Summary

David’s final instructions regarding Solomon’s ascension to the throne are given in this verse. David says to the assembled servants, You shall come up after him, and we have the right to ask, Come up where? The question demands the answer, Jerusalem. Jerusalem was the capital of the kingdom of Israel, the location of the king’s throne, and the central place of worship with the presence of the ark of the covenant within its walls.

This brings another question that we may not be able to fully answer. Why did David direct that the anointing should take place outside Jerusalem? Though I said that we may not be able to give a full answer, there are profitable observations to consider. First, an anointing inside the city might make the use of David’s mule unnecessary for Solomon, but his riding on the royal mount played an important role in displaying that Solomon was the choice of David for his successor. Second, David’s instruction, when put into practice, created a visible procession of notable size to capture the attention of the population of Jerusalem and the surrounding area. This event also contributed to the momentum of circumstances swinging in Solomon’s favour.

Whatever we may think of the previous observations, there is one matter of great importance to mention. In this proposed procession we see a shadow of the triumphal entry of Jesus Christ into Jerusalem at the beginning of Passion Week. Jesus, at that time, entered Jerusalem with the voices of the multitude crying, Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest (Matthew 21:9b)! In this shout is the evident acknowledgement of Jesus to be both Messiah and King. The parallels between Solomon and Jesus are unmistakable.

The next matter that David stressed is what Solomon was to do. He would come into Jerusalem and sit upon David’s throne. Note that David called the throne my throne, and this is proper in every way. It was his, because he was still the living king. Also, he received it by the appointment of the Lord, and it was his because he was, and would continue to be, the head of the dynasty. This was the dynasty that that God promised would sit upon that throne forever.

What was the purpose of Solomon’s siting on the throne? David made it quite clear. It was so that Solomon could reign in David’s place. Was this an abdication on the part of David in favour of Solomon? Most commentators that I have consulted prefer to call it the inauguration of a co-regency, which was a common practice in the ancient Near East. David would continue to be regarded as king, but much of the government would be in the hands of his son.

David was speaking of Solomon’s enthronement. We see in that enthronement another important shadow of Jesus Christ, that was his ascension into heaven. Between the two events in the Gospels that are foreshadowed in the procession of Solomon coming into Jerusalem and his enthronement stands the centrepiece of human history: the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ! It is the absence of any foreshadow of the latter events that ought to remind us that in Solomon, for all his later majesty, we have but a pale shadow of Jesus.

One question remains to discuss in this verse. That question is raised by the concluding sentence of David’s statement, And I have appointed him to be ruler over Israel and over Judah. We have criticized Adonijah for seeking to take the throne on his own initiative. Is David guilty of the same kind of mistake by giving the rule to Solomon on his own initiative? We should not think so.

The circumstances of David’s statement concerning Solomon’s ascension do not support such an idea. David’s words are in response to the question brought by both Bathsheba and Nathan that asked if he supported the ascension of Adonijah as his successor. The words he speaks here are the simple answer to that question. He had chosen Solomon, not Adonijah. He was not engaged in a theological discussion concerning the ultimate authority (Yahweh) standing behind the ruler of Israel’s sovereignty. The nature of the question determined the nature of David’s answer.