As you say, you focus on literary-theological issues.
In your view what is more likely, literary-theologically-
Jeroboam had children named Nadab and Abijah, who died prematurely
AND
Aaron had children named Nadab and Abihu, who died by holy fire from God
AND
Jeroboam was initially appointed by God to follow Solomon and Rehoboam
AND then Jeroboam turned out to be an apostate against YHWH
AND
Jeroboam decided to celebrate his newfound kingship by appointing a new god for his people
OR
the position that
Solomon kicked out Abiathar and the priests of Shiloh for supporting the wrong brother in the fight for the throne
AND
Jeroboam was appointed by the priests of Shiloh to recover their position as priests that they had lost under Solomon
AND
Jeroboam then decided not to appoint the priests of Shiloh as official temple priests, thus causing them to
Repudiate Jeroboam as king
AND
Jeroboam gave his children Yahwistic names in Nadab and Abijah (YHWH is my Father), both of whom died premature deaths
AND
YHWH was represented by a calf (Samarian ostracon 41),
AND
Jeroboam was actually making a feast to YHWH (it doesn’t make sense for a newly crowned king to alienate his subjects by changing the official religion).
AND
Aaron’s episode and children’s names were polemic against Jeroboam and his family.
Theologically, literally - was Jeroboam really an apostate against YHWH?
Or is it simply propaganda by the author?
Is the traditional conservative evangelical position more likely to be correct (the first set), or the secular biblical studies view?