The main strength of this objection lies in the supposition, that Solomon did not repent of his idolatry which he committed in his old age, or, as it is supposed, in the latter part of his life, and also from the silence of scripture as to the matter; especially in that part of it which gives an account of his fall and death. But this is not sufficient to support the weight of the objection, and to oblige us to conclude him to be an apostate; for there is nothing that appears from the account we have of him in scripture, but that he might have sufficient time for repentance between his fall and death. It is said indeed, that in his old age his wives turned him aside, but this they might do, and yet he not die an apostate; for sometimes that part of life which is called old age, comprises in it several years; therefore, when he began to be in his declining age, he might sin, and after that be brought to repentance. And as for the scripture’s speaking first of his fall, and then of his death; it does not follow from thence that one was immediately after the other; since the history of the blemishes and troubles of his life is but short. On the other hand, there are several things which may give us ground to conclude, that he repented after his fall; particularly, (1.) We have an intimation hereof in God’s promise relating thereunto, in which it is supposed, that God would suffer him to fall, and a provisionary encouragement is given to expect that he should be recovered: thus he says, _I will chastise him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee_, 1 Sam. vii. 14, 15. and the same thing is repeated, in which his fall is supposed, and his recovery from it particularly mentioned, in Psal. lxxxix. 30-34. as though God had designed that this should be a supplement to his history, and remove the doubts which might arise from it, with relation to his salvation.