1 Kings 2 Study Notes

2:17 One of the customs of the ancient world was for the new king to confirm his position by taking the wives of the former king (2Sm 16:22). Adonijah must have viewed Solomon as very weak to make this dangerous request.

2:18 It seems unbelievably naive for Bathsheba to intercede with Solomon in this request. Or did she see that encouraging Adonijah’s foolishness was a good way to make clear to Solomon the threat Adonijah represented? If so, her decision here moved Adonijah a step closer to his demise.

2:19-21 The protocol and ceremony of this scene again pointed to the influence of the queen mother. And yet her influence went only so far.

2:22-25 Solomon’s words grouped Adonijah . . . Abiathar, and Joab together as joint leaders of the failed coup. Adonijah’s foolish attempt to extract some advantage from the failure gave Solomon the opportunity to deal with Adonijah and all the plotters.

2:26-27 Solomon’s decisive action showed that both Solomon and the Bible writer believed that Solomon was removing major threats to his rule. Abiathar knew that his priestly participation in the abortive coronation was essential to Adonijah’s plot; his participation was neither innocent nor casual. Mere banishment was a gentle penalty; death would have been justified. Banishment prevented him from playing an influential role either at the tabernacle or in the Lord’s temple yet to be built. Removal of Abiathar from office fulfilled the earlier judgment on Eli’s family (1Sm 2:30-36).

2:28-29 As the commander of the army, Joab could have mobilized the old tribal and clan levies in support of Adonijah. Such a threat was virtually treasonous, and the treasonous potentialities remained as long as Joab lived. Furthermore, judging Joab for his murders was a necessary step in repudiating the old violent ways—a step that David never took.

2:30-34 Joab understood perfectly the consequences of his deeds and sought safety at the altar, where Benaiah executed the death sentence against him. In executing the commander in chief of the tribal levies, Solomon was either carrying out a risky deed to remove a popular enemy, or he was so secure in his power that he did not fear any repercussions. Executing Joab at the altar raised other questions. The devotion to the Lord among the masses may not have risen far above the superstition that the horns of the altar provided magical protection. Assuming that Solomon’s faith was real, his disbelief in the magical protection of the horns of the altar was a rejection of popular superstition and an assertion that real moral and social values transcended such superstitious magic (see note at 1:50). Joab might have hoped for sanctuary at the altar, but the right of sanctuary only applied to those who committed accidental manslaughter (Ex 21:12-14).

2:35 Benaiah’s appointment to Joab’s place over the army indicated that Joab remained the commander in chief up to his death. The later restructuring of government to minimize the traditional powers (chap. 4) could have indicated ongoing concerns about the loyalty of the traditional tribal authorities to Solomon.

2:36-46 Shimei’s situation was the opposite of Abiathar’s. Abiathar was a danger in the capital where he could meddle in centralized worship. Shimei was a danger away from Jerusalem where he could stir up trouble in distant locales; therefore, Shimei was placed under house arrest in Jerusalem. When Shimei violated his house arrest, possibly thinking Solomon’s concern had diminished over the three-year period, he was executed. The Kidron Valley, just east of Jerusalem, served as one of the boundaries of Jerusalem.