Why did Rehoboam abandon the law of the LORD in 2 Chronicles 12:1? Canonical Text and Immediate Statement “After Rehoboam had established his sovereignty and royal power, he and all Israel with him abandoned the Law of the LORD.” (2 Chronicles 12:1) The verse itself supplies the first answer: once security and power were consolidated, Rehoboam—and the populace he led—forsook divine instruction. The Chronicler deliberately ties apostasy to the moment “he was strong” (cf. 2 Chron 12:1, ESV), echoing the Mosaic warning, “…then your heart will become proud and you will forget the LORD your God” (Deuteronomy 8:10-14). Historical-Covenantal Context • Rehoboam ruled c. 931–913 BC (Usshur chronology 3029-3047 AM). • He inherited a nation fracturing from the idolatry Solomon allowed late in life (1 Kings 11:1-8). • Judah’s kings were bound by Deuteronomy 17:18-20 to hand-copy and daily read the Torah; Rehoboam’s abandonment shows that mandate neglected. • The three-year honeymoon of obedience (2 Chron 11:17) fulfilled Psalm 132:12’s conditional clause, but complacency soon nullified it. Formative Influences 1. Parental Example: Solomon’s syncretism (1 Kings 11) and Naamah the Ammonite’s pagan background seeded toleration of idols. 2. Peer Counsel: The same youthful advisers who spurned elder wisdom in 2 Chron 10 re-emerged as a court echo chamber. 3. Absence of Prophetic Accountability: After obeying Shemaiah once (2 Chron 11:2-4), Rehoboam appears to have distanced himself from prophetic rebuke until disaster loomed (12:5). Spiritual Dynamics—Pride and Complacency “Pride goes before destruction” (Proverbs 16:18). Strength ushered in self-reliance. The Hebrew verb ʿāzab (“abandoned”) implies deliberate, conscious forsaking, not mere neglect. By covenant logic, forsaking God invites reciprocal abandonment (2 Chron 12:5). Collective Apostasy The phrase “he and all Israel with him” underscores corporate complicity. Leaders set tone; populace followed into building “high places, sacred pillars, and Asherah poles” (1 Kings 14:23). Moral decay spread to institutionalized cult prostitution (v. 24). Intertextual Parallels • Uzziah (2 Chron 26:16) and Hezekiah (32:25) repeat the “strong-then-proud” cycle. • New-covenant warning: “So, the one who thinks he is standing must watch out lest he fall” (1 Corinthians 10:12). Archaeological Corroboration Sheshonq I’s Bubastite Portal (Karnak, c. 925 BC) lists 150+ Judean sites, matching the biblical invasion (2 Chron 12:2-9). Destruction layers at Gezer, Megiddo, and Lachish date to early 10th century BC, consistent with the Shishak campaign God allowed because Judah “abandoned” Him. Theological Significance Abandoning Torah is covenant treason; therefore Shishak functions as covenant lawsuit executioner. Yet divine discipline is restorative: Rehoboam’s partial humility (12:6-7) mitigates total annihilation, preserving the Davidic line for Messianic fulfillment (2 Samuel 7:13-16; Matthew 1:7). Practical Lessons 1. Strength demands heightened vigilance. 2. National righteousness begins with leadership fidelity. 3. Scripture internalization guards against drift (Psalm 119:11). 4. God’s chastening is mercy aimed at repentance (Hebrews 12:5-11). Summary Answer Rehoboam abandoned the Law because, once firmly established, he succumbed to pride, surrounded himself with echoing counselors, inherited and advanced idolatrous patterns, neglected the Deuteronomic kingly mandate, and led a willing populace into collective apostasy—thereby triggering divine discipline verified by both Scripture and archaeology. |
    |