of gold attributed to Solomon are fantastic, but there is evidence of enormous amounts of gold in ancient empires.14 The claim that all Solomon’s drinking vessels are gold (10:21) is unexceptional by ancient standards. Kings of the cultured Mesopotamian city of Ur, more than fifteen hundred years before Solomon (ca. 2600 B.C.), had palaces adorned with golden cups and dishes. Elegant specimens were discovered by Sir Leonard Wooley in excavations of the Royal Cemetery in 1927–31. The Cairo Museum boasts gold-plated furniture of ancient Egyptian kingdoms. Gold-plated furniture was buried with Queen Hetepheres, mother of Cheops, builder of the great pyramid (ca. 2600 B.C.).
The tomb of King Tutankhamun, who was buried about 1331 B.C., contained a carved wooden chair covered almost completely with gold. It still retains inlays of glass and colored stones. Gold was beaten into animal heads on the front of the armrests and claw feet on the chair legs. It gleams today much like the great throne of Solomon once did. Ivory was also common in the ancient world and was often covered with gold in an ostentatious display of wealth. In a tomb at Salamis, on the southern coast of Cyprus, a throne and a bed covered with ivory veneers were found smashed in a tomb. Thousands of ivory fragments found in the Assyrian palaces at Nimrud (ancient Kalah) are still being catalogued, drawn, and illustrated. Gold overlay on ivory surfaces has been preserved.
Gold was not limited to items of tableware and furniture. Pharaohs of the new kingdom period of Egypt (ca. 1550–1150 B.C.) were particularly lavish. Amenophis III (ca. 1386–1349) honored the great god Amun with a temple at Thebes that was “plated with gold throughout, its floor adorned with silver, (and) all its portals with electrum.”15
Actual examples of large buildings covered with gold to substantiate the boasts of kings do not exist, but the evidence for them does. Pierre Lacau, a French scholar, examined exhaustively the pillars set up by Tuthmosis III (ca. 1479–1425 B.C.) in front of the Temple of the Sacred Boat at Karnak (Thebes).16 Each pillar is carved to resemble bundles of papyrus reed set on a flat round base. There are twelve pillars, each over eleven feet high, but textual descriptions indicate that an additional fourteen pillars, each about fifty-three feet from base to capital, were present in another hall. Narrow horizontal slits on the base and vertical slits around each column appear to have been designed to anchor sheets of gold that once covered these pillars. Elsewhere in the temple the stones of doorways, shrines, and obelisks all have slits or nail holes used to secure gold sheeting.
It is presumptuous to assume that biblical descriptions have no basis in reality. The biblical writers provide descriptions of gold items and weights of gold that are in accord with other records of those times. King Osorkon I of Egypt (921 B.C.) records a gift to the gods of 383 tons of gold and silver. Fragments on pillars in a temple at Bubastis (in the eastern Nile delta) show itemized lists of gifts to each god and goddess of Egypt and tally the vast gold treasure.17 Such records are astounding and can no longer be verified, but care was taken to trace even small amounts of gold coming into official royal depots or storehouses.
The taxes Solomon receives are not regarded as negligible in comparison to the twenty-five tons of gold received in one year (10:14–15). Various grades of gold are often mentioned, and weights of gold given may have included the entire object. Though the amounts of gold attributed to Solomon cannot be determined with factual objectivity, the descriptions fit that of great kings of his time.
The enormous wealth of Solomon is sometimes regarded as exaggeration made to serve the purpose of the narrative; Solomon’s “accruing of bullion, vessels, and other valuable artifacts in Jerusalem is not intended to be credible, but incredible.”18 The fashioning of shields and the king’s stepped throne are examples of extravagant display of excessive wealth. Solomon, it is alleged, grew to be a figure larger than life as the ideal of his kingdom was perpetuated through the centuries.
DeVries provides a detailed analysis of the record of temple building (6:2–7:51) in which he distinguishes earlier records of measurements and removes all material he considers to be narrative embellishment. He asserts that once the original records are recovered, “it will be seen that ‘Jerusalem the Golden’ is a figment of someone’s imagination.”19 Such literary conclusions are based on historical assessments. Davies helps clarify this issue: “The question of historicity—namely, how much use the text is to a modern historian operating with a rationalistic view of things as having either happened or not (or with quantifiable degrees of probability)—is a matter not for literary criticism but for historical criticism.”20
The problem here is that historical criticism does not have the option of objectivity; data and methods open to the historian are subjective, even to the point that it is considered impossible to make any statements about the past that may be labeled true or false.21 Such extreme skepticism is a discredit to the work of ancient historians. Information regarding Solomon’s kingdom has been drawn from official records (11:41). These records had to be sufficiently precise to allow a vast empire to function. Early historians did distinguish between events, myths, legends, and deliberate invention in writing history. If the wealth of Solomon had no basis in reality, it could not have served to establish the claim of divine fulfillment, as it was obviously intended to do.
Solomon and Hiram. Historical records do leave diverse information for the historian; the texts describing Solomon’s kingdom have some striking differences. A difficult example is the relationship that Solomon has with Hiram. The Hebrew text makes Solomon an independent king who establishes concord with Hiram because of a previous alliance with David. The LXX of 1 Kings 5:1 has quite a different statement: “And Hiram king of Tyre sent his servants to anoint Solomon in place of David his father, for Hiram always loved David.” This account seems to make Solomon a subordinate to Hiram, not the architect of an alliance that became a vast empire. The historian seeking to judiciously assimilate all information in reconstructing the past cannot simply dismiss such a statement. At times the textual critic may despair in trying to explain the origin of differing texts.22 But it is probable that the Greek is a corruption of the Hebrew, since later versions support the accepted Hebrew text.23
However preservation of such information must be accounted for; it is possible this version independently preserves another perspective on the relationship. The LXX reading of Solomon being subordinate to Hiram can be supported textually as a true reading.24 Evaluation of this Greek version requires a reexamination of other statements about the relationship between Hiram and Solomon.
The agreement between Hiram and Solomon results in substantial yearly obligations for Solomon. Hiram does determine certain conditions of the agreement (5:9–11), and the agreement is to be financially beneficial for Hiram because he is a superior in his dealing with Solomon.25 The obligations of Solomon to Hiram may have included taxation, unmentioned by the accounts. Hiram probably controls the shipping operations as part of his commercial operations, with benefit to Solomon as a subordinate partner. None of this reduces the status of the empire of Solomon. The biblical description is not given as a full account of Solomon’s international relations. The preservation of the Greek reading is an example of how the ancients retained data they had at their disposal, even when it was apparently contradictory.
The ideal king. A prophetic work such as Kings does not pretend to be modern history in its goals and purposes, nor is it inaccurate in its presentation. A comparison of Solomon in the account in Kings with that in Chronicles shows how much the objective of the writer determines the profile of his work.26 The purpose of Kings is not to glorify Solomon; it is to show how the intention of God is at work in the rise and demise of the nation. The summary statement of Solomon’s greatness is followed by a second conclusion (10:26–29). Reading this report together with the condemnation of Solomon in chapter 11 suggests that it is a negative evaluation of Solomon’s reign against the ideal of the covenant king (cf. Deut. 17:16–17).27 Peace in Jerusalem is not achieved by military might alone, nor can all the horses of Cappadocia preserve it. Silver as readily available as common stones and majestic cedars as plentiful as the ordinary sycamore of the Shephelah will not in themselves bring prosperity and justice to the people.
The prophet Zechariah has quite a different description of the great king who will come to Jerusalem to bring the peace security they so deeply desire:
Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion!
Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem!
See, your king comes to you,
righteous and having salvation,
gentle and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey.
I will take away the chariots from Ephraim
and the war-horses from Jerusalem,
and the battle bow will be broken.
He will proclaim peace to the nations.
His rule will extend from sea to sea
and from the River to the ends of the earth. (Zech. 9:9–10)
The humble king of Jerusalem does not arrive on a war steed or with military power. The connection of this king with Solomon is not to be lost. His rule will extend from sea to sea and from the river to the ends of the earth, just like the rule of the ideal king in the psalm attributed to Solomon (cf. Ps. 72:8). Solomon represents the kingdom of God as the greatest of all kingdoms. More than ostentation of gold, the ruler over God’s people is to manifest justice and equity:
Endow the king with your justice, O God,
the royal son with your righteousness.
He will judge your people in righteousness,
your afflicted ones with justice.
The mountains will bring prosperity to the people,
the hills the fruit of righteousness. (Ps. 72:1–3)
Presumably a king with the wealth and international reputation attributed to Solomon would be in the most advantageous position to bring prosperity and justice to the people. Ironically, in some ways the opposite is the case. The glory of Solomon places a heavy burden on his people, and his primary concerns are not those of justice. Initially Solomon has the wisdom that generates wealth and fame, but he does not retain the wisdom that is characterized by covenant loyalty, the wisdom of learning the fear of Yahweh. The ideal of King Solomon (Ps. 72) is only a memory to what his reign should have been.
Contemporary Significance
WEALTH, ITS SIGNIFICANCE, and its use. Wealth is never an individual matter; no one can achieve wealth in isolation from a community or a broad work environment; people with wealth should always honor God as the Giver. We must live our Christian lives with these principles in mind. The use of money is fundamental to living out Christian values. The story of Solomon has important lessons on God’s view of wealth, its significance, and its use.
Solomon’s wealth was not his personally, nor were the riches he accumulated in Jerusalem an example of God’s desire for individual wealth. In Kings the most significant theological statements are often found in speeches. The famed wisdom and wealth of Solomon that draw the attention of the distant queen of Sheba are not for the personal benefit or reputation of Solomon, but for the reputation of his God, as expressed by the queen herself: “Praise be to the LORD your God, who has delighted in you and placed you on the throne of Israel. Because of the LORD’s eternal love for Israel, he has made you king, to maintain justice and righteousness” (10:9). God’s reputation depends on Solomon’s serving the entire nation with his wealth. To his credit, this is said to have been accomplished: “During Solomon’s lifetime Judah and Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, lived in safety, each man under his own vine and fig tree” (4:25).
What control should individuals exercise over wealth? To what extent is wealth a personal achievement, and to what extent is it the product of the structure of a whole society? Should Bill Gates, the developer of the world’s dominant computer operating system, be personally entitled to his forty billion dollars? Should corporate executives earn multimillions if their leadership earns shareholders billions in profits? The covenant of Deuteronomy contains warnings to the Israelites, not just to the Israelite king, about the accumulation of wealth in their new land:
Be careful that you do not forget the LORD your God.… Otherwise, when you eat and are satisfied, when you build fine houses and settle down, and when your herds and flocks grow large and your silver and gold increase … then your heart will become proud and you will forget the LORD your God … You may say to yourself, “My power and the strength of my hands have produced this wealth for me.” But remember the LORD your God, for he it is who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms the covenant, which he swore to your forefathers, as it is today. (Deut. 8:11–18)
The wealth of Israel was not the personal possession of individual Israelites, as though they earned it themselves, nor was it the possession of the king who made their national economy possible. According to Shmuel of Sokhokhow, a Hasidic rabbi of the early twentieth century, Israel endured slavery in Egypt in order to learn that wealth came from God, not from the Nile River.28 God granted wealth in Israel the same way as he provided manna in the desert. The Israelites were to remember that they were unable to become independently wealthy. The very expression is an oxymoron. Theologically, resources are a gift from God; sociologically, they are received as a community and are a product of the collective work of individuals.
Bush and Dekro refer to Albert Einstein in establishing the “torah of money” principle imbedded in the theology that the earth belongs to the Lord.29 The paradigmatic “genius” of the twentieth century was firm in his insistence that “in science … the work of the individual is so bound up with that of his scientific predecessors and contemporaries that it appears almost as an impersonal product of his generation.”30 The invention of a bright young computer scientist is not really his own; it is impossible without previous centuries of knowledge, skills, and resources. The scientist harvests the fruit of the labors of many before him.
The story of Solomon shows that wealth is a blessing from God. This does not validate what has come to be called the “prosperity gospel.” The promise of this type of theology is that God desires wealth for each individual that can be generated by acts of faith and piety. It is often featured in the opulence of television personalities. Humorist Ray Stevens asks, “Would Jesus wear a Rolex on his television show?” The preacher had so inspired him he had already begun to write the check when the question came to his mind. Luxury can be successful in making financial appeals; evidence of material success inspires a desire to become a part of it. Viewers want to believe they can be as wealthy as the preacher; they need the preacher to be wealthy, and they respond by giving to be sure he remains wealthy.
Theologically the question of Stevens addresses a vital issue. A wealthy ruler came to Jesus with the question of what he needed to do to inherit eternal life (Mark 10:17–25). In answer to the question Jesus cites six social and ethical responsibilities. When the young man declares that he has observed these from the time he was young, Jesus shows special love for him and responds by telling him to sell what he has and give it to the poor. His wealth is a barrier to the good he desires; it has become his god.
The story continues with a lesson to the disciples. Peter observes that they have done exactly what Jesus urged the wealthy man to do. Jesus responds by assuring them that they have not given up anything that will not be restored to them one hundred times in this life, and in the world to come they will have eternal life. The blessing of wealth cannot be the end for which service is rendered to God. Service is rendered to the glory of God alone; God provides abundance to those who seek to magnify his name.
The story of the rich young ruler is usually interpreted as addressing the question of faith. Cranfield attempts to resolve the conflict between selling one’s goods and salvation by faith alone. Selling one’s goods and giving the proceeds to the poor is a meritorious act that will earn treasure in heaven (Mark 10:21); the reward is God’s undeserved gift to those who are willing to receive it. But trust, willingness to accept God’s gift as a gift, cannot help but show itself by outward tokens. Jesus, by commanding the man to show the tokens that are the outward expression of faith, is really appealing to him to have faith.31 Faith always involves questions of use of wealth. Trust is difficult for the wealthy—more difficult than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. The response of the disciples indicates that the words of Jesus have application beyond the particular case of the rich young ruler. Jesus is saying something about the use of possessions for all those who trust him.
The response of Jesus to the disciples after the encounter with the rich ruler indicates that all believers must make a decision regarding community loyalty. Those who follow Jesus become part of a new kinship group that represents the kingdom of God (Mark 10:29–30). Jesus assures Peter that both his relational and material needs will be satisfied in the context of the family of which he is a part. As argued by Hellerman:
The promise to Peter assumes as its background a constellation of family values which characterized the patrilineal kinship groups of Mediterranean antiquity. Among these values were some tenaciously held convictions about the place of material goods in the family setting. Specifically, the sharing of material resources constituted a characteristic practice of Mediterranean family systems.32
The requirement that the young ruler give his goods to the poor is given in the context of the followers of Jesus; the obligation is not to disperse wealth indiscriminately to all who are poor but to invest it in those who are the followers of Jesus who have devoted their lives to his kingdom. The rich ruler has his place in a highly stratified class structure that isolates the wealthy elite from the agrarian peasants and the urban poor. Roman society was replicated in villages, cities, and provinces, in which class stratification was supported by an inequitable distribution of landed wealth. The difficulty for the rich ruler is to abandon the privileged place he has in larger society to join the community of the kingdom where such privilege does not exist. It is this choice of faith that leaves him grieved and troubled; it is a choice that must be made by all believers in all circumstances. The choice of joining the alternate community established by Jesus makes it easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for the rich to enter the kingdom.
Traditional ancient wisdom held that wealth invariably represented the blessing of God and that loss of wealth was evidence of a moral failure. Eliphaz and his accomplices defended this doctrine as they sought to correct Job. Eliphaz begins by commending Job, suggesting that his confidence should be found in knowing the just rules of retribution:
Should not your piety be your confidence
and your blameless ways your hope?
Consider now: Who, being innocent, has ever perished?
Where were the upright ever destroyed?
As I have observed, those who plow evil
And those who sow trouble reap it. (Job 4:6–8)
In his second speech Eliphaz describes the terror of the wicked; they know their wealth cannot endure, that their vast possessions will be lost (Job 15:29). The rich ruler may well have held to the sentiments of the wisdom of Job’s friends. If his wealth is a mark of divine favor, what more does he need to be part of the kingdom of God? His faith and his fear of God are evident in his life, because he has all the signs of being blessed by God. The book of Job does not deny this truth of traditional wisdom, but the story of Job is meant to show limits to the analogy of sowing and reaping.
Job is intransigent in resisting the arguments of his friends while he sits on the ash heap, because he is fully conscious of his integrity with God. His inner strength keeps him from yielding to the enormous pressure of traditional arguments, while he endures the harsh lessons of learning to trust God in his new circumstances. According to the subversive wisdom of Jesus, the rich are not necessarily within the kingdom of God and quite probably are outside of it.
Christians need to think carefully about their view of the world in relation to wealth. Industrialized societies tend to view the world as a resource of unlimited good. If this is so, wealth can be generated by hard work; hard work done honorably brings about God’s blessing, and the wealth earned is the sole responsibility of the individual. Science and technology have taught well the lesson that the resources of this world are much more than is known. If current use of resources is not sustainable, new ways can be found to provide the same benefits. Christians need to remember that resources are limited for particular people in particular places. Not everyone is able to generate a living through relentless hard work, let alone wealth. Those in the kingdom of God must look beyond their own interests both in how they acquire wealth and how they share it with those who do not have the same opportunities.
In the kingdom of Solomon is a distinct recognition of limited resources, even though his trading ships do go to the farthest reaches of the world in search of treasures. When God established his people in the Promised Land, land was the most important limited resource, and it was to be carefully allotted so every family had a share (Num. 26:52–56). The year of release of debts for those whose land had been mortgaged, and the restoration of land to the original family in the Jubilee year, served as a protection against those who would join house to house and field to field until there was no place left for anyone else in the land (Isa. 5:8).
Priests and Levites received no share of land to prevent them from using their privileged status to control use of land in relation to temple service.33 The blessing of God for Solomon was not to accumulate wealth in Jerusalem but to do what was just and right, as the Queen of Sheba said (1 Kings 10:9). Justice would bring honor to God, even for a pagan queen, not the continuous acquisition of wealth.
In the days of Jesus it was particularly the religious leaders who were guilty of robbing the vulnerable. Jesus warned against those who liked to walk about in flowing garments, to have first place in the synagogue or at meals, but who devoured widow’s houses and whose long prayers were nothing more than display of piety (Mark 12:38–39). A closely related evil was defrauding workers of their proper pay. Jesus warns against this in his response to the rich ruler; he follows the words of the covenant in saying do not kill, do not commit adultery, do not steal, and do not bear false witness, but he breaks the pattern by saying, “Do not defraud” (10:19). James refers to this same evil when he warns the rich that the wages they have failed to pay those who mow their fields are crying out (James 5:4). The Lord Almighty will hear the cries of the harvesters; the rich have reason to fear.
Sharing resources. The early Christians took seriously the challenge of forming a new community in which resources would be shared. The first believers shared everything in a single community, literally doing what Jesus had told the rich young ruler; they sold all their goods and distributed it to the needy. At first they were able to do this with complete harmony, and their numbers grew rapidly (Acts 2:44–47; 4:32–37). The specific example of Barnabas selling his property shows that the dispersal of landed wealth was not to give it up in monastic fashion, but was specifically given to assist the needy of the group that formed following the ascension.
This understanding of the Christian community is found in the first centuries of Christianity. Clement of Alexandria, who died early in the third century, wrote to people of some means a treatise entitled “Who Is the Rich Man Who Is Saved?”34 He was attempting to interpret the words of Jesus to the rich man for wealthy believers. He did not take the command of Jesus to sell everything in a literal fashion; if all were in need of food and shelter, there would be no ability to meet the needs of the poor. Instead, he took the position that the church is a family; wealth and poverty were to be shared within this kinship group bound by faith, just as it might be in an ordinary family inheritance. Not every believer was expected to give up properties; resources were shared within the group without centralized ownership and control. The kingdom of God was to stand in opposition to the institutionalized greed of the world in which they lived.
Marx has called money our “jealous god” who can tolerate no other deity.35 Marx found his own way to serve this same god; his solution was substitution of servitude. The failure of economic and political systems to provide justice is a lesson on the high calling given to Christians. Christians serve God rather than mammon; they work hard in order to be able to give to the one who has need (Eph. 4:28). Individuals are to have control over wealth they are able to earn; provision must be made so all can contribute to the common good.
The great challenge of living for the kingdom of God is that all Christians participate simultaneously in two worlds. Economically all members of a society participate in a system that serves the “jealous god.” Political systems measure standard of living in material abundance; it seems to be the one common value held by all. Christians participate in a second kinship group, the family of God; they are responsible to do good for all, as they are able, especially to those of the household of faith (Gal. 6:9–10). They must not grow weary in doing well, because their work will not perish as the material gains provided by the “jealous god.”
Wealth is an evidence of the blessing of God, but not all wealth is the result of God’s blessing. The possession of wealth is not necessarily a blessing; wealth is probably responsible for as much unhappiness in this world as poverty. Those who have wealth must recognize the vulnerable spiritual circumstance that comes with prosperity. Those who do not have riches should not fear that opportunity for goodness in life has passed them by. The King of kings who fulfilled the promise to David after Solomon did not have a place to lay his head.
Solomon is an important example to all Christians who have considerable material well-being in comparison to other people of the world. God must be honored through the riches he has given us through the collective support of a whole economic system. We are privileged to have the blessing; we need not apologize for it. Our challenge is to use this blessing to bring about peace and good, the kind of kingdom envisaged for Solomon (Ps. 72). We as Christians follow the king described by Zechariah, whose rule came through humility and sacrifice. The dominion of that kingdom will be “from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth” (72:8).