I just studied I Kings 5. At the moment, I'm not entirely clear about what to write, but we'll see what comes out! I'm at the library right now, and my computer desk is pretty small, so I feel rather crowded. Plus, that cool jazz concert is not going on in the background at the moment, but maybe it will start while I'm typing this post. Every Saturday that I've been here, there's been a cool jazz concert on the first floor of the library, and we can hear it up here on the second floor.
I'm in the mood for hamburgers right now. I went to a hamburger place when I was here one time, and I ended up paying ten dollars for a regular hamburger and a side of macaroni and cheese. I expected the burger to be bigger! But the place has bite-size burgers and appetizers that cost less, so maybe I'll try that after I finish this post.
Hiram, king of Tyre. One struggle I have as I read all these commentaries is that they contradict each other. I really didn't have that problem when I was doing my weekly quiet times at home. At home, I used such sources as John Gill and Matthew Henry as well as listened to Cavalry Chapel sermons. They mostly agreed with one another. Here at the library, I use mostly academic commentaries that have a Christian twist. And, this week, they can't agree on certain issues.
Here are some examples: Did Solomon rule Tyre, as I Kings 4:21 and 9:9 may imply? Or was Tyre a nation independent of Solomon's kingdom? After all, I Kings 5:12 mentions a peace agreement between Solomon and Hiram. Doesn't that indicate that they were two separate kingdoms? Add to that the Encyclopedia Judaica article I read on Hiram, which refers to Josephus, who cites ancient sources about Hiram of Tyre. According to Josephus, Hiram had quite an empire of his own in Mesopotamia!
Was there equality between Hiram and Solomon when they sat down to talk? One commentary made a big deal about Solomon not following Hiram's advice but doing what he (Solomon) wanted instead. Solomon offered to send his servants to Tyre to help out, Hiram replied that the Sidonians could do the job by themselves, and Solomon sent his servants anyway. From how this commentary talked, you'd think that Solomon was abusing his power, or was preparing an invasion of Tyre! Personally, my impression is that he was just trying to be nice.
So one commentary said the agreement was lopsided in Solomon's favor. But others suggested that Hiram was getting all of the goodies. After all, Solomon agreed to pay Hiram's palace and workers an annual supply of animals, grain, and oil. That certainly added to the tax burden of the Israelites, who were already paying a lot to support Solomon's palace. Yet, I Kings 5 says that Solomon was acting wisely. In a sense, maybe he was. The Encyclopedia Judaica article I read cited W.H. Albright (yes, this is the latest edition of EJ!), who said that Solomon's alliance with Hiram kept the Philistines in check.
Was Solomon wise to build a temple for God's name, forming an alliance that led to increased taxation for his own nation, Israel? That depends on whom you ask. In II Samuel 7, God says he was always content to live in a tent, so maybe Solomon didn't have to build an elaborate temple to please God. Yet, God promised in that same chapter that David's son would build it. And, in the Book of Haggai, God criticizes the Israelites for building their own homes while neglecting the construction of the temple. So perhaps God did desire a temple, or at least some place where he could be worshipped.
In the EJ article, I learned that, according to Josephus, Hiram demolished the ancient temples in his country and built sanctuaries to Heracles and Astarte. I'm not too sure at the moment if Heracles was around in the tenth century B.C.E. (the time of Solomon and Hiram), but perhaps he was a god of another name, who later got identified with Heracles. But what's interesting is what I Kings 5 and II Chronicles 2 say about Hiram's religious confession. In I Kings 5, Hiram says that Yahweh made a wise man like Solomon king over Israel. Some commentators act as if the king of Tyre has become a Yahwist as a result of Solomon's good witness; most point out, however, that all nations in the ancient Near East acknowledged the gods of other nations, without seeing them as supreme. II Chronicles 2 ups the ante, though: there, Hiram calls Yahweh the creator of heaven and earth!
Some of the religious commentaries I read seek to glean a homiletical point from all this: Hiram knew about the true God and his power, but he didn't have a relationship with this God, for he worshipped Heracles and Astarte. And so we should ask ourselves: Do we acknowledge God while worshipping the things of this world?
The rabbinic literature on Hiram was fascinating. I read about it in the Jewish Encyclopedia's article about him. In aggadic literature, Hiram lived a very long time. And I mean a long time! You know Hirah the Adullamite in Genesis 38, the one whose daughter Judah (the son of Jacob) married? That was Hiram! And you know the proud king of Tyre, whom Ezekiel condemns in Ezekiel 28? That was Hiram! And Ezekiel lived a couple of centuries after the time of Solomon! According to certain rabbis, Hiram became proud and thus wicked on account of his accomplishments, his riches, his glory, and his longevity, notwithstanding the fact that he was good at a particular point in his life: when he helped Solomon build the temple. I vaguely recall reading a rabbinic tradition that said that, when God decided to limit people's lifespans in Genesis 3:22, God was thinking of Hiram! The tradition may have in mind what several Christian interpreters have stated about Genesis 3:22: God limited our lifespans because we'd all become like Hitler if given enough time, due to our sinful human nature. I guess Hiram proved that!
I enjoyed this quiet time, but I'm not sure where the voice of God is in it right now. Usually, I have a moral or spiritual lesson that it meaningful to me, and I've got it when I sit down to write my post. I think there are practical lessons in this chapter about social skills. Whether Hiram was Solomon's subordinate, equal, or superior, Solomon still approached him with humility and kindness. He asked Hiram for help, praised the skill of the Sidonians, and gave Hiram what his nation lacked: grain, oil, etc. And Hiram sought out Solomon after the death of David. He went to Solomon to see how he was doing. Walter Bruegemann talked as if Hiram was sucking up to form a political connection, and maybe that was part of it. But perhaps he was also a sincere lover of David. As a case in point, Solomon says that Hiram is aware that David couldn't build a temple. David may have shared with Hiram his desire to honor the God of Israel, and God's refusal of his offer to build a temple for the name of the LORD. That's intimacy.
Nowadays, social skills include a lot of joking and being witty. In those days, things were more formal, and perhaps simpler: Hiram wondered how Solomon was, Solomon needed something from Hiram and praised the skill of the Sidonians, and there was give-and-take. They helped each other out. In a sense, social skills still require this degree of concern. The books I read on effective conservational skills don't really discuss joking, but they focus on showing an interest in another person, allowing her to express herself. David could do that with Hiram.
My session ends in ten minutes, so I'll stop here. Next stop, hamburgers!