I have decided (for the moment), that the descriptions of Solomon are not meant to represent an actual person. Instead, Solomon is the personification of a period in which Israel was prosperous and admired by other nations. The gift of wisdom he receives from God today and the wealth and fame that he wins because of that wisdom represent Israel's triumph.
Now, that is not to say that the character of Solomon does not represent an actual person. It may very well represent the ruler of Israel during some remembered time of prosperity. What I doubt is that the king himself engendered all of the wonderful properties applied to Solomon. Instead, this seems like a case of attributing situational success to an individual who had little, if any, real effect on that success (like how CEOs often are given way more credit or blame than is justified given their actual influence).
Oh yeah, and Solomon has a bunch of officials. Yawn.
Just like Moses when he appointed officials to help him judge the Israelites, the apostles learn the importance of delegation.
Just like with Jesus, Stephen has his character blemished due to some liars. This story and the similar story of the false accusations at Jesus' trial should really make you wonder about the credulity of the first believers and those around them. This was obviously a society where people believed things easily. A couple liars could convince people that an individual was not to be trusted. Given that the contemporaries of Jesus were obviously so easily swayed, why should we believe that there was truth to the miraculous stories about Jesus and his followers? Maybe those stories were just lies or legends that came to be believed by a credulous society.
Psalms and Proverbs
It is good for workers to have an appetite;This seems like one of those proverbs that has probably been abused by those who want to justify bad working conditions.
an empty stomach drives them on.