And Abijah stood up on the top of mount Zemaraim, which is in mount Ephraim, and said, Hear me, Jeroboam, and all Israel!
Abijah, Judah's new king, climbs a hill in Ephraim and calls across to Jeroboam and the ten tribes who had broken from David's line. He preaches before he fights — so was this politics or real concern, and can true words still hide the truth?
The chapter gives no reason for the war, only the moment when one king decides to speak before he strikes.
We are not told what caused the great battle between Judah and the ten tribes. Abijah gathered an army of 400,000 to fight against 800,000 chosen warriors of Israel (v. 3). Then Abijah took the chance to stand on Mount Zemaraim in Ephraim and speak to Jeroboam and his men. He must have had a loud voice, and called upon them to hear what he said (v. 4).
Abijah does not argue that his army is stronger. He argues that the kingdom is God's own, held in David's line. And he says Jeroboam's priesthood was never God's at all.
Abijah stood up on Mount Zemaraim, the mount of "two fleeces." There he declared the truth: the flock is one. God's people should be shepherded under the one King of David's line. The kingdom in His hand was "the kingdom of the LORD" (v. 8). If that is true, then Jeroboam was a rebel... The priesthood that served with Jeroboam was not from God, because it was not of Aaron's line. They also worshipped idols.
One writer rates the speech above anything in any literature. He also finds it one-sided. Every statement is true, but Abijah never turns the charge on his own house.
He stood on the top of Mount Zemaraim, in Mount Ephraim, somewhere along the northern border of his kingdom. For sharpness, accusation, warning and appeal, no speech in any literature of any time matches it... Though true in all its statements, it lacks frankness... Whether he meant to or not, he ignores the root of all this strife — his grandfather's sins. He also ignores that God had forbidden his father Rehoboam to make war on the separated tribes, saying, "This thing (the schism) is from Me." He knows how to present what makes his own position right and good. But he completely ignores God's judgment on his own tribes, and on the house of David, for its own sins.
One writer leaves Abijah's motive open. The question is real, but the words were a call either way.
Abijah reasons with the revolted tribes. Was this just human policy, an effort to win Israel back to himself? Or was it real concern about their condition before God? Whatever his motive, it was still a call to Israel to return to the LORD God of their fathers. Israel did not listen. They even tried to destroy this testimony and set an ambush against Judah. Judah cries, and God delivers.
Being right in the argument did not make Judah innocent.
Judah had the true religion, but without realizing her sin and disgrace. What she lacked was an awakened conscience.
Abijah's own life does not explain what happened next.
As a man he was not very admirable (1 Kings 15). But that only makes the surprising victory which followed all the more striking. It shows that the victory was a victory for the truth of God. It shows too the immense value He sets on faithfulness to the order He Himself set up. This does not excuse Abijah's bad personal behaviour in other matters. He suffered for that under God's righteous government.
God's ban on this war was narrow. It ruled out the sword, not the search for peace.
God did not forbid His people to look for a righteous way to be reconciled. He did not forbid them to find out why the break had happened, or to confess their failure together. But He did forbid them to fight with their brothers... Where the failure has been general, it is better to drop the sword and for everyone to go to their knees.
- Platform — Abijah climbs a hill in Ephraim, on his kingdom's northern border, and calls out to a force twice his size. The appeal comes before the battle.
- Plea — The kingdom belongs to God and rests in David's line. So Jeroboam's throne and his priesthood are rebellion, not an alternative.
- Omission — Every statement is true, yet he never names his own family's sins or God's own word that the split came from Him. True words can still leave the worst part unsaid.
- Motive — He may have wanted the tribes for himself, or wanted them back with God. Either way his words called them to the God of their fathers.
- Conscience — Judah held the right position with an unsearched heart. The victory honoured God's order, and Abijah still answered for his own ways. Where brothers divide, the sword is not the answer.
Ought ye not to know that Jehovah the God of Israel gave the kingdom over Israel to David for ever, to him and to his sons [by] a covenant of salt?
Abijah faced an army twice the size of his own, and he opened not with a threat but with a claim of right: God had given the kingdom to David's line by a covenant of salt. So what does that phrase mean, and may a king who was no model himself appeal to it?
Salt was more than seasoning in the ancient world; sharing it created an obligation. One writer traces the picture behind the words:
The covenant of salt refers to a very ancient custom. If a host welcomed a guest into his tent and they shared salt, the host's duty to that guest became sacred and could not be broken. The LORD's covenant with David was like a covenant of salt — it could not be broken. Abijah believed in that covenant.
God commanded the same salt in Israel's worship, so the picture reaches beyond politics. The quote below follows an older translation of Mark 9, which includes the words about every sacrifice:
And so we read of "a covenant of salt," a picture of what was to be kept unbroken and unchanging (Numbers 18:19; 2 Chronicles 13:5). So the Lord, in Mark 9:49-50, says that "everyone will be salted with fire, and every sacrifice will be salted with salt. Salt is good, but if the salt has lost its saltiness, how will you make it salty again? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another."
Whatever Abijah was himself, the ground he stood on held:
The Lord's covenant with Judah, through David, was for ever. God's counsels concerning the royal line could never be reversed. Abijah was right to claim the unchangeable counsels of God against his enemy.
The promise had two sides. One side David's next sons could lose. The other no failure could touch:
With David, God made another covenant, in part conditional, and in part unconditional (2 Samuel 7:10-16). The sons who followed him on the throne kept that throne, and the nation kept its blessing under them, only as they obeyed. If they disobeyed, God would chastise them. Yet in one way the covenant had no conditions: God's mercy would never finally leave David's house. One would come from his own body who would sit on his throne without fail.
If the throne is God's gift, then fighting it is not politics but revolt. Abijah's speech builds his whole case on that footing:
He boldly claimed the truth that the flock is one, and that God's people should be shepherded under the one King of David's line. He also claimed that the kingdom in His hand was "the kingdom of the LORD" (v. 8). Since that is true, Jeroboam was a rebel, and those who had strengthened him were sons of Belial. The priesthood with him was not of God either, for it was not of Aaron's line.
His hearers already knew the throne was David's. Every word Abijah spoke was true — and the speech still spared his own family:
Though true in all its statements, it lacks frankness… The gathered crowds who listened to him knew well the truth of this. But, whether on purpose or without realising it, he ignores the root of all this strife — his grandfather's sins. He also ignores that God had forbidden his father Rehoboam to make war on the separated tribes, saying, "This thing is from me." He knows how to put forward what makes his own position right and good. Yet he completely ignores God's judgment on his own tribes and on the house of David because of its own sins.
Another writer notes the same gap, adding that Abijah "did not mention that Rehoboam had treated the ambassadors of the ten tribes with cruel contempt."
The outcome turned on what Abijah appealed to, not on what he was:
Abijah himself was not a man to admire (1 Kings 15). That only makes the surprising victory which followed more striking. It shows that the victory belonged to the truth of God. It also shows the immense value He places on faithfulness to the order He Himself set up. This does not excuse Abijah's bad personal behaviour in other matters. He suffered for that under God's righteous government.
- Salt — an unbreakable bond. Sharing salt made a bond no one could break. God chose that picture for what He gave David.
- Salt — an unchanging bond. The same salt seasoned every offering. The Lord then told His disciples to have salt in themselves (Mark 9).
- Covenant — unbreakable at its core. Kings could lose blessing by disobeying. But God's mercy would never finally leave David's house, and One would come from David to sit on his throne.
- Rebellion — against God, not a man. The throne in David's line was "the kingdom of the LORD." So Jeroboam's breakaway was revolt against God, served by a priesthood God never appointed.
- Victory — for the truth, not the speaker. Every word Abijah said was true, yet he passed over his own family's sin. God honoured the ground he stood on, and still dealt with him for his failure.
But Jeroboam the son of Nebat, the servant of Solomon the son of David, rose up and rebelled against his lord.
Abijah begins his appeal to the northern tribes by naming the man who caused the split. Jeroboam had served Solomon, then turned on him — so was he simply a rebel, or was the division God's own doing?
Jeroboam's danger lay in how close he had been to the throne. One writer notes both his position and the message that moved him:
The third enemy of Solomon was the most dangerous, because he was Solomon's own servant. He was a capable man, and Solomon had trusted him with a responsible position. Jeroboam rebelled against the king because of a message God sent to him by the prophet Ahijah. So it is clear that God raised up such an enemy. Jeroboam came from Ephraim, and Solomon set him over all the labour force of the house of Joseph. He would have known the running of Solomon's kingdom inside out.
Abijah's title for his enemy is not neutral. He chose it to wound:
The LORD had given the kingdom to David and to his sons by a covenant of salt, said Abijah. … A covenant of salt was one that could never be broken. Abijah believed in that covenant. Then he mentioned Jeroboam, whom he sarcastically calls "the servant of Solomon."
Abijah's argument runs from who owns the throne to the rebel's guilt:
He boldly declared the truth that the flock is one. God's people should be shepherded under the one King of David's line. The kingdom in His hand was "the kingdom of the Lord" (v. 8). Since that is true, Jeroboam was a rebel, and those who had strengthened him were children of Belial.
The same writer weighs what made Jeroboam's name so heavy in Scripture:
Under him the great mass of God's people, ten of the twelve tribes, broke away from God's centre at that time. Again and again these sad words toll like a death knell, the words by which the Spirit marks this man out: "Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin." … Personal sins are bad enough. But to turn away God's people from the centre which He has set up — what could be worse?
Ten tribes did not follow a fugitive by accident. One writer explains the speed of it from a sentence God had already passed:
"This thing is from me." This explains how ten tribes, as with one mind, threw off their loyalty to the house of David all at once. A fugitive servant no sooner blows his trumpet than they follow him. It was the judgment of the Lord, spoken in Solomon's day and carried out in the days of his son.
Because that word stood on record, Abijah's charge is only half the story. One writer is blunt about the gap in his speech:
Every statement in it is true, yet it lacks frankness. … Whether he means to or not, he ignores the root of all this strife — his grandfather's sins. He also ignores that God had forbidden his father Rehoboam to make war on the separated tribes, saying, "This thing (the division) is from Me." He knows how to put forward what makes his own position right and good. But he wholly ignores the judgment of God on his own tribes, and on the house of David, because of its own sins.
Judah's claims hold up item by item. What was missing was not accuracy:
Judah, for her part, had God at her head. She had His priests, and His trumpets that called the people together. In fact, Jeroboam was making war against God. Once again, all this was true. What was Judah lacking? Only this: Judah had the true religion, but without seeing her own sin and disgrace. What she lacked was an awakened conscience.
Yet the outcome did not hang on Abijah's character:
In himself he was not a man to admire (1 Kings 15). But that only makes the surprising victory which followed all the more striking. It shows that the victory belonged to the truth of God. It shows, too, the immense value He sets on faithfulness to His own established order.
- Servant. Jeroboam was no outsider. Solomon himself had promoted this capable man, so Abijah's name for him — "the servant of Solomon" — stings.
- Rebel. The throne he attacked was "the kingdom of the Lord" in David's line. So breaking away was rebellion against God, and those who backed him were "children of Belial" — worthless men.
- Sentence. The split spread fast for one reason. God spoke His judgment in Solomon's day and carried it out in his son's: "This thing is from me."
- Blind spot. Every statement Abijah makes is true, yet he leaves out his own family's sins and God's word that forbade the war.
- Victory. Judah held the right ground, but her conscience was asleep. The victory that followed honoured the truth of God, not the man who spoke it.
And vain men, sons of Belial, gathered to him and strengthened themselves against Rehoboam the son of Solomon, and Rehoboam was young and faint-hearted, and did not shew himself strong against them.
Abijah stood on Mount Zemaraim facing an army twice the size of his own. He opened his case by retelling how the kingdom came apart: Jeroboam rebelled, worthless men rallied to him, and Rehoboam was too young and too weak to stop them. The verse raises two questions at once — was the charge true, and was it the whole truth?
Abijah is not just telling history. He argues that the split was a rebellion against God, and that the men behind it were worthless.
He boldly asserted the truth that the flock is one, and that God's people should be shepherded under the one King of David's line. He also asserted that the kingdom in His hand was "the kingdom of the Lord" (v. 8). Since that was true, Jeroboam was a rebel, and those who had strengthened him were children of Belial.
The setting makes the accusation remarkable. Abijah calls Jeroboam's backers children of Belial — worthless men — while facing twice his own number of trained soldiers. He speaks to his own side as much as to theirs.
Strong words these, spoken before an army of valiant men twice the size of his own! — he is bent on making them realise one thing. However strong they are, their beginning in separation from his own tribes is not of God. This would also greatly strengthen his own supporters. He was no doubt speaking for their ears as well as for those of his enemies.
Rehoboam's weakness traces back to the day he chose his advisers.
Rehoboam the king, the son of Solomon, did not inherit his father's wisdom. He inherited whatever was foolish and wrong in Solomon. He took counsel not with the men of experience who might have helped his youth, but with the young men who only urged on his rashness.
Abijah then turns his father's weakness into a threat.
He seems to say: you might deter my faint-hearted father from punishing you and forcing you into submission, but you have a different man to deal with now.
Every statement Abijah makes is true. The problem lies in what he never mentions. He passes over Solomon's sin, the root of the division, and God's own word that forbade Rehoboam to fight the ten tribes.
Though true in all its statements, it lacks frankness… Whether on purpose or without realising it, he ignores the root of all this strife — his grandfather's sins. He also ignores that God had forbidden his father Rehoboam to make war on the separated tribes, saying, "This thing (the split) is from Me." He knows how to put forward what makes his own position right and good. But he wholly ignores the judgment of God on his own tribes and on the house of David because of its own sins.
Judah did have God at her head and His priests. What she did not have was any sense of her own condition.
Judah, for her part, had God at her head, His priests, and His trumpets which gathered the people. In fact, Jeroboam was making war against God. Once again, all this was true. What was Judah lacking? Only this: Judah had the true religion, but without realising her sin and disgrace. What she lacked was an awakened conscience.
The outcome does not prove Abijah's heart was right. The victory rested on something outside him.
On the one hand, all this is sublime. On the other, had their hearts been as true to the Lord as their outward words were, they would likely not have been standing there, facing their brothers for battle… So, too, though a group may hold right doctrine while being far from God in heart, its fight against those who oppose Christ must for now be recognised and helped. God loves the house of David and will sustain it — Christ is dear to God, and He upholds all who fight for Him, though He may have something against them too… God owns whatever good He can find among His people.
The verse turns on one word — strength. Trace who has it, who loses it, and who gives it.
- Strength seized. Worthless men gathered to Jeroboam and made themselves strong. The throne of David was the kingdom of the Lord, so their rebellion struck at God Himself.
- Strength lost. Rehoboam was young and weak for a reason. He had refused experienced counsel and listened to young men who fed his rashness.
- Strength claimed. Every word of Abijah's accusation was true. Yet it passed over Solomon's sin and God's word that the split was from Him.
- Strength hollow. Judah had God at her head and the true religion. She still lacked what would have kept her off that battlefield — an awakened conscience.
- Strength given. The victory belonged to the truth, not to the man. God owns whatever good He can find among His people.
And now ye think to shew yourselves strong against the kingdom of Jehovah in the hand of the sons of David; and ye are a great multitude, and ye have with you the golden calves that Jeroboam made you for gods.
Abijah tells the ten tribes what their war is. It is not a quarrel with Judah. It is an attack on a throne God Himself had given. The verse sets two things side by side: a kingdom that belongs to the Lord, and a crowd with golden calves. Which one can hold?
Abijah does not call it his kingdom. Commentators point out where God had placed His authority, and where He had not.
Responsibility to administer this kingdom rested on rulers, priests, and elders in Israel. God centred the authority for it in Jerusalem, where He was pleased to set His name. Jeroboam tore the ten tribes away from Judah and Benjamin and set up his kingdom in Samaria. That kingdom was in no sense recognised as "the kingdom of Jehovah," because God's authority remained in Jerusalem, the place of His choice (2 Chron. 13:8).
Abijah's confidence rests on a covenant of salt. One writer explains that picture from everyday hospitality.
Abijah said that the LORD had given the kingdom to David and to his sons by a covenant of salt. The covenant of salt refers to a very ancient custom. When a host welcomed a guest into his tent and shared salt with him, his duty to that guest was sacred and unbreakable. The covenant of Jehovah with David was like a covenant of salt — that is, nothing could break it. Abijah believed in that covenant.
Another writer notes how long that covenant was meant to last.
The Lord's covenant with Judah, through David, was for ever. God's counsels concerning the royal line could never be reversed. Abijah was right to claim the unchangeable counsels of God against his enemy.
The verse pairs the size of Israel's army with the calves they carried. One writer draws out how this way of counting collapsed once the fighting started.
Jeroboam put twice as many on the field of battle as Abijah. He acted without faith, but with his usual worldly wisdom and strategy. Victory seemed certain, and only a moment away from being obvious. While Abijah was declaring the truth of God against error, Jeroboam was quick to surround him in front and behind. He was about to seize his prey. He had, however, no resource above; so the battle turned in favour of those who had. This is always the way of the worldly wise: the look of things to the natural eye governs them.
Every charge Abijah makes is true. But being right was not what saved Judah.
Judah, for her part, had God at her head. She had His priests, and His trumpets used to gather the people. In fact, what Jeroboam was doing was making war against God. Once again, all this was true. What was Judah lacking? Only this: Judah had the true religion, but without any sense of her own sin and disgrace. What she lacked was an awakened conscience.
The same writer marks the point where the trumpets could finally sound.
It is only from this point — I am lost — that the loud-sounding trumpets can sound against the enemy. A man must not trust his trumpets against his opponents. He must cry out to God for himself. Only then can the trumpets resound, that is, only then can the testimony be effective. Salvation can only come from Him, and not from even the most orthodox forms of religion.
Commentators differ on how far to admire Abijah. One notes that his case, true as it is, is selective.
Though true in all its statements, it lacks frankness. He says, "Hear me, Jeroboam, and all Israel!"… But he ignores the root of all this strife — his grandfather's sins. He may do this on purpose, or without realising it. He also ignores that God had forbidden his father Rehoboam to make war on the separated tribes. God said, "This thing is from Me."
Yet the same writer explains why God still backed a man whose heart He could not commend.
God could not put His seal on the state of soul in Abijah and the tribes with him. Even so, He had to vindicate the rightness of everything said against Jeroboam and his followers… God loves the house of David, and He must sustain it. Christ is dear to God, and He must uphold all who fight for Him, even though He may have something against them too.
- Covenant — God gave the kingdom to David's line by a covenant of salt. Like shared salt between host and guest, that bond could not be broken.
- Ownership — That covenant made the throne at Jerusalem "the kingdom of the LORD." A kingdom set up anywhere else never carried that name.
- Rebellion — To take up arms against the king of that line was, in fact, to make war against God.
- Arithmetic — Double numbers and golden calves are how the worldly wise count. They judge by what the eye can see, and they lose.
- Conscience — Judah held the true religion. But Judah won only after it stopped counting its advantages and cried out to God. Right belief does not save; God does.
Have ye not cast out the priests of Jehovah, the sons of Aaron, and the Levites, and made you priests as the peoples of the lands? whoever comes to consecrate himself with a young bullock and seven rams, he becomes a priest of what is not God.
Abijah stands on a mountain in Ephraim and shouts across to the ten tribes that broke away under Jeroboam. His sharpest charge is about the priesthood — who may draw near to God, and whether Jeroboam's priests serve any real god at all.
Aaron's line held the priesthood by God's law, not by Judah's choice. One writer shows how far Jeroboam went:
This was a direct violation of the law of God concerning the priesthood. See Numbers 18:1-7. And he did not stop there. He plainly viewed the rightful priests and the Levites with special suspicion, and he refused their services.
Jerusalem held what the north could not copy:
Judah had the temple of the Lord at Jerusalem. There God dwelt between the cherubim. That was the only place for the perpetual burnt offering and the other sacrifices. And only the priests God Himself appointed could draw near to Him on behalf of the people.
The verse says the new priests were "like the peoples of other lands." One commentator names the country they copied. He also explains the word older translations render as "devils":
Jeroboam cast off the true priests and Levites who had remained with him, so they could no longer carry out their holy and God-given office. He also had priests "for the devils." The Hebrew word translated "devils" means "hairy ones" and "goats." Egypt worshipped the sacred goat, and Jeroboam copied that worship.
The result was two rival systems wearing similar clothes:
They gladly fell in with the king's plan. Straight away they had priests and feasts modelled on those God had instituted. The new religion of Israel was one of imitation, leaving God out of the question. From then on two religions stood side by side. One was founded on the word of God. The other, whatever it claimed, was plain idolatry.
"Whoever comes for ordination" shows the office had a price and no other condition:
Israel had completely refused the worship of the Lord. They cast out the priests, the sons of Aaron, and ordained as priests any men they wanted. In effect, these men bought their way into the priesthood by bringing a bull and seven rams.
So the choice no longer belonged to the king alone. It cost his house everything:
"Any who would, he ordained to be priests of the high places." It was not only Jeroboam's will that was at work. It was anybody's will, everybody's will. And this thing became sin to the house of Jeroboam, so that it was cut off and destroyed from the face of the earth.
The verse ends by emptying out the whole arrangement: these men are priests of what are not gods. One commentator sets this line beside Galatians 4:8 — "those that by nature are not gods":
Men once worshipped these objects. The Greek negative used here does more than deny that they are gods. It denies that they could ever be gods. (See 2 Chronicles 13:9.) Men have made them gods, but they are gods in name only.
Commentators read this as more than history. One draws the lesson out for the church today:
Both Rome and Protestantism can surely learn lessons from what Jeroboam did to the priesthood. But one lesson is certainly not there: the right of one class among God's people to exercise priestly functions alone. His action shows the opposite. It shows what they have done themselves — shutting out the whole body of those who are truly God's children, and therefore truly priests, and consecrating to the office men who have never been born of God.
The same writer states who the priests are now:
Christ is the "great High Priest," of whom Aaron was the type, and every true believer is a priest of the same spiritual family, pictured by Aaron's sons. A believer is a priest, not by a special call, but only because faith links him to Christ.
Abijah's argument was true. But truth alone was not enough for Judah:
Judah had the true religion, but without realising her sin and disgrace. What she lacked was an awakened conscience.
- Appointed — God's law gave the priesthood to Aaron's sons and the Levites. Casting them out broke the law of Numbers 18.
- Imitated — the new worship copied other nations. From then on two religions stood side by side: one from God's word, one idolatrous.
- Purchased — a bull and seven rams bought the office. Anyone who wished could have it, so the will at work was no longer the king's only but everybody's.
- Empty — men ordained this way served gods that are gods in name only. What is not a god by nature can never become one.
- Examined — a man-made priesthood shuts out believers who are truly priests, since faith's link with Christ makes a believer a priest. And even God's true order leaves you needing an awakened conscience.
But as for us, Jehovah is our God, and we have not forsaken him; and the priests that serve Jehovah are the sons of Aaron, and the Levites are at their work
Abijah, king of Judah, calls out to the northern tribes who had followed Jeroboam away from David's line. His case turns on one claim: Judah still has the true God and the priesthood He appointed. Two questions follow. What made Judah's ground right? And is saying "we have not forsaken Him" the same as meaning it?
Abijah sets his words against what Jeroboam had built in the north. One writer quotes the charge in full, then adds a note about how far Judah's own claim really went.
"You have with you the golden calves that Jeroboam made you for gods. Have you not cast out the priests of the LORD, the sons of Aaron, and the Levites, and made priests of your own like the peoples of other lands? Whoever comes to consecrate himself with a young bull and seven rams becomes a priest of what is not God. But as for us, the LORD is our God, and we have not forsaken Him." (This may have been true outwardly. But we have already seen the Spirit's testimony about the real, inward condition in Judah, in 1 Kings 14:22-25.)
Abijah answers by listing what Judah still had.
He had already reminded them of the covenant of salt with David's line. And now:
- The LORD was their God (v. 10). - The ordered priesthood served Him. - The Levites waited on their work. - Burnt sacrifices and sweet incense ascended (v. 11). - The showbread was set on the pure table (v. 11). - The golden lampstand was attended to (v. 11).
The strength of his case did not come from his own life.
He was not a very commendable man personally (1 Kings 15). But that only makes the surprising victory which followed all the more striking. It shows that this was a victory for the truth of God. It shows, too, the immense value He sets on faithfulness to His own established order. This does not excuse Abijah's bad personal behaviour in other matters. He suffered for that under God's righteous government.
Every claim in the verse was true. One writer still finds something missing — not in Judah's worship, but in her heart.
What was Judah lacking? Only this: Judah had the true religion, but without realizing her sin and disgrace. What she lacked was an awakened conscience.
The same writer turns this on the reader today.
One may, for example, have God's Word, know the true God, and understand fully what is lacking in a semi-idolatrous religion. One may be able to refute its errors convincingly and hold all the truths that make up Christianity — and still be very far from God... He lacked something: a conscience that had been touched. He lacked the sense of his own guilt — not measured against others and their errors, but standing by himself before God.
If Abijah's heart was not right, why did the battle go his way?
God could not put His seal on the state of soul in Abijah and the tribes with him. Yet He must vindicate the righteousness of all that Abijah says against Jeroboam and his followers... God loves the house of David and must sustain it. Christ is dear to God, and all who fight for Him must be upheld, though God may have something against them too... God owns whatever good He can find among His people.
What drove Abijah to speak at all? One writer leaves that question open.
Was this mere human policy, an attempt to win back Israel to himself, or real concern about their condition before God? Whatever his motive, it was no less a call to Israel to return to the LORD, the God of their fathers.
Judah's advantage was real. But holding the truth does not by itself draw anyone.
It is therefore a mistake to expect others to be drawn to us because we have the truth. Others must see that the Lord is with us, for He is the magnet of His people's hearts... Suppose we are with God — with God in His judgment of ourselves, of everything around us, in true separation from evil, and in subjection to His word. Then He will never fail to show that He is with us.
- Ground — Abijah's case rests on what God set up: the LORD as Judah's God, Aaron's sons serving, the Levites at their work.
- Contrast — the north had golden calves and priests anyone could buy, so their priesthood served what is not God.
- Gap — his words were true outwardly, but Judah had the true religion with a sleeping conscience.
- Grace — God still gave the victory, because He owns whatever good He can find among His people.
- Goal — having the truth is not enough. Others are drawn when they see that the Lord Himself is with us.
and they burn to Jehovah every morning and every evening burnt-offerings and sweet incense; the loaves also are set in order upon the pure table; and the candlestick of gold with its lamps to burn every evening for *we* keep the charge of Jehovah our God; but *ye* have forsaken him.
Abijah stands on a mountain before a battle he looks sure to lose. He reads out an inventory of Judah's worship: the daily offerings, the incense, the bread, the lampstand. It is his proof that Judah still keeps the charge of the LORD, while the north has walked away. Commentators ask what that claim was worth.
The list only makes sense against what Jeroboam had built in the north. He had invented a rival system so his people would not travel south to worship. It copied the real one point for point.
They willingly fell in with the king's plan. Straight away they had priests and feasts modelled on the ones God had instituted. Israel's new religion was one of imitation, leaving God out of the question. From then on two religions stood side by side. One was founded on the word of God. The other, whatever it claimed, was simply idolatrous.
One writer lays out the whole speech as a list. It runs from the royal line down to the furniture of the sanctuary.
He had already reminded them of the covenant of salt with David's line; and now, the LORD was their God (v. 10). The ordered priesthood served Him. The Levites attended to their work. Burnt sacrifices and sweet incense went up (v. 11). The showbread was set on the pure table (v. 11). The golden lampstand was cared for (v. 11).
Two of these items carry the word "pure" again and again. One writer follows them forward to the coming age.
The pure lampstand had seven lamps, fed with pure oil beaten out of olives. The pure table had on it the twelve cakes of fine flour, covered in pure frankincense. They were renewed sabbath by sabbath before the LORD. In the coming age the light of the Spirit of God will not only be "before the throne," but also "sent out into all the earth" (Rev. 4:5; Rev. 5:6). In that age too the twelve tribes will at last be kept before God in a fragrance that comes entirely from Christ.
Everything Abijah said about Judah's worship was accurate. It still left his own heart untouched.
No doubt all this was true of the formal worship of Judah. But the spiritual meaning of that worship had no real effect on the heart of Abijah.
The danger is not in the list but in the measuring. Abijah set himself beside Israel instead of before God.
People may be champions of orthodoxy. They may be able to expose the evils of idolatrous worship found in many denominations. But though their forms are orthodox in some measure, their hearts may still be far from God. This is hypocrisy. May we judge it absolutely and seek grace to walk honestly with God. Abijah thought he was righteous compared with the evil of Israel. But he ought to have seen himself under the eye of God, instead of comparing himself with others.
Commentators differ on how to weigh Abijah. One sees hypocrisy exposed. Another sees God standing up for His own order through a man of poor character.
He was not a very commendable man himself (1 Kings 15). But that only makes the surprising victory that followed all the more striking. It shows clearly that this was a victory for the truth of God. It also shows the immense value He sets on faithfulness to His own established order. This does not excuse Abijah's bad personal behaviour in other matters. He suffered for that under God's righteous government.
The verse ends with a claim: Judah keeps the charge. What saved Judah came later, when they cried out.
Judah cried to the LORD, and the priests sounded their trumpets, and God delivered the Israelites into their hand. The LORD's presence was therefore the source of Judah's strength and victory. And note this carefully. No claims, however lofty, and no human wisdom, however clever in its method, can command the presence of the LORD. Neither can they deliver in the time of danger.
That principle turns outward too. Right position does not draw anyone by itself.
It is therefore a mistake to expect others to be drawn to us because we have the truth. It must be seen that the Lord is with us; for He is the magnet of His people's hearts.
- Imitation — Jeroboam's system copied the real one in priests and feasts, but left God out. Two religions then stood side by side: one from God's word, one idolatrous.
- Inventory — Abijah's list runs from the covenant with David's line down to the sacrifices, the pure table and the lampstand. Every item was appointed by God, none invented.
- Accurate — What he said about Judah's worship was true. Its meaning had made no impression on his own heart.
- Comparison — He measured himself against Israel's evil, not under God's eye. That is the shape of hypocrisy: orthodox forms, distant heart.
- Presence — Judah won when they cried out, not when they listed their credentials. No claim and no cleverness can command the Lord's presence. And it is His presence, not our correctness, that draws others.
And behold, we have God with us at our head, and his priests, and the loud-sounding trumpets to sound an alarm against you. Children of Israel, do not fight with Jehovah the God of your fathers; for ye shall not prosper.
Abijah faces an army twice the size of his own. He ends his speech by naming his one advantage: God is on his side. Two questions follow. Is that claim true? And is the right position by itself enough to win?
The verse closes a long speech. Abijah has listed what Judah still had: the line of David, the priests, the daily worship. One writer sums up what that added up to, and what it made Jeroboam's attack into:
Judah, for her part, had God at her head, and His priests, and His trumpets, which called the people together. In fact, what Jeroboam was doing was making war against God. Once again, all this was true. What was Judah lacking? Only this: Judah had the true religion, but without realizing her sin and disgrace. What she lacked was an awakened conscience.
The trumpets were not battlefield noise. Priests blew them, and the blowing itself was testimony. That is why it mattered more than the size of Judah's army:
The priest always pictures communion with God. That is the character of the power that gathers: it works through communion. All the testimony came only from the mouth of those in communion with God — the testimony of those in the sanctuary... So it was in war too. It was not simply asking God to help them. It was a memorial of their calling on God. "Do not be afraid of their terror." They were to blow an alarm, and "you shall be remembered" in this public declaration of God's mind. They blew the alarm because God was there to help them.
Abijah was not a good man. One writer treats that gap between the man and his message as the point of the story:
He was not a very commendable man himself (1 Kings 15). But that only makes the surprising victory which followed more striking. It shows that this was a victory for the truth of God. It also shows the immense value He sets on faithfulness to His own established order. This does not excuse Abijah's bad behaviour in other matters. He suffered for that under God's righteous government.
Abijah pointed to the trumpets while the enemy still stood in front of him. One writer notes the step that has to come first:
It is only from this point: I am lost, that the loud-sounding trumpets can sound against the enemy (v. 12). Instead of trusting in his trumpets against his enemies, a man must first cry out to God about himself. Only then can the trumpets sound. Only then can the testimony work. Salvation can only come from Him and not from even the most orthodox forms of religion. We must always begin with our own condition, not with that of others.
So why did Judah win at all, if their hearts were no better than their words? One answer is that God was defending a claim, not rewarding a man:
On one hand, all this is magnificent. On the other, had it been as true in their hearts toward the LORD as it was true outwardly, they would probably never have stood there, facing their own brothers in battle... God could not put His seal on the state of soul in Abijah and the tribes with him. Yet He had to uphold the righteousness of everything said against Jeroboam and his followers... God owns whatever good He can find among His people.
Abijah's closing words warn the other side. But one writer turns the verse back on the speaker, because his whole case rested on comparison:
People may be champions of orthodoxy, may be able to expose the evils of idolatrous worship that are common in many denominations. But though their forms are in measure orthodox, their hearts may still be far from God. This is hypocrisy... Abijah thought that he was righteous in comparison with the evil of Israel, but he ought to have considered himself as under the eye of God rather than comparing himself with others.
- Claim. Abijah's boast was that God Himself led Judah, with His priests and His trumpets — so Jeroboam was not fighting an army but fighting God.
- Trumpets. Priests blew the alarm. It was not a plea for help but a public memorial, sounded because God was already there.
- Truth. The victory honoured the truth Abijah stood on, not the man himself. His own conduct was poor, and he suffered for it later.
- Conscience. Judah had the true religion but no awakened conscience. The trumpets only became real testimony when they cried, "I am lost."
- Mirror. The danger of the verse is Abijah's own: measuring yourself against other people's errors instead of standing under the eye of God.