Difference between revisions of "Abiathar"

<span> 1 [[Samuel]] 22:1 </span> <span> 1 Samuel 23:6 </span> <span> 1 Samuel 23:9 </span> <span> 1 Samuel 30:7 </span> <span> 2 Samuel 2:1 </span> <span> 2 Samuel 5:19 </span> <span> 1 [[Chronicles]] 15:11-12 </span> <span> 2 Samuel 15:24 </span> <span> 2 Samuel 15:1 </span> <span> 1 Kings 1:7 </span> <span> 1 Samuel 2:31-35 </span> <span> 1 Kings 2:26-27 </span> <span> 1 Kings 2:35 </span> <span> 1 Kings 4:4 </span> <span> 1 Samuel 21:1-9 </span> <span> 2 Samuel 8:17 </span> <span> 1 Chronicles 18:16 </span> <span> 1 Chronicles 24:31 </span> <p> <span> [[Mark]] 2:26 </span> records Jesus' statement that [[David]] took the showbread from the place of worship when [[Abiathar]] was high priest at Nob. <span> 1 Samuel 21:1 </span> reports that this happened when Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar, was still the high priest. However, a few days after this incident Abiathar did become high priest ( <span> 1 Samuel 22:19-20 </span> ). Some New [[Testament]] [[Greek]] manuscripts omit “when Abiathar was high priest.” It may be that Abiathar was co-priest with his father. [[Or]] a copyist of the [[Gospel]] of Mark may have copied the text wrong. [[See]] <a> [[Priests]] </a> ; <a> [[Levites]] </a> ; <a> [[Chief]] [[Priest]] </a> . </p> <p> [[Donald]] R. Potts </p>

<p> <translit> a </translit> - <translit> bı̄´a </translit> - <translit> thar </translit> , <translit> ab </translit> - <translit> i </translit> - <translit> ā´thar </translit> ( <span> אביתר </span> , <i> <translit> 'ebhyāthār </translit> </i> , "father of super-excellence," or, "the super-excellent one is father." [[With]] changed phraseology these are the explanations commonly given, though "a father remains" would be more in accord with the ordinary use of the stem <i> <translit> yāthar </translit> </i> . The pious [[Abiathar]] was still conscious that he had a Father, even after the butchery of his human relatives): </p> <h4> 1. The [[Biblical]] [[Account]] </h4> <p> The [[Scriptures]] represent that Abiathar was descended from [[Phinehas]] the son of Eli, and through him from [[Ithamar]] the son of Aaron; that he was the son of [[Ahimelech]] the head priest at [[Nob]] who, with his associates, was put to death by [[King]] [[Saul]] for alleged conspiracy with David; that he had two sons, Ahimelech and Jonathan, the former of whom was, in Abiathar's lifetime, prominent in the priestly service ( <span> 1 [[Samuel]] 21:1-9 </span> ; <span> 1 Samuel 22:7 </span> ; <span> 2 Samuel 8:17 </span> ; <span> 2 Samuel 15:27 </span> ; <span> 1 [[Chronicles]] 18:16 </span> ; <span> 1 Chronicles 24:3 </span> , <span> 1 Chronicles 24:6 </span> , <span> 1 Chronicles 24:31 </span> ). [[See]] <a> AHIMELECH </a> ; <a> AHITUB </a> . </p> <p> Abiathar escaped from the massacre of the priests at Nob, and fled to David, carrying the ephod with him. This was a great accession to David's strength. [[Public]] feeling in [[Israel]] was outraged by the slaughter of the priests, and turned strongly against Saul. The heir of the priesthood, and in his care the holy ephod, were now with David, and the fact gave to his cause prestige, and a certain character of legitimacy. [[David]] also felt bitterly his having been the unwilling cause of the death of Abiathar's relatives, and this made his heart warm toward his friend. Presumably, also, there was a deep religious sympathy between them. </p> <p> Abiathar seems to have been at once recognized as David's priest, the medium of consultation with [[Yahweh]] through the ephod ( <span> 1 Samuel 22:20-23 </span> ; <span> 1 Samuel 23:6 </span> , <span> 1 Samuel 23:9 </span> ; <span> 1 Samuel 30:7 </span> , <span> 1 Samuel 30:8 </span> ). [[He]] was at the head of the priesthood, along with [[Zadok]] ( <span> 1 Chronicles 15:11 </span> ), when David, after his conquests ( <span> 1 Chronicles 13:5 </span> ; compare 2 [[Sam]] 6), brought the ark to Jerusalem. The two men are mentioned together as high priests eight times in the narrative of the rebellion of [[Absalom]] ( <span> 2 Samuel 15:24 </span> ), and are so mentioned in the last list of David's heads of departments ( <span> 2 Samuel 20:25 </span> ). Abiathar joined with [[Adonijah]] in his attempt to seize the throne (1 Ki 1:7-42), and was for this deposed from the priesthood, though he was treated with consideration on account of his early comradeship with David ( <span> 1 Kings 2:26 </span> , <span> 1 Kings 2:27 </span> ). [[Possibly]] he remained high priest emeritus, as Zadok and Abiathar still appear as priests in the lists of the heads of departments for Solomon's reign ( <span> 1 Kings 4:4 </span> ). [[Particularly]] apt is the passage in <span> [[Psalm]] 55:12-14 </span> , if one regards it as referring to the relations of David and Abiathar in the time of Adonijah. </p> <p> There are two additional facts which, in view of the close relations between David and Abiathar, must be regarded as significant. [[One]] is that Zadok, Abiathar's junior, is uniformly mentioned first, in all the many passages in which the two are mentioned together, and is treated as the one who is especially responsible. [[Turn]] to the narrative, and see how marked this is. The other similarly significant fact is that in certain especially responsible matters (1 Ch 24; <span> 1 Chronicles 18:16 </span> ; <span> 2 Samuel 8:17 </span> ) the interests of the line of Ithamar are represented, not by Abiathar, but by his son Ahimelech. There must have been something in the character of Abiathar to account for these facts, as well as for his deserting David for Adonijah. To sketch his character might be a work for the imagination rather than for critical inference; but it seems clear that though he was a man worthy of the friendship of David, he yet had weaknesses or misfortunes that partially incapacitated him. </p> <p> The characteristic priestly function of Abiathar is thus expressed by Solomon: "Because thou barest the ark of the [[Lord]] Yahweh before David my father" ( <span> 1 Kings 2:26 </span> ). [[By]] its tense the verb denotes not a habitual act, but the function of ark-bearing, taken as a whole. Zadok and Abiathar, as high priests, had charge of the bringing of the ark to [[Jerusalem]] ( <span> 1 Chronicles 15:11 </span> ). We are not told whether it was again moved during the reign of David. [[Necessarily]] the priestly superintendence of the ark implies that of the sacrifices and services that were connected with the ark. The details in Kings indicate the existence of much of the ceremonial described in the Pentateuch, while numerous additional [[Pentateuchal]] details are mentioned in Ch. </p> <p> A priestly function much emphasized is that of obtaining answers from [[God]] through the ephod ( <span> 1 Samuel 23:6 </span> , <span> 1 Samuel 23:9 </span> ; <span> 1 Samuel 30:7 </span> ). The word ephod (see <span> 1 Samuel 2:18 </span> ; <span> 2 Samuel 6:14 </span> ) does not necessarily denote the priestly vestment with the [[Urim]] and [[Thummim]] (e.g. <span> [[Leviticus]] 8:7 </span> , <span> Leviticus 8:8 </span> ), but if anyone denies that this was the ephod of the priest Abiathar, the burden of proof rests upon him. This is not the place for inquiring as to the method of obtaining divine revelations through the ephod. </p> <p> Abiathar's landed estate was at [[Anathoth]] in [[Benjamin]] ( <span> 1 Kings 2:26 </span> ), one of the cities assigned to the sons of [[Aaron]] ( <span> [[Joshua]] 21:18 </span> ). </p> <p> [[Apart]] from the men who are expressly said to be descendants of Aaron, this part of the narrative mentions priests three times. David's sons were priests ( <span> 2 Samuel 8:18 </span> ). This is of a piece with David's carrying the ark on a new cart (2 Sam 6), before he had been taught by the death of Uzza. "And also [[Ira]] the [[Jairite]] was priest to the king" ( <span> 2 Samuel 20:26 </span> the [[English]] [[Revised]] Version). "And [[Zabud]] the son of [[Nathan]] was priest, friend of the king" ( <span> 1 Kings 4:5 </span> the English Revised Version). These instances seem to indicate that David and [[Solomon]] had each a private chaplain. [[As]] to the descent and function of these two "priests" we have not a word of information, and it is illegitimate to imagine details concerning them which bring them into conflict with the rest of the record. </p> <h4> 2. [[Critical]] Opinions [[Concerning]] Abiathar </h4> <p> [[No]] one will dispute that the account thus far given is that of the [[Bible]] record as it stands. Critics of certain schools, however, do not accept the facts as thus recorded. [[If]] a person is committed to the tradition that the Deuteronomic and the priestly ideas of the [[Pentateuch]] first originated some centuries later than Abiathar, and if he makes that tradition the standard by which to test his critical conclusions, he must of course regard the Biblical account of Abiathar as unhistorical. [[Either]] the record disproves the tradition or the tradition disproves the record. There is no third alternative. The men who accept the current critical theories understand this, and they have two ways of defending theories against the record. [[In]] some instances they use devices for discrediting the record; in other instances they resort to harmonizing hypotheses, changing the record so as to make it agree with theory. [[Without]] here discussing these matters, we must barely note some of their bearings in the case of Abiathar. </p> <p> [[For]] example, to get rid of the testimony of [[Jesus]] ( <span> [[Mark]] 2:26 </span> ) to the effect that Abiathar was high priest and that the sanctuary at Nob was "the house of God," it is affirmed that either Jesus or the evangelist is here mistaken. The proof alleged for this is that Abiathar's service as priest did not begin till at least a few days later than the incident referred to. This is merely finical, though it is an argument that is sometimes used by some scholars. </p> <p> Men affirm that the statements of the record as to the descent of the line of [[Eli]] from Ithamar are untrue; that on the contrary we must conjecture that Abiathar claimed descent from Eleazar, his line being the alleged senior line of that family; that the senior line became extinct at his death, Zadok being of a junior line, if indeed he inherited any of the blood of Aaron. In making such affirmations as these, men deny the Bible statements as resting on insufficient evidence, and substitute for them other statements which, confessedly, rest on no evidence at all. </p> <p> [[All]] such procedure is incorrect. [[Many]] are suspicious of statements found in the [[Books]] of Chronicles; that gives them no right to use their suspicions as if they were perceptions of fact. Supposably one may think the record unsatisfactory, and may be within his rights in thinking so, but that does not authorize him to change the record except on the basis of evidence of some kind. If we treat the record of the times of Abiathar as fairness demands that a record be treated in a court of justice, or a scientific investigation, or a business proposition, or a medical case, we will accept the facts substantially as they are found in Samuel and Kings and Chronicles and Mk. </p>

<p> (Heb. Ebyathar', <span> אֶבְיָתָר </span> <span> , father of abundance, </span> i.e. <span> liberal; </span> Sept. <span> ‘Αβιάθαρ </span> or <span> ‘Αβιαθάρ </span> , N.T. <span> ‘Αβιάθαρ </span> , [[Josephus]] <span> ‘Αβιάθαρος </span> ) <span> , </span> the thirteenth high-priest of the Jews, being the son of Ahimelech, and the third in descent from Eli; B.C. 1060-1012. When his father was slain with the priests of Nob, for suspected partiality to David, [[Abiathar]] escaped; and bearing with him the most essential part of the priestly raiment [ sEE EPHOD ], repaired to the son of Jesse, who was then in the cave of [[Adullam]] ( <span> 1 [[Samuel]] 22:20-23 </span> ; <span> 1 Samuel 23:6 </span> ). [[He]] was well received by David, and became the priest of the party during its exile and wanderings, receiving for [[David]] responses from [[God]] ( <span> 1 Samuel 30:7 </span> ; comp. <span> 2 Samuel 2:1 </span> ; <span> 2 Samuel 5:19 </span> ). The cause of this strong attachment on the part of the monarch was the feeling that he had been unintentionally the cause of the death of Abiathar's kindred. When David became king of [[Judah]] he appointed Abiathar high priest (see <span> 1 [[Chronicles]] 15:11 </span> ; <span> 1 Kings 2:26 </span> ), and a member of his cabinet ( <span> 1 Chronicles 27:34 </span> ). [[Meanwhile]] [[Zadok]] had been made high-priest by [[Saul]] <span> — </span> an appointment not only unexceptionable in itself, but in accordance with the divine sentence of deposition which had been passed, through Samuel, upon the house of [[Eli]] ( <span> 1 Samuel 2:30-36 </span> ). When, therefore, David acquired the kingdom of Israel, he had no just ground on which Zadok could be removed, and Abiathar set in his place; and the attempt would probably have been offensive to his new subjects, who had been accustomed to the ministration of Zadok, and whose good feeling he was anxious to cultivate. The king appears to have got over this difficulty by allowing both appointments to stand; and until the end of David's reign Zadok and Abiathar were joint high priests ( <span> 1 Kings 4:4 </span> ). [[As]] a high-priest, Abiathar was the least excusable, in some respects, of all those who were parties in the attempt to raise [[Adonijah]] to the throne ( <span> 1 Kings 1:19 </span> ); and Solomon, in deposing him from the high-priesthood, plainly told him that only his sacerdotal character, and his former services to David, preserved him from capital punishment ( <span> 1 Kings 2:26-27 </span> ). This completed the doom upon the house of Eli, and restored the pontifical succession <span> — </span> Zadok, who remained the high-priest, being of the elder line of Aaron's sons. (See <a> ELEAZAR </a> ). </p> <p> [[In]] <span> [[Mark]] 2:26 </span> , a circumstance is described as occurring "in the days of Abiathar, the high-priest" ( <span> ἐπὶ </span> <span> ‘Αβιάθαρ </span> <span> τοῦ </span> <span> ἀρχιερέως </span> <span> — </span> a phrase that is susceptible of the rendering, <span> in [the time] of Abiathar, [the son] of the high-priest), </span> which appears, from <span> 1 Samuel 21:1 </span> , to have really occurred when his father [[Ahimelech]] was the high-priest. The most probable solution of this difficulty (but see Alford's <span> Comment. </span> in loc.) is that which interprets the reference thus: "in the days of Abiathar, <span> who was </span> afterward the high-priest" (Middleton, [[Greek]] Article, p. 188-190). But this leaves open another difficulty, which arises from the precisely opposite reference (in <span> 2 Samuel 8:17 </span> ; <span> 1 Chronicles 18:16 </span> ; <span> 1 Chronicles 24:3 </span> ; <span> 1 Chronicles 24:6 </span> ) to "Ahimelech [or Abimelech] the son of Abiathar," as the person who was high-priest along with Zadok, and who was deposed by Solomon; whereas the history describes that personage as Abiathar, the son of Ahimelech. [[Another]] explanation is, that both father and son bore the two names of Ahimelech and Abiathar, and might be, and were, called by either (J. C. Leuschner, <span> [[De]] Achimelecho binomini, </span> Hirschb. 1750). But although it was not unusual for the [[Jews]] to have two names, it was <span> not </span> usual for both father and son to have the same two names. Others suppose a second Abiathar, the father of Ahimelech, and some even a son of the same name; but none of these suppositions are warranted by the text, nor allowable in the list of high priests. (See <a> HIGH-PRIEST </a> ). The names have probably become transposed by copyists, for the [[Syriac]] and [[Arabic]] versions have "Abiathar, the son of Ahimelech." The mention of Abiathar in the above passage of Mark, rather than the acting priest Ahimelech, may have arisen from the greater prominence of the former in the history of David's reign, and he appears even at that time to have been with his father, and to have had some part in the pontifical duties. In additional explanation of the other difficulty above referred to, it may be suggested as not unlikely that Ahimelech may have been the name of one of Abiathar's sons likewise associated with him, as well as that of his father, and that copyists have confounded these names together. (See <a> AHIMLECH </a> ). </p>