I Kings 1:8-10 · Bible study
1 Kings 1:8-10 Commentary: The Divided Court
Hebrew · 9 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why did Zadok, Nathan, Benaiah, and others refuse Adonijah's feast? This study explores the loyalists who stood by God's chosen successor, Solomon.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The refusal of David's key officials to attend Adonijah's feast exposes his coup as illegitimate and confirms God's choice of Solomon.
- Key words: “Sacrificed” (H2076, zavach, the normal term for offering, indicating religious pretension); “did not call” (H7121, qara, deliberate exclusion of opponents).
- Main debate: Identity of Shimei and Rei, some take them as David's brothers (Barnes); others as court officials (Gill). Also debated: was the feast primarily sacrificial or political?
- Theological theme: God's sovereign choice of a king overrides human ambition and birth order.
- Best use: Teaching on God's providence, the value of faithful loyalty, and the courage to stand against a popular but wrong movement.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
8But Zadok the priest, Benaiah son of Jehoiada, Nathan the prophet, Shimei, Rei, and David’s mighty men would not join Adonijah.
9And Adonijah sacrificed sheep, oxen, and fattened calves near the stone of Zoheleth, which is next to En-rogel. He invited all his royal brothers and all the men of Judah who were servants of the king.
10But he did not invite Nathan the prophet, Benaiah, the mighty men, or his brother Solomon.
WEB World English Bible 2000
8But 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.
9Adonijah killed sheep, cattle, and fatlings by the stone of Zoheleth, which is beside En Rogel; and he called all his brothers, the king’s sons, and all the men of Judah, the king’s servants;
10but he didn’t call Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah, and the mighty men, and Solomon his brother.
KJV King James Version 1769
8But Zadok the priest, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and Nathan the prophet, and Shimei, and Rei, and the mighty men which belonged to David, were not with Adonijah.
9And Adonijah slew sheep and oxen and fat cattle by the stone of Zoheleth, which is by En–rogel, and called all his brethren the king’s sons, and all the men of Judah the king’s servants:
10But Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah, and the mighty men, and Solomon his brother, he called not.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
8But Zadok the priest, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and Nathan the prophet, and Shimei, and Rei, and the mighty men that belonged to David, were not with Adonijah.
9And Adonijah slew sheep and oxen and fatlings by the stone of Zoheleth, which is beside En-rogel; and he called all his brethren, the king’s sons, and all the men of Judah, the king’s servants:
10but Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah, and the mighty men, and Solomon his brother, he called not.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
8and Zadok the priest, and Benaiah son of Jehoiada, and Nathan the prophet, and Shimei, and Rei, and the mighty ones whom David hath, have not been with Adonijah.
9And Adonijah sacrificeth sheep and oxen and fatlings near the stone of Zoheleth, that is by En-Rogel, and calleth all his brethren, sons of the king, and for all the men of Judah, servants of the king;
10and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah, and the mighty ones, and Solomon his brother, he hath not called.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
8But Zadok the priest, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and Nathan the prophet, and Shimei, and Rei, and the mighty men whom David had, were not with Adonijah.
9And Adonijah sacrificed sheep and oxen and fatted cattle by the stone of Zoheleth, which is by En-rogel, and invited all his brethren, the king's sons, and all the men of Judah, the king's servants;
10but Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah, and the mighty men, and Solomon his brother, he did not invite.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
8But Sadoc, the priest, and Banaias, the son of Joiada, and Nathan, the prophet, and Semei, and Rei, and the strength of David's army, was not with Adonias.
9And Adonias having slain rams and calves, and all fat cattle, by the stone of Zoheleth, which was near the fountain Rogel, invited all his brethren, the king's sons, and all the men of Juda, the king's servants:
10But Nathan, the prophet, and Banaias, and all the valiant men, and Solomon, his brother, he invited not.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · I Kings 1:8
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators uniformly see these verses as establishing the fault line in David's court. Those named in verse 8, Zadok the priest, Benaiah the army commander, Nathan the prophet, Shimei, Rei, and David's mighty men, constitute the group that did not support Adonijah's bid for the throne. Keil and Delitzsch observe that Adonijah, as David's eldest surviving son, thought he had a claim, but God had already designated Solomon. The verb “were not” (הָי֖וּ, hayu) in verse 8 is a simple past, but the context makes it a deliberate refusal. Barnes notes that Nathan had been privy to David's intentions (1 Kings 1:24) and would not betray them. Gill points out that Adonijah deliberately excluded Nathan, Benaiah, the mighty men, and Solomon from his feast (v.10), a glaring omission that revealed both his awareness of the opposition and the illegitimacy of his coup. The Cambridge Bible adds that the slaughter of animals (v.9) used the verb usually translated “sacrifice,” so the feast was likely intended as a sacrificial inauguration, giving it religious cover. All commentators agree that the refusal of these key figures to join Adonijah was decisive: the support of the prophet, the priest, and the military commander remained with Solomon, and that loyalty reflected God's own choice.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: God had chosen Solomon to succeed David, and the loyalists' refusal to join Adonijah's feast demonstrated their allegiance to that choice.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| God's choice of Solomon | All traditions agree that God chose Solomon as David's successor (2 Samuel 12:25; 1 Kings 1:13,30). | Whether the choice was based on David's oath (Catholic/Orthodox emphasis) or God's sovereign decree (Reformed emphasis). Both affirm the choice itself. |
| Role of Zadok and Abiathar | Both served as priests under David; Zadok at Gibeon and Abiathar in Jerusalem with the ark. | Which one held the rank of high priest? Jewish tradition and some commentators see Abiathar as high priest (Barnes); others see Zadok as high priest given his later sole office (1 Kings 2:35). |
| Nature of Adonijah's feast | It was a large feast intended to inaugurate Adonijah as king. | Some see it as a religious sacrifice (Clarke, Cambridge) because the verb זָבַח is used; others argue it was a purely political banquet with slaughtered animals (Jamieson-Fausset-Brown). |
| David's parental discipline | David's failure to confront Adonijah contributed to the crisis. | Some see this as a tragic flaw (Matthew Henry); others emphasize that God's plan was never dependent on David's parenting. |
Historical & Cultural Context
David was nearing death, and his weakness invited ambition. Adonijah, the fourth son (2 Samuel 3:4), followed the pattern of Absalom: he “exalted himself, saying, ‘I will be king’” (1:5), prepared chariots and runners, and drew support from Joab and Abiathar the priest. The contrast with verse 8 is sharp. Those who did support Adonijah had been close to David, Joab was his long-time general, Abiathar a high priest. But others stood apart.
The loyalists named here held key roles. Zadok the priest ministered at the tabernacle in Gibeon while Abiathar served in Jerusalem (Barnes; 1 Chronicles 16:39). Benaiah commanded David's bodyguard, the Cherethites and Pelethites (2 Samuel 8:18). His father Jehoiada may have been a Levite, and Benaiah himself was one of David's mighty men (2 Samuel 23:20-22). Nathan the prophet had been David's confessor and advisor, he confronted David over Bathsheba (2 Samuel 12) and later gave Solomon the name Jedidiah (2 Samuel 12:25). Nathan knew God's plan. Shimei and Rei are less known. Barnes suggests they were David's brothers (Shimma and Raddai, 1 Chronicles 2:13-14); Gill offers other possibilities. Their mention shows that even lesser courtiers chose sides. The mighty men were David's elite warriors, a company originally formed during his outlaw days (1 Samuel 25:13).
The location also matters. En-rogel means “fuller's spring,” a well southeast of Jerusalem where fullers washed clothes. Adonijah held his feast there, “by the stone of Zoheleth” (meaning “serpent” or “crawling”). It was near the border of Benjamin and Judah, a site traditionally associated with boundary stones. The feast itself was a mix of political rally and religious ceremony: the verb “slew” (זָבַח, zavach) is the word for sacrificing (Cambridge, Clarke). By offering sacrifices, Adonijah sought divine legitimacy, but the omission of the key loyalists exposed the thinness of his claim.
Textual Notes
The consulted commentaries note no significant textual variants for this passage. The Hebrew text is stable across all major manuscript traditions. In verse 9, the verb זָבַח (zavach) is rendered “slew” by some translations (KJV, WEB) and “sacrificed” by others (BSB, YLT). This is a translation choice rather than a variant; the word carries both the general meaning of slaughter and the technical meaning of religious sacrifice, as the Cambridge Bible notes. The context of a feast with religious overtones makes either rendering appropriate.
Reception History
From the early church through the Reformation, this passage was read as a case study in God's providence over earthly power struggles. Matthew Henry's devotional commentary (1710) drew a pastoral warning: David's lack of discipline toward Adonijah led to near-catastrophe, yet God preserved the line of promise. Reformation-era writers highlighted the faith of Zadok, Nathan, and Benaiah, who risked their positions by refusing a popular rebellion. In Catholic tradition, the passage is cited to illustrate the importance of legitimate authority and the role of religious leaders (priest and prophet) in confirming the right successor. Modern scholars focus on the literary structure: the two lists (v.8 and v.10) bracket the feast narrative, showing that the real power lay not with the celebrants but with those who stayed away. The story continues to be used in discussions about leadership transitions and the courage required to support God's chosen, even when the majority seems to be going another way.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Adonijah's grab for power. While David lay weak, Adonijah exalted himself, assembled chariots, and won over Joab and Abiathar. The coup looked strong, until you saw who was missing.
- The faithful who refused to join. Zadok, Nathan, Benaiah, the mighty men, and others did not attend the feast. They knew God's plan and risked their standing to stay out of a rebellion.
- God's sovereign choice prevails. The exclusion of Solomon was no accident. Within hours, Nathan and Bathsheba would act, and David would officially name Solomon king. Human schemes have no power against the Lord's decree.
Five-point outline
- The setting: David's old age and Adonijah's ambition (1:1-6).
- The conspiracy: Joab and Abiathar defect to Adonijah (1:7).
- The loyal remnant: Those who would not attend the feast (1:8).
- The feast at En-rogel: A coronation disguised as a sacrifice (1:9).
- The exclusion: Why Adonijah did not invite Nathan, Benaiah, or Solomon, and why that sealed his failure (1:10).
Illustration hooks
- A company's board splits when the CEO is incapacitated; the founding family's expressed wishes are honored by only a few executives who refuse to join an internal coup.
- In a family where an aging parent's will is known, one child tries to seize control while the parent still lives, and the sibling left out remains calm because the parent will soon confirm the plan.
- A sports team's assistant coach tries to take over while the head coach recovers, but key players refuse to attend a rival training session; they know the real leader will return.
Questions your congregation is asking
- How do we recognize God's chosen leader when human ambition creates confusion?
- What should we do when a popular movement conflicts with what we know God has said?
- Does this story suggest that David's failure to discipline his children set the stage for this crisis?
Leading a Discussion
This passage drops us into a tense moment of transition. David is dying, and his son Adonijah is taking matters into his own hands. But not everyone follows. A small group of key leaders refuses to join the feast at En-rogel. Their names and their absence tell us that God's plan for Solomon is still on track, even when it looks like a coup is succeeding.
Discussion questions
- Make a list of everyone named in verses 8-10. What do you notice about the two groups?
- Why would Adonijah invite “all his brothers, the king's sons, and all the men of Judah” but leave out Nathan, Benaiah, the mighty men, and Solomon?
- What did Nathan, Benaiah, and Zadok have in common that made them stand apart from Joab and Abiathar?
- How does Adonijah's feast (v.9) function as both a political rally and a religious ceremony? Why would he want both?
- Read verse 11-14. How does Nathan's immediate response show that he expected this showdown?
- In what ways can human ambition mask itself as devotion to God? Where do we see that today?
- What does this passage teach about the courage of being part of a faithful minority?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| II Samuel 7:2 | the king said to Nathan the prophet, “See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but God’s ark dwells within curtains.” |
| II Samuel 7:4 | That same night, Yahweh’s word came to Nathan, saying, |
| II Samuel 8:17 | Zadok the son of Ahitub and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar were priests, Seraiah was scribe, |
| II Samuel 8:18 | Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over the Cherethites and the Pelethites; and David’s sons were chief ministers. |
| II Samuel 12:1 | Yahweh sent Nathan to David. He came to him, and said to him, “There were two men in one city: the one rich, and the other poor. |
| II Samuel 12:15 | Then Nathan departed to his house. Yahweh struck the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and he was very sick. |
| II Samuel 20:25 | Sheva was scribe, Zadok and Abiathar were priests, |
| II Samuel 23:8 | These are the names of the mighty men whom David had: Josheb Basshebeth a Tahchemonite, chief of the captains; he was called Adino the Eznite, who killed eight hundred at one time. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
9 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke sees Adonijah's slaughter of sheep and oxen as a calculated mix of royal feast and sacrifice, giving his rebellion a religious veneer. By pretending to receive divine backing, he tried to make his claim to the throne look legitimate in the people's eyes.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes clarifies the unusual arrangement of two priests by proposing that Abiathar served as the actual high priest at the ark in Zion, while Zadok officiated at the tabernacle in Gibeon. This explains their parallel roles rather than a single high priest.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator notes that Adonijah knew David had chosen Solomon as his successor, yet deliberately staged a solemn sacrificial feast at En-rogel to assert his own claim. The specific location, identified as a fuller's washing place near Jerusalem, and the sacrificial nature of the slaughter underscore the calculated challenge to David's intention.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Notes point out that Adonijah's plot was no mere celebration but a calculated rebellion: he deliberately excluded Zadok the priest, Nathan the prophet, Benaiah the commander, the royal guard, and Solomon the rightful heir. Those loyal to David's chosen succession were never invited.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill notes that Adonijah deliberately excluded Nathan, Benaiah, David's bodyguards, and Solomon from his feast. Nathan had already prophesied Solomon's succession, so Adonijah knew he could not be won over. The omission reveals the conspiracy was openly set against God's declared will.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB stresses that Adonijah's feast at En-rogel was a calculated political event, not a mere celebration. He points out existing rivalries among David's officials, with each supporting opposite royal candidates, and sees the lavish feast as an attempt to build a party to claim the throne.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch highlights that Adonijah's bid for the throne was not merely personal ambition but a direct challenge to God's sovereign right to choose Israel's king, since the Lord had already designated Solomon before his birth. David's lifelong failure to discipline his son encouraged this presumption, and the conspiracy proceeded despite clear knowledge of divine will.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange argues that the opening episode describes a medical remedy, not a sexual arrangement. Physicians prescribed a young attendant to restore David's lost body heat, and the text explicitly states David did not know Abishag. This detail is included to explain why Adonijah later sought to marry her in a bid for the throne.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry notes that David's failure to ever correct Adonijah fueled his son's ambition and self-exaltation. He suggests David was not unaware of Adonijah's faults but silently grieved them instead of intervening, turning what might have been a jewel into a thorn.