Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Morning Bible Devotions: October 4
Today is: Thursday, April 18th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of October: (Show All Months)
1 Kings 3
God giveth to him that hath. It was the previous possession of wisdom that qualified him for more. David distinctly recognized him as “a wise man;” and his wisdom is evinced by nothing more, than his choice of wisdom beyond all other blessings, when the fruition of his wishes was in the vision at Gibeon offered to him. What he asked was “a wise and understanding heart,”—“wisdom to govern this great people;” and his choice was so much approved, that benefits which he had refrained from asking—wealth, power, length of days, were thrown in without his seeking. The terms of his request indicate the nature of the “wisdom” he required. That Divine wisdom in spiritual things—that heart religion, which the Jews sometimes denoted by this name, is not intended. With that he was not pre-eminently gifted; not more gifted certainly—hardly so much gifted, as his father David. The wisdom which he craved was that of which he had already enough to appreciate the value of its increase—practical wisdom, sagacity, clearness of judgment and intellect in the administration of justice and in the conduct of public affairs, with an aptitude for the acquisition and use of the higher branches of philosophical knowledge, natural and moral, which constituted the learning of his age. In the latter he excelled the most famous men of his time. We are told that in the course of his career he found a sufficiency of learned leisure to compose three thousand proverbs, and songs a thousand and five; and that he “spoke,” or wrote, on all known species of plants, “from the cedar in Lebanon to the hyssop that springeth out of the wall,” as well as in every branch of zoology—“of beasts, of fowls, of creeping things, and of fishes.” The loss of these works in natural history is greatly to be deplored. We are not, however, to suppose, that they were regular scientific descriptions and accounts of the various subjects, but such concise observations as we find interspersed among the existing writings ascribed to him, more frequently than in any other books in Scripture. The Jews have a notion, that a considerable portion of Solomon’s observations of this kind are preserved in the works of Aristotle, to whom, according to them, his great pupil, Alexander, sent a copy of Solomon’s writings, which he met with in the East.
Of his “Songs” we have a few interesting specimens in one of the Psalms—in the wonderful “Song of Songs,” which perhaps rightly bears his name; besides which, the introductory chapters of the book of Proverbs abound in poetry of the highest order. Of his “Proverbs” also, we have many specimens left; and these, with the book of Ecclesiastes (if rightly ascribed to him), contain such lessons of practical wisdom, and embody such profound observations on man’s life and nature, as would alone account for the wide-spread reputation which this great king acquired.
It was, however, a monarch’s sagacity in the administration of justice, which was calculated to make the most marked impression upon the popular mind, and likely to be most generally talked about through the land. This quality also came more home to the personal concerns of his subjects than any other, and was for that reason alone the more carefully regarded. The administration of justice was in all ancient monarchies, as it is now in the East, a most important part of the royal duties and functions; and there is no quality more highly prized than that keen discernment in the royal judge, which detects the clue of real evidence amidst conflicting testimony, or that ready tact which devises a test of truth where the evidence affords not even the clue to any grounds of decision. It was an instance of this kind which supplied to the watchful people the first evidence of the marvellous judicial sagacity with which their king was endowed.
The story is well known. Two mothers, one of whom had lost her son, contend for the possession of the living child; and the king, having to decide which of the two has the best claim to it, detects the real mother by the emotion she evinces when he orders the living child to be divided, and half given to each; and by her readiness to abandon her claim rather than see the child perish before her eyes. We are not aware of anything in Hebrew history that more strongly evinces the despotism which had by this time crept into the kingdom, than the fact that the woman really believed this outrageous mandate would be executed. If a judge made such a suggestion among us, he would be laughed to scorn for so futile an experiment, which the most ignorant woman in the land would know that he was utterly unable to execute. The real terror of the mother, at a judgment which she too well knew might be executed, becomes, in this point of view, doubly affecting.
At the present day in the East, the people are prone to exalt the civil wisdom of their kings by nothing so much as by their discernment and equity in judgment. The reader of Eastern history or tale will recollect numerous instances by which the king and judges resort to the most ingenious devices for the discovery of the truth, not demonstrable by direct evidence. Some of these have a certain resemblance to that of Solomon. The Hindus reverently preserve the memory of some of their kings who have rendered themselves famous by the equity of their judgments. One of the most celebrated of these was Mariadiramen, among other instances of whose sagacity the following is recorded—
A rich man had married two wives; the first of whom, although ugly, had a great advantage over the second, in that she had brought her husband a son, while the other was childless. But, as if to compensate for her sterility, the second wife possessed such charms of person and character, that she reigned supremely in the heart of her husband. Provoked at this preference, the first wife concocted a plan of vengeance equally astounding for its diabolical ingenuity and its savageness. She lavished every external mark of maternal love and tenderness upon the infant at her breast, and let the neighborhood know that this child was now her only comfort, the center of her hopes, in the absence of that affection which her husband denied her. As soon as she had convinced the world that her heart was altogether wrapped up in her little son, she, one night, when the husband was away from home, twisted the child’s neck, and laid the corpse beside the second wife, who lay asleep in her bed. In the morning, pretending to seek for her infant, she ran into the chamber of her rival, and there finding the child dead, she fell upon the ground, tore her hair, and gave vent to the most frightful howls and lamentations. This brought the neighbors together: and the other wife was already condemned in their eyes; for it was clear the child had been murdered, and it could not cross their minds that any mother—and, least of all, a mother so fond as this—should thus destroy her own infant, whom she had held up as the only comfort left to her in life. This, however, was what the other urged in her defence—dwelling upon the enmity which the mother entertained against her, and maintaining that no passion was so cruel and relentless as jealousy.
The case was brought before Mariadiramen; and a day was appointed for each woman to plead her cause. They did so, with that natural eloquence which passion usually inspires. The king, unable to decide upon the statements before him, pronounced this sentence: Let the woman who is innocent, and who pretends that her rival is culpable, move through this assembly in the posture which he would show her. The posture he indicated was one from which modesty would shrink. But the mother of the child with much vehemence declared that, in order to convince the assembly that her rival was guilty, she would not only take this turn through the assembly once, but a hundred times if required. The other sorrowfully declined the test, declaring that, although innocent, she would sooner submit to the must cruel death than do what was then required of her. The other was about to reply; but the voice of the king stilled all other sound. He pronounced her guilty, and her antagonist innocent. “A woman,” he said, “whom the certain prospect of death cannot constrain to an unbecoming action, is incapable of so great a crime; but a woman who, having lost all sense of womanly reserve, hesitates not at an immodest action, sufficiently declares herself to be capable of the blackest crimes.” Confounded to find herself thus discovered, the mother of the child vindicated the penetration of the royal judge, by publicly acknowledging her crime.
The sagacity of Solomon was, however, more marked than this; for the evidence in the case brought before him was more equal, and the test more intelligent and more appropriate to the particular case. Solomon’s was altogether a most wonderful decision; and its results were most important to him; for it evinced, in the judgment of the people, his fitness to fill worthily the high place to which he had been raised. Of this some doubt and misgiving appear to have been previously entertained, on account of his age—too young for experience, yet too old for a regency. But now all this was at an end. He had delivered a judgment which the most ripened experience could not surpass. “They saw that the wisdom of God was with him to do judgment;” and thenceforth they regarded him with the respect and veneration due to riper years.