When the king lived in his house, and Yahweh had given him rest from all his enemies all around, the king said to Nathan the prophet, “See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but God’s ark dwells within curtains.”
Nathan said to the king, “Go, do all that is in your heart; for Yahweh is with you.”
That same night, Yahweh’s word came to Nathan, saying, “Go and tell my servant David, ‘Yahweh says, “Should you build me a house for me to dwell in? For I have not lived in a house since the day that I brought the children of Israel up out of Egypt, even to this day, but have moved around in a tent and in a tabernacle. In all places in which I have walked with all the children of Israel, did I say a word to any of the tribes of Israel, whom I commanded to be shepherd of my people Israel, saying, ‘Why have you not built me a house of cedar?’ ” ’ Now therefore tell my servant David this, ‘Yahweh of Armies says, “I took you from the sheep pen, from following the sheep, to be prince over my people, over Israel. I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all your enemies from before you. I will make you a great name, like the name of the great ones who are in the earth. I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in their own place, and be moved no more. The children of wickedness will not afflict them any more, as at the first, and as from the day that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel. I will cause you to rest from all your enemies. Moreover Yahweh tells you that Yahweh will make you a house. When your days are fulfilled, and you sleep with your fathers, I will set up your offspring after you, who will proceed out of your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He will build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my loving kindness will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before you. Your house and your kingdom will be made sure forever before you. Your throne will be established forever.” ’ ” Nathan spoke to David all these words, and according to all this vision.
Then David the king went in, and sat before Yahweh; and he said, “Who am I, Lord Yahweh, and what is my house, that you have brought me this far? This was yet a small thing in your eyes, Lord Yahweh; but you have spoken also of your servant’s house for a great while to come; and this among men, Lord Yahweh! What more can David say to you? For you know your servant, Lord Yahweh. For your word’s sake, and according to your own heart, you have worked all this greatness, to make your servant know it. Therefore you are great, Yahweh God. For there is no one like you, neither is there any God besides you, according to all that we have heard with our ears. What one nation in the earth is like your people, even like Israel, whom God went to redeem to himself for a people, and to make himself a name, and to do great things for you, and awesome things for your land, before your people, whom you redeemed to yourself out of Egypt, from the nations and their gods? You established for yourself your people Israel to be your people forever; and you, Yahweh, became their God. Now, Yahweh God, the word that you have spoken concerning your servant, and concerning his house, confirm it forever, and do as you have spoken. Let your name be magnified forever, saying, ‘Yahweh of Armies is God over Israel; and the house of your servant David will be established before you.’ For you, Yahweh of Armies, the God of Israel, have revealed to your servant, saying, ‘I will build you a house.’ Therefore your servant has found in his heart to pray this prayer to you.
“Now, O Lord Yahweh, you are God, and your words are truth, and you have promised this good thing to your servant. Now therefore let it please you to bless the house of your servant, that it may continue forever before you; for you, Lord Yahweh, have spoken it. Let the house of your servant be blessed forever with your blessing.”
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv2, 5, 7, 9, 10, 14, 16, 19, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29 Within the Tabernacle covered with skins, Exod. 26:7.
Within the Tabernacle covered with skins, Exod. 26:7.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1–29 2Sa 7:1 And it came to pass, when the…
2Sa 7:1 And it came to pass, when the king sat in his house, and the LORD had given him rest round about from all his enemies;
Ver. 1. When the king sat in his house.] His newly built house of cedar; and considered that God and his ark dwelt in tabernaculo pelliceo et papillione, in a meaner tabernacle.
Read full note →
And the Lord had given him rest.] So that he abounded with leisure; and could relax a while.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29 When the king sat in his house, i.e. was…
When the king sat in his house, i.e. was settled and warm in the house which Hiram’s men built for him, 2Sa 5:11; then he reflected upon the unhandsome and unsettled state of the ark. From all his enemies, Philistines, Moabites, and others; so that they durst not invade his land, as they had formerly done; for though you read of David’s wars with them, 2Sa 8, yet in them David was the aggressor, and entered their lands.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On vv1, 4, 18 Here is, I. David at rest. He sat in…
Here is, I. David at rest. He sat in his house (Sa2 7:1), quiet and undisturbed, having no occasion to take the field: The Lord had given him rest round about, from all those that were enemies to his settlement in the throne, and he set himself to enjoy that rest. Though he was a man of war, he was for peace (Psa 120:7) and did not delight in war. He had not been long at rest, nor was it long before he was again engaged in war; but at present he enjoyed a calm, and he was in his element when he was sitting in his house, meditating in the law of God.
II. David's thought of building a temple for the honour of God. He had built a palace for himself and a city for his servants; and now he thinks of building a habitation for the ark. 1. Thus he would make a grateful return for the honours God put upon him. Note, When God, in his providence, has remarkably done much for us, it should put us upon contriving what we may do for him and his glory. What shall I render unto the Lord? 2. Thus he would improve the present calm, and make a good use of the rest God had given him. Now that he was not called out to serve God and Israel in the high places of the field, he would employ his thoughts, and time, and estate, in serving him another way, and not indulge himself in ease, much less in luxury. When God, in his providence, gives us rest, and finds us little to do of worldly business, we must do so much the more for God and our souls. How different were the thoughts of David when he sat in his palace from Nebuchadnezzar's when he walked in his! Dan 4:29, Dan 4:30. That proud man thought of nothing but the might of his own power, and the honour of his own majesty; this humble soul is full of contrivance how to glorify God, and give honour to him. And how God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace and glory to the humble, the event showed. David considered (Sa2 7:2) the stateliness of his own habitation (I dwell in a house of cedar), and compared with that the meanness of the habitation of the ark (the ark dwells within curtains), and thought this incongruous, that he should dwell in a palace and the ark in a tent. David had been uneasy till he found out a place for the ark (Psa 132:4, Psa 132:5), and now he is uneasy till he finds out a better place. Gracious grateful souls, (1.) Never think they can do enough for God, but, when they have done much, are still projecting to do more and devising liberal things. (2.) They cannot enjoy their own accommodations while they see the church of God in distress and under a cloud. David can take little pleasure in a house of cedar for himself, unless the ark have one. Those who stretched themselves upon beds of ivory, and were not grieved for the affliction of Joseph, though they had David's music, had not David's spirit (Amo 6:4, Amo 6:6) nor those who dwelt in their ceiled houses while God's house lay waste.
Read full note →
III. His communicating this thought to Nathan the prophet. He told him, as a friend and confidant, whom he used to advise with. Could not David have gone about it himself? Was it not a good work? Was not he himself a prophet? Yes, but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety. David told him, that by him he might know the mind of God. It was certainly a good work, but it was uncertain whether it was the will of God that David should have the doing of it.
IV. Nathan's approbation of it: Go, do all that is in thy heart; for the Lord is with thee, Sa2 7:3. We do not find that David told him that he purposed to build a temple, only that it was a trouble to him that there was not one built, from which Nathan easily gathered what was in his heart, and bade him go on and prosper. Note, We ought to do all we can to encourage and promote the good purposes and designs of others, and put in a good word, as we have opportunity, to forward a good work. Nathan spoke this, not in God's name, but as from himself; not as a prophet, but as a wise and good man; it was agreeable to the revealed will of God, which requires that all in their places should lay out themselves for the advancement of religion and the service of God, though it seems his secret will was otherwise, that David should not do this. It was Christ's prerogative always to speak the mind of God, which he perfectly knew. Other prophets spoke it only when the spirit of prophecy was upon them; but, if in any thing they mistook (as Samuel, Sa1 16:6, and Nathan here) God soon rectified the mistake.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv1–29 And it came to pass, when the king sat…
And it came to pass, when the king sat in his house,.... Which Hiram's servants had built for him, having no occasion to go out to war:
and the Lord had given him rest round about from all his enemies; both at home and abroad; though this rest and peace did not last long; for the next chapter gives an account of each of the people he was engaged in war with, Sa2 8:1.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29 Nathan approves David's design of building an house for…
Nathan approves David's design of building an house for God, ver. 1-3. God forbids it, but promises to bless him and his seed, ver. 4-17. His prayer and thanksgiving, ver. 18-29.
Sat - That is, was settled in the house which Hiram's men had built for him, then he reflected upon the unsettled state of the ark.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 25 David consults the prophet Nathan about building a temple…
CHAPTER VII
David consults the prophet Nathan about building a temple for
Read full note →
the Lord, and is encouraged by him to do it, 1-3.
That night Nathan receives a revelation from God, stating that
Solomon, not David, should build the temple, 4-16.
Nathan delivers the Divine message, and David magnifies God for
his mercies, and makes prayer and supplication, 17-29.
NOTES ON CHAP. VII
Verse 1. When the king sat in his house] That is, when he became resident in the palace which Hiram, king of Tyre, had built for him.
And the Lord had given him rest] This was after he had defeated the Philistines, and cast them out of all the strong places in Israel which they had possessed after the overthrow of Saul; but before he had carried his arms beyond the land of Israel, against the Moabites, Syrians, and Idumeans. See 2Sa 8:1-14.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 27 2Sa 7:1-2. When the king sat in his house…
2Sa 7:1-2. When the king sat in his house — That is, was settled in the house which Hiram’s men had built for him; then he reflected upon the unsettled state of the ark. For, being a pious prince, he spent much of his time in holy meditations and the exercises of devotion; and among other subjects of consideration, thought upon the meanness of God’s habitation in comparison of the splendour of his own. See now, I dwell in a house of cedar — Such as the rich Jews had in the days of Haggai, termed by the Lord ceiled houses; see Hag 1:4; but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains — That is, in a tent or tabernacle, (2Sa 7:6,) composed of several curtains. This, David thought, ought not to be, and therefore resolved to build a stately house for God’s ark.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 23, 27 There is no indication how soon after the bringing…
There is no indication how soon after the bringing up of the ark these things occurred, but it was probably at no long interval.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29 Enemies, before he had made war upon the surrounding…
Enemies, before he had made war upon the surrounding nations, 1 Paralipomenon xviii. 1.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v1 II. The divine consecration of the Davidic kingdom by…
II. The divine consecration of the Davidic kingdom by the promise of the imperishable kingly dominion of the Davidic house.
2Sa_7:1-29
Read full note →
1. David’s purpose to build the Lord a house, and the divine promise that the Lord will build him a house. 2Sa_7:1-16.
1And it came to pass, when the king sat in his house, and the Lord [Jehovah] had given him rest1 round about from all his enemies, 2That the king said unto Nathan the prophet, See now, I dwell in an house of cedar, but [and] the ark of God dwelleth within curtains [the curtain].2 3And Nathan said to the king, Go,3 do all that is in thine heart [All, etc., go do], for the Lord [Jehovah] is with thee. 4And it came to pass that night, that the word of the Lord [Jehovah] came unto Nathan,4 saying, 5Go and tell [say to] my servant, [ins. to] David, Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah], 6Shalt5 thou build me a house for me to dwell in? Whereas [For] I have not dwelt in any [a] house since the time that I brought up6 the children of Israel 7out of Egypt even to this day, but have walked7 in a tent and in a tabernacle. In all the places8 wherein I have walked with all the children of Israel, spake I a word with any of the tribes9 of Israel, whom I commanded to feed my people Israel, saying, 8Why build ye not me an house of cedar? Now, therefore, so [And now, thus] shalt thou say unto my servant, [ins. to] David, Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah] of hosts, I took10 thee from the sheepcote [pasture], from following the sheep, to be ruler over my people, over Israel; 9And I was with thee whithersoever thou wentest, and have cut off all thine enemies out of thy sight [from before thee], and have made thee a great11 name like unto the name of the great men that are in the earth. 10Moreover [And] I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own [and they shall dwell in their own place], and move no more [and no more be disturbed], neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime, 11And as since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel,12 [.] and have caused [And I will cause] thee to rest from all thine enemies, also [and] the Lord [Jehovah] telleth thee that he [Jehovah]13 will make thee an house.
12And14 [om. and] when [When] thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels,15 and I will establish his kingdom. 13He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be 14my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the stripes of the children of men. 15But my mercy shall not depart16 away from 16him, as I took it from Saul whom I put away [ins. from] before thee. And thy house and thy kingdom shall be established [stable] forever before thee;17 thy throne shall be established forever.
2. David’s prayer as answer to this divine promise. 2Sa_7:17-29
17According to all these words and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David. 18Then went king David in [And king David went in] and sat before the Lord [Jehovah], and he said, Who am I, O Lord God [O lord Jehovah]18, and what is my house, that thou hast brought me hitherto? 19And this was yet a small thing in thy sight, O Lord God [O lord Jehovah], but thou hast spoken also of thy servant’s house for a great while to come. And is this the manner of man, O Lord God? [And this is the law of man,19 O lord Jehovah]. 20And what can [shall] David say more unto thee? for thou, Lord God [om. Lord God], knowest thy servant [ins. lord Jehovah]. 21For thy word’s20 sake, and according to thine own heart hast thou done all these great things, to make thy servant know them. 22Wherefore thou art great, O Lord God [Jehovah God]; for there is none like thee, neither is there any [and there is no] God beside thee, according to21 all that we 23have heard with our ears. And22 what one nation in the earth is like thy people, even [om. even] like Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to himself, and to make him a name, and to do for you [them] great things and terrible, for thy land [om. for thy land, ins. to drive out] before thy people, which thou redeemedst 24to thee from Egypt, from the [om. from the] nations and their gods? For [And] thou hast confirmed to thyself thy people Israel to be a people unto thee forever, and thou, Lord [Jehovah], art become their God.
25And now, O Lord [Jehovah] God, the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant and concerning his house, establish it [om. it] forever, and do as thou hast said. 26And let thy name be magnified forever, saying, The Lord [Jehovah] of hosts is the [om. the] God over Israel; and let the house of thy servant David be established before thee. 27For thou, O Lord [Jehovah] of hosts, God of Israel, hast revealed to thy servant, saying, I will build thee an house; therefore hath thy servant found in his heart to pray this prayer unto thee. 28And now, O Lord God, [lord Jehovah], thou art that [om. that] God, and thy words be true [are23 truth], 29and thou hast promised [spoken] this goodness unto thy servant; Therefore [And] now, let it please thee to bless the house of thy servant that it may continue forever before thee; for thou, O Lord God [lord Jehovah], hast spoken it, and with thy blessing let [shall] the house of thy servant be blessed forever.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1. David’s purpose to build the Lord a house, and the divine prohibition with the promise that the Lord will build him a house. 2Sa_7:1-16 (1 Chronicles 17).
2Sa_7:1-3. David’s resolution to build the Lord a house is approved by the prophet Nathan. Comp. 1Ch_17:1-2.
2Sa_7:1. And when the king dwelt in his house (comp. 2Sa_7:11). What follows occurred not only after David had built his royal palace, but also after he, having secured external quiet, had taken up his permanent abode therein. The starting-point of David’s words in 2Sa_7:2 (like that of the narrative) is the “house” in which he dwelt [Philippson: Abarbanel refers to Deu_12:9-10 sq.,24 supposing that David thought the condition there laid down to have now reached a fulfilment.—Tr.]—And the Lord had given him rest round about from all his enemies.—According to these words the following narrative cannot be put chronologically immediately after the Philistine war related in 2 Samuel 5, which view the position of this section after 2 Samuel 6 might seem to favor. Decisive against this is the phrase: “round about from all his enemies,” and 2Sa_7:9 : “I have cut off all thy enemies before thee.” The temporary quiet that David gained by that double victory over the Philistines he used to bring the ark to Zion; but he soon found himself involved in new wars begun by Israel’s enemies round about, first by the Philistines, according to the narration in 2 Samuel 8. Not till he had crushed all Israel’s pressing enemies could he wish to carry out his determination to build a house for the Lord. On account of its factual connection with the account of the ark the history of this determination is attached to 2 Samuel 6, the narrative throughout, indeed, not appearing to be strictly chronological, but bearing the impress of a grouping of the several sections according to certain principal points of view. (In chs. 8–12 the external wars, in 13–20 the internal difficulties, and in 21. sq. detached occurrences in David’s life are brought together without chronological sequence.) But it is not to be assumed that “our narrative is to be put in the last part of David’s life” (Then.), since, according to 2Sa_7:11, he had still other wars to carry on against the enemies of Israel, for which reason precisely, and because he had to be on his guard without, the peaceful work of temple building could not be executed (as Solomon also expressly affirms, 1Ki_5:17); and since the promise in 2Sa_7:12 refers to the seed, that will yet proceed from his body. The time of the words: “when the Lord had given him rest” (wanting in Chron.), is to be put after that of the wars in 2 Samuel 8, whereby David secured his throne against “enemies round about,” without being able thus to exclude further wars; his resolution to build a temple can be referred only to a temporary rest after his first victorious contests against all his enemies.—[Comp. the language in 2Sa_22:1 and Jos_23:1.—Tr.]
2Sa_7:2. David communicated this resolution to the prophet Nathan, who, according to this, stood in a confidential relation to him as counsellor, and this is confirmed not only by Nathan’s reproof after the sin with Bathsheba, but also by the fact (2Sa_12:25) that Solomon’s education was committed to him, and he with David’s approval anointed Solomon as successor to his father while the latter was still living (1Ki_1:34). [On Nathan see Erdmann’s Introduction and the Bible-Dictionaries.—Tr.]—David states to Nathan as the ground of his resolution the contrast that he dwelt in a palace of cedar, while the ark of God stood within the curtains, that is, simply in a tent (2Sa_6:15). The word here used (הַיְרִיעָה) means in Exo_26:2 sq. the inner cover composed of several curtains, that was spread over the board-structure of the tabernacle. The Plu. is used in Isa_54:2 as=“tent,” and in Son_1:5; Jer_4:20 as=“tents.” The “within” refers to the drapery formed by the curtains; Chron. has “under curtains.” David’s words express the pious, humble disposition in which his purpose was founded. The utterance of the purpose itself is not added to this statement of its ground, but is presupposed in Nathan’s approval [2Sa_7:3]. All that is in thy heart, that is, in this connection, what thou hast resolved on, comp. 1Sa_14:7; 2Ki_10:30. For the Lord is with thee, where the preceding “do” is based on the Lord’s leading, under which David, as theocratic king, stands. Nathan characterizes David’s purpose as one well-pleasing to the Lord. J. H. Michaelis: “out of his own mind, not by divine revelation.”
2Sa_7:4-16. The divine revelation to Nathan for David and his house.
a. 2Sa_7:4-7. Not David is to build the Lord a house.
2Sa_7:4. In that night, following the day on which David held the above conversation with Nathan, came the word of the Lord to Nathan. Nothing is said here of a divine revelation through a dream (comp. Num_12:6; 1Ki_3:5), or through a vision and the hearing of a voice (comp. 1Sa_3:5; 1Sa_3:10; 1Sa_3:15), but the word of the Lord is described as having come to Nathan by night; that is, it is related that he received a divine revelation in the form and through the medium of the word, he receiving its content with the inner ear of the Spirit as a divine decision respecting that which was stirring his heart. Comp. Isa_21:10. By the conversation held with David during the day Nathan’s soul with all its thoughts and feelings was concentrated on David’s great and holy purpose; this was the psychological basis for the divine inspiration that forms the content of the following revelation, and not in inner contradiction with, but in distinction from his answer to David, informs him that the purposed temple-building is to be executed according to the Lord’s will not by David, but by his seed.
2Sa_7:5. Nathan receives the divine revelation that he may officially impart it to David.—Shouldest [or, shalt] thou build me a house to dwell in?—The question has a negative significance=thou shouldest [shalt] not. Chron., interpreting the meaning, has: “not thou.” Certainly Nathan’s assent to David’s thought that a house ought to be built for the Lord is not thereby set aside; but it is true that the opinion that David himself is to be the builder is corrected into this other, that this resolution is to be first carried out by his seed. Hengstenberg’s interpretation, therefore, that David is to build the house not personally, but in his seed [Christol., Eng. tr. I. 126], is forced and in contradiction both with his word and with Solomon’s interpretation (1Ki_8:15-21).
2Sa_7:6. The reason for the no. It is logically obvious that this reason must stand in some relation to the sense in which the “shalt thou?” is spoken. Not thou shalt build me a house, for: 1) “I have not dwelt in a house from the day when I brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt to this day.” During this whole period, while the people had yet no secure, firm, unendangered dwelling-place, the symbol of the Lord’s presence and dwelling amid His people could also have no permanent abode. But I was a wanderer in tent and dwelling-place, that is, as the people was in constant movement and unquiet, so my abode was of necessity a movable tent, wandering from place to place; the allusion is to the necessary frequent change of place of the sanctuary, first in the wilderness, and then during the unquiet movements hither and thither in the land itself (Gilgal, Shiloh, Nob, Gibeon). Comp. 1Ch_17:5 : “and I was from tent to tent and from dwelling to dwelling.” There is no sufficient ground for distinguishing “tent” and “dwelling” as tent-frame and tent-cover (Then.); rather the “dwelling” is to be taken with Keil as explicative: in a tent, which was my dwelling.—[The word mishkan, rendered in Eng. A. V. “tabernacle,” sometimes means the whole structure built by Moses, as in Exo_35:11, where it includes the boards, the tent (ohel, the goatskin-curtain) and the covering (mikseh, the curtains of ram-skins and seal-skins). Elsewhere (as in Exo_40:18) it denotes the board-structure with the inner curtains of blue, purple and scarlet; and again it is used (Exo_26:6) apparently for the inner curtains alone. It seems clear that technically the ohel or tent signified the outer cloth of goat-skin, and the mikseh or covering the two protecting heavy cloths of ram-skin and seal skin, the mishkan proper denoting the rest of the structure; but it is not so probable that the technical distinction is introduced here; the interpretation of Keil seems better. Still, taking the somewhat different reading in Chron., we may suppose that each of the terms ohel and mishkan is put for the whole structure of which they formed a part, a variation of terms for the sake of filling out the conception, the former rather suggesting the wilderness, the latter the land of Canaan.—Tr.]
2Sa_7:7. 2. To the statement that the Lord had hitherto had no fixed dwelling, but had dwelt only in a movable tent, is appended a second, that in all this time He had never given command to build Him a fixed abode.—In all wherein I walked, that is, in my whole walk, during the whole time that I walked among all the children of Israel. These words are to be taken not with the preceding (2Sa_7:6), which form the adversative definition of the immediately preceding declaration, but with the following, and correspond in context with the statement of time in 2Sa_7:6 : “from the day. . . to this day.” The “walking” denotes the self-witness of the divine presence, might and help in the whole historical development of Israel up to this time. Spake I a word with any one of the tribes of Israel?—Instead of “tribes” (שׁבטי) Chron. has “judges” (שׁפטי), which is adopted by Ewald, Bertheau, Thenius, Bunsen, after 2Sa_7:11. But the “judges” are there mentioned in a totally different connection of thought; and if this were the original word, it would be impossible to explain the origination and general unquestioned acceptance of the difficult “tribes.” The reading of the text “tribes” is to be retained with Maurer, Böttcher, Keil, Hengstenberg. Maurer correctly remarks: “those tribes are to be understood that before the time of David attained the supremacy, as Ephraim, Dan, Benjamin. Böttcher gives a complete list of the tribes that successively attained the headship through the Judges chosen from them. [Abarbanel (quoted by Philipps.) renders “sceptres” = “judges,” but this is not admissible. On the text see “Text. and Gramm.”—Tr.] The “feeding” (a figure derived from the shepherd, who goes before the flock, leads it to pasture and protects it) denotes the guidance and defence of the whole people, to which one tribe was called, and which it accomplished through the judge that represented it. The Chronicler had only the line of judges in mind; his alteration is a collateral text that serves very well to explain the main text. Why build ye not me a house of cedar?25—That is, a permanent and costly sanctuary, worthy of my glory. Comp. 1Ki_8:16, where Solomon, with reference to these words, cites as the Lord’s word: “I chose no city among all the tribes of Israel to build me a house.” Psa_78:67 is in like manner elucidatory of this passage; for there the choice of David as prince, and of Zion as the place of the sanctuary, is represented as if it were the choice of the tribe of Judah after the rejection of Ephraim. [Synopsis Criticorum: In this discourse of God some things are omitted that are afterwards represented as having been said here, as in 1Ki_8:16; 1Ki_8:18; 1Ki_8:25; 1Ch_22:8-9; 1Ch_28:6; it is Scriptural usage not always to report the whole of a discourse, but sometimes to give a brief summary.—Tr.] Thus in 2Sa_7:6-7, looking at the whole past of the people, one side of the reason for the “shalt thou?” in 2Sa_7:5 is given: From the beginning of the history till now a permanent dwelling for the Lord, instead of the moving tent, had neither actually existed (because not possible under the circumstances), nor been divinely commanded. [There is no reproof to David in this.—Tr.]
b. 2Sa_7:8-11. The other side of the reason lies in the history of the Lord’s dealings with David, which point to the fact that the Lord will build David a house before a house can be built to the Lord.
2Sa_7:8. The Lord’s first manifestation of favor to him was his elevation from the lowliness of the shepherd-life to the office and dignity of prince over Israel. “From the sheepfold” (נָוֶה) see Psa_78:70. [Better: “from the pasture.” The word means “habitation,” which in reference to flock means, not where they spend the night (which is, as Thenius says, גְּדֵרָה), but where they feed (see Isa_65:10, where Eng. A. V. has improperly “fold”), and this suits the context of our passage.—Tr.] To this was added the continuous revelation of His gracious presence: 2Sa_7:9.—I was with thee in all thy going.—These two facts, the elevation of David to be king and his constant attendance [by God] in all his walk, answer to the elevation of Israel to be his people, and the Lord’s walking with them (2Sa_7:6-7). The wars hitherto waged form the third stadium: I have cut off all thy enemies before thee.—These wars, however, were the wars of the Lord, waged by Him as king of his people (1Sa_25:28). On this plane of the Lord’s exhibition of power in wars and victories over enemies rises the glory of the great name that the Lord has made for him in the sight of the nations round about (comp. Psa_132:17-18; 1Ch_14:17).
2Sa_7:10. These gradually advancing manifestations of the Lord’s favor to David look to the wellbeing of the people of Israel: 1) He thereby prepared a place for them [Erdmann renders: “I prepared a place,” etc.; see “Text. and Gram.”26—Tr.]; that is, by subduing their enemies made room for a safe, unendangered expansion in the promised land; 2) Planted them—that is, on the soil thus cleansed and made safe He established a firm, deep-rooted national life; 3) They dwell in their [own] place, their life-power unfolds itself within the limits secured them by the Lord; 4) They shall no longer be affrighted by restless enemies. In these words the discourse turns to the future of the people. The sense is: after all these manifestations of favor in the past up to this time, the Lord will for the future assure His people a position and an existence, wherein they shall no more experience the affliction and oppression that they suffered from godless nations. The “as beforetime” refers to the beginning of the people’s history in Egypt. The words in 2Sa_7:11 from “and as since” to “Israel” belong with the “beforetime” as chronological datum, and depend on the “as” in 2Sa_7:10. And from the time when I ordained Judges over my people Israel.—That is, not merely during the period of the Judges, but on from the time when the judges began to lead the people, since the Prep. “from” [Eng. A. V.: “since”] gives only the terminus a quo, and consequently the period of the continuous oppression of the people by surrounding nations in the time after the judges till now is not excluded. This glance at the history of Israel’s affliction and oppression from the beginning on answers to the glance at the Lord’s presence and walk with them during their long period of wandering. All this the Lord has done to the people through His servant David (comp. Psa_89:22-24). The usual connection of these words with the following: “and from the time that.… have I caused thee to rest” (so still Hengst. ubi sup. [p. 130]) is untenable—because: 1) we thus have the impossible statement that God gave David rest from the beginning of the period of the Judges on, and 2) the period of the Judges was any thing but a time of quiet. And I give thee rest from all thy enemies.—The verb (Perf. with Waw consec.) is to be understood of the future, as is usual with this form when, as here, a future precedes. “In the quiet progress of the discourse the Future here passes over into quiet description” (Ges. § 126, 6). It is also here to be considered that the Perf. refers to Future in asseverations and assurances. To take the verb in a Perfect sense [= I have given rest], the narrative concerning the past in 2Sa_7:9 being thereby resumed (De Wette, Thenius [Bible Commentary, Philippson]), is inadmissible, because the discourse has already in the preceding words turned to the future, and such a retrogressive repetition, considering the rapid advance elsewhere in all these words, would be intolerable. David’s present rest (2Sa_7:1) was only a temporary one—for the hostile nations were ever seeking opportunity to assault Israel. Although David’s wars and victories hitherto had so far firmly established Israel that the former times of “terror and distress” could not return, yet his reign was a constant war with the hostile nations around, in order to maintain the security that had been won, and to ward off the freshly inpressing enemies. To this continuing unquiet refers the first promise of the Lord to David: “I will give thee rest from all thy enemies.” The Chron. has (2Sa_7:10): “and I subdue all thy enemies, and tell it thee, and a house will the Lord build thee.”27 The second declaration is introduced by the words: “the Lord announces to thee” (not, has announced), “causes to be announced.” Thereby the promise itself: The Lord will build thee a house is raised to its supereminent importance above all the preceding words. In it culminates the gradually rising line of the Lord’s exhibitions of favor to David, and through him to the people. The “house” is the royal authority in Israel, which is assured and established for his family. According to these words (2Sa_7:5-11) there are two principal grounds for the Lord’s negative answer to David’s determination to build him a house: 1) as the Lord could have no fixed dwelling-place amid His people, so long as they were wandering out of Canaan, and in Canaan were constantly disquieted by enemies and driven hither and thither, so also David’s rule, in spite of victories over enemies, was still too much disquieted by external enemies that had to be fought, he being especially called thereby to secure to the people a settled permanent existence for the future. Hence now also the dwelling-place of the Lord amid His people can have no other form than that of the tent, the symbol of Israel’s wandering, which was to be ended and quieted first by David’s battles and victories. 2) David had indeed declared that he wished to perform something for the Lord in the building of a house, but this human plan should and could not reach fulfilment except and before the Lord had completed His manifestations of favor to David and carried out His plan, which looked to confirming the royal authority for his house and family forever, and thereby assuring the well-being of the people. What the Lord had hitherto done for David, and through him for Israel, was only the beginning of this confirmation of his kingdom; it was by its assured connection for all the future with David’s posterity that the firm foundation was first laid, on which could be carried out the work of temple-building as the sign of the immovably founded kingdom of peace and of the theocracy that was to exhibit itself in undisturbed quiet in Israel. The meaning of the divine prohibition, therefore, is this: Thou canst not build me a house, for I must first build thee a house, before the building of a house for me is possible. This second principal ground is connected immediately with the first; for the promise could not be fulfilled, unless by the establishment of external peace the condition for the confirmation of David’s house was given. The first ground is more precisely defined in 1Ch_22:7-13; 1Ch_28:3 sq. by the statement that David was not permitted to build the temple on account of his wars: “because thou art a man of war and hast shed blood.” With this agrees Solomon’s word to Hiram, 1Ki_5:3 : “My father could not build a house to the name of the Lord for the wars that were about him.”28
c. 2Sa_7:12-16. The wider expansion and exacter definition of the promise: “I will build thee a house.” 2Sa_7:12 starts from the end of David’s life; after his death the promise will be fulfilled. I will set up thy seed after thee.—The “set up” (הֵקִים) denotes not the “awakening” or bringing into existence, but the elevating the seed to royal rule and power. The “seed” is not the whole posterity, as is clear from the explanatory words in 1Ch_17:11 : “thy seed that shall be of thy sons,” nor merely a single individual, but a selection from the posterity, which will be appointed by God’s favor to succeed David on the throne. Which shall proceed (come) out of thy body.—The seed here spoken of was still in the future when this promise was made to David. We are not, with Thenius, to change “will proceed” (יֵצֵא) to “has proceeded” (יָצָֹא), as if Solomon were then already born. And I will establish his kingdom.—On the setting up and elevation to the royal dignity follows its confirmation to David’s posterity, which has been called to be bearer of the theocratical royal office. This promise was fulfilled in the first place in Solomon, who also expresses his consciousness of this fact in 1Ki_8:20; comp. 1Ki_2:12.
2Sa_7:13. He, this thy seed, will build a house for my name.—The name stands for God Himself, so far as He reveals Himself to His people as covenant-God and makes Himself known in His loftiness and holiness. “To build a house for His name” signifies therefore not simply “in His honor, or as a place to call on Him,” but “to establish a fixed place, which should be the sign and pledge of His abode in Israel.” To the shorter formula: “To the (or, for the) name of the Lord” (comp. 1Ki_8:17-20; 1Ki_8:48; 1Ki_3:2; 1Ki_5:17; 1Ch_22:7; 1Ch_22:19; 1Ch_28:3) answers the longer: “that my name may be there, my name shall be there” (1Ki_8:16; 1Ki_8:29; comp. 2Ch_6:5; 2Ki_23:27), or, “that my name may dwell there” (Deu_12:11; Deu_14:23; Deu_16:11; Deu_26:2; Neh_1:9), or, “that I may put my name there” (1Ki_9:3; 2Ki_21:7).And I will stablish the throne of his kingdom forever.—The royal dominion will not only be one established in David’s house, but also one enduring forever, never to be severed from this house. It is not here the everlasting dominion of one king that is spoken of, but it is said: with the seed of David the kingdom shall remain forever (= everlastingly). The everlasting stay of the kingdom in the house of David is promised. Comp. 2Sa_7:25, where David so understands this divine promise. Comp. Psa_89:30; Psa_72:5; Psa_72:7; Psa_72:17.
2Sa_7:14. I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son.—The relation of fatherhood and sonship will exist between the covenant-God of Israel and the seed of David. This denotes in the first place the relation of the most cordial mutual love, which attests its enduring character by fidelity, and demonstrates its existence towards the Lord by active obedience. But besides this ethical significance of the relation of David’s seed as “son” to God as “its father” (indicated by the Prep, “to”), we must, from the connection, note 1) the origin or descent of the son from the father; the seed of David, entrusted with everlasting kingly dignity, has as such his origin in the will of God, owes his kingdom to the divine choice and call, comp. Psa_2:7; Psa_89:27; Psa_28:2) In the designations “father and son” is indicated community of possession; the seed, as son, receives the dominion from the father as heir, and, as this dominion is an everlasting one, he will, as son and heir, reign forever in possession of the kingdom. The father’s kingdom is an unlimited one, embracing the whole world; so in the idea of sonship there lies, along with everlastingness, the idea of all-embracing world-dominion, on which the son lawfully enters. Comp. Psa_89:26-30; Psa_2:7-9. Whom, if he commits iniquity—that is, not hypothetically, “in case he sin,” but actually, when he sins (as cannot fail to happen); the seed, David’s posterity here spoken of is not exempted from the sin that clings to all men—I will chasten with the rod of men and with the stripes of the children of men.29—That is, with such punishments as men suffer for their sins. David’s seed will be free neither from sin nor from its human punishment. “Grace is not to release David and the Davidic line from this universal human lot, is not to be for them a charter to sin” (Hengst.). Comp. Baur: Gesch. d. altt. Weissag. [Hist. of O. T. Prophecy] I. 392 sq. Such chastisement will not be set aside by the cordial relation of David’s seed as son to the Lord as father, but will rather follow David: The father will punish the son for his sins. The elevation of the latter to such glory above all the children of men is not to be a reason for making him an exception in respect to punishableness, but in this regard he will be equalled with all men before God’s righteousness. Clericus, against the connection, explains the “rod of men” to mean: “moderate punishments, such as parents usually inflict.” Wholly wrong is the rendering: “whom if any one offend, or, against whom if any one sin,” comp. Pffeiffer, Dubia Vexata, V. 2, l. 84, p. 390; Russ, De promissione Davidica soli Messiœ vindicata, Jen., 1713. In Psa_89:31-33 we have the further elucidation: “If his sons forsake my law and walk not in my judgments.… I will visit them with the rod of their sin and with the stripes of their iniquity.” Chron. omits this declaration in order to bring out the more strongly the following thought that the divine favor will, in spite of sin, remain with David’s seed (Hengst. ubi sup. [p. 135]).
2Sa_7:15. But my favor shall not depart from him.—It is presupposed that in his sinning he remains faithful to the Lord, not departing from Him, and that the chastisement leads him to repentance (comp. 1Ch_28:9; Psa_132:12). This is clear from the following words: as I took it from Saul whom I put away before thee.—Comp. 1Sa_15:23; 1Sa_15:26; 1Sa_15:28. “Before thee,” before thy face; Saul and his kingdom had to disappear before David, who, with his kingdom took their place, and with whose seed the kingdom will remain forever in spite of the sins that shall be found in the individuals of his posterity, “his sons” (Psa_89:31). “The contrast is that between the punishment of sin in individuals and the favor that remains permanently with the family, whereby the divine promise becomes an unconditioned one” (Hengst.).
2Sa_7:16. And thy house and thy kingdom shall be permanent, as the result of the permanent favor and grace assured to David’s seed (comp. Psa_89:29; Psa_89:38; Isa_55:3 [“sure mercies of David,” same word as is here rendered “established” in Eng. A. V.—Tr.]), and as the lasting fulfilment of the promise in verse 2 Samuel 12 : “I will raise up, lift up thy seed.” The word “before thee” is arbitrarily changed by Sept. and Syr. into “before me.” Böttcher explains: “in thy conception” (comparing 2Sa_7:26; 2Sa_7:29; 1Ki_8:50), and adds: “the reference is to the outlook of the living, not to a conscious participation still granted to the dead.” O. v. Gerlach: “David, as ancestor and beginner of the line of kings, is conceived of as he who passes all his successors before him in vision.” Thy throne will be firm forever.—This answers to the words in 2Sa_7:12 : “and I will confirm his kingdom,” as the continuous effect of this promise. In the “forever” (here twice given and resumed from 2Sa_7:13) in the promise of the everlasting kingdom connected with the house of David, the prophecy culminates. On the “firm” [גָכוֹן, Eng. A. V.: “established,” different from the word so rendered in the former part of this verse, which = “sure,” “faithful.”—Tr.], comp. Mic_4:1, and on the “forever” comp. Psa_72:17; Psa_89:37; Psa_45:7; Psa_110:4; Psa_132:11-12. Comp. Joh_12:34.
2. David’s prayer.
2Sa_7:17-29.
2Sa_7:17. Conclusion of the preceding section and introduction to the following. According to all these words and according to all this vision.—The words, as the content of God’s revelation to Nathan, are distinguished from the vision as indication of its form and mode. To suppose a dream here (Thenius) because the revelation occurred at night (2Sa_7:4) is inadmissible—since nothing is said of a dream; for the vision (חָזוֹן=חִזָּיוֹן) is every where distinguished from the revelation by dream (Keil); and in Isa_29:7 the word “dream “is expressly added in order to indicate a “vision” that occurred in a dream. Our word signifies the view, vision, as the result of the looking or gazing of the prophets (who are called חֹזִיִם, gazers, seers) with the inner sense, whether in a waking state or in a dream. In the former case the “vision” may denote either collectively a number of divine revelations, taken as a whole (so Isa_1:1; Oba_1:1; Nah_1:1), or, a single revelation, as here (so Eze_7:26; Dan_8:1-2; Dan_8:15; Dan_8:17). But it is not the vision or view in itself that forms the essence and substance of the prophetic revelation, but rather the “word” or the “words” of the Lord, which as medium of the Spirit of God come to the prophetic spirit; the vision is the psychical form under which the revelation takes place. David’s answer to the Lord falls into three parts: Thanks for the exceeding abundant favor shown him and his house now in this revelation (2Sa_7:18-21), Praise to the Lord for the great things He has done for His people in the past (2Sa_7:22-24), and Prayer for the fulfilment of the promise in the future (2Sa_7:25-29).
a. 2Sa_7:18-21. David’s thanksgiving for the Lord’s gracious manifestation in the great promise now received.—The words “David went in… before Jehovah” indicate the powerful impression that Nathan’s communication made on David’s soul; the divine revelation received compels him to betake himself to the sanctuary “into the presence” of the Lord, where he “remained” (רַיֵּשֶׁב tarried [Eng. A. V. sat]) sunk in contemplation and prayer. It cannot be inferred from Exo_17:12 that David is to be thought of here as sitting; for Moses there sat from weariness after long prayer. The verb (יָשַׁב usually “sit”) is often used in the general sense: “remain, tarry.” [Bib. Comm. correctly points out that, even if the verb be rendered “sat,” it is not necessary to suppose that David prayed sitting. He may have risen to pray after meditation. Yet sitting under such circumstances would be a respectful attitude, and elsewhere we have no proof in the Scriptures of a customary attitude in prayer; that Solomon (1Ki_8:22) and Ezra and the Levites (Neh_8:4; Neh_9:4) stood was due to the peculiar circumstances. It is not stated in what place David offered his prayer; it may have been in his own house or in some part of the tabernacle.30—Tr.]—The content of this thanksgiving-prayer is like a clear glass, wherein we see into the innermost depths of David’s heart. His soul, wholly taken up with the divine revelation and promise, expresses itself in the following utterances, which follow one another quickly in accordance with the internal excitement of feeling: 1) The humble confession of unworthiness in respect to all manifestations of favor hitherto made to him and his house Who am I, Lord Jehovah, and what is my house? The words answer exactly to Jacob’s words in Gen_32:10 as the expression of the deepest humility and feeling of nothingness over against the greatness and glory of God. So in Psa_8:5; Psa_144:3 there is the contrast between the divine loftiness and human lowliness and nothingness. That thou hast brought me hitherto.—David reviews all the past leadings of God’s grace, in respect to which, as manifestations of the divine favor and love, he so feels his unworthiness and nothingness, and at the same time indirectly declares that he has hitherto submitted himself to the Lord’s guidance. 2) David, with like humility, thanks the Lord for this present supereminent manifestation of His favor in the promise relating to the future of his house.
2Sa_7:19. He gives the liveliest expression to his humble and joyfully excited feeling of the greatness and glory of God in the repetition of the preceding address, “Lord Jehovah” (2Sa_7:18), and (comparing the abundant fullness of grace in this present revelation with the former exhibitions of grace, which culminate in it) in the first sentence of this verse (from the beginning to “great while to come”). From the far future [Eng. A. V.: “for a great while to come”], that is, of my house; the promise refers to favors in the far future for his house. The sense is: if, looking at former undeserved favors, I must bow low with the feeling of unworthiness, much more in view of the promises made out of free grace to my house for the far future. The last sentence of this verse (וְזֹאת תּוֹרַת הָאָדָם) is as enigmatic as the parallel passage, 1Ch_17:17 (וּרְאִיתַני כְּתוֹר הָאָדָם הַמַּעֲלָה). At the outset it must be assumed as certain that this word torah [Eng. A. V.: manner] never=“manner, custom, mode of acting” (מִשְׁפָּט ,חק). Therefore the explanation (in itself very agreeable and easy): “and this (hast thou spoken) after the manner of men, thou actest with me, that stand so infinitely below thee, in human manner,—that is, in such friendly manner as men use with one another” (Grotius, Gesenius, Winer, Maurer, Thenius, and De Wette: “such is the manner of men”) is as untenable as Luther’s translation: “this is the manner of a man who is God the Lord,” which besides rests on the conception of this passage as directly Messianic (pointing to the incarnation of God in Christ), and incorrectly takes “Lord Jehovah,” which here as before and after is an address, as explanatory apposition to “man.” For the same reason the explanation of Clericus and others is to be rejected: “in human fashion—that is, thou hast cared for me and my family as men do for their children and grandchildren, looking out for their future,” especially as it assigns to David’s words the very trivial thought of caring for a family for the future. Ebrard (Herz. VI. 609) characterizes this expression, “the law of man, of the Lord Jehovah,” as a word of “presageful bewilderment,” and finds the explanation in 1Ch_17:17, where he renders: “Thou hast looked on me like the form of man, who is God, Jehovah above;” David, says Ebrard, saw that he himself was contemplated, but at the same time so that Jehovah appeared to him here as a man, who was also God and enthroned on high, recognizing the fact that the final point of the promised posterity was Jehovah Himself, but Jehovah as man and God.So already S. Schmidt, who (after Chron.) inserts “as” before torah, taking this last=“condition, state” (תּוֹד): “O Jehovah God, Thou hast looked on me.…Thou who, in the humble condition and infirm state of wretched, afflicted man, art in all things made like man.” Apart from the incorrect, direct Messianic interpretation, all these and similar expositions take torah in a sense that it never has. It means regularly law. Hence Dathe and Schultz render: “such is a law for men”—that is, so should my enemies act when they think to hurl my descendants from the throne. So Bunsen: “This (Thy promise) is an indication (law) for men—that is, Thou wilt make Thy will authoritative even among men.” But this explanation requires too much to be supplied in order that the words may be understood. The same thing is true of the rendering of Hengstenberg—which Keil adopts: “The law of man, the law that is to regulate the conduct of men (comp. the expression Lev_6:2 (9), the law of the burnt-offering; 2Sa_14:2, the law of the leper; 2Sa_12:7, the law of the woman that has borne a child), is the law of love to one’s neighbor, Lev_19:18; Mic_6:8; ‘this,’ namely, the Lord’s conduct to him in his love and faithfulness, answers to the law by which men are to be governed in their conduct to one another; when God the Lord so graciously and lovingly condescends to act towards poor mortals according to this law that holds among men, it must fill us with adoring wonder. To this answers the parallel passage in Chron.: and thou sawest me (visitedst me, dealedst with me) after the law of man (תוֹרה = תוֹר), that is, the law of love to one’s neighbor, thou height (!) Jehovah God.” Against this view is to be remarked 1) that it requires too much to be understood in connection with “this” and “law,” 2) that God’s acting according to the law of love (given by Himself) cannot be thus represented as in contrast with His greatness and glory, as if He stood above the conduct that men (according to this law) are to follow, and should therefore be worthy of the greater admiration if He condescended to such conduct.—As torah originally signifies teaching, instruction, both divine (Job_22:22; Psa_19:8) and human (Pro_1:8; Pro_3:1; Pro_4:2; Pro_7:2; Pro_28:7; Pro_28:9), it is possible to render: “and this is a (divine) instruction for (poor, abject) man, to whom Thou so condescendest, O Lord God,” or, to paraphrase with Bunsen: “Thou instructest me (makest disclosures to me) as one man another; so great is thy condescension.” But this rendering, contrary to David’s tone of feeling throughout this whole section, lays all the stress on a formal thing, namely, the fact that God condescends to speak to him, to make disclosures to him, while it must be the content of the Lord’s words about the future of his house that moves him to humble thanksgiving and praise. Not the fact that the Lord condescends to him with His word of revelation (which He has often done before), but what He has now spoken to him is the cause of his humble thanksgiving.—For the explanation of this obscure passage it is further to be considered that these words, uttered abruptly and in lapidary style, are from the connection evidently to be token 1) as the expression of a joyfully excited heart, and 2) as the exclamation of humble astonishment at the greatness and glory of the grace of God in the promise given to his house, in contrast with human lowliness, as is indicated by the word “man” over against the address “Lord Jehovah.” The content of the promise to David’s house for the future, to which David has just referred as the highest evidence of the divine favor, and to which the “this” must beyond doubt be referred, is the divine determination that the kingdom is to be one proper to his house and forever connected with it, and is thus to have an everlasting duration. This is the divine torah or prescription, which is to hold for a weak, insignificant man and his seed, for poor human creatures. In the exclamation “this,” David looks in astonishment and adoration at the glory and the everlastingness (imperishableness) that is promised his house. This kingdom is indeed the kingdom of God Himself, and since it is promised his house forever, divine dignity and divine possession is thus for the farthest future ascribed to this house by that “word of the Lord;” the “Lord Jehovah,” towards whom David already feels so humbled and lowly by reason of His former manifestations of love and favor, now condescends to attach His kingdom in Israel, His everlasting divine dominion forever to his house, to his posterity, that is, to insignificant children of men, by such a law, which is contained in that word of promise. Similarly O. v. Gerlach: “This is an expression of wondering admiration of the gracious condescension of God. Such a law Thou establishest for a man and his house, namely, that Thou promisest it everlasting duration.” Comp. Bunsen: “Of so grand a promise hast Thou, O Eternal One, thought a mortal man worthy.” [Eng. A. V., adopting the interrogative form with negative force, apparently takes the meaning of this sentence to be: “it is not thus that men act towards one another, but Thy ways, O Lord, are above men’s ways.” Against this is that the word torah does not mean “manner” (so Erdmann above), and that the sentence thus stands in no relation as to sense with the parallel passage, 1Ch_17:17.—Other interpretations (see Poole’s Synopsis) take אָדָם as the proper name Adam, and explain: “as Adam’s posterity rule the world, so shall mine rule Israel,” or: “as Thou madest a covenant with Adam and his posterity, so with me and mine;” but the proper name Adam occurs nowhere else in the Davidic period, and this interpretation does not suit the context, especially the sense of unworthiness expressed by David.—This word again is taken as =“a great man” (so Bib.Com. and Abarbanel), or as =“a mean man,” neither of which senses it can have by itself. We cannot therefore explain: “Thou dealest with me as is becoming (to deal with) a great man,” or: “this is the law (or prerogative) of a great man, to found dynasties that are to last into the far future” (Bib. Comm.), which interpretations (though agreeing somewhat with 1Ch_17:17) do not accord with the humility that characterizes the whole passage. Chandler’s rendering: “this is according to the constitution of men,” namely, that the crown should be hereditary (God graciously making it hereditary in David’s family), is somewhat far-fetched and unsuitable to David’s line of thought. The early English commentators mentators generally interpret the passage as directly Messianic; but the context does not permit this.—If our text be retained, the sentence must be rendered: “and this is the law of man,” that is, the promise given is the prescription made for the government of man, who, in comparison with God, is so low, so unworthy of such honor; and Dr. Erdmann’s explanation is the most satisfactory. But regard must be had to 1Ch_17:17, in which it is evidently intended to give the same thought as is given here, and which, as it now stands, is to be rendered: “Thou regardest me according to the line of men on high.” It is difficult to bring these two declarations into harmony. Moreover, the two texts have enough similarity and difference to suggest that one has been altered from the other, or that both are corruptions of the original text. The ancient versions give little or no aid in determining text or meaning; they mostly either render literally, or give paraphrases that cannot be gotten from the existing Hebrew, and that offer no fruitful suggestion. It is noticeable, however, that the Chald. in “Samuel” has: “and this is a vision of men,” while the Sept. in “Chronicles” renders: “Thou regardedst me as a vision of man,” and these translations favor the causative form of the verb in Chron. (Hiph. תַּרְאֵני), or else a reading ראי “vision” instead of תוֹרה or תור.—Ewald (after Chron.) reads the Samuel text: וְהִרְאִתַנִי בְתוֹר הָאָדָם לְמַעֲלָה “and Thou hast made me look on the line of men upwards,” that is, into the future; and Wellhausen changes תּוֹרָה (and תּוֹר) into דּוֹרוֹת “Thou hast made me see generations.”—Since none of the proposed amendments of the text are quite satisfactory (for it is not clear how our present text originated), we must be content to know the general idea of the passage (which does not essentially vary in the renderings of Erdmann, Ewald and Wellhausen), namely, that David here continues his humble acknowledgment of the divine favor.—Tr.]
2Sa_7:20. David here affirms 3) the inexpressibleness and exceeding abundance of the divine favor bestowed on him, and the consequent impossibility of setting forth in words the thankfulness that he feels in his heart. And what shall David say more to thee?—Language fails; silence is here the most eloquent thanks. And thou knowest thy servant, Lord Jehovah.—As in 2Sa_7:19 the exclamation “Lord Jehovah!” formed a sharp contrast to the “man,” so it does here to “thy servant,” answering to the humble consciousness of the endless distance between him and his God, with which, however, is connected the childlike consciousness of immediate cordial community with God: for, as he often elsewhere appeals to God, who knows the heart, for consolation and justification against man, so he does here in respect to his thankful heart, since he is sure of having the testimony of the Omniscient for him (see Psa_40:6; Psa_40:10 [5, 9]).
2Sa_7:21. For thy word’s sake and after thy heart hast thou done all these great things to make them known to thy servant; the concrete “great deeds”31 is here meant, not the abstract “greatness,” see Psa_71:21; Psa_145:3. The word “this” [Eng. A. V. “these”] shows that the great things here referred to are the splendid promises that the Lord announced through Nathan to Him, his servant. Looking, now, at all the great things that the Lord has done for him in this revelation, David declares 4) the supernatural, superhuman eternal ground and origin of these new great manifestations of favor (which exceed all preceding ones) in “the word” and in “the heart” of God, that is, in His free gracious will, which is independent of all human merit. For Thy word’s sake. Chron. 2Sa 2Sa_5:19 : “for thy servant’s sake,” that is, because Thou hast chosen and called me to be king of Israel. “For David does not boast before God that his own merit had gained him these things” (Cler.). According to this point of view “the word” is perhaps that word of choice and destination given in 1Sa_16:12 (“the Lord said, Arise, anoint him, for this is he”), as Hengst. supposes. It is possibly, however, the old prophecy concerning the Tribe of Judah in Gen_49:10; “for that David recognized the connection between the promise given him through Nathan and the prophecy of Gen_49:10, is shown by 1Ch_28:4, where he represents his choice to be king as the result of the choice of Judah to be prince” (Keil). [It does not appear from this passage in Chron. that David means more than that the tribe of Judah had been now selected in his person as the royal tribe.—Tr.]. “And according to thy heart,” that is, according to the love and grace by which thy heart is filled, from thy loving will.32 Clericus: “From the spontaneous motion of thy mind, without external incitement.” Comp. Exo_34:6; Psa_103:8. Over against “God’s heart” as the source of the great favor received David sets his heart as filled with humble thanks therefor; but his word of thanks must stand dumb before the clear Yea and Amen and the earlier words of promise of God, the Yea and Amen of which is this exhibition of favor. In thus deriving it from God’s faithfulness to His promise, and from His heart-love, he adds the positive thought to the negative “who am I?” of 2Sa_7:18, and so leads the conclusion of this thanksgiving back to its beginning. [“To make thy servant know,” or, as in Chron. (2Sa_5:19) “to make known all (these) great things.” God not only in His sovereign mercy determined great things for David, but further for his consolation and strengthening made them known to him through His prophet.—Tr.]
b. 2Sa_7:22-24. Praise of the Lord’s greatness and incomparable glory as manifested by this highest exhibition of favor, in accord with the great deeds whereby in times of old He made Himself known to His people as their God.
2Sa_7:22. Therefore, because Thou hast done so great things for me, on the ground of this experience of Thine abounding favor, thou art great, Lord God; comp. 2Sa_7:26 : “and Thy name will be great,” not: “considered great” (Luth.), nor: “be Thy name praised by me” (5. Gerl., Then.), but it is an assertion of greatness manifested objectively in facts. The factual confession “great is the Lord” (comp. Psa_35:27; Psa_40:17 (16) is precisely praise to God. —Now follows the ground for this praise of the Lord’s greatness: For there is none like thee—this declares God’s incomparableness. Comp. Exo_15:11 “who is like thee, etc.?” Deu_3:24. And there is not a God beside thee, declaration of God’s aloneness and exclusiveness, comp. Deu_4:35; 1Sa_2:2. According to all that we have heard with our ears;33 David here passes from the contemplation of the greatness, incomparableness and soleness, wherein the Lord has declared Himself to him in the present, to the praise of God in the review of the great deeds whereby in the past He has revealed Himself to His people as such a God. “In Psa_40:6 David rises, just as here, from his personal experience to the whole line of God’s glorious manifestations in the history of His people” (Hengst.).
2Sa_7:23. And what nation is as thy people, as Israel any [nation] on earth? The initial “and,” according to the sense, gives the factual ground of what precedes. We cannot render: “where is, as Israel, a nation, etc.” (De W. [and Luther])34, nor “for whose sake God went, etc.”, (Hengst.), but must translate: “what nation … whom God, etc.” Elohim35 here stands with a plural verb—as often elsewhere where heathen idol-worship is referred to, as in Exo_32:4; Exo_32:8, where Elohim is used of the golden calf (“these are thy gods, that brought thee out of Egypt”), comp. Deu_4:7; 1Ki_12:29, while, as name of the God of Israel, it has a singular verb or other complement—because the thought is here intended to be expressed that there is no nation but Israel that had been redeemed by its deity or its idols by such a deed as that by which the true God had redeemed Israel to be His people. It is therefore unnecessary to change the verb into the singular, reading “brought” ( הוֹלִיךְ) [הוֹלִכוֹ] instead of “went” (הָלְכוּ). In consequence of God’s great deeds Israel is a people sole of its kind, to be compared with no other, comp. Deu_4:7; Deu_33:29. By His great deed, the deliverance out of Egypt, He has proved Himself to His people to be the only God, besides whom there is no God, and with whom no other is to be compared (Exo_15:11-13; Deu_4:34). Whom God went (put Himself in motion) to purchase to himself (redeem) for a people; the deliverance from Egypt was the suigeneric, incomparable deed of the incomparable, sole God, whereby He made Israel an independent nation and gained them out of all nations as His own possession. And to make himself a name; that deed of redemption is the factual historical proof that He is the true God, who has not His equal, and the God of Israel in the fulness of His might and of the revelation of His grace, and this fulness it is that makes His name. In this His name (whereby Israel only knows and names Him as the God that led them out of Egypt) He is contrasted with the vain idols of the heathen nations as the one true God (Jos_24:17; Jdg_2:1; Jdg_2:12; Jdg_6:13).—And to do for you great things and terrible. The “for you” refers not to “gods” (Elohim), but to “people;” but it is not necessary to change the text to “for them” (after the Vulgate), because, David’s soul being filled and excited with the thought of his people, in the course of his prayer his words turn suddenly in increasing vividness from reference to the people naturally and immediately to the people itself, and “since also 1 Chronicles 17. has in its ‘for thee’ this easily explicable leap to an address to the thing spoken of” (Böttch.). [But the address to the people is much harder than the address to God, and it seems better to read “for them.”—Tr.].—On the other hand, the “for thy land” gives no good sense without forcing, and Chron. has instead of this “to drive out” (2Sa_7:21). It is therefore better (with the Sept. τοῦ ἐκβαλεῖν σε) to suppose a clerical error, and (taking לְגָרֶשְׁךָ as the true text) to render: (namely) that thou drovest out before thy people.—The frightful, terrible things are the great deeds of the Lord in connection with the destruction of the heathen nations. On this idea comp. Exo_15:11; Deu_10:21. The fundamental passage respecting the expulsion of foreign nations is Exo_23:27-33, where this verb “drive out” (גּרשׁ) is repeatedly used. Which thou redeemedst to thee from Egypt.—This fundamental deed of the God of Israel is expressly mentioned in this parenthetical sentence, because the right of property that He thereby had in His people chosen out of the nations, necessarily led to His maintaining and defending them against the heathen nations, and the destruction of the Egyptians in this deed was the prelude to God’s for Israel “great” but for the hostile Canaanites “terrible deeds,” whereby He placed Israel in position to drive their enemies out of the land. The heathen and their gods; these words depend on the verb “drovest out.” Keil (who retains the “for thy land,” rejecting the alteration according to Chron.) takes these words as apposition to “from Egypt” and supplies the prep. “from” before them [so Eng. A. V. and Philippson.—Tr.].—But this construction is inadmissible, because the Plur. “nations” does not accord with the Sing. “Egypt.” After the deliverance from Egypt David will celebrate the expulsion of the heathen from Canaan as a great deed of God. The Sing. suffix [Heb. “nations and its gods”] gives no sense after the Plu. noun; to take it distributively, as Keil does (“the gods of each of these heathen nations”), is too hard; we must therefore read the Plu. suffix “their gods.”
2Sa_7:24. The result of God’s mighty deeds stated in 2Sa_7:23. And thou hast confirmed to thyself thy people Israel, comp. 2Sa_7:10; it is God’s act whereby in the conquered land the people were led to the firm establishment of their dwellings, their possessions, and their whole life. The thought does not go back to the time of Moses, but advances from the foregoing fact of the subjection and expulsion of “the heathen nations and their gods” to the establishment of the people in Canaan. To be a people to thee forever. The design of God’s gracious benefits was: 1) Israel was to belong to Him alone as His property;36 through God’s mighty deeds the long-since executed choice of the people as His property is ever anew confirmed, and their obligation, to belong to and serve Him alone as people, ever repeated. 2) “For ever” they were to belong to Him as His people. This appointment of the people to be everlasting is remarkable; there shall never cease to be such a people of possession on the ground of such gracious manifestations and saving acts of the Lord. To this idea of the everlasting continuance of a people of God, (—“all nations are finally merged in this people, the divine Israel, the congregation of Jesus Christ,” O. v. Gerlach), answers the promise of the everlasting continuance of the throne of David, which gave him occasion thus to praise God for His deeds, whereby He has established and prepared Israel for Himself as His people forever. And thou, Lord, art become their God, as Israel has become Thy people. This His relation to His people as their God has been established by all His revelations and deeds; for He has thereby testified that He is their God and given Himself to them as their own. The people on their part have contributed nothing thereto. The Lord’s free grace in its great and glorious manifestation is the source and origin of this covenant-association, wherein God is His people’s God and the people their God’s people. [Bib. Com. here refers well to Gen_17:7-8; Exo_6:7—Tr.]
c. 2Sa_7:25-29. David’s prayer for the fulfilment of the promise, attached to his thanksgiving for the past, his glance passing from the splendor of the present (to which the promise has led him) to the future.
2Sa_7:25. David here distinguishes between the two applications of the promise, to him personally and to his house: that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant and concerning his house; “establish it forever,” as indeed it has promised the everlasting continuance of the house and of the kingdom. Let thy word become deed.
2Sa_7:26. Design or consequence of the fulfilment: that thy name may become great forever.—David has in eye, as the highest end of the fulfilment, not the honor of his house, not the glory of the people, but solely the honor of the Lord. Saying, the Lord of Sabaoth is God over Israel, that is, “the almighty God, who rules heaven and earth, is the defender and protector of Israel, His people; He attests Himself as their God by protecting the royal house on which depends Israel’s welfare” (Hengst.). And the house of thy servant David will be established before thee.—The petition here assumes the form of confident hope. This expression of definite expectation by reason of its boldness needs basing on a sure foundation, as is done in 2Sa_7:27, where it returns to the form of confident petition. For this reason the initial particle in 2Sa_7:27 (כִּי) is to be rendered “for” (with Luth., Buns., De W., Hengst.) as giving the ground of what precedes, and not to be connected with the following “therefore”: “because thou… therefore has” (Böttch., Then.). The former rendering accords with the liveliness of feeling with which David prays; the latter gives a construction too sluggish for his feeling. For thou, Lord of Sabaoth, hast uncovered the ear of thy servant, that is, hast revealed to him through thy word (comp. 1Sa_9:15), saying, a house will I build thee.—David goes back to this fundamental promise, because in it are contained all the manifestations of favor that are promised to his family for the future. It is on the firm basis of this word, wherein the Lord acknowledged him and condescended to him, that David founded that confident petition: Therefore has thy servant found his heart, that is, found courage [Eng. A. V. “found in his heart”]. Heart = courage, Gen_42:28; 1Sa_17:32; Psa_40:13 [12] and often elsewhere.—In 2Sa_7:28 and 2Sa_7:29 follows the conclusion and the completion of the petition; its ground on the subjective side of confidence and courage (which is exhibited in 2Sa_7:25-26) having been given by appeal to the divine promise (2Sa_7:27), the content (not yet expressed) of that which completes the petition, is based on the truth of the Lord’s word [that is, he first (2Sa_7:28) appeals to God’s truth and then (2Sa_7:29) sets forth his petition in final form.—Tr.]. And now, Lord Jehovah, thou art God,37 and thy words are truth, not: “may thy words be truth,” [nor, “will be truth.”—Tr.]. The following words of the verse are to be taken as protasis (Thenius): And thou spakest this goodness to thy servant, wherein the content of the promises is briefly condensed and recapitulated.
2Sa_7:29. The “and now” resumes the “and now” of 2Sa_7:28 : And now begin (not: let it please thee) to bless (Sept., Vulg.) the house of thy servant that it may continue forever before thee; the everlasting continuance of the house depends on the blessing of the Lord; the beginning in the blessing that secures the everlasting continuance is related to the “forever.” [Erdmann here follows Thenius in rendering “begin” instead of “let it please thee” as Eng. A. V.; the Hebrew word properly means “to set one’s self to do a thing with free determination of will,” and the rendering of the Septuagint and Vulgate “begin” is only a very general one and not very correct. We cannot easily find a better rendering than that of Eng. A. V., which is the usual one; other possible translations are: “make up thy mind, set thyself to, take in hand.”—Tr.] For thou, Lord Jehovah, hast spoken; these words represent the content of 2Sa_7:28 as the divine ground of the desired fulfilment of the promise, since in them is given the security for the confident hope that is expressed in the concluding word: And from [or, with] thy blessing will the house of thy servant be blessed forever. Instead of “thou wilt bless,” it reads: “from thy blessing” as the source of all blessings “will the house of thy servant” to which thou hast promised everlasting existence “be blessed forever,” which is the condition of everlasting continuance. David’s prayer is completed by the expression of confident hope, and goes over into prophecy. [This future rendering of the last clause gives a richer sense and one more appropriate in the connection (God has spoken and it will be so) than the optative form of Eng. A. V. So substantially 1Ch_17:27.—Tr.].
HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL
1. Historically the divine revelation and promise that came to David through Nathan, concerning the theocratic-messianic kingdom that was forever connected with his seed, presupposes the previous development of the idea of the theocratic kingdom. Comp. pp. 68 sqq., 186 sqq. [Hist. and Theol. to 1 Samuel 8.]. In this development (which advances from the general to the particular, from the promise of salvation for all nations to be realized through the whole nation descended from Abraham) the promise that assigns to the house and family of David the position of bearer and mediator of the Messianic blessing is based on the prophecy which, out of the seed of Abraham as represented by the twelve sons of Jacob and the corresponding tribes, designates the tribe of Judah as the bearer of a royal dominion that embraces and brings peace to all the nations of the earth (Gen_49:10). “While up to this time the tribe only had been designated in which an imperishable dominion was to be established, and out of which at last the Saviour was to come, under David the designation of the family also was added” (Hengst. Christol. [Eng. tr., p. 123]). The really existing theocratic kingdom, as exhibited in David’s government, approximated very nearly to the ideal significance of the kingdom over Israel; that is, to being God’s dominion over His people through the human organ chosen by Him, who was in humility and obedience unconditionally to subject his own will to the divine will. On the basis of this fact the prophecy of a future seed of David, that should, in the possession of an everlasting royal dominion, stand in closest community with God as His son, could take shape, as here in Nathan’s word. In contrast with the kingdom of Saul, which came into sharp opposition to the idea of the absolute divine dominion in Israel, and consequently into permanent conflict with the other theocratic institutions (the Prophetic office and the Priesthood), there appeared, through the rule of David, the man after God’s own heart (1Sa_13:14), on the one hand, the idea of the theocracy, in such manner that David regarded himself only as the “servant of the Lord,” and wished to be nothing but the humble, obedient instrument of the divine government over the people, and on the other hand, the royal office was elevated to the position of being the controlling and centralizing point of all the theocratic main elements of the national life. This, then, was the basis of the further development of the Messianic idea, the way for which was paved by Nathan’s word to David, wherein the idea of the theocratic kingdom, which reached its highest point in David, was most intimately connected with David’s royal house.
2. The historical character of Nathan’s prophecy shows itself in the first place in its factual occasion. This lies in the relative contrast in the plans of human and divine wisdom. David’s plan, after subduing his enemies, to build a temple to the Lord’s honor in the midst of His people, together with Nathan’s agreement thereto, corresponds thoroughly with the theocratic disposition of the two men, and with their recognition of the Lord’s relation to His people as the people of His possession, and of the people’s character as a priestly kingdom. But according to God’s thought, the right time for this was not yet come; for the execution of this plan (which is not in itself rejected) the divine wisdom demands 1) that the present condition of the people should cease, for (despite David’s victories) they were still surrounded by threatening heathen nations, had not found sure and permanent rest, and so God’s sanctuary must still be a wandering tent; 2) that David’s house and the kingdom therewith connected should be completely, forever and finally established as basis for the unfolding of the divine dominion [theocracy] over the people of Israel and the other nations, as this dominion was to be exhibited in God’s enthroned dwelling in the permanent house [temple]. Nathan is made acquainted with these thoughts and ways of God’s wisdom through a divine revelation, in consequence of which he now in his divine-prophetic word does not indeed principially [fundamentally or essentially] reject the plan to build a temple to the Lord, but still announces the Lord’s will that the execution of this plan is to be reserved for the seed of David. The view that the prophet’s restraining word declares that Jehovah needs in general no stately house (Diestel, Jahrb. f. deutsche Theol., 1863, p. 559) finds no support in the text, which says nothing more in 2Sa_7:5 than that David should not build; and the assertion (ubi sup.) that the prohibition is in no way based on grounds derived from the special situation is obviously opposed to the statement of reasons in 2Sa_7:6-11, wherein Israel’s wanderings are connected with the still continuing unrest and insecurity of David’s time (the enemies being yet not definitively subdued), and the thought is clearly enough expressed that the temple cannot yet be built because quiet is still to be secured against enemies. There is, therefore, no ground for referring (Diestel) the prohibition of the temple-building to an ancient strict opinion [against such building]; nothing of this sort can be meant here, since the symbolical conception of God’s dwelling in space amid His people in a permanent temple is no more opposed to the strict conception of the being [essence] of God than that of His dwelling in a movable tent. And so also there is no sufficient ground for assigning this prohibition to some one else than Nathan, to Gad, for example. Rather the section 2Sa_7:4-16 is in accord both with the historical situation that it presupposes and to which it refers, and with itself.—From another side the concrete38 reference to Solomon’s birth and the temple-building to be completed by him has been adduced against the purely historical character of the words of Nathan and David; it is affirmed to be clear—from this reference, and from a comparison between it and the ideal picture of the kingdom contained in the words, and by comparing the brief and very peculiar “last words of David,” especially 2Sa_23:5—that we have here a later post-Solomonic remodelling of the original promise, and that this original promise, which was of a more general form, was at a later time more distinctly stated according to events that had meantime occurred (G. Baur, ubi sup., p. 394, 405). Against which, however, is to be remarked 1) that those special designations are by no means so concretely set forth; there is nothing but a general statement of the raising up of the seed after David and of a building of the temple by this seed; 2) Solomon’s discourse in 1Ki_5:5 presupposes that Nathan’s words contained precisely this statement. Thenius also opposes this supposition of an ex post facto remodelling of these prophetic words, remarking (p. 176, 2d ed.): “For the rest there is no ground to suppose with De Wette that Nathan’s prophecy was not composed till after Solomon; Psalms 89. (2Sa_7:4-5; 2Sa_7:20-29 [3, 4, 19–37], especially 2Sa_7:20 [19]), Psa_132:11-12, and Isa_55:3 attest its historical truth, and rightly understood it as Messianic also.”—To this must be added that David’s prayer (2Sa_7:18-29) which in its peculiar individuality bears the marks of genuineness or originality, presupposes the whole content of Nathan’s words as here reported, especially the reference to the future and to the everlasting continuance of David’s house (comp. 2Sa_7:19; 2Sa_7:25-27; 2Sa_7:29); and so also his Psalms 18. (2 Samuel 22), especially the close, and his last word (2Sa_23:1-7).
3. The chief points in the content of this prophecy, which is introduced by the word: “Not thou shalt build for the Lord a house, but the Lord will build thee a house,” are the following (in order of mention): 1) God promises David a seed destined and called to be the bearer of the theocratical kingdom. It is true, the promise relates to David’s house in general (2Sa_7:11; 2Sa_7:16; 2Sa_7:19; 2Sa_7:25-27; 2Sa_7:29). But the house is not identical with the seed, to whom refer the declarations that form the gist of the prophecy. This seed is not the whole posterity, but a selection from it; comp. 2Sa_7:12 : “I will raise up thy seed after thee” with 1Ch_17:11, according to which the seed is to be of the sons of David; nor is it restricted to a single person, but signifies the posterity selected and appointed by God, which is to be bearer for all future time of the theocratic kingdom. 2) For this seed chosen by God’s free grace, wherein is represented the house that the Lord builds for David, the kingdom is firmly established; the securely established royal authority will be attached to the house of David (2Sa_7:12). 3) To the Davidic kingdom, the bearer of which is David’s seed, an everlasting duration is promised; the reference is not to the everlasting rule of a single king, but to the endless continuance of the kingdom of David’s seed. Like the promised kingdom, the house of David also has a perpetual duration (2Sa_7:13; 2Sa_7:16). 4) God promises to be the Father of David’s seed, and pledges it such an intimate relation to Himself that it shall be His son. As God is the Father of the people of Israel by the fact that He has chosen them as His people by free grace, made them His people by redemption, led them by His paternal love, obligated them to obedience, and sanctified them to be the people of His possession, so He is the Father of the everlasting royal seed of David by the fact that He has chosen it for His kingly house in Israel, and made and formed it to be bearer of His everlasting dominion over His people, and it is His son by love of most intimate fellowship with God, and by the humble obedience wherein it thoroughly subjects its will to the divine will. “As all Israelites are sons of Jehovah (Deu_14:1), so must the king be in special measure, but only as the head of the chosen people of God” (Diestel, ubi sup. 559). 5) On the ground of this relation of father and son the favor of God will abide unchanged with the seed of David, that is, the theocratic king. He will, indeed, be punished for the sins into which he falls; but these chastisements will never reach the point of rejection, as happened in Saul’s case; the sins of David’s seed will, for the sake of the promise given to David, never set aside the divine counsel.—“The word of the prophet Nathan and the thanksgiving of David mark the culmination of the Davidic history” (Baumgarten).
4. The significance of the prophecy for the Messianic expectation of salvation. The direct Messianic reference to Christ (Tertull. ad Marc. iii. 20; Lactant. divin. instit. 4, 13; August. de civ. Dei, 17, 8; Rupert von Deutz, Beza, S. Schmid, Calov, Pfeiffer, Buddeus, and other old theologians [Patrick (in part), A. Clarke]) stands (apart from the un-historical view of the nature of Messianic prophecy that lies at its foundation) in contradiction with the sinning of David’s seed (2Sa_7:14-15), whereby a purely human and sinful posterity is designated, and with the temple-building (2Sa_7:13), which can only be understood of earthly work. [Some attempt to set aside these objections to a direct Messianic interpretation by suggesting that the sin in the case of Christ is the sin He bore for men, as in Isaiah 53. (Gill), or by rendering 2Sa_7:14 “even in his suffering for iniquity I shall chasten him,” etc. (A. Clarke), and by regarding the house built by Christ as a spiritual one; but this translation of the Heb. is not admissible, and the spiritualizing in the other case is harsh and contrary to the plain meaning of the text. Such a prophecy must be treated as that of the “Servant of Jehovah” in Isaiah and as the Parable of the Prodigal Son; the main spiritual idea must be determined, and its fulfilment looked for in the Messiah, without attempting to transfer all the details into the sphere of permanent spiritual history.—Tr.]—The limitation of the prophecy to Solomon and his immediate posterity (Rabbinical writers, Grotius) is opposed to the “everlasting” duration that is promised the Davidic kingdom, and that cannot be weakened into a designation of a long period of time (comp. Psa_89:30 [29]). [The phrase “forever” (the Eng. rendering of several different but substantially equivalent phrases in Heb.) sometimes indicates a limited period of time (as in 1Sa_1:22), where the limitation is determined by the nature of the case or by statements in the context; here the absence of any special limiting statements, taken in connection with the general tone of the promises to Israel in the Old Test., leads us to the conclusion that an unlimited duration is intended to be expressed.—Tr.]—The interpretation that refers the words in part immediately and directly to Christ, in part to Solomon and his nearest posterity is found already in Theodoret (2 Reg. quœst. 21), who explains 2Sa_7:12-13 a, 14 b, 15 of David’s immediate bodily descendants, but 2Sa_7:13 b, 14 a, 16 of Christ. So also Brenz: “he does not wholly exclude Solomon, yet refers principally to Christ.” Similarly Sack (Apologet. 243 sq.) says that the seed of 2Sa_7:12-13 is to be understood of the Messiah, but the content of 2Sa_7:14-15 of the earlier scions of the Davidic house, from whom, notwithstanding their sins, the kingdom is never or at least not soon to be withdrawn. But this supposition of a double reference is as much opposed by the unity and continuity of the prophet’s thoughts and views (as traced in the Exposition) as the related supposition (based on the presupposition of a double sense in the Scripture) according to which Nathan’s word refers in the literal sense to Solomon, in the mystical sense to Christ (Glass, philol. sacra, p. 272). [We must distinguish between this mechanical view of a double sense in Scripture and the view that assigns to certain persons and things a typical-prophetical position in the development of the plan of salvation.—Tr.]
In the first place it must be determined in what respect we are to suppose a factual fulfilment of this promise in David’s own lifetime, and then in his posterity. David himself, in 1Ch_22:9 sq., refers them first to Solomon, applying to him the words: “he will be to me a son and I will be to him a father, and I will establish the law of his kingdom over Israel for ever.” David does the same in 1Ch_28:2 sq., both times with the exhortation faithfully to observe the commandments and judgments of God, and by obedience to the Lord’s will to live worthy of his high calling in order that the promise might be fulfilled. So also Solomon applies the promise to himself, 1Ki_5:5; 2Ch_6:7 sq.; 1Ki_8:17-20. In 1Ki_9:4-5 God confirms to him the power given to David, assuring him that if he would walk before His face as David did, and faithfully keep His commandments, He would establish the throne of his dominion forever, in accordance with His promise to David: “there shalt not fail thee a man from the throne of Israel.”—Punishment for his defection from the living God was visited on Solomon by the separation of the Ten Tribes under Jeroboam; but the promise that His favor should yet not be withdrawn from David’s house is also fulfilled, the kingdom “for David’s sake” and “that David, the servant of the Lord, might always have a light before him in Jerusalem, which He had chosen to put His name there,” remaining to the seed of David, which for this sin “is to be afflicted, but not forever.” The humbling of David’s seed was to be only temporary, and the promise of the everlasting kingdom was to be fulfilled not in Jeroboam’s house, but in David’s, 1Ki_11:31-39. Abijah, the son of Rehoboam, walked in the sins of his father, and his heart was not wholly with the Lord; but for David’s sake the Lord his God gave Rehoboam a light in Jerusalem, in that he raised up his son after him and let Jerusalem stand, because David had done what was right in the sight of the Lord (1Ki_15:4-5). Jehoram did that which was evil in the eyes of the Lord; but the Lord would not destroy Judah for David his servant’s sake, as He had promised to give him a light in his sons alway (2Ki_8:18-19). “While prophecy announces the downfall of one dynasty after another of the Ten Tribes, it also indeed threatens individual apostate kings in Judah with the divine judgment, but never questions the continuance of the right of David’s family to the throne. David’s crown may be taken away; but there will come one to whom it belongs, Eze_21:32 [27]” (Œhler, Herz. IX. 412). The promise is thus referred to all David’s descendants that were called to the throne from Solomon on (comp. Psa_89:20-50; Psa_132:10-11) in accordance with the word of David in 2Sa_7:25, wherein he speaks of the promise of an everlasting kingdom as one that is given forever to his house.—Nathan’s prophecy has thus in the first place a fundamental significance for the development of the kingdom of God and the salvation therein unfolded, in so far as from now on for all time the kingdom of Israel with its theocratic calling to realize God’s dominion in the life of His people, and to fulfil the ends of His kingdom, towers far above the Prophetic Office (as the organ of the revelation and announcement of God’s will to His people), and above the High-priesthood (as expiatory mediation between the sinful people and the holy God). All hopes and expectations of the future salvation under the theocracy that is realizing itself in the people attach themselves to the idea of the theocratic kingdom, which is the representative and manifestation of the kingdom of God itself and therefore everlasting, as also the people of God themselves have received the promise of everlasting duration (Deu_11:21). But this kingdom is exclusively the Davidic; with the seed of David (so far as this seed is chosen and appointed for it) it goes forth as everlasting bearer of the favors and blessings of God, of which the people partake on the ground of the covenant that God has concluded with David (Isa_55:3). “Things may indeed be affirmed of every king that sits on David’s throne that are true in the first instance not of him personally, but of the kingdom that he represents (comp. passages like Psa_21:5; Psa_21:7; Psa_61:7). But, impelled by the Spirit, the sacred poesy produces a kingly form that far transcends what the present shows, and exhibits the Davidic and Solomonic kingdom in its archetypal completeness” (Oehler, Herz. IX. 412). The idea of the theocratic Davidic kingdom of everlasting duration, and with the stamp of sonship assumes from this prophecy a concrete form in the ideal of a theocratic king who proceeds from the seed of David. This latter is called in Psa_2:7; Psa_2:12, “the son of God” absolutely; in Psa_110:1 declared to be the ruler that shares with God His unlimited might and power over heaven and earth, and even David’s lord; in Psalms 72 everlasting dominion to the ends of the earth is ascribed to him, and in Psa_45:2 the name “Elohim, God,” itself is given him. In David’s prophetic word in 2 Samuel 23 this ideal takes the form of a righteous ruler, who introduces a glorious future, in Psalms 2, 110, that of a victorious prince who as son and heir of God in unconquerable power extends his dominion by vigorous battles over the whole earthy and brings His foes to his feet, and in Psalms 72 that of a powerful prince, who conducts His government in divine righteousness, dispenses weal and blessing to the wretched, stretches out His kingdom of peace and its blessings over all princes and nations of the earth and receives their homage.—[More correctly, these passages refer first to a present earthly monarch looked on as representing the ideal king, and their assertions, partially true of the finite earthly king, are to be realized in one that shall be identical with the ideal.—Tr.] Further the promise given to David is the foundation of all Messianic prophecies and hopes in the prophets concerning the completion of the kingdom of God, its revelations of grace and its blessings of salvation, comp. Oehler ubi sup. 413. The idea of the everlasting victorious and peaceful theocracy that embraces not only Israel, but all the nations of the earth, and the ideal of the theocratic king, proceeding from David’s house and seed, and standing in the exclusive relation to God of son, who introduces and exercises this dominion [the theocracy], finds its full reality in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Son of David, who is anointed without measure with the Holy Ghost and by the complete indwelling of God in His person exhibits Himself as the personal principle of the kingdom of God. The view that the descent of Christ from the Davidic race does not belong to the essential content of the fulfilment of the idea of the Old Testament-kingdom (G. Baur, 407) is refuted by the constant declarations of the prophets concerning the Davidic descent of the great king, as well as by the universal Jewish conception of the Messiah as the son of David (Mat_22:42 sq.), both of which rest on this fundamental prophecy. Jesus Himself accepts the name of “Son of David” without protest; Paul (Rom_1:3), the Epistle to the Hebrews (2Sa_7:14), and the Apocalypse (2Sa_5:5; 2Sa_22:16) declare Him to be a descendant of David. “How deep this promise penetrated David’s soul is shown by his thanksgiving prayer in 2Sa_7:18 sq. The Messiah is not therein spoken of in the first instance; it relates to the ideal person of the Davidic race; but its final fulfilment in the Messiah is already contained indirectly in its own content, since the everlastingness of a merely human kingdom is inconceivable; this became clearer to David the more he compared this promise with the Messianic idea that had come down from the fathers; it finally reached full certainty in his mind through the further inward disclosures that attached themselves to this fundamental promise which occupied David day and night” (Hengst., Gesch. d. Reich. Gott. unter d. Alt. Bundes, 1871, II. 2, 124 [Hengstenberg’s Hist. of the Kingdom of God under the Old Covenant]).
5. The prayer of David after the reception of the Lord’s promise of favor (2Sa_7:18-29) bears testimony to the unexpected, joyfully surprising revelation that was made to him, and mirrors his childlike humility, fervid devotion and unshakable confidence towards his God. To this prayer which proceeds from a joyfully shocked and deeply moved heart, applies (so far as is possible from the Old Testament stand-point) what Bernard of Clairvaux says of true prayer: “If the way to God’s throne is to stand free and open to our prayer, and it is there to find ready acceptance and hearing, it must proceed from an humble, fervid and trusting heart. Humility teaches us the necessity of prayer, fervor gives it flight and endurance, trust provides it with an unmovable foundation.” The humility of the praying servant of God expresses itself in the declaration of its own littleness and unworthiness: 1) in view of the many manifestations of favor, through which the Lord has brought him in the past up to this point (2Sa_7:18); 2) In view of the great promises for the future that He has given him out of free grace (2Sa_7:19); and 3) In view of the paternal kindness, wherein He has condescended to him in this present revelation of love (2Sa_7:20-21). “All without merit or worthiness of mine” (Luther).—A further special exhibition of humility is the occurrence of the word “servant” three times in 2Sa_7:18-21 and seven times in 2Sa_7:25-29. “This thanksgiving confirms anew the fact that the only foundation on which the true godliness and everlastingness of the kingdom can rest is the purity and holiness of an humble heart, and therefore the hearty and living humility of David’s thanksgiving may give us the strongest assurance that here is really enthroned the culmination of all royal rule” (Baumgarten).—In the prayer humility is combined with childlike fervor and sincerity, wherewith: 1) God’s power and glory, as revealed in His previous gracious deeds for His people, is praised and celebrated (2Sa_7:22-23); 2) God’s love, wherein He acknowledges Himself to be His people’s God and Lord, is declared (2Sa_7:24); and 3) God’s name is invoked from the depths of a heart full of the consciousness of His gracious presence. (“The name Jehovah occurs twelve times, and is ten times addressed. In the address the simple Jehovah occurs once, Adonai Jehovah six times, Jehovah Elohim twice, and Jehovah Sabaoth once. The address Adonai Jehovah is found at the beginning and at the end. The third division first takes up the divine names of the second, and then returns at the close to that of the first.” Hengst., ubi sup., 158.)—[Compare the use of divine names in the parallel passage in 1 Chronicles 17.—Tr.]). With humility and fervor is combined hearty trust 1) in the prayer for the fulfilment of the gracious promise; 2) in the appeal to the truthfulness of God’s word; and 3) in the confident hope of God’s blessing (2Sa_7:25-29).
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
2Sa_7:1-11. “The Lord is with thee” (2Sa_7:3). I. How the Lord owns Himself as thine: 1) In battle and victory over all thy enemies; 2) In the quietness and peace of thy heart; 3) In the blessing of thy house; 4) In the instructions of His word. II. How thou shouldst consequently place thyself with respect to the Lord: 1) In joyful willingness to prove thy gratitude to Him; 2) In humble obedience of faith to His will when it rejects thy thoughts; 3) In humbly letting thy house be built for thee by Him, and letting Him give to thee before thou wilt give to Him; and 4) In awaiting with childlike confidence His blessing for the future.
Giving and Taking in the relation of man to God: 1) “A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven;” but 2) A man can also give nothing to God the Lord, except it be first given him by the Lord.
“I was with thee whithersoever thou wentest” (2Sa_7:9): 1) How far this divine testimony has been confirmed in the guidance of thy whole course of life; 2) How its truth should qualify thee to know His ways in the guidance of His people, and in the history of His kingdom; 3) What obligation is thereby laid on thee in relation to thy God.
2Sa_7:12-16. The fulfilment of the great and gracious promise of God to David, in Christ the Son of David: 1) In His person, He is not merely David’s seed = seed of the woman = Abraham’s seed, but also God’s Song of Solomon 2) In His office, He is King over the kingdom of God, King of all kings; 3) In His possession of power, He has an everlasting kingdom, to Him is given all power in heaven and on earth; 4) In His work, He builds for the name of God the Father a house, a spiritual temple in humanity, out of living stones (comp. Joh_2:19).
[2Sa_7:16-17. Robert Hall: The advantages of Civil Government contrasted with the blessings of the Spiritual Kingdom of Jesus Christ (Works, Am. Ed., III., 444): 1) As to security, and the sense of security. 2) Liberty. 3) Plenty. 4) A tendency to improvement in social institutions. 5) Stability.—Tr.]
2Sa_7:18-24. The greatness of the manifestations of God’s grace: 1) They infinitely surpass the desert and worthiness of sinful men (Who am I? etc.), 2Sa_7:18; 2 Samuel 2) They fill all times, from the remotest past into the farthest future (2Sa_7:18-19); 3) They are high-exalted above all human thoughts and words, which cannot comprehend and express them (2Sa_7:20); 4) They are deep-grounded in God’s word and heart (2Sa_7:21).
2Sa_7:22-24. The right praise of God on the part of His people: 1) Looking to that which He is to them, as their incomparably gracious God, and exclusively their own; 2) Looking to that which He as their God has done in them in the wonders of His redeeming might and love; and 3) Looking to that for which He has made them His people, and prepared them for Himself.
2Sa_7:25-29. The right prayer and supplication of living faith: 1) It grounds itself firmly in the word of God’s promise (2Sa_7:25); 2) It aims at nothing but the honor of God’s name (2Sa_7:26); 3) It springs from a heart which is moved by God’s promise (2Sa_7:27); 4) It appeals to God’s faithfulness and truth; 5) It receives the fulness of God’s promised blessing.
[2Sa_7:18-29. Henry: David’s Prayer: 1) He speaks very humbly of himself, and his own merits (2Sa_7:18). 2) He speaks very highly and honorably of God’s favors to him (2Sa_7:18-20). 3) He ascribes all to the free grace of God (2Sa_7:21). 4) He adores the greatness and glory of God (2Sa_7:22). 5) He expresses a great esteem for the Israel of God (2Sa_7:23-24). 5) He concludes with humble petitions to God (2Sa_7:27-29).—Tr.]
2Sa_7:1-4. [Henry: When God His providence gives us rest, and finds us little to do of worldly business, we must do so much the more for God and our souls. How different were the thoughts of David, when he sat in his palace, from Nebuchadnezzar’s, when he walked in his, Dan_4:29-30.—Tr.]—J. Lange: It is not enough to have a good design in a matter, but one must also have a particular assurance as to whether this or that is according to God’s gracious will.—Schlier: Alas for us, if the Scriptures were nothing more than human, well-meant thoughts of holy men of God; who could then rely on them? who could live and die on them? But well for us that we have a word of God, a word out of God’s own mouth, which God’s Spirit has given us.
2Sa_7:4-5. Wuert. Bible: God is much more desirous of giving to us than of receiving from us.—S. Schmid: God demands not so much splendid outward service, but rather an inner and honest service of the heart, Isa_4:24.—Schlier: The true house of God is His people; there would He make His abode in the hearts of His own. A human heart that opens itself to God is a temple more pleasing to Him than the stateliest structure of gold and marble, and a church that really has the Lord dwelling in its midst is in the sight of God more precious than the noblest showy building which sets all the world a wondering.
2Sa_7:8-11. We always indeed imagine that we must first give something to the Lord, and that if we have not been beforehand with Him, the Lord will not bless us; and yet what is all that we do, if the Lord has not first taken hold of us?—We must first experience the Lord’s blessings in ourselves, and then first can we do any thing for Him in return.
2Sa_7:12-16. Starke: Christ’s kingdom is a firmly established kingdom; even the gates of hell cannot prevail against it (Mat_16:18).—Christ is the right architect of the spiritual house of God; and through Him alone can we become temples and abodes of the living God (1Co_6:16; 1Pe_2:5).—Schlier: The true and living house of God, which He has built, is the church of the Lord which He has bought with His blood and gathered by His Spirit.
2Sa_7:17. S. Schmid: A faithful servant of God speaks according to the direction of God’s word—takes nothing therefrom, and adds nothing thereto (Deu_12:32).
2Sa_7:18. Cramer: That is the true complexion of the saints: the more they are exalted by God and favored with gifts and goods, the more they humble themselves and count themselves unworthy thereof (Gen_18:27; Gen_32:10; Luk_1:48).
2Sa_7:20-21. Osiander: When a devout man’s heart is stirred up by the Holy Spirit to gratitude towards God, it can often not find words enough to utter its hearty love, and to exalt God high enough over all (Luk_1:46 sq.).—Starke: In praying we must not merely recognize and acknowledge our unworthiness, but also praise God’s grace and compassion (Luk_1:48-50).
2Sa_7:17-21. Schlier: God’s goodness should awaken us to a recognition of our sins, it should bring us down on our knees, it should make us little and worthless. The more God the Lord does us good, so much the more should we humble ourselves; and the higher He places us, so much the more should we recognize our unworthiness; and when He lifts us up from the dust to the height and blesses us with the fullness of His blessing, then first should we become thoroughly little and worthless in our own eyes.
2Sa_7:22. Cramer: God demands of us not only the faith of the heart, but also the confession of our lips (Rom_10:10).
2Sa_7:23. S. Schmid: Not their own deeds make a people great, but the works of God which He does among such a people. Blessed is that people whose God is the Lord; but this blessedness comes from the mere compassion of God.
2Sa_7:22-24. Schlier: It is a great gain when, through God’s benefits, we learn to recognize the benefactor, and let ourselves be drawn by God’s goodness to the Lord Himself. God’s goodness should make us little and worthless, and bow us down on our knees, but God’s goodness should also make the Lord in our estimation ever greater, worthier and nobler.
2Sa_7:25-26. Cramer: Although we have God’s fair and rich promises before us, and have once found grace, yet we should always continue to seek confirmation and increase thereof (1Ki_8:25-26).
2Sa_7:28 sqq. Berl. Bible: The greatest act in praying is the persevering supplication of faith for the performance of God’s blessed purpose; to hold fast the everlasting truth made known to us, and as if seeking payment of a debt to remind, urge, press, knock, beat the door.—Starke: Every blessing in heavenly good things is derived from the gracious pleasure of God (Eph_1:3).
[2Sa_7:2. It seems natural and appropriate that our houses of worship should be not less substantial and elegant than our dwelling-houses.
2Sa_7:3. The Lord’s having evidently “been with us” does not prove that He approves all we have done; still less that He will approve all we feel inclined to do.—It may be perfectly proper that a thing should be done, and yet not proper that we should undertake to do it.—Our wisest friends may give us wrong counsel, in hastily taking for granted that what seems to them good will seem good to the Lord.—In denying us the gratification of some pious wish, God may design accomplishing it in a way that He sees to be better; and He may commend and reward the wish He does not gratify. (“Thou didst well that it was in thine heart,” 1Ki_8:18)—A sermon on Nathan, 2Sa_7:1-17; 2Sa_12:1-14.
[2Sa_7:9. Fame.—“And have made thee a great name,” etc. I. Fame is a gift of God’s Providence—hence to be enjoyed with humility. II. Fame is one of God’s noblest gifts—hence may be desired and earnestly sought, if righteously. III. Fame, like all other gifts, has weighty responsibilities—hence to be used for the good of men and the glory of God.
2Sa_7:14. “I will be his father, and he shall be my son.” This true—1) of Solomon and other descendants of David who were kings of Judah; 2) of Christ, “the son of David,” Heb_1:5; Hebrews 3) Of every one who is a believer in Christ, and thus a child of God, 1Jn_3:1; 1Jn_5:1.—Tr.]
[2Sa_7:18-21. A model of devout thanksgiving: I. Over what he rejoices. 1) Over great blessings received in the past, 2Sa_18:2) Over yet greater blessings promised in the future, 2Sa_19:2. In what spirit he regards these favors. 1) As utterly undeserved by himself, 2Sa_7:18; 2Sa_20:2) As the gift of God’s sovereign grace, 2Sa_7:21; Mat_11:26.
2Sa_7:22. The greatness of Israel’s God argued from the wonders of Israel’s history. Comp. 2Sa_7:23-24.—Tr.]
[2Sa_7:27. Promise and Prayer. 1) The promise does not prevent prayer. 2) The promise authorizes prayer that would otherwise be presumptuous. 3) The promise gives assurance of success in prayer. Comp. 2Sa_7:28-29.—Tr.]
Footnotes:
[1][2Sa_7:1. Sept. κατεκληρονόμησε “caused to possess,” reading נָחַל for נוּהָ.—Tr.]
[2][2Sa_7:2. Sept. “tent” (אֹהֶל), others δέῤῥεως “curtain of skins.” Vulg. has the plural here, as in 1Ch_17:1. The difference is not important.—Tr.]
[3][2Sa_7:3. This word (רֵךְ) is wanting in a few MSS. and in Syr. and Ar.; it is of the nature of an expletive.—Tr.]
[4][2Sa_7:4. “Nathan the prophet” in Syr., Ar., and in 5 MSS., a natural scriptio plena.—Tr.]
[5][2Sa_7:5. Philippson: wilt thou [wishest thou to] build?; Cahen: is it thou that wishest? Sept. and Syr.: thou shalt not build. Chald. has: a house for my presence [Shekinah] to dwell in. We may render either “shall” or “will.”—In the first clause some MSS. and EDD., and all the ancient VSS. except Chald. omit the second “to,” probably to ease the construction (as in Eng. A. V.); so also in 2Sa_7:8.—Tr.]
[6][2Sa_7:6. Thenius, citing the ancient VSS. (especially Sept., Syr., Chald.), would read the Perf. הֶעֱלֵתִי instead of the Inf. הַעֲלֹתִי, and would then supply אֲשֶׁר; but the masoretic pointing is at least as suitable as that of the VSS., and these last may easily be a free translation of our text.—Tr.]
[7][2Sa_7:6. Lit.: “have been walking,” “have been a perambulator.”—Tr.]
[8][2Sa_7:7. So Sept., Vulg., Chald., Ew., Then., Philippson, Cahen. De Wette and Erdmann have less well “in the whole time.”—Tr.]
[9][2Sa_7:7. This reading is discussed in the exposition.—Tr.]
[10][2Sa_7:8. In this address to David (2Sa_7:8-16) the sequence of verb-form? (in respect to time) presents some difficulty. The passage begins with a Perf. (past time), which is followed in regular sequence by Waw with Impfs. till we reach the last verb in 2Sa_7:9, where the form changes to Waw with Perf., followed by similar forms in apparently future sequence up to the Athnach in 2Sa_7:11; in the last clause of this verse we find Waw with Perf., where the time is present. The remaining portion (2Sa_7:12-16) is clearly future. The difficulty concerns the rendering of the verbs in 2Sa_7:8-11. Here it is to be observed that the change of form in 2Sa_7:9 after the Athnach is somewhat strange if the past time is to be maintained, and on the other hand, for future time we should expect the Impf.; it seems better, therefore, to take it as present (as in 2Sa_7:11). But in 2Sa_7:10-11 a the time is more naturally fixed as future by the Impfs. that there occur, and the introductory Waw with Perf. (וְשַׁמְתִּי) may be explained by supposing that the preceding עָשִׁיתִי “I make,” extends into the future, so that according to the law of sequence it would be followed by Perfs. Thus, then, we should render in the past from 8 b to 9 a, make 9 b a transitional present, 10 and 11 a future, and 11 b present.—This is nearly the order of the Sept.; it varies only in 9 b where the Greek has the Aorist (so Vulg.). Philippson and Bib-Com. render throughout in the past, except in 11 b where the former has, and the latter permits the present. So Böttcher, Then., Cahen. The rendering here given is nearly that of Eng. A. V. and Wellhausen.—According to the one view God has given His people rest, and will now make David a house; according to the other He has cut off David’s enemies, and will give him rest and make him a house.—The past form in 2Sa_7:1 “had given him rest” is the strongest argument for a past rendering in 2Sa_7:11, and therefore throughout; but this is not conclusive, since the “rest in the latter case may be completer than in the former.—Tr.]
[11][2Sa_7:9. The adj. is omitted in 1Ch_17:8, and in Sept., which is better.—Tr.]
[12][2Sa_7:11. The first clause of 2Sa_7:11 is now (as the connection requires) generally taken as the conclusion of 2Sa_7:10, with a full stop after “Israel” (but Philippson connects it with the following: “and since the time… I have caused thee, etc.”). Instead of וַהֲנִיחתִֹי לְךָ Ewald (followed by Wellh.) reads וה׳ לוֹ “and I will cause them [Israel] to rest,” on the ground that here (from 2Sa_7:10) it is Israel that is spoken of. This reading would remove the above-mentioned objection to the future rendering, but cannot be regarded as more than a conjecture, since in such a discourse the change of reference (as in the last clause of 2Sa_7:11) would not be strange.—Tr.]
[13][2Sa_7:11. The proper name “Jehovah” is here inserted probably for clearness.—Tr.]
[14][2Sa_7:12. There is no connective in the text, but 1Ch_17:11 and Sept., prefix וְהָיָה “and it shall come to pass.” which, according to Wellh., has here fallen out by reason of the preceding יחוה.—Tr.]
[15][2Sa_7:12. The divergences of the text of Chron. from ours are obvious. The former is briefer and simpler, and confines itself to the expression of the divine blessing, omitting (as unessential) the minatory clause in 2Sa_7:14.—Tr.]
[16][2Sa_7:15. Instead of the Qal we find Hiph. “I will not remove” in 1Ch_17:13, Sept., Vulg., Syr., At., which form De Rossi thinks is supported by some MSS., which have 1 sing. Qal Impf. (אסוּר); it is scarcely possible to decide between the two readings.—So in the latter clause of this verse Sept. has καθὼς ἀπέστησα ἀφ’ ῶ̇ν ἀπέστησα ἐκ προσώπου μον as I removed it from those whom I removed from before me,” and Chron.: “as I took it. from him that was before thee.” Here from the connection the “thee” of the Heb. seems preferable to the “me” of Sept.; as between “Samuel” and “Chron.” the general presumption is that the latter condenses and abbreviates an originally longer text. The “Saul” may be insertion for clearness of reference, and the difference in the two texts may be connected with the repetition of the verb הֲסִיוֹתִי (which in Eng. A. V. is here given by the two words “took” and “put away”). It is perhaps better to suppose that the two editors (of “Samuel” and “Chron.”) have wrought the original material each in his own way.—Tr.]
[17][2Sa_7:16. Some MSS. and Sept. and Syr. read “before me,” which is preferred by De Rossi.—Tr.]
[18][2Sa_7:18. In Heb.: Adonai Jahveh. Where this combination occurs, the Masorites call the second name Elohim (instead of the ordinary Adonai); the Chald. has Jahveh Elohim, Syr. Lord God, Sept. κύριός μου κύρῐος and Vulg. Dominus Deus, whence Eng. A. V. Lord God.—Tr.]
[19][2Sa_7:19. For discussion of the text of this clause see Exposition and Notes.—Tr.]
[20][2Sa_7:21. It is to be noted that, whereas Sept. here has “for thy servant’s sake” (as 1Ch_17:19), it omits this clause in the parallel passage in Chron.; this may point to a correction of the text by the Greek translators (Wellh. takes a similar view, holding the Sept. “according to thy heart thou hast done” to be taken from Chr.). The context seems to favor the reading in Chron.—Tr.]
[21][2Sa_7:22. In some good MSS. and EDD. “in all,” which is preferred by De Rossi.—Tr.]
[22][2Sa_7:23. The text of this verse can hardly be satisfactorily restored, even after introducing the changes suggested by the Chronicles-text (as given in the brackets). There seems to be a mingling of two forms of assertion, in one of which Israel is compared with a heathen nation and Jehovah with a false god, while in the other the comparison expresses only what Jehovah had done for Israel. To the first form, perhaps, belongs the Sept. phrase “what other nation,” and the Plu. verb “went” in “Samuel,” and to the second belong the phrases “for you.” “for thy land,” “redeemedst from Egypt.” As regards the testimony of the ancient versions, the Vulg. renders our Heb. text (as Eng. A. V.), except that it has at the end “nation” instead of “nations” (because elo-him has the Sing. suffix); the Chald. gives the Heb. paraphrastically: and who is as thy people, as Israel, a people one, chosen… whom men sent from Jehovah went to redeem… till they came to the land of thy presence which thou gavest to them,” etc.; Syr. “on the earth aforetime” (לְאַרְצֶךָ מִפְּנֵי); Sept. has “other nation” (instead of “one nation”), “as God led them” (הֹלִכוֹ instead of הָלְכוּ), “to drive out (as in Chron.)… nations and tents” (אֹהָלִים for אֱלְהים). Instead of “for you,” Vulg. and Chald. have “for them;” our text here is defended by Böttcher and Erdmann, but even if such change of conception is possible for David, it is harsh and is perhaps better omitted in a translation.—See further in the Exposition.—Tr.]
[23][2Sa_7:28. The fut. rendering is given by Sept., Syr., Vulg., but the Pres. is better (with then. and Erdmann), because the whole clause is a declaration of what God is essentially. Philippson has less well: “and thy words will be (werden, ‘become,’) truth, since thou hast spoken.”—Tr.]
[24][To this Josephus perhaps alludes when he says (Ant. 7, 4, 4) that Moses predicted the building of the temple.—Tr.]
[25][Bib. Comm.: The cedar of Lebanon is a totally different tree fro n what we improperly call Virginia cedar (Juniperus Virginiana). It is a close-grained, light-colored, yellowish wood, with darker knots and veins.—Tr.]
[26][The general sense is not changed by this slight difference of translation.—Tr.]
[27][The sense is the same as in Samuel.—Tr.]
[28][See the thought here well brought out in Keil on “Samuel,” Eng. tr. p.344 sq.—Tr.]
[29]The Rel. sentence begun with אֲשֶׁר is broken off, the Inf. (בה׳), as indication of cause, acting as protasis and the Perf. with Waw cons. as apodosis in a future sense, giving the result of the sinning. Ges. §126, 6 d, Rem. 1. then. strikes out the second ו (as a mis-copy of the first), and connects the Rel. with the suffix in הֹכַחְתִּיו.
[30][On David’s posture see notes of Patrick and Gill in loco.—Tr.]
[31]This is the only meaning of גְּדוּלָּה (גְּדֻלָּה. [But see 1Ch_29:11; Est_1:4—Tr.]
[32][Note that the word “heart” in the usage of the O. T. means the whole inner nature, including intellect, affections and will.—Tr.]
[33][This phrase probably refers to the oral tradition by which Israel’s history was handed down from father to son.— Tr.]
[34] מִי is not = “where” (De W.), but is to be connected with גּוֹי אֶחָד (comp. Jdg_21:8; Deu_3:24). See Ew. § 325a: “what one people, what people ever [whatever people]…?”—אֲשֶׁר is to be connected with לִפְדּוֹת as accus. of the object. [On the text see “Text. and Grammat.”— Tr.]
[35][The Heb. word elohim is in form plural, but is the usual word for God.—Tr.]
[36][This is the phrase found in Exo_19:5 “ye shall be to me a possession or property” (Eng. A. V. “peculiar treasure”), in Deu_7:6 “a people of possession” (Eng. A. V. “Special people”), and in Mal_3:17 they shall be to me, in the day that I make, “a possession.” The Hebrew word (סגלה) is rendered by the Sept. περιούσιος and περιποίησις, which have thus passed into the N. T. in this sense of “property, possession,” as Tit_2:14 “a peculiar people” = “a people that is God’s property,” and 1Pe_2:9—Tr.]
[37] הוּא here stands for the 2d person (as the 3d pers. pron. is often used for the verb “to be”): “Thou art God,” comp. Psa_44:5 [4]; Zep_2:12; Ew. § 297 b. [The “that God” of Eng. A. V. is incorrect, and Dr. Erdmann’s rendering is right; but it is not true that the 3 pers. pron. is ever used for the 2 pers. or for the substantive verb; the literal translation here is “thou art He (namely) God,” the copula being omitted as often in Heb.—Tr.]
[38][That is, the specific reference, the idea being clothed in a person.—Tr.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20 Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that…
Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that is in thine heart--The piety of the design commended it to the prophet's mind, and he gave his hasty approval and encouragement to the royal plans. The prophets, when following the impulse of their own feelings, or forming conjectural opinions, fell into frequent mistakes. (See on Sa1 16:6; Kg2 4:27).
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23 DAVID’S PURPOSE TO BUILD THE TEMPLE, AND NATHAN’S MESSAGE…
DAVID’S PURPOSE TO BUILD THE TEMPLE, AND NATHAN’S MESSAGE FROM GOD CONCERNING IT, 2Sa_7:1-17.
1. Sat in his house — Became established in his royal palace on Zion.
Read full note →
Had given him rest — It was a time of national peace and quiet, not, however, after all David’s wars.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29 Ch. 2Sa_7:1-29. The Promise of Perpetual Dominion to the…
Ch. 2Sa_7:1-29. The Promise of Perpetual Dominion to the house of David
=1 Chronicles 17. Cp. Psa_89:19-37
Read full note →
1–3. David’s desire to build a house for the Lord
1. when the king sat in his house] When the king dwelt in his house, which he had built in the “city of David” (ch. 2Sa_5:9; 2Sa_5:11; 1Ch_14:1). At what period of his reign David formed this resolution to build a temple cannot be exactly determined. On the one hand the emphatic words “when the Lord had given him rest round about from all his enemies” (cp. 2Sa_7:9) seem to point to a time after some at least of the wars recorded in ch. 8. On the other hand it was before the birth of Solomon (2Sa_7:12), and so cannot be placed in the latter years of his reign. The arrangement of the book is not strictly chronological, and this narrative finds a most suitable place here from its close connexion with the subject of the preceding chapter.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29 (1) Had given him rest.—No intimation is given of…
(1) Had given him rest.—No intimation is given of how long this may have been after the events narrated in the last chapter; but it is evident that this narrative is placed here, not because it followed chronologically, but because it is closely related in subject, and the historian, after telling of the removal of the ark, wished to record in that connection David’s further purposes in the same direction. It must have been after the successful close of David’s principal foreign wars—“rest round about from all his enemies”—and the future in 2Sa_7:10 does not necessarily imply that it was before the birth of Solomon; yet it is more likely to have been in a time of quiet prosperity, before the troubles of his latter years.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 When the king sat in his house. The order…
When the king sat in his house. The order is not chronological; for the words, Jehovah had given him rest from all his enemies round about (so the Revised Version, rightly), imply the successful termination, not of all wars necessarily, but certainly of something more than that with the Philistine invaders in the Rephaim valley. A general summary of all David"s wars is given in ch. 8., and it was probably after he had subdued the Philistines and Moab, and his throne was now fully established, that in some time of peace, possibly before Hanun forced him into wars which won for him an empire, David sent for Nathan, and told him his full desire. Its position here immediately after the account of the bringing of the ark to Zion has a higher unity than that of chronology. It shows that David had always a larger purpose than the mere placing of the ark in its feint; and, as soon as a period of tranquillity arrived, he confided his thoughts to the prophet. Thus, with only one step taken towards his whole plan, David exercised a wise moderation in leaving the service at Gibeon unmolested. As regards the word "rest," we have to distinguish between the first series of wars, which established David firmly on his throne, and the second series, which gave him widespread dominion.
Vers. 1-11. The facts are:
Read full note →
1. David, being settled in his kingdom and furnished with a permanentplace of abode, is dissatisfied that the ark of the Lord should remain in a frail tent.
2. He sends for Nathan, and intimates his desire to build a fitting house forthe Lord, and receives encouragement from the prophet.
3. During a vision of the night Nathan is directed to inform David that hisdesire cannot be realized; that all along it had been God"s will to move from place to place in a tent (ver. 6); that it was never his purpose to have any other abode while Israel was unsettled (ver. 7).
4. He is further to inform David that the dwelling in a tent, and his own callfrom the sheepcote (ver. 8) to be a leader of Israel, were both parts of one design, and that the success vouchsafed to him (ver. 9) was evidence of this.
5. Also, David is to know that, in pursuance of the same purpose, Godgave his people a land of their own, and planted (these verbs to be taken as perfects, not as converted into futures) them in a permanent abode, free from the embarrassment of such powerful assailants as annoyed them in the time of the judges, and from which they now have rest.
6. The good desire of David, though not to be now realized, isacknowledged by the assurance that God has further purposed to establish his house in Israel.
Commendable but unseasonable zeal.
Every reader of the narrative at once feels how natural and beautiful it was in David to desire, for the symbol of God"s presence among his people, an abode somewhat commensurate with its glory and suggestive of permanence. It was in keeping with all the antecedents of his life, and there was manifested an exquisite spiritual sensibility in mentioning first of all so important a subject as a change in the abode of the ark to the prophet who represented the Divine source of guidance as distinguished from civil authority. What are the elements which render such zeal commendable and at the same time unseasonable?
I THERE IS A PERSONAL ABSORPTION IN THE INTERESTS OF GOD"S KINGDOM AMONG MEN. God"s kingdom among men was the great fact to be emphasized and illustrated in the life of the chosen race, suggestive of a more developed kingdom in later times. This fact had absorbed the energies of Moses, but was somewhat obscured when the people, weary of the existing form of the theocracy, asked for and obtained king in Saul. From the first David had, in his own life, restored the idea of the Divine kingdom to the distinctness of Mosaic times, and counted himself to have no function in the world apart from seeking to realize it in the national experience. For it he lived and ruled; for it he prayed, and of it he sang. This was the fountainhead of all his zeal, and the key to the communication made to Nathan. Herein also is the secret of all acceptable Christian zeal. We are right in feeling and purpose only in so far as our entire life is one with Christ"s. Human life rises to its highest level only when it causes all its strength to flow in with the great stream of spiritual force which one day is to cover the earth. It is not patronage of institutions, study or criticism of Christian forms of thought and action, friendly feeling towards workers in mission fields, but personal identification with the interests of Christ"s kingdom as the most vital and precious of all interests. This is a practical illustration of the phrase, "We have the mind of Christ.
II THERE IS A WHOLESOME FEAR LEST PRIVATE AND SECULAR PROSPERITY SHOULD GENERATE SELFISHNESS. David was blessed with great prosperity in home and in state. In clearer, more reflective moods, he saw that this was connected with the furtherance of the great purpose of God in the world; but amidst the hurry of life and inevitable weaknesses of the moral nature, it was liable to produce a feeling of selfish content with his own condition. The dangers of prosperity are proverbial. His words to Nathan, contrasting his own permanent dwelling with the slender covering of the ark, revealed the thoughts and feelings of a man sensible of a grave spiritual danger, and anxious not to fall into it. It is sometimes, in the course of doing God"s work, or what may be called secular work in a Christly spirit, that Providence grants men secular prosperity. Then comes the testing time of the religious life. Many fall under the spell, and undue absorption in temporal personal comfort robs the kingdom of Christ of much thought and energy it otherwise would have received. The pleasures of the "house of cedar" shut out the condition of the spiritual kingdom. But where zeal is sound, watchfulness is maintained, and spiritual growth keeps pace with worldly prosperity, there will be cherished a wholesome dread lest the blessings which come from God should in any measure wean the heart from him and the supreme interests of his kingdom.
III THERE IS A PERCEPTION OF THE TEMPORARY CHARACTER OF EXISTING RELIGIOUS APPLIANCES. Spiritual instinct led David to feel that the tent was not suited as the abode in perpetuity of the eternal, unchangeable God. There was an incongruity between the nature of the occupant and the frailty and transitoriness of the dwelling place. Apart, then, from the contrast with his own "cedar house," he saw that the arrangement which had received Divine sanction through many generations was not to be considered as perfect and unalterable. This was confirmed by the faith he cherished that the presence of God among his people was in pursuance of the great historic promise made to Abraham, (Gen_22:17, Gen_22:18) and preparatory to some further unfolding of the plan which embraced within its scope all the nations of the earth. So far his zeal in seeking a permanent abode for the ark was enlightened. And this is a characteristic of all true zeal. It does not merely proceed from impulse and strong feeling; it has respect to the nature of the kingdom of Christ and the variability of its outward appliances according to the stages of its development. The visible forms and arrangements adapted to one state of society may need revision and change more or less radical to render the deposit of truth more effective in its influence on a different state of society. A mere love of change is not identical with commendable zeal; a bare feeling that simple variation in outward forms will strengthen the power of religion is no sure guide; but a distinction between the permanent truth centring in Christ, and the transitoriness of the setting of that truth, will lead to a desire, when occasion offers, to make such modifications in the circumstantials of religion as may best accord with the nature of the truth on the one side and the development of human society on the either.
IV THE IMPERFECTION OF THE ZEAL MAY LIE IN THE ERROR AS TO SEASONABLENESS. In this case all seemed right and sound, in accordance with the purest love and devotion, both to David and to Nathan. Subsequent light from God himself showed that here feeling was right and thought also up to a given point, but that the zeal was inappropriate by reason of a defective knowledge of the specific purposes of God. There were reasons in the Divine mind why David, at this juncture, should not build a house for the Lord. Probably his work of consolidation was not sufficiently advanced, and either then or later on he was reminded that a man of peace was alone suited for such work. (1Ch_22:8 1Ch_28:3) The defectiveness of the judgment even of good men is cause of much mistake in altering the institutions and visible agencies of the Church. There are times when neither David nor Nathan may depend on their present feelings and knowledge, but more light must be sought from the Head of the Church. However sound the principle that forms and circumstantials do not possess the permanence belonging to the central truth they cover, still a busy zeal eager to introduce something new as more suited to a later development, even though shown by the most sincere of men, must be regarded with distrust unless Providence, by some means as good to us as was Nathan"s vision to David, makes it quite clear that the time has come when the old should give place to the new. Holy desire, even when conjoined with knowledge of a limited experience, may not be fitly realized because God"s time is not quite come.
GENERAL LESSONS.
1. Where there is sincere piety there will be jealousy lest the cause of Godshould not receive its due consideration.
2. It will be a mark of prosperous piety amidst prosperous circumstanceswhen men deliberately study how they may more worthily serve God and give him the honour due to his Name.
3. We should always anticipate that, as time advances, there will be freshopportunities for manifesting our devotion, even though our specific methods be not wisest.
4. It is a noble ambition to seek to render the house of God as perfect ashuman means can make it, and in this often we see contrasts in character (vers. 1-3; cf. (Hag_1:2, Hag_1:5) A good man"s life"s work attains completion in so far as he combines, with advancing secular prosperity, regard for the prosperity of religion.
The historic development of God"s purpose concerning man.
In vers. 4-11 we have an exposition of the grounds on which God declined to accept David"s proposal to build a house for him. The motive was good, and there was a certain perception of propriety in the design, but as its unseasonableness resulted from imperfect knowledge of the Divine will, that will is here made known.
I GOD HAS A PURPOSE CONCERNING MAN. This is the basis of the declaration to David. It may, indeed, be said that there is a Divine purpose in the existence of every atom and form of force, since each is what it is by the will of God, and is related to all the rest of the universe in a definite way, so as to issue in a progressive order. Every change is thus the working out in the material world of a purpose of the eternal mind. But while this is true of man also considered as an organized creature in the world, it is further true of him that there is a purpose in the eternal mind of which he is the object, and to work out which all other things are means and agents. God has something to effect for man as well as by man. The New Testament informs us that it is spiritual in its nature, and abounding with good to man and glory to God..
II GOD"S PURPOSE CONCERNING MAN IS INCORPORATED WITH HUMAN AFFAIRS. It is pointed out to David that the history of his ancestors in Egypt and under the judges, and also his own personal history, have been the vehicle through which this purpose has been gradually working. God"s thoughts for man assume concrete forms. They enter as the golden thread into the rough web of human life. Human wills work in their own free way, but another will works with them, and uses them in their free course for the manifestation of itself. Abraham"s domestic life, Israel"s sojourn in Egypt and the desert, the struggle for existence during the period of the judges, and the raising up and fall of Saul, and the exploits of David, were occasions and forms by which that redemptive purpose revealed itself which later on in Judaea, in Pilate"s hall and in the ages of Christendom, became more distinct and yet more one with human interests.
III IN THE OUTWORKING OF THE PURPOSE TEMPORARY INSTITUTIONS ARE CREATED. The ark and the tabernacle were the creation of the Divine purpose working along the line of human history. They were the product of two things the purpose and the incidents of Israel"s existence. David was right in viewing the tabernacle as essentially temporary; but he is reminded (ver. 6) that it expressed the Divine will for the time because of the human element through which that will was working onwards. A succession of temporary expedients is traceable from the first to the second Adam. One by one they disappeared before the approach of the true Light. Many of the modern expedients of the Church will prove their temporary character in so far as Christ"s holy will works its way into the heart of the world, and men, possessing this life, become in the best sense a law to themselves. (1Co_13:8-10)
IV THE DIRECT CONTROL OF GOD SECURES TRANSITION FROM STAGE TO STAGE. The words to David were, "I brought up the children of Israel;" "I have walked in a tent;" "I commanded to feed;" "I took thee from the sheepcote;" "I have appointed a place." Thus men were free, and history was formed by the free action of man; but, still, in pursuance of the Divine purpose, an unseen hand so fashioned the sum of human free action that captivity in Egypt yielded to a settled home, and a good shepherd appeared to care for the flock in that settled home. It was this recognition of the actual control of God so as to shape the items of human history and secure a succession of transitions towards a definite goal that distinguished the teaching of the prophets. It is this which gave such assurance to apostles. (Rom_8:22, Rom_8:28, Rom_8:31) The contending forces of each age are subject to him who by his mighty working can subdue all things unto himself. (Php_3:21)
V THE VALUE OF MEANS IN THE WORKING OUT OF THE PURPOSE IS RELATIVE. David"s pious dissatisfaction with the tabernacle as an abode for the ark was met by the assurance (vers. 6, 7) that God was not dissatisfied, but had shown his approval of his servants who were identified with its maintenance. The tabernacle may have been inadequate to the later stage, but it was perfect in its adaptation to the early stage of God"s method of working. He never complained of disrespect to his Name; he even honoured his servants who served him with such humble means. This applies to the methods by which, in different ages, revelations came to men agencies for diffusing and preserving the truth, the condition of the Churches by which his will is still done and the individual efforts of Christians to bring on the final triumph of Christ. Those who will not approve of action and appliances and methods till they meet with what is absolutely perfect, do not know history, or else, knowing it, are unwilling to accept its lessons. In an imperfect world where perfect holiness has to be attained through means inferior, and out of perfect relation to the end in view, we have to estimate each method and agency by its fitness to raise us to a stage above the present, and in which it may be dispensed with for something that will be a stepping stone to a still higher point.
VI THE WHOLE OF THE SUCCESSIVE STAGES TEND TO THE PERMANENT DWELLING OF GOD WITH MAN; David was fight in his ambition and faith. To have God permanently among Israel was the perfection of holy desire. All hitherto had pointed in that direction; and though in the visible sense in which David desired it his wishes were not to be granted, yet he was pointed on to the reality of a "house" (ver. 11), which we know involved the raising up of Immanuel. This is the goal of all Old Testament revelations and ancient forms of instruction and discipline. And now that God has been visibly manifest in the flesh, the process is going on by which spiritually the dwelling of God with man in permanent union is to be realized. (2Co_3:7-11; cf. Eph_2:18-22)
GENERAL LESSONS.
1. Life should be conducted on the principle that God is with man andworking with and for him.
2. The comparison of events illustrated by the Bible teaching will enable usto trace out the line of God"s Working.
3. Although occasions may arise, as during periods of Israel"s history,when the signs of God"s working are obscured, (Isa_45:15) our faithshould rest on the general revelation.
4. However unable we may be sometimes to see the unity of God"sworking, Providence will throw light upon it, and by some explicit "I have walked," "I took thee," our confidence will be confirmed.
5. All our desires and efforts and methods should, in their nature, havereference to the great issue God"s habitation of the Church through the Spirit.
Consolation in disappointment.
Although vers. 11, 12 of Psalm 132, make it clear that the psalm was written after the date of Nathan"s visit to David, it is highly probable that the sentiments expressed in vers. 3-5 of that psalm were cherished before the king unbosomed himself to the prophet. In the fallibility characteristic of prophets when not authorized to speak by God, Nathan piously encouraged his king in his cherished wishes, and it is certain that that night David went to rest believing that now, with the concurrence of so good a man, the great ambition of his heart would soon be realized. The authorized revelation of the prophet on the following day must have brought with it a disappointment corresponding in bitterness to the previous elevation of feeling. But the gentle, kindly way in which it is allowed to fall is a beautiful instance of God"s tenderness toward his people.
I GOD RECOGNIZES US AS HIS OWN. There was balm in the words, "tell my servant David." In the beginning of his career David knew that he was called of God, but many a year had passed, and many a sore spiritual conflict with varied success had been endured. It was then refreshing to his spirit to be thus distinctly acknowledged to be the servant of the Most High one honoured in heaven and identified with the carrying out of God"s will on earth. To be owned of God, to have the witness of his Spirit with ours that we are his, to know on good evidence that our life is moving along the lines of his purpose, what more satisfying and comforting when some cherished desire is denied? Paul"s thorn in the flesh and consequent disappointment of holy ambition was even welcome when the Lord sent a message assuring that he was his "servant to do some work in the world, though not in the form desired. It is much in life if, amidst many failures of character and frustration of cherished desires, a man is permitted to know that God is not ashamed of him, and still honours him with a place among the great body of coworkers with himself.
II PROVIDENCE GRADUALLY MAKES CLEAR, IN PART AT LEAST, THE WISDOM OF THE DISAPPOINTMENT. The first note of Nathan"s message brought sorrow and even anguish of spirit. Fond hopes of joyous activity in a blessed cause were crushed. The dream of holy hours vanished. Loving toil was rejected. The heart sank. But by degrees, as the message unfolded and the course of Providence in reference to the tabernacle and settlement of Israel were unfolded, and probably reference made to wars yet impending (vers. 6-10; cf. (2Sa_8:1-8 1Ki_5:3, 4 8:19) the reasons of the Divine conduct became manifest, and the troubled heart could rest in an unerring wisdom alone. A similar course was taken with the apostles when their Lord soothed their disappointment at his expected departure by partially expounding the reason of his conduct. (Joh_14:1-4) Sometimes Christian workers who have, through sickness, failing opportunities, temporal disasters, and defective holiness of life, been denied the privilege of accomplishing all that was in their heart for Christ, have had to dwell in dense darkness for a while; but gradually events have occurred and light from God"s Word has come which have shown how just and even kind it was that, under all the circumstances of the ease, the disappointment came. The day will come when the bitter experiences of life will be so seen in their varied relations to ourselves and others as to give occasion for thankfulness.
III THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT GOD WILL USE US IN OTHER WAYS. "My servant" meant to David that there was yet noble work to do for God. Human choice of the old form of work is not always best. In the great kingdom that is being established there is scope for many energies in manifold forms; and as the kingdom is one, every worker is honourable and every work essential. To keep the door of the sanctuary, to wash the feet of weary pilgrims, to give a cup of cold water, to feed the hungry, to place a mite in the treasury, and visit the widow and fatherless, are services honoured as truly as erecting a temple and as necessary to the perfection of the kingdom of God on earth. The Apostle Paul could not charm men by unfettered eloquence, but he could bless the universal Church by his example of loving acquiescence in the Lord"s will. (2Co_12:8-10) Even the very ambitions that have not been gratified may be used up by God as means to inspire others with generous aims and lofty aspirations.
IV GOD REVEALS TO THE SPIRIT A CROWNING BLESSING. It was a repayment of David"s loving devotion in his own kind when the prophet was instructed to reveal to him that God would "make him a house." To an Oriental monarch, especially after the sad failure of Saul, there could not have been a more coveted distinction than being blessed with a posterity that should hold his place in the kingdom. The blessing in this case, we know, carried with it also a spiritual significance embodied in the expression applied to Christ, "the Son of David." This cannot be regarded simply as a reward for the design to build a house for the Lord it was part of a great purpose from the beginning; but it was clearly brought in here as a matter revealed for the soothing of David"s spirit in a season of disappointment. In this way the future blessedness of the faithful is revealed in order that they may have abundant consolation. Good men do not live and labour for future rewards, but from love of Christ and passionate sympathy with the purposes of his heart; nevertheless, the pastor, missionary, and parent whose hopes sometimes seem blighted, rejoice to be able to think of an issue of their life which, in spite of all appearances, redounds to the glory of God. "Here am I, and the souls thou hast given me," is to be true of multitudes. God will give a godly seed, "a house" better and more enduring than any we could build for him (Psa_126:5, Psa_126:6; Mat_19:29)
HOMILIES BY B. DALE.
Vers. 1, 2 (THE KING"S PALACE IN ZION.) (1Ch_17:1)
David"s purpose to build a house for the Lord.
References: (1Ki_5:3 1Ki_6:12 1Ki_8:17-19; 1Ch_22:7-10 1Ch_28:2-7 1Ch_29:1-3; 2Ch_6:7-9) The king"s palace of cedar on Mount Zion had been completed. In the adjacent tabernacle or dwelling place of Jehovah (ver. 6) the ark had found rest, and a regular order of public worship had been instituted. Surrounding enemies had been subdued, and there was at least a temporary cessation from war. Jerusalem was the civil, military, and ecclesiastical centre of the kingdom. And now another step in advance was taken. Whilst contemplating the lowly abode of the ark of the Lord in comparison with his own palace, the thought arose in David s mind of building a splendid and durable temple for the Name of the Lord God of Israel, (1Ki_8:17) a house of rest for the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and for the footstool of our God, (1Ch_28:2) "exceeding magnifical of fame and of glory throughout all countries"; (1Ch_22:5) and "when the king sat in his house" he intimated his wish (for it scarcely amounted to a distinct and definite resolution) to Nathan the prophet, doubtless in order to obtain his advice concerning its propriety and accomplishment. What followed was of the highest importance in relation to the permanence of his dynasty, the prosperity of his people, the worship of God, and the development of Messianic purposes. "The word of the Prophet Nathan and the thanksgiving of David mark the culmination of David"s history" (Baumgarten). This chapter affords a glimpse into his innermost heart, and reveals the devotional feelings, patriotic desires, and lofty aspirations and hopes that dwelt therein. In him we here see an example of
I DEVOUT OCCUPATION IN THE RETIREMENT OF HOME. Such retirement, necessary for all, is not always spent wisely and well; but often in sensuous indulgence, frivolous amusement, self-adulation, (Dan_4:29, Dan_4:30) envious discontent, (1Ki_21:4) or meditating secular and selfish schemes. (Luk_11:17, Luk_11:18) The godly man not only "returns to bless his household," but also:
1. Meditates on the best things: the Name of the Lord, his greatness and goodness, his works, his ways, his Word, his worship, and the welfare of men. He considers "the days of old," and "communes with his own heart" (Psa_77:5, Psa_77:6) of his benefits, obligations, condition, and prospects (Psa_55:17; Mat_6:5; Joh_1:48)
1. Talks of these things in a right manner.
2. Cultivates social intercourse with good men, the excellent, in whom is all his delight". (Psa_16:3 Psa_119:63) He prefers their society to any other, befriends them, and makes them his friends. (Luk_16:9) Nor is there any greater treasure on earth than a faithful friend, such as David had in Nathan. The manner in which men spend their leisure hours is a sure indication of their real character.
II ARDENT GRATITUDE TO GOD FOR SUCCESS in his undertakings, labours, conflicts (ver. 1), and whatever rest and prosperity he enjoys.
1. These he ascribes, not to his own skill or power, (Deu_7:17) but to the Divine hand; and, in considering what God "hath done for his soul": (Psa_66:16)
2. He is deeply affected by his exceeding kindness, so condescending, undeserved, and inexpressible (vers. 8, 9, 20)! While he muses the fire. (Psa_39:3)
3. And he is constrained to testify his thankfulness in word and deed. "Those who stretch themselves upon beds of ivory, (Amo_6:4-6) and were not grieved for the affliction of Joseph, though they had David"s music had not David"s spirit" (Matthew Henry). "Though the Prophet David was guilty of many of the most deadly sins, yet he was said to be a man after God"s own heart, because he abounded more with thankfulness than any other that is mentioned in Holy Scripture" (Isaac Walton).
III TENDER CONCERN FOR THE DIVINE HONOUR. "See now I dwell in a house of cedar," etc. The devout and grateful heart fuels:
1. That with the honour of God the house of God is intimately connected. No material fabric, however stately, can now possess the same significance or relative importance as the tabernacle or temple. (1Sa_1:3, 1Sa_1:9) But wherever God"s children meet for Divine worship and spiritual fellowship (thus constituting the true temple and Church), the place is "hallowed ground." Standing amidst other dwellings, the house of God is a constant witness for him; and, by its sacred associations, religious exercises, and the holy influences therein received and thence diffused, it greatly conduces to his glory, as well as to the good of men.
2. That it ought to correspond with its declared purpose, and the circumstances and abilities of those by whom it is erected and attended. All "temples made with hands" fall infinitely beneath the dignity of the Eternal (1Ki_8:27; Act_17:24) yet it is becoming that "strength and beauty should be in his sanctuary," that men should offer their best in his service, (2Sa_24:24) and that, while they dwell in "celled houses," his house should not "lie waste". (Hag_1:4)
3. That it is a duty and a privilege to employ the gifts bestowed by God for the improvement of his house and the promotion of his honour. When he has done much for us we should do much for him. "Four great means for administering the religion of Christ have been divinely appointed: the Book of God, the day of God, the worship of God, and the house of God. This last is for the sake of the former three. Without it they cannot be upheld. In the house of God the truth of God is proclaimed, the day of God is hallowed, and the worship of God is solemnized. All good gathers into and around God"s house. "I will make," saith he, "the places round about my hill a blessing." There gather pious families. There arise schools for neglected children. There benevolent activities prevail. There spring up fountains of missionary liberality. And from humble sanctuaries in England, gospel light streams forth to distant regions of the earth the wilds of Southern Africa, or the populous hives of Chinese idolatry" (Algernon Wells).
IV HIGH ESTIMATION OF FRIENDLY COUNSEL. Unlike some successful and powerful men, who take counsel of their own hearts and despise the advice of others, David valued, sought, and received the advice of Nathan as the counsel of God himself. "The first great office of a friend is
(1) to try our thoughts by the measure of his judgment, and to taste the wholesomeness of our designs and purposes by the feelings of his heart. As this office of a good friend is to guard us against the imperfections of our own nature, and protect the world from the effects and ourselves from the responsibility of our folly, the next office of a friend is
(2) to protect us from the selfish and wilful and malicious part of our nature. A third great office of friendship is
(3) to awaken us and lift us up, and set us on nobler deeds. The fourth good office of a friend is
(4) to rally us when we are defeated or overtaken with adversity. And so much is the world alive to this office as to have chosen it out as the true test; it being one of our best proverbs that "a friend in need is a friend indeed (E. Irving). D.
HOMILIES BY G. WOOD Vers. 1, 2.
David"s desire to build a temple.
After the conquest of Jebus by David and his appointment of the spot to be the capital of the united kingdom of which he was now the ruler, it soon became his earnest purpose to bring thither the long-neglected ark of the covenant, that the city might be the sacred as well as the civil metropolis. This purpose was at length fulfilled. The ark was settled on Zion in a tent prepared for it, and a daily service established in connection with it. But the king was not long satisfied with what he had done. Larger and more generous thoughts took possession of his mind, and stirred within him eager desire.
I WHAT WAS THE KING"S DESIRE? To erect a solid, permanent building, of suitable magnificence a temple in which the ark should be placed, and where the services of worship should be constantly maintained. Most likely he contemplated what was afterwards effected, the reunion on one spot of the ark and the altars; and the presentation of the daily and other sacrifices and offerings at their proper place before the symbol of the Divine presence the revival, in fact, of the Mosaic ritual under circumstances and with accompaniments adapted to the existing condition of the nation. The purpose was good and tended to good. It was time that the irregularity and negligence which had prevailed should come to an end, and the requirements of the Law should be obeyed. It was fitting that the unity of the people should be fully symbolized, expressed, and promoted by such a united worship as the Law enjoined. It was also suitable to the more settled state which, under David, the people had reached, that a solid fixed building should supersede the tent which was adapted to the time of wandering and unsettlement; and, as the nation"s resources had increased, it was right that the building to be reared should be proportionately costly.
II HOW IT ORIGINATED.
1. A time of peace favoured it. (Ver. 1.) Giving the king leisure for thought as to how he could further promote the nation"s welfare; awakening gratitude; affording means and opportunity. Times of war are greatly unfavourable to such enterprises, forcing minds and hearts into other channels, and swallowing up the resources which might otherwise be expended on them.
2. The solidity, beauty, and comforts of David"s own house suggested it. "I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains." David had known for years what it was to have no settled abode, but to wander about the land, taking refuge in woods and caves; and afterwards he was much away from home, engaged in wars. Lately he had built himself a handsome palace, and now for a time he was able to sit quietly in it and meditate; and as he did so, it one day struck him that his abode was superior to that of the ark of God, and the desire was kindled to put an end to the incongruity. Not every one would have been thus moved. How differently the rich man of whom our Lord speaks in Luk_12:16, et seq., " thought within himself"! And how many prosperous people there are, professing to have given themselves to God, who, as they increase in wealth and enjoy comfort and luxury, never turn a thought towards God"s house or cause, or inquire what they can do for them! They reflect much, it may be, on the question how best to invest their increasing gains; but it never seems to occur to them that the most suitable and profitable investment might be in the cause of religion or charity. A more fervent piety would suggest such thoughts. Gratitude for the abundance bestowed on them; the contrast presented (see Hag_1:4) between their residences and their churches, between what they spend on their establishments and, what they spend in the promotion of the kingdom of God; the witness which their mansions and surroundings bear to the ample means with which God has endowed thrum the large trust he has committed to them; all would be fruitful of thoughts and emotions to which they are now strangers, and of a style of giving which they have never allowed themselves. It was David"s piety more than the surrounding circumstances that originated his generous purpose.
III HOW IT WAS TESTED. As to its propriety and probable acceptance with God. He consulted his friend and adviser, Nathan the prophet: The more important the steps we contemplate, the more needful is it, before we are openly and irrevocably committed to them, that we should ascertain how they appear to others, especially to the wisest and best whom we know. Feeling is not a sufficient guide, not even pious feeling; and our own judgment may not be of the soundest. Another may put the matter in a new light, which shall convince ourselves that, however good our motives, our purpose is not wise or not practicable. We cannot directly consult a prophet, but we may find good and enlightened and trustworthy men who will be glad to aid us to a fight conclusion. And what joy it gives to Christian ministers to be consulted by such as come saying, "God has prospered me, I have done well for myself and my family, and I should like to do something proportionate for my God and Saviour: advise me as to how I may best fulfil my desire"! Such applicants are few and far between; such a style of thought and purpose is rare. But it ought not to be. It is a sin and shame that God"s work should be hindered for want of money in a thriving community which can spend freely in all other directions.
IV HOW IT WAS REGARDED BY NATHAN. He approved and encouraged the desire, assuring David of the Divine approval add cooperation (ver. 3). He spoke on the impulse of the moment, with the feeling natural to a pious Israelite and prophet, thankful that his king should cherish such a design. He did well, but had he paused and proposed to "sleep upon" the matter, he would have done better, as appeared next day. We should ever be ready to encourage others in good thoughts and purposes, yet in important matters it is well to take time to consider before we advise as to definite proposals.
V HOW IT WAS REGARDED BY GOD. The proposal was approved, commended, rewarded, and rejected. The refusal was softened by the terms in which it was conveyed, and the representations and promises by which it was accompanied (vers. 4-17; 2Ch_6:8) declaring that it was well that it was in his heart to build a house for God"s Name, although it was a matter of indifference to the Most High what sort of dwelling places men provided for him; reminding David of what he had done for him; assuring him that he would continue to favour the nation, that he would build a house for him as he had sought to build one for himself, and that his son should fulfil the father"s desire, and the throne should continue in his family forever. This was the greatest promise David had received, greater than he himself could then understand, for it looked forward to the everlasting kingdom of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. But though his knowledge of its purport was imperfect, his pain at the rejection of his proposal was more than soothed; his heart was filled with adoring gratitude and joy.
VI HOW ITS SINCERITY WAS PROVED. If he might not do all he desired, he would do all he might and could. He, therefore, prepared plans for the building, accumulated materials for its erection, and urged the work on his son Solomon and the chief men of the nation. An example for us if, setting our hearts on some particular work for God, our purpose is frustrated. Let the diverted energies be employed all the more in such services as are within our reach. A contrast to the conduct of many who, disappointed in reference to some cherished desire (e.g. to become clergymen or missionaries), allow their zeal to decline to the common level, if it do not pass away altogether.
In conclusion:
1. Christian piety will kindle earnest desires to do the greatest possible work for God. Such desires should be cherished in subordination to the Divine will. For though approved of God, they may be denied. (Pro_10:24 notwithstanding) If denied, we should be content, assured of the perfect wisdom and goodness of the purpose of God which has frustrated ours, and that for us and others he has some better thing in store than we had thought of. Though denied, our desire may be fulfilled (as David"s by Solomon). Whether denied or gratified, goal desires (such as are really good, and not mere idle wishes) are always valuable, for what they indicate in ourselves, for the Divine approval they elicit, for their influence on ourselves, and their influence on others (as David"s on his successor and on the chiefs of the nation).
1. The desire to build or aid in building a house for the worship of God isgood.
2. We may all assist in the erection and adornment of a nobler templethan that which David sought to build. "The house of God is the Church of the living God", (1Ti_3:15) and all who labour for the conversion and spiritual improvement of men are helping in the glorious work of building and adorning this spiritual house. Let all Christian workers realize the dignity and glory of their work. Let us all ask ourselves whether we have any heart for it, are doing anything towards it; whether we are capable of doing anything in it that shall be acceptable to God, having first given our own selves to him, and received his Spirit. G.W.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv1, 5, 8, 11, 14, 15, 16, 18 I dwell in an house of cedar, but the…
2Sa_7:1-17
I dwell in an house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains.
Read full note →
Proposal to build a temple
1. The spirit of David was essentially active and fond of work. Even in Eastern countries, with their proverbial stillness and conservatism, such men are sometimes found, but they are far more common elsewhere. Great undertakings do not frighten them; they have spirit enough for a lifetime of effort, they never seem weary of pushing on. When they look on the disorders of the world, they are not content with the languid utterance, Something must be done; they consider what it is possible for them to do, and gird themselves to the doing of it. For some time David seems to have found ample scope for his active energies in subduing the Philistines and other hostile tribes that were yet mingled with the Israelites, and that had long given them much annoyance. When all his enemies were quieted, and he sat in his house, he began to consider to what work of internal improvement he would now give his attention. Was it right that there should be such a contrast between the dwelling-place of David and the dwelling-place of God? It was the very argument that was afterwards used by Haggai and Zechariah after the return from captivity, to rouse the languid zeal of their countrymen for the re-erection of the house of God. Is it time for you, O ye, to dwell in your celled houses and this house lie waste? A generous heart, even though it is a godless one, is uncomfortable When surrounded by elegance and luxury, while starvation and misery prevail in its neighbourhood. To the feelings of the godly a disreputable place of worship, contrasting meanly with the taste and elegance of the hall, or even the villa, is a pain and a reproach. What we have more need to look at is the disproportion of the sums paid by rich men, and even by men who can hardly be called rich, in gratifying their own tastes and in extending the kingdom of Christ. Wealth which remunerates honest and wholesome labour is not all selfishly thrown away. But it is somewhat strange that we hear so seldom of rich Christian men devoting their superfluous wealth to maintaining a mission station with a full staff of labourers, or to the rearing of colleges, or hospitals, or Christian institutions, which might provide on a large scale for Christian activity in ways that might be wonderfully useful. It is in this direction that there is most need to press the example of David.
2. When the thought of building a temple occurred to David, he conferred on the subject with the prophet Nathan. Nathan was to inform David that, unlike Saul, he was not to be the only one of his race to occupy the throne; his son would reign after he was gathered to his fathers, the kingdom would be established in his bands, and the throne of his kingdom would be established for ever. To this favoured son of his would be entrusted the honour of building the temple, God would be his father, and he would be Gods son. The proposal which David had made to build a temple was declined. The time for a change, though drawing near, had not yet arrived. The curtain-canopied tabernacle had been designed by God to wean His people from these sensuous ideas of worship to which the magnificent temples of Egypt had accustomed them, and to give them the true idea of a spiritual service, though not without the visible emblem of a present God. The time had not yet arrived for changing this simple arrangement. God could impart His blessing in the humble tent as well as in the stately temple.
3. But the message through Nathan contained also elements of encouragement, chiefly with reference to Davids offspring, and to the stability and permanence of his throne. To appreciate the value of this promise for the future, we must bear in mind the great insecurity of new dynasties in Eastern countries, and the fearful tragedies that were often perpetrated to get rid of the old kings family, and prepare the way for some ambitious and unscrupulous usurper. To David, therefore, it was an unspeakable comfort to be assured that his dynasty would be a stable dynasty; that his son would reign after him. A father naturally desires peace and prosperity for his children, and if he extends his view down the generations, the desire is strong that it may be well with them and with their seed for ever. But no father, in ordinary circumstances, can flatter himself that his posterity shall escape their share of the current troubles and calamities of life.
4. The emotions roused in David by tills communication were alike delightful and exuberant. He takes no notice of the disappointment--of his not being permitted to build the temple. Ally regret that this might occasion is swallowed up by his delight in the store of blessing actually promised. And here we may see a remarkable instance of Gods way of dealing with His peoples prayers. Virtually, if not formally, David had asked of God to permit him to build a temple to His name. That petition, bearing though it did very directly on Gods glory, is not vouchsafed. But in refusing him that request, He makes over to him mercies of far higher reach and importance. And how often does God do so! How often, when His people are worrying and perplexing themselves about their prayers not being answered, in God answering them in a far richer way! Glimpses of this we see occasionally, but the full revelation of it remains for the future.
5. It is a striking scene that is presented to us when David went in, and sat before the Lord. It is the only instance in Scripture in which any one is said to have taken the attitude of sitting while pouring his heart out to God. Yet the nature of the communion was in keeping with the attitude. We seem to see in this prayer the very best of David--much intensity of feeling, great humility, wondering gratitude, holy intimacy and trust, and supreme satisfaction in the blessing of God. We see him walking in the wry light of Gods countenance, and supremely happy. The joy of David in this act of fellowship with God was the purest of which human beings are capable. It was indeed a joy unspeakable and full of glory. Oh that men would but acquaint themselves with God and be at peace! (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)
Davids desire to build a temple
I. Davids counsel and purpose to build the temple allowed by man but disallowed by God.
1. First, the moving cause of this counsel was the peace God had given him now round about.
2. Second, Nathans over-hasty approving of Davids purpose (v. 3) before he had well considered it in his own mind, or consulted with God about it. This was Nathans private opinion, but not by Divine revelation, which showeth, that the prophets did not always speak by prophetical inspiration, but sometimes as private men by a human prudence.
3. Third, God suffers not His servants to lie long under mistakes. He comes to Nathan that night to rectify both his and Davids error (2Sa_7:4-7), from whence:
(1) This mistake arose from a pious mind, therefore God soon discovers it, and reveals His will therein (Php_3:15).
(2) David thought, because God had promised there should a house be built him, when Israel was once settled in Canaan (Deu_12:10-11), that now the time was come, and he was the man whom God had designed to do this great work.
(3) God took this pious purpose of Davids so well that he accepted of the will for the deed (1Ki_8:18, and 2Co_8:12). Nay, God doth not only graciously accept it, but he doth bountifully reward it (v. 10, 11), etc., here, as if David had done the deed.
(4) This Divine acceptance of Davids pious purpose (as if it had been a performance) was signified by Gods calling him twice over My servant David (v. 5, 8).
II. The reasons God rendered to David why he was refused to build the temple.
1. He was a martial man, and had shed much blood. The temple was a type of the church built by Christ, that Prince of Peace (Isa_9:6), therefore saith God, I reserve this piece of service for thy son Solomon, whose name signifies peaceable.
2. It was meet the shadow should be suitable to the substance.
2. A second reason is rendered by Solomon (1Ki_5:3), that God had designed David soon after this transaction to wage war with the nations round about Israel, therefore could he look for little leisure to carry on so great and glorious a fabric.
3. The third reason of Gods refusing David for this work is found in this Divine oracle to David here, saying, there is no necessity or present haste for building Me a house, seeing that a tent has given Me content to dwell in, ever since Israels coming out of Egypt, and so will be still till My time be come; yet as I have been hitherto all-sufficient unto Israel, so will be as efficacious to them from the ark of My presence in the tabernacle, as if it were magnificently fixed in the temple.
4. The oracle of God secretly taxeth David for being too preposterous in his zeal, saying all the judges of Israel were willing to wait for a Divine warrant to this great work, none of them durst undertake it for want of my commanding warrant, and wilt not thou wait also? Zeal must be rightly timed (1Ch_17:6.) (C. Ness.)
The sanctuary for the people
I. The sanctuary, in Davids view was the house of the Lord. The sanctuary signifies a holy or a sanctified place--a dwelling-place of the Most High--a place where people assembled to honour God and worship Him in the spirit of liberality and holiness.
II. In the sanctuary, work must be done for the world. The religion of Christ reaches out to the lost and the undone. Giving is not a hindrance but a help. The poorest as well as the richest feel that it is a blessed privilege to give. The widows mite has a right to a place in the aggregations which support missions and which build up the waste places.
III. The sanctuary is the training-place for the nobler nature. Business is laid aside. The sharpness, the grasping, the watching, the suspicious spirit may be banished.
IV. The condition of the sanctuary evidences our regard for God. What we do for friends at home attests our love for those committed to our keeping. So what is done for the sanctuary proves the regard cherished for every effort put forth to promote the glory of God and advance the interests Of our fellow-men. David felt this when he called attention to the fact that he dwelt in cedar while the ark of God dwelt within curtains. He did not desire to build the temple to save his soul, but because of his love for God and of his desire to promote the interests of His cause. (J. D. Fulton, D. D.)
The intended temple
David looking at his own personal comfort did not say, Let me now enjoy it; I have paid dearly for it; everything in my house cost me blood; if any man is entitled to a long quiet afternoon in life, I am the man; I am thankful for this tranquillity, and nothing shall disturb it. Men of Davids quality never made speeches of that kind: their peace is in their activity; their Sabbath is in their worship. So, said David, look at the condition of affairs: I dwell in a house of cedar, and the ark of God dwelleth within curtains, etc. Truly, he was a poet with a fine sense of rhythm. Were a syllable too-much in a line it would afflict him like the puncture of an edged instrument. Without studying letters, he knew when things swung in astronomic rhythm and balance and harmony. We may have lost that fine sense of unity and practical poesy; some men have lost it in speech. God has set all things in relation. He is a God of order. He has published the universe as a poem, and all his goings fall into noble sequence. We must study that spirit and pray for it, so that we cannot rest while a picture is out of square, whilst a pillar that ought to be upright is leaning a little to the right or to the left. We ought to be flung into disorder and sense of shame by a false colour, a false note. But while this is impossible to us in a practical way, what is possible to us is a sense of moral justice, a sense of righteous relation, a sense of what is due to God. To be at ease whilst His house is without a roof is to proclaim oneself no child of Heaven.
1. Having come into personal comfort, David will do good. That is the right expression of gratitude. What can I do for the Church? What can I do for the poor? Having read many books, and acquired some information, what can I do for the ignorant?
2. Nathan and David settled the matter according to their own will. Nathan was a man who might perhaps be not indisposed to agree with the king whatever he said. He may come to another temper under Divine ministry; for that we must wait. The idea struck Nathan as a good one. Nathan had no objection. He said, The idea is beautiful; carry it out instantaneously; the Lord is evidently with thee; that is a thought the image and superscription of which cannot be mistaken; and Nathan went home to sleep. There are some things that appear to need no judgment. There are some proposals that are so beautiful and precious that we at once accept them, endorse them, and pass them on to fulfilment, and then retire to rest. The Lord taught David another lesson; he said: This thing is all wrong; it is out of season; there is much more to be done before this man can advance in the direction he has proposed: my house must not be built by his hands; I have an interest in my house: I care for the masonry as well as for the sanctuary. No blasphemer ought to be engaged in building the walls of a cathedral; no flippant man ought to touch the meanest part of Gods house; and no man of blood should build s temple.
3. Yet how gentle is the Most High! Who can speak like God? It is the dignity that gives the value to the condescension. The lesson which God taught to David is to trust the providence which has been good from the very first:--Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote,--so I am not going to forsake thee; if I had taken thee from a throne, reasoning in another direction might have been at least partially justified, but I took thee from the sheepcote, from following the sheep, to be ruler over my people, over Israel. God will have His providence judged as a whole--that is to say, he will have the mind thrown back to the point of origin, and have all the days linked, like loops of gold, like loops of light; then he will say to the subject of His gracious government: Look back at the beginning; count the days; read between the lines; study the whole, and see how all the time I have been building thee a house; and, until that house is finished, wait! What peace it would give to us all if we could adopt this holy method of criticism I Look at the beginning: Where were we? What were we? How have we been trained, watched, defended!
4. God further shows that all things are critically timed: Thou shalt sleep with thy fathers (v. 12)--But God never sleeps. He says: I will put thee to rest, O brave soldier, chivalrous grand heart I will close thine eyelids, stained with rivers of tears; I bury the universe. We must leave something for the future to do. All things are written down in Gods book. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Significance of the ark within curtains
Was not that long continuance in the humble tabernacle intended to make plain the contrast between this God and the gods who were enshrined in the massive structures that Israel had seen in Egypt? Was it not a lesson, even in the days when Israel needed some accommodation to its weakness in the shape of symbolical and ceremonial worship, that He dwelleth not in temples made with hands? Was it not an early gleam of the perfect day--a protest as strong as could then be made against localising the Divine presence and creating sacred places? The degree of religious development in Israel could not yet dispense with all localising, but the minimum of it was attained by the dwelling of the ark in the tabernacle; and there was a danger, which experience proved to be only too real, that a gorgeous temple should become the tomb of religion rather than the dwelling-place of God. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)
The church contrasted with the palace
The cedar was largely used for decorative purposes throughout the whole East. In Nineveh and its Remains, Layard thus describes the internal appearance of an Assyrian building: The ceilings . . . were divided into square compartments, painted with flowers, or with the figures of animals. Some were inlaid with ivory, each compartment being surrounded by elegant borders and mouldings. The beams, as well as the sides of the chambers, may have been gilded, or even plated with gold and silver; and the rarest woods, in which the cedar was conspicuous, were used for the woodwork. (Zep_2:14; Jer_22:14; 1Ki_6:15; 1Ki_7:3.) The true relation of the houses of men to the house of God may be illustrated from Ancient Athens. The dwelling-houses of Athens were mean; its temples were the wonder of the world, abounding in all magnificence of wealth and art. (Sunday School Times.)
Remembering Gods house
Mathew Henry says: Note: When God, in His providence, has remarkably done much for us, it should put us upon contriving what we may do for Him and His glory. What shall I render unto the Lord? And John Trapp adds: Ahab dwelt in a palace of ivory, and yet had no thoughts of heart for God and His service. David and Ahab both have their like among the sons of men.
Purpose in life
The great Socialist, Robert Dale Owen, says: I committed one fatal error in my youth, and dearly have I bewailed it; I started in life without an object, even without an ambition. Had I created for myself a definite purpose--literary, artistic, scientific, social, there would have been something to labour for, and to overcome. But the power is gone. I have thrown away a life. I am an unhappy man. Lack of purpose has ruined more lives than has a deliberately-chosen bad purpose. It leaves that life at the mercy of every shabby influence without a guiding principle or unifying power. (H. O. Mackey.)
Communion with God
The narrative presents David--
I. Still concerned for the glory of God. Looking round upon the splendid house he has reared, the contrast between that and the place where was the ark of God grieves him. I dwell in a house of Cedar but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains.
1. The gratitude of his heart to the Giver of all his mercies is strongly characteristic of the man. His heart was tender as a womans and strong as a heros. True gratitude always acknowledges first the Band Divine. The grateful heart needs no constraint to bring the offering of the first-fruit to the Lord.
2. The piety of David is unmistakably shown here. The needle suddenly disturbed and forced from its centre trembles to return. David is never at rest, never restful, until he is obeying and serving God. A gracious soul will always revolt from meanness towards Gods house and luxury toward his own. Devoted souls love to consecrate wealth and leisure to God. Gracious hearts can never do enough for God. These remove the reason for the sarcasm of the infidel, that, judged by the houses they are said to dwell in, the Christians gods are very human.
II. Gods reply and Davids reception thereof.
1. The purpose in Davids heart is accepted.
2. The actual building of the Temple is denied him. Generous impulses should be taken to God. He speeds not who tries to run before the Lord sends him. Impatient hurry is apt to lead astray.
3. A wonderful promise is given him. Dr. Kennicott, Bishop Horsley, and others point out that the Hebrew verb translated If he commit iniquity is not in the active but in the passive voice, and thus the passage would be rendered, I will be his Father, and he shall be my son: even in his suffering for iniquity I shall chasten him with the rod of men (with the rod due to men), and with the stripes (due to) the children of men. Another view is presented in Psa_89:1-52. It is not the king himself but his children that are supposed to transgress and require correction, but out of faithfulness to them their chastisements are not to be destructive. Dr. Gifford, in his Voices of the Prophets, thus writes:--The seed which shall be of Davids sons must be some descendant later than Solomon; and the whole description is such as cannot be applied to a mortal king, or only as far as he is type of one greater than himself. It points to eternal and spiritual truth prefigured and embodied in the Kingdom of David to be realised in the Kingdom of his Son. David seems to have grasped the double application of this prophecy, to have risen to the prophetic within the promise. Reference to his Psalms will clearly establish this (62, 45, and 110.). And also study of Davids prayer and thanksgiving will establish this.
4. Davids reception of the promise. His heart is filled with warmest emotions of gratitude and delight. Large as the promise would be if confined to Solomon, it would scarcely account for the profound humility and reverence depicted in the language used by David. His emotions are irrepressible. (H. E. Stone.)
Concern for religious things
Davids self is all right, but in the nobility of the grace that God has given to him, his thoughts are away from self and upon God. What ails John Welsh that he rises at a most unseasonable time to wrap his plaid about him, and sob, and groan, and cry? The ark of God--that is, Scotland--is within curtains, is being buffeted by the winds of indifference, and that robs the eyelids of John Welsh of their sleep, and he tells his wife that he cannot rest, for he has the souls of three thousand to answer for, and he knows not how it is with many of them. John Welsh is like David, concerned not for himself, but for God. Ah, the times have been in this land when men were burdened with the public state, when a Christless generation would lie heavily on the hearts of the covenanted people, when sleep would fly, and groans and tears would come for the wickedness of the land. Campbell, of Kinnioncleugh, what ails you? You are in the covenant of grace, and the tears, bitter and salt, are running down your cheeks. What is the sorrow? What is the burden? Has the Lord forsaken you? They ask him, Why this agony and groaning? He replied, It is the ark in Scotland that I am concerned about. It is Scotlands kirk that I am troubled about. Ah! there are few now burdened about Scotlands kirk. As prosperity and wealth come, the spiritual drought and spiritual darkness, and the awful indifference of a generation that will not have God, do not lie as burdens, as they should, on our hearts. We are content with the houses of cedar; we are content, and we rub our hands in a kind of competing glory in church extension. Denomination after denomination is rushing on for denominational objects, and the unholy fire is being spread abroad, while all the time Gods ark is within curtains, the people axe unsaved, and their hearts are empty of love to Jesus. (J. Robertson.)
Self-denying grace needed in the church
Do you know the problem in the heathen field? Do you know why those Chinese and those heathen tribes refuse to come to Christ? It is because they do not believe in our earnestness. For every commercial post there are a thousand applicants; for every chance to get the gold that perisheth, there are competitors by the score; but to tell the story of redeeming love, one is considered sufficient for a province containing two million souls. Oh, this awful blame that lies at the door of the professing Church of Christ! We are dwelling in cedar while the ark of the Lord is buffeted by the storms. Real grace cannot be content with self, with the house of cedar. Because our wealthy churches have no missionary spirit, have no self-denying, but are wasting their givings on self, the poorer parts of the cities and the heathen fields are left struggling and helpless. Verily God in His day will judge the so-called Christian communities. Oh, for more of the self denying grace that David had! He felt that the very house of cedar was about to tumble down upon him while the ark of God was exposed to the storms of the night. (J. Robertson.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v1
CHAPTER I X.
PROPOSAL TO BUILD A TEMPLE.
Read full note →
2Sa_7:1-29.
THE spirit of David was essentially active and fond of work. He was one of those who are ever pressing on, not content to keep things as they are, moving personally towards improvement, and urging others to do the same. Even in Eastern countries, with their proverbial stillness and conservatism, such men are sometimes found, but they are far more common elsewhere. Great undertakings do not frighten them; they have spirit enough for a lifetime of effort, they never seem weary of pushing on. When they look on the disorders of the world they are not content with the languid utterance, "Something must be done;" they consider what it is possible for them to do, and gird themselves to the doing of it.
For some time David seems to have found ample scope for his active energies in subduing the Philistines and other hostile tribes that were yet mingled with the Israelites, and that had long given them much annoyance. His friendship with Hiram of Tyre probably gave a new impulse to his mind, and led him to project many improvements in Jerusalem and elsewhere. When all his enemies were quieted, and he sat in his house, he began to consider to what work of internal improvement he would now give his attention. Having recently removed the Ark, and placed it in a tabernacle on Mount Zion, constructed probably in accordance with the instructions given to Moses in the wilderness, he did not at first contemplate the erection of any other kind of building for the service of God. It was while he sat in his new and elegant house that the idea came into his mind that it was not seemly that he should be lodged in so substantial a home, while the Ark of God dwelt between curtains. Curtains might have been suitable, nay, necessary, in the wilderness, where the Ark bad constantly to be moved about; and even in the land of Israel, while the nation was comparatively unsettled, curtains might still have been best; but now that a permanent resting-place had been found for the Ark, was it right that there should be such a contrast between the dwelling-place of David and the dwelling-place of God? It was the very argument that was afterwards used by Haggai and Zechariah after the return from captivity, to rouse the languid zeal of their countrymen for the re-erection of the house of God. "Is it time for you, O ye, to dwell in your ceiled houses and this house lie waste?"
A generous heart, even though it be a godless one, is uncomfortable when surrounded by elegance and luxury, while starvation and misery prevail in its neighbourhood. We see in our day the working of this feeling in those cases, unhappily too few, where men and women born to gold and grandeur feel wretched unless they are doing something to equalize the conditions of life by helping those who are born to rags and wretchedness. To the feelings of the godly a disreputable place of worship, contrasting meanly with the taste and elegance of the hall, or even the villa, is a pain and a reproach. There is not much need at the present day for urging the unseemliness of such a contrast, for the tendency of our time is toward handsome church buildings, and in many cases towards extravagance in the way of embellishment. What we have more need to look at is the disproportion of the sums paid by rich men, and even by men who can hardly be called rich, in gratifying their own tastes and in extending the kingdom of Christ. We are far from blaming those who, having great wealth, spend large sums from year to year on yachts, on equipages, on picture galleries, on jewelery and costly furnishings. Wealth which remunerates honest and wholesome labour is not all selfishly thrown away. But it is somewhat strange that we hear so seldom of rich Christian men devoting their superfluous wealth to maintaining a mission station with a whole staff of labourers, or to the rearing of colleges, or hospitals, or Christian institutions, which might provide on a large scale for Christian activity in ways that might be wonderfully useful. It is in this direction that there is most need to press the example of David. When shall this new enlargement of Christian activity take place? Or when shall men learn that the pleasure of spreading the blessings of the Gospel by the equipment and maintenance of a foreign missionary or mission station far exceeds anything to be derived from refinements and luxuries of which they themselves are the object and the center?
When the thought of building a temple occurred to David, he conferred on the subject with the prophet Nathan. The Scripture narrative is so brief that it gives us no information about Nathan, except in connection with two or three events in which he had a share. Apparently he was a prophet of Jerusalem, on intimate terms with David, and perhaps attached to his court. When first consulted on the subject by the king, he gave him a most encouraging answer, but without having taken any special steps to ascertain the mind of God. He presumed that as the undertaking was itself so good, and as David generally was so manifestly under Divine guidance, nothing was to be said but that he should go on. "Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that is in thine heart, for the Lord is with thee." That same night, however, a message came to Nathan that gave a new complexion to the proposal. He was instructed to remind David, first, that God had never complained of His tabernacle-dwelling from the day when He brought up the children of Israel to that hour, and had never given a hint that He desired a house of cedar. Further, he was commissioned to convey to David the assurance of God's continued interest and favour towards him - of that interest which began by taking him from the sheepfold to make him king over Israel, and which had been shown continuously in the success which had been given him in all his enterprises, and the great name he had acquired, entitling him to rank with the great men of the earth. Towards the nation of Israel, too, God was actuated by the same feeling of affectionate interest; they would be planted, set firm in a place of their own, delivered from the thralldom of enemies, and allowed to prosper and expand in peace and comfort. Still further - and this was a very special blessing - Nathan was to inform David that, unlike Saul, he was not to be the only one of his race to occupy the throne; his son would reign after he was gathered to his fathers, the kingdom would be established in his hands, and the throne of his kingdom would be established for ever. To this favoured son of his would be entrusted the honour of building the temple, God would be his Father, and he would be God's son. If he should fall into sin, he would be chastised for his sin, but not destroyed. The Divine mercy would not depart from him as it had departed from Saul. The kernel of the message was in these gracious concluding words - "Thine house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee; thy throne shall be established forever."
Here, certainly, was a very remarkable message, containing both elements of refusal and elements of encouragement. The proposal which David had made to build a temple was declined. The time for a change, though drawing near, had not yet arrived. The curtain- canopied tabernacle had been designed by God to wean His people from those sensuous ideas of worship to which the magnificent temples of Egypt had accustomed them, and to give them the true idea of a spiritual service, though not without the visible emblem of a present God. The time had not yet arrived for changing this simple arrangement. God could impart His blessing in the humble tent as well as in the stately temple. As long as it was God's pleasure to dwell in the tabernacle, so long might David expect that His grace would be imparted there. So we may say, that so long as it is manifestly God's pleasure that a body of His worshippers shall occupy a humble tabernacle, so long may they expect that He will shine forth there, imparting that fullness of grace and blessing which is the true and only glory of any place of worship.
But the message through Nathan contained also elements of encouragement, chiefly with reference to David's offspring, and to the stability and permanence of his throne. To appreciate the value of this promise for the future, we must bear in mind the great insecurity of new dynasties in Eastern countries, and the fearful tragedies that were often perpetrated to get rid of the old king's family, and prepare the way for some ambitious and unscrupulous usurper.
We hardly need to recall the tragic end of Saul, the base murder of Ishbosheth, or the painful deaths of Asahel and Abner. We have but to think of what happened in the sister kingdom of the ten tribes, from the death of the son of its first king, Jeroboam, on to its final extinction. What an awful record the history of that kingdom presents of conspiracies, murders, and massacres! How miserable a distinction it was to be of the seed royal in those days! It only made one the more conspicuous a mark for the poisoned cup or the assassin's dagger. It associated with the highest families of the realm horrors and butcheries of which the poorest had no cause even to dream. Anyone who had been raised to a throne could not but sicken at the thought of the atrocities which his very elevation might one day bring upon his children. A new king could hardly enjoy his dignity but by steeling his heart against every feeling of parental love.
And, moreover, these constant changes of the royal family were very hurtful to the kingdom at large. They divided it into sections that raged against each other with terrible fury. For of all wars civil wars are the worst for the fierceness of the passions they evoke, and the horrors which they inflict. Scotland and England too have had too much experience of these conflicts in other days. Many generations have elapsed since they were ended, but we have many memorials still of the desolation which they spread, while our progress and prosperity, ever since they passed away, show us clearly of what a multitude of mercies they robbed the land.
To David, therefore, it was an unspeakable comfort to be assured that his dynasty would be a stable dynasty; that his son would reign after him; that a succession of princes would follow with unquestioned right to the throne; and that if his son, or his son's son, should commit sins deserving of chastisement, that chastisement would not be withheld, but it would not be fatal, it would bring the needed correction, and thus the throne would be secure forever. A father naturally desires peace and prosperity for his children, and if he extends his view down the generations, the desire is strong that it may be well with them and with their seed for ever. But no father, in ordinary circumstances, can flatter himself that his posterity shall escape their share of the current troubles and calamities of life. David, but for this assurance, must have looked forward to his posterity encountering their share of those nameless horrors to which royal children were often born. It was an unspeakable privilege to learn, as he did now, that his dynasty would be alike permanent and secure; that, as a rule, his children would not be exposed to the atrocities of Oriental successions; that they would be under the special care and protection of God; that their faults would be corrected without their being destroyed; and that this state of blessing would continue for ages and ages to come.
The emotions roused in David by this communication were alike delightful and exuberant. He takes no notice of the disappointment - of his not being permitted to build the temple. Any regret that this might occasion is swallowed up by his delight in the store of blessing actually promised. And here we may see a remarkable instance of God's way of dealing with His people's prayers. Virtually, if not formally, David had asked of God to permit him to build a temple to His name. That petition, bearing though it did very directly on God's glory, is not vouchsafed. God does not accord that privilege to David. But in refusing him that request. He makes over to him mercies of far higher reach and importance. He refuses his immediate request only to grant to him far above all that he was able to ask or think. And how often does God do so! How often, when His people are worrying and perplexing themselves about their prayers not being answered, is God answering them in a far richer way! Glimpses of this we see occasionally, but the full revelation of it remains for the future. You pray to the degree of agony for the preservation of a beloved life; it is not granted; God appears deaf to your cry; a year or two after, things happen that would have broken your friend's heart or driven reason from its throne; you understand now why God did not fulfill your petition. Oh for the spirit of trust that shall never charge God foolishly! Oh for the faith that does not make haste, but waits patiently for the Lord, - waits for the explanation that shall come in the end, at the revelation of Jesus Christ!
It is a striking scene that is presented to us when "David went in, and sat before the Lord." It is the only instance in Scripture in which any one is said to have taken the attitude of sitting while pouring his heart out to God. Yet the nature of the communion was in keeping with the attitude. David was like a child sitting down beside his father, to think over some wonderfully kind expression of his intentions to him, and pour out his full heart into his ear. We may observe in the address of David how pervaded it is by the tone of wonder. This, indeed, is its great characteristic. He expresses wonder at the past, at God's selecting one obscure in family and obscure in person; he wonders at the present: How is it Thou hast brought me thus far? and still more he wonders at the future, the provision made for the stability of his house in all time coming. "And is this the manner of man, O Lord God?"* All true religious feeling is pervaded by an element of wonder; it is this element that warms and elevates it. In David's case it kindles intense adoration and gratitude, with reference both to God's dealings with himself and His dealings with Israel. "What one nation in the earth is like Thy people, even like Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to Himself, and to make Him a name, and to do for you great things and terrible, for Thy land, before Thy people, which Thou redeemedst to Thee from Egypt, from the nations and their gods?" This wonder at past goodness, moreover, begets great confidence for the future. And David warmly and gratefully expresses this confidence, and looks forward with exulting feelings to the blessings reserved for him and his house. And finally he falls into the attitude of supplication, and prays that it may all come to pass. Not that he doubts God's word; the tone of the whole prayer is the tone of gratitude for the past and confidence in the future. But he feels it right to take up the attitude of a suppliant, to show, as we believe, that it must all come of God's free and infinite mercy; that not one of all the good things which God had promised could be claimed as a right, for the least and the greatest were due alike to the rich grace of a sovereign God. "Therefore now let it please Thee to bless the house of Thy servant, that it may continue forever before Thee; for Thou, O Lord God, hast spoken it, and with Thy blessing let the house of Thy servant be blessed forever." Appropriate ending for a remarkable prayer! appropriate, too, not for David only, but for every Christian praying for his country, and for every Christian father praying for his family! "With Thy blessing," bestowed alike in mercy and in chastisement, in what Thou givest and in what Thou withholdest, but making all things work together for eternal good - "With Thy blessing let the house of Thy servant be blessed forever." (*The expression is very obscure, whether we take the affirmative form of the Revised Version or the interrogative form of the Authorized Version. "And this, too, after the manner of men, O Lord God!" (R.V.) We must choose between these opposite meanings. We prefer the interrogative form of the A.V. David's wonder being the more excited that God's ways were here so much above man's.)
We seem to see in this prayer the very best of David - much intensity of feeling, great humility, wondering gratitude, holy intimacy and trust, and supreme satisfaction in the blessing of God. We see him walking in the very light of God's countenance, and supremely happy. We see Jacob's ladder between earth and heaven, and the angels of God ascending and descending on it. Moreover, we see the infinite privilege which is involved in having God for our Father, and in being able to realize that He is full of most fatherly feelings to us. The joy of David in this act of fellowship with God was the purest of which human beings are capable. It was indeed a joy unspeakable and full of glory. Oh that men would but acquaint themselves with God and be at peace! Let it be our aim to cherish as warm sentiments of trust in God, and to look forward to the future with equal satisfaction and delight.
A very important question arises in connection with this chapter, to which we have not yet adverted, but which we cannot pass by. In that promise of God respecting the stability of David's throne and the perpetual duration of his dynasty, was there any reference to the Messiah, any reference to the spiritual kingdom of which alone it could be said with truth that it was to last forever? The answer to this question is very plain, because some of the words addressed by God to David are quoted in the New Testament as having a Messianic reference. "To which of the angels said He at any time, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to Me a son?" (Heb_1:5). If we consider, too, how David's dynasty really came to an end as a reigning family some five hundred years after, we see that the language addressed to him was not exhausted by the fortunes of his family. In the Divine mind the prophecy reached forward to the time of Christ, and only in Christ was it fully verified. And it seems plain from some words of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost that David understood this. He knew that "God had sworn to him that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh. He would raise up Christ to sit on His throne" (Act_2:30). From the very exalted emotions which the promise raised in his breast, and the enthusiasm with which he poured forth his thanksgivings for it, we infer that David saw in it far more than a promise that for generations to come his house would enjoy a royal dignity. He must have concluded that the great hope of Israel was to be fulfilled in connection with his race, God's words implied, that it was in His line the promise to Abraham was to be fulfilled - "In thee and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." He saw Christ's day afar off and was glad. To us who look back on that day the reasons for gladness and gratitude are far stronger than they were even to him. Then let us prize the glorious fact that the Son of David has come, even the Son of God, who hath given us understanding that we may know Him that is true. And while we prize the truth, let us embrace the privilege; let us become one with Him in whom we too become sons of God, and with whom we may cherish the hope of reigning for ever as kings and priests, when He comes to gather His redeemed that they may sit with Him on the throne of His glory.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On vv1, 12, 17 2Sa_7:1. “When the king sat in his house,” etc.,…
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES—
2Sa_7:1. “When the king sat in his house,” etc., i.e. the palace mentioned in 2Sa_5:11. Many commentators place the events of this chapter later on in the life of David, inasmuch as they think it could not be said at this period that he had “rest from all his enemies,” yet nearly all agree in understanding from 2Sa_7:11 that Solomon was, not born at the time. It therefore seems necessary to understand the rest spoken of as only a temporary interval of peace (for he was more or less involved in war until the end of his life), and if so, the conception of building a temple to Jehovah seems to follow here most naturally. It is quite in keeping with David’s devout character, and just what we should expect from him, that his first interval of repose should be occupied with such a purpose.
Read full note →
2Sa_7:2. “Nathan, the prophet.” This prophet here appears for the first time, and it is evident that he sustained a similar relation to David as Samuel and Gad had done, and as the latter still continued to do (see 2Sa_24:11-19). “If the expression first and last in 2Ch_9:29 is to be taken literally, he must have lived late into the life of Solomon, in which case he must have been considerably younger than David. At any rate he seems to have been the younger of the two prophets who accompanied him, and may be considered as the latest direct representative of the schools of Samuel. The peculiar affix of ‘the prophet’ as distinguished from the ‘seer’ given to Samuel and Gad (1Ch_29:29) shows his identification with the later view of the prophetic office indicated in 1Sa_9:9.” (Dean Stanley.) Most bible scholars consider that this part of the book of Samuel is at least compiled from Nathan’s work mentioned in 1Ch_29:29. Within curtains, literally, within the tent-cloth.
2Sa_7:3. “Nathan said,” etc. This answer shows that, even if David did not expressly state his intention, Nathan understood his purpose to build the temple, and sanctioned his design “from his own feelings, not by Divine revelation.” (Michaelis.)
2Sa_7:4. “That night.” The one following the day in which the conversation took place. “The Word of the Lord came.” “By the conversation held with David during the day, Nathan’s soul with all its thoughts and feelings was concentrated on David’s great and holy purpose; this was the psychological basis for the Divine inspiration.” (Erdmann) “Shalt thou,” etc. “The question involves a negative reply.” (Keil.)
2Sa_7:6-7. Here “Jehovah gives two reasons why David’s proposal should not be carried out … but this does not involve any blame as though there had been any presumption on David’s part … but simply showed that it was not because of any negligence on the part of the former leaders of the people that they had not thought of erecting a temple, and that even now the time for such a work had not yet come.” (Keil)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—2Sa_7:1-7
DAVID FORBIDDEN TO BUILD THE TEMPLE
I. A good man’s desire may be in harmony with the mind of God, yet its accomplishment may be contrary to the Divine will. It must always be right and always pleasing to a good father for his son to desire to honour him and to express by some outward act his sense of love and gratitude. But while the feeling is in itself most acceptable to him, he may desire it to take some other form of expressing itself, or he may see that some other season will be a more fitting one for this particular outward expression of his child’s love and reverence. The feeling which prompts the desire must be right at all seasons, but the accomplishment of the desire may be unseasonable or undesirable. So it was with David’s desire and purpose at this period. It was most fitting and could not but be pleasing to God that David should desire to build Him a house far more beautiful than his own palace. We should feel that David was out of harmony with himself if he had sat contentedly in his palace while the ark of God was within curtains. And it is plain that the feelings which gave birth to his purpose were very acceptable to God, as all grateful emotion and desire to express them must ever be. Yet he was forbidden to carry out his design. Let no good man, then, ever think that, because his desire is not fulfilled it is displeasing to God. It may be quite the opposite. The gratitude and reverence that desires to do something for the glory of God must be most pleasing to such a God as ours; but although the feeling may be genuine and the motive pure, He may see reasons for not permitting the purpose to be carried out.
II. Those who instruct others in the oracles of God may be right in their general interpretation of the Divine will, and yet wrong in their application to special instances. Every servant of God is sure that it is the will of God that His glory shall be the ruling aim, and His service the first thought in the life of His children. But he may sometimes be mistaken as to the best methods of promoting that glory or the best time for undertaking a special service, and he must not therefore be dogmatic on these matters. Nathan was quite right in encouraging David in his endeavours to bring his own people and the surrounding nations into more intimate relation with the God of Israel. Like that of all the good in all ages his prayer was “Let the people praise Thee, O God; let all the people praise Thee.” But right as he was in the general principle, he erred in the special application on this occasion. Although it was quite true that the Lord was with David in the sense of approval of his general feeling, He was not with him in the sense that He would permit him to undertake this particular work.
III. But when God’s servants sincerely desire to do His will, He will not permit them to remain long in ignorance. If a father knows that his children only need to know what is right in order to do it, it would surely be cruel of him to let them remain in ignorance. And when our Heavenly Father sees in His children such integrity of heart that they joyfully acquiesce in His purposes concerning themselves, and desire above all other things His guidance, we cannot for a moment suppose He will withhold from them a revelation of His will. When they are permitted to err, it must be because there is some self-will which prevents entire singleness of purpose—some alloy mixed with the pure gold of a desire right in the main. David and Nathan were very soon put in full possession of God’s mind in respect to the building of the temple, and that it was so is a proof of their undivided loyalty to the Divine will, and a pledge that all who are like minded shall be as certainly instructed in the work they are to do and the part they are to fulfil.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
2Sa_7:2. The sentiment underlying these words was in the highest degree honourable to David. They indicate that he felt it to be a moral anomaly, if not a species of dishonesty, that he should look so well after his own personal comfort and regal dignity, while yet the house of God was but a tent. It were well, in these days, that we all shared these convictions, for we are too apt to lavish our wealth exclusively upon our own enjoyment and indulgence, forgetful of the higher claims which God and His cause have upon us. I say not, indeed, that it is wrong for a man to take such a position in society as his riches warrant him to assume, or that there is sin in spending money on our residences, or in surrounding ourselves with the treasures of human wisdom in books, or the triumphs of human art in pictures or statuary; but I do say that our gifts to the cause of God ought to be at least abreast of our expenditure for these other things; and that if we so cripple ourselves by our extravagance on house, or dress, or luxuries, as to render it impossible for us to do anything for the promotion of the Gospel abroad, or for the instruction of the ignorant at home, we are “verily guilty concerning our brethren,” and before our God. The principle here acknowledged by David is a thoroughly sound one, and though he was discouraged from applying it in the particular way on which he had set his heart, we must not suppose that his feelings, as expressed to Nathan, were wrong. On the contrary, the spiritual instinct in him was true, and God declared that “it was well that it was in his heart.” Now what was this principle? It was this, that in proportion as we increase our expenditure upon ourselves for the comforts and the elegancies of life, we ought to increase our offerings to God for the carrying on of works of faith and labours of love among our fellow-men. If we can afford to enter a larger dwelling, we ought to make ourselves afford to add proportionately to our contributions for all good objects. If we allow ourselves to gratify our taste in the purchase of a new picture or a new book, we should feel impelled to do just so much more for the gratification of the impulse of Christian benevolence. The value of this principle, when rightly understood, and conscientiously carried out, will be very great. It will act in two ways. On the one hand, it will keep us from hampering ourselves in our benevolence by personal extravagance, and so be a check on that tendency to luxury which is manifested even in many Christian households. On the other hand, it will impel us to add to our gifts to the Lord Jesus Christ; since every time we do anything for ourselves there will be a new call made upon us to do more for Him.—Taylor.
David was not one of those easy-minded men who are content to keep things just as they are, but one of those who are ever pressing onward, and urging others towards progress, improvement, development. A most useful order of mind it is, especially when duly ballasted by minds in which caution is more predominant. The world would stagnate—the church would settle down into the poorest and tamest society on earth, if such men were not raised up, with their trumpet-tongues and burning hearts, to rouse their fellows to high and lofty enterprise.—Blaikie.
2Sa_7:4. God will not suffer His dear children to lie long in error; but if in anything they be otherwise minded, He will reveal even this unto them (Php_3:15).—Trapp.
2Sa_7:4-5. God demands not so much splendid outward service, but rather an inner and honest service of the heart (Isa_4:2-4.)—Schmid.
God is much more desirous of giving to us than of receiving from us.—Wuert. Bible.
The true house of God is His people; there would He make His abode in the hearts of His own. A human heart that opens itself to God is a temple more pleasing to Him than the stateliest structure of gold and marble, and a church that really has the Lord dwelling in its midst is in the sight of God more precious than the noblest showy building which sets all the world a wondering.—Schlier.
2Sa_7:6. The curtained tabernacle had been specially designed by God to wean His people from those sensuous ideas of worship to which the gorgeous temples of Egypt had accustomed them; and to give them the true notion of a spiritual service, along with the visible emblem of a present God. The time had not quite arrived for changing this simple arrangement, and as long as it was God’s pleasure to dwell in the tabernacle so long might David expect that His grace might be shed forth most abundantly there. And so, whenever it seems to be indicated by God in His providence that a body of worshippers should remain in a tent-like building, they may expect that He will then shine forth in the fulness of His grace.—Blaikie.
2Sa_7:8. God signified His good acceptance by calling him His servant David; for at another time when he had offended it was plain David. (2Sa_24:12.) I took thee from the sheepcote. So that thou needest not to doubt of my love, though I use not thy service in this particular. To be ruler over my people. Do this well, and thou needest not be idle.—Trapp.
2Sa_7:9. Fame.
1. Fame is a gift of God’s providence—hence to be enjoyed with humility.
2. Fame is one of God’s noblest gifts—hence it may be desired and earnestly sought if righteously.
3. Fame, like all other gifts, has weighty responsibilities—hence to be used for the good of men and the glory of God.—Translator of Lange’s Commentary.
2Sa_7:11. This thought contains the deep general truth that God must first of all build a man’s house before the man can build God’s house, and applies it especially to the kingdom of Israel.—Keil.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On vv4, 18 2 Samuel
2 Samuel
THE PROMISED KING AND TEMPLE-BUILDER
Read full note →
2Sa 7:4 - 2Sa 7:16.
The removal of the ark to Jerusalem was but the first step in a process which was intended to end in the erection of a permanent Temple. The time for the next step appeared to David to have come when he had no longer to fight for his throne. Rest from enemies should lead to larger work for God, else repose will be our worst enemy, and peace will degenerate into self-indulgent sloth. A devout heart will not be content with personal comfort and dwelling in a house of cedar, while the ark has but a tent for its abode. There should be a proportion between expenditure on self and on religious objects. How many professing Christians might go to school to David! Luxury at home and niggardliness in God’s work make an ugly pair, but, alas! a common one.
Nathan approved, as was natural. But he knew the difference between his own thoughts and ‘the word of the Lord’ that came to him, and, like a true man, he went in the morning and contradicted, by God’s authority, his own precipitate sanction of the king’s proposal. Clearly, divine communications were unmistakably distinguishable from the recipient’s own thoughts.
The divine message first negatives the intention to build a house. In 1 Chronicles a positive prohibition takes the place of the question in 2Sa 7:5, but that is only a difference of form, for the question implies a negative answer. From David’s last words {1Ch 28:3} we learn that a reason for the prohibition was ‘because thou art a man of war, and hast shed blood.’ His wars were necessary, and tended to establish the kingdom, but their existence showed that the time for building the Temple had not come, and there was a certain incongruity in a warrior king rearing a house for the God whose kingdom was in its essence peace.
The prohibition rests on a deep insight into the nature of Jehovah’s reign, and draws a broad distinction between His worship and the surrounding paganism. But the reason given in the text is very remarkable. God did not desire a permanent Temple. If we may so say, He preferred the less solid Tabernacle, as corresponding better to the simplicity and spirituality of His worship. A gorgeous stone Temple might easily become the sepulchre, rather than the shrine, of true devotion. The movable tent answered to the temporary character of the ‘dispensation.’ The more fixed and elaborate the externals of worship, the more danger of the spirit being stifled by them. The Old Testament worship was necessarily ceremonial, but here is a caveat against the stiffening of ceremonial into stereotyped formalism.
The prohibition was accompanied by gracious and far-reaching promises, designed to assure David of God’s approbation of his motive, and to open up to him the vision of the future and the wonders that should be. We need say little about the retrospective part of the message {2Sa 7:8 - 2Sa 7:9}. God had been the agent in all David’s past, had lifted him from the quiet following of his sheep, had given him rule, which was but a delegated authority. Israel was ‘My people,’ and therefore he was but an instrument in God’s hand, and was not to govern by his own fancies or for his own advantage.
Every devout man’s life is the realisation of a plan of God’s, and we sin against ourselves as well as Him if we do not often let thankful thoughts retrace all the way by which the Lord our God has led us.
With 2Sa 7:9 the prophecy turns to the future. David personally is promised the continuance of God’s help; then a permanent, peaceful possession of the land is promised to the nation, and finally the perpetuity of the kingdom in the Davidic line is promised. The prophecy as to the nation, like all such prophecies, is contingent on national obedience. The future of the kingdom will stand in blessed contrast with the wild times of the Judges, if-and only if-Israel behaves as ‘My people’ should.
But the main point of the prophecy is the promise to David’s ‘seed.’ In form it attaches itself very significantly to David’s intention to build a house for Jehovah. That would invert the true order, for Jehovah was about to build a house, that is, a permanent posterity, for David. God must first give before man can requite. All our relations to Him begin with His free mercy to us. And our building for Him should ever be the result of His building for us, and will, in some humble way, resemble the divine beneficence by which it has been quickened into action. The very foundation principles of Christian service are expressed here, in guise fitted to the then epoch of revelation.
But the relation of the two things, God’s building and Solomon’s, is not exhausted by such considerations. The consolidation of the monarchy in David’s family was an essential preliminary to the rearing of the Temple. That work needed tranquil times, abundant resources, leisure, and assured dominion. So the prophet goes on to promise that David shall be succeeded by his ‘seed,’ who shall build the Temple.
Further, three great promises are given in reference to David’s seed,- a perpetual kingdom, a personal relation of sonship to Jehovah, and paternal chastisement, if necessary, but no such departure of Jehovah’s mercy as had darkened the close of Saul’s sad reign. Then, finally, the assurance is reiterated of the perpetuity of David’s house and throne. The remarkable expression in 2Sa 7:16, ‘established before thee’ {that is, David}, if it is the true reading, suggests a hint of the life after death, and conceives of the long-dead king as in some manner cognisant of the fortunes of his descendants. But the Septuagint reads ‘before Me,’ and that reading is confirmed by 2Sa 7:26 and 2Sa 7:29, and by Psa 89:36.
Now it is clear that these promises were in part directed to, and fulfilled in, Solomon. But it is as clear that the great promise of an eternal dominion, which is emphatically repeated thrice, goes far beyond him. We are obliged to recognise a second meaning in the prophecy, in accordance with Old Testament usage, which often means by ‘seed’ a line of successive generations of descendants. But no succession of mortal men can reach to eternal duration.
Apart from the fact that the kingdom, in the form in which David’s descendants ruled over it, has long since crumbled away, the large words of the promise must be regarded as inflated and exaggerated, if by ‘for ever’ is only meant ‘for long generations.’ A ‘seed,’ or line of perishable men, can only last for ever if it closes in a Person who is not subject to the law of mortality. Unless we can with our hearts rejoicingly confess, ‘Thou art the King of glory, O Christ! Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,’ we do not pierce to the full understanding of Nathan’s prophecy.
All the glorious prerogatives shadowed in it were but partially fulfilled in Israel’s monarchs. Their failures and their successes, their sins and their virtues, equally declared them to be but shadowy forerunners of Him in whom all that they at the best imperfectly aimed at and possessed is completely and for ever fulfilled. They were prophetic persons by their office, and pointed on to Him.
He has built the true Temple, in that His body is the seat of sacrifice and of revelation, and the meeting-place of God and man, and inasmuch as through Him we are built up into a spiritual house for an habitation of God. In Him is fulfilled the great prophecy of ‘My Servant the Branch,’ who ‘shall build the Temple of the Lord’ and ‘be a Priest upon His throne.’ In Him, too, is fulfilled in highest truth the filial relationship. The Israelitish kings were by office sons of God. He is the Son in ineffable derivation and eternal unity of life with the Father, and their communion is in closest oneness of will and mutual interchange of love. In that filial relation lies the assurance of Christ’s everlasting kingdom, for ‘the Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into His hand.’
The prophecy is echoed in many places of Scripture, and is ever taken to refer to a single person. The angel of the annunciation moulded his salutation to the meek Virgin on it, when he declared that her Son ‘shall be called the Son of the Most High: and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David: and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of His kingdom there shall be no end.’
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 The Promise of God to David in Requital of…
The Promise of God to David in Requital of his Desire to Build the Temple
This chapter affords an excellent illustration of the way in which prophecy has often two quite distinct applications, one to the more immediate and the other to the more distant future. The primary reference is to Solomon (see especially 2Sa_7:12-14), but the prophecy looks beyond him to a greater Son, of whom he was only an emblem and type. We get a somewhat similar instance in Isa_7:14-17 (see especially 2Sa_7:16). Chronologically this chapter should follow 2 Samuel 8.
Read full note →
2. Nathan] The prophet is here mentioned for the first time. He played an important part in David's reign (2 Samuel 7, 12, 1 Kings 1) and afterwards wrote a history of it, and of part, at least, of the reign of Solomon. Curtains] i.e. a tent: see on 2Sa_6:17.
3. This v., when read in connexion with 2Sa_7:4, 2Sa_7:5., is important as showing the difference between the prophet as an ordinary man and the prophet as the spokesman of God: cp. 1Co_7:6, 1Co_7:10, 1Co_7:12.
5. Shalt thou build] LXX 'Thou shalt not build.' 'But his son shall' (2Sa_7:13). According to 1Ch_22:8 the prohibition was connected with his having been a man of war.
6. Whereas] RV 'for.' This v. gives the reason why David was not to build. In a tent and in a tabernacle] The tent denotes the outer covering: the tabernacle the framework of boards and bars.
7. Tribes] Chronicles has preserved the true reading 'judges' (1Ch_17:6).
9. Have made] RV 'will make.' Nathan turns from the past to the future.
11. Also the lord telleth thee] The revelation turns to David's posterity.
12. In Act_2:30 this v. is directly referred to the Messiah.
13. He shall build an house] fulfilled in the person of Solomon (1Ki_8:16-20). I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever] On this is based the statement in Luk_1:33.
14. I will be his father, and he shall be my son] In Heb_1:5 this is applied'to Christ, who was God's Son in a sense that Solomon never was. If he commit iniquity] History records many instances of the transgressions and punishment of David's posterity. The rod of men] Such chastisement as fathers inflict on their sons.
16. Before thee] LXX and Chronicles 'before me.' For ever] The promise was conditional on conduct: but the kingdom of Messiah, David's greatest Son, is eternal.
19. Is this the manner of man] rather, 'this is the law of (i.e. imposed on) man.' God has made it a law regulating men's conduct, that kind intentions should be recognised and requited. But it was a sign of condescension that God should consider Himself bound to reward David's zeal by such proofs of regard and affection.
21. For thy word's sake] i.e. to perform the promise made to David through Samuel.
23. To render this v. intelligible we must do two things: (a) with LXX omit the words 'for you,' (b) with Chronicles change 'for thy land' into 'drive out.' Render, therefore,' and to do great things and terrible, to drive out nations and their gods before thy people, which thou redeemedst to thee from Egypt.'
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On vv15, 16, 23 2Sa 7:14-15 state the principle of judgment within the…
mercy
2Sa 7:14-15 state the principle of judgment within the family of God. (See Scofield "1Co 11:31"). It is always remedial, not penal Heb 12:5-11.
Read full note →
Judgment of the wicked is penal, not remedial.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 4. The Lord’s Promise to David and the Covenant
4. The Lord’s Promise to David and the Covenant
CHAPTER 7
Read full note →
1. David’s desire (2Sa 7:1-3)
2. Nathan receives the message for David (2Sa 7:4-17)
3. David in the presence of Jehovah (2Sa 7:18-29)
We reach now a climax. The Lord speaks and reveals His great purposes He had in His eternal councils for David, the king after His own heart. We behold the king in peace sitting in his own house; he had rest from all his enemies. In pious meditation the heart of the king had but one great thought, one great ambition. The prophet Nathan is in his presence and to him he speaks. “See now, I dwell in an house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains.” And Nathan told him to do all that was in his heart. But he had spoken without divine authority. God knew all David planned and what was in his heart. While His prophet encouraged David to carry out his wishes, God meant otherwise.
That night Nathan received an important message. The Lord told Nathan that David thought of building Him a house, but that the Lord would build David a house. Then He promises him a son. “He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever.” Solomon is first in view, but he is only a type of Him, who said while on earth “a greater than Solomon is here.” In Christ alone this great covenant-promise is to be fulfilled. Chastening for his offspring is announced, but a disannulment of the covenant is impossible, for God’s gifts and calling are without repentance. “But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee, thy throne shall be established forever.” More than that, this great covenant was confirmed by the oath of Jehovah. “Once I have sworn by My holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before Me” (Psa 89:35-36). And when He was about to come, the Son of David according to the flesh, but also David’s Lord, He who spoke these words to Nathan, it was divinely announced “the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David. And He shall reign forever and of His kingdom there shall be no end” (Luk 1:32-33). That throne and that kingdom He has not yet received. He fills the Father’s throne in the highest heaven, but all heaven and earth wait for the appointed time when He will come again to claim His crown-rights and receive the world-wide kingdom, which David in inspired songs of praise so often beheld (Ps. 72).
“And this prophecy refers neither only to Solomon nor only to Christ; nor has it a twofold application, but it is a covenant-promise which, extending along the whole line, culminates in the Son of David, and in all its fulness applies only to Him. These three things did God join in it, of which one necessarily implies the other, alike in the promise and in the fulfilment: a unique relationship, a unique kingdom, and a unique fellowship and service resulting from both. The unique relationship was that of Father and Son, which in all its fulness only came true in Christ (Heb 1:5). The unique kingdom was that of Christ, which would have no end (Luk 1:32-33; Joh 3:35). And the unique sequence of it was that brought about through the temple of His body (Joh 2:19), which will appear in its full proportions when the New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven (Rev 21:1-3).
“Such was the glorious hope opening up wider and wider, till at its termination David could see ‘afar off’ the dawn of the bright morning of eternal glory; such was the destiny and the mission which, in His infinite goodness, God assigned to His chosen servant. Much there was still in him that was weak, faltering, and even sinful; nor was he, whose was the inheritance of such promises, even to build an earthly temple. Many were his failings and sins, and those of his successors; and heavy rods and sore stripes were to fall upon them. But that promise never failed.” (A. Edersheim, Bible History)
And to this we add, nor will the promise ever fail in the future. Even now all is preparing for Him who alone is the Hope of the world. “Thy Kingdom come” is still the prayer, nor will it ever come till the King’s coronation day arrives. And Nathan delivered faithfully the great covenant message. David’s response is beautiful, yea it measures up to the fullness of grace the gracious Lord had bestowed upon him. He does not seek the fellowship of Nathan to talk over this unspeakably Wonderful promise. He sat before the Lord. All the thoughts in him, planning to work and to build the Lord a house, were forever hushed. He is in His presence as a worshipper, pouring out his grateful heart. Jehovah’s grace has touched the innermost cords of his soul; they give forth their sweet vibrations, which ascend in a holy melody to the courts above. He is humbled, bowed in the dust. “Who am I, Lord God? and what is my house that thou hast brought me hitherto?”--He believes all he has heard; he trusts in every word. His prayer is “do as thou hast said.” What an hour it was when the king with the message of grace and mercy was in the presence of the Lord! May we who are the Recipients of even greater grace in our Lord Jesus Christ respond to that grace as David did.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On vv1, 18 The News Announced to David
The News Announced to David
v. 1. And it came to pass, when the king sat in his house, an expression referring to his permanent abode after having attended to all the external affairs of the kingdom, and the Lord had given him rest round about from all his enemies, all those nations which still felt strong enough to dispute the growing power of Israel having been vanquished,
Read full note →
v. 2. that the king said unto Nathan, the prophet, whom he regarded highly as a confidential adviser, See, now, I dwell in an house of cedar, in a fine palace, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains. Even though David had provided a tabernacle in his city which consisted of very fine and costly curtains, like those of the first Tabernacle, yet the contrast was too obvious and too incongruous; it did not seem right and fitting to David that he should have a finer palace than that used for housing the ark.
v. 3. And Nathan, understanding the suggestion of the king and approving his intention, said to the king, Go, do all that is in thine heart, all that David had resolved upon; for the Lord is with thee. This approval of David’s purpose, however, came out of Nathan’s own mind, not by divine Revelation
v. 4. And it came to pass that night that the word of the Lord came unto Nathan, saying,
v. 5. Go and tell My servant David, an honoring designation for the king, Thus saith the Lord, Shalt thou build Me an house for Me to dwell in? The question implies, of course, a very decided denial of his request, a rejection of his proposal to build a temple.
v. 6. Whereas I have not dwelt in any house, any permanent building, since the time that I brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle, literally, "I was a wanderer in tent and dwelling-place"; for even after the children of Israel had reached Canaan, the tent had been moved from Gilgal to Shiloh, and then to the hill between Gibeah and Gibeon. The Tabernacle, the structure as built by Moses, Exo 35:11, had been Jehovah’s dwelling-place.
v. 7. In all the places wherein I have walked with all the children of Israel, spake I a word with any of the tribes of Israel, whom I commanded to feed My people Israel, saying, Why build ye not Me an house of cedar? Neither during the desert journey, nor during the entire period of the Judges, when the leadership passed from one tribe of the more important ones to another, had the Lord ever commanded the children of Israel to build Him a permanent and costly sanctuary, worthy of His glory.
v. 8. Now, therefore, so shalt thou say unto My servant David, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Jehovah Sabaoth, the King of the whole earth, I took thee from the sheepcote, from the meadows where the sheep were pastured, from following the sheep, to be ruler over My people, over Israel. That was an act of God’s merciful favor.
v. 9. And I was with thee whithersoever thou wentest, David had always been sure of the merciful presence of Jehovah, even during the years when Saul persecuted him, and have cut off all thine enemies out of thy sight, from before thy face, and have made thee a great name like unto the name of the great men that are in the earth; for David’s victories had brought him into prominent attention in all the surrounding nations. of so much concerning his outward success Nathan was to remind David first, of the fact that he owed his position and all his success to the Lord alone.
v. 10. Moreover, I will appoint a place for My people Israel and will plant them, rather, "I have established and I have planted," that they may dwell in a place of their own and move no more, not be troubled, distressed, and driven from one place to another; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime, in the time of the Egyptian oppression,
v. 11. and as since the time that I commanded judges to be over My people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies. The former days of slavery and tribulation were to return no more. Those were the blessings which the Lord had provided for the people as such. And now comes the most wonderful promise of all, one affecting both king and people to the most remote descendants. Also the Lord telleth thee that he will make thee an house, literally, "And there announces to thee Jehovah that a house will make to thee Jehovah," a very solemn announcement preparing for the prophecy proper.
v. 12. And when thy days be fulfilled and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, after David would have been laid to rest in the hope of a glorious resurrection to eternal life, I will set up thy Seed after thee, one of David’s descendants, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, as a true descendant according to the flesh, and I will establish His kingdom, confirm the royal office in His case.
v. 13. He shall build an house for My name, to the name of Jehovah, and I will stablish the throne of His kingdom forever. The descendant of David to whom this prophecy looked forward was to be confirmed in regal honor and dignity in a most singular way, in a kingdom which would have everlasting duration. His building of a house to Jehovah, moreover, would be the same as that of Jehovah making a house to Himself, v. 11. The two statements refer to the same event. The relation between Jehovah and this singular descendant of David is now described in detail.
v. 14. I will be His Father, and He shall be My Son. If he commit iniquity, literally, "whom, if He transgresses," I will chasten Him with the rod of men and with the stripes of the children of men. That this is not spoken of Solomon, as most modern commentators will have it, may be seen from the fact that Solomon was a mere man, and there would have been nothing unusual in his being punished for any transgressions after the manner of men. This singular descendant of David, if found guilty of the sins of men, the implication being that the latter would be imputed to Him, would have to bear the penalty of a sinner.
v. 15. But my mercy shall not depart away from Him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee, "from before thy face. " The descendant of David to whom the Lord refers would not experience the rejection which struck Saul, because He would not become guilty of such disobedience to Jehovah.
v. 16. And thine house and thy kingdom, the royal power in lineal descendants of David, shall be established forever before thee; thy throne shall be established forever. The constant repetition of the phrase "forever, for eternity," again forces the conclusion that we must look beyond Solomon, to the eternal existence of the Son here concerned, to One who is Himself possessor of eternal life and of a kingdom which shall never have an end. This, of course, may rightly be said only of Christ, for it was in His case alone that there was so complete an identification with the sons of men as to make the expression possible: "He was made sin for us," 2Co 5:21.
v. 17. According to all these words and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David. The temple here spoken of is that of the Christian Church, the communion of saints, which is the habitation of God in the Spirit. Christ is the Lord, and the believers cling to this Head in the Kingdom which shall last through all eternity.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1, 3, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27 It happened
It happened
This phrase is used here to mark the beginning of a new part of the story. If your language has a way for doing this, you could consider using it here. (See: Introduction of a New Event)
Read full note →
given him rest from all his surrounding enemies
"given him safety from all his surrounding enemies." Here "rest" is an abstract noun. AT: "caused the enemy people groups to stop attacking Israel" (See: Abstract Nouns)
I am living in a house of cedar
Cedar is a kind of tree that is known for its strength. If you have an equivalent type of tree in your culture, you can use that name, otherwise you can reword this. AT: "I am living in a strong, permanent house" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
the ark of God is staying in the middle of a tent
Tents are temporary dwellings. If you do not have tents in your culture, you can word this differently. AT: "the ark of God is staying in a temporary place" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
translationWords
king
Yahweh
rest
Nathan
prophet
life
house
cedar
ark of the covenant
tent
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 7:1-29 David was not satisfied merely building a tent…
7:1-29 David was not satisfied merely building a tent for the Ark (6:17). He wanted to build a house for God.
7:1-2 If God had only a tent while David had a palace, it might create the impression that David was the real king rather than God. Thus, David intended to build a temple for God.
Read full note →
7:1 from all . . . enemies: See Deut 12:9-10; 1 Kgs 5:4; 8:56. David’s rest was temporary because shortly he was at war again (see 2 Sam 8:1-18).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.