Solomon ordered 30,000 people from all over Israel to cut logs for the temple, and he put Adoniram in charge of these workers. Solomon divided them into three groups of 10,000. Each group worked one month in Lebanon and had two months off at home.
He also had 80,000 workers to cut stone in the hill country of Israel, 70,000 workers to carry the stones, and over 3,000 assistants to keep track of the work and to supervise the workers. He ordered the workers to cut and shape large blocks of good stone for the foundation of the temple.
Solomon’s and Hiram’s men worked with men from the city of Gebal, and together they got the stones and logs ready for the temple. (Contemporary English Version)
A lot of labor went into construction of the temple in Jerusalem. King Solomon raised a massive workforce, and placed them under the command of Adoniram. The work was not voluntary, but compulsory; no tribe or citizen in Israel or Judah had a choice of whether to labor in the forest and the quarry, or not.
This treatment of the Israelite people, in being required to work in Lebanon one month out of every three months, became a significant reason for the kingdom’s split after Solomon’s death. (1 Kings 11:26-28; 12:1-16)
There was an even larger group of workers to quarry and dress the stones in the hill country. The workforce was likely made up of both Jewish and non-Jewish persons, because of the needed manpower.
King Solomon was a master administrator. All of the planning, and movement of supplies and people, was a major endeavor to pull off. And this gets to the nub of working relations, both then and now.
Oftentimes, what looks good on paper, and makes sense to those in charge, is short-sighted. The actual people who will do the work are rarely consulted. This is especially strange and unacceptable in this day and age.
If companies can put a lot of time, energy, and expenditures into marketing focus groups to determine things like what color to use on packaging in order to sell more, then it is curious that no time and energy is placed into communication and interaction with workers.
It is sad and tragic that the corporation with high levels of effective engagement between management and employees is so very rare.
At the core of it all, I believe, is our anthropological view. Show me a workplace with sour relations and strained negotiations, and I will show you a management and executive team who use workers as replaceable parts in a machine.
But show me a company that discerns people as inherently worthy of respect and kindness, and I will show you a place where effective communication flows freely, and worker satisfaction is high.
Furthermore, our anthropology determines how we treat safety on the job. Rather than putting some safe policies in place because of government oversight and pressure, a view of people as important above all else will ensure that both the physical and psychological environment are secure – and they will take a zero tolerance approach to any and all unsafe practices, in order to preserve human dignity and life.
Therefore, why we do what we do is just as important as what we do.
And the only effective way to answer the why is through a broad and involved connection with a diversity of people within an organization. There is absolutely no substitute for this. Taking shortcuts only leads to ineffectiveness, and more importantly, to human duress and harm.
In order to achieve such an ambitious goal of constructing a temple – along with a palace and administrative buildings – a large corporate government was required to make it all happen.
Essentially, King Solomon enacted a massive administration akin to ancient Egypt and their construction of pyramids. With such a government came classes and ranks and opportunities. Frankly, it was a lot like a totalitarian regime, in which the major function was to bless what was happening.
This resulted in a humungous structure and system that became intolerant of any alternative thinking. Thus, the kingdom (the government) was prepared to crush anything or anyone that threatened the established status quo of how to operate. This is why the Old Testament prophets were not viewed well by the state, and many of them were killed.
So, if you have been following me through these reflections on King Solomon over the past several days, you may wonder if I like him, or loathe him. The fact of the matter is that Solomon, like us, is a complicated person. He tends to get hailed as the wisest person who ever lived, to the neglect of some of his unwise choices. For many, Solomon too easily gets off the hook.
Along with all of Solomon’s grandeur and sagacity, he also had a slave labor force that toiled in quarries, forests, and mines. He was given to excess in most things, and didn’t seem to have a stop button. And, later in life, he honored forbidden gods with sinister sacrifices at shrines on the outskirts of Jerusalem.
The truly wise person in the room will view Solomon in his totality; will have a broader and more contextual view of work and labor; and will discern people as majestic creatures in God’s image, who also have a tragically twisted heart which can easily be prone to foolishness and harming others.
So, as we remember the temple Solomon built, we can keep in mind its beauty and architectural wonder, and the skill needed to make it happen, as well as the thousands of people who endured harsh and sometimes inhumane treatment.
Looking at history from only one angle is really not seeing history at all. We need a full-orbed understanding of people, their situations, the context of events, and the challenges they faced. Otherwise, we’ll get a sanitized version which only ends up demeaning everyone.
Lord God Almighty, who has made all the peoples of the earth for your glory, to serve you in freedom and in peace: Give to the people of this world a zeal for justice and the strength of forbearance, so that we may use our liberty in accordance with your gracious will; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen.
Rev. Tim Ehrhardt 