Deeper Commentary
1Ki 2:1 Now the days of David drew near that he should die; and he
commanded Solomon his son saying-
According to Josephus (Antiquities 7.14,7) the events of 1
Chronicles 28, 29 happened in the interval between the first anointing of
Solomon and the death of David. I would
argue that the events related in 1 Chron. 22–29 had occurred between 1
Kings 1 and 2. The final events in David's life reveal all concerned to be
egocentric, devious, manipulative, and yet also naïve, impulsive, and
vulnerable. This is exactly what it is to be human. We have human nature
here displayed... in a totally psychologically credible way.
1Ki 2:2 I am going the way of all the earth-
This is quoting the words of Joshua, as do the second part of the
verse. David has Joshua in mind because he considers that Solomon is going
to now inherit the Kingdom.
Be strong therefore, and show
yourself a man-
As noted above, this is the language of Joshua (Dt. 31:7,23; Josh. 1:6,7).
See on :3. "Show yourself a man" may refer to the fact Solomon was very
young (1 Kings 3:7) and needed to quickly act as an adult.
David seems to have theoretically recognized that the building of the temple was
conditional on Solomon's spirituality, but he overlooked this in his
enthusiasm for Solomon to be the Messiah, who may be the reference of "a
man". He tells Solomon to show himself
a man, and goes on in :4 to speak of how “a man” would
eternally reign on his Messianic throne. He was encouraging Solomon to be
and act like Messiah. Ps. 127 is "For Solomon" (Ps. 127:2 "beloved" = Heb.
Jedidah), and warns him that his labour for the temple will be in vain
unless God builds it. The Psalm basically says that God
will build Solomon a house in the sense of a family centered in the beloved
seed who would die [“sleep”] to enable it; and therefore Solomon should
not be so sweating himself day and night to build God a house / temple.
This is the very message which God had given David earlier. David and
Solomon evidently shelved their knowledge of the fact that Heaven is God's
dwelling place. It would seem that Solomon particularly was guilty of a
false humility; there is a gross contradiction within his words of 2
Chron. 6:2,18: "I have built an house of habitation for thee, and a place
for thy dwelling for ever... But will God in very deed dwell with
men on the earth? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain
thee; how much less this house which I have built?". This is one of
several hints that Solomon felt that the full fulfilment of the Davidic
promises was to be found in him (cp. 2 Chron. 6:10). He failed to look
forward to the spirit of Christ, instead becoming obsessed with the
achievement of his own works. He was largely encouraged in this by David,
who seems to have felt that Solomon was the Messiah figure the promises
spoke about. Thus Ps.72 is dedicated to Solomon, and yet it speaks clearly
of the messianic Kingdom. In the same way as David came to misquote and
misapply the promises God made to him, Solomon did likewise. God told
David that He did not want a physical house, because He had never
commanded this to be done at any time in the past. Solomon misquotes this
in 2 Chron. 6:5,6 to mean that God had never asked for a physical house in
the past, but now he had asked David's son to build such a house in
Jerusalem.
1Ki 2:3 and keep the instruction of Yahweh your God, to walk in His ways,
to keep His statutes, His commandments, His ordinances and His
testimonies, according to what is written in the law of Moses, that you
may prosper in all that you do, and wherever you turn yourself-
In Prov. 29:14 “The king that faithfully judges the poor, his throne
shall be established for ever”, Solomon is clearly referring to the
promises to David, which he assumed were about him. He thought that
because he had judged the poor harlots wisely, therefore he would be the
promised Messiah. And this was just what David his father had hoped and
expected of him. David had even asked Solomon to “do wisely” i.e. to show
wisdom, in order that the promises to him about Messiah would be fulfilled
(1 Kings 2:3 RVmg.). So
this was surely one of Solomon’s
motives in giving them justice and being ‘wise’; he sought to live out his
father’s expectations and to fulfil the requirements of the Messiah
figure.
"That you may prosper" is s.w. "to make one wise" (Gen. 3:6). David's desire was that Solomon would be "wise" just as David had been "wise / prospered" (1 Sam. 18:5,14,15), and so Solomon asked God for wisdom and wanted to be wise. But his subsequent life showed this was because he wanted to live out parental expectation rather than be personally wise. And so he later turned away from that wisdom in his personal life. The language of prospering continues the Joshua allusions (see on :2; Josh. 1:7,8).
1Ki 2:4 This is so that Yahweh may establish His word which He spoke
concerning me saying, ‘If your children take heed to their way, to walk
before Me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul, there
shall not fail you’, He said, ‘a man on the throne of Israel’-
The "He said..." again shows us that David is reporting God's words,
claiming this is what God said. But as discussed earlier, 2 Sam. 24 were
the last prophetic words of David by Divine revelation. His various claims
as to what God said about Solomon in 1 Chron. 23-29 are all reported by
him, claimed by him, and in fact contradict what God actually said in 2
Sam. 7. David wanted Solomon to be that "man" (:2). Solomon's prophetic sonship of David was conditional upon him
preserving or observing Yahweh's ways (1 Kings 2:4; 1 Chron. 22:13; 2
Chron. 7:17); but he didn't preserve or observe them (1 Kings 11:10,11);
despite David praying that Solomon would be given a heart to observe them
(1 Chron. 29:19). We can pray for God to work upon the hearts of others,
but He will not force people against their own deepest will and heart
position. Solomon stresses overmuch how God would keep or preserve the
righteous (Prov. 2:8; 3:26), without recognizing the conditional aspect of
this. Why did Solomon go wrong? His Proverbs are true enough, but he
stresses that obedience to
his wisdom and teaching would preserve his hearers (Prov. 4:4;
6:22; 7:1; 8:32; 15:5), preservation was through following the example of
the wise (Prov. 2:20); rather than stressing obedience to God's
ways, and replacing David his father's simple love of God with a love of
academic wisdom: "Yahweh preserves all those who love Him" (Ps. 145:20).
Another example of Solomon misquoting God is in 2 Chron. 6:6. Solomon
claims that God said: “I have chosen Jerusalem, that my name might be
there”. God had chosen no resting place, although it would have been
politically convenient for Solomon if the city of Jerusalem as a city was
where God had chosen to dwell. And so he kept thinking that way until he
persuaded himself that in fact this was what God had said.
David had
charged Solomon with the words which
he claimed God had spoken to him about Solomon:
“If thy children take heed to their way, to walk before me in truth with
all their heart and with all their soul” (1 Kings 2:4). But Solomon subtly
changes this when he reminds God of how He had supposedly told David:
“There shall not fail thee a man to sit on the throne of Israel; so that
they children take heed to their way, that they walk before me as thou
hast walked before me” (1 Kings 8:25). Two things become apparent here:
- The conditionality of the promise to David about Solomon is totally
overlooked. “If
thy children…” becomes “so that…”, with the
implication that David would always have descendants on the throne who
would walk obediently before God. The possibility of personal failure had
been removed by Solomon from his own perception of God.
- God’s desire that Solomon should “walk before me in truth” was
changed to “walk before me as thou [David] hast walked before me”. This
defined walking before God personally as having the relationship with God
which your father had. And so often we have made the same mistake. The
call to personally follow the Lord has become displaced by a following Him
through others.
Notice how Solomon says these words to God Himself. Solomon had
persuaded himself that this truly was what God had asked of David and
himself, and so he comes out with these words to God.
There was no sense in Solomon that he might have the possibility of
failure, of rejection by God. The promises to David were conditional-
David pointed this out to Solomon in 1 Kings 2:4: "If
thy children take heed to their way...". But Solomon misquotes this in 1
Kings 8:25: "Now therefore, O LORD, the God of Israel, keep with thy
servant David my father that which thou hast promised him, saying, There
shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel;
so that thy children take heed to their way to walk before me
as thou hast walked before me". Some translations offer paraphrases of the
difficult "so that" phrase. But there's no getting around it. Solomon is
saying 'Give me what you promised me, without conditions, so that I will
fulfil those conditions... it's not possible for anyone to fulfil those
conditions unless you first give them what you conditionally promised'.
The logic is all upside down, and is very demanding upon God, implying
that any failure to "take heed to the way" would be because God hadn't
given what He promised. It's a telling insight into Solomon's mind. It was
all about him, rather than all about God and glorifying Him.
Note that all this happened at the very start of Solomon's reign; it
seems to me that he was always on the wrong track, rather than as it were
'going wrong' later on.
1Ki 2:5 Moreover you know also what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me and
what he did to the two captains of the armies of Israel, to Abner the son
of Ner, and to Amasa the son of Jether, whom he killed, and shed the blood
of war in peace, and put the blood of war on his sash that was about his
waist, and in his shoes that were on his feet-
The only person in David's life whose belt is noted is Joab (2
Sam. 20:8; 1 Kings 2:5). But Ps. 109:8,19 wish curses upon the man who was
well known for his belt. See notes there for the extent of David's anger
with Joab and his desire for the man's condemnation because of it- even
though David was not himself perfect. Solomon's comment that Joab shed the blood of war in peace,
perhaps meaning 'in the name of peace', may allude to how Joab killed
Amasa whilst asking him whether "Is all well with you?", using the word
shalom, "peace".
We see David's narcissism even at this final point in his life.
He considers Joab had done evil "to me". Joab had in fact preserved David
on his throne multiple times. But all that 'good' was forgotten beneath
David's obsession with what he considered was 'evil' done to him. He also
overlooks the fact that the murders of Abner and Amasa were [especially in
Abner's case] for the good of David. I noted on 1 Kings 1 that it was
effectively Joab who had led Israel in battle rather than David; and to
lead the people in battle was the definition of what it was to be king of
Israel. David dies with unbridled jealousy, leading him in his mind to
turn a friend into a foe, to turn good into evil. What "evil" had Joab
done David? He had told him the hard home truth that his soppy obsession
for his worthless son Absalom would cost him his throne. He had backed
Adonijah as future king rather than Solomon. But that was not "evil" to
David. Or we can translate: "You know also what Joab son of Zeruiah did to
me, how he
dealt with the two commanders of the armies of Israel". David sees Joab's
"evil" to him in slaying Abner and Amasa. But Joab was without doubt the
best army commander David could have wished for. But as the classic
narcissist, David wants to personalize this as if it had been done to him
personally. And the irony is that Joab's murders of Abner and Amasa,
especially of Abner, likely solidified David's power and despite Joab's
personal motives for the murders, he was effectively establishing David in
power. But David doesn't want to see that.
We can read 'what Joab did to me' as David believing that the guilt for the blood of Amasa and Abner had been wrongly placed on him by Joab. David thus takes his false narrative about Joab yet further. Solomon bought into this when he tells Benaiah to "fall upon him [Joab] and bury him, and turn aside from me and from my father’s house the innocent blood that he has shed" (:31,32). The reasoning was that actually David had been falsely counted guilty of the blood of Amasa and Abner, and that could only be removed by the blood of Joab being shed. This of itself is false spiritual logic, because God would not count Solomon and his descendants guilty for supposed murders by David which David was genuinely innocent of. David overlooks that he was actually guilty of the blood of Uriah and the other soldiers. And that guilt had been removed by grace and not by any blood sacrifice. If that wonderful truth had remained his guiding light, he would not have expanded his false narrative about the "need" for Joab's blood to atone for his supposed guilt. And David ought to have learnt by this point in his life that the only blood guilt worth worrying about is that which God counts against a person. If others thought that David had been behind the murders of Abner and Amasa, that was their problem and the only thing that mattered was whether God counted David as guilty. In all this, David shows how far he has gone from the David of the penitential psalms. In Ps. 51:14 he prays "Deliver me from blood guiltiness, O God". He realizes he is saved from blood guilt by God's grace alone, and not by sacrifice, let alone the blood of Joab. But now at his end, he has pretty much cancelled all those lessons he had learnt. Earlier at the time Joab murdered Abner, David publically stated " 'I and my kingdom are forever guiltless ... for the blood [of Abner]" (2 Sam. 3:28). It could be argued that Joab killed Abner as permitted blood revenge for Abner's murder of his brother Asahel. And Abner was likely a threat to David at the time; and likely Amasa too, who strangely delays or fails to gather an army with which to put down Sheba's rebellion. Joab's murders were in support of David. But now he presents his political, ungrateful, faithless scheming to Solomon as "your wisdom" (:6), “you are a wise man; you will know what to do” (:9). It was nothing of the sort, despite David framing it against his command that Solomon be obedient to God's law (:2-4). There is a sharp and intended contrast between David's spiritual appeal in :2-4 and the harsh, unspiritual material which follows in the next verses. Justice was to be the characteristic of Israel's king (Dt. 17:17-20) and yet David shows no justice in his commands about Joab and Shimei, and sets up Solomon to be unjust. It all set Solomon up for spiritual failure. It would require him to perceive that his father's wisdom was not at all wisdom. And that is hard for any son whom his parents have set up in power.
David says that Joab "killed, and shed the blood of war in peace", he killed men who thought they were at peace with him. Yet this is exactly what David had done to Uriah and the other soldiers killed to cover up Uriah's murder. He dies with no sense of conviction for his sin against Uriah, hypocritically judging and condemning others to the death penalty which he himself had been spared from by grace. Earlier David had thanked God for His forgiveness of David, triumphing that God had brought him up from the grave, rather than allowing him to be brought down to it: "Yahweh, You have brought up my soul from Sheol. You have kept me alive, that I should not be brought down to the pit" (Ps. 30:3). But now he wants to bring others down to the grave. We have a powerful warning not to forget grace and forgiveness shown to us, and to live humbled by it literally all our days, and not just for a few days at the time.
David is also arguing that just as Joab had murdered men he was apparently at peace with, so he might murder Solomon. And to just remove that possibility, he commands Solomon to take the initiative and kill Joab. Or he could be saying that as Joab has murdered two previous army commanders, he may also now murder Benaiah, whom Solomon appointed army commander (:35). Again, we see fear of possible consequence leading to murder, as it does so often in homicides today. But faith is the opposite of fear... and David appears to have little of it.
1Ki 2:6 Do therefore according to your wisdom, and don’t let his gray head
go down to Sheol in peace-
Solomon alludes to this in Prov. 19:5,9: "A false witness shall not be
unpunished; he who utters lies shall perish". See on :5. Solomon is alluding to his father David's parting
commandments to him to destroy all the opposition to him (1 Kings
2:6,9). So whilst what Solomon writes is true, he is harnessing Divine
truth to his own agenda of self justification. And we who claim to hold
His truths must take warning.
Joab was David's cousin, who had shown David a lifetime of loyalty. But we sense a personality conflict between the two of them, and indeed it seems that originally Joab had supported Absalom's idea of seizing power, but then fell out with him; and he supported Adonijah's. David held Joab as too hard a man, not understanding grace; whereas Joab held David to be far too soft, and increasingly lacking strong leadership skills in his old age. The support for Adonijah was perhaps more because of disillusion with David than because Adonijah personally had much to offer. Yet to order his death seems to me absolutely lacking in grace.
1Ki 2:7 But show kindness to the sons of Barzillai the Gileadite, and let
them be of those who eat at your table; for so they came to me when I fled
from Absalom your brother-
On balance, over a lifetime, Joab had shown David far more kindness
than Barzillai. So it is so sad that David, who had experienced so much
grace, at the end of his life was so lacking in it and so short termist in
his view. After Solomon's ascension, there was judgment and reward; in the
form of being able to eat at his table (1 Kings 2:7 cp. 2 Sam. 9: 7,10;
19:28).
1Ki 2:8 Behold, there is with you Shimei the son of Gera, the Benjamite of
Bahurim, who cursed me with a grievous curse in the day when I went to
Mahanaim; but he came down to meet me at the Jordan, and I vowed to him by
Yahweh saying, ‘I will not put you to death with the sword’-
David had told Shimei "You will not die" (2 Sam. 19:23). But
just as he twists God's promises to him, so he now again plays with words
by iterating this as "I will not put you to death with the sword". As if
his emphasis had been upon the word "I". David would not, but Solomon
could. Yet his promise was "You will not die". Again we see David twisting
the narrative to his own advantage [as he perceived it] and misquoting and
twisting words. We note how David breaks his oath to Shimei, but all so as
to keep his supposed [unrecorded] oath to Bathsheba that Solomon should
reign. His morality and justice was highly selective.
David earlier forgave Shimei for cursing him. But he tells Solomon to
bring down that old man’s white hairs to the grave with blood on them- a
crude image for the murder of an old man (:9). And he uses the same awful turn
of phrase to ask Solomon to do this also to his lifelong friend Joab (1
Kings 2:6,9). Surely grace would’ve found another way?
He was therefore
barred from building the temple because of the amount of blood he had shed
(1 Chron. 22:8).
David graciously overlooked Shimei's cursing, promising him that he would not die because of it (2 Sam. 16:10,11; 19:23). But he didn't keep up that level of grace to the end: he later asked Solomon to ensure that Shimei was killed for that incident (1 Kings 2:8,9). And one wonders whether it was Shimei’s words which so broke David’s heart that he later wrote: “Because that he remembered not to shew mercy, but persecuted the poor and needy man…as he loved cursing, so let it come unto him; as he delighted not in blessing, so may it be far from him. He clothed himself also with cursing as with a garment…” (Ps. 109:16-18).
1Ki 2:9 Now therefore don’t hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man-
This was not at all "wisdom". It was secular, not spiritual
wisdom. Possibly Solomon's request to God for true wisdom was so thrilling
to God because it reflected a tacit acceptance that his father's "wisdom"
was not at all wise. And possibly his request for wisdom might reflect
some regret for his murders of Joab and Shimei on his father's say so,
cloaked as "wisdom".
It is significant that Solomon's spiritual life has more appearance of spirituality the closer we get back to David's death. David had asked for wisdom (Ps. 119:34), and even Solomon’s request for wisdom can be seen as rooted in a desire to live out parental expectation more than purely from his own volition. For David had told him: “You are a wise man” (1 Kings 2:9), and Solomon wanted to live up to that expectation. In other words, David's influence was extremely strong, but it decreased over the years. Yet even at the end, Solomon’s wisdom stayed with him in that some aspects of his upbringing stayed with him- he could never escape from it. When he says that he has never found a truly wise woman, but he did know one wise man (Ecc. 7:28) he may well have had David in mind.
And you will know what you ought to do to him, and you shall bring his
gray head down to Sheol with blood-
Solomon alludes to this in Prov. 21:11: "When the mocker is
punished, the simple gains wisdom. When the wise is instructed, he
receives knowledge". This seems to be justifying David's command for
Solomon to punish the mocker Shimei, who had cursed him at the time of
Absalom's rebellion. At the time, David had forgiven Shimei and forbidden
his men to kill him. But at the end of his life, David didn't maintain
that level of grace, and commanded Solomon to ensure that he brought
Shimei's grey hairs down to the grave with blood. And
Solomon justified this collapse of forgiveness and grace by saying that it
would give wisdom to others and instruct the wise.
Shimei was a wicked man who hated God's servant David. God told him to
curse David (2 Sam. 16:10). Afterwards, Shimei repents and acknowledges
that by doing so he sinned (2 Sam. 19:20). And although
David recognized
that God had told Shimei to curse him (2 Sam. 16:10), David tells Solomon
not to hold Shimei "guiltless" for how he had cursed him (1 Kings 2:9). As
with the evil spirit from Yahweh working upon Saul, a man is encouraged by
God to do the sinful act in which he has set his heart.
Psalm 7:16 had been David's commentary about Shimei: "The trouble he causes shall return
upon his own head, his violence shall come down on the crown of his own
head".
In the context of Shimei,
whose cursing was the initial context of this Psalm (see on Ps. 7:1),
David sought himself to bring this about. He told Solomon to ensure that
Shimei's head and grey hairs should be brought down with blood to the
grave by him (1 Kings 2:8,9). This unspiritual attitude of David was
rooted in the way that at the earlier point, here in Ps. 7:16, David
rejoiced in the thought that Shimei would be condemned by God; and sets
about to bring that condemnation about himself. This surely was a case of
taking Divine judgment into his own hand in a way he should not have done,
and quite overlooking the Divine desire for repentance
1Ki 2:10 David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of
David-
This idiom is clear evidence that the distinction in reward between
good and evil people is not made at the point of death. Death is
unconsciousness, and the eternal outcome of our lives will be at the
resurrection and day of judgment.
There is a huge contradiction between the Bible later setting
David as the gold standard of spirituality, and the historical record of
David post Bathsheba. The contradiction is so laboured, so repeated and so
huge that there has to be a point being made. And it surely is that God
sees His beloved, His Davids, as wonderful. Because they are His beloved.
And if they have a heart for him, despite all their major surface level
weakness. It is apparently possible to have a heart for the Lord and yet
still fail, in things great and small... And all this has huge meaning for
we who are justified in Christ, declared to have His righteousness. David
is a worked example of how this looks from God's side. Perhaps this is why
in Chronicles we have such a sanitized view of David, omitting mention of
his sin with Bathsheba and presenting him so positively- because this is
how God saw him. Here are just some of the passages which set David as
some gold standard of obedience, spirituality and devotion to Yahweh:
- Abijam: “His heart was not wholly true to the Lord his God, as the heart
of David his father” (1 Kings 15:3).
- Asa: “And Asa did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, as David his
father had done” (1 Kings 15:11).
- Amaziah: “And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, yet not
like David his father” (2 Kings 14:3).
- Ahaz: “And he did not do what was right in the eyes of the Lord his God,
as his father David had done” (2 Kings 16:2).
- Hezekiah: “And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, according
to all that David his father had done” (2 Kings 18:3).
- Josiah: “And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, and walked
in all the way of David his father, and he did not turn aside to the right
hand or to the left” (2 Kings 22:2)
- “Solomon loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of David his father” (1
Kings 3:3). But later: "Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the
Lord, and did not wholly follow the Lord, as David his father had done” (1
Kings 11:4–6). "And if you will walk in My ways, keeping My statutes and
My commandments, as your father David walked, then I will lengthen your
days” (1 Kings 3:14). “And as for you, if you will walk before Me, as
David your father walked, with integrity of heart and uprightness, doing
according to all that I have commanded you, and keeping My statutes and My
ordinances, then I will establish your royal throne over Israel for ever,
as I promised David your father” (1 Kings 9:4,5).
- A similar conditional promise is made to Jeroboam: "If you will hearken
to all that I command you, and will walk in My ways, and do what is right
in My eyes by keeping My statutes and My commandments, as David My servant
did, I will be with you, and will build you a sure house, as I built for
David” (1 Kings 11:38). But later God tells Jeroboam: “I tore the kingdom
away from the house of David and gave it to you; and yet you have not been
like My servant David, who kept My commandments, and followed Me with all
his heart, doing only that which was right in My eyes” (1 Kings 14:8).
1Ki 2:11 The days that David reigned over Israel were forty years; he
reigned seven years in Hebron, and he reigned thirty-three years in
Jerusalem-
1Ki 2:12 Solomon sat on the throne of David his father; and his kingdom
was firmly established-
The language continues to allude to that of the promises to David in 2
Sam. 7. But the fulfilment of those promises was conditional; so we are
being given here the impression which was externally given, and how
Solomon himself perceived things. For Solomon and his kingdom were not the
ultimate fulfilment of those promises. But God did establish his kingdom,
and potentially enabled him to be that Messiah figure. And so his kingdom
appears to be a type of that of the Lord Jesus. But in reality I would
rather express it as saying that he was given the potential to have the
Messianic kingdom, but only achieved a dim image of it.
1Ki 2:13 Then Adonijah the son of Haggith came to Bathsheba the mother
of Solomon. She said, Do you come peaceably? He said, Peaceably-
She feared for her life, using the same term as in 1 Sam. 16:4.
We wonder why Adonijah would ask Bathsheba if he could marry
Abishag. The fact he goes to her is a tacit reflection of the power
Bathsheba had. She was a king maker. I suggested on 1 Kings 1 that she set
up the situation between David and Abishag in order to prove David's
impotence and thus disqualify him from actively reigning; instead pushing
him thereby to make her son king. She presents as a powerful manipulator.
And this influences our reading of her in the account of her adultery with
David, where I suggested she was far from an innocent victim of power
rape.
1Ki 2:14 He said moreover, I have something to tell you. She said, Say on-
He had come not only to ask for the hand of Abishag in marriage, but
also to tell her something (:15). We can understand that Solomon therefore
interpreted Adonijah's actions as a desire to usurp him.
1Ki 2:15 He said, You know that the kingdom was mine, and that all Israel
set their faces on me, that I should reign. However the kingdom is turned
around, and has become my brother’s; for it was his from Yahweh-
This is a typical mixture of truth and untruth. Indeed the kingdom
was Solomon's "from Yahweh" in that David had made that decision and sworn
by Yahweh. It is however not so true that "all Israel" wanted him to be
king, for when Solomon was pronounced king, there was ecstatic rejoicing
amongst the people. And "the kingdom was mine" only in that he was the
eldest surviving son of David; but being the eldest son didn't at all mean
that the throne was passed on to him, because kings typically chose one of
their sons to reign rather than the throne passing automatically to the
eldest son. And he quite overlooks the promises to David, which make being
the true son of David conditional upon obedience to Yahweh.
Adonijah is presumably quoting David's words "It was [Solomon's] from
Yahweh", but I have elsewhere suggested that God didn't say this- this was
merely David's claim. Adonijah clearly took it that way, for otherwise he
wouldn't have tried to be king.
1Ki 2:16 Now I ask one petition of you. Don’t deny me. She said to him,
Say on-
This again is manipulative. Perhaps "Say on" was too close to
agreeing to grant a petition she had not yet heard; for perhaps from pride
she asks Solomon to grant the petition, even though it was highly dubious.
1Ki 2:17 He said, Please speak to Solomon the king (for he will not tell
you ‘no’), that he give me Abishag the Shunammite as wife-
Again Adonijah is playing with words and logic, arguing that Solomon
cannot say no to his mother, and she cannot say no to him, Adonijah.
Why did Adonijah want to marry Abishag? He surely knew it looked like a
positioning of himself to unseat Solomon, which he had vowed not to do.
The only obvious reason was sexual infatuation. Thus he followed his
father's failure and lost his life for it. Possibly Bathsheba runs with
his request because she foresees how her son Solomon would respond, and
thus get rid of another possible competitor against her son.
1Ki 2:18 Bathsheba said, Alright. I will speak for you to the king-
Either she was naive, or she felt bound to ask because of her unwise
response to him in :16. But I will later suggest she agrees to ask
Solomon because she foresees Solomon's reaction, and wants to see the
death of a potential rival to her son.
1Ki 2:19 Bathsheba therefore went to king Solomon, to speak to him for
Adonijah. The king rose up to meet her, and bowed himself to her, and sat
down on his throne, and caused a throne to be set for the king’s mother;
and she sat on his right hand-
We sense here and in 1 Kings 1 the deep sense of respect for David
and Bathsheba. Solomon speaks so highly of his mother in Proverbs,
apparently modelling the "virtuous woman" of Prov. 31 upon her.
To sit on
the right hand means to be second in command of power, so we can assume
Bathsheba was a powerful political individual as David's favourite
surviving wife and mother of the son he had chosen as king.
1Ki 2:20 Then she said, I ask one small petition of you; don’t deny me.
The king said to her, Ask on, my mother; for I will not deny you-
He repeats the same error she had made in :16, agreeing to a petition
before knowing what it was. This seems a theme the Bible likes to raise,
for we think of king Darius with Daniel, and Herod and the daughter of
Herodias. She considers it a "small petition", but it was a very large
petition because of its major political ramifications, which Solomon
immediately perceived. We wonder therefore whether she was being simply
naive rather than feeling railroaded because of her response in :16.
Bathsheba here comes over as manipulative. She
makes a request with huge political implications, but passes it off
to her son as 'just a small thing'. We wonder whether Abishag was
under Bathsheba's control and manipulation. There is ample evidence from
surrounding nations that the queen mother controlled the king's harem and
it is in my view quite possible that Bathsheba was doing this with
Abishag. I suggested on 2 Sam. 11 that Bathsheba may well have been far
from an innocent victim in her affair with David. There likely was an
element of manipulation in her, and this comes out clearly in her attitude
to Abishag and getting her son Solomon declared the next king. Again we
get the impression of an impotent David, unloved and surrounded on his
death bed by people who were using and manipulating him, developing their
own agendas regarding what would happen after his death. That loneliness
at the end was surely to propel him towards final trust in God and His
promises to David. And lonely final years and emotionally hard deaths are
used by the Father to teach men the same lesson to this day.
1Ki 2:21 She said, Let Abishag the Shunammite be given to Adonijah your
brother as wife-
Perhaps she thought that Adonijah's only motive was his desire to
marry a beauty queen. But as suggested on 1 Kings 1:1, Abishag was more
than a carer for a man in a geriatric ward. She had had intimate sexual
contact with David, although he had not succeeded in achieving intercourse
with her. He was therefore to be considered as at least one of his
concubines, and whoever married her was thereby strengthening their
connection with David's throne.
The Hebrew is "Abishag... shall be given to Adonijah"; this and
her description of this as a "small" favour (:20) again reveal Bathsheba
as manipulative. Quite possibly Bathsheba is doing all this with some
irony. She foresees her son's reaction and is in fact setting up Adonijah
to be slain. Possibly she actually creates the whole story. It was after
all in her interests to have the rightful claimant to the throne murdered,
and her son Solomon thereby more firmly established as king.
1Ki 2:22 King Solomon answered his mother, Why do you ask Abishag the
Shunammite for Adonijah? Ask for him the kingdom also; for he is my elder
brother; even for him, and for Abiathar the priest, and for Joab the son
of Zeruiah-
Solomon may well have been correct. But there is also the possibility
that he wildly extrapolated from the fact Adonijah wanted to marry thus
beautiful woman, and refused to give him credit for accepting that Solomon
rather than himself was Yahweh's choice for the throne (:15). And from
that, Solomon creates a conspiracy theory about Joab and Abiathar. He had
threatened Adonijah that he had as it were a suspended death sentence
which would be triggered if he committed any more "wickedness" (1 Kings
1:52). Adonijah's motives are left intentionally unclear in the record, to
provoke our reflection. Whatever, it seems to me that Solomon was eager to
perceive Adonijah as having broken the conditions of 1 Kings 1:52 so that
he could kill him.
We may well ask: "Why does Solomon first promise to grant his mother's request, then attack her for making it, then switch his wrath to Adonijah?". Perhaps it all contributes to the overall impression of fickleness and people acting without principle. And also there is a theme here of people's behaviour being on one hand shrewd and on the other most unwise. Why did Bathsheba agree to Adonijah's request? Why did Adonijah even think of so quickly trying to position himself as Solomon's rival, when he has just been spared from death by Solomon and has sworn loyalty to him? This is all psychologically credible. We are being given the impression of a court family plagued by weakness, instability and unwisdom.
1Ki 2:23 Then king Solomon vowed by Yahweh saying, God do so to me, and
more also, if Adonijah has not spoken this word against his own life-
If Adonijah realized how Solomon would react, he surely wouldn't have
gone ahead as he did in trying to marry Abishag. And as noted on :14-17,
his reasoning was less than honest and deceitful, but again, we could put
this down to his simple desire to marry the beautiful Abishag. It seems a
rather strict interpretation of 1 Kings 1:52 to claim that the request for
Abishag was "wickedness". We note that Solomon is going
totally on the words of Bathsheba reporting what she says Adonijah said.
He makes no effort to hear Adonijah's side of the story, and his murder of
Adonijah for this reported request seems totally wrong. Likewise Benaiah
was wrong for operationalizing it. Solomon has come out of nowhere
in 1 Kings 1, propelled to the throne by Bathsheba, and then his father
David falling for that and making all kinds of false claims in 1 Chron.
22-29 about how God had in fact long ago named Solomon as next king.
Solomon is set up as a man who was propelled to power in a putsch
orchestrated by his mother, taking the throne from Adonijah. And who
begins his reign with very poor, unspiritual behaviour. This sets the
path; for after the account of his glory and apparent wisdom, we will then
learn that he has no heart for God and turns away to idols, in one of the
greatest cases of spiritual failure in the pages of Scripture.
1Ki 2:24 Now therefore as Yahweh lives, who has established me, and set me
on the throne of David my father, and who has made me a house, as He
promised, surely Adonijah shall be put to death this day-
David's belief that Ps. 72 applied totally to Solomon would have
encouraged him Solomon to feel that the fact that he was the great Son of
David and had had the promises made to him justified all his actions. This
is an example. For as discussed on :22,23, his desire to murder Adonijah
was not on any very Biblical basis from the law of Moses.
The seed to be eternally established upon David's throne was one
to be born after David slept with his fathers, and would be a Divinely
begotten son. Solomon fulfilled neither of these requirements.
"Established" is the word used in the promises of the eternal establishment of David's throne (2 Sam. 7:12,13,16 etc.), and Solomon wrongly assumed that the conditional nature of the promises concerning the seed were just irrelevant to him as he had wisdom. Therefore he uses the word of how his kingdom has been "established" (1 Kings 2:24 s.w.). Solomon's contenders for the throne were all stopped by God, they tried to prepare or establish themselves but it never worked out (2 Sam. 15:1; 1 Kings 1:5); and so surely Solomon has the idea in mind that he has been established as the promised Messianic seed of David with an eternally "established" throne and kingdom. This leads him to the conclusion that the outcome of wisdom and folly is in this life, and he has no perspective of a final day of judgment and eternal establishment of God's Kingdom on earth. This is why the simplistic dichotomies he presents in Proverbs between the blessed and wise, and the cursed and foolish, are not always true to observed experiences in this life. For it is the future Kingdom which puts them in ultimate perspective.
He felt that God “has made me an
house, as he promised” to David. He felt that he was the
fulfillment of the promises, and therefore the Kingdom had come; he failed
to be awed by the greatness of the Christ to come, and abstracted and
reduced His coming Kingdom into an effective nothingness. By doing so, he
totally overlooked the highly conditional nature of the promises, and
forgot his own proneness to failure, and the weakness of his nature. He
failed to meditate upon the promises beyond what they seemed to offer him
in the here and now; and the result was that he felt they were totally
fulfilled in him (1 Kings 8:20,24).
1Ki 2:25 King Solomon sent by Benaiah the son of Jehoiada; and he fell on
him, so that he died-
Benaiah must now have been an old man, so perhaps he arranged the
murder through a proxy.
1Ki 2:26 To Abiathar the priest the king said, Go to Anathoth, to your own
fields; for you are worthy of death. But I will not at this time put you
to death, because you carried the ark of the Lord Yahweh before David my
father, and because you were afflicted in all in which my father was
afflicted-
One act of kindness to David during Absalom's rebellion, i.e.
carrying the ark of Yahweh at that time, is seen as rationale for sparing
Abiathar. But Joab had saved David from Absalom in battle... and that
didn't figure at all in Solomon's logic. As discussed on :22,23, there was no specific evidence that Abiathar
had done anything worthy of death, nor that he was actually involved in
any plot to establish Adonijah as king again. Perhaps it was as simple as
Adonijah being in love with a beautiful woman and wanting to marry her.
And Adonijah is being dogmatically condemned on the basis of conspiracy
theory alone. We note that Abiathar carried the ark at the time of
Absalom's rebellion (2 Sam. 15:24); but it is hard to prove that he was
from the line of Levites who were allowed to do this. David had been
taught through the death of Uzzah that the ark must be carried only
according to the specific Mosaic legislation. But he apparently was so
close to the spirit of the law that he realized even after that, that the
letter of that law could be broken.
1Ki 2:27 So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest to Yahweh, that
he might fulfil the word of Yahweh, which He spoke concerning the house of
Eli in Shiloh-
But we get the impression God didn't want that prophecy to have to
come true. All Abiathar's family had been slain by Saul and Doeg for their
loyalty to David. But Abiathar had been preserved, presumably because God
hoped that somehow He would not have to fulfil that prophecy of
destruction. For He hopes against hope, in the gap between the statement
of condemnation and fulfilling it, for human repentance and persuasion of
Him to change His mind. But Solomon knew none of that, and just wanted
Abiathar destroyed because he was potentially disloyal to him. We may well
enquire what right Solomon had to thrust out Abiathar from the priesthood;
surely only God could ultimately do that. Perhaps Solomon quoted God's
words about the house of Eli. But his murder of Abiathar was
inappropriate; for on that logic, David should have murdered Abiathar long
ago just for who he was, a descendant of Eli. Solomon's spirituality was
highly flawed and biased towards his own self justification, right from
the beginning of his reign.
However we have to face a hard truth here. This claim is an intentional untruth. Abiathar was a descendant of the priests of Nob, not Eli. Just as David twists God's words to him in 2 Sam. 7, so he does here, falsely using scripture, as it were, to justify his own devious end. He does the same twisting of words as noted on :8.
1Ki 2:28 The news came to Joab; for Joab had turned after Adonijah, though
he didn’t turn after Absalom. Joab fled to the tabernacle of Yahweh, and
caught hold on the horns of the altar-
This was a sad end for Joab, who was by now elderly. It seems
David had
a personality clash with Joab, frustrated at his refusal to understand
grace and complaining that Joab was "too hard" for him. But it ended up
with David's son Solomon ordering Joab to be slain, despite all his
loyalty, and I would consider this as the supreme example of intolerance
of intolerance, showing a lack of grace to someone because they had not
understood grace. David in the later part of his life had always refused
to carry out legitimate death sentences, e.g. as demanded by the behaviour
of Amnon and Absalom. But Solomon lacked that grace, because he failed to
perceive his own sins and need for grace himself.
1Ki 2:29 It was told king Solomon, Joab has fled to the tabernacle of
Yahweh, and behold, he is by the altar. Then Solomon sent Benaiah the son
of Jehoiada saying, Go, fall on him-
It seems that Solomon didn’t really reflect on who his father really
was. He had an ideal image of him, choosing to overlook his failures with
women. David committed the sin of presumption with Bathsheba, and yet
Solomon judges Joab for committing presumptuous sin without mercy (1 Kings
2:29 cp. Ex. 21:14).
LXX has Joab adding: “Because I am afraid of
you I have fled to the Lord”. Like Adonijah, he is using Ex. 21:12-14:
"One who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death, but
not if it is unintentional, but God allows it to happen: then I will
appoint you a place where he shall flee. If a man schemes and comes
presumptuously on his neighbour to kill him, you shall take him from My
altar, that he may die". This offered salvation at the altar for those
falsely accused of murder. I suggested that Adonijah was not wrong to
assume he as the remaining firstborn would be the next king. He fled to
the altar because he felt Nathan and Bathsheba had wrongly accused him of
intending to murder Solomon and Bathsheba. Joab likewise flees to the
altar because he too is persuaded that he has killed nobody in order for
Solomon to seek to kill him. Neither Adonijah nor Joab would have fled to
the horns of the altar unless they believed they were innocent and would
thereby be saved. They would have run away far from Solomon. Instead they
run to the horns of the altar and remain there, a sitting target for
Solomon. I suggest they both only did this because they were convinced of
their innocence of murder, and that therefore Bathsheba's claim to David
that Adonijah was likely to murder herself and Solomon was just
manipulative- she wanted her son Solomon to be king, not Adonijah. It all
presents a sad picture of deceit and low moral fibre in all concerned.
Solomon murders Joab on the basis that he can't legitimately take refuge
at the altar because he has committed other murders. But so had David! And
Solomon is willing to desecrate the altar with Joab's blood, a sign he has
scant regard for Yahweh's holiness; for Ex. 21 says that the insincere
seeker of asylum at the altar must be removed from the altar and only then
slain: "thou shalt take him from my altar to put him to death" (Ex. 21:14
LXX). Solomon murders Joab, the army commander, for having murdered two
previous army commanders. The hypocrisy is evident, and doesn't bode well
for Solomon's long term spiritual path. He of course has been set up in
this hypocrisy by David.
1Ki 2:30 Benaiah came to the tabernacle of Yahweh and said to him, Thus
says the king, ‘Come forth!’. He said, No; but I will die here. Benaiah
brought the king word again saying, Thus said Joab, and thus he answered
me-
As discussed on 1 Kings 1, to grab hold of the horns of the
altar was done by those under unfair persecution for blood guilt. Joab was
utterly persuaded of his innocence and maybe that is why he insisted on
dying there by the altar. Perhaps Joab said this to still try to avoid death, reasoning that
surely Solomon would have more respect for the tabernacle than to order
him to be slain on the altar. Or perhaps Joab's spiritual side was eager
to die as a sacrifice upon God's altar. Or maybe he wanted to make Solomon
unpopular with the people by ordering him slain on the altar. The
narrative is purposefully open ended to provoke our reflections.
1Ki 2:31 The king said to him, Do as he has said, and fall on him, and
bury him; that you may take away the blood which Joab shed without cause,
from me and from my father’s house-
Solomon's reasoning was wrong in so many ways.
To murder someone on
the horns of the altar showed a lack of respect for Yahweh's holiness.
Joab could easily have been removed and executed elsewhere. The blood shed
by Joab "without cause" was no reason for his death at this stage; David
himself had shed much blood without good cause. The slaying of
Shimei and Joab was in fact likewise "without cause". And Joab's guilt did not
pass to David and Solomon. And murdering Joab did not somehow cleanse
Solomon from some imagined guilt by association with Joab. Solomon wanted
Joab dead because his father had told him to eliminate him. And so he was
using any quasi spiritual reasoning which came into his head to justify
it.
David's graceless attitude to bloodguilt was continued by Solomon, who uses the argument to justify slaying Joab in order to cleanse David's descendants from blood guilt for the murders Joab had committed (1 Kings 2:31-33). Solomon's argument here is weak; because as noted on 2 Sam. 21:1, David had been saved from his own blood guilt by grace, and he ought to have reflected that in turning down the request of the Gibeonites. But Solomon just repeats his father's political usage of blood guilt expiation, and wrongly reasons that he has to slay Joab lest David's family be charged with blood guilt seeing that Joab was David's cousin, of the same blood family.
1Ki 2:32 Yahweh will return his blood on his own head, because he fell on
two men more righteous and better than he, and killed them with the sword,
and my father David didn’t know it: Abner the son of Ner, captain of the
army of Israel, and Amasa the son of Jether, captain of the army of Judah-
This may have been true on one level. But David had slain men like
Uriah who were more righteous and better than himself. And been forgiven
by grace. The reasons given by Solomon are in fact a condemnation of his
father rather than a justification of him. We note already an effective
distinction between Israel and Judah; the division which was to come was
only bringing into the open what had historically been developing for
generations. God confirms men in the divisions they themselves wish to
happen, and binds together those who wish to unify.
David [in my view, falsely] claimed Yahweh precluded him from
building the temple because he had shed much blood, and yet in the next
breath he orders the death of Joab for shedding the blood of just two men.
David shows here a total lack of remorse for the deaths of Uriah and the
other soldiers who died in an attempt to cover that up. He goes to his
graveplanks impenitent. Despite an earlier peak of penitence when
confronted for his sin. And yet will still be saved by grace alone.
1Ki 2:33 So shall their blood return on the head of Joab, and on the head
of his seed forever. But to David, and to his seed, and to his house, and
to his throne, there shall be peace forever from Yahweh-
The eternal peace upon David's throne would be achieved only
through God's only begotten son bringing eternal peace with God. Solomon here states dogmatically that he is the eternally blessed
seed of David, and his house and throne are to be blessed with eternal peace
with God. But those promises were conditional upon his obedience, and he
ignored those conditions. He was led into this by the assumptions and
parental obsessions of his father, but all the same, it was this which led
him to make shipwreck of his faith. This assumption that the Davidic
promises were fulfilled in him led him to a lack of self examination and
no humility arising from a sense of the eternal future he might miss if he
turned away. See on :45.
Solomon may be alluding to how "it will go well with you" if the shedder of innocent blood is condemned to death (Dt. 19:13). But he fails to realize that David was in exactly that situation, and had been saved by Divine grace alone. And he ought to have reflected that grace, even if David didn't.
1Ki 2:34 Then Benaiah the son of Jehoiada went up and fell on him, and
killed him; and he was buried in his own house in the wilderness-
The 'going up' would have been by the steps which led up to the
altar; unless the reference is to 'going up' to the mount Zion where the
temple was.
1Ki 2:35 The king put Benaiah the son of Jehoiada in his place over the
army; and the king put Zadok the priest in the place of Abiathar-
Benaiah surely did the wrong thing by slaying Joab, without evidence
for his wrongdoing, by the altar. Yet he is rewarded for his
conscienceless behaviour by political promotion. All this doesn't sound
the stuff of God's Kingdom.
1Ki 2:36 The king sent and called for Shimei and said to him, Build
yourself a house in Jerusalem, and dwell there, and don’t go out anywhere
from there-
The intention of making him move to Jerusalem from Bahurim (1 Kings
2:8) was surely in order to set him up to be murdered. Solomon reveals a
very calculating and callous side, typical of a man who (unlike David) had
never been personally spiritually desperate, and had not known grace.
1Ki 2:37 For on the day you go out, and pass over the brook Kidron, know
for certain that you shall surely die: your blood shall be on your own
head-
The limit of the Kidron was to ensure Shimei didn't return to
Benjamite territory in order to stir up a Saulide rebellion against
Solomon. Shimei didn't cross the Kidron when he went to Gath. Indeed,
Shimei's journey there would've been in the steps of David who fled there
from Saul and was saved there only by grace. But Solomon doesn't want to
reflect that grace and jumps at the chance to slay Shimei for leaving
home. There is no grace in Solomon, only fear and narcissism. Nor is there
any perception in him of the grace shown to his father David.
Solomon may well have been present that terrible night when David and his family passed over the brook Kidron, and then encountered Shimei's cursing. And he therefore built this memory in to his punishment of Shimei. The Kidron was the river he would have had to cross were he to return to his home town of Bahurim, from whence he had been summoned to live in Jerusalem (1 Kings 2:8). See on :40. We sense Solomon's playing of God by the manner in which he alludes to the curse in Eden, that "in the day" the brook was crossed, "you shall surely die"; see on :44.
1Ki 2:38 Shimei said to the king, The saying is good. As my lord the king
has said, so will your servant do. Shimei lived in Jerusalem many days-
The description of the length of time periods in the Bible is
relative; "many days" is three years (:39).
1Ki 2:39 It happened at the end of three years, that two of the servants
of Shimei ran away to Achish, son of Maacah, king of Gath. They told
Shimei saying, Behold, your servants are in Gath-
These slaves may have been Philistines who ran back home. David had
twice fled to Achish king of Gath (1 Sam. 21:10; 27:2). But Solomon is
unmoved by these associations with his father's days of desperation and a
life preserved by Divine grace.
1Ki 2:40 Shimei arose, saddled his donkey, and went to Gath to Achish, to
seek his servants; and Shimei went, and brought his servants from Gath-
The road to Gath would not have involved crossing the Kidron; it was
in the opposite direction. For Solomon to insist that Shimei had broken
the spirit of his commandment about not crossing the Kidron was therefore
very legalistic, and not a very solid basis upon which to murder a man
whom David had assured of forgiveness.
1Ki 2:41 It was told Solomon that Shimei had gone from Jerusalem to Gath,
and had come again-
Shimei surely did this assuming that he was not liable for the death
penalty because he had not crossed the Kidron (:37), as Gath was in the
opposite direction; and he had kept the spirit of the agreement in that he
had returned. Solomon comes over as very much lacking in integrity in now
killing him.
1Ki 2:42 The king sent and called for Shimei, and said to him, Didn’t I
adjure you by Yahweh and warn you, saying, ‘Know for certain, that on the
day you go out, and walk abroad any where, you shall surely die?’. You
said to me, ‘The saying that I have heard is good’-
There is no reference in the narrative to any such oath by Yahweh.
This is not to say no such reference to Yahweh was made, but it also
rather supports the impression we have of Solomon's lack of integrity and
willingness to tell untruths; see on :40.
1Ki 2:43 Why then have you not kept the oath of Yahweh, and the
commandment that I have instructed you with?-
Solomon is condemned for not keeping the covenant / oath of Yahweh
and His commands (s.w. 1 Kings 11:10,11, which implies he was guilty of
not doing so from his youth: "he didn’t keep that which Yahweh commanded.
Therefore Yahweh said to Solomon... you have not kept my covenant and my
statutes...). His hypocrisy and lack of grace is so
marked.
1Ki 2:44 The king said moreover to Shimei, You know all the wickedness
which your heart knows full well, what you did to David my father.
Therefore Yahweh shall return your wickedness on your own head-
Again, Solomon is playing God, as we saw him doing on :37. It was not
Yahweh who was returning his wickedness upon him, but Solomon doing so.
Shimei had apologized for his words of cursing, and David had forgiven him
and given him assurances. Solomon's attitude is very wrong, and there was
no Mosaic legal justification for the death penalty for cursing a man. And
Shimei's stoning of David and calling him a "man of blood" had been
justified, in that indeed David was worthy of death by stoning and was
indeed a man of blood. To slate this as "wickedness" worthy of the death
penalty is very severe judgment. And Solomon is choosing to respect his
father's senile words spoken from his deathbed, rather than his father's
earlier gracious forgiveness of Shimei.
1Ki 2:45 But king Solomon shall be blessed, and the throne of David shall
be established before Yahweh forever-
Solomon saw himself as the Messianic Son of David, therefore he felt
his kingdom was the Messianic Kingdom; and he here states dogmatically
that he is the eternally blessed seed of David. But those promises were
conditional upon his obedience, and he ignored those conditions. And in all this, of
course, we see our warning. This may explain why he built his own house as
a replica of God's house - he felt that in fulfillment of the Davidic
covenant his house was God's house. Solomon's attitude to the Kingdom was
that it was all here and now, and it was not so much the Kingdom of God as
the Kingdom of Solomon. In this Solomon may seem far removed from our
experience. But with eyes half closed, discerning only the general
outline, Solomon is surely in a mind-set analogous to many of us. Solomon
was so sure that because of his father’s righteousness, therefore God
would establish him. “Mercy and truth preserve the king, and he upholdeth
his throne by mercy” (Prov. 20:28 RVmg.) says as much- the promises
(“mercy and truth” usually refer to God’s promises) had been given to
David and just because of that, Solomon was sure that
his throne and kingdom would thereby
be upheld.
1Ki 2:46 So the king commanded Benaiah the son of Jehoiada; and he went
out, and fell on him, so that he died. The kingdom was established in the
hand of Solomon-
Clearly the kingdom was established in a secular sense, by Solomon's
brutal murder of potential contenders for the throne. But this was not the
same as the promised eternal establishment of David's kingdom in the hands
of his Messianic seed.
Previous Chapter
