- 80-
among the people, and this for three reasons. There was, first, the continued influence
for good of the Temple at Jerusalem; and in this we see at least one providential reason
for the existence of a central Sanctuary, and for the stringency of the Law which
confined all worship to its courts. Secondly, the idolatrous kings of Judah were always
succeeded by monarchs distinguished for piety, who swept away the rites of their
predecessors; while, lastly and most remarkably, the reign of the idolatrous kings was
uniformly brief as compared with that of the God-fearing rulers. Thus, on a review of
the whole period, we find that, of the 253 years between the accession of Rehoboam
and the deportation of the ten tribes, 200 passed under the rule of monarchs who
maintained the religion of Jehovah, while only during 53 years His worship was more
or less discarded by the kings of Judah.^177
We repeat, it were a mistake to ascribe the separation of the ten tribes entirely to the
harsh and foolish refusal of Rehoboam to redress the grievances of the people. This
only set the spark to the inflammable material which had long been accumulating. We
have seen how dissatisfaction had spread, especially in the northern parts of the
kingdom, during the later part of Solomon's reign; how, indeed, a rising seems to have
been actually attempted by Jeroboam, though for the time it failed. We have also called
attention to the deep-seated tribal jealousy between Ephraim and Judah, which ever
and again broke into open hostility Judges 8:1-3; 12:1-6; 2 Samuel 2:9; 19:42, 43).
This, indeed, may be described as the ultimate (secondary) cause of the separation of
the two kingdoms. And, if proof were required that the rebellion against Rehoboam
was only the outcome of previously existing tendencies, we would find it even in the
circumstance that the language used by the representatives of Israel, when renouncing
the rule of Rehoboam, was exactly the same as that of Sheba when he raised against
David the standard of what would be represented as the ancient federal Republic of
Israel (2 Samuel 20:1 comp. with 1 Kings 12:16). Still more wrongful would it be to
account for the conduct either of Israel or of Jeroboam, or even to attempt vindicating
it, on the ground of the prophecy of Ahijah (1 Kings 11:29-39). The latter foretold an
event in history, and explained the reason of what, in view of the promises to David,
would otherwise have been unaccountable. But such prediction and announcement of
judgment - even if known to the tribes - warranted neither their rebellion nor the
usurpation of Jeroboam. It is, indeed, true that, as the Old Testament considers all
events as directly connected with God, its fundamental principle being: Jehovah
reigneth - and that not merely in a pseudo-spiritual, but in the fullest sense - this, as all
other things that come to man, is ultimately traced up to the living God. So was the
resistance of Pharaoh, and so are the sword, the pestilence, and the famine. For, all
things are of Him, Who sendeth blessings upon His people, and taketh vengeance of
their inventions; Who equally ruleth in the armies of heaven, and among the
inhabitants of the earth; Who maketh the wrath of man as well as the worship of His
people to praise Him; Who always doeth marvelously, whether He accomplish His
purposes by direct interposition from heaven, or, as much more frequently, through a
(^)