The first segment of the writer's story (1:1-2:12) continues the history of Israel's monarchy where 2 Samuel ended. It records the final events in David's reign that led to Solomon's succession to the throne. It answers the question raised in 2 Samuel 9-20, namely, "Who will succeed David?"
It was customary in ancient times to warm an elderly person not only by covering him or her with blankets, but also by putting a healthy person in bed with him or her.16The body heat of the well person would keep the older person warmer. David's physicians chose Abishag to provide nursing care for David as well as to warm him.17Since David was the king, they sought and found a beautiful nurse for him.
"Shunammite"is an alternate reading of "Shulammite,"a resident of Shunem in Issachar. There is no way of telling if Abishag was the Shulammite Solomon loved and wrote of in the Song of Solomon (Song of Sol. 6:13). The fact that David did not have sexual relations with this "very beautiful"young woman (v. 4) is significant because it shows that his physical powers were now weak. David had been sexually active, but now his vigor had departed. This shows that it was time for a more energetic man to reign.
Adonijah was David's fourth son (2 Sam. 3:4) and the eldest one living at this time. Evidently he believed it was more important that the eldest son succeed David, as was customary in the Near East, than that the king of Yahweh's anointing occupy that position. God had identified Solomon as David's successor even before Solomon was born (1 Chron. 22:9-10). Adonijah's revolt was primarily against the revealed will of God, secondarily against David, and finally against Solomon.
"His father had never interfered with himor crossed him' (NASB) is more descriptive than displeased him' (RSV), for this comment by the author (cf. vv. 8, 10) betrays David's weakness in his unwillingness to cause his children any physical or mental discomfort . . ."18
Adonijah prepared to seize David's throne as Absalom had attempted to do (cf. 2 Sam. 15:1). Joab had long since demonstrated his disregard for God's will in many instances (2 Sam. 3:22-30; 20:8-10; 18:5-15). He evidently sided with Adonijah now because he realized he was out of favor with David. If Solomon succeeded to the throne, he would probably demote Joab at least.
Abiathar had been the leading priest in Israel until David began to give Zadok priority. He had fled from Nob after Saul massacred the priests there to join David in the wilderness (1 Sam. 22:18-20). He had also offered sacrifices at David's tabernacle in Jerusalem while Zadok served at the Mosaic tabernacle at Gibeon. However, David had been showing increasing favor to Zadok (cf. 1 Chron. 15:11; 2 Sam. 15:24; 20:25). Abiathar was one of Eli's descendants whom God had doomed with removal from the priesthood (1 Sam. 2:30-36; cf. 1 Kings 2:27). Probably Abiathar saw in Adonijah's rebellion a promising opportunity to retain his position that he must have seen he would lose if Solomon came to power.
Shimei (v. 8; cf. 2 Sam. 16:5-13; 19:16-23) may have been truly loyal to David at this time, or he may have gone along for the sake of personal advantage (cf. 2:36-38).
Adonijah's banquet (barbecue?) at En-rogel, just a few hundred yards southeast of the City of David, was probably a covenant meal at which his supporters pledged their allegiance to David's eldest living son. If David's other supporters had attended and eaten with Adonijah, custom would have bound them to support and protect one another.19
As a prophet, Nathan spoke for God. Evidently God moved him to do what he did here. It was certainly in harmony with God's will (cf. 2 Sam. 12:1). Adonijah had become king (v. 11) only in the sense that he was the people's choice at that moment. Perhaps Nathan was trying to shock Bathsheba and David by referring to Adonijah as the king.
David had undoubtedly assured Bathsheba that Solomon would succeed him after God had revealed that to David (1 Chron. 22:9-10). Nathan wanted to make sure at least two witnesses would hear David's promise (cf. Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15). This was especially important since Adonijah's rebellion against the Lord's anointed was a capital offense.
We should probably interpret Bathsheba's request (v. 20) as a desire that David would appoint Solomon co-regent rather than that he should step down and let Solomon rule in his place.20
Normally in the ancient Near East a new king would purge his political enemies when he came to power (cf. 2:13-46). This was the basis for Bathsheba's fear (v. 21). Nathan's news that Adonijah's feast was taking place at that very moment (v. 25) would have encouraged David to act at once. Nathan's words to David (vv. 24-27) were very diplomatic and appropriate for a man in his position.
The clause, "May the king live forever,"(vv. 31, 34; et al.) occurs often in the Old Testament. It expresses the wish that because the king had acted or would act righteously God would bless him with long life. God had promised righteous Israelites long life under the Mosaic Law. It also expressed the desire that David might live forever through the lives of his descendants.
Zadok, Nathan, and Benaiah were the highest ranking priest, prophet, and soldier respectively. Their leadership in the events David ordered (vv. 32-35) would have shown the people that they were acting as King David's representatives. Kings often rode on mules in the Near East symbolizing their role as servants of the people (v. 33). The Gihon spring (v. 33) was the other main water source for Jerusalem beside En-rogel. It was one-half mile north of En-rogel on the eastern side of Zion, and it was visible from En-rogel.
Zadok the high priest anointed (consecrated) Solomon king of Israel there (vv. 34, 39) with oil from David's tabernacle (v. 39) symbolizing Solomon's endowment with God's Spirit for service (cf. 1 Sam. 10:1; 16:3, 12). At the same time someone anointed Zadok as high priest (1 Chron. 29:22), probably before Solomon. A trumpet blast (vv. 34, 39) often announced God's activity in Israel throughout its history (Exod. 19:16; et al.).
"Two terms are used for the royal office: king' (1 Kgs. 1:34, 35a) and ruler' (v. 35b). King' (melek) had a long history of usage and carried with it associations of autocracy and despotism from the practice of kingship among Israel's neighbors. Ruler' (nagid, translated elsewhere as prince' or leader'), a term unique to Israelite tradition, emphasizes that one rules at God's appointment and pleasure (cf. 1 Sam. 9:16; 10:1; 13:14; 25:30; 2 Sam. 7:8; 1 Kgs. 14:7; 16:2). These two terms anticipate the long struggle between the ideal and the practice of kingship in Israel."21
By anointing Solomon (v. 39, in 973 B.C.) the high priest identified him as David's successor. Solomon now took his seat on Israel's throne as David's co-regent (v. 46). David thanked God for allowing him to live to see Solomon's coronation (v. 48).
"The placing of Solomon on the throne signals the beginning of the Davidic dynasty, a royal lineage that will eventually produce Jesus Christ. God has begun to keep the promises made to David in 2 Sam 7:7-17."22
Some commentators believe this was Solomon's second anointing when he became the sole king over Israel (in 971 B.C.).23It seems more likely, however, that David did not die for some time after the events described in chapter 1 (i.e., for two years; cf. 2:10-12).
Adonijah fled to the sanctuary courtyard, evidently the one in Jerusalem, and took hold of the horns on the brazen altar. In the ancient Near East and in Israel the people customarily regarded the central sanctuary as a place of refuge (Exod. 21:14; cf. Ezek. 21:13-14).24The idea behind this custom seems to have been that God had been gracious to people by accepting their offerings. Consequently people should be gracious to the refugee who had offended his fellowman. Solomon, like David and like Yahweh, showed mercy (v. 52).25
"The central truth for the throne-succession historian is that Yahweh was at work to frustrate Adonijah and to establish Solomon."26
David's words here state succinctly the philosophy of history the writer of Kings set forth in this book.27It is the philosophy David had learned and now commended to his son Solomon. Careful obedience to the Law of Moses would yield success in all areas of his son's life (v. 2). That obedience would constitute his manhood (v. 1). Since God made man in the image of God, man can realize his manhood only by placing himself under God's authority. "Statutes,""commandments,""ordinances,"and "testimonies"are all different kinds of precepts in the Law. Solomon's faithful obedience would also insure an unbroken line of rulers (v. 4; implied in 1 Sam. 7:12-16).
David also gave Solomon advice concerning certain men. Solomon should execute Joab for his murders (2 Sam. 3:22-30; 20:8-10). David had been merciful to Joab. He was living on borrowed time because of his service to David. Nevertheless he deserved to die so justice would prevail. Evidently David had reason to believe Shimei the Benjamite would threaten the throne again (cf. 2 Sam. 16:11). If he did, Solomon was to execute him (v. 9; cf. vv. 36-46). We see here (vv. 1-9) another instance of the theme that punishment comes on those who resist the Lord's anointed and blessing follows those who serve him.
"David was wrong in passing on responsibility to Solomon to execute the judgment he himself should have ordered at the time. This was to cause his son and successors much trouble and feuding."28
David and Saul each reigned for 40 years (cf. Acts 13:21). The differences in their personal lives and administrations were not due to any natural difference in the time they ruled. These differences sprang from God's response to them that their response to Yahweh's will determined. David experienced God's blessing as a warrior, poet, musician, military commander, administrator, and man of God. His most significant characteristic, I believe, was his heart for God.
David was 70 years old when he died (2 Sam. 5:4). Saul may have been 80 when he died.29However the deaths of these two kings as well as their lives contrast dramatically. David died in peace, Saul in battle. David died in victory, Saul in defeat. When David began to reign, the Philistines dominated Israel. When Solomon began to reign, Israel was at peace and in control of her neighbors (v. 12).
This section (1:1-2:12) provides a bridge between David and Solomon's reigns.30Much in it is transitional dealing with the transfer of power. When Solomon began to reign as sole king in 971 B.C., he had a strong foundation on which to build because of the blessing God had brought to Israel for David's commitment to God and His Law.
