The text of 2 Chronicles 1:11-17 gives the Biblical view of the glory of Solomon’s reign in Israel. The son of David, and the last king to reign over a united Israel, was rich. We are told “he made silver and gold as common in Jerusalem as sone, and he made cedars as abundant as the sycamores which are in the lowland” (15). He was powerful. He had 1,400 chariots, 12,000 horsemen. His fame went forth over the world at that time. The queen of Sheba visited him, enthralled by his reputation. She said, “It was a true report which I heard in my own land about your words and your wisdom. However I did not believe their words until I came and saw with my own eyes; and indeed the half of the greatness of your wisdom was not told me. You exceed the fame of which I heard” (2 Chronicles 9:5-6).
The Bible reveals a detailed history of Solomon’s greatness at the time of his reign. And yet, there is not a great deal of archaeological proof of his existence and reign. And, because of this, the typical response of the modern critic is that it is not so.
Note the following quotes from Wikipedia. Of course, Wikipedia is not particular authoritative. However, as a generic source it does a pretty good job of relating the present view of modern criticism toward Solomon.
“Historical evidence of King Solomon other than the biblical accounts has been so minimal that some scholars have understood the period of his reign as a ‘Dark Age’.”
“Current consensus states that regardless of whether or not a man named Solomon truly reigned as king over the Judean hills in the tenth century BCE, the Biblical descriptions of his apparent empire’s lavishness is almost surely an anachronistic exaggeration.”
“As for Solomon himself, scholars on both the maximalist and minimalist sides of the spectrum of biblical archeology generally agree that he probably existed. However, a historically accurate picture of the Davidic king is difficult to construct.”
It is interesting that modern scholarship seems to demand archaeological evidence concerning every event and personage in the Bible. It doesn’t seem to matter that archeology has proven the Bible to be true time and again, the absence of evidence in any particular matter is to some proof that the Bible is wrong.
A lack of proof does not indicate inaccuracy. It is simply a lack of proof! The Bible is accurate, and dependable. The archeological proof that has been uncovered, as it is discovered, has consistently verified the Bible account.
Do not be fooled, the modernist has his own agenda. He colors his criticisms with his doubt concerning scripture. Instead, recognize this truth, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16). The casting of doubt upon God’s word does not in any way impact its accuracy and inspiration. These are God’s words, not the words of man. Rejecting or ignoring the agency of God will always lead to such mistakes. “But the Lord is the true God; He is the living God and the everlasting King” (Jeremiah 10:10).
