Why did God allow Shishak to attack Jerusalem in 2 Chronicles 12:2? Immediate Historical Setting After Solomon’s death, Rehoboam inherited a kingdom already drifting spiritually. Within three years (2 Chronicles 11:17), Judah “abandoned the Law of the LORD” (12:1). Their rapid apostasy—idolatrous high places, Asherah poles, and male shrine prostitution (1 Kings 14:22-24)—formed the backdrop for Shishak’s invasion in Rehoboam’s fifth year (ca. 926 BC on a conservative Ussher-style chronology). Covenant Framework: Blessings and Curses Deuteronomy 28 and Leviticus 26 had spelled out the covenant stipulations: fidelity brings protection; infidelity invites foreign oppression. 2 Chronicles 12:2 explicitly links Shishak’s advance to Judah’s unfaithfulness, not to mere geopolitical weakness. The Chronicler, writing centuries later, consistently interprets Israelite history through this covenant lens (cf. 2 Chronicles 15:2; 24:20). Divine Discipline, Not Annihilation Through the prophet Shemaiah, God announces, “You have abandoned Me; therefore I have abandoned you to Shishak” (12:5). Yet, upon the rulers’ humble confession—“The LORD is righteous” (12:6)—judgment is tempered: “They will become his servants, so they will learn the difference between serving Me and serving the kingdoms of other lands” (12:8). The objective is corrective, not terminal. Hebrews 12:6 reaffirms the principle: “For the Lord disciplines the one He loves.” Archaeological Corroboration of Shishak 1. Bubastite Portal (Karnak, Thebes): Pharaoh Shoshenq I’s relief lists roughly 150 conquered Judean and Israelite sites, matching the biblical description of cities “without walls” (12:4). Although Jerusalem’s name is absent—likely omitted because its tribute spared it from destruction—the list validates a large-scale campaign exactly when the Bible places it. 2. Megiddo Stela Fragment: Inscribed with Shoshenq’s cartouche, discovered in a Solomonic stratum, it anchors the synchronism between Shishak and Rehoboam archaeologically. These finds support the chronicler’s historical reliability while underscoring God’s sovereignty over international affairs (Isaiah 10:5-7). Chronological Notes Using a conservative Ussher-style timeline: • Solomon’s death: 930 BC • Rehoboam Year 5: 926 BC • Shishak/Shoshenq I reign: 945–924 BC (conventional Egyptian chronology), allowing a brief overlap adjusted in young-earth scholarship by modest synchronism calibration. Theological Motifs 1. Sovereign Instrumentality: God often employs pagan rulers as “His shepherd” (Isaiah 44:28) or “rod” (Isaiah 10:5) to chasten His people. 2. Call to Repentance: The incursion functioned as a national altar call. Their partial repentance brought immediate deliverance (12:7) and later “conditions were good in Judah” (12:12). 3. Humbling of Earthly Glory: The loss of Solomon’s golden shields (1 Kings 10:17; 2 Chronicles 9:16) symbolizes faded splendor apart from God, replaced with bronze—an inferior substitute (12:10-11). God magnified His worth over royal opulence. 4. Foreshadowing of Ultimate Salvation: The pattern—sin, judgment, repentance, deliverance—prefigures the gospel arc climaxing in Christ’s cross and resurrection (Romans 3:23-26). Temporary servitude to Shishak anticipates the deeper liberation Christ provides from sin’s dominion (John 8:34-36). Practical Application for Modern Readers • Corporate Accountability: Churches and nations are not immune to divine discipline (Revelation 2–3). • Personal Humility: Confession (“The LORD is righteous”) swiftly reopens the channel of grace (1 John 1:9). • Stewardship of Blessing: Prosperity is a test of fidelity; misuse invites corrective loss (Luke 12:48). Summary God allowed Shishak’s attack as a covenantal discipline triggered by Judah’s apostasy, authenticated by both Scripture and archaeology, designed to humble, correct, and ultimately restore His people—foreshadowing the greater redemptive work accomplished in Christ. |
    |