I Chronicles 29
Verses 1-9 continue the account of what David said to the
whole congregation,
respecting his son Solomon and his tender age in view of the great
enterprise of
building the temple; respecting the public preparations which had
been already made,
and
the gifts of his own individual property — these latter being alluded to, no
doubt,
for
the sake of example. On the faith of them he grounds with tenfold effect his
appeal
to
people and princes to join heartily in the work. Verses 6-9 also contain the statement
of
the hearty practical response which was made by the “chiefs of the fathers and
princes of the tribes,” and other varieties of givers, and of the consequent
general joy.
1 “Furthermore
David the king said unto all the congregation,
Solomon my son, whom alone God hath chosen,
is yet young and
tender, and the work is great: for the palace is
not for man, but for
the LORD God.”
The anxiety which David felt on account of
the youth of
Solomon (repeated from ch.22:5) evidently pressed heavily
on him. The
additional expression here is to be noticed, whom alone God
hath chosen. By this plea, full of truth as it was, we may suppose that
David would shelter himself from any possible blame or
reflection on the
part of the people, from the charge of partiality on the part of his elder
children, and any unjust slight to them, and also from any self-reproach,
in
that he was devolving such a responsible task on so young and tender a
man.
Palace. This word (hr;yBih"), by which the temple is designated here
and
in v. 19, seems to be very probably a word of Persian derivation. It is
found in Nehemiah 1:1; in Daniel 8:2; but very frequently in
Esther, where it is
used not only of “Shushan
the palace” (Esther 1:2; 2:3; 3:15), as the royal abode,
but
also of the special part of the city adjoining the palace proper (Ibid. ch.
1:5; 2:5;
8:14; 9:6). The word is found also in Nehemiah 2:8; but
there it carries the
signification of the fortress of the temple. There may be some special
appropriateness
in
its use here, in consideration of the circumstance of the fortifications and
wall,
which flanked the temple.
“The palace is… for the Lord God.” This is to put things in their right places —
God, heaven, immortality, the unperishing first of all. A most neglected aspect
of religious practice is here brought into prominence. Truths and principles of
religion, acknowledged by the lip, are too often ignored in practice. The prayers
we say, the praise we sing, the adoration we exhibit, are not unfrequently
dishonored to the degree of being rendered worthless through the next deed we
do or fail to do. It is not the tender, the immature, the inexperienced, the
incompetent who, not trusted in statesmanship, not trusted in the professions
of human life, are to be indifferently or recklessly trusted with the affairs of
“the kingdom.” And even when God calls such, man, both prince and people,
the skilled and the experienced, are only to hear more practically the call to rally
round the Lord’s choice.
2 “Now I
have prepared with all my might for the house of my God the gold
for things to be made of gold, and the silver
for things of silver, and the brass
for things of brass, the iron for things of
iron, and wood for things of wood;
onyx stones, and stones to be set, glistering
stones, and of divers colors,
and all manner of precious stones, and marble
stones in abundance.”
The six designations of stones in this verse are as follows: —
Job 28:16; Ezekiel 28:13).
feminine form of the same word is found in Ibid. ch.28:17, 20;
39:13).
The other meanings of this word
are inauguration to the priest’s office
(Leviticus 8:33), and the sacrifice
of inauguration (Ibid. ch.7:37).
fu~kov – phukos - seaweed. From this
seaweed an alkaline pigment was
prepared, which came to be called by
the same word. This Hebrew word
also meant a “dye” made from stribium, the Latin name of antimony
(Septuagint, stimmi> - stimmi - Vulgate, stibium), with
which Hebrew
women stained their eyelashes (see also II
Kings 9:30; Isaiah 54:11;
Jeremiah 4:30). Gesenius would translate here
“stones of pigment,” and
understands them to mean possibly marble for
covering, as though with
a solid paint, the walls.
is only in this passage applied to stones. It is applied once
to the feathers of
the eagle (Ezekiel 17:3); but almost always to needlework or
garments,
often being translated in the Authorized Version as “broidered”
(Judges
5:30; Psalm 45:14; Ezekiel 16:10,13,18; 26:16; 27:7,16,24).
idea of the word is “heavy,” thence precious, dear, rare (II
Samuel 12:30;
I Kings 7:9; 10:2; I Chronicles
20:2; II Chronicles 3:6; 9:1; Job 28:16;
Proverbs 1:13; 3:15; Isaiah
28:16; Ezekiel 28:13; Daniel 11:38).
word is found only here; Septuagint and Vulgate, “Parian marble.” A word
akin (vve), meaning also “white marble” is found in Esther 1:6. The further
treatment of these stones will be found on II Chronicles 3:6.
3 “Moreover,
because I have set my affection to the house of my God,
I have of mine own proper good, of gold and
silver, which I have given to the
house of my God, over and above all that I have
prepared for the holy house,”
Translate, And, moreover, because of my delight in the house of my God, what
I have as mine own
treasure of gold and of silver I have given to the house
of my God, over and above
all I have prepared for the holy house. The
word
hL;Gus], on the seven other
occasions of its use (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 7:6; 14:2;
26:18; Psalm
135:4; Ecclesiastes 2:8; Malachi 3:17), is found in the Authorized Version
as
“peculiar treasure” or “special
treasure” and once “jewels,” but in
every
instance it is evident that the specialness denoted is at one with the idea of the
affection
that is borne by a person to his own
possession and property.
4 “Even three
thousand talents of gold, of the gold of Ophir, and
seven
thousand talents of refined silver, to overlay the
walls of the houses withal:”
Respecting the uncertainty of the amounts here denoted,
even if the numbers of the
present text be accepted as correct, see note on ch.22:14. Bertheau and Keil make
three thousand talents
of gold the equivalent of
thirteen millions and a half of our
money (200 years ago – CY – 2013), and seven thousand talents
of silver the
equivalent of two and a half millions of our money — or, if the royal shekel instead
of
the sacred be supposed to be the standard,
they make them the half of those two
amounts respectively. Others
calculate the value of the gold to reach thirty millions,
and
of the silver three millions of our
money. The situation of Ophir is still considered
undetermined. The other occasions on which it is mentioned are as
follows:
ch.
1:23, Genesis 10:29; I Kings 9:28; 10:11; 22:49; II Chronicles 8:18; 9:10;
Job 22:24; 28:16; Psalm 45:9; Isaiah
13:12. It must be understood also that
it is
to
it that allusion is made in I Kings 10:22, where we read that silver, ivory,
apes, and
peacocks, beside the gold, were imported into
tree is also said to have been brought in the same ships which brought the
gold of Ophir. The Septuagint always translates by
some form of the word
Soufi>v – Souphis - (except in Genesis
10:29), which word comes very near the
Coptic name for
Ammianus, and Abulfeda, the site of the
present emporium of
Soupa>ra – Soupara - and which would explain Both the Hebrew and the
Septuagint words. An Indian site for Ophir would
also well suit the
mention of the ivory and the particular wood which the ships
brought. On
the
other hand, the first occasion of this name Ophir
finds it placed among
the
tribes of Joktan’s descendants,
who occupied
(ch.1:23; Genesis 10:29) placed between
in
gold. There are other considerations that favor
been suggested, and some of them supported by respectable authorities, such
as
Eastern Africa, South America and
about it, to the prejudice of Arabia, it would be to
of
the commodities brought belonged more especially to
that case the majority belonged undoubtedly to
circumstance throws great probability into the suggestion that whether
Ophir were in Arabia or
exporter of its own particular produce. The last sentence of this
verse certainly says
that the destined use of the refined
silver, as well as of the gold of Ophir,
was to overlay the
walls of the houses. We know that gold
was used for
this purpose (II Chronicles 3:5-10). But we do not read of the silver
being used for overlaying purposes. We also read that none
of the
drinking-vessels of Solomon were of silver, as “it was nothing accounted
of in the days of
Solomon” (I Kings 10:21; II Chronicles
9:20). It is
possible, the order of the sentences notwithstanding, that the
mention of
the
refined silver is only to prepare the way for the contents of v. 5, and
that it must not be applied to the last sentence of our present verse.
5 “The
gold for things of gold, and the silver for things of silver, and
for all manner of work to be made by the hands
of artificers. And
who then is willing to consecrate his service
this day unto the
LORD?” The
Authorized Version, to consecrate his
service, might in
this instance seem to be not merely an inaccurate but an incorrect
translation. For David’s evident meaning was, after rehearsing his own
example, to base on it the appeal, Who is… willing to bring all
ungrudging handful this day
to the Lord? And II Chronicles 13:9
might perhaps be cited as a confirmatory instance. But on the
other hand,
the
idiom was evidently, by the witness of many passages, a general one,
and
the meaning of it is not incorrectly conveyed in the Authorized
Version, where service means in every case active and
practical help
(Exodus 28:41; 29:9; 32:29; Numbers 3:3). The question now
is
not one of consecrating heart and affection, but rather of giving the
practical proof of them.
Consecrated Service (v.5)
“And
who then is willing to consecrate his service this day unto the LORD?”
These words are an appeal of David to the nobles, and to
the people
generally, to contribute towards the building of the
Jerusalem. He himself set the example of liberality; and
his subjects
generally followed the example he gave. “Who then,” asked he, “is
willing
to fill his hand this day unto the
Lord?” As these gifts were really an
expression of the devotion that animated the hearts of the
Israelites, the
English Version may be said to offer rather an enlargement
than a
perversion of the language. And the question is one which may be
addressed to all hearers of the gospel. For all
are called upon to GIVE
THEMSELVES and all they have and are unto the GOD WHO MADE
THEM, and the REDEEMER WHO
BOUGHT THEM! We have here:
a service. Salvation is the
substance of what God gives; consecration is
what God demands. Salvation
is from past sin; consecration is for future
life and service. God has a right to:
Ø
the surrender of our
will,
Ø
the devotion of our
powers,
Ø
the offering of our
possessions,
Ø
the service of our hands.
The heart is His first demand; “my son, give me thine heart”
(Proverbs 23:26), our labors, our influence, our liberality, will all follow.
This is a just claim. It is
founded on Divine right and authority; for
He is our Creator and King, He
has a powerful claim upon our
gratitude; for He has treated us with bounty, and He has given us
His Son to
redeem us from iniquity and from destruction. We are
for ever dependent upon Him, who is our Lord and Judge; and,
in
giving unto Him, we do but give Him His own. (vs. 14,16)
Ø
A willing response. In fact, there can be no unwilling response. God
does not use constraint, and a grudged offering would not be
acceptable to Him; for it is our
affection and devotion that He desires.
Ø
An immediate response. “Who is willing this
day?” To-day is not too
early; to-morrow may be too late. The old have no time to lose. The
middle-aged and busy should not leave decision until old age comes,
if come it should. But
it is chiefly from the young that AN
IMMEDIATE ACCEPTANCE OF THE INVITATION OF THE
GOSPEL IS
DESIRED that so they may spend a whole life in
His
delightful service. “To-day if ye will hear His voice, HARDEN NOT
YOUR HEART.” (Psalm 95:7-8; Hebrews 4:7)
understanding the entreaty and the ground upon which it is based; all
who enjoy religious privileges, who hear God’s Word, Christ’s
gospel,
are under a sacred obligation to yield themselves a living
sacrifice
unto God (Romans 12:1-2). Motives,
inducements, persuasions, —
all are brought to bear upon the soul. A most honorable and happy
service, the most desirable recompense,
the profoundest satisfaction, —
all are proffered to you upon the
terms of unconditional surrender,
complete consecration. “Who then is
willing to consecrate his service
this day unto the Lord?”
David’s Further Address to the Congregation
(vs. 1-5)
David gives an explanation at the commencement of this
chapter why he
himself had prepared so much for the house of God, viz. that
Solomon
himself was as yet young and tender, and the work was great. But
David
assigns the true reason why the work was great, viz. that the
house was
“not for man, but FOR THE LORD GOD.” It is true that the house was
a
great one, and that the work was great in a natural point of view. But
all such
thoughts are lost or sink behind HIM,
WHO ALONE, makes anything great —
THE LORD GOD! There are two ways
of estimating greatness — one that
strikes the mere outward sense, and one that looks at God. It may
be that
the
building is only a hut, but if it is to the Lord it is infinitely greater
than
the
grandest building ever erected by the art of man. And because it was
for
the Lord, David had prepared for it “with all his might.” It is this
motive which gives power and strength and delight and earnestness to all
work.
But it was not only as a king David had thus prepared. In this world
men
may separate the office from the person; but not so in the kingdom of
God. God’s claims on men are not only official but PERSONAL, not only as
kings, but as Christian men. David had prepared so much (see v.
2) as
(see v. 3). A minister of Christ
has not only to walk worthy of his
vocation as a minister, but also as a man; not only
in the pulpit and parish,
but
as a man in all the private relations of life. Having fulfilled both of these
relations to the house of God, he can now make his appeal to others.
He
has
set the example: who will follow it? “Who
then is willing to consecrate
his service this day unto the Lord?” (v.5) - “Those things which ye have
both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do” (Philippians 4:9).
And consecration is simply to “fill the hand” (see margin). “He has his
hands full” is a familiar saying. Yes; it is every faculty of
the man — body,
soul, and spirit taken up with the Lord and His work. No room for anything
else. Not even a grain more can the hand hold. “To
me to live is Christ”
(Ibid. 1:21). All our secular work done to Him. Thus
life becomes transfigured.
And this is not for to-morrow. It is “THIS DAY.” God
asks for it NOW!
Two of God’s requirements there are which admit of no
to-morrow:
the day of salvation.”
consecrate his service this day unto the Lord?” It
is not so much a
command as an appeal. It must come from the heart or it
cannot be
accepted. “Whom shall I send, and who will go
for us?” (Isaiah 6.)
is made to the heart of the prophet. That heart had “seen the King,” and
out of the fullness of a love that had penetrated its inmost
recesses it
exclaimed, “Here am I, Lord; send me.” So it was here. All the princes
and rulers and congregation of
whom they loved, and offered largely and “willingly.” No wonder all was
joy. The king, the princes, the
congregation, were overflowing with joy.
It was the response of a “perfect heart,” a
true, whole-hearted, joyous
surrender of themselves and all they had to the Lord. This is THE
SPRING OF ALL
TRUE JOY! IT IS FOUND NOWHERE
ELSE — an unconditional
surrender of ourselves and all we have
TO HIM “who loved us and gave Himself for us.” (Ephesians 5:2)
6 “Then
the chief of the fathers and princes of the tribes of
the captains of thousands and of hundreds,
with the rulers of the
king’s work, offered willingly,” The response was hearty; it comprised
voluntary gifts from the
most of those mentioned in ch.28:1; and described
in
ch.27:16-31. For the rulers
of the king’s work, see ch.27:26; 28:1. As the
more general term “work” is
employed, we are not bound to confine the
expression to include only those who managed “the substance and cattle”
of
ch.28:1.
7 “And
gave for the service of the house of God of gold five thousand
talents and ten thousand drams, and of silver ten
thousand talents,
and of brass eighteen thousand talents, and
one hundred thousand
talents of iron.”
The Authorized Version translation drams
occurs also twice
in Ezra and twice in Nehemiah. There is no
doubt that the coin referred to is
the
Persian daric, with which the Jews became
familiar during the time of
their exile. The Hebrew word appears in three different forms.
The obverse of the coin shows the image of a king, with bow
and spear. The
value of the coin is variously computed at thirteen shillings
and sixpence or
twenty-two shillings and sixpence. Keil
suggests that the mention of darics
as
well as talents in this verse may point to some of the gold being contributed
in
the shape of coin instead of talents-weight. This does not seem
likely, however,
because, of course, the daric itself
was not in use in
and
any gold coin that was then in use might have received mention on its own
account, even if translated also into the daric.
The Septuagint translates in this
verse merely by the word crusou~v – chrusous – made of gold; gold
coin - the
Vulgate by solidos. Under any
circumstances, the coin is to be distinguished
from the dracnh> - drachma – silver coin; piece of silver. Specimens of the
daric, both in gold and silver, exist in the
word for the ten thousand preceding the so-called drams of this
verse is the
word for “myriad” (wOBri, a shortened form of twOBr), found also in Ezra 2:64;
Nehemiah 7:66; Daniel 11:12; Jonah 4:11.
8 “And they
with whom precious stones were found gave them to the
treasure of the house of the LORD, by the hand of Jehiel the Gershonite.
9 Then the people rejoiced, for that they offered willingly, because
with perfect heart they offered willingly to
the LORD: and David
the king also rejoiced with great joy.” For Jehiel, see ch.23:7-8: 26:20-22;
and
for the stones contributed
among the other gifts, see Exodus 35:9, 27.
Of the same chapter in Exodus, especially in its
vs. 4-9 and 20-29, the whole
of our present passage so vividly reminds
us that the difficulty might be to
doubt that it was present as a model to the mind of David
himself.
Next, the majesty and comprehensiveness of this passage,
vs. 10-20, we
have a national liturgy of itself, that are in direct proportion to the
brevity of it.
It includes adoration,
acknowledgment of the inherent nature of human
dependence, self-humiliation, and confession, dedication of all the
offerings, and prayer
both for the whole people in general, and for
Solomon in particular, in view of his future position and responsibilities. Its
utter repudiation of all idea of meritoriousness
is very striking. The traces
are
visible of what may be called snatches of memory on the part of David
from various religious odes of his own authorship, as well as from those of
others still on record, as, for instance, especially in vs.
14-17, compared
with passages in Psalm 24.; 50.; 89,; 39; 90.; 102.; 144.;
7.; 17.; and 139.
But the unity of this service is abundantly conspicuous,
and every sentence
seems weighed and measured for the occasion. The scene, reaching
its
climax in what is recorded in v. 20, must have been one of the
utmost
religious grandeur and impressiveness. It is true that the very last
clause,
which couples the reverence done on the part of the assembled
multitude
to
the king, with that done to Jehovah Himself, strikes us as an unfortunate
conjunction. It does not, indeed, need upon its merits any
vindication,
considering the tenor of all which has preceded; but it may be felt an
extenuation of the form in which the expression occurs, if we suppose
(as
we
justly may) that the people viewed their act in the light of part of their
religious service at that particular time. In I Kings 1:31 the same
words
express the reverence paid to David, though in numerous other
passages
they mark that offered to God (Exodus 4:31; II Chronicles 29:30;
Nehemiah 8:6).
10 “Wherefore
David blessed the LORD before all the congregation:
and David said, Blessed be thou, LORD God of
for ever and ever. 11 Thine, O LORD is the greatness, and the power,
and the glory, and the victory, and the
majesty: for all that is in the
heaven and in the earth is thine;
thine is the kingdom, O LORD, and
thou art exalted as head above all. 12 Both
riches and honor come of
thee, and thou reignest
over all; and in thine hand is power and might;
and in thine hand it
is to make great, and to give strength unto all.
13 Now
therefore, our God, we thank thee, and praise thy glorious
name. 14 But who am I, and what
is my people, that we should be able
to offer so willingly after this sort? for all things come of thee, and of
thine own have we given thee.”
15 “For we
are strangers before thee, and sojourners, as were all our
fathers: our days on the earth are as a shadow,
and there is none
abiding.”
Of the seven other clear occasions of
occurrence of the word
here translated abiding (hw,q]mi), it bears three times the meaning of “a
gathering together” as of waters (Genesis 1:10; Exodus 7:19;
Leviticus 11:36).
The other four times it is translated in the Authorized
Version “hope,” either in
the
abstract (Ezra 10:2), or in the personal object of it (Jeremiah 14:8; 17:13;
50:7). Probably the word “abiding,” as drawn from this latter
aspect of the word,
expresses with sufficient accuracy the intended meaning here.
Man But a Sojourner (v.15)
Before “life and
immortality” had been “brought to light”
(II Timothy 1:10),
the
brevity of man’s life on the earth seems to have caused much distress, even to
godly people. There is a wailing tone about many of the Old
Testament
references to short life and remorseless death that seem but little
in advance
of
the despairings of the pagan, who cried after his
passing friend, “Vale,
vale, aeternum vale!” (Farewell for ever) - A few
specimens may be given.
“For what is your life? It is even a vapor, that appeareth for a little time,
and then vanisheth away.” (I remember, as a teenager in the late 1950’s, in Pulaski
jets, as they flew over terrain that, topographically was similar to that of the inhabited
a trail like this vapor of which James is speaking – I was aware of this verse then and
understood its application. But now, over a half century later I understand it much
better – that is the brevity of life! – CY – 2009 on James 4:14 and 2013)
“All flesh is grass,
and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of
the field;
the grass withereth, the flower fadeth,
because the Spirit of the
Lord bloweth upon it: surely the people is
grass.” (Isaiah 40:6-7) -“As for man,
his days are as grass:” - (following is an excerpt from
Charles Haddon Spurgeon
on
Psalm 103:15-16 -
He lives on the grass, and lives like the grass. Corn is but
educated grass, and man, who feeds on it, partakes of its nature. The
grass lives,
grows, flowers, falls beneath the scythe, dries up, and is removed from
the field:
read this sentence over again, and you will
find it the history of man.)
(Dear Reader, it is my
history. I remember in the late
1950’s sitting on the ground
between
the house and the barn and reading this and
the next verse and what an
impression
it made on me! Now a half
century later, I can testify of this truth.
That
afternoon, I looked out over the hay field
and projected my thoughts. THE
TIME IS SHORT – the theme of this web site – CY –
2011 and 2013) - “My
days are swifter than a post: they
flee away, they see no good. They are
passed away as the swift ships: as the
eagle that hasteth to the prey.”
(Job 9:25-26), “My
days are swifter than a weaver’s shuttle, and are spent
without hope.” (Ibid. ch. 7:6), “Let me alone; for my days
are vanity.”
(Ibid. v. 16). There is, happily,
another side to the Old Testament
representations, and the pious men of the olden times looked away from
swift passing life, and from the sorrow of death and separation, to the
THE UNCHANGING STABILITY OF THE EVERLASTING GOD
and
the high and eternal hopes that rest upon his gracious provisions
and promises. Transitoriness is
the condition
of present being, not for us men
only, but also for all the created things with which we have to do. (God made
the
creation subject to vanity and change – Romans 8:20). All nature tells of
change and passing away; things are here for a little
while, and then they vanish
away. The winter snow falls lightly, and lies
in its white purity — mystic, wonderful
— over all the land; but soon it
soils and browns and sinks away. The
spring flowers that come, responsive to the low sunshine and the
gentle
breath, are so fragile, and they stay with us but such a little
time, and then
pass away. The summer blossoms multiply and stand thick over
the
ground, and they seem strong with their deep rich coloring; and
yet they
too wither and droop and pass away. The autumn fruits cluster on the tree
branches, and grow big, and win their soft rich bloom of ripeness;
but they
too are plucked in due season, and pass away. The gay dress of varied
leafage is soon stripped off by the wild winds; one or two
trembling leaves
cling long to the outmost boughs, but by-and-by even they fall
and pass
away. Down every channel of the hillside are borne the crumblings washed
from the “everlasting
hills,” as we call them, that are, nevertheless, fast
passing away. All around us is speaking of change and decay. The writing
is
on wasting rock and crumbling peak, on the old tower and the ivied wall,
the
flowing stream and the autumn tints, — ‘Here is no rest.’ Man and his
world are but sojourners. Recall Coifi,
the ancient Briton’s, figure of man’s
brief life as a bird, coming out of the dark and flying through
the lighted
hall away out into the dark again; and illustrate and enforce the following
points: — (I learned in a recent study of the book of Judges that
it is good
“that a life so sinful as ours, it is good that it is so short” – CY – 2013)
The brevity of man’s life on the earth is designed to:
findeth to do, do it with
thy might.” (Ecclesiastes 9:10).
It says:
Ø What has to be done should be done quickly.
Ø What has to be done must be done earnestly.
Ø
And seeing the time is
so short, and so much has to be accomplished,
we need much grace for the doing.
home where we are to stay.
RELATIONS.
Convincing us that we are here for some important
Purpose and mission; and that we are here on our way home,
getting ready for the life at home by the experiences of
our sojourning-time.
Should we then, as Christians,
grieve that life is short, and we are only here
on earth awhile as the stranger who turns aside to tarry for
a night? Surely
not, if we keep close home to our hearts the conviction that
we are
homeward bound.
16 “O LORD our God, all this store that we have prepared to build thee
an house for thine
holy name cometh of thine hand, and is all thine own.
17 I know also, my God, that thou triest the
heart, and hast pleasure in
uprightness. As for me, in the uprightness of mine
heart I have
willingly offered all these things: and now have I
seen with joy thy
people, which are present here, to offer
willingly unto thee.” It may very
possibly be that the stress with which David here says, I know, had its special
cause. The thought of God as one who “tried” the heart is one often brought
out
in David’s psalms, but a strong conviction of it may have been wrought in
David’s mind by Samuel’s rehearsal of the language God used to
him at the
very time of the election of David from amid all the other of Jesse’s sons
(I Samuel 16:7).
18 “O LORD
God of Abraham, Isaac, and of
this for ever in the imagination of the
thoughts of the heart of thy
people, and prepare their heart unto thee:” In the imagination of the
thoughts of the heart. We have here again a reminiscence of the early
language
of Genesis (Genesis 6:5; 8:21. See also our book, ch.28:9;
Deuteronomy 31:21). This same word for “imagination” (rx,ye) is found
in
the Authorized Version in Isaiah 26:3, “Whose
mind is stayed on thee;”
and
in Psalm 103:14; Isaiah 29:16; Habakkuk 2:18; in the last three
passages translated as “frame,”
“framed,” and “work.”
19
“And give unto Solomon my son a perfect heart, to keep thy
commandments, thy testimonies, and thy statutes, and to
do all
these things, and to build the palace, for the
which I have made
provision.” For the palace, see v. 1.
20
And David said to all the congregation, Now
bless the LORD your
God. And all the congregation blessed the LORD
God of their
fathers, and bowed down their heads, and
worshipped the LORD,
and the king.”
Verses 21-25, record “the sacrifices and drink offerings” by
which all the service of this day was ratified as it were on the
following
day;
also the solemn “anointing of Solomon to
the Lord as chief governor,
and of Zadok as priest,” with
the visible enthronement of Solomon, and the
submission to him “of all
of all the sons of
David” (I Kings 1:49-53).
21 “And
they sacrificed sacrifices unto the LORD, and offered burnt
offerings unto the LORD, on the morrow after that
day, even a
thousand bullocks, a thousand rams, and a thousand
lambs, with
their drink offerings, and sacrifices in
abundance for all
In this verse the distinction is to be noticed between the sacrifices of thank
offerings (μyjib;z]); those of burnt
offerings (μwOl[O); and their drink
offerings, i.e the drink
offerings that went with them (μj,yKes]ni). For the
first of these the more specific Hebrew word is μymil;v] (Leviticus 7:20; 9:4)
or
μymil;v]
j;b"z, (Leviticus
3:1; 7:11, 13, 15; Numbers 7:17). The breast and
right shoulder were the priest’s share. All the rest belonged to
the person who
sacrificed, and his friends, and must be eaten the same or the next
day
(Leviticus 7:11-18, 29-34).
(These offerings are dealt with in a thorough
manner in the referred to chapters of Leviticus – a study which I
recommend –
CY
- 2013). The last clause of our verse tells us how
ample was the feast
provided by these sacrifices on this occasion, being in abundance for all
Israel The burnt offering is first mentioned in Genesis
8:20; it is the
only sacrifice that the Book of Genesis (see 15:9, etc.; 22:2, etc.) knows.
The offering (hj;n]mi) of Genesis 4:4 is somewhat obscure, but does not
appear to have been a sacrifice of blood. This sacrifice was one
which was
wholly consumed on the altar of fire, and supposed to ascend to heaven.
The chief kinds of burnt offerings were:
festivals and the Feast of Trumpets (Numbers 28:11-29:39).
Beside these, there were the several kinds of freewill and
private burnt
offerings. The first, seventh, and eighth chapters of Leviticus
contain full
accounts of the ceremonial. The drink offering is spoken of
as early as
Genesis 35:14; but those to which reference is here made as
appertaining
to
the before-mentioned sacrifices are more explicitly spoken of in such
passages as Exodus 29:40; Leviticus 23:13; Numbers 6:17; 15:5-24;
28:10-14.
22 “And
did eat and drink before the LORD on that day with great
gladness. And they made Solomon the son of David
king the second time,
and anointed him unto the LORD to be the chief
governor, and Zadok to
be priest.”
Evident stress is laid upon the eating and
drinking of that day
as
before the Lord, and upon the
anointing of Solomon to the Lord. This
latter expression is more forcible than the former. The second time of
making Solomon king is explained by ch.23:1 and I Kings 1:32-40.
The
statement that Zadok was anointed to be priest must probably be understood
to
describe, either the re-anointing of him (just as “they made Solomon king
the second time”) on an occasion which particularly invited it; or an
anointing
which had not been before fully performed. This latter is,
perhaps, an unlikely
supposition; but at the same time, the fact of any previous ceremony
of the
kind does not happen to be narrated. Zadok had
been joint priest with Abiatbar
of
the line of Ithamar (ch.15:11; II Samuel 19:11); but
now he was anointed
under circumstances of special publicity, and at a crisis of
special interest,
to
supersede Abiathar. who had
sided with Adonijah, and who was early to
be
removed altogether from the sacred office (1 Kings 1:7-8, 32, 38, 44-45;
2:26-27).
23 “Then
Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king instead of
David his father, and prospered; and all
Israel obeyed him.” For the happy
expression, the throne of
the Lord, see ch.28:5. And
for evidence that Solomon
did
really exercise royal authority before David’s death, see I Kings 1:32, 45-48;
2:1.
24 “And
all the princes, and the mighty men, and all the sons likewise
of king David, submitted themselves unto Solomon
the king.”
David’s Prayer and Blessing (vs. 10-24)
In this blessing we observe how everything
is ASCRIBED TO GOD —
greatness, power, glory, victory, majesty, riches, honor, the
kingdom;
ALL ARE HIS AND COME FROM HIM! What
an exalted view of God is here!
And there follows that which always follows on man’s side, “humility” (vs.
14-16).
God’s greatness bows down the soul in conscious littleness.
We are
“strangers,” “sojourners;” our days a “shadow” and “none abiding.” In
order, then, to be humble, we should ever have God’s greatness
and God’s
grace filling the soul in conscious littleness. The
eye on God, and there is no
room for the creature but in the dust. David’s prayers close
with one for the
people (v. 18) and one for Solomon (v. 19). He prays for the
congregation, that
God would keep them ever in this frame of heart, viz. of
willing, joyful, whole-
hearted surrender of themselves and all they had to Him; and also
that their hearts
might be ever set towards God Himself. For Solomon he prays that
God
would give him an undivided heart. And this whole-heartedness
would
show itself first in relation to God and His truth — “To keep thy
commandments, thy testimonies, thy statutes, and to do all these
things;”
and
secondly, “to build the palace for the which I have
made provision.”
This is ever the Divine order in David’s mind — God and His
truth first,
and
the
work of God next. And
finally, he calls upon the whole assembly to
praise the Lord, which they did, bowing before the Lord and the
king, and
worshiping. In order to seal their confession thus made in word and
deed,
they proposed a great feast on the following day, consisting of a thousand
bullocks, a thousand rams, and a thousand lambs, with drink
offerings and
thank offerings to correspond. Thus ended the consecration, the
prayer and
praise, viz. in joy and “GREAT
GLADNESS.” These are ever the
results,
and
there never wilt be joy and gladness in the
Lord WITHOUT THEM!
25 “And
the LORD magnified Solomon exceedingly in the sight of all
on any king before him in
two
kings “before” Solomon in
however, when He was “pleased”
with the speech of the prayer which he
offered a very short time subsequently, was much larger, and
suggests itself
to
us as what may really have been present to the mind of the historian
when he used the less comprehensive words above (II Chronicles 1:12;
I Kings 3:12-13).
Solomon’s Accession (vs. 23-25)
The book which has been so largely occupied with the acts
and the reign of
David, closes with the accession of his son. It is an
exemplification of the
saying, “One generation passeth
away and another generation cometh.”
(Ecclesiastes 1:4). Each
generation has its own work to do, and has then to make
way
for its successor. David’s part was to conquer by valor and power; Solomon’s
part was to reign in magnificence. David prepared for the temple; Solomon
built it. Everything that a father could do to facilitate a son’s
work David
certainly did for his successor, who entered upon a heritage of
peace and power.
RELIGION.
They “anointed him unto the Lord;” he
“sat on the throne
of the Lord.” These
expressions, taken in connection with the narrative of the
events following Solomon’s accession, indicate that he began his reign in a
truly religious spirit, with a desire to consecrate his
position and
influence to the
glory of God.
MARKED BY THE ALLEGIANCE OF THE PRINCES AND THE
OBEDIENCE OF THE POPULATION GENERALLY. With
conspicuous loyalty the ancient captains and chiefs of David
transferred their
allegiance to his youthful successor, and the people who had been
dazzled into
obedience by the exploits of the father, at once and cheerfully
submitted to
the sway of the son.
DISTINGUISHED BY PROSPERITY AND BY MAJESTY. This glory
Is by the
chronicler justly attributed to the favor of the Lord. The “royal
majesty” of the youthful occupant of the throne exceeded anything
before
known in
this. During the first
part, at all events, of this splendid reign, Solomon
was faithful to his trust and to his God. He was a type of THE PRINCE
OF PEACE, WHOSE
KINGDOM, AND DOMINION ENDURETH
THROUGHOUT ALL
GENERATIONS!
Verses 26-30 contain last words respecting David’s reign,
its extent and its length;
respecting his death and age, and the succession of Solomon; and
respecting the
sources of the history of himself, his reign, his people, and
other countries.
26
“Thus David the son of Jesse reigned over all
not
indeed hard to follow here, but marking the close instead of the commencement
or
career of David’s reign over all
ch. 18:14; II Samuel 8:15.
27 “And
the time that he reigned over Israel was forty years; seven
years reigned he in
Jerusalem.”
In the same way the contents of this verse
are paralleled by
ch.3:4; II Samuel 5:5; I Kings 2:11; this last passage giving only
seven years
instead of the seven years and six months for the reign in
28 “And he
died in a good old age, full of days, riches, and honor: and
Solomon his son reigned in his stead.” We learn from
II Samuel 5:4-5, that
David was thirty years old when he began to reign in Hebron. He
must,
therefore, have died in his seventy-first year. That this is called
here a
good old age (Eye opening, since through the mercy of God, I am 69 –
CY -2013) shows that the
length of human life had now greatly subsided.
In comparison of all his successors on the thrones of Judah and
of Israel,
his
age was clearly a “good old age?’
David’s Death (vs. 26-30)
Our book ends with David’s death. He had reigned forty
years, viz. seven
years and a half in
old age.” Many an age is “old,” but not “good.” But David had set
God
before him through life, and God sets the crown upon it in these words.
The Bible obituaries of good men are short. There is no
parade, no
lengthened record on marble monument or polished stone. They need none.
Their record is in heaven. In this they form a striking contrast to the
fullsome epitaphs of this world. The greatest of men in Bible
history have
short records. “So Moses
died, and the Lord buried him.” Is
that all, and of
such a man! Yes; for it is the life that should speak and not the death;
and
that life is the character of the man, whatever the world may say of his
death. “Full of days, riches, and honor,”
all worthy of a record because
consecrated to God. Our days are only “full” when thus used. What empty
days fill up the
lives of most around us — days of which an
unseen hand
has
written “vanity,” but for which the soul
must give an account to God!
(II Corinthians 5:10).
It is said here that a record is given of “the times that went
over him.” There were “times” of sorrow and “times” of joy, times of
trouble and
times of rest, times of weakness and times of strength; but when God is in
them THERE ARE NO EMPTY
DAYS! They
were full because God was
in
them. In the midst of all the changes and chances of this mortal life may such
be
our
days!
Honored in Death by God and Man (v. 28)
This was the case with King David. “He died in a good old age, full
of
days, riches, and honor.” With
the reverent love of a whole nation round
him,
they bore him to his royal tomb. “David died, according to Josephus,
at
the age of seventy. The general sentiment which forbade interment
within the habitations of men, gave way in his case, as in that
of Samuel. He
was
“buried in the city of
and
which could only be honored, not polluted, by containing his grave. It
was,
no doubt, hewn in the rocky side of the hill, and became the center of
the
catacomb in which his descendants, the kings of
after him.” “The only site which is actually consecrated by
traditional
sentiment as the tomb of David, is the vault underneath the Mussulman
Mosque of David, on the southern side of
modern
professes to be built above the cavern, and contains only the
cenotaph
usual in the tombs of Mussulman
saints, with the inscription in Arabic, ‘O
David, whom God has made vicar, rule
mankind in truth.’” Observing how
honored in death King David was, and how honored in memory King
David is, though his life was so checkered and so seriously
marred with
wilfullness, indulgence, and sin, we are reminded of the lines often
quoted
from our greatest national poet:
“The
evil that men do lives after them;
The
good is oft interred with their bones;”
(Shakespeare)
and
we ask — Are these lines, in any large and important sense, true; and
must we so invert our fixed notions as to admit that the good in our
lives is
temporary and fading, while the evil is permanent, and must go on,
with its
mischievous influences, when we have passed away? We cannot think this.
What is true about men — especially such public men as
David — may be
stated under three headings.
CRITICISM. We
must all accept of this condition. We must not wonder
if the criticism finds out and unduly magnifies the evil that
may be in us.
Though often a source of much
bitterness and trouble, and often painfully
depressing to the earnest man, it is, on the whole, healthy that public men
should be thus exposed,
and must take count of the fact that their
fellows
will never let their wrong-doings or wrong teachings hide away
or work in
secret. It is more true that the “evil
of a man” lives while he
lives.
Such a time has a strange
calming and solemnizing influence even on
political and theological opponents. The “other party” will write
sketches
of the dead man’s life without a trace of bitterness or
reference to a
disputed topic. Perhaps this was never more strikingly illustrated
than at
the death of the good Dean Stanley. Touchingly tender and
beautiful were
the references made to him, and all vied in saying good or
saying nothing.
The good, not the evil,
lived after him. And so in David’s death-time, all
the evil and the enmity were put aside, that the nation might
do homage to
its great and good king.
try to forget the evil, and fix their thoughts only on the
good. Biographies
scarcely even hint the natural weaknesses, the stumblings,
or the stains.
Nay, a kind of glory-halo
gathers round the heroic dead, in which we even
lose sight of their infirmities; and so it is the good in a man
that lives after
him. Then comes the question — Does our homage in death to a
man
necessarily imply approval of his career? Yes; it does of his career as
a
whole — of the great
features of it. Though this must be admitted, that the
homage is far oftener rendered to genius rather than character.
29 “Now
the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are
written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the
book of Nathan
the prophet, and in the book of Gad the
seer,” The
Hebrew word here
translated acts is
identical with the words translated three times afterwards
in
this verse book. A uniform rendering for all might be found in the general
word “history” or “acts.” The question as
to the probable nature of these
works, and whether
identical with our Books of Samuel, has been
treated of
in
the Introduction.
The Hebrew word for “seer,” applied
in this verse to
Samuel, is ha,roh;. And that applied to Gad, though the Authorized Version
has
the same
translation, “seer,” is hz,jh;. There can be no doubt that the word
applied to Samuel would, under any circumstances, stand as the
higher of
the
two names, were there any comparison intended between them. This is
confirmed by the fact that it is found used only of him (I Samuel
9:9, 11,18-19;
II Samuel 15:27; ch. 9:22; 26:28;
and in this verse) and of Hanani (II Chronicles
16:7,10), whereas the word applied
to Gad in this verse is the generic name for seers,
and
is used several times in the Books of Chronicles of other persons than Gad. At
the
same time, the parenthesis in (I Samuel 9:9, to the effect that the word here
used of Samuel as seer (ha,roh;) was superseded in later times (as, for instance,
at
the time of the writing of the Books of Samuel) by the word prophet
(aybin,), compared with Isaiah 30:10, points in a somewhat
different
direction. In the first place, it would indicate that our Authorized
Version
in
Isaiah 30:10 should rather stand, “Which
say to the prophets,
Prophesy not, and
to the seers,” etc. While for our present
passage it
would indicate that no insidious comparison is possible between
Samuel
and
Gad as seers, but rather that Samuel retains the old honored name by
which he had been wont to be called, and that to Nathan is
with equal
naturalness attached the more modern name — the functions represented
being essentially the same, or at least analogous.
30 “With
all his reign and his might, and the times that went over him,
and over
this verse, The times
that went over him, is noticeable
as an hapax legomenon.
There are, however, not a few
phrases more or less nearly approaching it in sense,
and all hinging on the word times (ch.12:32; Esther 1:13; Job 24:1.; Psalm 31:15;
Daniel 7:25). The last sentence of this chapter is
illustrated, and most
suggestively, by II Chronicles 12:8; 17:10-11.
"Excerpted text Copyright AGES
Library, LLC. All
rights reserved.
Materials are reproduced by
permission."
This material can be found at:
http://www.adultbibleclass.com
If this exposition is helpful, please share
with others.