The Ultimate Commentary On 1 Kings E-Book

Albert Barnes

• Herausgeber: David Turner
• Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018

Beschreibung

We are to read the Bible in order to understand God’s message to us. He speaks to us in plain language but there are times we need a helping hand in what we read. Commentaries are not just for preachers or seminary students. They are for us all. The Ultimate Commentary Collection is designed to bring you a variety of thoughts and insights from theologians of high renown and reputation. Their study of the Bible is of great help to us. We are presenting to you the studies and thoughts of 6 of the Church’s greatest minds: Albert Barnes – John Calvin – Adam Clarke – Matthew Henry – Charles H. Spurgeon – John Wesley. Their commentaries will help you understand, enjoy and apply what God’s word says to you. In addition to these commentaries you will also find all of Spurgeon’s sermons on this particular book of the Bible. This volume is The Ultimate Commentary On 1 Kings.  

Leseprobe

CHAPTER ONE

1 Kings

1 Kings Contents

1 KINGS CONTENTS

Chapter Two - Albert Barnes

Chapter Three - Adam Clarke

Chapter Four - Matthew Henry

Chapter Five - Charles H. Spurgeon

Chapter Six - Sermons Of Spurgeon

Chapter Seven - John Wesley

1 Kings Contents

Bible Study Guide

Other Publications

Main Contents

CHAPTER TWO

Albert Barnes

1 Kings Contents

1 KINGS CONTENTS

1 Kings Introduction

1 Kings Chapter 1

1 Kings Chapter 2

1 Kings Chapter 3

1 Kings Chapter 4

1 Kings Chapter 5

1 Kings Chapter 6

1 Kings Chapter 7

1 Kings Chapter 8

1 Kings Chapter 9

1 Kings Chapter 10

1 Kings Chapter 11

1 Kings Chapter 12

1 Kings Chapter 13

1 Kings Chapter 14

1 Kings Chapter 15

1 Kings Chapter 16

1 Kings Chapter 17

1 Kings Chapter 18

1 Kings Chapter 19

1 Kings Chapter 20

1 Kings Chapter 21

1 Kings Chapter 22

1 Kings Contents

Bible Study Guide

Other Publications

Main Contents

1 Kings Introduction

1 KINGS INTRODUCTION

Introduction to 1 and 2Kings

The Greek translators, known as the Septuagint, who separated the “Book of the Law of Moses” into five parts, and the “Book of Samuel” into two, made the division, which is now almost universally adopted, of the original “Book of Kings” into a “First” and a “Second Book.” The separation thus made was followed naturally in the early Latin versions, which were formed from the Greek; and when Jerome set forth the edition now called “The Vulgate,” he followed the custom which he found established. The general adoption of the Vulgate by the Western Church caused the arrangement introduced by the Septuagint to obtain almost universal acceptance.

The work is named from its contents, since the entire subject of the whole is the history of the “kings” of Israel and Judah from the accession of Solomon to the Babylonian captivity.

1. The unity of the work is proved by the marked and striking simplicity and regularity of the plan. The work is, from first to last a history of the kings in strict chronological order, on the same system, and on a uniform scale. Exceptions to this uniformity in the larger space bestowed on the reigns of a few monarchs are due to the principle of treating with the greatest fullness the parts of the history theocratically of most importance.

A second evidence of unity is the general uniformity of style and language - a uniformity admitted by all writers, and one which is only slightly infringed in two or three instances, where the irregularity may be accounted for by a diversity in the sources used by the author and a close following of the language which he found in those sources.

To these general heads of evidence may be added certain peculiarities of thought or expression which pervade the two books, all of them indicating with greater or less certainty a single author.

2. Some have thought from the continuity of the narrative, from the general resemblance of the style, and from the common employment of a certain number of words and phrases, that the six “books,” commencing with Judges and terminating with the Second Book of Kings, are the production of a single writer, and constitute in reality a single unbroken composition. Others consider these arguments far from conclusive. The continuity of the narrative is formal, and may be due to the after arrangements of a reviser, such as Ezra is commonly believed to have been.

So far as the mere idiom of the language goes, it is perhaps true that we cannot draw a marked line between Kings and Samuel. But many of the traits most characteristic of the writer of Kings are wholly wanting in the other (and probably earlier) composition. For these and other reasons the “Books of Kings” may claim distinctness and separateness.

3. There are two grounds upon which, apart from all traditional notices, the date of a historical work may be determined, namely, the peculiarities of the diction, and the contents.

The language of Kings belongs unmistakably to the period of the captivity. It is later than that of Isaiah, Amos, Hosea, Micah, Joel, and Nahum, earlier than that of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. In general character it bears a close resemblance to the language of Jeremiah and Ezekiel; and may be assigned to the sixth century before our era.

The result obtainable from the contents is similar, only somewhat more definite. Assuming the last detached section of the work 2 Kings 25:27-30 to be an integral portion of it, we obtain the year 561 B.C. - the first year of Evil-Merodach - as the earliest possible date of the completion of the composition. Again, from the fact that the work contains no allusion at all to the return of the Jews from their captivity, we obtain for the latest possible date the year 538 B.C., the year of the return under Zerubbabel: or in other words between the death of Nebuchadnezzar and the accession of Cyrus in Babylon. Linguistic and other considerations favor the belief that the actual completion was early in this period - about 560 B.C.; and it is not improbable that the greater part of the work was written as early as 580 B.C. - i. e. some twenty years previously.

4. Jewish tradition assigns the authorship of Kings to Jeremiah; and there are very weighty arguments in favor of this view. There is a very remarkable affinity between the language of Kings and that of the admitted writings of the prophet. The matter moreover, of the two works, so far as the same events are treated, is in the closest harmony, those points being especially singled out for insertion, of which Jeremiah had personal knowledge and in which he took a special interest. Another argument of very considerable force is drawn from the entire omission of any notice at all of Jeremiah in Kings, which would have been very strange and unnatural in any other historian, considering the important part which Jeremiah played in the transactions of so many reigns, but which is completely intelligible on the hypothesis of his authorship of Kings: it is then the natural fruit and sign of a becoming modesty and unselfishness.

Still, though Jeremiah‘s authorship appears, all things considered, to be highly probable, we must admit that it has not been proved, and is therefore to some extent uncertain.

5. The author of Kings cites as authorities on the subject matter of his history three works:

(1) the “book of the acts of Solomon” 1 Kings 11:41;

(2) the “book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel” (1 Kings 14:19, etc.); and

(3) the “Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah” (1 Kings 14:29, etc.).

His own history was, at least in part, derived from these works. Lesser works were also open to him. Further, the writer had probably access to a work of a different character from any of those quoted by the author of Chronicles, namely, a collection of the miracles of Elisha, made probably in one of the schools of the prophets.

Hence, the sources of Kings may be considered threefold, consisting, first, of certain general historical documents called the “Books of the Chronicles of the Kings;” secondly, of some special treatises on the history of particular short periods; and, thirdly, of a single work of a very peculiar character, the private biography of a remarkable man.

The “books of the chronicles of the kings” were probably of the nature of public archives, - state-annals, that is, containing an account of the chief public events in the reign of each king, drawn up by an authorized person. With the Israelites the authorized person was probably in almost every case a prophet. The prophets regarded this as one of their principal duties, as we see by the examples of Isaiah 2 Chronicles 26:22; 1 Kings 6:1 seems to be a gloss of this character, and it may be suspected that to a similar origin is due the whole series of synchronisms between the dynasties of Israel and Judah. It is probable that the original work gave simply the years assigned to each king in the “books of the chronicles,” without entering upon the further question, in what regnal year of the contemporary monarch in the sister kingdom each prince ascended the throne. The chief difficulties of the chronology, and almost all the actual contradictions, disappear if we subtract from the work these portions.

Excepting in this respect, the Books of Kings have come down to us, as to all essentials, in a thoroughly sound condition. The only place where the Septuagint Version differs importantly from the Hebrew text is in 1 Kings 12:24 and 1 Kings 12:25. But this passage is clearly no part of the original narrative. It is a story after the fashion of the apocryphal Esdras, worked up out of the Scripture facts, with additions, which the Alexandrian writer may have taken from some Jewish authority whereto he had access, but which certainly did not come from the writer of Kings. None of its facts except possibly a single one - the age, namely, of Rehoboam at his accession belongs to the real narrative of our historian.

7. The primary character of the work is undoubtedly historical. It is the main object of the writer to give an account of the kings of Israel and Judah from Solomon‘s accession to the captivity of Zedekiah.

The history is, however, written - not, like most history, from a civil, but from a religious point of view. The Jews are regarded, not as an ordinary nation, but as God‘s people. The historian does not aim at exhibiting the mere political progress of the kingdoms about which he writes, but intends to describe to us God‘s treatment of the race with which lie had entered into covenant. Where he records the events of the civil history, his plan is to trace cut the fulfillment of the combined warning and promise which had been given to David 2 Samuel 7:12-16.

Hence, events, which an ordinary historian would have considered of great importance, may be (and are) omitted by our author from the narrative; or touched slightly and hastily.. He treats with the utmost brevity the conquest of Jerusalem by Shishak 1 Kings 14:25-26, the war between Abijam and Jeroboam 1 Kings 15:7, that of Amaziah with Edom 2 Kings 14:7, and that of Josiah with Pharaoh-Nechoh 2 Kings 23:29; events treated at length in the parallel passages of the Book of Chronicles.) As a general rule, the military history of the two kingdoms, which was no doubt carefully recorded in the “Books of the Chronicles,” is omitted by the writer of Kings, who is content for the most part to refer his readers to the state-annals for the events which would have made the greatest figure in an ordinary secular history.

On the other hand, the special aim of the writer induces him to assign a prominent piece and to give a full treatment to events which a secular historian would have touched lightly or passed over in silence. The teaching of the prophets, and their miracles, were leading points in the religious history of the time; it was owing to them especially that the apostasy of the people was without excuse; therefore the historian who has to show that, despite the promises made to David, Jerusalem was destroyed, and the whole twelve tribes carried into captivity, must exhibit fully the grounds for this severity, and must consequently dwell on circumstances which so intensely aggravated the guilt of the people.

The character of the history that he has to relate, its general tendency and ultimate issue, naturally throw over his whole narrative an air of gloom. The tone of the work tires harmonises with that of Jeremiah‘s undoubted writings, and furnishes an additional argument in favor of that prophet‘s authorship.

The style of Kings is, for the most part, level and uniform - a simple narrative style. Occasionally, a more lofty tone is breathed, the style rising with the subject matter, and becoming in places almost poetical 1 Kings 19:11-12; 2 Kings 19:21-31. The most striking chapters are 1 Kings 8; 18; 19; 2 Kings 5; 9; 18; 19; 20.

8. The general authenticity of the narrative contained in our books is admitted. Little is denied or questioned but the miraculous portions of the story, which cluster chiefly about the persons of Elijah and Elisha. Some critics admitting that the narrative generally is derived from authentic contemporary documents - either state-annals or the writings of contemporary prophets - maintain that the histories of Elijah and Elisha come from an entirely different source, being (they hold) collections of traditions respecting those persons made many years after their deaths, either by the writer of Kings or by some other person, from the mouths of the common people. Hence, according to them, their “legendary” or “mythical” character.

But there are no critical grounds for separating off the account of Elijah, or more than a small portion of the account of Elisha, from the rest of the composition. The history of Elijah especially is so intertwined with that of the kingdom of Israel, and is altogether of so public a nature, that the “chronicles of the kings of Israel” would almost necessarily have contained an account of it; and an important part of the history of Elisha is of a similar character. Further, it is quite gratuitous to imagine that the account was not a contemporary one, or that it was left for a writer living long subsequently to collect into a volume the doings of these remarkable personages. The probability is quite the other way. As the prophets themselves were the historians of the time, it would be only natural that Elisha should collect the miracles and other remarkable deeds of Elijah; and that his own should be collected after his decease by some one of the “sons of the prophets.” Add to this that the miracles, as related, have all the air of descriptions derived from eye-witnesses, being full of such minute circumstantial detail as tradition cannot possibly preserve. The whole result would seem to be that (unless we reject miracles altogether as unworthy of belief on account of an “a priori” impossibility) the account of the two great Israelite prophets in Kings must be regarded as entitled to acceptance equally with the rest of the narrative.

Both internal consistency and probability, and also external testimony, strongly support the general authenticity of the secular history contained in Kings. The empire of Solomon is of a kind with which early Oriental history makes us familiar; it occurs exactly at a period when there was room for its creation owing to the simultaneous weakness of Egypt and Assyria; its rapid spread, and still more rapid contraction, are in harmony with our other records of Eastern dominion; its art and civilization resemble these known to have prevailed about the same time in neighboring countries. The contact of Judaea with Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia, during the period covered by our books agrees with the Egyptian annals, and in some respects is most strikingly illustrated by the cuneiform inscriptions. Berosus, Manetho, Menander, Dius - the pagan historians of Babylon, Egypt, and Tyre - join with the monuments in the support which they furnish to our author‘s truthfulness and accuracy, as the comment appended to the text will prove abundantly.

Even the broader features of the chronology are both internally probable, and externally confirmed by the chronologies of other countries. The interval between the accession of Solomon and the captivity of Zedekiah is given as 433 12 years, which is divided among twenty-one monarchs, who belong to eighteen (or, excluding Jehoiachin, to seventeen) generations. This allows for each generation the very probable term of 25 12 years. During the portion of the history where the chronology is double, and where the chief internal difficulties occur, the divergence of the two schemes is but slight, amounting to no more than about twenty years in 240 or 250. Egyptian annals confirm approximately the Biblical dates for Shishak‘s invasion, and So‘s alliance. The Assyrian annals agree with the Hebrew in the date of the fall of Samaria, and in exhibiting Hazael and Jehu, Tiglath-Pileser and Ahaz, Sennacherib and Hezekiah, Esarhaddon and Manasseh, as contemporaries. The chronological difficulties, where such exist, do not at all exceed those with which every reader of profane historians is familiar, and which, in fact, pervade the whole of ancient chronology. They are partly to be accounted for by diversities in the mode of reckoning; while occasionally no doubt they result from a corrupt reading, or from an unauthorized interpolation.

ALBERT BARNES COMMENTARY CONTENTS

1 Kings Chapter 1

CHAPTER 1

Verse 1

Now - Rather, “and.” The conjunction has here, probably, the same sort of connecting force which it has at the opening of Joshua, Judges, 1Samuel, etc., and implies that the historian regards his work as a continuation of a preceding history.

King David - The expression “king David,” instead of the simpler “David,” is characteristic of the writer of Kings. (See the introduction to the Book of Kings) The phrase is comparatively rare in Chronicles and Samuel.

Stricken in, years - David was perhaps now in his first year. He was thirty years old when he was made king in Hebron 2 Samuel 5:4; he reigned in Hebron seven years and six months 2 Samuel 2:11; 1 Chronicles 3:4; and he reigned thirty-three years at Jerusalem 2 Samuel 5:5. The expression had here been used only of persons above eighty Genesis 18:11; Genesis 24:1; Joshua 13:1; Joshua 23:1: but the Jews at this time were not long-lived. No Jewish monarch after David, excepting Solomon and Manasseh, exceeded sixty years.

Clothes - Probably “bed-clothes.” The king was evidently bed-ridden 1 Kings 1:47.

Verse 2

Since the Jewish law allowed polygamy, David‘s conduct in following - what has been said to have been - physician‘s advice, was blameless.

Verse 5

The narrative concerning - Abishag, the Shunammite (see the margin reference “a”), is introduced as necessary for a proper understanding of Adonijah‘s later history (see 1 Kings 2:13-25.) But even as it stands, it heightens considerably the picture drawn of the poor king‘s weak and helpless condition, of which Adonijah was not ashamed to take advantage for his own aggrandizement. Adonijah was born while David reigned at Hebron, and was therefore now between thirty-three and forty years of age. He was David‘s fourth son, but had probably become the eldest by the death of his three older brothers. He claimed the crown by right of primogeniture 1 Kings 2:15, and secretly to his partisans (compare 1 Kings 1:10) announced his intention of assuming the sovereignty. It was well known to him, and perhaps to the Jews generally, that David intended to make Solomon his successor 1 Kings 1:13.

To run before him - That is, he assumed the same quasi-royal state as Absalom had done, when he contemplated rebellion 2 Samuel 15:1.

Verse 6

Had not displeased him - i. e. “His father had never checked or thwarted him all his life.”

A very goodly man - Here, too, Adonijah resembled Absalom 2 Samuel 14:25. The Jews, like the other nations of antiquity, regarded the physical qualities of rulers as of great importance, and wished their kings to be remarkable for strength, stature, and beauty 1 Samuel 9:2. Adonijah‘s personal advantages no doubt helped to draw the people to him.

His mother … - i. e. Haggith bare Adonijah after Maacah bare Absalom 2 Samuel 3:3-4. The words in italics are not in the original; hence, some, by a slight alteration, read “David begat him.”

Verse 7

Joab‘s defection on this occasion, after his faithful adherence to David during the troubles caused by Absalom 1 Chronicles 22:9 and by his preference for the character of Adonijah. He may also have thought that Adonijah, as the eldest son 1 Kings 1:5, had almost a right to succeed.

Abiathar‘s defection is still more surprising than Joab‘s. For his history, see 1 Samuel 22:20 note. Hereto, David and he had been the firmest of friends. It has been conjectured that he had grown jealous of Zadok, and feared being supplanted by him.

Verse 8

There is some difficulty in understanding how Zadok and Abiathar came to be both “priests” at this time, and in what relation they stood to one another. The best explanation seems to be that Abiathar was the real high priest, and officiated at the sanctuary containing the ark of the covenant in Zion, while Zadok performed the offices of chief priest at the tabernacle of Witness at Gibeon 1 Chronicles 16:39.

For Benaiah, see 2 Samuel 8:18; 2 Samuel 20:23; 2 Samuel 23:20-21. For Nathan, see 2 Samuel 7:2-3, 2 Samuel 7:17; 2 Samuel 12:1-15, 2 Samuel 12:25. As privy to all David‘s plans 1 Kings 1:24, he had no doubt fully approved the order of succession which the king was known to intend.

Shimei and Rei - Shimei and Rei are perhaps David‘s two brothers, Shimma and Raddai 1 Chronicles 2:13-14.

Mighty men - Probably the company of 600, originally formed during David‘s early wanderings 1 Samuel 25:13; 1 Samuel 27:2, and afterward maintained as the most essential element of his standing army.

Verse 9

Adonijah‘s feast was probably of a sacrificial character, and intended to inaugurate him as king. Compare the “sacrifices” of Absalom 2 Samuel 15:12.

Zoheleth - No satisfactory explanation has been given of this name. Large blocks of stone always attract attention in the East, and receive names which are often drawn from some trivial circumstance. Sinai and Palestine are full of such “Hajars,” which correspond to the “Ebens” or “stones” of Holy Scripture. (Compare Genesis 28:22; Joshua 4:9; 1 Samuel 6:14.) For En-Rogel, see the margin reference.

Verse 11

The son of Haggith - Compare the margin reference. This expression was well chosen to touch the pride of Bath-sheba. “Adonijah; not thy son, but the son of thy rival, Haggith.”

Verse 12

It would have been in accordance with general Eastern custom for Solomon to suffer death, if Adonijah had succeeded in his attempt. But to have executed his mother also would have been an unusual severity. Still, such cases sometimes occurred: Cassander put to death Roxana, the widow of Alexander the Great, at the same time with her son, the young Alexander.

Verse 14

Confirm thy words - “Establish” them, by giving a second testimony. Nathan thinks it best to move David‘s affections first through Bath-sheba, before he comes in to discuss the matter as one of state policy, and to take the king‘s orders upon it.

Verse 15

Into the chamber - The “bed-chamber” or “inner chamber.” Abishag was a disinterested witness present, who heard all that Bath-sheba said to David.

Verse 16

Bath-sheba bowed, like the woman of Tekoah 2 Samuel 14:4, with the humble prostration of a suppliant. Hence, the king‘s question, “What wouldest thou?”

Verse 20

Tell them who shall sit on the throne - Side by side with what may be called the natural right of hereditary succession, there existed in the old world, and especially in the East, a right, if not of absolutely designating a successor, yet at any rate of choosing one among several sons. Thus, Cyrus designated Cambyses; and Darius designated Xerxes; and a still more absolute right of nomination was exercised by some of the Roman emperors.

Verse 21

Shall sleep - This euphemism for death, rare in the early Scriptures - being found only once in the Pentateuch (margin reference.), and once also in the historical books before Kings 2 Samuel 7:12 - becomes in Kings and Chronicles the ordinary mode of speech (see 1 Kings 2:10; 1 Kings 11:43, etc.; 2 Chronicles 9:31; 2 Chronicles 12:16, etc.). David uses the metaphor in one psalm Psalm 13:3. In the later Scriptures it is, of course, common. (Jeremiah 51:39; Daniel 12:2; Matthew 9:24; John 11:11; 1 Corinthians 11:30; 1 Corinthians 15:51; 1 Thessalonians 4:14, etc.)

Verse 22

Nathan came into the palace, not into the chamber, where he might not enter unannounced. Bath-sheba retired before Nathan entered, in accordance with Oriental ideas of propriety. So, when Bath-sheba was again sent for 1 Kings 1:28, Nathan retired (compare 1 Kings 1:32).

Verse 24

Hast thou said - Thou hast said. In the original no question is asked. Nathan assumes, as far as words go, that the king has made this declaration. He wishes to draw forth a disclaimer.

Verse 29

“As the Lord liveth” was the most common form of oath among the Israelites (e. g. Judges 8:19; 1 Samuel 14:39; 1 Samuel 19:6). It was unique to David to attach a further clause to this oath - a clause of thankfulness for some special mercy 1 Samuel 25:34, or for God‘s constant protection of him (here and in 2 Samuel 4:9).

Verse 31

A lower and humbler obeisance than before 1 Kings 1:16. In the Assyrian sculptures ambassadors are represented with their faces actually touching the earth before the feet of the monarch.

Verse 32

The combination of the high priest, the prophet, and the captain of the bodyguard (the Cherethites and Pelethites, 1 Kings 1:38), would show the people that the proceedings had the king‘s sanction. The order of the names marks the position of the persons with respect to the matter in hand.

Verse 33

Mules and horses seem to have been first employed by the Israelites in the reign of David, and the use of the former was at first confined to great personages 2 Samuel 13:29; 2 Samuel 18:9. The rabbis tell us that it was death to ride on the king‘s mule without his permission; and thus it would be the more evident to all that the proceedings with respect to Solomon had David‘s sanction.

Gihon - Probably the ancient name of the valley called afterward the Tyropoeum, which ran from the present Damascus Gate, by Siloam, into the Kedron vale, having the temple hill, or true Zion, on the left, and on the right the modern Zion or ancient city of the Jebusites. The upper “source” of the “waters of Gihon,” which Hezekiah stopped (see the margin reference), was probably in the neighborhood of the Damascus Gate.

Verse 34

Anoint him - Inauguration into each of the three offices (those of prophet, priest, and king) typical of the Messiah or Anointed One, was by anointing with oil. Divine appointment had already instituted the rite in connection with the kingly office 2 Samuel 2:4; but after Solomon we have no express mention of the anointing of kings, except in the three cases of Jehu, Joash, and Jehoahaz 2 Kings 9:6; 2 Kings 11:12; 2 Kings 23:30, who were all appointed irregularly. At the time of the captivity, kings, whose anointing has not been related in the historical books, still bear the title of “the anointed of the Lord.” Lamentations 4:20; Psalm 89:38, Psalm 89:51.

Verse 35

Over Israel and over Judah - There is no anticipation here of the subsequent division of the kingdom; the antithesis between Judah and Israel already existed in the reign of David 2 Samuel 2:9; 2 Samuel 19:11.

Verse 37

As the Lord hath been with my lord - This phrase expresses a very high degree of divine favor. It occurs first in the promises of God to Isaac Genesis 26:3, Genesis 26:24 and Jacob Genesis 28:13. See further margin reference.

Verse 39

The tabernacle - Probably that which David had made for the ark of the covenant on Mount Zion 2 Samuel 6:17. For the holy oil, see the margin reference. That it was part of the regular furniture of the tabernacle appears from Exodus 31:11; Exodus 39:38.

Verse 40

Piped with pipes - Some prefer “danced with dances” - a meaning which the Hebrew would give by a change in the pointing, and the alteration of one letter. But the change is unnecessary. (Flutepipes were known to the Israelites 1 Samuel 10:5; they were very ancient in Egypt, and were known also to the Assyrians.

The earth rent - If the present Hebrew text is correct we have here a strong instance of Oriental hyperbole. But it is suspected that there is a slight corruption, and that the verb really used meant “resounded.”

Verse 42

Jonathan had acted in a similar capacity, as a carrier of intelligence, in the time of Absalom‘s attempt 2 Samuel 15:36; 2 Samuel 17:17; but at that time, like his father, he was faithful to David, and “a valiant man,” “a virtuous man,” or “a man of worth.” (See 1 Kings 1:52; Proverbs 12:4.)

Verse 43

Verily - “Nay, but” (or, “Not so”).

Verse 47

The king bowed himself - The king worshipped God and prayed that it might be so. Compare Genesis 47:31, with margin reference, Hebrews 11:21.

Verse 50

On the “horns” of the altar, see Exodus 27:2 note. The altar to which Adonijah fled was probably in the “tabernacle” already referred to 1 Kings 1:39.

Verse 52

There shalt not an hair … - This was a proverbial expression, meaning “he shall suffer no hurt at all.” Solomon‘s clemency in pardoning Adonijah is very remarkable. In the East not only are pretenders almost always punished with death, but it has often been the custom for each king upon his accession to put to death all his brothers as mere possible pretenders.

ALBERT BARNES COMMENTARY CONTENTS

1 Kings Chapter 2

CHAPTER 2

Verse 1

The events related in 1 Chronicles 2829 had occurred in the interval which separates the last and this present chapter.

Verse 2

David appears to have in his thoughts the divine address to Joshua. Without following it servilely, he reproduces several of its leading expressions and sentiments (compare the margin reference). Solomon‘s youth clearly constituted one of the chief difficulties of his position. If he was about nineteen or twenty, and known to be of a pacific disposition 1 Chronicles 22:9, then to have to rule over the warlike and turbulent Hebrew nation, with a strong party opposed to him, and brothers of full age ready to lead it, was evidently a most difficult task. Hence, he is exhorted, though in years a boy, to show himself in Spirit “a man.”

Verse 3

The “statutes” have been explained to be the positive ordinances of the Law; the “commandments” the moral precepts, not to steal, etc.; the “judgments” the laws belonging to civil government; and the “testimonies” the laws directing the commemoration of certain events. Compare Psalm 19:7-8.

Verse 4

That the Lord may continue his word - The original promise given to David indirectly, through Nathan 2 Samuel 7:11-17, and apparently unconditional, afterward was made conditional upon continued obedience. (See the margin reference “f.”) David reminds Solomon of this, in order to impress upon him a powerful motive to continue faithful and obedient.

Verse 5

In his directions with respect to certain important persons, David, anxious for the security of his young successor‘s kingdom, allows old animosities to revive, and is willing to avenge himself indirectly and by deputy, though he had been withheld by certain scruples from taking vengeance in his own person. We must not expect Gospel morality from the saints of the Old Testament. They were only the best men of their several ages and nations. The maxim of “them of old time,” whether Jews or Gentiles, was “Love your friends and hate your enemies” (see Matthew 5:43); and David perhaps was not in this respect in advance of his age. Joab‘s chief offence against David, besides his two murders, was no doubt his killing Absalom 2 Samuel 18:14. Another serious crime was his support of the treasonable attempt of Adonijah 1 Kings 1:7. But besides these flagrant misdemeanours, he seems to have offended David by a number of little acts. He was a constant thorn in his side. He treated him with scant respect, taking important steps without his orders 2 Samuel 3:26, remonstrating with him roughly and rudely 2 Samuel 2:24-25, almost betraying his secrets 2 Samuel 11:19-21, and, where he disliked the orders given him, disobeying them 1 Chronicles 21:6. David allowed his ascendancy, but he chafed against it, finding this “son of Zeruiah,” in particular “too hard” for him (margin reference).

Put the blood of war upon his girdle … - Meaning “The blood of Amasa spirited all over the girdle to which the sword of Joab was attached; and the sandals on his feet were reddened with the stains left by the falling corpse.”

Verse 6

His hoar head - Joab, though the nephew of David, was probably not very greatly his junior, David being the youngest of the family, and Zeruiah, as is most likely, one of the eldest.

Verse 7

One of the sons of Barzillai here intended was probably Chimham (see the margin reference). Who the others were is not known. The family continued down to the return from the captivity, and still held property in Israel (compare Ezra 2:61 and Nehemiah 7:63).

Verse 9

Hold him not guiltless - i. e. “Do not treat him as an innocent man. Punish him as in thy wisdom thou deemest best. Not capitally at once; but so that he may be likely to give thee in course of time a just occasion to slay him.” So, at least, Solomon seems to have understood the charge. (See 1 Kings 2:36-46.)

Verse 11

Forty years - In all forty years and six months. See 2 Samuel 5:5, and 1 Chronicles 3:4. The Jewish writers almost universally omit the fractions of a year.

Verse 12

The “establishment” of the kingdom here intended is probably its universal acceptance both by the tribe of Judah and the other Israelites.

Verse 16

Deny me not - literally, as in the margin, i. e. “make me not to hide my face through shame at being refused.”

Verse 19

A seat - Or, “a throne.” We have here a proof of the high dignity of the Queen-mother. Compare also 1 Kings 15:13; 2 Kings 11:1-3. In the Persian court the Queen-mother had often the chief power.

Verse 22

Ask for him the kingdom also - Bath-sheba had not seen anything dangerous or suspicious in Adonijah‘s request. Solomon, on the contrary, takes alarm at once. To ask for Abishag was to ask for the kingdom. To the Oriental mind a monarch was so sacred, that whatever was brought near to him was thenceforth separate from common use. This sacred and separate character attached especially to the Royal harem. The inmates either remained widows for the rest of their lives, or became the wives of the deceased king‘s successor. When a monarch was murdered, or dethroned, or succeeded by one whose title was doubtful, the latter alternative was almost always adopted (compare 2 Samuel 12:8; 2 Samuel 16:22). Public opinion so closely connected the title to the crown and the possession of the deceased monarch‘s wives, that to have granted Adonijah‘s request would have been the strongest encouragement to his pretensions. Solomon, seeing this, assumes that Adonijah cherishes a guilty purpose, that there has been a fresh plot, that Abiathar and Joab - Adonijah‘s counselors in the former conspiracy 1 Kings 1:7 - are privy to it, and that the severest measures are necessary to crush the new treason.

Verse 23

Against his own life - Adonijah had forfeited his life by his former conduct, and his pardon had been merely conditional 1 Kings 1:52.

Verse 24

The phrase “making a house” means “continuing the posterity” of a person, and, in the case of a royal person, “maintaining his descendants upon the throne.”

Verse 26

For Anathoth and the allusions in this verse, see the margin reference.

Verse 27

That he might fulfil the word of the L RD - We need not understand this as stating that the fulfillment of the old prophecy was Solomon‘s motive, or even one of his motives. The reference is to the overruling providence of God, which thus brought about the fulfillment of the prophecy. (Compare Matthew 1:22; Matthew 2:15; Matthew 27:35, etc.) The deposition of Abiathar involved the rejection of the house of Ithamar 1 Chronicles 24:3, to which Eli belonged, and the reestablishment of the high priesthood in the line of Eleazar.

Verse 28

Joab followed the example of Adonijab (margin reference). The tabernacle was now at Gibeon 1 Kings 3:4; 1 Chronicles 16:39.

Verse 31

It was only a murderer to whom the tabernacle was to be no protection (margin reference). Hence, the reference to the “innocent blood.”

Verse 32

Shalt return his blood - i. e. “his shedding of blood.”

Verse 33

Upon the head of his seed - Compare the margin reference. Nothing further is heard of Joab‘s descendants in the history.

Verse 34

Retribution overtook Joab on the very scene (Gibeon) of the most treacherous of his murders. It was at the “great stone which is in Gibeon” that Joab killed Amasa 2 Samuel 20:8-10.

Verse 35

The high priesthood had been for some time in a certain sense divided between Zadok and Abiathar. (See the 1 Kings 1:8 note). Henceforth, Zadok became sole high priest.

Verse 36

The object, apparently, was to keep Shimei under the immediate eye of the government. Shimei‘s old home, Bahurim, lay east of Jerusalem, on the road to Jericho, 2 Samuel 17:18, and could only be reached by crossing the Kedron valley. Solomon assumes, that, if he quits the city, it will probably be in this direction 1 Kings 2:37.

Verse 39

Achish - Possibly the Achish of the marginal reference, but more probably the grandson of the former Achish.

Verse 42

Did I not make thee to swear - The Septuagint add to 1 Kings 2:37 a clause stating that Solomon “made Shimei swear” on the day when he commanded him to reside at Jerusalem.

ALBERT BARNES COMMENTARY CONTENTS

1 Kings Chapter 3

CHAPTER 3

Verse 1

What Pharaoh is meant is uncertain. It must have been a predecessor of Shishak (or Sheshonk), who invaded Judaea more than 40 years later 1 Kings 14:25; and probabilities are in favor, not of Psusennes II, the last king of Manetho‘s 21st dynasty, but of Psinaces, the predecessor of Psusennes. This, the Tanite dynasty, had become very weak, especially toward its close, from where we may conceive how gladly it would ally itself with the powerful house of David. The Jews were not forbidden to marry foreign wives, if they became proselytes. As Solomon is not blamed for this marriage either here or in 1 Kings 11:5-7 were in no case dedicated to Egyptian deities, it is to be presumed that his Egyptian wife adopted her husband‘s religion.

The city of David - The city, situated on the eastern hill, or true Zion, where the temple was afterward built, over against the city of the Jehusites (1 Kings 9:24; compare 2 Chronicles 8:11).

Verse 2

The word “only” introduces a contrast. The writer means to say that there was one exception to the flourishing condition of things which he has been describing, namely, that “the people sacrificed in high-places.” (Compare the next verse.) The Law did not forbid “high-places” directly, but only by implication. It required the utter destruction of all the high-places which had been polluted by idolatrous rites Deuteronomy 12:2; and the injunction to offer sacrifices nowhere except at the door of the tabernacle Leviticus 17:3-5 was an indirect prohibition of them, or, at least, of the use which the Israelites made of them; but there was some real reason to question whether this was a command intended to come into force until the “place” was chosen “where the Lord would cause His name to dwell.” (See Deuteronomy 12:11, Deuteronomy 12:14.) The result was that high-places were used for the worship of Yahweh, from the time of the Judges downward Judges 6:25; Judges 13:16; 1 Samuel 7:10; 1 Samuel 13:9; 1 Samuel 14:35; 1 Samuel 16:5; 1 Chronicles 21:26, with an entire unconsciousness of guilt on the part of those who used them. And God so far overlooked this ignorance that He accepted the worship thus offered Him, as appears from the vision vouchsafed to Solomon on this occasion. There were two reasons for the prohibition of high-places; first, the danger of the old idolatry creeping back if the old localities were retained for worship; and, secondly, the danger to the unity of the nation if there should be more than one legitimate religious center. The existence of the worship at high places did, in fact, facilitate the division of the kingdom.

Verse 4

Gibeon - The transfer to Gibeon of the “tabernacle of the congregation,” and the brass “altar of burnt offerings” made by Moses, which were removed there from Nob (compare 1 Samuel 21:6, with marginal references “i,” “k”), had made it “the great high-place,” more sacred, i. e., than any other in the holy land, unless it were Mount Zion where the ark had been conveyed by David. For the position of Gibeon, see Joshua 9:3 note.

A thousand burnt offerings did Solomon offer - Solomon presented the victims. The priests were the actual sacrificers 1 Kings 8:5. A sacrifice of a thousand victims was an act of royal magnificence suited to the greatness of Solomon. So Xerxes offered 1,000 oxen at Troy. If the offerings in this case were “whole burnt offerings,” and were all offered upon the altar of Moses, the sacrifice must have lasted several days.

Verse 5

The Lord appeared unto Solomon in a dream - Compare the marginal references and Genesis 15:1; Genesis 28:12; Genesis 37:5.

Verse 6

This great kindness - David himself had regarded this as God‘s crowning mercy to him 1 Kings 1:48.

Verse 7

See 1 Kings 2:2 note, and on the hyperbole contained in the phrase “little child,” compare Genesis 43:8; Exodus 33:11.

How to go out or come in - This expression is proverbial for the active conduct of affairs. (See the marginal reference.)

Verse 8

Compare the marginal references. Solomon regards the promises as fulfilled in the existing greatness and glory of the Jewish nation.

Verse 9

One of the chief functions of the Oriental monarch is always to hear and decide causes. Hence, supreme magistrates were naturally called “judges.” (See the introduction to the Book of Judges.) In the minds of the Jews the “judge” and the “prince” were always closely associated, the direct cognisance of causes being constantly taken by their chief civil governors. (See Exodus 2:14; Exodus 18:16, Exodus 18:22; 1 Samuel 8:20; 2 Samuel 15:2-6.)

Good and bad - i. e. “right and wrong,” “justice and injustice.”

Verse 10

Although Solomon‘s choice was made “in a dream” 1 Kings 3:5, we must regard it as springing from his will in some degree, and therefore as indicative of his moral character.

Verse 11

Thine enemies - e. g. Hadad the Edomite 1 Kings 11:14-22 and Rezon the son of Eliadah 1 Kings 11:23-25, whom Solomon might well have wished to remove.

Verse 12

A wise and an understanding heart - Solomon‘s wisdom seems to have been both moral and intellectual (see 1 Kings 4:29-34). But it was moral wisdom alone which he requested, and which was promised him. The terms translated “wise” and “understanding,” both denote practical wisdom. (See Genesis 41:33, Genesis 41:39; Deuteronomy 4:6; Proverbs 1:2, etc.)

Neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee - i. e. in the knowledge of what was in man, and in the wisdom to direct men‘s goings, he was to be the wisest of “all” mere men. In such wisdom the world would know one only “greater than Solomon” Matthew 12:42; Luke 11:31.

Verse 13

A striking illustration of that law of the divine government to which Christ referred (marginal reference).

Verse 14

I will lengthen thy days - The promise here was only conditional. As the condition was not observed 1 Kings 11:1-8, the right to the promise was forfeited, and it was not fulfilled. Solomon can scarcely have been more than fifty-nine or sixty at his death.

Verse 15

Solomon determined to inaugurate his reign by a grand religious ceremonial at each of the two holy places which at this time divided between them the reverence of the Jews. Having completed the religious service at Gibeon, where was the tabernacle of the congregation, he proceeded to Jerusalem, and sacrificed before the ark of the covenant, which was in Mount Zion 2 Samuel 6:12. A great feast naturally followed on a large sacrifice of peace-offerings. In these the sacrificer always partook of the flesh of the victim, and he was commanded to call in to the feast the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow Deuteronomy 14:29. Compare 2 Samuel 6:19; 1 Chronicles 16:3.

Verse 28

The wisdom of God - i. e. “Divine wisdom,” “a wisdom given by God” 1 Kings 3:12. The ready tact and knowledge of human nature exhibited in this pattern judgment, and its special fitness to impress Orientals, have generally been admitted.

ALBERT BARNES COMMENTARY CONTENTS

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!

Lesen Sie weiter in der vollst?ndigen Ausgabe!