Rating
King Solomon
Most
of the kings of Judah and of Israel are rated in the book of Melachim
(Kings 1 and 2). The kings of Israel, the northern kingdom are rated
on whether they promoted idolatry and particularly whether they
followed in the sins of Yeravam ( Jereboam). This refers to
retaining the golden calves which he had instituted at Bethel and at
Dan. The Judean kings are rated on how well they walked in the
footsteps of their ancestor David. Their rating goes down if they
allow elements of idolatry to pervade their kingdom. But the author
of Kings is also particularly concerned with eliminating the bamot-
the local sanctuaries that existed at the time of the first Beit Ha
Mikdash (the Temple in Jerusalem). These bamot were considered
illegitimate as worship could only be done, according to the Torah,
at the temple in Jerusalem.
Two
kings -Chizkiahu (Hezekiah) and Yoshiahu (Josiah) get particularly
good reviews in Kings because they made strong efforts to eliminate
the peripheral sanctuaries.
King
Solomon is gets mixed reviews in the book of Kings. He is noted as
the builder of the Temple and of other sites in Jerusalem. However
he carries some heavy theological baggage. He had 700 wives and 300
concubines. He had thousands of horses. He had great riches. In
some cultures this would all be considered positive. In the Torah
however the king is forbidden all these things. But the worst is
that he built sanctuaries for his foreign wives so that they could
worship the foreign gods of their native homelands and he ultimately
turned to the idol worship of the surrounding nations. So the final
mark for king Solomon is a failing grade as given by the author of
the book of Kings.
On
the other hand in the book of Divrei Ha Yamim (Chronicles) Solomon
(and his father David) have all the bad things in their record
expunged. Chronicles does not not mention Davids affair with
Bathsheba, or his giving over the descendants of Saul to the
Gibeonites. The book does not mention the many wives or the
idolatry of Solomon . So why this diversity of opinion between the
two biblical books?
The
answer seems to be dependent on the audience that each book is
addressing. The book of Kings came to final form in the last dark
days of the kingdom of Judah and into the exile. This book explains
why the kingdom of David split into two and why things went so wrong
for Judah. The kingdom is destroyed and the people exiled because of
the sin of idolatry especially on the part of the monarchs who were
either complacent or actively participated in foreign worship for
various reasons political and social. So it serves the purpose of
the book to put in full view the transgressions of the kings and his
subjects.
The
book of Chronicles, on the other hand, is addressing the community
which returned from Babylonia. Chronicles came to final form around
400 BCE, more than a hundred years after the return of the exiles with
Zerubavel. The community is struggling to gain its footing in the
land which is new for most of the returnees. For the returnees, who
were all from Judah, the restoration of the Davidic dynasty and its
religious institutions is a hope which still lives.
So it serves no purpose for the Chronicler to air the past
transgressions of the Davidic monarchs.
Hence the difference in the two books view of Solomon is based on the
needs of their respective readers.
