Solomon's folly

I'm re-reading Dale Ralph Davis' book, The Wisdom and the Folly: it's a commentary/exposition of the Book of First Kings. Here are a few extracts...

He's been talking about Solomon and the way in which all his wealth is spoken of:

'In light of what we have just said in the preceding section, we can say that I Kings 10 speaks a word of testimony, namely, that the prosperity of the people of God is always a gift of Yahweh's goodness, which (I would think) demands of us both gratitude (lest we idolize the gifts in place of God) and joy (lest we despise God's gifts as though they were sinful). Some have difficulty with the latter response in I Kings 10. In spite of the positive tone of the writer commentators seem convinced that all that gold can't be good and so feel impelled to emphasize the clouds on the horizon for Solomon's kingdom...we feel obligated to moan over 'materialism' and all that could possibly go wrong with such bounty rather than acknowledging that it is the blessing of the Lord that makes rich (cg Proverbs 10:22) and being content to enjoy that should he give it.' [page 107]

The next section refers to chapter 11, where Solomon's heart is gradually turned to other gods.

'This infidelity is also subtle because it is gradual. Verse 4 has a scary line: "When Solomon was old, his wives had turned away his heart after other gods." It was not some sudden attack or irresistible assault that explains Solomon's plunge into pagan ecumenism. No, it took years - the result of the creeping pace of accumulated compromises, the fruit of a conscience de-sensitized by repeated permissiveness....We must take a moment to be frightened. "When Solomon was old..." How that text ought to goad older believers to pray the last petition of the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6: 13a). Is there not a warning to churches as well, who have a fixation on youth ministry and a love affair with young marrieds and/or young families? Need we not exercise far more vigilance over our over-sixties crowd, many of whom will doubtless meet the major troubles of their lives in their final years? (page 115)

And in a long footnote on page 117 he writes:

'It is interesting to note the assumptions 1 King 11:1-10 overthrows (by implication). One sometimes reads Christian writers who bemoan the current lack of 'heroes'. There is such a dearth, they claim, of suitable models for youth. But the text says Solomon had a fine model - David his father (vv 4, 6). (The idea is not that David was Simon-pure, but that he was first-commandment faithful.) Yet that did not keep Solomon from folly. This exposes the example fallacy. Yahweh's anger in verse 9 is "because his heart had turned away from Yahweh, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him two times" (see 3:4-15 and 9:1-9). Note the inference: even the most privileged, intimate experiences with God do not guarantee immunity from infidelity - undermining the experiential fallacy. Verse 10 affirms that Yahweh had clearly warned Solomon about this other-gods seduction, yet Solomon "did not keep what Yahweh had commanded." How often sociopolitical groups assume that if people are only informed about some danger they will then avoid it. If only youth know that drugs will fry their brains like an egg in a skillet, well, then, they will "just say no" to drugs. Or even Christians can assume that if only they indoctrinate their children in biblical doctrine and with a biblical world view, then they will not fall away. But Solomon did - with Yahweh as his teacher; and that exposes the educational fallacy