1 Kings 14:25

The Invasion of Shishak.

Three years after the death of David, the foundations of the temple, the glory of that age—some have called it orbis miraculum, the marvel of every age—were laid. Four years after the death of Solomon his son—some forty years, that is to say, after its foundation, three and thirty years after its completion, according to some only twenty years after its dedication—the treasures of that temple, its gold and gems, were carried off by an invader. A short time after his accession, again, Solomon made alliance with the strongest and proudest of the empires of that age, with Egypt, and a Hebrew, one whose forefathers were Pharaoh's bondmen, was gladly recognized as great Pharaoh's son-in-law. A short time after his death, this same Egyptian kingdom is become an assailant of Solomon's son, and Pharaoh is turned to be the oppressor and plunderer of his realm. For a great part of Solomon's reign it was the boast of the people that an Egyptian princess occupied one of his splendid palaces in Jerusalem, but he has not been long dead before those same palaces are rifled by Egyptian princes, and Jerusalem is environed by the legions of Shishak.

And yet that temple, the magnificence of which has been so short-lived, which was hardly completed ere it was despoiled, was built to the name of the Lord, and as a habitation for the mighty God of Jacob. And as such it was accepted by Him. That house had had a greater glory and consecration than of gold and precious stones, for "the glory of the Lord had filled the house of the Lord" ( 1 Kings 8:11 ). Why, then, is it, we may well ask, as the men of that age would ask, that it is so soon left comparatively desolate? Cannot the Deity to whom it was dedicated protect it against spoliation. Or have His worshippers provoked Him to anger, so that He has "abhorred his sanctuary," and "delivered his glory into the enemies' hand"?

For we may be quite sure that there was a profound reason for this profound dishonour and disgrace. We cannot account for the fact that the temple of the Lord, the "house of the great God" ( Ezra 5:8 ), was stripped bare and left a wreck within a few years of its erection, on the supposition that a chance happened to it, and that it only suffered as other shrines have done from the vicissitudes of fortune and the impartial, inevitable havoc of war. " In rebus bellicis, " it has been said, " maxime dominatur Fortuna ." But if we feel at liberty to interpret other histories by a theory of chance, that idea must be excluded in thinking of God's people. If their history was fortuitous, then the Old Testament is a delusion. No; we may not be able always to trace the finger of God in profane history, but it will be passing strange if we cannot recognize it here.

Now the immediate cause of the invasion was, no doubt, the divided and therefore weakened state of the kingdom. We might have been tempted to think that Jeroboam had summoned his patron Shishak to his aid, had we not proof that Israel as well as Judah suffered from this campaign. And of course it is possible that Jeroboam instigated a war which ultimately extended to his own kingdom. But it is obvious that Shishak would need no invitation to attack Jerusalem. The fame of its immense treasure is quite sufficient of itself to account for his advance. So long as it was guarded by the armies of Solomon it was secure. But Rehoboam, whose troops would not number a third of his father's, and who was paralyzed by the hostility of Israel crouching like a wild beast on his northern border, offered an easy prey to a general with 1,200 chariots and 60,000 horsemen, and "people without number" under his command.

We see, then, that it was the treasures of the Holy City—the vast accumulation of the precious metals—which excited the cupidity of the Egyptians, while theft defenceless state suggested the idea of seizing them. Observe here—

I. THE RETRIBUTION OF SOLOMON 'S SIN .

1 . Of his greed and pride . He has "multiplied silver and gold to himself" only to provoke an invasion of his territory and the humiliation of his people. If he had obeyed the law; if he had been content to embellish the house of the Lord and leave the palaces alone; if his overweening pride and his insatiable thirst for fame had not prompted him to amass treasures which excited universal attention, it is probable that Judah would have escaped invasion. In this case "pride has gone before destruction." The very magnitude of his treasures led to their dispersion.

2. Of his idolatry . We have already seen how this sin ( 1 Kings 11:5-8 ) was punished by the partition of his realm. In the plunder of his palaces, provoked and made possible by that division, we see a further recompense of his outrage and defiance of the almighty. The hills on which his idol altars were erected now swarmed with idolaters, assembled not to sacrifice, but to slay. We are reminded here of the retribution which befell the Jerusalem of a later day. On one of the hills before Jerusalem the Jews raised a cross—they crucified the Prince of Life. On all the hills that are round about Jerusalem, the Romans raised crosses, the crosses of His murderers (Jos; Bell. Jud. Romans 5:11 .1).

3. Of his multiplication of horses . For it is to be remembered from what quarter the retribution came. There is an exquisite judicial propriety in an invasion from Egypt, and an invasion of chariots and horses. This was retaliation in the proper sense of the word; it was like for like. Why, there was almost a beaten track made for those same chariots by the horses and chariots which Solomon had imported in such prodigious numbers. Literally the trade horses paved the way for the horses of war. This illegal traffic had long since familiarized Egyptian charioteers with the shortest way to the Holy City.

4. Of his multiplication of wives . Solomon's lawful wife came from Egypt. Had he been true to her, he would probably have been true to his Lord God ( 1 Kings 11:3 ), and so his realm would have escaped invasion. It is a kind of Nemesis for the wrong done to his Egyptian consort that his harem was plundered by Egyptians. There are those who connect Napoleon's fall with the repudiation of Josephine. The "judge of the widow" ( Psalms 68:5 ) is also the avenger of the injured and dishonoured wife ( Hebrews 13:4 ). Human laws seldom take cognizance of these, the deepest of wrongs, but the cry of the heart-broken woman goes up into the ears of One who has said, "I will repay."

II. THE PUNISHMENT OF REHOBOAM 'S FOLLY AND SIN .

1 . Of his obstinacy . For in the first place, but for his infatuation, humanly speaking, the kingdom would have escaped division, and the land would have escaped invasion. That infatuation, it is true, was the product of his breeding and his training, but that consideration does not wholly exonerate him from blame. No man can charge his parents or surroundings with his sin. The law does not excuse the thief on the ground that from infancy he has been taught to steal. Rehoboam was a free agent, and ought to have acted otherwise, and doubtless he knew it when it was too late.

2. Of his pride . It was his pride had rejected all compromise, and had prated of scorpions, etc. It had been humbled once in the dismemberment of his realm. It must be humbled again in the spoliation of his palaces. For observe, it was when he "had strengthened himself" ( 2 Chronicles 12:1 ) that Shishak came to prove his weakness. St. Paul is not the only one who has had to learn the lesson, "When I am weak, then am I strong." It is extremely probable that this vainglorious prince, after losing most of his realm, still piqued himself on the abundance of his treasures. His trust was in his shields of gold. So he must be reduced to shields of pinchbeck.

3. Of his infidelity . "He forsook the law of the Lord" (2 Chronicles l.c. ) Much as his father had done before him. "What the old sing," says the German proverb, "the young chirp." That is to say, he still worshipped Jehovah (verse 28; cf. 1 Kings 9:25 ), but he sanctioned, or did not suppress, idolatry. The son of an Ammonitess, he would find it difficult to trample on the gods of his mother ( 1 Kings 11:5 ), and he was probably too much afraid of another insurrection to stamp out the abominations of verses 28, 24.

III. THE RECOMPENSE OF ISRAEL 'S IDOLATRIES . Though the chronicler informs us that Rehoboam "forsook the law and all Israel with him, " yet it seems probable from verses 22, 24, "And Judah did evil," etc; that he rather followed than led his people. He could hardly fail, at first, to see that his strength lay in a rigid adherence to the law; that his policy was one of piety. The Levites and others who streamed into Judah, shocked by the innovations of Jeroboam, cannot fail to have suggested that his role was orthodoxy. It is probable, therefore, that it was not until a large section of his people, infected with the superstitions and vices they had learned in Solomon's reign, clamoured for the tolerance of shameful shrines, that he yielded to idolatry. Verse 25 seems to connect the invasion directly with the people's sin. But for the high places and images. etc; the land would have been spared this humiliation. It is to be carefully noted that, so long as king and people served the Lord, Shishak was held back from attacking them. Hence we understand why Judah receives earlier and greater stripes than Israel It was Jeroboam made Israel to sin. It was Judah made Rehoboam to sin. The guilty people, accordingly, are punished by the invasion of their land and the spoliation of their treasure; the guilty king by the destruction of his house. And here again, let us observe, how significant that the chastisement should come from Egypt. Time was when God had punished the idolatries of Egypt through the instrumentality of the Jewish people (Exodus 7-14.) Now the tables are turned, and Egypt is employed to avenge the idolatries of Judah. This was the first time that an Egyptian army had crossed their border—the first time, indeed, that the land had sustained the brunt of any invasion. It was the Sodomites and the like had drawn forth those swords from their scabbards. What a contrast between Exodus 14:1-31 . and 1 Kings 14:1-31 . Israel, who then "saw the Egyptians dead upon the seashore," now feels the grip of Pharaoh at his throat, and the iron of Pharaoh in his soul.

HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD