2 Chronicles Chapter 10
The Reign of Rehoboam
A. Rehoboam and the Nation at Shechem
1. (2 Chronicles 10:1–5) The Elders of Israel Offer Rehoboam the Throne of Israel
“And Rehoboam went to Shechem: for to Shechem were all Israel come to make him king. And it came to pass, when Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who was in Egypt, whither he had fled from the presence of Solomon the king, heard it, that Jeroboam returned out of Egypt. And they sent and called him. So Jeroboam and all Israel came and spake to Rehoboam, saying, Thy father made our yoke grievous: now therefore ease thou somewhat the grievous servitude of thy father, and his heavy yoke that he put upon us, and we will serve thee. And he said unto them, Come again unto me after three days. And the people departed.”
Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, traveled to Shechem, where all Israel had gathered to make him king. This moment marks the transition of power from the reign of Solomon to his heir and the beginning of a new, though troubled, chapter in Israel’s history. The pattern of succession—David to Solomon, then Solomon to Rehoboam—appeared to continue smoothly, preserving the Davidic dynasty established by divine covenant.
Yet, from the very outset, the tone of Rehoboam’s reign differed greatly from his father’s. Solomon had ruled over a united kingdom, rich and powerful, but his heavy taxation, conscripted labor, and indulgent building projects had exhausted the people. As a result, Rehoboam’s coronation began not in Jerusalem, the city of God’s choosing, but in Shechem, a site that carried great historical and symbolic weight.
Shechem had deep biblical roots: it was where Abraham first built an altar to the Lord when he entered Canaan (Genesis 12:6–7), where Jacob purchased land and built an altar (Genesis 33:18–20), and where Joseph’s bones were buried (Joshua 24:32). It was also in Shechem that Joshua renewed the covenant with Israel before his death (Joshua 24:1–25). Yet in this moment, the city represented the heart of the northern tribes, not the center of worship in Judah. By agreeing to meet there, Rehoboam placed himself on foreign ground—politically and spiritually. Rather than summoning the tribes to Jerusalem, he met them on their terms, suggesting an early sign of weakness.
Rehoboam is the only son of Solomon mentioned by name in Scripture (1 Chronicles 3:10). This is remarkable, considering Solomon had one thousand wives and concubines. The silence of Scripture regarding other sons underscores the futility of Solomon’s sensual excesses. Despite his vast harem, his lineage was reduced to a single heir—and that heir proved to be a fool. This confirms the truth that sin is a poor foundation upon which to build a legacy.
When Jeroboam the son of Nebat heard of Solomon’s death, he returned from Egypt. Jeroboam, once an industrious servant under Solomon, had been told by the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite that God would give him rule over ten tribes after Solomon’s death (1 Kings 11:29–31). Fleeing from Solomon’s wrath, he found refuge in Egypt, and now, upon Solomon’s death, he reemerged as the spokesman for the northern tribes. His return was not accidental—it was providential, setting the stage for the division God had foretold as judgment upon Solomon’s idolatry.
The elders and representatives of Israel presented a reasonable request to Rehoboam: “Thy father made our yoke grievous: now therefore ease thou somewhat the grievous servitude of thy father, and his heavy yoke that he put upon us, and we will serve thee.” The people sought relief from the oppressive labor and taxation that had characterized the latter years of Solomon’s rule. The burden of supporting his extravagant court and construction projects had fallen heavily upon the people. Their appeal was not rebellious; it was a request for fairness and reform.
The Lord had long ago warned Israel of this very situation. In 1 Samuel 8:10–18, Samuel had forewarned that a king would “take” their sons, daughters, fields, servants, and flocks. Despite this warning, the nation insisted upon having a king. Now the people felt the weight of that prophecy. The grandeur of Solomon’s kingdom had come at great personal cost to its citizens.
However, their request reveals something troubling as well. They sought economic and political relief but made no mention of spiritual renewal. Not one word was said about Solomon’s idolatry or the restoration of pure worship to the Lord. This silence reflects the spiritual dullness that had infected the nation. While Solomon’s political oppression grieved them, his apostasy did not. Material burdens moved them more than the loss of fellowship with God.
Rehoboam, hearing their plea, replied, “Come again unto me after three days.” This pause was wise at face value, giving time for deliberation. Yet it also hints at hesitation. A spiritually mature king would have immediately sought the Lord’s direction, as David had done in his reign. Instead, Rehoboam turned to human counsel, setting the stage for one of the most consequential decisions in Israel’s history.
2. (2 Chronicles 10:6–7) The Counsel from Rehoboam’s Older Advisors
“And king Rehoboam took counsel with the old men that had stood before Solomon his father while he yet lived, saying, What counsel give ye me to return answer to this people? And they spake unto him, saying, If thou be kind to this people, and please them, and speak good words to them, they will be thy servants for ever.”
Rehoboam first sought the advice of the elders who had served his father Solomon. These were men of experience, seasoned by years of statecraft, diplomacy, and wisdom. They had witnessed Solomon’s successes and failures firsthand. Their counsel came not from ambition but from prudence and understanding of the human heart. It was wise of Rehoboam to consult them, as they represented the continuity and stability of his father’s administration.
Their advice was simple yet profound: “If thou be kind to this people, and please them, and speak good words to them, they will be thy servants for ever.” These counselors understood that leadership begins with servanthood. They knew that the new king could not rely on Solomon’s reputation or authority. Solomon had been a man of grandeur, but Rehoboam lacked both his wisdom and his charisma. The people would serve him, not for the splendor of his crown, but for the humility of his heart.
Their counsel reflected the principle later embodied perfectly in Jesus Christ, who said in Matthew 23:11–12, “But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.” The elders recognized that gentleness and compassion were stronger foundations for loyalty than power and intimidation.
Had Rehoboam followed this godly advice, he would have secured the throne over all Israel and preserved the unity of the kingdom. The nation longed for a servant-hearted ruler who would lead with justice and humility. Tragically, as the following verses reveal, Rehoboam would reject the wisdom of age in favor of the arrogance of youth. His failure to heed this counsel would fulfill God’s prophecy through Ahijah, dividing the kingdom and setting Israel and Judah on separate paths of history.
3. (2 Chronicles 10:8–11) The Counsel from Rehoboam’s Younger Advisors
“But he forsook the counsel which the old men gave him, and took counsel with the young men that were brought up with him, that stood before him. And he said unto them, What advice give ye that we may return answer to this people, which have spoken to me, saying, Ease somewhat the yoke that thy father did put upon us? And the young men that were brought up with him spake unto him, saying, Thus shalt thou answer the people that spake unto thee, saying, Thy father made our yoke heavy, but make thou it somewhat lighter for us; thus shalt thou say unto them, My little finger shall be thicker than my father’s loins. For whereas my father put a heavy yoke upon you, I will put more to your yoke: my father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.”
After receiving sound and godly counsel from the elders who had advised Solomon, Rehoboam rejected their advice and instead turned to the young men who had grown up with him. His rejection of the elders’ words preceded his consultation of others; he did not weigh both perspectives impartially, but forsook wisdom before hearing folly. This was not a process of discernment but an act of willful pride.
This demonstrates a practice common even today—what may be called “advice shopping.” Many people seek counsel not to find truth, but to find affirmation. They continue asking until they hear what agrees with their desires. The book of Proverbs 12:15 warns, “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.” True wisdom accepts reproof, even when it wounds pride; foolishness, however, always surrounds itself with agreeable voices.
Rehoboam’s young advisors were his companions in privilege, raised in luxury within Solomon’s court. As Payne notes, “They were probably some of Solomon’s many sons, rendered callous by upbringing in the luxurious harem and court at Jerusalem.” These men had never known hard labor or sacrifice; their world was defined by wealth and entitlement. Having been reared in ease, they understood neither the burdens of the people nor the cost of tyranny.
When asked, “What advice give ye?”, they answered with arrogance and cruelty. Their words reflect the language of pride, not of leadership. They advised the king to display power through fear: “My little finger shall be thicker than my father’s loins… my father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.” The phrase “my little finger shall be thicker than my father’s loins” was a proverbial boast, meaning that his weakness would be stronger than his father’s might. In essence, they advised him to say, “You think my father was hard on you; you haven’t seen anything yet.”
This response was a complete reversal of the elders’ wisdom. Instead of gentleness and compassion, it proposed intimidation and domination. They wanted the people to fear Rehoboam rather than love him. This marked a crucial turning point, for Solomon’s rule—though demanding—had been tempered by wisdom and purpose. Israel had endured Solomon’s burdens because they believed in his divine calling and the glory of the temple. Rehoboam had no such moral authority. He substituted fear for respect and tyranny for vision.
As G. Campbell Morgan wrote, “He attempted to continue the despotism of his father, though he lacked his father’s refinement and ability to fascinate.” The young king mistook cruelty for strength and harshness for leadership. He forgot that true authority flows from moral integrity, not from threats or displays of power.
David Dilday insightfully observes, “With a dozen rash words, Rehoboam, the bungling dictator, opened the door for four hundred years of strife, weakness, and, eventually, the destruction of the entire nation.” His arrogance did not merely cost him popularity—it fractured the covenant nation into two kingdoms: Israel and Judah.
The advice of the younger men reveals a timeless truth about leadership and human nature. When pride rules the heart, it blinds a man to reason and hardens him against compassion. Proverbs 16:18 declares, “Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.” Rehoboam’s downfall began not with his policies, but with his refusal to humble himself before God and heed wisdom.
4. (2 Chronicles 10:12–15) Rehoboam Answers Jeroboam and the Elders of Israel Harshly
“So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam on the third day, as the king bade, saying, Come again to me on the third day. And the king answered them roughly; and king Rehoboam forsook the counsel of the old men, and answered them after the advice of the young men, saying, My father made your yoke heavy, but I will add thereto: my father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions. So the king hearkened not unto the people: for the cause was of God, that the Lord might perform His word, which He spake by the hand of Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat.”
On the appointed third day, Jeroboam and the representatives of Israel returned for the king’s answer. Rather than humbling himself and seeking peace, Rehoboam answered them roughly. The text repeats this phrase to emphasize the tone of arrogance and cruelty. His words were not those of a shepherd-king but of a tyrant who viewed his people as subjects to be subdued.
Rehoboam forsook the counsel of the old men and followed the reckless advice of the young. His declaration, “My father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions,” refers to scourges embedded with metal hooks or barbs, instruments far more painful than ordinary whips. In this, he presented himself not as a servant of the people but as their master.
“So the king hearkened not unto the people.” This failure was not simply political—it was spiritual blindness. A wise ruler must discern when the plea of the people aligns with justice and mercy. Though leadership should not bow to popularity, it must yield to righteousness. In this case, the people’s request was fair, and Rehoboam’s rejection was foolish.
His father Solomon foresaw such a tragedy in Ecclesiastes 2:18–19:
“Yea, I hated all my labour which I had taken under the sun: because I should leave it unto the man that shall be after me. And who knoweth whether he shall be a wise man or a fool? yet shall he have rule over all my labour wherein I have laboured.”
That lament found its fulfillment in Rehoboam. He inherited his father’s glory but lacked his wisdom.
Adam Clarke wrote, “Rehoboam was a fool; and through his folly he lost his kingdom. He is not the only example on record: the Stuarts lost the realm of England much in the same way.” The lesson is eternal—no dynasty, nation, or ministry can survive when pride deafens its leaders to wise counsel.
Yet, amid this human folly, Scripture reveals the sovereign hand of God. “For the cause was of God, that the Lord might perform His word.” God’s prophecy through Ahijah the Shilonite in 1 Kings 11:29–31 was now fulfilled: ten tribes would be torn from Solomon’s house because of his idolatry. The division of Israel, though tragic, was ordained by divine decree.
This does not mean that God caused Rehoboam’s sin. The text is clear—God overruled human pride to accomplish His sovereign will. F. B. Meyer notes, “It seemed to be altogether a piece of human folly and passion; but now we are suddenly brought into the presence of God, and told that beneath the plottings and plannings of man He was carrying out His eternal purpose. He makes the wrath of man to praise Him.”
Charles Spurgeon also wrote, “Notice that God is in events produced by the sin and stupidity of men. This breaking up of Solomon’s kingdom was the result of Solomon’s sin and Rehoboam’s folly; yet God was in it: ‘This thing is from Me,’ saith the Lord.” Though God was not the author of their sin, He was the master of its outcome. He turned rebellion and rashness into instruments of judgment.
Thus, the tragedy of Rehoboam’s harsh reply stands as both a warning and a comfort. It warns that prideful leadership invites ruin, yet comforts the believer that God remains sovereign even over human failure. No mistake, no rebellion, no folly can thwart His plan. The kingdom divided, but the covenant endured, for God’s promise to David would yet be fulfilled in the coming King of Kings, the Lord Jesus Christ.
B. The Revolt Against Rehoboam
1. (2 Chronicles 10:16–17) Jeroboam Leads Those Leaving Rehoboam’s Rule
“And when all Israel saw that the king would not hearken unto them, the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David? and we have none inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man to your tents, O Israel: and now, David, see to thine own house. So all Israel went to their tents. But as for the children of Israel that dwelt in the cities of Judah, Rehoboam reigned over them.”
When the people of Israel realized that King Rehoboam would not listen to their plea for mercy, their frustration erupted into open defiance. They answered the king with words that echoed rebellion: “What portion have we in David? and we have none inheritance in the son of Jesse.” This statement was not merely against Rehoboam personally, but against the entire Davidic dynasty. Their anger toward the immediate injustice led them to reject the very covenant line through which God had promised the Messiah.
The cry, “Every man to your tents, O Israel!” was a call for national separation. It declared independence from the rule of the house of David. The people no longer viewed themselves as one nation under David’s heirs, but as tribes free to determine their own leadership. Their rebellion was political in its expression but spiritual in its implications, for in rejecting David’s house, they resisted the divine order God had established.
“So all Israel went to their tents.” This phrase signals the division of the twelve tribes into two separate kingdoms: the northern kingdom of Israel consisting of ten tribes under Jeroboam, and the southern kingdom of Judah, composed of Judah and Benjamin, remaining under Rehoboam.
The northern tribes had long harbored resentment toward the dominance of Judah and Jerusalem. During David’s reign, their loyalty was tested multiple times, and during Solomon’s reign, they bore the brunt of his heavy taxation and forced labor. Rehoboam’s arrogance merely ignited the smoldering resentment that had been building for years.
This moment fulfills the divine warning that God had spoken through Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam in 1 Kings 11:31, where the prophet said, “Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee.” What appeared to be political upheaval was, in truth, God’s righteous judgment upon Solomon’s idolatry and Rehoboam’s pride.
Rehoboam, however, still reigned over the children of Israel that dwelt in the cities of Judah. The southern kingdom remained loyal to David’s line, not because of Rehoboam’s wisdom or virtue, but because of God’s covenant with David. As 1 Kings 11:36 records, God had promised that David’s lineage would always have “a light before Me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen.” This preservation of Judah’s throne was an act of divine mercy, maintaining the messianic line that would ultimately culminate in Jesus Christ, the Son of David.
2. (2 Chronicles 10:18–19) Israel Rebels Against the House of David
“Then king Rehoboam sent Hadoram that was over the tribute; and the children of Israel stoned him with stones, that he died. But king Rehoboam made speed to get him up to his chariot, to flee to Jerusalem. And Israel rebelled against the house of David unto this day.”
After the northern tribes’ declaration of independence, Rehoboam attempted to reassert control by sending Hadoram, the officer in charge of the tribute, to deal with the rebels. This man, also known as Adoram in 1 Kings 12:18, was the overseer of forced labor and taxation. He was perhaps the most despised official in the entire kingdom, the very embodiment of oppression and injustice.
As Payne notes, “He was probably one of the most hated figures in the land, an embodiment of oppression.” Rehoboam’s decision to send such a man to negotiate was catastrophic. Instead of reconciliation, he sent a symbol of tyranny. It revealed his complete blindness to the real problem—his pride and his heavy-handed rule.
When the people saw Hadoram approach, their anger erupted. “The children of Israel stoned him with stones, that he died.” This act of mob violence showed that the northern tribes were no longer merely protesting—they had entered full rebellion. The killing of the king’s tax collector was tantamount to declaring war.
At this, “King Rehoboam made speed to get him up to his chariot, to flee to Jerusalem.” The king barely escaped with his life, racing south to the safety of his capital. The very people who had once shouted, “God save King Solomon!” now shouted rebellion against his son. This single event marks the permanent political rupture between the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah.
The narrator concludes, “And Israel rebelled against the house of David unto this day.” From this point forward, the name “Israel” would refer exclusively to the ten northern tribes, and “Judah” would refer to the southern kingdom consisting of Judah and Benjamin.
The split was not just political but deeply spiritual. The northern kingdom would quickly descend into idolatry under Jeroboam’s leadership, establishing golden calves in Bethel and Dan. The southern kingdom, though often unfaithful, retained the temple, the priesthood, and the Davidic line. This division—though tragic—served to fulfill God’s sovereign purposes in judgment and redemption.
There had always been tension between Judah and the northern tribes. Even in David’s day, after Absalom’s rebellion, there had been disputes over loyalty, as seen in 2 Samuel 19:41–43:
“And behold, all the men of Israel came to the king, and said unto the king, Why have our brethren the men of Judah stolen thee away? … And the men of Judah answered, The words of the men of Israel are fiercer than the words of the men of Judah.”
That tension led directly into the rebellion of Sheba in 2 Samuel 20:1–2, whose cry was nearly identical to that of Rehoboam’s time: “We have no part in David, neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man to his tents, O Israel.” What Sheba began in rebellion, Jeroboam completed in revolution.
As Knapp aptly remarks, “Rehoboam ought to have been thankful that God’s love to David had left him even two tribes.” Though the ten tribes departed, God’s covenant mercy preserved the remnant of Judah, from whom the true King—Jesus Christ—would come.
Thus, the division of the kingdom stands as both a warning and a witness. It warns of the consequences of pride, injustice, and idolatry; but it also bears witness to the faithfulness of God, who—even in judgment—preserves His redemptive purpose. Though Israel rebelled, the promise to David stood unbroken, awaiting its ultimate fulfillment in the eternal reign of Christ.
