1 kings 1:5-6

My Notes

Was David a bad Father or was Adonijah a bad kid?

I think… probably, yeah. But, it’s a little more complicated than that

First, let’s just address this: in the event where one of your children rapes another, there is no good answer to that problem. You ignore the problem, you’ve decided not to respond to the rape of your daughter, which makes you weak. You try and negotiate a settlement, you’re not punishing the man who raped your daughter enough. You execute the son, you’ve just murdered one of your own children. In the event where one of your children murders another as punishment for said rape, there is no good answer to that problem. Because, it was justified. But, it shatters the family even more than it already was.

We also have to factor a couple other things into this situation. We don’t know a whole lot about Amnon, except for his worst action that he ever commits. So all were left with of him is an awful picture. We also know a lot more about Absolem, which tarnished the validity of his response based in his character that he displays afterwards

I’d suggest two things:

A) After the news reaches David, he’s angry. But, he decides to try and resolve this conflict without destroying Amnon. Because, as I’ve just implied, there is probably more to Ambon’s character than just this. Maybe he feels remorse. Maybe this is out of character behaviour, or maybe it’s because of a nasty situation that was growing under David’s nose. Or, maybe David doesn’t want to kill his son (which I’m sure any fathers out there can relate to that). So, he tries to forgive Amnon, and work through it with his other kids.

But Absolam is furious at this response, and demands immediate vengeance. David says no, and so Absolam takes matters into his own hands and murders his brother as justice. Which breaks David’s heart, as that was exactly the situation he was trying not to avoid. Absolam is banished in response. Absolam, feeling completely betrayed by David and his actions, plots rebellion, and refuses to ever consider making amends with his father again

It’s a heartbreaking situation. Your daughter is raped, maybe because you weren’t paying enough attention to the rivalry that was growing between your kids, and more importantly, you weren’t paying attention to what was going on in your son’s heart. So, your precious princess has been defiled… by your son. A boy who, up until this moment, you probably looked on with pride. You’re angry at this realization, and horrified, and disgusted. You go, and you barge into his chambers. And you can tell from the look on his face that it’s true.

You’re disgusted, and for one minute, you hate your son, the vile, disgusting creature that he is. How could you have not seen it? You wonder if he did this to any of your other daughters. You look at him with disdain, and hatred.

But then, you look in his eyes. He looks so afraid. You’ve seen it in men before. You’ve felt it yourself, maybe when Saul was threatening you and you were alone in the desert. And you can see the eyes of the little boy who once tried to wrestle you off your throne, giggling the whole time.

But… how could he have done this? How could he do such an awful thing? And what are you supposed to do? Rape is punishable by gelding or death. Can you sentence your own little boy to gelding or death?

You want to hate him. Desperately, you’d hoped it wasn’t true. But he’s guilty, you can tell. Your daughter is crying somewhere in the palace. Your son is a monster now, someone you now don’t recognize.

But you think back to when you were his age. And what happened on the field, and how you yourself stole a woman from one of your top commanders. You understand the beast that is your sex drive, and how it’s led you astray. And you look at your son, and secretly, in the deepest place of your heart, you wished that he had been better than you were. And he’s not. And that shames you, because secretly, you’ve felt the same thing before, and it terrified you.

You decide, after many minutes of alternating between yelling and silence… that you won’t kill Amnon. You won’t kill your son. You tell him that you’re not happy, and there will a price to pay. But he’s your son, you won’t punish him with death. Amnon thanks you, blubbering, and you nod along quietly, not really listening. What on earth are you going to do?

So, you go to Tamar, and you gently try and extract the story from her, her version. You hear exactly how he raped her, and it’s so painful to listen to. And you don’t really know why you’re listening, you already knew he was guilty. Maybe you’re just trying to comfort your daughter. So, as she’s sobbing in your arms, you say that you’re so sorry that this happened, and that it’s your fault.

Fast forward. David’s decision not to punish Amnon is met with indignation and fury by Absolam, Tamar’s brother, and your other son. He demands to know why you haven’t ordered his death, and you respond back “You would demand of me that I kill one of my own sons?” He’s right, you know, and the reason it bothers you is because you’re not entirely sure whether you’re making the right decision or not. But, you and Absolam get into an argument, where he demands justice. And you say “I understand why you’re upset. But this would only make matters worse.”

Your son disappears from the court. You don’t really know what he’s going to do, and you hope that he doesn’t make a rash decision. But, you’re so preoccupied with wrestling with what to do with Amnon that it doesn’t occur to you to watch over your hot headed and furious son.

It comes to your attention the next day. Amnon is dead, Absolam killed hon, and has now fled.

So now, you rest, heartbroken. You tried to forgive your son, and as a result, Tamar your daughter now hates you, Absolam your son hates you, and Amnon, rhe one who you were trying to defend because you couldn’t bear to see him dead, is now killed BECAUSE you weren’t soothing enough to the offended party. Heartbroken, angry, and secretly feeling very guilty, David declares that Absolam is no longer welcome in Jerusalem.

To me… this sounds like a dad who is trying to do something really hard. But he doesn’t keep as tight a grip on the situation as he needed to if he was going to spare Amnon. And as a result of his mercy, everybody hates him, whereas before, if he’d just been more ruthless, he wouldn’t have to bear that.

Would I say he’s a bad father? Unaware for the majority of the childhood of what was going on, with terrible repercussions. But when he figures out what’s going on, he extends forgiveness to a son whom everyone else abandoned, because he cares about him. And as punishment for this act, he loses the faith of his daughter, he loses the respect of his son, and the son he spared is murdered for the crime.

I don’t think David was a bad father. I think David was a father who was trying a different way. And it backfired

Difference in Gods permissive will and david being a permissive father?

how can you dish out disipline when you are having trouble with your own personal battles or the same battles? Is this an excuse not to give correction, or does it make you the perfect one to give it? (peter after you have been sifted, you will be on program to do the restoring)

ADONIJAH ad-ə-nīʹjə [Heb. ’aḏōnîyâ, ’aḏōnîyāhû—‘Yahweh is my Lord’]. 1. The fourth son of David, born in Hebron, who attempted to become king (2 S. 3:4; 1 Ch. 3:2; 1 K. 1–2). Aside from Chileab, Adonijah was the oldest living son in David’s last days. During this period Adonijah built up an entourage (1 K. 1:5) and solicited the support of Abiathar the priest and Joab the army commander (1 K. 1:7; 2:22). Just before David died Adonijah made a feast for his supporters at En-rogel, doubtless expecting to conclude it with a coronation ceremony. However, Nathan and Bathsheba secured the succession for Solomon, who was promptly anointed by Zadok the priest at Gihon, near En-rogel. Adonijah and his followers heard the noise and fled from the festal assembly, fearing an attack. Adonijah took refuge at the altar and, having assured Solomon of his loyalty, obtained a promise that he would be spared (1 K. 1:51–53). But after David died Adonijah behaved treasonably (1 K. 2:19–25), and for this was executed by Solomon. Harrison, R. K. (1979–1988). Adonijah. In G. W. Bromiley (Ed.), The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Vol. 1, p. 53). Wm. B. Eerdmans.

1. David’s Declining Health (1:1–4) 1 When King David was old and well advanced in years, he could not keep warm even when they put covers over him. 2 So his servants said to him, “Let us look for a young virgin to attend the king and take care of him. She can lie beside him so that our lord the king may keep warm.” 3 Then they searched throughout Israel for a beautiful girl and found Abishag, a Shunammite, and brought her to the king. 4 The girl was very beautiful; she took care of the king and waited on him, but the king had no intimate relations with her. 1:1 The story opens with David’s physical health all but gone. Once a great fighter, politician, and lover, his circulation is not sufficient to keep him warm, even with the aid of blankets. With death imminent, it is obvious that a new leader must replace David. Who will this person be? How will he be chosen? What kind of character will he possess? 1:2–4 Before these questions are addressed, royal servants attempt to revive the aging monarch. They seek a “young virgin” to nurse the king and to “lie beside him,” which may be better translated “lie in your bosom” (NASB). Their search yields “Abishag, a Shunammite” of exceptional beauty. Indeed she does care for the king and see to his needs, but he has “no intimate relations with her.” Presumably he can no longer do so, which reinforces the emphasis on the king’s irretrievably failing health. If not even a lovely young woman can stir David’s blood, then he obviously is not long for the world. It is important to note, however, that the text makes no mention of senility. His mind is still sound. 2. Adonijah’s Attempt to Become King (1:5–10) While David “is cited for his shivering impotence … his markedly handsome son stands just beyond sight and hearing.” As in nearly every nation, a candidate for the throne presents himself before the old officeholder has had time to die. In this part of the story the candidate is Adonijah, David’s oldest surviving son. Absalom, the thirdborn, dies in his revolt, but not before killing Amnon, the firstborn. The secondborn, Kileab, disappears from the story after the mention of his birth in 2 Sam 3:3. Thus, though Israel has no established accession system, it seems reasonable for Adonijah to assume he will be king. But what kind of man cannot wait for his father to die before seeking power? (1) Adonijah’s Strategy and Character (1:5–6) 5 Now Adonijah, whose mother was Haggith, put himself forward and said, “I will be king.” So he got chariots and horses ready, with fifty men to run ahead of him. 6 (His father had never interfered with him by asking, “Why do you behave as you do?” He was also very handsome and was born next after Absalom.) 1:5–6 These two verses portray Adonijah as an aggressive, self-possessed person. He “put himself forward” would be more literally he was “lifting himself up,” by emphatically stating, “I will be king.” By declaring such intentions he breaks with the Israelite tradition of God choosing the king, then confirming the choice through a prophet’s ministry. Neither Saul nor David sought the throne, yet God told Samuel to select these men for the task (1 Sam 10:9–27; 16:1–13). Not only is his arrogance shown through his “running for office,” but it is further revealed by his choice of “fifty men to run ahead of him.” He acts like a king before being made king. Three reasons for this arrogance are offered. David, whom 2 Samuel 13–19 reveals as a rather ineffective father, never contradicted Adonijah. Adonijah was very handsome and also was the oldest living son. Good looks and a favored status, coupled with parental indulgence, rarely build strong character. Neither do they instill wisdom, as will become evident later in the story. (2) Adonijah’s Supporters (1:7–8) 7 Adonijah conferred with Joab son of Zeruiah and with Abiathar the priest, and they gave him their support. 8 But Zadok the priest, Benaiah son of Jehoiada, Nathan the prophet, Shimei and Rei and David’s special guard did not join Adonijah. 1:7–8 Whatever his faults, Adonijah is able to recruit two powerful supporters: Abiathar the priest and Joab the great general. These two men had been with David since the beginning of his career (1 Sam 22:20; 2 Sam 2:13ff.) Joab was particularly important to David, for he conquered Jerusalem (1 Chr 11:4–6), led Israel’s military triumphs (2 Sam 8:1–14; 10:1–19), and helped David through the Absalom episode. Yet he also murdered two men in cold blood who stood in the way of his personal goals (2 Sam 3:22–39; 20:9–10). These murders could be construed as done in the nation’s best interests, but they ultimately serve Joab’s purposes more than the country’s. Finally, Joab also killed Absalom after David had commanded he be spared (2 Sam 18:1–18), then counseled David to cease mourning his son’s death, lest he lose his loyal soldiers (2 Sam 19:1–8). Joab is decisive, powerful, and politically dangerous. Other influential leaders are either not asked or do not choose to follow Adonijah. Zadok, David’s other priest (2 Sam 8:17), Benaiah, the head of David’s elite guards, the Kerethites and Pelethites (2 Sam 8:18), Nathan, David’s straightforward court prophet, and David’s “special guard,” or “mighty men,” were not part of Adonijah’s inner circle. Thus, Adonijah had some important advocates, but he did not have the unanimous support of every influential leader. (3) Adonijah’s “Coronation” (1:9–10) 9 Adonijah then sacrificed sheep, cattle and fattened calves at the Stone of Zoheleth near En Rogel. He invited all his brothers, the king’s sons, and all the men of Judah who were royal officials, 10 but he did not invite Nathan the prophet or Benaiah or the special guard or his brother Solomon. 1:9 Lacking a clear consensus, Adonijah pushes forward with his plans to become king. He offers sacrifices and invites strategically important persons to a meal, all of which is intended to unite the group. His brothers are included so they can relinquish their right to the throne. The “men of Judah who were royal officials” are invited so that the most prestigious leaders in David’s court can give Adonijah’s claim more validity. 1:10 Those not invited to this premature coronation are prominent persons. Three names are highlighted. Nathan has religious authority, while Benaniah bears the sword. They pose religious and military threats to Adonijah’s plans. Solomon is also mentioned for the first time. This brief phrase “or his brother Solomon” deftly announces Adonijah’s younger brother as potential heir to David’s kingdom. Gray notes that the exclusion of these individuals meant that Adonijah relied on “the strength of his party to liquidate the opposition” rather than on any notion of negotiating peace with them. How will those snubbed respond? 3. Solomon Becomes King (1:11–52) When 1:10 ends, Adonijah sits eating with his supporters, seemingly in possession of his father’s empire. Unfortunately for him, a less-public power play will soon begin. Those he expects to eliminate will move into action. Led by the seasoned prophet/politician Nathan, this group will install Solomon as coregent with his declining father. Before they achieve this goal, however, the plot will become more complicated. Old characters will eventually rouse themselves and determine what younger persons will carry the story forward. House, P. R. (1995). 1, 2 Kings (Vol. 8, pp. 87–90). Broadman & Holman Publishers.

ADONIJAH’S QUEST FOR POWER Then Adonijah the son of Haggith exalted himself, saying, “I will be king”; and he prepared for himself chariots and horsemen, and fifty men to run before him. (And his father had not rebuked him at any time by saying, “Why have you done so?” He was also very good-looking. His mother had borne him after Absalom.) Then he conferred with Joab the son of Zeruiah and with Abiathar the priest, and they followed and helped Adonijah. But Zadok the priest, Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, Nathan the prophet, Shimei, Rei, and the mighty men who belonged to David were not with Adonijah. And Adonijah sacrificed sheep and oxen and fattened cattle by the stone of Zoheleth, which is by En Rogel; he also invited all his brothers, the king’s sons, and all the men of Judah, the king’s servants. But he did not invite Nathan the prophet, Benaiah, the mighty men, or Solomon his brother. —1 Kings 1:5–10 Adonijah, now about thirty-five years old, was David’s fourth son. We know nothing of his mother, Haggith, one of David’s wives. Adonijah was by now the king’s oldest son since Amnon, David’s firstborn, was slain by the order of Absalom. Absalom, after his unsuccessful coup d’état, was in turn killed by Joab’s men; another son, Chileab, is not mentioned in Scripture, probably indicating he died young. This left Adonijah as the oldest, and even though primogeniture had not yet been established as the rule of monarchical succession in Israel, he assumed, as the oldest, he had a right to the throne. Actually, the early Hebrew kings could name whomever they wished as their successors without regard to the age or rank of the heirs. Saying, “I will be king,” Adonijah “exalted himself” (v. 5) and launched his campaign for the crown. This statement uses a participle and should be translated, “was exalting himself,” emphasizing the continuous process of a developing scheme. Adonijah’s actions, therefore, were not spontaneous but premeditated, planned over a period of time, as he watched the encroaching weakness of his father. It is interesting to note that much of his plan for rebellion was identical to the plan his brother Absalom used in his abortive at tempt at overthrowing his father David’s regime. For example, the numbers of chariots, horsemen, and runners are exactly the same as those Absalom recruited in 2 Samuel 15:1. Adonijah obviously took a lesson from his rebellious older brother. “Horsemen” in verse 5 is actually the word horses. Mounted cavalry were not employed by Israel until Solomon’s day, although they were used by Egypt and other cultures earlier. “Men to run before him” is the usual Hebrew terminology for royal bodyguards, similar no doubt to today’s secret service men who run beside the presidential limousine in national parades. Adonijah is described as handsome, a desirable leadership quality in ancient cultures, but he was spoiled by a doting father. “His father had not rebuked him at any time” (v. 6). David may have been a heroic king, but he had a history of paternal weakness toward his sons. The Scriptures tell us he was unable to rebuke Amnon (2 Sam. 13:21) or to discipline Absalom (2 Sam. 18:5), and here he is described as unsuccessful in restraining Adonijah. David may have been so engrossed in his kingly responsibilities that he neglected his sons. Whatever the reason for the failure, it is clear that a child who does not learn early to subordinate his selfish interests to a greater loyalty is left like Adonijah, ill-prepared for life. Think what David could have done for Adonijah if he had taken time to share some of his own rich experiences as a youth. If he had demanded responsibility and accountability, or as verse 6 expresses it, if he had confronted Absalom with the words, “Why have you done so?” Since, as a father, David had failed to teach his son to obey him or the Lord and thereby encouraged him to pursue whatever he wanted regardless of what was right, it is no surprise that Adonijah rebelled. Although he knew Solomon was God’s as well as his father’s choice for a successor, Adonijah was not willing to accept it. The Bible uniformly points out the importance of strong parental discipline in the development of mature, responsible children. It teaches us that the family is the first training ground for trusteeship at every level in life. Sometimes these lessons are presented in the form of negative examples such as Eli’s failure with his children (1 Sam. 3:13) or Samuel’s failure with his (1 Sam. 8:3). At other times the teaching is by direct admonition: He who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly (Prov. 13:24). Do not withhold correction from a child (Prov. 23:13). Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it (Prov. 22:6). And you fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4). One who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence (1 Tim. 3:4). That they admonish the young women … to love their children (Titus 2:4). While unstructured, relaxed theories of parenting have been popular in the past, a new consensus is emerging even among secular psychologists that a firm, loving parental style is best. Public school systems are discovering the same principles and are replacing social promotions and other unstructured policies. Calling for stricter discipline in the classrooms and a return to “old-fashioned” priorities in learning, some school systems have implemented “no pass—no play” rules that require greater accountability from students before they can participate in extracurricular activities. How often so-called new educational developments and parenting styles are in reality rediscoveries of ancient biblical principles. Coconspirators in Adonijah’s attempted coup are named in verse 7. First is Joab, the son of Zeruiah, David’s sister and therefore Adonijah’s cousin. He was a long-time military leader in David’s regime, but he had earned the king’s disfavor by having Absalom, David’s rebellious son, killed and by slaying two trusted leaders, Abner and Amasa (2 Sam. 18:9–17; 3:22–39; 20:8–10). No doubt, David had made Joab feel rejected, especially when he appointed Benaiah to the military post Joab once held. Joab’s professional jealousy degenerated into hate. He wanted to be indispensable. As a fighter, he knew that would never be the case in a peaceful regime, so he rallied behind Adonijah, risking everything on the hope that the pretender to the throne would emerge the winner. Another in Adonijah’s political party was Abiathar the priest. He was the sole survivor of Saul’s massacre of the house of Eli, the hereditary priests of the ark of Shiloh (1 Sam. 22). Abiathar and Zadok had apparently shared the high priesthood between them when David ordered the ark to be brought to Jerusalem (1 Chr. 15:11). For some unknown reason, David preferred Zadok, and Abiathar assumed that his own future under the present monarchy was bleak. He would have a better chance for power under Adonijah as king, so he joined the rebellion. The statement, “They followed and helped Adonijah” in verse 7 is a pregnant construction in Hebrew, meaning literally, “they supported after Adonijah.” Here is a tragic illustration of how a selfish grasping after power can destroy relationships as well as individual personalities. Over the years Joab and Abiathar had developed intimate friendships with their colleagues Benaiah and Zadok. Their fellowship, which had been made closer because of shared dangers and suffering, now crumbled under the sad pressure of petty personal jealousies. As leaders, these two should have been more concerned for the welfare of the king and the nation than for the protection of their own futures. Once a self-centered quest for personal position or power gets into a relationship, it is like a trickle of water in the crack of a huge rock. Even though it appears harmless, when the water freezes in winter it can split even the hardest of stones. To be heroic and effective in a great cause, leaders must suppress side glances toward personal ad vantage and, like Paul, decide, “This one thing I do.” Joab and Abiathar tarnished their sacred commitments, discarded precious friendships, and self-destructed because they thought more of them selves than of God’s will. In verse 8, the list of those not invited to Adonijah’s feast indicates he knew his claim to the throne would be contested. In fact the persons named here and in verse 10 became the nucleus of an opposition party favoring David’s appointment of Solomon as the next ruler. Zadok, Benaiah, Jehoiada, and Nathan are identified later as members of this group. Nothing is known about Shimei and Rei. “The mighty men” were a select group of seasoned soldiers who had fought with the king through the years since his wilderness exploits (2 Sam. 23:8). The Hebrew word gibbōrı̂m is kin to an Arabic word meaning “giant” or “bully.” Here its meaning is primarily “a person of substance.” Combining a religious ceremony with a celebrative announcement party, Adonijah hosted a feast. “Sheep and oxen and fattened cattle” were slaughtered and prepared for his guests gathered by “the stone of Zoheleth, which is by En Rogel” (v. 9). The location of the stone (which is also called “the rolling stone” or “the serpent’s stone”) is most likely the water supply southwest of the Davidic-Jebusite city of Jerusalem in the Kidron Valley slightly lower down than the junction with the Hinnom Valley. Adonijah’s premature celebration is a classic example of counting chickens before they hatch. Such a feast should have climaxed, not initiated his dash for the throne. His quick defeat teaches us to weigh the outcome of our deeds before we commit ourselves to a course of action. It warns us to see a challenge through to completion before we start planning a victory dinner. As Maclaren put it, “They who feast when they should fight are likely to end their mirth with sorrow.” Adonijah was guilty of another offense that is frequently repeated today. He tried to disguise his self-promotion as God’s will. He “exalted himself, saying, ‘I will be king’ ” (v. 5), then planned a religious feast to mask his selfish manipulations hoping they would pass as God’s will. Adonijah is not the first nor the last personality in history to enlist both the military and the church to gain power. More often than not, the plan fails as it did here. It seems clear from his proud claim, “I would be king,” that Adonijah wanted to rule, not serve. How strikingly different was the pattern of Jesus who came “not to be ministered unto, but to minister. Dilday, R., & Ogilvie, L. J. (1987). 1, 2 Kings (Vol. 9, pp. 30–35). Thomas Nelson Inc.

David was now unable to carry on his royal duties, so his son Adonijah took advantage of the situation and proclaimed himself king of Israel. “I will be king!” he announced, all the while realizing that God had appointed Solomon to succeed David (1:17; and see 2:13–15). Adonijah was deliberately rebelling against the will of God. Sad to say, some of David’s confidential advisors fell in with the wicked plot, including Joab (whom David once tried to replace; see 2 Sam. 19:11–15 and 20:4–13) and Abiathar the priest. The treacherous prince followed the example of Absalom by preparing chariots and seeking to impress the people (see 2 Sam. 15:1ff). Wiersbe, W. W. (1993). Wiersbe’s Expository Outlines on the Old Testament (1 Ki 1). Victor Books.

1:5–10. David’s oldest living son, Adonijah, determined to fill the political vacuum. He apparently knew that Solomon, and not he, was David’s intended choice, or he would have been content to let events take their course. But David had not publicly named his successor, so the opportunistic Adonijah decided to make a play for the throne. The description of David’s indulgence of Adonijah has an ominous tone, especially combined with the reference to Absalom. Like Absalom who rebelled against his father, Adonijah was spoiled, handsome, and willing to go behind his father’s back in a bid for personal power. His determination was clear: I will be king. In his play for the throne, Adonijah first surrounded himself with the trappings of power—chariots and horses … with fifty men as military attendants. This was a quasi-military force, using powerful cultural images. He also enlisted some of David’s power brokers, especially two powerful figures, Joab the military leader and Abiathar the religious leader. Third, he held a celebration just outside the city limits of Jerusalem as the final event before presenting himself to the nation as the new king. Those who attended were the people who would make his coup a reality. By their participation in this quasi-coronation meal, they were entering into a covenant with Adonijah. 1:11–27. Adonijah knew that his intentions were not universally acceptable. He had carefully excluded some of those closest to David: the prophet Nathan … Zadok the priest, and Benaiah son of Jehoiada. He had also been careful not to invite his brother Solomon to his celebration. At this point Nathan seized the initiative, fearing that David’s frailty had made him unaware of the seriousness and urgency of events. Nathan was not just a godly and wise man, but the prophet through whom God had revealed his covenant to David. He was not willing to wait passively for the will of God to be done. Aware of the danger posed by men concerned only to further their own agenda, he acted shrewdly and decisively to protect and to promote the purposes of God. Inrig, G. (2003). I & II Kings (M. Anders, Ed.; Vol. 7, pp. 11–12). Holman.

6 And his father had not displeased him †at any time in saying, Why hast thou done so? and he also was a very goodly man; and his mother bare him after Absalom. His father had not displeased him at any time: this is noted as David’s great error, and the occasion of Adonijah’s presumption. Why hast thou done so? he neither restrained him from, nor reproved him for his miscarriages; which was a great sin against that plain law, Lev. 19:17, and severely punished in Eli, which David was not ignorant of, except Adonijah’s, errors were small, or concealed from David. He also: this particle relates, either, first, To Absalom here following, who also was a goodly man. Or rather, secondly, To what goes before, to signify that this was a second ground of his confidence, because his great comeliness made him amiable in the people’s eyes, as his father’s indulgence was the first. After Absalom, i.e. next after Absalom was born of his mother: see 2 Sam. 3:3, 4. Poole, M. (1853). Annotations upon the Holy Bible (Vol. 1, p. 646). Robert Carter and Brothers.

Then Adonijah the son of Haggith exalted himself. Nothing is said as to the origin or rank of Haggith, so that it is probable she was not distinguished by family descent. Adonijah, though David’s fourth son (2 Sam. 3:4; 1 Chr. 3:2), was now the eldest alive; and his personal attractions and manners (cf. 1 Sam. 9:2) not only recommended him to the leading men about court, but made him the favourite of his father, who, though seeing him assume an equipage becoming only the heir-presumptive to the throne (2 Sam. 15:1), said nothing, and his silence was considered by many, as well as by Adonijah, to be equivalent to an expression of consent. It was one of the characteristic weaknesses of David to be doatingly fond of, and culpably indulgent to, his children. To such an excess did he carry his paternal affection, as to be blind to their faults, and never durst rebuke their delinquencies. 6. his father had not displeased him [עֲצָבו, had pained, grieved him; Septuagint, ἀπεκώλυσε, prevented, challenged him] at any time [מִיָמָיוֹ, from his days, all his life (cf. 1 Sam. 25:28; Job 38:12). Jamieson, R. (n.d.). A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments: Joshua–Esther: Vol. II (p. 291). William Collins, Sons, & Company, Limited.