17. Zadok. Here Zadok and Ahimelech are listed as priests, evidently high priests, since the list comprises the highest officials of the kingdom. Zadok has already appeared earlier in the history of David’s reign, where he is named jointly with Abiathar in connection with the bringing of the ark to Jerusalem (1 Chron. 15:11). During David’s reign the two are repeatedly named as colleagues, apparently equal.
Three reasons have been suggested as to why David followed the seemingly strange procedure of having two high priests: (1) The two priests represented the two lines descended from Aaron’s sons Eleazar and Ithamar respectively (see 1 Chron. 24:1-6, where Zadok and Abiathar’s son, Ahimelech, are mentioned). (2) In reuniting Judah and Israel after a long war, David may have hoped to cement the unity of national religious sentiment by dividing the high priesthood between the two houses. The priestly line of Abiathar had been almost wiped out by Saul (1 Sam. 22:9-20) for help given to David, but the branch represented by Zadok remained faithful to Saul, at least until David became king of all Israel (1 Chron. 12:23-28). (3) The national worship of Jehovah was not yet centralized, for the ark was at Jerusalem, and the tabernacle at Gibeon, where it had been taken after the massacre at Nob; therefore there was need for two high-ranking priests, and Zadok is specifically mentioned as ministering at Gibeon (1 Chron. 16:39, 40). For the history of Zadok and his partners in office, see the next section on Ahimelech.
Ahimelech. Mentioned as the son of Abiathar not only here but also in the parallel passage of 1 Chron. 18:16 (spelled “Abimelech”), and in 1 Chron. 24:6, which refers to a later occasion. But David’s joint high priests (see on “Zadok,” above) are repeatedly named as “Zadok and Abiathar” throughout his life, and even at the beginning of Solomon’s reign. Therefore the mention of Zadok and Ahimelech in the present verse and in Chronicles has raised speculation about “scribal errors” and “confused names,” especially since Ahimelech is called the son of Abiathar, and Abiathar the son of Ahimelech.
But there is no need to assume any errors. Critics do not always take into account the fact that their supposed difficulty may as readily arise from the lack of complete information as from a mistake on the part of the ancient writer or his copyists. Scattered references to several generations of a priestly family do not constitute a complete narrative. For example, let us imagine a foreigner, unfamiliar with American history, reading a book on American politics. He might be puzzled to understand references to Cleveland as the President following Benjamin Harrison, along with other statements that he preceded Harrison. If he read the whole history of that period, he would find that both are correct.
The statements about Ahimelech, Abiathar, and Ahimelech permit the following reconstruction of the events. The Ahimelech who gave the shewbread to the fugitive David at Nob was the son of Ahitub (1 Sam. 22:9-12), and was a descendant of Eli, for his son Abiathar fulfilled the prophecy concerning the house of Eli (1 Kings 2:27). According to the genealogy of 1 Sam. 14:3, Ahimelech must have been an old man when he helped David. His son Abiathar might also have been high priest at the same time (see on Mark 2:26), if he held the office jointly with his father. Or he may have been the functioning high priest while his father was “high priest emeritus” as was evidently the relationship between Eli and his sons and between Annas and Caiaphas in the time of Christ (see on Luke 3:2). When Saul had the priests of Ahimelech’s family slain, Abiathar escaped with the ephod, the symbol of his office (see on Ex. 28:6-30), and became adviser and priest to the outlawed David (1 Sam. 22:20; 23:6, 9; 30:7). Abiathar and Zadok are again mentioned as joint high priests in connection with the festal ceremony of bringing the ark of God to Jerusalem (1 Chron. 15:11, 12). Henceforth Zadok and Abiathar are repeatedly named together as “the priests” in the latter part of David’s life (2 Sam. 15:29, 35, 36; 17:15; 19:11; 20:25), and even early in Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 4:4).
After the victories of David’s armies over various foreign foes, the consolidation of the kingdom, and the secure establishment of domestic justice, as described in the present chapter ( 1-15), we find a list of David’s highest officials. But here are included the names of Zadok and Ahimelech, “the priests,” as in the parallel passage (1 Chron. 18:16). Abiathar was apparently replaced for a time by his son. There is nothing to indicate how long Ahimelech held this office, or why it was not permanent. Perhaps he was made priest temporarily, during a time when his father was in poor health. Perhaps the older man may have been brought out of intended retirement by unexpected developmentsâpossibly Absalom’s rebellion. Though the Bible does not inform us on these matters, there could have been changes in the priesthood for a number of reasons. There is no need to assume a scribal error.
Once more, years later, we find Ahimelech participating in a public ceremony. This was preceding the coronation of Solomon, when the aged David assigned the duties of the Levites in the future service of the anticipated Temple. Lots were cast before David and before “Zadok the priest, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar” (1 Chron. 24:1-3; 6, 31) as representatives of the two branches of the family of Aaron. It is not at all surprising that on this occasion Abiathar was not present, for he had but recently been active in Adonijah’s attempt to seize the throne (1 Kings 1:5-7, 19). In his absence it was natural that his son Ahimelech should function as the head of the house of Ithamar, opposite Zadok of the house of Eleazar. So the linking of his name with Zadok here does not require another change in the office of high priest. Ahimelech is not called a priest, although he is mentioned three times (1 Chron. 24:3, 6, 31). Zadok alone was anointed high priest at Solomon’s coronation (1 Chron. 29:22).
Abiathar is still named, however, in the first list of high officials at the beginning of Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 4:4; 1, which implies that this list refers to the beginning of the reign), that is, before David’s death. Solomon probably retained him in office out of respect for David’s esteem for him as an old friend and counselor. At least he did not depose Abiathar from the priesthood until after David’s death, and then not until Adonijah made what Solomon considered to be another threatening move (1 Kings 2:22, 26, 27). Thenceforth Zadok was the sole high priest (1 Kings 2:35).
Thus it is evident that the various accounts are complementary, not contradictory, and hence require no revision.
The scribe. Evidently a high position, comparable to that of secretary of state (see 2 Kings 12:10; 18:37; 19:2).