ABIATHAR (a-bi'a-thar), (Heb. eb-yaw thawr', father of abundance), the thirteenth priest of the Jews and fourth in descent from Eli.
When Abiathar's father, the high priest Abime lech, was slain with the priests at Nob, for sus pected partiality to the fugitive David. Abiathar escaped the massacre, and bearing with him the most essential part of the priestly raiment (See Epiton), repaired to the son of Jesse, who was then in the cave of Adullam ( I Sam. xxii :2o-23; xxiii :6).
(1) High Priest. He was well received by David. and became the priest of the party during its exile and wanderings. As such he sought and received for David responses from God. When David became king of Judah he appointed Abi athar high priest. Meanwhile Zadok had been appointed high priest by Saul, and continued to act as such while Abiathar was high priest in Judah. The appointment of Zadok was not only unexceptionable in itself, but was in accordance with the Divine sentence of deposition which had been passed, through Samuel, upon the house of Eli (I Sam. ii :3o-36). 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 to do so 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 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. How the details of duty were settled, under this somewhat anomalous arrangement, we are not informed.
(2) Deposed. As a high priest Abiathar must have been perfectly aware of the Divine intention that Solomon should be the successor of David ; he was therefore the least excusable, in some respects, of all those who were parties in the attempt to frustrate that intention by raising Adonijah to the throne. So his conduct seems to have been viewed by Solomon, who, in deposing him from the high priesthood, and directing him to with draw into private life, plainly told him that only his sacerdotal character, and his former services to David, preserved him from capital punishment. This deposition of Abiathar completed the doom long before denounced upon the house of Eli, who was of the line of Ithamar, the younger son of Aaron. Zadok, who remained the high priest, was of the elder line of Eleazar. Solomon was probably not sorry to have occasion to remove the anomaly of two high priests of different lines, and to see the undivided pontificate in the senior house of Eleazar (t Kings i :7-t9; ii :26-27).
(3) Apparent Discrepancy. In Mark ii :26 a circumstance is described as occurring in the days of Abiathar, the high priest,' which appears, from I Sam. XXi:I, to have really occurred when his father Abimelech was the high priest. Numerous solutions of this difficulty have been offered. The most probable in itself is that which interprets the reference thus in the days of Abiathar, who was afterwards the high priest' (Bishop Middleton, Greek Article, pp. 188-19o). But this leaves open another difficulty which arises from the precisely opposite reference (2 Sam. viii :17; I Chron. xviii :16; xxiv :3, 6, 31) to '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 Abimelech. The only ex planation which seems to remove all these diffi culties—although we cannot allege it to be alto gether satisfactory--is, that both father and son bore the two names of Abimelech and Abiathar, and might be, and were called by, either. But although it was not unusual for the Jews to have two names, it was not usual for both father and son to have the same two names. We there fore incline to leave the passage in Mark ii :26 as explained above, and to conclude that the other discrepancies arose from an easy and obvious transposition of words by the copyists, which was afterwards perpetrated. In these places the Syriac and Arabic versions have 'Abiathar, the son of Abimelech.' ABIB (a'bib), (Heb. :";k?, aw-beeb', from to fructify ; properly, an ear of grain), the month of corn or grain, (Lev. ii :14, "green ears:" Lev.
xxiii :to-14, "ears ;" therefore the month of newly ripe grain; Exod. xiii:4; xxiii :115; xxxiv:t8; Deut. xvi:z). The first month of the ecclesiastical year of the Hebrews; afterwards called Nisan. It answered to our March, or part of April. Abib, as above, signifies green cars of corn, or fresh fruits. It was so named because corn, particularly barley, was in car at that time. It was an early custom to name times, such as months, from observation of nature; and the custom is still in use among many nations. So it was with our Saxon ancestors; and the Germans to this day, along with the usual Latin names of the months, have also others of the above character, e. g., June is also called Brachmonath, or month for ploughing; July, Ileumanails, or Ilay-month ; No vember, 1 'indmonoth, or Wind-month, etc. (See .Moxrit JEW1S11 CALENDAR, 01 Appendix.)