Solomon said some very wise things when he dedicated the Temple. After his prayer of dedication he turned to the people and reminded them, and us, that in order to serve God we must desire to do so. And in our human frailty the desire to serve God is a gift we must receive from Him. I came to realize as I read today’s passage that each time Solomon referred to someone praying towards the Temple he was using that action as a metaphor for turning away from evil and towards God. We, as human beings, are very influenced by taking physical actions which have symbolic meanings. Many of those who smoke cigarettes are as addicted to the ritual they go through each time they light a cigarette as they are to the nicotine. In the same way, a ritual can help us focus on God and doing His will. Solomon was offering the people of Israel such a ritual. Each one of us needs rituals in their life which turns our attention to God and His will for us. The only downside to this is that we may allow the ritual to take the place of God.
It took Solomon 7 years to build the Temple, but 13 years to build his own palace. At least part of this difference is a result of the Temple being a single function building while Solomo’s palace served multiple functions. The Temple was designed and built for offering sacrifices to God and for worshiping Him. Solomon’s palace on the other hand was built as a residence and seat of government. Therefore Solomon’s palace needed living quarters, a place for Solomon to hold court and greet foreign dignitaries, and space to meet with his advisers. However, all of this being said I believe that the extra time King Solomon put into building his palace reflects the beginning of what led to his kingdom being divided upon his death.
As I mentioned when we read the description of the Tabernacle, I do not get much out of these passages which give detailed descriptions of the furnishings used in worship. That does not in any way mean that I don’t understand why some people do. That being said, today’s description of all of the bronze items King Solomon commissioned for the Temple does tell us something interesting. Bronze is an alloy made by smelting copper and tin together. While copper was relatively common in that part of the world, tin was not. In fact the tin used in the bronze here either came from the Iberian peninsula(modern day Spain and Portugal), or from even further away in Britain. The large amounts of bronze used in the Temple is the first hint we have of King Solomon’s vast trading network.
Today, I am reading and commenting on 1 Kings 4-6.
From the list of King Solomon’s officials we learn that King Solomon formally delegated governing Israel to subordinates. These officials almost certainly had other officials reporting to them. In yesterday’s passage, King Solomon eliminated the various power bases which King David had spent his reign balancing. In their place he set up officials and governors whose power derived from King Solomon. All of this demonstrates Solomon’s wisdom. King David had conquered most of the surrounding lands. King Solomon established a system of government which allowed him to use the wealth of these lands to begin building projects. In discussing King Solomon’s wisdom and knowledge the writer mentions that he composed a large number of proverbs and wrote a large number of songs. I am sure that some of those proverbs were designed to give guidance to the officials and judges who served under Solomon.
In describing King Solomon’s wisdom and fame, the author uses language which is reminiscent of myths, legends, and tall-tales. I am not saying that King Solomon was not that wise, merely that the writer is using the language used in those sorts of stories to quickly convey Solomon’s great wisdom before moving on to talk about his actual actions. I mention this to contrast it with the precision the writer uses to describe the year in which construction began on the Temple. He writes that Temple construction began in the 4th year of Solomon’s reign, 480 years after the Israelites left Egypt. This gives us a hard and fast date from which we can figure out when everything that happened before this occurred. Of course, the problem we have is that we cannot be sure when King Solomon built the Temple.
Today, I am reading and commenting on 1 Kings 2-3.
Today’s passage begins with what I believe is an account of the same event described in 1 Chronicles 28. Here King David advises Solomon to keep the Law of Moses and instructs him to settle “debts” which David considers to still be outstanding. David lists two men whom David asks Solomon to see suffer the consequences of the wrongs they have done and the sons of a man whom David asks Solomon to care for because of the good their father had done him. I find it interesting that of all the people David had interacted with it was Barzillai whom David made a point of rewarding on his deathbed. I don’t know the significance of it, but I find it interesting.
Later, Adonijah goes to Bathsheba and asks her to get King Solomon to allow him to marry Abishag, the last of King David’s concubines. When Bathsheba takes this request to her son, King Solomon, he reacts badly, ordering the execution of Adonijah. Further he orders Abiathar to retire from all priestly duties. When Joab heard of Adonijah’s execution he sought sanctuary at the altar that was with the Ark of the Covenant. It is only when Solomon hears that Joab has done this that he orders Joab’s execution. I am less than clear on what happened here. Joab and ABiathar had supported Adonijah’s attempt to claim the crown before King David’s death, but when Solomon granted his brother the right to live out his life in peace as long as he stayed out of politics, they appear to have been granted a similar deal. Now, I understand how Adonijah’s attempt to marry King David’s concubine violated his deal, I do not see that Abiathar or Joab played a role in that.
Perhaps we really see what was happening here when the passage tells us that after doing these things King Solomon sent for Shimei. While Shimei had not supported Adonijah’s bid for the throne he had also not actively supported Solomon either. And we know that Shimei had relished King David’s temporary loss of power during Absalom’s rebellion (even though he had not actively supported Absalom). What we have here is King Solomon consolidating power. He eliminated those who had power and opposed him and acted to limit those who had power and whose support for him was ambivalent. By forcing Shimei to remain in Jerusalem, Solomon limited his ability to maintain connections which could threaten Solomon’s hold on the throne. Then when Shimei acted to exert his power outside of Jerusalem, Solomon had him killed.
Finally today’s passage ends with King Solomon seeking wisdom and with an illustration of that wisdom. You can look at the incident at Gibeon as an actual event (as I do) or as a figurative event and the lesson is the same either way. Early in his reign, King Solomon recognized that the task of governing, of leading, the people of Israel was more than he could accomplish on his own. Rather than seeking his own gratification he sought the ability to better serve others. Because King Solomon sought God’s wisdom to govern His people God granted him wealth and fame. If we seek and strive to serve God, God may not grant us fame and wealth as He did King Solomon, but He will grant us that which truly makes us happy.
King David appears to have made no official pronouncement as to who would be his successor. So, when he got old enough that he was no longer able to actively govern, Adonijah decided to take matters into his own hands. Adonijah approached King David’s closest advisers to gain their support. Joab and Abiathar (the priest who came to David for protection when King Saul killed the rest of his family) supported Adonijah’s plan to take the throne. However, Zadok, David’s other priest, Benaiah, commander of David’s bodyguards, Nathan the prophet, and Shimei did not. It is interesting that Shimei was one of the advisers whose lack of support for Adonijah the writer thought important enough to mention. Despite only having the support of two of King David’s key advisers, Adonijah moves forward with his plans to make himself king. Looking at Adonijah’s plan I see two important points. Because he did not have King David’s support, or the support of a majority of King David;s advisers, Adonijah began the process of having himself coronated outside of Jerusalme. However, because he did not plan on overthrowing his father, he did so in close proximity to Jerusalem.
When Nathan learned that Adonijah had put his plan in motion, he coordinated with Bathsheba to get King David to make Solomon king. As told here, King David had not formally named a successor. However, Nathan tells Bathsheba to ask King David about a vow he had made to her that Solomon would be king. There is no mention anywhere else of this vow (some people would point to 2 Chronicles 28, but I read that as being a different account of the same event recorded here). That does not mean that King David had not made such a promise, just that there is no record of him making it. In fact we have evidence supporting the idea that it was known that Solomon was King David’s choice for successor. Adonijah had invited all of his brothers except Solomon to the feast which he intended to culminate in his coronation. One could read the passage differently, but I reach the conclusion that King David’s inability to govern was not a result of mental limitations, but merely physical limitations. Which leads me to conclude that he had intended all along for Solomon to be his successor and that his advisers knew it.
It is not clear why Joab and Abiathar chose to support Adonijah’s attempt to make himself king, but it is clear that Nathan and Benaiah favored Solomon becoming king after David. We know that Nathan favored Solomon because he coordinated with Bathsheba to make it happen. Some would say that Nathan conspired with Bathsheba, but that carries the implication that they tricked King David into making Solomon king when the passage does not tell us that (although it is possible to read it that way). From Benaiah’s reaction to King David’s instructions we learn that he too favored Solomon becoming king. There is no evidence in the passage as to whether the other advisers who refused to support Adonijah did so because they supported Solomon or for some other reason. I found it interesting to see how everyone’s actions here were influenced by Absalom’s earlier attempt to seize the throne.
I have been taking note of the complicated relationship between David and Joab. In light of that, Joab’s support of Adonijah is interesting. Especially when considered relative to his role in the Absalom incident. Joab supported Absalom’s return from exile and reconciliation with his father, but did not support his attempt to seize the throne.
Today’s passage contains what appears to be accounts about King David which the writer wanted to include, but could not fit in anywhere else. He lists here the Three and the Thirty, mighty warriors in David’s service. We do not really know a lot about what it meant to be one of either of these groups. My best guess is that the Thirty was a special forces type unit in David’s forces before he became king and perhaps after as well. I suspect that there were legends regarding many of these men, and regarding them as a group as well. I suspect that when this book was written, the Three and the Thirty were sort of like the Knights of the Round Table or Robin Hood’s Band. I think the writer of this book lists them out here in order to tell people that these two groups actually existed and they were real people.
I do not really understand the point of the story about the plague which followed David’s census. Once again, the story shows us more about the relationship between David and Joab. Joab questions the value of taking the census, but carries it out anyway when David insists. After the census is completed, David realizes it was a bad idea and a sin (although I am not sure what the sin was that David committed by taking the census). Perhaps the key take away comes when David chooses to suffer his punishment at the hand of God rather than at the hand of humans. This story also teaches us that others may suffer the consequences of our sins. All too often we tell others to stay out of our business when they point out the wrong we are doing. However, we are often not the only ones to suffer when we do wrong, which makes it not just our business.
At the end of yesterday’s passage there was an account of the argument between the men of the northern tribes and the men of Judah over the honor of escorting David back to be king. We see here the geographic divide which was present when Joshua first led the Children of Israel into the land. Also, during the time of the judges several men from the northern tribes tried to set themselves up as king over Israel but were unable to do so. Even here, it is Sheba from the tribe of Benjamin who leads the revolt against King David. King David notes that this revolt is actually a greater threat than Absalom’s was. Sheba’s revolt is a greater threat because it divides the nation of Israel along family and tribal lines. King David recognized that Israel would come apart and the Israelites would be overrun by other peoples if they started to identify more according to tribe than according to being Israelites.
Now we have more about the complex relationship between David and Joab. Amasa was the commander of Absalom’s army, yet, as part of the agreement to get back the full support of the leaders of Judah, King David made him commander of his army in place of Joab. King David orders Amasa to assemble the entire fighting force of Judah to go after Sheba and gives him a deadline of three days. When Amasa fails to meet that deadline, King David tells Abishai, Joab’s brother, to take the troops David already had assembled and go after Sheba. Notice that King David did not give this mission to Joab, but Abishai took him along anyway. In fact, it appears that Joab was in command. Then, when they meet up with Amasa finally returning Joab greets him as a family member and kills him. We do not really know what Joab’s motivations were for killing Amasa. Perhaps he did it to keep his position as commander of David’s army. Or, something which occurred to me in light of David’s responses to Abishai’s repeated wish to kill Shimei (a response which was directed at both Abishai and Joab), perhaps Joab killed Amasa because he had betrayed King David by siding with Absalom.
Today’s passage ends with te song of praise to the Lord which David sang when he was delivered from his enemies. It is unclear if he sang this song shortly after King Saul’s death, or not until after the victory over Sheba. Or, perhaps he composed it early on and sang it repeatedly throughout his life. In any case, it is a song which contains powerful imagery. David expresses how he was completely overwhelmed by the events of his life. How things had gotten so bad that he could not go on living like that and there was nothing in his power to change them. At that point, David cried out to the Lord for rescue. He sings that God heard his cries and answered them. God burst forth in a manner which made it clear that no obstacle would stand in His way and rescued David from his distress.
I love all of the imagery, but I want to focus on what our behavior and characteristics will reveal about God. If we are faithful, we will see God’s faithfulness. If we act with integrity, we will witness God’s integrity. But, if we are deceitful, we will learn that God is shrewd and that He will not be deceived. No matter how clever you think that you are, you will not outsmart God.
This is probably relatively unique to me, but I always assumed that the battle between David’s and Absalom’s men took place in the vicinity of the city where David took refuge. However, David had fled across the Jordan river and took refuge in a city east of the Jordan. The battle, on the other hand, took place in the forests of Ephraim, which were west of the Jordan river. We learn here what was suggested by Absalom’s rejection of Ahithophel’s advice, Absalom had a terrible understanding of strategy and tactics. First, there was no strategic gain to be had for Absalom in fighting David’s army. Absalom needed to kill David, his father, in order to secure the throne. As long as David was alive Absalom’s hold on the throne was tenuous. David could always raise another army. Second, Absalom had the larger army, so fighting in the difficult terrain of the forest favored David’s army, which was more experienced from top to bottom.
After Joab had killed Absalom Ahimaaz, the son of one of King David’s key allies, wanted to take the news to David. Joab, knowing what David had done to the men who brought him news of King Saul’s death and of Ishbosheth’s death, did not want to send him. Instead, Joab sent an Ethiopian. Joab chose a foreigner because he expected David to have the messenger who brought him word of Absalom’s death killed. Nevertheless, Ahimaaz persisted in wanting to take the nes to David, so that Joab finally let him go. Joab probably thought that the Ethiopian, having left first, would get there first. However, Ahimaaz knew the countryside better and took a less direct, but easier route and got there first. However, Ahimaaz understood that David would not take the news of Absalom’s death well, so only told David that victory had been won and feigned ignorance as to Absalom’s fate. And her is a point to be noted, David did not have the Ethiopian messenger killed because, unlike the previous bearers’ of unwelcome news, the Ethiopian did not claim responsibility for the death.
Now we come to the aftermath of the rebellion. First, we once again see the complex between King David and Joab (and his brother). David goes into mourning over the death of Absalom, depressing his followers who wanted to celebrate their victory. Joab has to confront David and warn him that he had better let his followers know that he appraciates what they have done for him. Then when King David crosses back over the Jordan he is met by Shimei, who begs forgiveness for cursing David. Joab’s brother once more wants to kill Sjimei. And once more King David forbids him from doing so. And once more, King David expresses anger at both Joab and his brother over this, even though Joab is not involved in this scene.
Related to this, Mephibosheth also met King David as he crossed the Jordan. Mephibosheth had essentially been in mourning since David fled Jerusalem, lending credence to his claim that he had tried to join David in his flight but was unable to do so because Ziba did not have someone saddle a donkey for him. Yet, despite Ziba lying to him about Mephibosheth, King David is willing to allow him to keep at least part of the property he gave him when they fled Jerusalem.
Also during David’s flight from Jerusalem he is met by Ziba, a servant of King Saul whom David had made manager of Mephibosheth’s estates. Ziba brought supplies for David. When David asks Ziba where Mephibosheth is Ziba replies that Mephibosheth thought he would gain his grandfather’s throne out of this rebellion. This suggest ungratefulness on the part of Mephibosheth, but perhaps we should take what Ziba said with a grain of salt.
Immediately following the scene with Ziba we have the incident where Shimei curses David as he flees. Joab’s brother, Abishai, wanted to go and kill Shimei for doing so, but David forbade him. In his response to Abishai, David lumped him with Joab. So, here we get yet another view of the complex relationship between King David and Joab and discover that Joab’s brother was part of that complex relationship. And perhaps this incident will shed a little more light on David’s conflict with Joab. I am reaching a little bit here, but we do not have much to go on. We learn later that Shimei is a man of some importance, such that even King Solomon, who needed to do less of a political balancing act than his father (as I will explain when we come to him), had to set a trap and wait for Shimei to fall into it before he could have him killed. This suggests that perhaps David’s problem with Joab and his brother was that they were too direct in dealing with things, making King David’s political balancing act that much more difficult.
Yesterday, I commented on the role King David’s nephew Jonadab played in the events leading up to Absalom’s exile. Today, I noticed that Joab, another one of King David’s nephews, played a significant role in Absalom’s return from exile and reconciliation with King David. Once again we see the complex relationship between King David and Joab. The passage tells us that Joab arranged for the woman from Tekoa to speak with King David because he knew how much David desired for Absalom to return. Was that Joab’s real reason for this? Or was he seeking to secure the return and rehabilitation of the person he perceived as the best candidate to be King David’s successor?
Here Joab is presented as plotting to convince King David to do what he, David, desired to do. The thing I am taking the most note of this year as I read these passages is the palace intrigue around King David. Except it is not just palace intrigue. As I read these passages, King David maintained a complex balance among the different power blocks within his kingdom. We see that Joab made Absalom’s rebellion possible, but Joab did not support that rebellion.
Another thing struck me today. As King David fled Jerusalem ahead of Absalom’s army, he went up the road to the Mount of Olives, the place where Jesus prayed the night before His Crucifixion. The passage tells us that people worshiped God at the summit of the Mount of Olives. And it was from the Mount of Olives that Jesus ascended into Heaven after His Resurrection. While the primary reason that Jesus went to the Mount of Olives to pray the night before His Crucifixion was a matter of the geography of Jerusalem, I am also sure that the symbolism of Jesus mourning His betrayal by Judas the same place the Bible records King David mourning his betrayal is not just happenstance.
