Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary1 Kings 1

The First Book of the KINGS Commonly Called the Third Book of the Kings INTRODUCTION [Following is the introduction to both 1 Kings and 2 Kings, which are parts of one whole.] 1. Title. The present two books of Kings were originally one, known in Hebrew as Melakim, “Kings.” In the Hebrew Bible, Kings continued undivided until the time of the printed edition of Daniel Bomberg, 1516–17. The Greek translators of the LXX, who divided the “book of Samuel” into two books, also divided the “book of Kings” into two books, and treated the four as parts 1 to 4 of “Kingdoms.” The title “Kings” indicates the contents of the books; our present first book of Kings gives the history of the Hebrew monarchs beginning with the death of David and the reign of Solomon and closing with the accession of Jehoram in Judah and Ahaziah in Israel. Second Kings begins with a continuation of the account of Ahaziah’s reign and closes with the end of the kingdom of Judah. 2. Authorship. The books of Kings are more in the nature of a compilation of selected materials brought together an editor rather than an original production from a single hand. They contain highly valuable and reliable historical material. Items drawn by inspired from early sources have been brought together and arranged into a framework following a specific pattern, with comments indicating a deep religious purpose. Many items have been taken directly or indirectly from official court or temple records. Archeological research touching many of these items has proved beyond question the striking accuracy of the accounts in Kings. There are narratives taken over, no doubt, from records preserved in the schools of the prophets. Stories are presented at times with great dramatic appeal, and yet again with sober moralizing judgments. Historical contributions are found in these writings without parallel anywhere in the records of Assyria, Egypt, or Babylon. Even when judged from the standpoint of profane history, these writings, with their deep human appeal, their matchless charm, sagacious political judgments, and penetrating moral philosophy, are among the most outstanding productions that have come to us from the ancient East. With all the diversity of source material, there exists a striking evidence of unity and regularity of plan. The accounts of the various kings are presented with a fixed formula for the beginning and ending of each reign. Judgments are pronounced in which the kings are compared with either the good or evil monarchs who preceded them. Certain peculiarities of thought and expression which pervade the entire two books of Kings point definitely to some single individual who played a prominent part in bringing together this material in its present form. The date of the composition is provided by the conclusion of the book itself, the final period of Judean history, when the southern kingdom was brought to its end by Nebuchadnezzar and its people were taken into Babylonian captivity. We cannot identify with certainty the individual who brought together the materials of Kings in their present form, but Jewish tradition has a report in the Talmud, Baba Bathra, 15a, that it was Jeremiah. If 2 Kings 25:27–30 be regarded as a postscript, the editor could well have been Jeremiah or an inspired contemporary of his.

3. Historical Setting. The books of Kings parallel one of the most interesting and eventful periods of ancient Near Eastern history. This is the period when Assyria rose to the height of its power and when its kings went out to conquer the world, including in their schemes of conquest the monarchies of Israel and Judah. This is the time of the Twenty-first to the Twenty-sixth Dynasty in Egypt, when Egypt had not yet given up its plans of conquest and when it vied with the Mesopotamia powers for the control of Palestine and Syria. This is the time of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, when the Medes and Chaldeans defeated the Assyrian Empire and brought much of the Near East under their sway, destroying the nation of Judah and taking the southern tribes into captivity to Babylon. Throughout this period the kingdoms of Israel and Judah were in almost constant and vital contact with the nations of the East. Among the wives of Solomon was a daughter of Pharaoh. Hiram of Tyre was regarded by Solomon as a personal friend, and lent great assistance in the construction of the Temple. Jeroboam, who was destined to become the first king of Israel, was a political refugee from Solomon and sought asylum in Egypt. Rehoboam, in the fifth year of his reign, was attacked by Shishak of Egypt. This Biblical “Shishak” was the famous Sheshonk I, founder of Egypt’s Twenty-second Dynasty, who also left his own record of his attack on the cities of Israel and Judah. Omri was a king who left such an imprint upon posterity that the kingdom of Israel came to be known among the Assyrians as Mat Humri, “Omri-Land.” Shalmaneser III mentions Ahab as having fought with the western allies against Assyria at the battle of Qarqar in Shalmaneser’s sixth year and that in his eighteenth year he received tribute from Jehu. Mesha of Moab is reported as having paid tribute to Ahab and as having rebelled against Israel after Ahab’s death. Further interesting details of this incident come to us from the famous Moabite Stone—that he received tribute from King “Joash, the Samaritan.” The record in Kings mentions Menahem’s payment of tribute to Pul of Assyria and of Tiglath-pileser’s attack on the northern tribes during the reign of Pekah. We also possess the records of Tiglath-pileser III in which he mentions his contacts with Menahem, Pekah, and Hoshea of Israel, and with Azariah and Ahaz of Judah. The Bible also mentions the payment of tribute by Hoshea to Shalmaneser V, Hoshea’s subsequent conspiracy against Assyria and with So of Egypt, and Shalmaneser’s three-year siege of Samaria, ending in the capture of Samaria and the end of the northern kingdom (2 Kings 17). During the 14th year of Hezekiah, Sennacherib made his famous invasion of Palestine, with “all the fenced cities of Judah” falling into his hands and with Hezekiah himself besieged at Jerusalem. Sennacherib has left to posterity his own vivid account of this campaign. It was about the time of Hezekiah’s heroic resistance against Sennacherib that Merodach-baladan of Babylon (see on 2 Kings 20:12) sent his envoys to the Judean king. Josiah met his death at the hands of Necho of Egypt while endeavoring to resist an Egyptian thrust through Palestine. Finally there are detailed accounts of Nebuchadnezzar’s numerous campaigns against Jerusalem in the days of Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah, which resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the southern kingdom. To appreciate this important period of Hebrew history it is necessary to understand the events then taking place in Assyria, Egypt, and Babylon. To integrate correctly the

affairs of these various nations it is necessary to arrange these into a chronological pattern, so that events may be correctly placed in the historical framework and contemporaneous kings and events may appear side by side. Except for the last three or four rulers of Assyria, the Assyrian and Babylonian dates for this period are generally accepted as fully established. For Egypt the chronology is not nearly so certain. See pp. 17, 124. 4. Theme. Though the books of Kings present the history of the Hebrew rulers from the death of David and the reign of Solomon to the final destruction of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, the primary purpose is not to present the facts of history for the sake of history. There is history, but it is presented with a purpose—to show how the experiences of the Hebrews relate to the plans and purposes of God. The object was not so much to write a detailed chronicle of the bald facts of history as to present the lessons of history. The compiler of these books had a deep religious motive and a very practical aim. The children of Israel were the people of God, and it was their task to fulfill the divine purpose and live out on earth the principles of the kingdom of heaven. Righteousness was to be the foundation for national prosperity. Sin could end only in ruin. If true to its divine mission, the nation would grow in strength and greatness. If kings and rulers failed to live up to the divine purpose, Israel as a people would perish. The nation could not exist without righteousness and without God. The amazing thing is that when the Israelites had failed as a nation and were face with utter and seemingly irretrievable ruin, someone found in the dark history of Israel’s sorrows and defeats something worth recording for generations to come. The lessons of Israel’s failure were to bring light and hope to the world. Upon the ashes of defeat there must yet be reared a new structure of success and victory. Israel might perish, but righteousness must not perish. If the lessons of Israel’s failure were learned, the world would yet find hope in God. The age when the book of Kings came into being was the age of the prophets. In the pronouncements of this book are to be found the courage and spiritual insight of the prophets, bringing home to the hearts of men lessons from God. The record of Kings begins with the glorious reign of Solomon, and the building of the Temple, with the nation virile and strong. It ends with the reign of a weak and infamous king, the Temple destroyed, and the land of Judah a desolate ruin. Yet this lesson of ruin was to rouse a new spirit of hope, and to focus attention upon a new and better age to come, with Israel ruled by its eternal King. “Lo, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will bring again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith the Lord: and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it” (Jer. 30:3). “They shall serve the Lord their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them” (v. 9). “Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid” (v. 10). “I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them: and I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land” (ch. 32:39–41). Even though the primary purpose of Kings is not the presentation of history as such, it contains history of great importance and remarkable accuracy. There are items concerning the Hebrew rulers such as are never found in the annals of neighboring states.

Secular annals of Israel’s neighbors were written to extol the king, to glorify him as builder, hunter, or statesman, to make public his acts of piety in the service of the gods, and to relate his exploits in war. Hebrew records as they have come down to us were to glorify not man but God. So we find in these records of Kings not only the outstanding accomplishments of the Israelite rulers but also their foibles and defeats. Kings contains items of historical importance not only concerning the kingdoms of Israel and Judah but concerning the nations round about. There are items of interest concerning Tyre and Egypt, ships of Tarshish going to Ophir for gold, Solomon’s navy at Ezion-geber on the shores of the Red Sea, the queen of Sheba’s coming to Jerusalem with a train of camels carrying spices and gold, Sennacherib’s being slain by his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer while worshiping in the house of his god, Syrian fears of Hittite kings, the tribute to Ahab of 100,000 lambs from Mesha, the sheepmaster king of Moab, the sending of the Egyptian forces of Tirhakah to harass the Assyrian hosts besieging Lachish and Libnah, Hiram’s importation of almug trees from Ophir to make pillars for the house of the Lord, the offering of the heir apparent as a burnt sacrifice upon a Moabite city wall to purchase the aid of the gods, Assyrian envoys speaking Aramaic and Hebrew in the 8th-7th centuries B.C., Zif and Ethanim and Bul as month names in the early history of Canaan—all interesting and vital ingredients of the basic stuff of which history is made. One of the outstanding features of the books of Kings is their basic chronological framework. Generally speaking, the kings are introduced in the order of their coming to the throne, regardless of whether they ruled in Israel or Judah. Two principal items of chronological information are given for each: (1) a synchronism, dating the beginning of the reign of a king of Judah in a specific year of the contemporary king of Israel, and vice versa, and (2) the length of each reign. Sometimes there are other time statements, such as intervals, regnal dates of events, or synchronisms between certain Hebrew reigns and those of other nations (see pp. 135, 145). However, there are many difficulties in reconciling the figures given for Israel with those of Judah, and in harmonizing both with non-Biblical chronology. Even in a series of reigns beginning and ending together in Israel and Judah, the totals are not the same. Such difficulties have led some Biblical scholars to conclude that the chronology of the Hebrew kings has become hopelessly confused, through the centuries, because of copyists’ errors. The efforts of others to harmonize the data have resulted in numerous theories (though not wide in range), based mostly on varying conjectural revisions of the figures in an effort to reconcile them with non-Biblical chronology (see pp. 140, 143). Actually, the seeming discrepancies are due largely, if not altogether, to our lack of information as to the various technical methods of reckoning used in Bible times. Our increasing understanding of the basic chronological principles employed by the Hebrew scribes makes possible, through recent studies, the construction of a coherent pattern that aligns the reigns of both Hebrew kingdoms in harmony with practically all of the Biblical data, and with the generally accepted chronology of Assyria and Babylonia (see p. 143). The dates employed in this commentary for convenient reference (see tabulation on p. 77) are derived from chronological systems of the kings based on thorough studies, and are chosen as showing the greatest degree of harmony among the Biblical data and as coming nearest to a complete solution of the problem. They are presented only as a tentative outline, for it is possible that future discoveries throwing more light on those

times may require more or less adjustment of this arrangement as a result of more exact knowledge of the chronology of the period. 5. Outline. I. From the Death of David to the Disruption, 1 Kings 1:1 to 11:43. A. The last days of David, 1:1 to 2:11. 1. David’s last illness, 1:1–4. 2. Adonijah’s effort to obtain the kingdom, 1:5–53. a. Preparations to seize the throne, 1:5–10. b. Nathan confers with Bath-sheba, 1:11–14. c. Bath-sheba confers with David, 1:15–21. d. Nathan confers with David, 1:22–27. e. David promises the kingdom to Solomon, 1:28–31. f. David makes Solomon king, 1:32–40. g. Adonijah hears that Solomon is king, 1:41–49. h. Solomon spares the life of Adonijah, 1:50–53. 3. David’s last charge to Solomon, 2:1–9. 4. The death of David, 2:10, 11. B. The reign of Solomon, 2:12 to 11:43. 1. The kingdom made secure to Solomon, 2:12. 2. Solomon’s dealings with his opponents, 2:13–46. 3. Solomon’s marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter, 3:1. 4. Solomon’s sacrifice at Gibeon and his message from God, 3:2–15. 5. Solomon’s notable judicial decision, 3:16–28. 6. The officers of the court, 4:1–28. 7. The wisdom of Solomon, 4:29–34. 8. The building of the Temple, 5:1 to 8:66. 9. Solomon’s buildings, offerings, and ships, 9:1–28. 10. The visit of the queen of Sheba, 10:1–13. 11. Solomon’s gold, his throne, navy, and chariots, 10:14–29. 12. Solomon’s many wives and his idolatry, 11:1–8. 13. The adversaries of Solomon, 11:9–40. 14. The death of Solomon, 11:41–43. II. From the Disruption to the Fall of Samaria, 1 Kings 12:1 to 2 Kings 17:41. A. Jeroboam I to Tibni, 1 Kings 12:1 to 16:22. 1. The coronation of Rehoboam and the disruption of the kingdom, 12:1–24. 2. Jeroboam I, 12:25 to 14:20. a. Altars established at Dan and Bethel, 12:25–33. b. The man of God and the disobedient prophet, 13:1–32. c. Jeroboam’s evil ways, 13:33, 34. d. Divine judgments pronounced against the house of Jeroboam, 14:1–20. 3. Rehoboam, 14:21–31. 4. Abijam, 15:1–8. 5. Asa, 15:9–24. 6. Nadab, 15:25–27. 7. Baasha, 15:27 to 16:7. 8. Elah, 16:8, 9.

9. Zimri, 16:10–20. 10. Tibni, 16:21, 22. B. Omri to Ahaziah, 1 Kings 16:23 to 2 Kings 8:29. 1. Omri, 1 Kings 16:23–28. 2. Ahab, 16:29 to 22:40. a. The iniquities of Ahab’s reign, 16:29–34. b. The rebukes by Elijah the prophet, 17:1 to 19:18. c. The call of Elisha, 19:19–21. d. War and peace with Syria, 20:1–43. e. The seizure of Naboth’s vineyard and Elijah’s rebuke, 21:1–29. f. The attack on Ramoth-gilead, 22:1–40. 3. Jehoshaphat, 22:41–50. 4. Ahaziah in Israel, 1 Kings 22:51 to 2 Kings 1:17. 5. Joram in Israel, 2 Kings 1:17 to 8:15. a. Joram’s accession in the second year of Jehoram of Judah, 1:17, 18. b. Elijah’s ascension, 2:1–11. c. Elisha succeeds Elijah, 2:12–25. d. Joram’s accession in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat, 3:1. e. The evils of Joram’s reign, 3:2, 3. f. The Moabites overcome, 3:4–27. g. Miracles of Elisha, 4:1–44. h. Naaman cured of his leprosy, 5:1–27. i. Building by the sons of the prophets, 6:1–7. j. The Syrians smitten with blindness, 6:8–23. k. Samaria besieged by the Syrians, 6:24 to 7:20. l. Elisha’s message for Hazael, 8:1–15. 6. Jehoram in Judah, 8:16–24. 7. Ahaziah in Judah, 8:25–29. C. Jehu to the end of the northern kingdom, 2 Kings 9:1 to 17:41. 1. Jehu, 9:1 to 10:36. a. Jehu anointed as king, 9:1–13. b. Jehu slays Joram and Ahaziah, 9:14–29. c. Jezebel slain, 9:30–37. d. Jehu slays all the seed of Ahab, 10:1–17. e. Jehu destroys Baal out of Israel, 10:18–28. f. The evils of Jehu’s reign, 10:29–36. 2. Athaliah, 11:1–21. 3. Jehoash in Judah, 12:1–21. 4. Jehoahaz, 13:1–9. 5. Jehoash in Israel, 13:10–25. a. His evil deeds and war with Amaziah, 13:10–13. b. The death of Elisha, 13:14–21. c. Cities recovered from Syria, 13:22–25. 6. Amaziah, 14:1–22. 7. Jeroboam II, 14:23–29. 8. Azariah, 15:1–7.

9. Zachariah, 15:8–12. 10. Shallum, 15:13–15. 11. Menahem, 15:16–22. 12. Pekahiah, 15:23–26 13. Pekah, 15:27–31. 14. Jotham, 15:32–38. 15. Ahaz, 16:1–20. 16. Hoshea, 17:1–41. a. Revolt against Assyria and the fall of Samaria, 17:1–6. b. The evils of Israel that brought about its ruin, 17:7–23. c. The mixed worship of the Samaritans, 17:24–41. III. From Hezekiah to the Destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, 2 Kings 18:1 to 25:30. A A period of reform, 18:1 to 20:21. 1. Hezekiah. a. Hezekiah serves the Lord and destroys idolatry, 18:1–12. b. Sennacherib’s campaigns, 18:13 to 19:37. c. Hezekiah cured from his serious illness, 20:1–11. d. The embassy from Merodach-baladan, 20:12–19. e. Hezekiah’s accomplishments, 20:20, 21. B. A period of decline, 21:1–26. 1. Manasseh, 21:1–18. 2. Amon, 21:19–26. C. The last reform, 22:1 to 23:30. 1. Josiah. a. The repair of the house of the Lord, 22:1–7. b. The finding of the book of the law, 22:8–20. c. The gathering of the elders, 23:1, 2. d. Idolatry destroyed from Judah, 23:3–20. e. The Passover observed, 23:21–23. f. Josiah’s widespread reforms, 23:24–28. g. Josiah slain by Necho, 23:29, 30. D. The final decline and the end of the southern kingdom, 23:31 to 25:30. 1. Johoahaz, 23:31–34. 2. Jehoiakim, 23:35 to 24:7. 3. Johoiachin, 24:8–16. 4. Zedekiah, 24:17 to 25:21. a. Zedekiah’s evil reign, 24:17–20. b. Nebuchadnezzar captures Jerusalem and takes the people to Babylon, 25:1–21. 5. Gedaliah made governor, 25:22–26. 6. Jehoiachin’s release from prison, 25:27–30.

David was old. The narrative that opens the book of Kings belongs basically to the close of the book of Samuel, being a sequel to the account there concerning David. But it forms a fitting introduction to the reign of Solomon in that it provides the setting for the narrative of Adonijah’s insurrection. The reason why Solomon ascended the throne before the death of David is found in the effort of Adonijah to take the kingdom for himself. David was then old and infirm, apparently near the end of life, and in no position to act firmly at a time of crisis. The writer begins, therefore, with a description of David’s condition. David had reached the age of seventy (2 Sam. 5:4). This makes him older at the time of death than any other Hebrew king of whom the record has been preserved. His life had been difficult and trying. Hardship, suffering, exposure, and sorrow had worn down a constitution once robust, and now the king found himself robbed of his strength and greatly enfeebled. He might also have suffered from some wasting disease. And now, added to his bodily afflictions, was rebellion on the part of one of his sons. In depicting the incidents of the narrative the author shows that he is well informed. He reveals vivid details known only to one intimately acquainted with the inner life of the court. He writes, not for the glory or benefit of the king, but for posterity. There is no need to point out morals—each poignant detail of the narrative speaks for itself. The hard facts of life are recorded exactly as they took place—exactly as they do take place in a world where proud and victorious monarchs and even earnest men of God are not free from reaping the harvests of the seeds that have been sown.

His servants. These were royal attendants, ministers of the king who looked after his personal wants and were responsible to the nation for his welfare. Josephus terms them “physicians” (Antiquities vii. 14. 3). The proposed remedy of seeking a healthy young woman to communicate warmth and vigor to a numb and enfeebled body was employed in ancient times when medical knowledge was limited. Similar prescriptions can be cited in medieval Europe and the modern East.

A Shunammite. Shunem, now called Sôlem, was in Issachar (Joshua 19:17, 18), on an eminence in the plain of Esdraelon, 6.5 mi. (10.4 km.) southwest of Tabor. The Shunammite was from the same place as the Shulamite maiden of Solomon’s Song (S. of Sol. 6:13), but there is no evidence that the two were identical.

Ministered to him. The maiden selected was not merely to assist in providing life and vitality to the ailing monarch but also to act as nurse and attendant, to stand before him for the performance of such duties as would serve the comfort and health of the king.

Adonijah. The fourth son of David (2 Sam. 3:4; 1 Chron. 3:2). The elder sons, Amnon and Absalom were dead, and Chileab presumably so, for nothing further is heard of him. Thus Adonijah seemed next in line for the throne. I will be king. Adonijah no doubt alleged that he had a just claim to the throne. Presuming upon his seniority and puffed up with pride, he determined to take what steps were necessary to secure the kingdom. Even though he must have known of his father’s plans, he was willing to secure the throne by force, if necessary, against what obviously was the divine arrangement (1 Chron. 22:5–9). The younger brother Solomon was better qualified than Adonijah to serve as ruler of Israel (PP 749), but the elder was determined that he would be king, no matter what the consequences might be to the country or to

those who might be persuaded to throw in their lot with him. The results are always tragic when reason and discretion are thrown to the winds in the service of self.

Ellen G. White

Not displeased him. Adonijah was a spoiled child—spoiled by an overindulgent father. As a child this aspirant to the throne had been allowed to have his own way, and now he was beyond restraint. Many a life has been ruined by an excess of paternal affection. Goodly man. Adonijah was handsome and attractive, and therefore no doubt popular with many of the people. But personal beauty is not among the most essential qualifications for position or leadership. Adonijah’s natural endowments had brought vanity, foolish conceit, and selfish ambition. His youthful passions were stronger than his principles, and his impulses trampled upon his convictions. He was a “goodly man” in appearance only. It is of far greater importance for a man to be good of heart. His mother bare. Heb. yaledah, “she bore.” “His mother” has been supplied by the translator. Maacah was the mother of Absalom (2 Sam. 3:3), whereas Haggith was the mother of Adonijah (2 Sam. 3:4). A better rendition would be, “He was born [next] after Absalom.”

Conferred with Joab. With the support of the commander in chief, Joab, Adonijah hoped to win over the army, and through the high priest, Abiathar, to secure also the support of the priesthood. Both Joab and Abiathar had been very close to David and had performed noble service for him in difficult and troublous times. Joab was a hard, bold, and at times unscrupulous man, imperious on occasion and even disobedient to the royal commands. Abiathar was the son of Ahimelech, who suffered death in David’s cause. Abiathar had been one of David’s firmest friends, having been with him in his wanderings when he fled from Saul (1 Sam. 22:20–23), serving him when he was king at Hebron (2 Sam. 15:35), and fleeing with him when Absalom rebelled (2 Sam. 15:24, 29, 35, 36; 17:15; 19:11). The reason for his defection at this time is not clear, but it might be that he did not view Adonijah’s conduct as an actual rebellion. David’s designation of Solomon for the throne might have been looked upon as springing from excessive fondness, and the assumption of the crown by the eldest son might have seemed only right and justifiable. On his part, Joab may have given support to Adonijah because of a grudge against the king for demoting him (2 Sam. 19:13).

Zadok. High priest with Ahimelech (see on 2 Sam. 8:17) and after his death, with Abiathar (2 Sam. 20:25). Both Zadok and Abiathar remained true to David at the revolt of Absalom, being sent back with the ark to Jerusalem when David fled (2 Sam. 15:24– 29, 35). The exact relationship between the two priests is not clear, but it may be that inasmuch as Zadok served at the tabernacle of witness at Gibeon (1 Chron. 16:39), Abiathar probably served at the sanctuary containing the ark at Zion (see 1 Chron. 16:1; cf. 2 Chron. 5:2). Benaiah. The chief of the Cherethites and Pelethites (2 Sam. 8:18; 20:23; 1 Chron. 18:17), David’s bodyguard (2 Sam. 23:20–23) who accompanied him on the occasion of Absalom’s revolt (2 Sam. 15:18). From their names arises the generally accepted opinion that they were recruited from Cretans and Philistines. These troops were not under Joab’s command, and Joab no doubt looked jealously upon Benaiah as a rival. Nathan. A prophet active in the days of David and very close to the king. Nathan could be counted upon by Solomon to be among his chief supporters. It was he who had given the infant prince the name of Jedidiah, “darling of Jehovah” (2 Sam. 12:25).

Slew sheep. When Saul was made king at Gilgal “they sacrificed sacrifices of peace offerings” (1 Sam. 11:15). When Samuel was called to anoint David as king he was instructed by the Lord to offer a sacrifice, to which Jesse and his sons were called (1 Sam. 16:1–5). So when Absalom seized the throne he also offered sacrifices (2 Sam. 15:12). Adonijah’s sacrifice was a peace offering such as was offered on occasions of joy or thankfulness, a sacrifice to which many might be invited. En-rogel. A deep spring below Jerusalem, just beyond the juncture of the Kidron and Hinnom valleys. According to Josephus it was in the king’s garden (Antiquities vii. 14. 4), outside of the city. It is known today as Bîr ‘Ayyûb, “Job’s Well.”

He called not. The fact that Solomon was not invited to the sacrifice gives proof that Adonijah was well aware of his father’s wish that the kingdom should go to Solomon and that Adonijah was determined to keep David’s plans from being carried out. By not inviting Solomon, Adonijah both betrayed his own plans and purpose and gave occasion for the frustration of his endeavors.

Nathan spake. Nathan’s act was in line with his responsibilities as a prophet of God and a faithful servant of the state. He saw that the carrying out of the plot would be directed against the accomplishment of the divine purpose, and with characteristic resolution and dispatch he took the lead in setting into operation effective moves destined to thwart the conspirators. Bath-sheba well knew that the usurpation by Adonijah would, as a matter of course, be sealed by her son’s blood and her own as well. She, more than anyone else, would be in a position to approach the king for the taking of such steps as the crisis required. With great wisdom and prudence Nathan proposed a course of action destined to cut short the conspiracy and to prevent a repetition of the disastrous experience of Absalom.

Bath-sheba went in. The mother of Solomon had the freedom of the palace and quickly made her way into the king’s presence, ill as he was. As she bowed low with the humble prostration of a suppliant, David recognized immediately that something of unusual import had prompted the call and he asked for details. The fact that David knew nothing of what was going on, that he had not been consulted by Adonijah concerning his proposed plans, and that Nathan was first informed of them at the moment of their execution, shows how secretly the affair had been managed. The intrigue revealed that Adonijah was not moved by a clear conscience. Bath-sheba began by reminding her husband of his promise to her that her son Solomon would succeed to the throne, and then abruptly informed him that in spite of this promise Adonijah was already king. Adonijah had presumed to take the kingdom while David himself was still on the throne. In such a situation the eyes of all Israel were on David to see what his move would be. Bath-sheba reminded him of his responsibility to the nation at this hour of crisis, and of the fact that if he did not act he would bear the blame for whatever fate would befall her and her son.

Also came in. At the climactic moment, Nathan entered and interrupted the queen with his urgent report. Bath-sheba adroitly withdrew (see v. 28), allowing Nathan the opportunity to make the same startling announcement, that Adonijah reigned. Surely this could not be without the command of the king! But how could David have given such orders as these? Why had he done it without a word to his trusted counselor and friend? Each question was an implied rebuke, a thrust at the king for having had part in a procedure so uncalled for, an outrage aimed directly at Solomon, Benaiah, and Zadok.

How could David have turned his back on these men who had been so close to him? The questions were asked, of course, merely to draw a vehement denial from the king. The denial must necessarily entail a royal rebuke upon the whole outrageous plot, for nothing like this could even be conceived of as having taken place without the will of the king, unless it were a plot directly against the throne. Nathan in his attitude of assumed injury was only ensuring the success of his mission, for it was now the king’s turn to be outraged and to direct the immediate steps to be taken to foil the conspirators in their plot.

Call me Bath-sheba. The queen was in readiness, awaiting the next move in the swiftly unfolding drama. She approached the king with confidence, for he had given to her his word, and she knew that it would be carried out. David reassured her, renewing his oath, and promising that it would be fulfilled that very day.

Call me Zadok. Zadok, Nathan, and Benaiah had not been called by Adonijah, but they now were called by the king. They were of no service to Adonijah in his conspiracy against the throne, but they were to be the key figures in the support of the throne. David, though “old and stricken in years,” is fired again by the characteristic energy of his youth. He thinks clearly and acts swiftly. Terse directions are given as to the part each should play. The sudden flash of energy and resoluteness of action is in striking contrast to the timidity and despondency with which David, when much younger, had received the news of Absalom’s rebellion (2 Sam. 15:14). At that time David knew that he had been in error, and that he was receiving a chastisement from God. Now all that was gone, and he knew that God was on his side.

Mine own mule. An animal undoubtedly well known to the people as reserved for the sole use of the king and symbolizing to them the prerogatives and privileges of royalty. If Solomon were seen riding that mule, the people would know that he was king. Gihon. The site selected for the ceremony was Gihon, the famous spring of early Jerusalem on the southeastern slope of Ophel. It was situated just east of the City of David and is known today by the name ‘Ain Sitti Maryam, “Spring of our Lady Mary.” This was the spring to which the Jebusites constructed a tunnel so that water could be secured without venturing outside the city walls. Hezekiah later constructed a tunnel from Gihon to carry water to the west side of the City of David (2 Chron. 32:30), to the Upper Pool, or Pool of Siloam, and constructed about the latter a wall so that water might be available in case of a siege (2 Chron. 33:14). This location where Solomon was to be anointed was over half a mile up the valley from En-rogel, where the festivities of Adonijah’s coronation were in progress.

Anoint him. The ceremony of anointing was to be carried out by Zadok as priest and Nathan as prophet—both being empowered by their official prerogatives to perform the rite. Samuel, who anointed David (1 Sam. 16:13), was both prophet and priest. Jehu was anointed by one of the sons of the prophets sent by Elisha (2 Kings 9:1–3).

Appointed him. David evidently claimed the right to name his successor. This was in line with recognized Eastern custom. Alyattes named Croesus; Cyrus appointed Cambyses; and Darius nominated Xerxes. Herodotus declares it to be a law of the Persians for a king always to nominate a successor before departing on an expedition. A still more absolute right of naming a successor was exercised by certain of the emperors of Rome and occasionally by the caliphs. See on chs. 1:39 and 2:24.

Israel and over Judah. An intended distinction between Israel and Judah is here noticeable. Evidences of distinction go back to the time when the land was first divided among the tribes (Joshua 11:21; 18:5). David reigned first over Judah at Hebron (2 Sam. 2:4), and then was approached by the elders of Israel in regard to becoming their king (2 Sam. 5:1–3). At the time of Absalom’s rebellion the division between Israel and Judah had become distinctly more marked (2 Sam. 15:10, 13; 18:6, 7; 43>19:41-43; 2>20:1, 2).

God save king Solomon. This is an idiomatic translation of the Hebrew, which reads literally “May King Solomon live.” David’s well-ordered plans were promptly and effectively carried out. The new king was anointed with the holy oil from the tabernacle, the anointing indicating that he held his office by the Lord’s appointment and with the divine benediction. After the sounding of the trumpet, the cry, “May king Solomon live,” gave notice that Solomon was king and that he had been accepted by the people. The official proclamation came first from a herald in accord with David’s command (v. 34) and then the cry was taken up by the people (v. 40).

When Joab heard. With Solomon was a group of people who hailed the coronation of the new king with unrestrained delight and with shouts of joyous acclaim. With Adonijah was a company of conspirators just completing their festivities, which must, however, have been clouded by a measure of ill-concealed anxiety and apprehension. The sound of the trumpet that was to the one group a note of triumph came to the other as a note of doom. The quick ear of the seasoned warrior, Joab, was not slow in catching the significance of what was going on.

Jonathan. This son of one of the conspirators had no doubt been left behind as a spy to ascertain what was going on in Jerusalem and the palace. He had previously risked his life in the carrying of confidential information (2 Sam. 15:27, 36; 17:17–21)—then, however, in the service of David. Good tidings. The tidings were anything but good to the conspirators, and Adonijah could hardly have expected them to be such. He spoke as he did to reassure himself and his accomplices.

Our lord king David. As long as David was alive, or until such a time as a successor was officially appointed, David’s word was law. Unless Adonijah was ready to support his revolt by force of arms, he and those with him could only acknowledge that the will of the old king was still the will of the state, and that his decrees would be carried out.

Solomon sitteth on the throne. Facts were facts, unwelcome though they might be to the conspirators. The significant fact was that Solomon, not Adonijah, sat on the royal throne. He had been formally chosen by David as his successor; he had been caused to ride to the place of his coronation on the royal mule; he had been solemnly anointed; the royal guard was with him; Zadok, Nathan, and Benaiah were all at his side; the hearts of the people were his; everything had been done properly and in order, in accord with the will of David and with the evident approval of God; the utmost publicity had been given to the whole transaction; and the only thing for the rebels now to do was to acknowledge that Solomon indeed was king. See on v. 35.

The king bowed himself. No earthly monarch lives forever. The fact that David knew that his end had come and that the royal scepter must now fall into the hands of another is not without a note of sadness. But David quietly accepted his fate, prostrating himself upon his bed in humble acknowledgment of the fact that his successor sat upon

the throne. His bowing was not to the new king but to God, in grateful thanksgiving for all His blessings and watchful care.

Were afraid. Jonathan’s recital of what had taken place filled Adonijah and his guests with terror and consternation. Without ceremony, Adonijah’s erstwhile adherents arose and fled. That fact indicates that they recognized the utter hopelessness of the cause to which they had lent their support.

Horns of the altar. The horns of the altar were projections from its four corners (Ex. 27:2; 308:2; 38:2), upon which blood was sprinkled (Ex. 29:12; Lev. 4:7; Eze. 43:20). To take hold of the horns was to claim the right of sanctuary. This right was denied to a willful murderer (Ex. 21:14), and thus was denied to Joab after the death of David (1 Kings 2:28–31). Adonijah, by fleeing to the altar, conceded the fact that he was guilty of a deed for which he might be executed. By acknowledging Solomon as king (v. 51), he may have attempted to make a public acknowledgment of his mistake and to represent his usurpation as an act of haste and inadvertency for which sanctuary might be justly claimed.

Go to thine house. The usurpation of Adonijah happily ended without bloodshed. David had shown his wisdom in dealing with the matter by setting up Solomon as king and allowing events to take their natural course rather than by sending troops to put down the usurper. Solomon took the course of wisdom and mercy by extending pardon, yet at the same time making it clear that clemency had been extended only upon condition of consequent good behavior. If Adonijah showed himself a worthy man, living quietly as a private citizen and submitting to the new regime, he would remain unmolested. But if not, his life would be imperiled. Adonijah bowed to the king and submitted himself to his inglorious fate.