A very rough first day...

You know that feeling when you make a mistake, or do something embarrassing, and you look around quickly to see if anyone’s looking? And you feel a great sense of relief when you realize that no one saw it. What if you did that on your first day on a new job, and you know that everyone IS looking – right at you? Whether you’ve done that or not, it’s easy to imagine how uncomfortable that would be. And the higher up the ladder you are, the more uncomfortable it gets. And more than uncomfortable, it could set a tone for your transition into the job. If you’re at the top, though, it could even damage your ability to leadership ability, especially if it’s seen as a failure to perform to expectations.

There is a story in 1 Kings 3 (16-28) about a guy starting his first day on a new job… as king of Israel. The story involves Solomon, the third king (after Saul and David, his father). Even if you don’t know his story in the Bible, you’ve most likely heard the phrase, “he is as wise as Solomon.” He is that “Solomon.” He was wise, and everyone knew it. Or rather, they knew it after his first day on the job. He almost had one of those moments. But, just when it looked to everyone like he blew it, he had an opposite kind of moment. He had a moment which showed that he had a wisdom that was not only greater than theirs, but so much so that it was above envy, and could only be admired with awe.

See, immediately after becoming king, Solomon found himself in a very difficult situation. Here’s the set-up:

1.      He had VERY big shoes to fill. He had succeeded his father, David, the beloved king of Israel. Regardless of who, or how good, he was, he would be compared to the model of sovereignty.

2.      He was young. In fact, he had just called himself a “little child” in a conversation (during a dream) with God (1 Ki. 3:7). So, experience was not on his side.

3.      And he was immediately put to the test. He had to judge a disputed case which no one else could answer. This case has been sent all the way up to him, the final authority, by the lower courts, and he would have to judge it.

Of all the “first days on the job,” this had to be the worst!

Solomon was probably wondering, himself, just how smart he really was. He hadn’t been tested. He had been the son of a king, royalty, and treated as a prince – but without the pressure of authority. Now, though, it was different. He truly wanted to be a good king, and wanted to be so for the good of the people in his kingdom. His greatest desire, as he told God, was to have the wisdom to lead God’s people, “to discern between good and evil” (1 Ki. 3:9). In fact, that’s what he asked for when God visited him in a dream and told him to ask for anything. So pleased was God with that response that He gave Solomon a “wise and discerning heart, so that there has been no one like you before you, nor shall one like you arise after you” (3:12). But when Solomon awoke from sleep he realized, “behold, it was a dream” (3:15). He did not know if he had really been given that great wisdom, or if it had been a creation of his mind. He knew that he would need it, though, to decide the difficult case that had just been dumped in his lap.

The dispute that Solomon had to judge was most difficult. The greatest judges in Israel could not decide how to rule on it. Two women had given birth to boys within three days of each other. Shortly after, one of the women’s sons died during the night. The two women lived in the same house, and one night the woman with the dead child switched the two boys while the other mother slept. Upon waking, the mother who had been given the dead boy could tell that he was not her child. As she made her case, the other mother, of course, denied the charge. If that weren’t enough, unique circumstance made the question even more difficult – 1) there were no witnesses and no other indisputable evidence. Only the word of the mothers made their case. 2) These two women happened to be harlots. By itself, that need not make it more difficult but, because of it, we can be surely deduce that, a) they were poor (living in the same house), b) they were without husbands (or anyone else to stand beside them) and c) they could not afford to hire a lawyer to present their petition (or, professionals who knew how to argue a case before a court). Only the infant boy and the two women, each claiming to be his mother, stood before Solomon – with a “(s)he said, she said” story. What to do…?

Solomon had to rule in the case, though. There was no higher court. All eyes were on him, the new king – how would he prove his merit? He heard each woman’s argument, and likely asked some questions. What Solomon did next, however, would have everyone scratching their heads, and probably wondering how to begin impeachment proceedings, because of his insane decision. He called his attendant into the court and told him to cut the living child in two, and to give one part of him to each mother. I know, crazy…!

His order did the trick, though. Upon hearing his directive, one woman said, “He shall be neither mine nor yours; divide him!” But the other woman said, “give her the living child, and by no means kill him.” By their reactions, it was clear who was the true mother. Solomon recognized the reaction and awarded the child, wholly, to his true mother.

You have to ask, did those reactions by the two mothers get Solomon “off-the-hook” for giving such a ridiculous order to begin with? Or was the order itself “off-the-hook”?

The latter, of course. It turned out that Solomon was, in fact, given a wisdom beyond the imagination of any other. He knew that the crazy order to slice the kid in two would elicit such a reaction by the true mother as to prove the child’s maternity. You gotta admit, that’s pretty wise! (Nobody else had thought of it, after all!) That’s one of those things that make us think, afterwards, “Yeah, that was pretty smart. Next time I’m in a situation like that I’ll be sure to think a little harder.”

But Solomon’s wisdom in this action is even much deeper than determining the truth. If no one else had thought of the first part (forcing a reaction), they certainly wouldn’t have thought to take it a step further as Solomon did. Matthew Henry, in his commentary of 1 Kings, believed that Solomon had most likely already decided who the true mother was, by the countenance of each during the petition and interrogation portion of the trial. Even so, he did not stop the trial and make his ruling, as would have been justified. He kept going… because he knew he had to. If he had stopped the trial and made his ruling there, the rightful mother would have had her rightful child, and all would have seemed to have been well. On the surface, at least. If Solomon had done that, though, he knew two things could’ve/would’ve, happened-

·        First, though the case would have been settled officially, it would not have been settled popularly, because there was still no evidence. Conflict among factions who felt it their calling to get in the middle of things (I don’t think we own a monopoly on that…) likely would have arisen. That would not have been good for the kingdom. Public opinion would have divided, if dividing the child had not been threatened. And,

·        Second, had he stopped the trial short of this “proof,” his wisdom would not have been credited, and it absolutely needed to be. He did not need his wisdom to be shown to Israel for his own ego, but for the establishment of their trust in him. He needed to demonstrate that he was, indeed, a most wise man for their benefit. And that he did.

He took this case, a case that no one else could even begin to decide, and made an easy matter of it. That’s the kind of king the people needed, and they needed to know they had it. That, as Larry David (Curb Your Enthusiasm) would say, is some “preeettyyyy, preeettyyyy, preeettyyyy good” wisdom.

Looking at this story that way is very interesting, I think. But… it’s not the point.

The point of this story, to me, is the great extension from it, and it is this… In the absence of undeniable evidence, only wisdom can find truth. And to that I ask…

…Is faith not the same?

If we deny Him because “we have no proof” that He is who He says He is, we are like the un-wise judges in the story about Solomon. Our public statements about Christ remain divided because of a perceived lack of evidence to prove His claim. BUT, there is no lack of evidence, there is only lack of faith. There is only lack of wisdom. For, He was divided in half for our sins, and He was rejoined for our salvation. It was no threat, as was Solomon’s faux-judgement. It was actually carried out. Only by our lack of faith, our lack of wisdom, do we prevent ourselves from accepting this evidence.

There is not one of us more able than any other to be so wise. The Proof is not invisible. If truth seem hidden, faith can, faith will, find it. And it will shine. We just need to let it. Ecclesiastes 8:1 says “A man’s wisdom illumines him and causes his stern fact to beam.” (The author of Ecclesiastes, btw… Solomon.)

Solomon cared enough for Israel to give more than just his word. He threatened a child’s life so that the people could believe him. Christ cares so much for you and for me, for His Israel, that He, too, gave more than His Word. He gave His life, so that we would believe Him. Can’t we be wise enough to do so?