Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Kings 2:9
Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for thou [art] a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him; but his hoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood.
9. hold him not guiltless ] i.e. Be sure not to let him go unpunished. Find out some good reason for vengeance to be taken on him. We are not to wonder at these injunctions of David, which were not unnatural, both for the satisfaction of his own feelings and for providing for the security of Solomon’s throne. Joab was a dangerous man to be left alive, and Shimei, with Oriental fickleness, would curse Solomon as readily as he had cursed David, should a reverse of fortune come upon him. Nor are we to look for New Testament virtues in even the best men of the older covenant. The Christian thinks it nobler to forgive, following the lessons of his master, but what David saw of Christ was in the less clear vision of faith, and neither he nor his people are to be expected to rise in any great degree towards the nobility of Christian forgiveness. Yet David was very generous toward Saul. He seems to have become less forgiving in his old age, though doubtless he was thinking chiefly of Solomon’s safety.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
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 1Ki 2:36-46.)
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 9. Hold him not guiltless] Do not consider him as an innocent man, though I have sworn to him that I would not put him to death by the sword; yet as thou art a wise man, and knowest how to treat such persons, treat him as he deserves; only as I have sworn to him, and he is an aged man, let him not die a violent death; bring not down his hoary head to the grave with blood. So Solomon understood David, and so I think David should be understood; for the negative particle lo, in the former clause, hold him NOT guiltless, should be repeated in this latter clause, though not expressed, his hoary head bring thou NOT down; instances of which frequently occur in the Hebrew Bible. See Dr. Kennicott’s note at the end of this chapter. 1Kg 2:46.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Hold him not guiltless; though I have spared his life, do not treat him as an innocent person, neither let him go wholly unpunished.
Thou art a wise man, and therefore wilt easily find out just occasions to chastise him, especially considering his perverse and wicked disposition.
What thou oughtest to do unto him; how to punish him, not without just cause, and yet without any violation of my oath, or reflection upon me, or upon religion for my or thy sake.
With blood, i.e. with the effusion of his blood; with a bloody or violent death.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
9. for thou art a wise manSolomonhad given early indications of wisdom before his miraculous endowmentwith the heavenly gift (see 1Ki3:11), and his own sagacity would dictate the course that shouldbe followed in any new offense that Shimei might commit.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Now therefore hold him not guiltless,…. Do not look upon him as an innocent person; and if he commits an offence against thee, as he has against me, do not acquit him as I have done:
for thou [art] a wise man; so it seems he was before the appearance of the Lord to him at Gibeon, even before his father’s death he had given some proofs of it to David himself:
and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him; to watch and observe him, and, if found offending, to punish him according to the rules of justice, and the laws of the land:
but his hoary head bring thou down to the grave with blood; spare him not on account of his age, but put him to death whensoever he shall be found guilty, let him not die a natural death.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
9. His hoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood Dr. Kennicott tries to make this passage mean precisely the opposite of what it says by connecting it with the first sentence of the verse, and understanding the negative in that sentence to be carried over and implied in this. But the passages he quotes as grammatical parallels are not at all relevant, for their connexion is so close that no one can mistake the meaning, whilst here the two sentences he proposes to link together in the same way are separated by two intervening affirmative sentences. Then, the ground of this untenable criticism is the assumption that David desired to bind Solomon under the same oath to protect the life of Shimei that he himself had made at Jordan. 2Sa 19:18. But if the honour and dignity of the kingdom called for the life of the bloody Joab, so did it also for the punishment of this blasphemous Benjamite; and this David’s words most clearly imply. He leaves it, however, to Solomon’s wise judgment to decide what his penalty shall be; and Solomon, though at first disposed to let him live and die in peace, was at length obliged in justice to bring down his gray head to the grave with blood. See 1Ki 2:36-46.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“ Now therefore do not hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man, and you will know what you ought to do to him, and you shall bring his hoar head down to Sheol with blood.”
Thus Solomon was not to look on Shimei as an ‘innocent’, as though there was no guilt in him, for he was guilty through and through. And being a wise man Solomon would know what he ought to do to him whenever the opportunity arose, because he was a latent rebel who could never be trusted. It was true that he was already old (‘his hoar head’), but Solomon was not to make that an excuse for delay. He was to arrange for his execution as soon as he had legal reasons for doing it. It should be noted that in the case of both Joab and Shimei David did not order their immediate execution. He simply warned Solomon of what dangerous men they were, and advised him to watch them like a hawk, and if the time ever did come when it became necessary, to deal with them in his wisdom as soon as there was any sign of disloyalty. If we feel a little uneasy about David’s words we must remember that his agents would have kept him fully in touch with the current behaviour of both men, and that he therefore no doubt had sound grounds for his advice.
Those who are familiar with 2 Samuel will recognise that David’s advice has been limited to persons fully described there, which is probably why they are mentioned in detail here. We may presumably assume that there were other names on David’s list whom Solomon was also warned against, but we are not told about them. He was seeking to warn Solomon about all the ‘dangerous men’ in his kingdom.
1Ki 2:10
‘ And David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David.’
Shortly after giving this advice to his son David died. ‘Slept with his fathers’ simply means the same thing as ‘gathered to his fathers’ in Genesis. It indicated that he had ‘joined’ them in the grave. But it does not mean that they necessarily shared the same tomb, for David was buried in the city of David. It is a euphemism for death. He had gone like all who had gone before him.
Jerusalem was ‘the City of David’ because it had been captured by David’s private army. It was thus seen as his personal possession, and it is regularly spoken of independently of Israel and Judah, even at the time of Jesus (Mat 3:5). As for the tomb of David Josephus tells us that John Hyrcanus and Herod the Great both rifled the outer chambers of David’s tomb but left the central part where the body lay intact. The tomb was referred to as still existing in Act 2:29.
1Ki 2:11
‘ And the days that David reigned over Israel were forty years; he reigned seven years in Hebron, and he reigned thirty three years in Jerusalem.”
We have reiterated in these words what we learned in 2Sa 5:4-5, that David had reigned for ‘forty years’, seven of those being in Hebron and thirty three in Jerusalem. It will be noted that all the numbers are significant, seven indicates divine perfection, thirty three indicates intensified completeness (a multiple of three), and forty signifies a full generation. It is telling us therefore that on the whole David enjoyed a complete and full reign before YHWH (his actual period of reign in Hebron was seven years and six months – 2Sa 5:5). An important chapter in Israel’s history was over.
1Ki 2:12
‘ And Solomon sat on the throne of David his father, and his kingdom was established greatly.’
But an equally important chapter in Israel’s history had also begun. Solomon now sat on the throne of his father, and his kingdom was firmly and strongly established. (Summary verses like this are regularly found from Genesis onwards. They were a normal literary form in Israel. There is nothing especially ‘Deuteronomic’ about them).
One important lesson of this passage is that whatever we are appointed to do we should seek in it to serve God with all our being, and ensure that we do it in a way that is pleasing to him. We should indeed note the contrast between the charge given to Solomon and the behaviour of men like Joab and Shimei. It is a reminder that what a man sows he will also reap, whether for good or bad.
A second lesson we learn from this is that we should ensure that we take the trouble to warn one another where there might be danger threatening of which someone might be unaware, in our case it refers especially to spiritual danger. Many a person could have been saved from grief if they had been duly warned of the dangers of sin and of the untrustworthiness of others. The New Testament letters are full of such warnings.
SECTION 2. The Life Of Solomon, Its Triumphs And Disasters ( 1Ki 2:13 to 1Ki 11:43 ).
This section commences with a planned rebellion against Solomon’s kingdom on behalf of three people and closes with two rebellions and a potential rebellion against Solomon’s kingdom. After the initial rebellion it then goes on to build up a picture of Solomon’s successes and splendour, interwoven, however, with indications of how they carried within them the seeds of their own destruction, and ends with explaining the major reasons that led YHWH to desert him. On the one hand therefore the picture is one of great success. On the other there are indications that all is not quite well.
This brings us to one remarkable fact about the reign of Solomon, and that is that although he was helped to the throne by Nathan the prophet (1 Kings 1) during the life of David, and it is through the writings of Nathan the prophet that we know much about his reign (2Ch 9:29), there is no indication anywhere of the activity of the prophets during his reign, even though the final verdict on him was that ‘he did what was evil in the sight of YHWH’ (1Ki 11:6). Throughout the account of his life he only has qualified approval, for there are continual indications of something not quite right, and yet no prophetic voice comes to warn him. Nor is any prophetic voice connected with the building or dedication of the Temple. Given the continual reference to prophets throughout the Book of Kings this must be seen as quite surprising. Was this because he was so confident in his own prophetic ability that he had somehow silenced the prophets. Had they been side-lined and indeed not included within the ministry of the new Temple? Why was the voice of prophecy silent? Towards the end of his reign Ahijah was to be found in Shiloh informing Jeroboam that through him Solomon’s house was to be punished (1Ki 11:29), and when Rehoboam commenced his reign, Shemaiah the prophet came to warn him against civil war with Israel (1Ki 12:22), but no prophetic voice ever spoke directly to, or gave warning to, Solomon. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that this indicates that in some way the prophets were suppressed and prevented from speaking during his reign, possibly because, with his great wisdom, he saw them as unnecessary.
Overall Analysis.
a
b Solomon banishes Abiathar to his estate in Anathoth and passes judgment on Joab because of their act of rebellion and attempt to cause trouble and do mischief to Solomon, reducing the status of Abiathar and sentencing Joab to death (1Ki 2:26-35).
c Shimei is confined to Jerusalem but breaks his covenant with Solomon by visiting Gath, from which he returns and is sentenced to death (1Ki 2:36-46 a).
d An introductory snap summary of Solomon’s glories, which, however, contains criticism on the religious level because of worship in high places (1Ki 2:46 to 1Ki 3:4).
e A description of the divine provision of God-given wisdom to Solomon by YHWH, which is then illustrated by an example (1Ki 3:5-28).
f A description of the magnificence of Solomon’s court, and the prosperity enjoyed by Judah and Israel as a whole, which is brought out by a description of his administration of Israel and of the quantity of provisions resulting from its activities, which were regularly consumed by the court, followed by a brief summary of Judah and Israel’s prosperity (1Ki 4:1-28).
g A description of the great practical wisdom of Solomon as contrasted with that of the great wise men of the Ancient Near East (1Ki 4:29-34).
h A description of the building of Solomon’s grand and magnificent Temple, a venture which was one of the ways in which great kings regularly demonstrated their greatness, which however resulted in his calling up compulsory levies of Israelites for the work, including a description of the building of Solomon’s own magnificent palace (1Ki 5:1 to 1Ki 7:12).
i A further expansion on the building of the Temple in terms of Hiram its builder and his innovations (1Ki 7:3-51).
j A description of the dedication of the Temple in which Solomon refers to YHWH’s covenant with David (1Ki 8:1-21).
k A description of Solomon’s intercession before YHWH which made all the people rejoice and be glad (1Ki 8:22-66).
j A description of the renewal of the conditional everlasting covenant by YHWH concerning the everlastingness of his family’s rule which was, however, accompanied by warnings of what the consequences would be of falling short of YHWH’s requirements (1Ki 9:1-9).
i A description of Solomon’s generosity towards Hiram in giving him cities, which was, however, at the same time depleting Israel of some of its own prosperous cities which were a part of the inheritance of YHWH (1Ki 9:10-14).
h A description of Solomon’s further magnificent building programme, which involved making slave levies on tributary nations (1Ki 9:15-25).
g A description of Solomon’s trading activities which included a visit from the Queen of Sheba to test out the wisdom of Solomon, which resulted in him giving her splendid gifts (1Ki 9:26 to 1Ki 10:13).
f Further details of Solomon’s great wealth and prosperous trading (1Ki 10:14-29).
e A description of Solomon’s folly with examples illustrating his lack of wisdom (1Ki 11:1-8).
d YHWH’s anger is revealed against Solomon because he worships in illicit high places and he is warned that YHWH will reduce the kingdom ruled by Solomon’s house down to Judah and one other tribe (1Ki 11:9-13).
c Hadad the Edomite flees to Egypt and returns to Edom on hearing of the deaths of David and Joab in order to ‘do mischief’ (1Ki 11:14-22).
b Rezon becomes leader of a marauding band and becomes king in Damascus and reigns over Syria causing trouble and mischief for Solomon (1Ki 11:23-25).
a Jeroboam becomes Solomon’s taskmaster over Judah and is informed by Ahijah the prophet that he is to supplant Solomon and become king over ten of the tribes of Israel at which Solomon seeks to kill him but he escapes to Egypt until the death of Solomon (11. 26-43).
We note first that the section opens with a description of three rebels and how Solomon disposed of them, and closes with a description of three rebels and how Solomon failed to deal with them. In ‘a’ Adonijah sought to supplant Solomon, and in the parallel Hadad is promised that he will supplant the house of Solomon in regard to ten out of the twelve tribes of Israel. In ‘b’ Abiathar and Job sought to cause mischief for Solomon, and in the parallel Rezon caused mischief for Solomon. In ‘c’ Shimei went abroad and returned to be treated as a traitor, and in the parallel Hadad the Edomite went abroad and returned to cause Solomon continual trouble. In ‘d’ YHWH was angry because Solomon and Israel worshipped in illicit high places, and in the parallel the same applies. In ‘e’ we have a description of Solomon’s wisdom and an example of his wisdom, and in the parallel we have a description of Solomon’s folly and examples of his folly. In ‘f’ we have a description of the wealth that poured into Solomon’s court from taxation, and in the parallel we have a description of how wealth poured in through trading. In ‘g’ the great wisdom of Solomon is described in comparison with other wise men, and in the parallel the Queen of Sheba tested out and admired the wisdom of Solomon. In ‘h’ we have a description of Solomon’s building projects and in the parallel a description of further building projects. In ‘i’ we have a description of Hiram the builder’s contribution towards the building of the Temple, and in the parallel Hiram the king received his reward for the building of the Temple. In ‘j’ Solomon reminded the people of the covenant that YHWH had made with David and in the parallel he himself is reminded of God’s covenant with David. Centrally in ‘k’ we have a description of Solomon’s great prayer to YHWH on the dedication of the Temple.
To some extent this description of the life of Solomon is based on 2 Samuel’s description of the life of David in that, playing down chronology, they both commence their descriptions of their reigns with incidents that eulogise the two monarchs and end by describing incidents that bring them into disrepute. But there is a subtle difference between the two, for while in the account of David’s life we are given the impression that underlying all that he did was a great love for YHWH, so that he truly repented his failings, in the case of Solomon there are continual hints that his love for YHWH is more on the surface, and that his greatest love was himself.
Consider, for example, the following;
Solomon is accused from the beginning of worshipping in disapproved high places (1Ki 3:3).
The writer deliberately omits the name of Solomon’s Egyptian princess presumably as a sign of disapproval of his marriage to her (1Ki 3:1).
The seven years of building the Temple is deliberately contrasted with the thirteen years taken over Solomon’s palace complex (1Ki 6:38 to 1Ki 7:1).
The writer indicates that Solomon did not introduce the Egyptian princess into apartments in his own house until that had ceased to house the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord (2Ch 8:11), presumably because he recognised that it would not be fitting in view of her penchant for pagan religion (1Ki 9:24; 1Ki 11:1-8).
He keeps emphasising the need for Solomon to continue to walk rightly before YHWH with a warning of the consequence if he fails to do so (1Ki 8:25; 1Ki 8:58; 1Ki 9:4), knowing perfectly well that he did fail to do so.
There was no prophetic voice to warn him when he failed or went astray.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Ki 2:9 Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for thou [art] a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him; but his hoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood.
Ver. 9. Hold him not guiltless. ] But when he shall have “added iniquity to his iniquity,” pay him home for the new and the old together. It hath been before observed, that sin may sleep a long time, like a sleeping debt, not called for of many years.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
for. Note the parenthesis as indicated. Figure of speech Epitrechon.
but = neither, as in Psa 38:1, the second negative being omitted, as is frequently the case. Literally “and [not]”. See Psa 9:18 (Revised Version nor); 1Ki 38:1 (neither); 1Ki 75:5. Pro 24:12; Pro 25:27. Isa 38:18. The Ellipsis must be supplied here, as it is in the above passages. The Hebrew Vav (?) is disjunctive (as well as conjunctive), and is frequently translated “or” (see note on Jdg 11:31), and with a negative “nor” and “neither”, as it should be here, &c. Solomon obeyed David’s former alternative and did not “hold him guiltless” (1Ki 2:36); but punished him for a fresh offence (verses: 1Ki 2:42-46).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
hold him: Do not consider him as an innocent man; for, as thou art a wise man, and knowest how to treat such persons, treat him as he deserves; only, as I have sworn to him that I would not put him to death, “bring not his hoar head down to the grave with blood.” So Solomon understood David; for, after he had commanded Joab to be slain, in obedience to his father, he sent for Shimei, and knowing he ought to be well watched, he confined him to Jerusalem for the rest of his life, and so it appears David should be understood; for the negative particle lo, in the former clause, “hold him not guiltless,” should be repeated in the latter clause, though not expressed; instances of which frequently occur in the Hebrew Scriptures. (See note on Jdg 5:30. 1Sa 2:3. Psa 1:5, Psa 9:18, Psa 38:1, Psa 75:5. Pro 5:16, Pro 24:12, etc). This is the view taken of the subject by Dr. Kennicott, and it seems the best and most correct mode of interpreting the text. Exo 20:7, Exo 22:28, Job 9:28
wise: 1Ki 3:12, 1Ki 3:28
his: 1Ki 2:6, Gen 42:38, Gen 44:31
with: Num 32:23
Reciprocal: 2Sa 16:5 – whose name 2Sa 19:23 – Thou shalt 1Ki 2:36 – Shimei Psa 45:9 – upon Pro 15:20 – wise Pro 19:5 – unpunished Pro 23:24 – father
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Ki 2:9. Now therefore hold him not guiltless Though I spared his life, do not treat him as an innocent person, nor consider him as one reconciled to my family, and to thy succession to the throne. He is Shimei still, and wants nothing but a fair opportunity to declare it. Clear him not, therefore, as I did, if thou findest him guilty of any mal-practices; but his hoar head bring down, &c. Cut him off as an old offender and dangerous enemy, to secure thy own peace, and the safety of thy government. In this sense Josephus understands the words. But, certainly, Davids telling Solomon, that he sware to Shimei he would not put him to death for his outrage and treason, is a demonstrative proof that he did not advise Solomon to put him to death for the crime that he himself had solemnly forgiven; for can any one imagine David would tell Solomon that he had sworn not to put Shimei to death, and in the same breath order him, in defiance of his oath, to be put to death? If he had intended that Solomon should immediately put him to death, there would have been neither reason nor sense in the words, Thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him. For to what purpose was it to tell Solomon that he knew how to behave to Shimei, if Davids command was immediately to cut him off, and Solomon understood him in that sense? But it is certain Solomon did not understand his father in that sense, by his ordering him to build a house for himself in Jerusalem, (1Ki 2:36,) as well as from the different manner in which he treated Shimei and Joab. The fact is, David advised his son to keep a strict watch over Shimei, and to put him to death only, if, on any new offence, he should again forfeit his life; and this, it is hoped, has been made appear to be the truth of the case. Now, how is this inconsistent with piety, or the advice of a prince on his death-bed? It is true, forgiveness of enemies is a duty, provided they cease to become our enemies; but no man is obliged, by any law, so to forgive an enemy, continuing such, as not to take the proper methods to guard against the effects of his enmity, and bring him to justice, if no other method will prove effectual. Much less is a prince obliged so to forgive an implacable enemy to his crown and government, and one who is likely to disturb the settlement of the crown in his successor, as not to order the successor to be upon his guard against him, and punish him, when guilty, according to his demerits. Such a caution and order is what he owes to his people; he may die as a private person, in charity with all mankind, and forgive every private injury against himself; and yet, as a prince, advise what is necessary for the public good after his decease, and even the execution of particular persons, if, by abusing the lenity and respite they once received, they should be guilty of new and capital offences. Chandler. Doctor Waterland, Le Clerc, and Calmet, give the same interpretation with Doctor Chandler. The reader will probably think that the above reasoning sufficiently justifies David in this particular, even on supposition that the text is rightly translated, which, however, Dr. Delaney is of opinion it is not. The Hebrew particle, , vau, he thinks, ought to have been rendered here, as in all similar cases, not connectively, but disjunctively, as it is Pro 30:8, and in many other places. Agur, says he, beseeches God to keep him from the extremes of poverty and wealth. If the particle vau were to be interpreted here connectively, the petition would run thus: Give me not poverty and riches. Every one sees the absurdity of this petition; and therefore the translators rightly rendered it, Give me neither poverty nor riches. In the same analogy, the passage in question, rightly translated, will stand thus: Now, therefore, neither hold him guiltless, (for thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him,) nor his hoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood. This advice, in this sense, is full of humanity, as well as wisdom, and Solomon (we see) understood and observed it in this sense, and in no other.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2:9 Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for thou [art] a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him; but his hoar head bring thou down to the grave with {g} blood.
(g) Let him be punished with death, see 1Ki 2:46.