Why did Joab and Abiathar support Adonijah's claim to the throne in 1 Kings 1:7? Historical Setting of 1 Kings 1 Israel stands at a watershed moment. David, advanced in years, has not yet made a public, formal declaration concerning his successor, despite Yahweh’s earlier promise that “Solomon your son shall reign after you” (1 Chronicles 22:9-10). In the absence of clarity, Adonijah—the eldest surviving son after Amnon, Absalom, and Chileab—seizes an opportunity to claim the throne. 1 Kings 1:7 records: “He conferred with Joab son of Zeruiah and with Abiathar the priest, who supported him” . Joab: Military Power Broker Joab, David’s nephew and commander of the army, had long been the king’s indispensable but uneasy ally. • He secured Jerusalem (2 Samuel 12:26-30). • He orchestrated Uriah’s death, obeying David’s darkest order (2 Samuel 11:14-25). • He killed Abner and Amasa, eliminating rivals (2 Samuel 3:27; 20:10). Years of service anchored Joab’s sense of entitlement. Yet David repeatedly distanced himself, replacing him with Amasa (2 Samuel 19:13) and later with Benaiah (anticipated in 1 Kings 2:35). Joab’s backing of Adonijah preserves his military relevance; Solomon, associated with Benaiah, threatened Joab’s position and possibly his life. Abiathar: Priestly Legitimacy Abiathar, sole survivor of the priestly massacre at Nob, carried the ephod to David (1 Samuel 22:20-23) and served alongside Zadok. By the close of David’s reign, priestly duties increasingly favored Zadok (2 Samuel 15:24-29). Aligning with Adonijah was Abiathar’s attempt to restore premier priestly influence. Solomon’s rise, prophesied even before his birth, imperiled his standing. Indeed, Solomon would later depose him (1 Kings 2:26-27), fulfilling judgment on Eli’s house (1 Samuel 2:31-35). Political Calculus and Court Factions Royal succession in the Ancient Near East customarily defaulted to the eldest son. Hebrew narrative reveals several near-parallel attempts: Absalom earlier campaigned for kingship (2 Samuel 15). Adonijah mirrors that strategy—horses, chariots, fifty runners (1 Kings 1:5)—markers of royal pretension. Joab and Abiathar’s support lends military strength and priestly credence, replicating the triad of king, army, and cult. Theological Undercurrents Scripture stresses Yahweh’s sovereign election over primogeniture. Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau, Joseph over Reuben, David over his brothers—each defies cultural expectation. Solomon’s selection (2 Samuel 7:12-14; 1 Chronicles 22:9-10) continues the pattern. Joab and Abiathar’s misalignment flows from neglecting clear divine revelation. Their decision exposes a heart issue: pragmatic power politics eclipsed obedience. Why Joab Supported Adonijah 1. Self-preservation: Solomon’s friendship with Benaiah threatened Joab’s command. 2. Grievance: David’s repeated rebukes and public demotions brewed resentment. 3. Military logic: The eldest viable prince seemed the obvious stabilizing choice, ensuring continuity for the army Joab shaped. 4. Personal covenant: Joab may have negotiated promises with Adonijah (cf. 1 Kings 2:28-34 suggests Joab sensed retribution looming). Why Abiathar Supported Adonijah 1. Familial lineage: As descendant of Eli, Abiathar’s office already rested on a precarious prophecy of replacement (1 Samuel 2:35). Political maneuvering aimed to forestall it. 2. Priestly rivalry: Zadok, of the line of Phinehas, was eclipsing him; a new regime might reverse that trend. 3. Historical loyalty: Abiathar stayed with David during Absalom’s revolt. He perhaps felt entitled to influence the succession, believing his insight superior to prophetic instruction delivered through Nathan. 4. Misreading providence: Abiathar interpreted customary rights of the firstborn above explicit prior divine choice. Scriptural Harmony The narrative knit across Samuel-Kings and Chronicles confirms the same thematic spine: Yahweh exalts the humble and opposes the proud (1 Samuel 2:7-8). Far from contradiction, parallel accounts corroborate each detail, sustained by manuscript fidelity: the Dead Sea Samuel scrolls (4QSam) echo the same power dynamics, showing no textual variance that alters meaning. Early Greek (LXX B) retains Joab and Abiathar’s alignment with Adonijah, underlining transmission accuracy. Archaeological and Historical Corroboration • The Tel Dan Stele (9th century BC) verifies a dynastic “House of David,” grounding Davidic succession in material history. • The Ophel inscriptions (10th-9th century BC) attest to Hebrew administration centered in Jerusalem during the time-frame of Solomon’s coronation. • Egyptian records (Shoshenq I relief, c. 925 BC) list fortified Judean cities matching Solomon’s defensive network (1 Kings 9:15-19), tying regional power transitions to observable stratigraphy. Such finds collectively strengthen confidence that the throne struggle was not mythic embellishment but realpolitik inside a documented dynasty. Providential Outcome Nathan the prophet and Bathsheba act swiftly; David has Solomon anointed by Zadok and proclaimed king (1 Kings 1:32-40). Immediate public acclaim neutralizes Adonijah. Joab and Abiathar’s miscalculation becomes evident. Solomon later judges them: Abiathar exiled, Joab executed for accumulated bloodguilt—justice blended with fulfillment of divine word (1 Kings 2:27, 31-34). Practical and Devotional Takeaways • Discernment: Spiritual leaders must weigh decisions by revealed truth, not expediency. • Authority: Positions of influence (military or priestly) do not license disregard for prophetic certainty. • Providence: God’s redemptive arc advances through flawed agents, yet human rebellion never thwarts His decree. Conclusion Joab and Abiathar’s support for Adonijah stemmed from calculated self-interest, institutional insecurity, and a failure to submit to Yahweh’s explicit promise regarding Solomon. Their story warns against substituting political pragmatism for obedient faith, while simultaneously showcasing the consistency, reliability, and divine superintendence of the biblical record. |
    |