In these verses above there is another repetition of the Lord’s words to Solomon concerning the two factors of the mitigation of the judgment upon Solomon. First, the rending of the kingdom of Israel would not take place in Solomon’s lifetime, and second, there would be one tribe, Judah, that would be left for the rule of the house of David.
These words serve as another kind of warning to Jeroboam, and they set limits upon him. His ascension to the throne of Israel is not intended to take place before the death of Solomon. Moreover, his rule is to be confined to ten out of the twelve tribes of Israel.
In setting these limitations upon Jeroboam, the Lord gives another kind of warning. Jeroboam is not to exceed the limits of the promise. These limits serve, therefore, as a test of Jeroboam’s obedience. If, as eventually he did, he attempts to exceed the boundaries, it will display that he possessed a disobedient heart.
Before we move on to the next two verses, there is one matter we ought to address. This has to do with the counting of the strips of material torn from Ahijah’s garment. Ahijah tore his garment into twelve pieces. Ten of them were given to Jeroboam, symbolizing the ten tribes over which he was going to reign. One piece was retained and symbolized the tribe of Judah over which the dynasty of David would continue to rule. These statements account for eleven pieces. What are we to say about the twelfth piece?
There are three possible answers. The one that has received the most support among orthodox commentators is that the twelfth piece represents the tribe of Benjamin. This answer accords with the apparent history of the matter in that the next chapter informs us that when the kingdom was torn apart, the tribe of Benjamin remained under the rule of Rehoboam.
A second possible explanation is based on the geographical arrangement of tribal shares. Excluding Judah, there was only one tribe that was situated in the south. That was the tribe of Simeon, whose territory was completely surrounded by Judah. It would be difficult for the ruler of the northern tribe to exercise authority over a piece of land completely surrounded by Judah.
A third possibility is that the twelfth piece is symbolic of the tribe of Levi, from which the priests and Levites descended. This suggestion is based upon the observation that God’s choice of Jerusalem as the location of the temple is mentioned by Him in the context, and the temple service was undertaken by the priests and Levites. In that case, we would not count Ephraim and Manasseh as separate tribes but combine them as the tribe of Joseph. Once or twice this reflects the language that the Bible uses. This is true in Numbers 36:5: The tribe of the people of Joseph is right.
All of the suggestions have problems associated with them. The first two explanations fail to supply a reason for the twelfth piece not to be mentioned. Additionally, they supply no reason for the mention of Jerusalem as God’s choice for the residence of his name as a reason that the house of David should rule over it, for, if Jeroboam had been given the whole of Israel, Jerusalem would still exist as the location of the Lord's temple. The third suggestion, however, gives no explanation as to why this manner of accounting the tribes was used by God.
34 Je n'ôterai pas de sa main tout le royaume, car je le maintiendrai prince tout le temps de sa vie, à cause de David, mon serviteur, que j'ai choisi, et qui a observé mes commandements et mes lois.