1 Kings 1
1:1-53 First Kings gives the reader a survey of sweeping social and religious forces that were vying to shape the future of Israel. The book begins with a power struggle between Adonijah and David over who would succeed David. At stake, many believed, was the identity of the nation. That Adonijah had no trouble garnering support in his quest for the throne indicates the deep divisions shaping up among the Hebrews.
At least six factors pressed for change in the kingdom. (1) The ideal of the violent, plundering warrior (Pr 1:10-19) was yielding in this new era to the ideal of the wise man (1Kg 4:32-34) and the successful businessman (Pr 22:29). (2) Central authority with a royal bureaucracy (1Kg 4:1-19) suppressed the power of the local elders and clan leaders. (3) The continued policy of converting and absorbing the many peoples of Canaan was creating a new nation united by Hebrew rulers and, nominally, by faith in the Lord. (4) The new, national, chariot army (10:26; see note at 1:38) would replace the levies (military conscriptions) of the tribes and clans, thus changing the identity and capacities of Hebrew military forces. (5) The rise of international commerce and a new business class forced drastic changes in Hebrew society (Pr 7:19-21; 31:10-31). (6) The older moral values were giving way to new ones (e.g., Pr 7:16-21). Most of these trends were underway before Solomon, but under Solomon they created a new society.
The writer of 1 Kings spoke for the Davidic dynasty and faith in the Lord over against Adonijah and other representatives of an alternate future. Thus it is accurate to say that a major purpose of this opening chapter and many other portions of the OT is to support the politics of David and Solomon. Some would use the term propaganda to describe this purpose, but the only proper issue is whether or not the new trends were God’s will for the nation. This is the author’s focus.
1:1 The reign of King David had begun the first age of godly greatness, prosperity, and power in the history of the Hebrews. After David’s death, could this greatness continue? In God’s plan it was to continue with Solomon, but would God’s purposes survive the crisis of David’s death?
1:2 The strongest Hebrew word for virgin (betulah) is used here. The word for the nuptial sheets that provided proof of the bride’s virginity (Dt 22:15) is derived from this word.
1:3-4 The ancients believed in the curative value of pairing a warm human body with an ill body, and so the phrase was not intimate with her speaks primarily to the fact that the sole purpose the girl served was to provide warmth and care. However, even among conservative scholars, some believe that given the context the above phrase may also indirectly indicate that aged David was no longer able to be intimate with a woman. In the eyes of his detractors, this would be taken as proof that David lacked the strength and fitness to continue as king. Once known, this may have encouraged Adonijah’s attempt to seize the throne.
1:5-10 In the struggle for Israel’s future, neither side (those aligned with David and his designated heir nor those against them) openly appealed to the tribal elders or other leaders for support (note tribal elders in 12:1-7). Both sides believed that if they seized power in Jerusalem, the traditional leaders would accept the outcome. Adonijah gathered his supporters and tried to seize the throne. Some of David’s loyal followers, such as Joab and Abiathar, joined with Adonijah. Perhaps they had given up on David, as he seems to have become rather detached and even irresponsible (e.g., 1:6).
Bathsheba and Nathan, supported by some of David’s remaining brave warriors and David’s loyal Cherethites and the Pelethites (see note at 1:38), reacted quickly and put an end to the attempted coup. Prudent human planning helped to gain David’s active support. Nathan’s warning to Bathsheba to act to save her and Solomon’s lives (v. 12) showed the likelihood for violence as a result of this struggle.
While there were moral positives and weaknesses to both sides, the decisive issue was which side God supported—despite its weaknesses. God’s purposes and the future fortunes of the Hebrews were bound to the new ways, to the centralized government, and to the Davidic dynasty.
1:5 Kept exalting indicates that Adonijah had already been proclaiming his future kingship and establishing his entourage for seizing the throne. Coup attempts are not birthed overnight. The chariots and runners recall Absalom’s revolt (2Sm 15:1). David had already promised Bathsheba that her son Solomon would be king and had publicly announced to the assembled nation that Solomon was his heir (1Ch 28:5). Nevertheless, Adonijah seems to have made his moves with his father’s silent acquiescence so that his will for the succession became unclear. In this context, the first to act might gain the throne.
Chariots and cavalry should probably be rendered “chariots” and “charioteers” since horse-mounted warriors (cavalry) are not documented for this early period. Early in the history of chariot warfare, the terms for chariot warriors were the same as the terms later used for cavalry warriors. By the time of Ahab (16:28), Assyrian records recognized the existence of mounted warriors in the region. During Solomon’s rule the military would become a chariot army, probably made up of foreign mercenaries since developing a local chariot force was a long, expensive process.
1:8 David’s royal guard (lit “great men”) likely refers to (1) the remnants and/or successors of David’s warriors (2Sm 23:8-39); or (2) David’s loyal palace guard, the Cherethites and Pelethites (see note at 1Kg 1:38).
1:9 Adonijah’s great feast amounted to an impromptu coronation, with many of the expected features: a revered setting, a military leader, a priest, pomp, and loyal followers.
1:11-14 With Adonijah’s coup already in motion, someone with sufficient standing to be accepted by the people had to initiate a counter movement for Solomon or the throne would be lost. Nathan, the prophet, assumed this role. He warned Bathsheba that the penalty for inaction could be death for herself and Solomon, and probably others of David’s loyalists as well. The losers in such power struggles were typically executed.
1:15-21 Bathsheba raised three issues to arouse David to action: (1) By God’s will David had promised the throne to Solomon. (2) Adonijah had proclaimed himself king without David’s public support or knowledge. (3) She pointed out that she and Solomon would be regarded as criminals if David did not act.
1:22-25 Nathan then came and reinforced the points Bathsheba had made to the king.
1:26-28 Nathan tactfully hinted at the danger to himself, Bathsheba, and David’s loyal officials by revealing that David’s inner circle had not been invited to the unofficial coronation. This cast them as outsiders, a dangerous place to be during a regime change.
Bathsheba had to be called in despite the fact that she was already in the king’s bedroom with David when Nathan entered (v. 22). Readers may think the text is inconsistent here because it seems to forget that Bathsheba was already present. But we must remember that Hebrew narrative is often very spare, leaving out details that can be implied from context. In this case readers should conclude that sometime after v. 22 Bathsheba had temporarily left the king’s room, appropriately giving Nathan private audience with his king.
1:29-32 David responded with the orders that legitimized Solomon’s succession. Benaiah seemed to be the leader of the Cherethites and the Pelethites. In the absence of any tribal levies, they were the dominant military force in the city.
1:33 The mule was the traditional mount of honor for that time. In an earlier age, the donkey had played that role, a custom still remembered as late as Zch 9:9. To ride the king’s mule was to claim the throne. The Gihon spring was an ancient, revered, and necessary source of water for Jerusalem. Later it was the source of water for King Hezekiah’s tunnel. Choosing it for the site of Solomon’s coronation indicated that it carried special significance and authority for the people of Jerusalem just as Adonijah’s selection of En-rogel recognized the significance of that site (v. 9).
1:34 The proper religious personnel were to anoint Solomon. This was done by the king’s command and in the presence of the king’s private army. These facts were sufficient for the people of Jerusalem to choose Solomon over Adonijah.
1:35-37 The last word is given by Benaiah who would be head of the army.
1:38 The Cherethites and the Pelethites were, formerly, Philistine mercenaries, personally loyal to David, and by this time, presumably converted to faith in the Lord. They formed David’s personal bodyguard and were effective infantry. The probable reason why David’s infantry could defeat Aramean chariots (2Sm 8:3-4), a rare skill for infantry, was the presence of these skilled Philistines.
1:39-40 The people who followed with rejoicing were probably the classes that benefited from several of the new ways that were emerging in the kingdom (see note at vv. 1-53). Both for good and for ill, Solomon’s rule would enhance these new ways.
1:41 The conflicting coronations were occurring within five hundred yards of each other, the distance between Gihon and En-rogel. Imagine the uneasiness when Adonijah’s group heard the noise of Solomon’s coronation.
1:42-46 All ceremonies for enthroning Solomon had been accomplished. Only major force could have reversed these actions. Adonijah’s followers were not ready to battle for Jerusalem, especially since David had spoken and was still alive.
1:47-48 These two speeches were not merely friendly sentiments. First, they represented David’s will. Then, repeated and recorded, they confirmed the new king in the same way that the public oath of office legitimizes an office holder in our time.
1:49 With the people of Jerusalem accepting Solomon’s coronation, and Adonijah’s followers having no stomach for fighting the Cherethites and the Pelethites, Adonijah’s coup had failed.
1:50 Adonijah’s failure was obvious when he took refuge at the altar, near the tabernacle. In popular attitudes of the day, such sanctuary may have involved magical protection rather than moral principle (see note at 2:30-34). The altar was the most sacred object outside the tabernacle proper, and over time, the horns became the most representative part of the altar.
1:51-53 Adonijah was temporarily given pardon.
