A verse by verse commentary on I Chronicles 17 dealing with God’s Promise to David and David's Prayer.

1. 1 CHRONICLES 17 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
God’s Promise to David
1 After David was settled in his palace, he said to
Nathan the prophet, “Here I am, living in a house
of cedar, while the ark of the covenant of the Lord
is under a tent.”
BARNES, "Compare throughout 2 Sam. 7 and the notes found there.
CLARKE, "Now it came to pass - See every thing recorded in this chapter amply
detailed in the notes on 2Sa_7:1 (note), etc.
HENRY, "Let us observe here,
I. How desirous and solicitous good people should be to serve the interests of God's
kingdom in the world, to the utmost of their capacity. David could not be easy in a house
of cedar while the ark was lodged within curtains, 1Ch_17:1. The concerns of the public
should always be near our hearts. What pleasure can we take in our own prosperity if we
see not the good of Jerusalem? When David is advanced to wealth and power see what
his cares and projects are. Not, “What shall I do for my children to get portions for
them? What shall I do to fill my coffers and enlarge my dominions?” But, “What shall I
do for God, to serve and honour him?” Those that are contriving where to bestow their
fruits and their good would do well to enquire what condition the ark is in, and whether
some may not be well bestowed upon it.
1

2. JAMISON, "(1Ch 17:1) Now it came to pass, as David sat in his house, that David said
to Nathan the prophet, Lo, I dwell in an house of cedars, but the ark of the covenant of
the LORD remaineth under curtains.
K&D1-9, "In the Chronicle, as in 2 Samuel 7, the account of the removal of the ark to
the city of David is immediately followed by the narrative of David's design to build a
temple to the Lord; and this arrangement is adopted on account of the connection
between the subjects, though the events must have been separated by a period of several
years. Our account of this design of David's, with its results for him and for his kingdom,
is in all essential points identical with the parallel account, so that we may refer to the
commentary on 2 Sam 7 for any necessary explanation of the matter. The difference
between the two narratives are in great part of a merely formal kind; the author of the
Chronicle having sought to make the narrative more intelligible to his contemporaries,
partly by using later phrases current in his own time, such as ‫ים‬ ִ‫ה‬ ֱ‫א‬ for ‫,יהוה‬ ‫כוּת‬ ְ‫ל‬ ַ‫מ‬ for
‫ה‬ָ‫כ‬ָ‫ל‬ ְ‫מ‬ ַ‫,מ‬ partly by simplifying and explaining the bolder and more obscure expressions.
Very seldom do we find divergences in the subject-matter which alter the meaning or
make it appear to be different. To supplement and complete the commentary already
given in 2nd Samuel, we will now shortly treat of these divergences. In 1Ch_17:1, the
statement that David communicated his purpose to build a temple to the Lord to the
prophet Nathan, “when Jahve had given him rest from all his enemies round about,” is
wanting. This clause, which fixes the time, has been omitted by the chronicler to avoid
the apparent contradiction which would have arisen in case the narrative were taken
chronologically, seeing that the greatest of David's wars, those against the Philistines,
Syrians, and Ammonites, are narrated only in the succeeding chapter. As to this, cf. the
discussion on 2Sa_7:1-3.
BENSON, ". Now it came to pass, &c. — This whole chapter is explained 2 Samuel
7., where the same things are recorded with very little variation of the words.
COFFMAN, "2 Samuel 7:1-17 is parallel to these fifteen verses; and we have written
fourteen pages of comments on them in Vol. 4 (2Samuel) of the Historical Books in
our series of commentaries, pp. 81-94.
The variations in the two accounts are not significant. God's prohibition against
David's intention of building God a house was stated in the form of a question in
2Samuel, but appears here as a positive commandment forbidding it. The meaning
2

3. is the same either way. The Hebrew method of making a negative statement
frequently took the form of a question as in Luke 18:8.
Also, both accounts make it absolutely certain that the passage has no reference
whatever to Solomon. This, of course, is disputed. Jacob M. Myers, for example,
wrote that, "Verse 11 must not be made to bear too much weight ... it seems to refer
only to Solomon."[1] However, it is impossible to put "too much weight" on verse
11! It thunders the message, found also in the parallel, that the Great One who
would build God a house would appear after (yes, that's the word, AFTER) David's
death; and Solomon did not appear after David's decease, but during his lifetime
and was co-regent with him for a period. See our extensive comment on this in the
parallel.
ELLICOTT, "1. David, desiring to build a house for God, receives from Nathan a
Divine promise of perpetual dominion (1 Chronicles 17:1-15). 2. His prayer (1
Chronicles 17:16-27). This section is a duplicate of 2 Samuel 7. The differences are
mostly verbal rather than essential, and are due, as usual, to a natural tendency to
interpret and simplify archaisms and obscurities in the original narrative.
Verse 1
(1) Now it came to pass, as David sat in his house.—In both texts the story of this
chapter naturally follows that of the removal of the Ark, although the events
themselves appear to belong to a later period of David’s reign, “when the Lord had
given him rest round about from all his enemies” (2 Samuel 7:1; comp. 1 Chronicles
17:8). 1 Chronicles 17:11-14 indicate some time before the birth of Solomon, but the
date cannot be more exactly determined.
David.—Thrice in 1 Chronicles 17:1-2, for which Samuel has “the king.” The
chronicler loves the name of his ideal sovereign.
3

4. Sat.—Dwelt.
Lo.—Samuel, “See, now.”
An house.—The house—viz., that which Hiram’s craftsmen had built (1 Chronicles
14:1, sqq.).
Of cedars.—A vivid allusion to the splendour of the palace, with its doors, walls,
and ceilings of cedar wood. “Cedar of Labnana” (Lebanon) was in great request
with the Assyrian monarchs of a later age for palace-building.
Under curtains—i.e., in a tent (Habakkuk 3:7). Samuel has, “dwelleth amid the
curtain” (collect.). The verb is omitted here for brevity.
GUZIK, "“This chapter lies at the heart of the Chronicler’s presentation of
history.” (Martin J. Selman)
A. God’s promise to David.
1. (1 Chronicles 17:1-2) Nathan’s premature advice to David.
Now it came to pass, when David was dwelling in his house, that David said to
Nathan the prophet, “See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark of the
covenant of the LORD is under tent curtains.” Then Nathan said to David, “Do all
that is in your heart, for God is with you.”
a. Now it came to pass: “Chronologically chapter 17 came after the termination of
the wars chronicled in chapter 18 and it should be dated about 995 B.C.” (Payne)
4

5. b. I dwell in a house of cedar: Cedar wood was especially valued. This means that
David lived in an expensive, beautiful home. When he remembered that the ark of
the covenant of the LORD is under tent curtains, the contrast bothered him. David
was troubled by the thought that he lived in a nicer house than the ark of the
covenant.
i. Without saying the specific words, David told Nathan that he wanted to build a
temple to replace the tabernacle. More than 400 years before this, when Israel was
in the wilderness, God commanded Moses to build a tent of meeting according to a
specific pattern (Exodus 25:8-9). God never asked for a permanent building to
replace the tent, but now David wanted to do this for God.
ii. The tent of meeting - also known as the tabernacle - was perfectly suited to Israel
in the wilderness, because they constantly moved. Now that Israel is securely in the
land, and the tabernacle is in Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6:17), David thinks it would be
better and more appropriate to build a temple to replace the tabernacle.
c. Do all that is in your heart, for God is with you: Nathan said this to David because
it seemed good and reasonable. What could be wrong with David building a temple?
i. All that is in your heart shows that David’s heart was filled with this question:
“What can I do for God?” He was so filled with gratitude and concern for God’s
glory that he wanted to do something special for God.
PARKER, "GOD’S RELATION TO HIS PEOPLE
1 Chronicles 17:24. The Lord of hosts is the God of Israel, even a God to Israel.
A SENSE of God’s kindness to us will invariably inspire us with a zeal for his glory.
5

6. The more deeply we feel our obligations to him, the more ready we shall be to speak
good of his name, and the more desirous that he should be honoured by every child
of man. It was David’s happy lot to be eminently favoured of his God. He had been
taken from the sheep-folds, to feed God’s people Israel; and he had received a
promise from God, that the kingdom should be perpetuated in his family to very
distant generations. Overcome, as it were, with the contemplation of these
stupendous mercies, he adores his God with the profoundest gratitude: “O Lord,
there is none like thee, neither is there any God besides thee, according to all that we
have heard with our ears [Note: ver. 16–20.].” Then, looking for the establishment
of God’s blessed word in relation to himself and his descendants, he prays that God
himself may be glorified by means of it: “Let it even be established, that thy name
may be magnified for ever, saying, The Lord of hosts is the God of Israel, even a
God to Israel;” that is, “I have found thee a God to me: and I desire that thou
mayest be known to Israel, and acknowledged by Israel, under that endearing
character, to the latest generations.”
Let us, for the illustrating of these words, consider,
I. The relation which God bears to his people—
He is here called “The God of Israel.” But there seems, at first sight, to be nothing
very peculiar in that, since he is “the God of the whole earth [Note: Isaiah 54:5.],”
yea, and of all his creatures, whether in heaven or hell; all being alike subject to
him, and all equally under his control. The title here given to him must evidently
import something of a more restricted nature, something that more immediately
connects him with Israel as his peculiar charge. Its real signification is,
1. That he has chosen them out from amongst the world, which lieth in
wickedness—
[This he did, when he called Abraham out of Ur of the Chaldees. Abraham was an
idolater, in the midst of an idolatrous family and nation. And God, of his own
sovereign will and pleasure, chose him, and called him out from his family and
6

7. nation, and “separated him for himself [Note: Psalms 4:3.].” And it is precisely thus
that he calls all his people, whether those who were Abraham’s lineal descendants,
or those who are heirs of Abraham’s faith. What was said to Israel in the
wilderness, may be said to God’s Israel to the very end of time: “Thou art a holy
people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special
people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth [Note:
Deuteronomy 7:6.].” Nor, in one instance more than another, can any reason for this
choice be assigned, but simply God’s sovereign will and pleasure [Note:
Deuteronomy 7:7-8.]. In every instance, he is found of them that sought him not, and
made known to them that inquired not after him [Note: Romans 10:20.].”]
2. That he has given himself to them in a peculiar way—
[He gave himself to Abraham and the nation of Israel, as their God, in a more
especial manner; so that he watched over them, and revealed himself to them, and
exerted himself for them in a way that he never had done for any other people. The
same he does for his chosen people at this time, only in a less visible manner. He
takes them under his special protection: he orders every thing for them: and he
makes himself known to them, as their Father and their Friend.]
3. That he avows that relation to them before the whole universe—
[This he did to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, calling himself their God: and when
he would afterwards make himself known to their posterity in Egypt, he
particularly commanded Moses to say to them, “The Lord God of your fathers, the
God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob, hath sent me unto you. This is my name
for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations [Note: Exodus 3:15.].” And
though the names of his people be not, nor can be, severally mentioned, he is as
much their God, as ever he was Abraham’s God. Wherever there are any persons
who have been called out from the world to “seek after a better country, that is, an
heavenly, he is not ashamed to be called their God [Note: Hebrews 11:16.].”]
But let us inquire more distinctly,
7

8. II. What, under that relation, we may expect at his hands—
“The God of Israel, is a God to Israel:” and whatever a God can do, that he will do
for them. Hence, then, they may assuredly expect from him,
1. The care of his providence—
[See what he did for Israel of old. They needed a deliverer from their bondage: and
he delivered them with a mighty hand, and a stretched-out arm. They needed
guidance through the wilderness: and he himself went before them in the pillar and
the cloud. They needed food: and he gave them bread from heaven to eat, and water
from the stony rock for their refreshment. And will he not provide for us also
whatsoever we stand in need of? “Is his ear heavy, that it cannot hear? or is his
hand now shortened, that it cannot save?” No: he is the same gracious God as ever,
and has pledged himself, that “they who seek his face, shall want no manner of thing
that is good [Note: Psalms 34:10.].”]
2. The communications of his grace—
[Without these, it were to little purpose that he were called our God: for it would be
impossible for us ever to behold his face in peace. “Without him we can do nothing.”
We should still continue slaves to sin and Satan; and perish for ever amongst the
enemies of God. But we need not fear. “He will give us both grace and glory [Note:
Psalms 84:11.].” As our necessities increase, “he will give us more grace [Note:
James 4:6.]:” and however great our trials may be, he engages that “his grace shall
be sufficient for us [Note: 2 Corinthians 12:9.].” Yea, so effectual shall be his
communications, that, “through him strengthening us, we shall be able to do all
things [Note: Philippians 4:13.].”]
3. The manifestations of his love—
8

9. [Who that would approve himself as a father, would withhold from his child the
tokens of his love? And will God, when he promises to be “a God unto us,” be so
unmindful of us, as never to lift up the light of his countenance upon us? No: He will
give us “a Spirit of adoption, whereby we may cry, Abba, Father [Note: Romans
8:15.].” He will give us also “the witness of the Spirit, as the earnest of our future
inheritance [Note: Romans 8:16.].” And to such a degree will he “shed abroad his
love in our hearts [Note: Romans 8:5.],” as to fill us with “a joy that is unspeakable
and glorified [Note: 1 Peter 1:8.].”]
4. The possession of his glory—
[This is particularly declared by our Lord himself, as inseparably connected with
the relation we are now considering. When a doubt was entertained, whether there
was ever to be a resurrection of the body, our Lord referred to the very name of
God, as “the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob,” as a demonstration of the
point in question. For, if he was their God, he was the God of their whole persons, of
their bodies as well as of their souls: and if their bodies should not be raised again,
he would cease to be their God, as far as their bodies were concerned. But that
relation should never cease: and, consequently, their bodies must be raised from the
dead, in order that they might participate in the promised bliss [Note: Matthew
22:31-32.]. No doubt, therefore, he will exalt to glory all his chosen people: for can
he be a God to any in hell? There he will be only an avenging Judge. It is in heaven
alone that he can execute all that that relation imports: we maybe sure, therefore,
that, as he is the God of his people, so “he will be their portion, and the lot of their
inheritance” for evermore.]
Whilst, however, we contemplate our privileges in consequence of God’s relation to
us, we must bear in mind,
III. What, under that relation, he is entitled to expect from us
Beyond a doubt, if he considers himself as bound to us, we also are bound to him:
9

10. and if he is our God, we must be his people. The one is comprehended in the other:
and, wherever one is mentioned, the other, if not absolutely mentioned, is always
implied. Just before the text it is said, “Thy people Israel didst thou make thine own
people for ever; and thou, Lord, becamest their God [Note: ver. 22.].” In the Epistle
to the Hebrews, not only is the mutual relation specified, but it is stated precisely in
our text; “I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people [Note: Hebrews
8:10.].” This, then, may God expect from us:
1. That we “be a people to him”—
[We are not to be satisfied with calling ourselves his: we must be really his. A
servant considers himself, his time, his talents, his all, as at the disposal of his
master: and from day to day he inquires how they can be improved for him. He
never, for a moment, considers it sufficient to compliment his master with the name
of master: but he waits upon him to receive his orders; and he departs from him
only to execute them. Thus, then, we must “be a people to” the Lord. We must
inquire what we can do for him. We must diligently learn what is the duty which he
has appointed us to perform; and we must strenuously set ourselves to the
performance of it — — —]
2. That we give ourselves to him, as he has given himself to us—
[We must do it freely, and cheerfully. There was no constraint on God’s part in
giving himself to us: he did it of his own mind and will. Thus must we surrender up
ourselves to him. We must not wait till we are beset with the terrors of hell, and then
give ourselves to him by compulsion. We should rather, from a view of his
excellency, and from a sense of the unspeakable privilege of serving him, desire to be
numbered amongst his favoured people [Note: Isaiah 64:9.]. We must do it also
wholly and unreservedly. Jehovah is not our God in part; doing some things for us,
and not others: there is nothing that he has not done; for he has given his only dear
Son to die for us: nor is there any thing he will not do; for “having given up his own
Son for us, we may be assured he will much more do for us every thing else that we
can need [Note: Romans 8:32.].” On no consideration, therefore, should we withhold
any thing from him. “Our whole body, soul, and spirit, should be sanctified to him
10

11. [Note: 1 Thessalonians 5:23.].” Nothing should be accounted too much to do or
suffer for him: if the sacrifice even of life itself should be called for, it should be
freely made; and we should rejoice that we are counted worthy to render him so
honourable a service. We must also do it unchangeably and for ever. God never
repents of what he has done for us [Note: Romans 11:29.]: he tells us that he will not
forsake his people, “because it hath pleased him to make us his people [Note: 1
Samuel 12:22.];” but that, “having loved us, he will love us to the end [Note: John
13:1.].” And so should it be with us: “after having once put our hands to the plough,
we should never look back again [Note: Luke 9:62.].” We should “never faint or be
weary in well-doing [Note: Galatians 6:9.].” We should give our ear to be bored in
his service; and never relinquish it, till we are called to serve him in a better world
[Note: Exodus 21:6.].
This, I say, is what God may justly expect from us: and I conceive there is not a
person upon earth so stupid and brutish, as not to see and acknowledge that it is “a
reasonable service [Note: Romans 12:1.].” If our expectations from God are greater
than those of others, our services also should be greater. The services of others are
no rule for us. The question that will be put to us will be, “What did ye more than
others?”]
Let me, then, conclude with two proposals:
1. That we, at this very hour, accept Jehovah as our God—
[He offers himself to us under this endearing character. He calls on every child of
man to “lay hold on his covenant;” and in that very covenant he makes over himself
to us as our God [Note: Jeremiah 11:2-4.]. Let us from this moment renounce all
other gods, and say, “Thou, O God, shall be my God for ever and ever [Note: Psalms
48:14.].” In accepting him, however, let us accept him for all the ends for which he
gives himself to us. It is not to save us only that he gives himself to us, but to “be a
God unto us;” to be the one source of all our joy; the one object of all our love; the
one end of our very being. Let us then, open our hearts to receive him under this
character. If there be any other that is more worthy of this place in our regards, or
that can better fulfil the office committed to him, then will I consent that you shall
11

12. take him for your God in preference to Jehovah: but if Jehovah alone can answer all
the necessities of your souls, then, I say, accept him now as your God, and avouch
him to be so in the presence of the whole universe [Note: Deuteronomy 26:17-18.].]
2. That we now consecrate ourselves to him as his people—
[This, as you have seen, must accompany the former: nor is there any man so blind,
as not to see that the two are, and must be, inseparably connected. Let us, then, at
this hour, “join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant, that shall not be
forgotten [Note: Jeremiah 50:5.].” Unite with me now, my Brethren, in a solemn
surrender of ourselves to God.
O Lord, our God, thine we are by every tie. To thee we owe our very being, for thou
hast created us To thee we owe our well-being, for thou hast upheld us every
moment, and supplied us with all things needful for us. Above all, to thee we owe
our hopes of happiness in a better world; for thou hast redeemed us by the blood of
thine only dear Son. “We are not our own; we are bought with a price: and are
therefore bound in every view to glorify thee with our bodies and our spirits, which
are thine [Note: 1 Corinthians 6:19-20.].” We acknowledge with shame that “other
lords besides thee have had dominion over us: but by thee will we henceforth make
mention of thy name, even of thine only [Note: Isaiah 26:13.].” Behold, O Lord, we
now dedicate to thee all that we are, and all that we have. We know it to be our
duty: we believe it to be our privilege: we are assured that it is our highest honour
and happiness. Make us sincere in this, we pray thee: and “keep it for ever in the
imagination of the thoughts of our hearts [Note: 1 Chronicles 29:18.]!” Oh, let us
never go back from thee, nor ever alienate from thee any portion of those regards
which are due to thee alone. Let the measure of our expectations from thee be the
measure of our dedication to thee: and, as we hope that thou wilt be fully and for
ever ours, so enable us to be fully and for ever thine!
Beloved Brethren, do you truly add to this your hearty “Amen [Note: At the Lord’s
table, we all do what is here done. “Here we offer and present unto thee, O Lord,
ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice unto
thee.”]?” The Lord grant you may! and may what we have now done be accepted of
12

13. our God, and be for ever ratified in heaven! Amen, and Amen!]
PULPIT, "This chapter is paralleled by 2 Samuel 7:1-29; and the parallel is for the
most part very close. The purport of the two accounts may be said to be identical,
while the variations of some few words and sentences just suffice to indicate the
somewhat different objects of the two writers, and the very different time when our
compiler was having recourse to the common authority. The "good" purpose which
was in David's heart is, like many other good purposes, obstructed by the will and
providence of God himself. It is not one of that other kind of "good intentions," with
which the way to hell is so often paved, when the man who forms the resolution and
entertains the intention is he who of his own choice, or fickleness, or indifference,
breaks it. It is acknowledged, therefore, and meets in fact with a large and gracious
reward, in being made the occasion of the distinct revelation to David of a lasting
house and perpetuated kingdom in his line. The interest of this chapter is
heightened, as will be seen, by the aspects of royal "home" life and peace which it
presents.
1 Chronicles 17:1
We may easily imagine how the excitement, though not the deeper interest,
attending the removal of the ark and the festival on occasion of its safe
establishment on Zion had now subsided. David's thoughts respecting the honour
due to God and to the ark of the covenant had time to grow into convictions, and
they were greatly and rightly stimulated by reflection on his own surroundings of
comfort, of safety, of stability and splendour. He revolves the possible methods and
the right methods of showing that honour due. The completion of his own house, one
presumably fit for the permanent abode of the King of Israel (1 Chronicles 14:1), is
the clear demonstration to him that the ark should not dwell in a mere tent. It is a
true touch of life, when it is written that as David sat in his house these thoughts
possessed him, and so strongly. The exact time, however, here designed, and the
exact occasion of his revealing the thoughts that burned within him, to Nathan, do
not appear either here or in the parallel place. In the opinion of some, an indication
of some interval having elapsed is found in the words (2 Samuel 7:1), "The Lord
had given him rest round about from all his enemies;" while others consider those
words to refer to the victories gained over the Philistines, as recorded in 1
Chronicles 14:1-17. Nathan the prophet. This name suddenly breaks upon us,
13

14. without any introduction, here for the first time. Nathan is emphatically entitled
"the prophet," but perhaps merely to distinguish him from Nathan, David's eighth
son. Amid many other important references to Nathan, and which speak for
themselves, must be specially noted 1 Chronicles 29:29; 2 Chronicles 9:29. And it
will be noticed from the former of these references, in particular how Nathan is the
prophet ( ‫יא‬ ִ‫ָב‬‫גּ‬ַ‫ה‬ ); not (like Samuel and Gad) seer ( ‫ה‬ ֶ‫א‬ֹ‫ר‬ָ‫ה‬ or ‫ֶה‬‫ו‬ֹ‫ת‬ַ‫.)ה‬ Possibly he is
intended in 1 Kings 4:5. An house of cedars. The cedar here spoken of does, of
course, not answer to our red, odorous cedar. The word employed is ‫ז‬ ֶ‫ר‬ ֶ‫,א‬ in the
plural number. The first Biblical use of this word is found in Le 1 Kings 14:4, 1
Kings 14:6, 52-49 . It is derived by Gesenius from an obsolete word ‫ז‬ ַ‫ר‬ ָ‫,א‬ from the
grip and the firmness of its roots. It is probably the derived signification, therefore,
that should be adhered to (as in the Authorized Version), and not the original,
where in Ezekiel 27:24, the plural of the passive participial is found, "made of
cedar," not with A. Schultens, "made fast." The cedar genus belonging to the order
Coniferae, is odoriferous, very lasting, and without knots. The numerous good
qualities which it possesses are spoken to in the variety of uses, and good kind of
uses, to which it was put—these all crowned by the almost solitary spiritualized
appropriation of the tree, found in Psalms 92:12 . From a comparison of 1 Kings
5:6, 1 Kings 5:8 (in the Hebrew, 20, 22) with 2 Chronicles 2:3, 2 Chronicles 2:8, and
some other passages, we may be led to believe that the cedar as the name of timber
was used occasionally very generically. Nevertheless, the very passages in question
instance by name the other specific kinds of wood. Two of the chief kinds of cedar
were the Lebanon and the Deodara, which is said not to have grown in Syria, but
abounds in the Himalayas. And as the use of the Lebanon cedar for some purposes
(e.g. for the masts of ships) is almost out of the question, it is exceedingly probable
that this Deodars and some other varieties of pines are comprehended under the eh-
rez. Dean Stanley points out what may be described as very interesting moral
landmark uses of the celebrated cedars of Lebanon, in those passages which speak
of Solomon's sweep of knowledge, commencing in the dewing direction from them (1
Kings 4:33), of the devouring fire that should begin with the bramble and reach
high up to those cedars (in Jotham's parable, 9:15), and (in the parable of Joash,
King of Israel, to Amaziah, King of Judah, 2 Chronicles 25:18) of the contempt with
which the family of the cedars of Lebanon is supposed to hear of the matrimonial
overtures of the family of the thistles of Lebanon. Stanley's pages are full of interest
on the subject of the cedars of Lebanon. Cedar was the choice wood for pillars and
beams, boarding and ceiling of the finest houses; and alike the first and second
temples (Ezra 3:7) depended upon the supply of it. Under curtains. Here rightly in
the plural, though our parallel (2 Samuel 7:2) shows the singular (Exodus 26:1-13;
Exodus 36:8-19).
14

15. BI 1-10, "Now it came to pass, as David sat in his house.
The king’s proposal
I. David’s proposal.
1. A noble purpose.
2. A generous purpose.
3. A purpose commended by the prophet.
II. God’s disapproval of David’s proposal.
1. God knows all our purposes.
2. God often hinders the accomplishment of our purposes.
III. Reasons for God’s disapproval of David’s proposal..
1. It was something entirely new.
2. It was untimely in its beginning.
3. David was not the right man to build. (J. Wolfendale.)
Our inspirations require to be revised
There are extemporaneous inspirations in life which have to be revised, amended, and in
some instances discarded altogether. A judgment is not always right simply because it is
sudden. There have been days upon which we have been perfectly sure that our duty lay
along such and such lines; everything concurred to prove the providence of the situation;
circumstances and impressions combined to show that a well-defined line of action had
been actually described by the Divine finger. It is precisely where duty appears to be so
plain that vigilance should be most on the alert. (J. Parker, D. D.)
David forbidden to build the temple
Some men are great only in intentions. If words were deeds, and dreams realities, they
would be the flower and crown of their generation. But life slips by unutilised. The future
of hope never becomes the present of fact. They are no more than glorious idle
dreamers. Not so with David.
I. David’s pious employment of his leisure. He had long been like a pursued mountain-
bird. And when Saul could pursue him no more, when he had come to the crown of
Judah, it was an assailed crown. But at last there was rest for David. No tent of the
warrior. It is “his house” he is in, his new mansion, his cedar palace. Therein he “sat.” He
has leisure. How does he use it? Seeking some excitement of pleasure wherein to escape
the oppression of self-consecration; the unwelcome voice of clamorous duty? When he
went forth to conflict he said, “The battle is the Lord’s.” And now he felt, “My leisure is
the Lord’s.” So as he sits in his beautiful mansion, the palace which the Tyrian builders
had built, he was comparing its elegance and splendour with the meanness of the
15

16. tabernacle in which he had placed the ark. The comparison pained him. He will build a
temple for the Lord. With such thoughts as these he occupied his leisure. Leisure! It is
the very thing that some seem never to get, and others getting, seek to escape. With
some life is a long, seldom-pausing battle with want. With others, when the respite
comes, they are eager soon, having no mental or spiritual resources, to get back again
into the familiar toil wherein they find the only life they care to live. Few and brief may
be our opportunities of leisure. All the more reason that they should be for our highest
refreshing and renewing by being dedicated to God. How a man spends his leisure will
tell much of the man. David’s employment of his speaks well for him.
II. God should be honoured with our substance. David felt God to be worthy of the best.
He desired to build Him a house. The largest liberality would be only poor
acknowledgment, a slight expression of his affection. David had built a palace. He was
not wrong in this. Comely symbols these of kingly power. Let the rich and great dwell in
stately houses. Let the owners of wealth possess what only the wealthy can buy. As David
did more for himself, he desired to do more for Him to whom he owed his all. That
should be the rule of our conduct. Do our riches increase? There should be a
proportionate increase of what we dedicate to God. A matter, this, little considered by
many.
III. Good wishes are never lost. David told Nathan the prophet his desire to rear a
temple for the Lord. We are not surprised to find that the prophet, with prompt
approbation, encouraged the king to the great undertaking. The work was good, but was
David the man to undertake it? To Nathan at night came a Divine intimation that he was
not. To war’s rough, sad business he was Divinely bidden. But because of its connection
with its inevitable horrors he was bidden back from the pious enterprise on which his
sublime and earnest ambition was set. What a verdict is thus passed upon war! What
then? Does David’s pious intention count for nothing? It counts for much. Beside which
he had his own important special work to do, to give his people rest from their foes and
consolidate the kingdom of Israel. His good wish had not been in vain. He was forbidden
to build the temple, but God would build him a family, and the world’s needed glorious
Deliverer was to be the “offspring of David.” A greater honour than he sought came to
him. God was pleased with his pious wish, and fulfilled it in a nobler way. Think not
little, then, of good intentions that are hindered from becoming more than intentions.
You may have desired to do some larger work for God; you may have intended to
consecrate your whole life to some holy ministry—to the ministry of the Gospel in this
land or far hence among the heathen; but you were hindered. In circumstances God said,
“No, not in this way; in some other”; and, perhaps, you look back and say, “My life is so
unlike what I had hoped. I drew the consecrated plan, and God’s viewless, but
undeniable, hand blotted it out. My wish was all in vain.” No, say not that. The desire
was good. It will be fulfilled; if not here, yet in higher service than otherwise had been
yours—in that bright and holy city beyond death. Cherish large and holy desires.
Precious seeds, you may be unable to sow them in any human heart, in any field of earth;
but heaven shall receive them. There they shall come to richest harvest. You shall find
them again—not baffled and scattered, as here, but in noblest service, in heaven’s eternal
praise. David was not to build the temple. But he knew it was to be built. The honour was
reserved for his son. “He,” said God, “shall build an house for My name.” If hindered
from an undertaking ourselves let us remember that our prayers and effort may help
another to do it. (G. T. Coster.)
16

17. 2 Nathan replied to David, “Whatever you have in
mind, do it, for God is with you.”
BARNES, "
CLARKE, "
GILL, "
HENRY, "II. How ready God's prophets should be to encourage every good purpose.
Nathan was no sooner aware of David's good design than he bade him go and do all that
was within his heart (1Ch_17:2), for he had no reason to doubt but that God was with
him in it. Ministers should stir up the gifts and graces that are in others as well as in
themselves.
JAMISON, "
K&D, "
ELLICOTT, " (2) Do.—Samuel, “Go, do.”
All that is in thine heart.—According to Hebrew ideas, the heart was the seat of the
mind and will, as well as of the emotions. But even the great Greek Aristotle, seven
centuries later than David, supposed the brain to be merely a kind of cooling
counterpoise to the heat of the liver.
God.—Samuel, “Jehovah;” but in last verse,” ark of God.
PULPIT, "This verse gives Nathan's response on the spur of the moment. And that
17

18. it was not radically wrong from a prophet may be inferred from the stress
afterwards laid upon the acceptableness to God of what had been in the heart of
David to do. Even with God, silence would sometimes be understood by a prophet to
be equivalent to assent.
3 But that night the word of God came to Nathan,
saying:
BARNES, "
CLARKE, "
GILL, "
HENRY, "
JAMISON, "
K&D, "
ELLICOTT, "(3) The same night.—The words indicate a dream as the method of
communication (Job 4:13; 1 Samuel 27:6).
GUZIK, "2. (1 Chronicles 17:3-6) God corrects Nathan’s hasty approval to David’s
plan to build a temple.
But it happened that night that the word of God came to Nathan, saying, “Go and
18

19. tell My servant David, ‘Thus says the LORD: “You shall not build Me a house to
dwell in. For I have not dwelt in a house since the time that I brought up Israel, even
to this day, but have gone from tent to tent, and from one tabernacle to another.
Wherever I have moved about with all Israel, have I ever spoken a word to any of
the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have
you not built Me a house of cedar?”‘“
a. That night that the word of God came to Nathan: Nathan’s response to David was
presumptuous. He answered according to human judgment and common sense, but
before the word of God came to him.
i. “It is of the utmost importance that we should ever test our desires, even the
highest and holiest of them, by His will. Work, excellent in itself, should never be
undertaken, save at the express command of God. The passing of time will always
vindicate the wisdom of the Divine will.” (Morgan)
b. For I have not dwelt in a house since the time that I brought up Israel, even to
this day: God seemed honored and “surprised” that David offered to build Him a
house. “You want to build Me a house? No one has ever offered to do that before,
and I never commanded anyone to do it.”
i. “The Hebrew text says literally, ‘build me the house.’ The idea of there being such
a house was legitimate, just that David was not the one to build it.” (Payne)
ii. David wanted to do more than God commanded. This is a wonderful place to be
in our relationship with God. Most of us are so stuck in the thinking, “How little can
I do and still please the LORD?” that we never really want to do more than God
commands.
iii. “Though the Lord refused to David the realization of his wish, he did it in a most
gracious manner. He did not put the idea away from him in anger or disdain, as
though David had cherished an unworthy desire; but he honored his servant even in
19

20. the non-acceptance of his offer.” (Spurgeon)
iii. David now knew that God didn’t want him to build the temple, but David didn’t
respond by doing nothing. Instead of building the temple, David gathered all the
materials for its construction so Solomon could build a glorious temple to God (1
Chronicles 29:2-9)
iv. “If you cannot have what you hoped, do not sit down in despair and allow the
energies of your life to run to waste; but arise, and gird yourself to help others to
achieve. If you may not build, you may gather materials for him that shall. If you
may not go down the mine, you can hold the ropes.” (Meyer)
PULPIT, "The express word of God came, however, that same night. It proved to be
an overruling word. But it brought with it the point of a fresh and most welcome
new departure for David. We might glean here by the way a suggestion of the
beneficent operation of express revelation, superseding the thought, the method, the
reason of man.
SBC 3-4, "I. It may often happen that what passes as zeal for the glory of God has itself
no small mixture of self-seeking. It would have been so natural for David, knowing that
the glorious work he had planned was to be taken out of his hands and committed to
another, to have given up the thing, and left the execution of it to his successor, that we
cannot sufficiently extol the strength, the sincerity, the fervency, of the piety that could
labour as energetically and provide as magnificently for the structure in which he was
not allowed to lay a stone, as though he had been assured of seeing it rise and of having
his own name connected with it to the remotest ages.
II. There is many a temple such as that built by Solomon, but for which the materials
were provided by David. It is the frequent, if not the invariable, ordaining of God that
one party is empowered to commence, and another to complete, the work of moral
renewal, through which men are builded together for the habitation of God through the
Spirit. The prayers and instructions of parents, the warnings of friends, the exhortations
of ministers, the dealings of Providence—these, spread, it may be, over a long course of
years, are generally made use of to reclaim the wanderer and bring him to the Redeemer.
If God honour us to the conversion of sinners, we do but enter into other men’s labours,
reaping what other men have sown. And though we may not visibly bring men to God,
we may be preparing the way for them to be brought to Him by others. We may not be
allowed to build the temple, but we may be preparing the materials with which another
shall build.
20

21. H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 3643.
4 “Go and tell my servant David, ‘This is what the
Lord says: You are not the one to build me a
house to dwell in.
CLARKE, "But have gone from tent to tent - “I have transferred my tabernacle
from Gilgal to Nob, from Nob to Shiloh, and from Shiloh to Gibeon.” - Targum and
Jarchi.
HENRY 4-15, " How graciously God accepts his people's good purposes, yea, though
he himself prevents the performance of them. David must not build this house, 1Ch_
17:4. He must prepare for it, but not do it; as Moses must bring Israel within sight of
Canaan, but must them leave it to Joshua to put them in possession of it. It is the
prerogative of Christ to be both the author and finisher of his work. Yet David must not
think that, because he was not permitted to build the temple, 1. His preferment was in
vain; no, “I took thee from the sheep-cote, though not to be a builder of the temple, yet to
be ruler over my people Israel; that is honour enough for thee; leave the other to one
that shall come after thee,” 1Ch_17:7. Why should one man think to engross all the
business and to bring every good work to perfection? Let something be left for those that
succeed. God had given him victories, and made him a name (1Ch_17:8), and, further,
intended by him to establish his people Israel and secure them against their enemies,
1Ch_17:9. That must be his work, who is a man of war and fit for it, and he must let the
building of churches be left to one that was never cut out for a soldier. Nor, 2. Must he
think that his good purpose was in vain, and that he should lose the reward of it; no, it
being God's act to prevent the execution of it, he shall be as fully recompensed as if he
had done it; “The Lord will build thee a house, and annex the crown of Israel to it,” 1Ch_
17:10. If there be a willing mind, it shall not only be accepted, but thus rewarded. Nor, 3.
Must he think that because he might not do this good work therefore it would never be
done, and that it was in vain to think of it; no, I will raise up thy seed, and he shall build
me a house, 1Ch_17:11, 1Ch_17:12. God's temple shall be built in the time appointed,
though we may not have the honour of helping to build it or the satisfaction of seeing it
built. Nor, 4. Must he confine his thoughts to the temporal prosperity of his family, but
must entertain himself with the prospect of the kingdom of the Messiah, who should
descend from his loins, and whose throne should be established for evermore, 1Ch_
21

22. 17:14. Solomon was not himself so settled in God's house as he should have been, nor
was his family settled in the kingdom: “But there shall one descend from thee whom I
will settle in my house and in my kingdom,” which intimates that he should be both a
high priest over the house of God and should have the sole administration of the affairs
of God's kingdom among men, all power both in heaven and in earth, in the house and in
the kingdom, in the church and in the world. He shall be a priest upon his throne, and
the counsel of peace shall be between them both, and he shall build the temple of the
Lord, Zec_6:12, Zec_6:13.
JAMISON, "I ... have gone from tent to tent, and from one tabernacle to
another — The literal rendering is, “I was walking in a tent and in a dwelling.” The
evident intention (as we may see from 1Ch_17:6) was to lay stress upon the fact that God
was a Mithhatlek (a travelling God) and went from one place to another with His tent and
His entire dwelling (the dwelling included not merely the tent, but the fore-courts with
the altar of burnt offerings, etc.) [Bertheau].
ELLICOTT, "4) David my servant.—Samuel, “unto my servant, unto David.”
Thou shalt not build me an house to dwell in.—Rather, It is not thou that shalt build
me the house to dwell in. Samuel, interrogatively, implying a negation, “Wilt thou
build me a house for me to dwell in?” The chronicler, thinking of the famous
Temple of Solomon, writes, “the house.”
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 17:4-15
These verses are the unfolding to David of the magnificent and far-stretching
purposes of God's grace towards him in his son Solomon and his descendants for
ever. The revelation is made by the mouth of Nathan.
1 Chronicles 17:4
Thou shalt not build. The Hebrew marks the personal pronoun here as emphatic,
"Not thou shalt build," i.e. but some one else. In the parallel this prohibition is
conveyed by that interrogative particle which expects the answer No, and may be
thus translated: "Is it thou shalt build for me," etc.?
22

23. 5 I have not dwelt in a house from the day I
brought Israel up out of Egypt to this day. I have
moved from one tent site to another, from one
dwelling place to another.
CLARKE, "But have gone from tent to tent - “I have transferred my tabernacle
from Gilgal to Nob, from Nob to Shiloh, and from Shiloh to Gibeon.” - Targum and
Jarchi.
HENRY, "III. How little God affects external pomp and splendour in his service. His
ark was content with a tabernacle (1Ch_17:5) and he never so much as mentioned the
building of a house for it; no, not when he had fixed his people in great and goodly cities
which they builded not, Deu_6:10. He commanded the judges to feed his people, but
never bade them build him a house, 1Ch_17:6. We may well be content awhile with mean
accommodations; God's ark was so.
JAMISON, "I ... have gone from tent to tent, and from one tabernacle to
another — The literal rendering is, “I was walking in a tent and in a dwelling.” The
evident intention (as we may see from 1Ch_17:6) was to lay stress upon the fact that God
was a Mithhatlek (a travelling God) and went from one place to another with His tent and
His entire dwelling (the dwelling included not merely the tent, but the fore-courts with
the altar of burnt offerings, etc.) [Bertheau].
ELLICOTT, " (5) Since the day that I brought up Israel (“out of Egypt,” Samuel)
unto this day.—The construction, as compared with Samuel, is simplified, and the
sentence abbreviated.
But have gone . . .—Literally, and I became from tent to tent, and from dwelling.
This is clearly too brief for sense; some words must have fallen out, or the reading of
23

24. Samuel may be original here. The phrase “and I became” almost demands a
participle, and the one actually read in Samuel may be here disguised under the
expression translated “from tent.” A slight further change (in the prepositions) will
give the sense: “And I continued walking in a tent and in a dwelling.” Perhaps,
however, the original text was, “and I walked from tent to tent, and from dwelling
to dwelling;” alluding to the various sanctuaries anciently recognised, such as Bethel
(Judges 20:18; Judges 20:26), Mizpeh (Judges 11:11; 1 Samuel 10:17), and Shiloh.
The word “dwelling” (mishkân) is a more general term than tent. It includes the
sacred tent and its surrounding court.
PULPIT. "1 Chronicles 17:5
This verse contains the three terms—house, tent, tabernacle (see notes on 1
Chronicles 16:1). Gesenius observes that when the Hebrew of the last two words is
used distinctively, the tent describes the outer coverings of the twelve curtains; and
the tabernacle, the ten inner curtains and framework as well, in other words, the
whole equipment of the well-known tabernacle. As compared with the version we
have here, the parallel place speaks an almost pathetic condescension, "I was a
shifting traveller in tent and tabernacle." God meant to remind David how surely
and faithfully he had shared the pilgrim lot and unsettledness of his people. What
most holy the tabernacle contained was herein a type of the bodily tabernacle of
Jesus Christ in later times.
6 Wherever I have moved with all the Israelites,
did I ever say to any of their leaders[a] whom I
commanded to shepherd my people, “Why have
you not built me a house of cedar?”’
24

25. JAMISON, "spake I a word to any of the judges — In 2Sa_7:7 it is “any of the
tribes” of Israel. Both are included. But the judges “who were commanded to feed the
people,” form the more suitable antithesis to David.
Why have ye not built me an house of cedars? — that is, a solid and magnificent
temple.
ELLICOTT, " (6) Wheresoever.—As long as . . . Literally, In all that . . .
With (in) all Israel.—Samuel, “in (among) all the sons of Israel.” (Comp. Leviticus
26:11-12; Deuteronomy 23:15.)
The judges of Israel.—Samuel has “tribes.” The term “judges” would be more
intelligible in later times, and has probably been substituted for the more difficult
original expression. The following clause seems to refer to individual rulers, but is
not really incompatible with a reference to the ascendency or hegemony of different
tribes at different epochs of Israelite history. (Comp. Genesis 49:10; 1 Chronicles
28:4; Psalms 78:67-68.) The word “tribe” (shçbet) might only denote clan, or house,
as in Judges 20:12 (Heb.).
To feed.—Shepherd, or tend—i.e., to govern. (Comp. Psalms 78:71.)
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 17:6
The judges of Israel. The substitution of the Hebrew character beth for pe, in the
word "judges," would make it "tribes," and bring it into harmony with the parallel
place. But the succeeding clause, Whom I commanded to feed my people, would
rather suggest that the parallel place, which adds the same clause, should be
brought into harmony with this (see again 1 Chronicles 17:10 of this chapter). The
general meaning and the gracious spirit underlying it is evident enough. God had
never made a suggestion to tribe, or leader of tribe, nor to judge, who had been
temporarily raised up to lead, and so to feed, all his people Israel, to build him an
house. He had shared their lot, and had shared it unmurmuringly. He also "had not
opened his mouth" (1 Kings 8:12-16; 1 Chronicles 28:3, 1 Chronicles 28:4; Psalms
78:67-71). Note also the expression, "I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel" (1
Kings 8:16). It is to be remarked that we learn from 1 Chronicles 22:8 and 1
Chronicles 28:3 the fuller causes why David was not to be permitted to be the
builder of the house. It is not apparent why those causes are not recited here. The
same remark applies to the parallel place.
25

26. 7 “Now then, tell my servant David, ‘This is what
the Lord Almighty says: I took you from the
pasture, from tending the flock, and appointed
you ruler over my people Israel.
JAMISON, "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote —
a round tower of rude construction, high walled, but open at the top, in which sheep are
often enclosed at night to protect them from wild beasts. The meaning is, I elevated you
to the throne from a humble condition solely by an act of divine grace, and not from any
antecedent merits of your own (see on 1Sa_16:11), and I enabled you to acquire renown,
equal or superior to any other monarch. Your reign will ever be afterwards regarded as
the best and brightest era in the history of Israel, for it will secure to the nation a settled
inheritance of prosperity and peace, without any of the oppressions or disorders that
afflicted them in early times.
ELLICOTT, " (7) I took thee from the sheepcote . . .—Comp. Psalms 78:70-72. The
pronoun is emphatic: “I it was who took thee from the pasture.”
From following.—Heb., from behind. Samuel has the older form of this preposition.
That thou shouldest be.—That thou mightest become.
Ruler.—Nâgîd (1 Chronicles 9:11; 1 Chronicles 9:20). (Comp. 1 Chronicles 11:2.)
GUZIK, "3. (1 Chronicles 17:7-10) God promises to build David a house.
Now therefore, thus shall you say to My servant David, “Thus says the LORD of
hosts: ‘I took you from the sheepfold, from following the sheep, to be ruler over My
26

27. people Israel. And I have been with you wherever you have gone, and have cut off
all your enemies from before you, and have made you a name like the name of the
great men who are on the earth. Moreover I will appoint a place for My people
Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own and move no
more; nor shall the sons of wickedness oppress them anymore, as previously, since
the time that I commanded judges to be over My people Israel. Also I will subdue all
your enemies. Furthermore I tell you that the LORD will build you a house.’”
a. I took you from the sheepfold, from following the sheep, to be ruler over My
people: God was about to make David an amazing promise - one that might be hard
for David to believe. Therefore, He first reminded David of His past work in His life.
The same God who was with David wherever he had gone would also fulfill this
promise.
b. I will appoint a place for My people Israel: God promised David that under his
reign, God would establish a permanent, secure, Israel. God promised this first
because He knew that David, being a godly shepherd, was first concerned about the
welfare of his people.
c. Furthermore I tell you that the LORD will build you a house: God promises
David that he will build him a house in the sense of establishing a dynasty for the
house of David. This was an enduring legacy for David long after his death.
i. David wanted to build God a temple. God said, “Thank you David, but no thanks.
Let me build you a house instead.” This was a greater promise than David’s offer to
God, because David’s house would last longer and be more glorious than the temple
David wanted to build.
ii. “The oracle’s significance depends on the various meanings of the Hebrew bayit,
‘house’, which can mean ‘dynasty’, ‘temple’, and even ‘household’ (1 Chronicles
16:43).” (Selman)
27

28. iii. Why did God say, “No” to David’s offer? Because David was a man of war, and
God wanted a man of peace to build His temple. 1 Chronicles 22:8-10 explains this:
But the word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘You have shed much blood and
have made great wars; you shall not build a house for My name, because you have
shed much blood on the earth in My sight . . . a son shall be born to you, who shall
be a man of rest . . . He shall be build a house for My name.
iv. The explanation to David recorded in 1 Chronicles 22:8 came years afterwards.
“It would have wounded David needlessly to have been told this at the time . . .
Meanwhile David possessed his soul in patience, and said to himself, ‘God has a
reason; I cannot understand it, but it is well.’” (Meyer)
v. “Our relationship with God is always based upon what He does for us, never
upon what we do for Him. If He wills that we build a Temple, it is our to do it, but
the doing of it creates no merit by which we may claim anything from Him.”
(Morgan)
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 17:7
I took thee. (So 1 Samuel 16:11, 1 Samuel 16:12; 2 Samuel 7:8; Psalms 78:1-72 :80.)
The sheepcote. The Hebrew ‫ֶה‬‫ז‬ָ‫נ‬ strictly signifies a resting or place of resting. Hence
the habitation of men or of animals, and in particular the pasture in which flocks lie
down and rest (Psalms 23:2, plural construction; Job 5:24; Hosea 9:13; Jeremiah
23:3; Jeremiah 49:20). The sheepcote was sometimes a tower, with roughly built
high wall, exposed to the sky at the top, used for protection from wild beasts at
night; sometimes the sheepfold was a larger low building of different shape, to
which a fenced courtyard was adjacent, where the peril of cold or of wild beast was
less imminent. The word of our present passage, however, cannot be compared with
these places; comp. rather Exodus 15:13; 2 Samuel 15:25; Isaiah 33:20; Isaiah
65:10; Hosea 9:13, as above.
BI 7-11, "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote.
God in personal life
28

29. I. God elevates men from the lowest to the highest station in life.
II. God helps men to do the work for which they are elevated.
1. By His constant presence.
2. By continual victories.
III. God honours men for faithful performance of the work to which they are elevated.
1. Honoured in reputed life.
2. Honoured in peaceful death. (James Wolfendale.)
From the sheepfold to the throne
David is thus presented to our thought as the type of youths rising from lowly to lofty
positions, and rising by virtue of conditions and qualities essentially the same. What are
these conditions and qualities? To say that God chose David and put this high honour on
him does not at all answer the question. Why did the Divine choice fall on him? God’s
choice of agents and bestowment of honours are not made capriciously, without ground
of personal merit in the subject. Our task is to study the human elements, to estimate the
subjective factors in this problem of growth and greatness. David was the man after
“God’s own heart,” not absolutely, but because he was the best of his nation and age for
the work he was called to do.
I. There was in David a substantial ground of personal worth, of susceptibilities and
tendencies upon which to build a life of greatness.
II. His life was swayed by a great purpose.
III. He had great courage.
1. Physical.
2. Moral.
IV. He exhibited, through all these years of preparation and development, great fidelity
to trusts imposed.
V. He had great faith in God.
VI. All his estimable qualities were fed and fired by habitual and genuine religious
devotion. (C. H. Payne, D. D.)
The remembrance of our early history should be a stimulus to gratitude
While many Americans are looking up their remote ancestors to provide themselves with
a crest and coat of arms, a few follow the example of early English families and adopt
some emblem which suggests a noteworthy incident in their own history. One
millionaire, not ashamed of the source of his wealth, has a derrick engraved on his seal.
Another family enriched by the manufacture of furniture has adopted a tree as a crest.
The most interesting of these modern symbols, perhaps, is found engraved on the plate
and books of a family of Pennsylvania Friends, who would probably be unwilling to call
it a crest. It is a cat carrying a rabbit in its mouth. There is a legend to explain it. The first
29

30. of a family to emigrate to this country was the father of eleven children. He sailed in the
same year as Penn, and died on the voyage, leaving his wife to land alone with her
helpless flock. She had a grant of land, but no money. They took refuge, as did many of
the first emigrants to America, in a cave dug out of the side of a hill. Winter came on.
Provisions failed. The widow saw her children grow pale and weak for want of food. The
day arrived at last when there was not a grain of meal in the barrel. She fell on her knees
and prayed in an agony of supplication. When she arose she smiled, her children said
afterwards, as if she had seen an angel coming with bread. Going out she saw no angel,
but the cat with a freshly killed rabbit in its mouth. The rabbit made a good meal, of
which pussy, we may be sure, had a full share. The family, which has been a prosperous
and influential one, preserves this symbol of their early history to commemorate their
gratitude to God. (Daily Paper.)
8 I have been with you wherever you have gone,
and I have cut off all your enemies from before
you. Now I will make your name like the names of
the greatest men on earth.
ELLICOTT, " (8) Whithersoever thou hast walked.—Same phrase as in 1
Chronicles 17:6, “wheresoever,” i.e., throughout thy whole career.
And have cut off all thine enemies.—This appears to refer not merely to the death of
Saul and the overthrow of his house, but also to the successful conclusion of some of
the wars recorded in the following chapters. (Comp. also 1 Chronicles 14:8-17.)
And have made thee.—Rather, and I will make thee.
The great men.—The sovereigns of Egypt and Babylon, of Tyre, and the Hittite
states.
30

31. 9 And I will provide a place for my people Israel
and will plant them so that they can have a home
of their own and no longer be disturbed. Wicked
people will not oppress them anymore, as they did
at the beginning
CLARKE, "Neither shall the children of wickedness - They shall no more be
brought into servitude as they were in the time they sojourned in Egypt. This is what is
here referred to.
JAMISON, "at the beginning, and since the time that I commanded
judges — that is, including the whole period from Joshua to Saul.
I tell thee that the Lord will build thee an house — This was the language of
Nathan himself, who was specially directed to assure David, not only of personal
blessing and prosperity, but of a continuous line of royal descendants.
ELLICOTT, " (9) I will ordain a place for my people Israel, and will plant them.—
Comp. Exodus 15:17; Psalms 44:2-3. Although Israel had effected a settlement in
Canaan, the history seems to show that down to the times of David the tribal
boundaries were subject to great fluctuation, and the inroads of surrounding
peoples made their tenure very uncertain.
Them . . . they . . . their.—Heb., him . . . he . . . his; Israel, the subject, being
singular.
In their place.—In his own stead, or fixed habitation. (Comp. homestead,
farmstead.)
Shall be moved.—Shall be troubled, or disturbed.
31

32. Children of wickedness.—Sons of wickedness, i.e., wicked men; like “sons of Belial”
(worthlessness).
Waste them.—An Aramaic usage of the verb. Samuel, “afflict them,” which seems
original. (Comp. Genesis 15:13.)
As at the beginning.—Referring to the bondage in Egypt.
PULPIT, "All the verbs of this verse are in the same tense as those of the foregoing
verse, which are correctly translated. For an expression similar to the last clause of
the verse, Neither shall the children of wickedness waste them any more, may be
found in Psalms 89:22.
10 and have done ever since the time I appointed
leaders over my people Israel. I will also subdue
all your enemies.
“‘I declare to you that the Lord will build a house
for you:
K&D, "In 1Ch_17:10, ‫ים‬ ִ‫ָמ‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫,וּל‬ like ‫ם‬ ‫יּ‬ ַ‫ן־ה‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫וּל‬ (2Sa_7:11), is to be connected with the
preceding ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ ‫אשׁ‬ ִ‫ר‬ ָ‫בּ‬ in this sense: “As in the beginning (i.e., during the sojourn in
Egypt), and onward from the days when I appointed judges,” i.e., during the time of the
judges. ‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫ל‬ is only a more emphatic expression for ‫ן‬ ִ‫,מ‬ to mark off the time from the
beginning as it were (cf. Ew. §218, b), and is wrongly translated by Berth. “until the
days.” In the same verse, ‫י‬ ִ‫תּ‬ ְ‫ַע‬‫נ‬ ְ‫כ‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫,ו‬ “I bow, humble all thine enemies,” substantially the
32

33. same as the ‫י‬ ִ‫ת‬ֹ‫ח‬‫י‬ִ‫נ‬ֲ‫ַה‬‫ו‬, “I give thee peace from all thine enemies” (Sam.); and the suffix in
‫י‬ ֶ‫ב‬ְ‫י‬ ‫א‬ is not to be altered, as Berth. proposes, into that of the third person ‫יו‬ ָ‫ב‬ְ‫י‬ ‫,א‬ either
in the Chronicle or in Samuel, for it is quite correct; the divine promise returning at the
conclusion to David direct, as in the beginning, 1Ch_17:7 and 1Ch_17:8, while that which
is said of the people of Israel in 1Ch_17:9 and 1Ch_17:10 is only an extension of the
words, “I will destroy all thine enemies before thee” (1Ch_17:8).
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 17:10. Furthermore I tell thee, &c. — Must he think that
his purpose was in vain, and that he should lose the reward of it? No: it being God’s
act that prevented the execution of it, he shall be as fully recompensed as if it had
been done.
ELLICOTT, " (10) And since the time that I commanded judges.—Heb., from days
that . . . Samuel, more definitely, “from the day that I appointed judges ever my
people.” This whole clause should not have been separated from 1 Chronicles 17:9,
which it properly concludes. The allusion is to the oppressions undergone in the
period of the judges, and the troubles of the former reign.
Moreover (and) I will subdue all thine enemies.—A continuation of the promises at
the beginning of 1 Chronicles 17:9. “I will subdue the foes of the king, as I subdued
the foes of the shepherd and the outlaw.” (Comp. 1 Chronicles 17:8.) Instead of this,
Samuel has, “And I will give thee rest from all thy enemies.”
Furthermore I tell thee . . .—Literally, And I have told thee, and a house will
Jehovah build thee;” that is, I have foretold it. (Comp. Isaiah 40:21; Isaiah 45:21.)
That which follows is a sort of ironical inversion of David’s wish to build a house for
the Lord. The term “house” is figurative (offspring), as in Psalms 127:1. (Comp.
Genesis 30:3.) The reading of Samuel is, “And Jehovah hath [now] told thee [by my
mouth] that a house will Jehovah make for thee.” This looks original, with its rare
construction of the perfect, which the chronicler has altered; its repetition of the
most holy Name; and its less exact “make,” which Chronicles improves into “build,”
with an eye to 1 Chronicles 17:4; 1 Chronicles 17:6, as well as to the play on the
word (bânâh, build; bânîm, sons).
PULPIT, "This verse should read on continuously with the preceding, as far as to
the word "enemies." The time here denoted will stretch from the people's
occupation of the laud to the death of Saul, as the expression, "at the beginning," in
33

34. 1 Chronicles 17:9, will point to the experience of Egyptian oppression. Will build
thee an house; i.e. will guarantee thee an unfailing line of descendants.
11 When your days are over and you go to be with
your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to
succeed you, one of your own sons, and I will
establish his kingdom.
JAMISON, "In 1Ch_17:10, ‫ים‬ ִ‫ָמ‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫,וּל‬ like ‫ם‬ ‫יּ‬ ַ‫ן־ה‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫וּל‬ (2Sa_7:11), is to be connected
with the preceding ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ ‫אשׁ‬ ִ‫ר‬ ָ‫בּ‬ in this sense: “As in the beginning (i.e., during the
sojourn in Egypt), and onward from the days when I appointed judges,” i.e., during the
time of the judges. ‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫ל‬ is only a more emphatic expression for ‫ן‬ ִ‫,מ‬ to mark off the time
from the beginning as it were (cf. Ew. §218, b), and is wrongly translated by Berth. “until
the days.” In the same verse, ‫י‬ ִ‫תּ‬ ְ‫ַע‬‫נ‬ ְ‫כ‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫,ו‬ “I bow, humble all thine enemies,” substantially
the same as the ‫י‬ ִ‫ת‬ֹ‫ח‬‫י‬ִ‫נ‬ֲ‫ַה‬‫ו‬, “I give thee peace from all thine enemies” (Sam.); and the suffix
in ‫י‬ ֶ‫ב‬ְ‫י‬ ‫א‬ is not to be altered, as Berth. proposes, into that of the third person ‫יו‬ ָ‫ב‬ְ‫י‬ ‫,א‬
either in the Chronicle or in Samuel, for it is quite correct; the divine promise returning
at the conclusion to David direct, as in the beginning, 1Ch_17:7 and 1Ch_17:8, while that
which is said of the people of Israel in 1Ch_17:9 and 1Ch_17:10 is only an extension of
the words, “I will destroy all thine enemies before thee” (1Ch_17:8).
K&D 11-16, "In 1Ch_17:11, ‫י‬ ֶ‫ת‬ֹ‫ב‬ֲ‫א‬‫ם־‬ ִ‫ע‬ ‫ת‬ ֶ‫כ‬ ֶ‫ל‬ָ‫,ל‬ “to go with thy fathers,” used of going
the way of death, is similar to “to go the way of all the world” (1Ki_2:2), and is more
primitive than the more usual ‫ת‬ ‫ב‬ ָ‫א‬ ‫ם‬ ִ‫ע‬ ‫ב‬ַ‫כ‬ָ‫שׁ‬ (2Sa_7:12). ‫ֶי‬‫נ‬ ָ‫בּ‬ ִ‫מ‬ ‫ֶה‬‫י‬ ְ‫ה‬ִ‫י‬ ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֲשׁ‬‫ע‬, too, is neither
to be altered to suit ‫י‬ֶ‫ע‬ ֵ‫מּ‬ ִ‫מ‬ ‫א‬ֵ‫ֵצ‬‫י‬ ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֲשׁ‬‫א‬ of Samuel; nor can we consider it, with Berth., an
alteration made by the author of the Chronicle to get rid of the difficulty, that here the
birth of Solomon is only promised, while Nathan's speech was made at a time when
David had rest from all his enemies round about (2Sa_8:1), i.e., as is usually supposed,
34

35. in the latest years of his life, and consequently after Solomon's birth. For the difficulty
had already been got rid of by the omission of those words in 1Ch_17:1; and the word, “I
have cut off all thine enemies from before thee” (1Ch_17:8), does not necessarily involve
the destruction of all the enemies who ever rose against David, but refers, as the
connection shows, only to the enemies who up till that time had attacked him. Had the
author of the Chronicle only wished to get rid of this supposed difficulty, he would
simply have omitted the clause, since “they seed” included the sons of David, and needed
no explanation if nothing further was meant than that one of his sons would ascend the
throne after him. And moreover, the thought, “thy seed, which shall be among thy sons,”
which Bertheau finds in the words, would be expressed in Hebrew by ‫ֶי‬‫נ‬ ָ‫בּ‬ ִ‫מ‬ ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֲשׁ‬‫א‬, while
‫ֶי‬‫נ‬ ָ‫בּ‬ ִ‫מ‬ ‫ֶה‬‫י‬ ְ‫ה‬ִ‫י‬ ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֲשׁ‬‫א‬ signifies, “who will come out of (from) thy sons;” for ‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬ ‫ָה‬‫י‬ ָ‫ה‬ does not
denote to be of one, i.e., to belong to him, but to arise, be born, or go forth, from one: cf.
Ben. 1Ch_17:16; Ecc_3:20. According to this, the linguistically correct translation, the
words cannot be referred to Solomon at all, because Solomon was not a descendant of
David's sons, but of David himself.
(Note: As old Lavater has correctly remarked: Si tantum de Salomone hic locus
accipiendus esset, non dixisset: semen quod erit de filiis tuis, sed quod erit de te.)
The author of the Chronicle has interpreted ‫י‬ ֶ‫ֲר‬‫ח‬ ַ‫א‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ְ‫ַר‬‫ז‬‫ת־‬ ֶ‫א‬ theologically, or rather
set forth the Messianic contents of this conception more clearly than it was expressed in
‫י‬ֶ‫ע‬ ֵ‫מּ‬ ִ‫מ‬ ‫א‬ֵ‫ֵצ‬‫י‬ ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֲשׁ‬‫א‬. The seed after David, which will arise from his sons, is the Messiah,
whom the prophets announced as the Son of David, whose throne God will establish for
ever (1Ch_17:12). This Messianic interpretation of David's ‫ע‬ ַ‫ֶר‬‫ז‬ explains the divergence of
the chronicler's text in 1Ch_17:13 and 1Ch_17:14 from 2Sa_7:14-16. For instance, the
omission of the words after ‫ן‬ ֵ‫בּ‬ in 2Sa_7:13, “If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him
with the rod of men” (2Sa_7:14), is the result of the Messianic interpretation of ֲ‫ע‬ ְ‫ַר‬‫ז‬,
since the reference to the chastisement would of course be important for the earthly sons
of David and the kings of Judah, but could not well find place in the case of the Messiah.
The only thing said of this son of David is, that God will not withdraw His grace from
him.
The case is exactly similar, with the difference between 2Sa_7:14 and 2Sa_7:16.
Instead of the words, “And thy house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever
before thee, thy throne shall be established for ever” (Sam.), the promise runs thus in
the Chronicle: “And I will settle (‫יד‬ ִ‫ֱמ‬‫ע‬ ֶ‫,ה‬ cause to stand, maintain, 1Ki_15:4; 2Ch_9:8)
him (the seed arising from thy sons) in my house and in my kingdom for ever, and his
throne shall be established for evermore.” While these concluding words of the promise
are, in the narrative in Samuel, spoken to David, promising to him the eternal
establishment of his house, his kingdom, and his throne, in the Chronicle they are
referred to the seed of David, i.e., the Messiah, and promise to Him His establishment
for ever in the house and kingdom of God, and the duration of His throne for ever. That
‫י‬ ִ‫ית‬ ֵ‫בּ‬ here does not signify the congregation of the Lord, the people of Israel, as Berth.
thinks it must be translated, is clear as the sun; for ‫ת‬ִ‫י‬ ַ‫,בּ‬ immediately preceding, denotes
the temple of Jahve, and ‫י‬ ִ‫ית‬ ֵ‫בּ‬ manifestly refers back to ‫י‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫ת‬ִ‫י‬ ַ‫בּ‬ (1Ch_17:12), while such a
designation of the congregation of Israel or of the people as “house of Jahve” is unheard
of in the Old Testament. The house of Jahve stands in the same relation to the kingdom
of Jahve as a king's palace to his kingdom. The house which David's seed will build to the
35

36. Lord is the house of the Lord in his kingdom: in this house and kingdom the Lord will
establish Him for ever; His kingdom shall never cease; His rule shall never be
extinguished; and He himself, consequently, shall live for ever. It scarcely need be said
that such things can be spoken only of the Messiah. The words are therefore merely a
further development of the saying, “I will be to him a Father, and I will not take my
mercy away from him, and will establish his kingdom for ever,” and tell us clearly and
definitely what is implicitly contained in the promise, that David's house, kingdom, and
throne will endure for ever (Sam.), viz., that the house and kingdom of David will be
established for ever only under the Messiah. That this interpretation is correct is proved
by the fact that the divergences of the text of the chronicler from the parallel narrative
cannot otherwise be explained; Thenius and Berth. not having made even an attempt to
show how ‫י‬ ִ‫ית‬ ֵ‫בּ‬ ְ‫בּ‬ ‫יהוּ‬ ִ‫תּ‬ ְ‫ד‬ ַ‫ֲמ‬‫ע‬ ַ‫ה‬ ְ‫ו‬ could have arisen out of ְ‫ית‬ ֵ‫בּ‬ ‫ן‬ ָ‫ֱמ‬‫א‬ֶ‫נ‬ ְ‫.ו‬ The other differences
between the texts in the verses in question, ‫י‬ ִ‫ל‬ (Chron.) for ‫י‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫,ל‬ ‫א‬ ְ‫ס‬ ִ‫ת־כּ‬ ֶ‫א‬ for ‫תּ‬ ְ‫כ‬ַ‫ל‬ ְ‫מ‬ ַ‫מ‬
‫א‬ ֵ‫סּ‬ ִ‫כּ‬ ‫ת‬ ֵ‫א‬ (1Ch_17:12, cf. 2Sa_7:13), and ‫ֶי‬‫נ‬ָ‫פ‬ ְ‫ל‬ ‫ָה‬‫י‬ ָ‫ה‬ ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֲשׁ‬‫א‬ ֵ‫מ‬ instead of ‫וגו‬ ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֲשׁ‬‫א‬ ‫אוּל‬ָ‫שׁ‬ ‫ם‬ ִ‫ע‬ ֵ‫מ‬
(1Ch_17:13, cf. 2Sa_7:15), are only variations in expression which do not affect the
sense. With reference to the last of them, indeed, Berth. has declared against Thenius,
that the chronicler's text is thoroughly natural, and bears marks of being more authentic
than that of 2 Sam 7.
In the prayer of thanksgiving contained in 1Ch_17:16 to 27 we meet with the following
divergences from the parallel text, which are of importance for their effect on the sense.
ELLICOTT, " (11) Omit the mark indicating the beginning of a paragraph (¶).
And it shall come to pass.—In accordance with the promise, “The Lord will build
thee an house” (1 Chronicles 17:10). The phrase is wanting in Samuel, and should
probably be supplied, with LXX.
Be expired.—Are fulfilled (perfect; Samuel has imperfect tense).
That thou must go to be with thy fathers.—Literally, to go with thy fathers—an
unusual expression, for which Samuel has the ordinary, “and thou lie down with thy
fathers.” (Comp. 1 Kings 2:2 : “Go the way of all the earth.”)
Which shall be (shall arise or come, Genesis 17:16) of thy sons.—Samuel has the
more original, “which shall go forth from thy bowels.” The chronicler has
paraphrased this, to suit the taste of a later age.
His kingdom.—Heb., malkûthô—a later word than the synonym in Samuel
(mamlakhtô).
GUZIK 11-15, "4. (1 Chronicles 17:11-15) God promises to build David a house
36

37. instead.
“And it shall be, when your days are fulfilled, when you must go to be with your
fathers, that I will set up your seed after you, who will be of your sons; and I will
establish his kingdom. He shall build Me a house, and I will establish his throne
forever. I will be his Father, and he shall be My son; and I will not take My mercy
away from him, as I took it from him who was before you. And I will establish him
in My house and in My kingdom forever; and his throne shall be established
forever.” According to all these words and according to all this vision, so Nathan
spoke to David.
a. I will set up your seed after you: In this, God specifically promised a hereditary
monarchy for the house of David. It was important for God to repeat this promise
specifically because there had never yet been a king succeeded by his son in Israel.
i. “The ambiguity inherent in the Hebrew word zera, like its English equivalents
‘seed’ (av) or offspring (niv, nrsv, rsv), means it can apply both to the dynasty as a
whole and to individual members of it (cf. the use of the same word in Genesis 3:15;
Gen_12:7; Gen_17:7; Gen_17:16).” (Selman)
ii. “While God did not here employ the term covenant, what he revealed was one;
and it is so designated subsequently (2 Samuel 23:5; Psalms 89:3; Psa_89:34; Psalms
132:11-12).” (Payne)
b. He shall build Me a house: Though David would not build a temple for God,
David’s descendent would.
i. “Like circumcision in the case of the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17), building
the temple is the act of human obedience by which God’s covenant promise is
accepted and confirmed.” (Selman)
37

38. c. I will establish his throne forever: The family of David did rule over Israel for
more than four centuries, but was eventually removed because of evil added upon
evil. Yet out of the “stump” of Jesse, God raised up a new branch that would reign
for ever and ever (Isaiah 11:1-2).
d. I will be his Father, and he shall be My son: This descendent of David would
enjoy a special relationship with God.
e. His throne shall be established forever: God promised David that the reign of his
dynasty will last forever.
i. Each of these great promises was partially fulfilled in Solomon, David’s son and
successor to his throne.
· Solomon ruled on David’s throne.
· God’s mercies never departed from Solomon, though he sinned.
· Solomon built God a magnificent house.
ii. Yet God’s promise to David was all the more important because of when the
Chronicler wrote about it - after the exile, when there was no independent kingdom
of Israel and the throne of David seemed vacant. The Chronicler had the faith to see
that this promise was not broken even when it plainly seemed to be. He knew that
Messiah would indeed come from the seemingly dead line of David and reign
forever. He had faith in what the prophets foretold as a greater fulfillment of these
promises:
· Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, that I will raise to David a Branch of
38

39. righteousness; a King shall reign and prosper, and execute righteousness in the
earth. . . . Now this is His name by which He will be called: THE LORD OUR
RIGHTEOUSNESS (Jeremiah 23:5-6)
· For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be
upon His shoulder. . . Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order it
and establish it . . . from that time forward, even forever. (Isaiah 9:6-7)
· And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call
His name JESUS. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the
Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the
house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end. (Luke 1:31-33)
iii. God did not want the earthly house built until the spiritual house was promised
and established. The more important house had to be in place first, and that house
was the dynasty that would result in the throne of God’s Messiah.
iv. As for David, God’s blessing was upon him in a unique way. The New Testament
identifies Jesus with David more than with any other human ancestor.
· Hosanna to the Son of David! (Matthew 21:9)
· The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. (Luke 1:32)
· I am the Root and Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star. (Revelation
22:16)
v. It also seems that David will be God’s chosen prince over a restored Israel in the
millennial earth. Hosea 3:5 says, Afterward, the children of Israel shall return, seek
39

40. the Lord their God and David their king, and fear the Lord and His goodness in the
latter days. Other passages which set forth this idea are Ezekiel 37:24-25, Ezekiel
34:23-24, and Jeremiah 30:9.
PULPIT, "The promise is now, not to "David and his seed," but to David
personally. The verse contains, no doubt, the original of the Apostle Peter's
quotation (Acts 2:29, Acts 2:30; see also Acts 13:34; Luke 1:32, Luke 1:33). The last
clause of this verse has Solomon, for the object of its pronoun "his."
12 He is the one who will build a house for me,
and I will establish his throne forever.
CLARKE, "I will establish his throne for ever - David was a type of Christ; and
concerning him the prophecy is literally true. See Isa_9:7, where there is evidently the
same reference.
ELLICOTT, " (12) He.—The emphatic word.
Build me.—Samuel, “for my name.” (See 1 Kings 8:29; 1 Kings 9:3.)
His throne.—Samuel, “throne of his kingdom”—a characteristic abridgment.
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 17:12-14
The reference of these promises was also to Solomon, and to him they were
40

41. faithfully fulfilled. They were early perceived to be prophecies also, and of the
highest significance and application (Psalms 89:26-37; Isaiah 9:7; Isaiah 55:3, Isaiah
55:4; Jeremiah 23:5, Jeremiah 23:6; Jeremiah 33:17-21; Zechariah 6:12, Zechariah
6:13; Hebrews 1:5; Hebrews 3:6). The alternative of the "son who commits
iniquity" (2 Samuel 7:14) is omitted from the middle of our thirteenth verse. The
latter half of 1 Chronicles 17:13 manifestly purports to say, "I will not take my
mercy away from Solomon, as I did take it away from Saul." The close of our
fourteenth verse is in the parallel place (2 Samuel 7:16) distinctly referred to David,
with the use of the second person possessive pronoun.
13 I will be his father, and he will be my son. I will
never take my love away from him, as I took it
away from your predecessor.
BARNES, "My son - The minatory clause which occurs after this in Samuel is here
omitted, because the writer is not about to record the sins of Solomon, or the sufferings 1
Kings 11:9-40 which he thereby brought upon himself.
CLARKE, "I will not take my mercy away from him - I will not cut off his
family from the throne, as I did that of his predecessor Saul.
JAMISON, "I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him
that was before thee — My procedure in dealing with him will be different from My
disposal of Saul. Should his misconduct call for personal chastisement, I shall spare his
family. If I see it necessary to withdraw My favor and help for a time, it will be a
corrective discipline only to reform and restore, not to destroy. (On this passage some
have founded an argument for Solomon’s repentance and return to God).
41

42. ELLICOTT, " (13) I will be his father . . .—Heb., I (on my part) will become a
father unto him, and he (on his part) shall become a son to me. (Comp. Psalms 2:7.)
After these words, Samuel adds: “If he commit iniquity I will chasten him with the
rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men.” The omission is probably
not a mere abridgment. The reference in this prophecy looks beyond Solomon to
Him of whom the greatest princes of the house of David were but imperfect types.
The warning here omitted was amply fulfilled in the history of Solomon and his
successors but it could not apply to the true Anointed of Jehovah, and is therefore
suppressed as a transitory element in the prophecy.
And I will not take my mercy away.—Samuel, “and my mercy shall not depart”—
the same verb in a different form. But the LXX., Syriac, and Vulgate there agree
with Chronicles.
As I took it (away) from him that was before thee.—Samuel, “as I took it away from
Said whom I took away from before thee; “repeating the same verb thrice. Our text
is probably more correct. So Vulg. and LXX. virtually; but Syriac, “My mercies
shall not depart from him, as I made [them] depart from Saul who was before thee.”
14 I will set him over my house and my kingdom
forever; his throne will be established forever.’”
JAMISON, "I will settle him in my house — over My people Israel.
and in my kingdom for ever — God here asserts His right of supreme sovereignty
in Israel. David and Solomon, with their successors, were only the vicegerents whom He
nominated, or, in His providence, permitted.
his throne shall be established for evermore — The posterity of David inherited
the throne in a long succession - but not always. In such a connection as this, the phrase
“for evermore” is employed in a restricted sense (see on Lam_3:31). We naturally expect
42

43. the prophet to revert to David before concluding, after having spoken (1Ch_17:12) of the
building of Solomon’s temple. The promise that his house should be blessed was
intended as a compensation for the disappointment of his wish to build the temple, and
hence this assurance is appropriately repeated at the conclusion of the prophet’s address
[Bertheau].
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 17:14. I will settle him in my house — In my dwelling-
place, 1st, In Jerusalem, the place where God had put his name for ever; or, 2d, In
the temple, which is more properly and constantly called God’s house; and so this
expression agrees but very imperfectly with Solomon or his successors; who might,
indeed, be said to be settled in God’s house, because they dwelt near it, and, in some
sort, were set over it; and because they were to take care that the priests and others
should perform their offices, and God’s service in it; but, strictly and properly, it
agrees only to Christ, to whom alone that promise also of an everlasting
establishment in this kingdom belongs, as was observed on 2 Samuel 7:16. And this
expression seems to be most emphatically added to signify that the person in whom
all those promises should be fully and perfectly accomplished, namely, the Messiah,
should be settled not only in the king’s throne, as others of David’s successors were,
but also in God’s house or temple; and consequently that he should be a priest as
well as a king; which mystery was clearly revealed to David, Psalms 110:1-2; Psalms
110:4, and may be intimated, though obscurely, in these words. And in my
kingdom — Either, 1st, In the kingdom of Israel, which God calls his kingdom,
because he was, in a special manner, the king and governor of it, having raised them
up and formed them into a kingdom, and given them that protection and assistance
which kings owe to their kingdoms; and because he expected and required from
them what kings do from their people, that they should be wholly governed by his
laws, and devoted to his service. Or, 2d, In God’s kingdom, in a more large and
general sense. And this, as well as the former phrase, may seem singularly to belong
to the Messiah, who was not only to be the king of Israel, but also of all nations, as
was foretold even in the Old Testament, in sundry passages; and, thus understood,
this may be an intimation of that great mystery, which is more fully revealed in the
New Testament, namely, that Christ is the head, king, or governor of all God’s
church, consisting of Jews and Gentiles, and of all nations, and indeed of all
creatures, the angels not excepted; all which is God’s kingdom, and by him given to
his Son, our blessed Lord Jesus Christ.
COKE, "1 Chronicles 17:14. Settle him in mine house, &c.— In 2 Samuel 7:16. In
43

44. thine house, and in thy kingdom. The Jews understand this as a prophetic
description of the reign of the Messiah. See Hebrews 1:5.
ELLICOTT, "(14) But I will settle him (Heb., make him stand) in mine house and in
my kingdom.—Samuel, “and thine house and thy kingdom shall be maintained for
ever before thee; thy throne,” &c.; where, however, the LXX. and Syriac have
“before me,” which agrees. better with our text. The change of persons in our verse
brings out more clearly the theocratic nature of the Davidic kingdom. Solomon and
his successors were to reign as vicegerents of Jehovah.
BI, "But I will settle him in Mine house and in My kingdom for ever.
The everlasting establishment
I. First of all, let us offer a word or two upon the kingdom. Much is written in Scripture
about kingdoms and empires.
1. That the “house” or the “kingdom” which Jehovah claims as His own is a kingdom
which originated with the Lord. It rose not up in the mind of mortals first. It grew
not up of Nature’s materials. It was not brought forth, and set up, and established, by
the arm of man, or by the conquests of warriors, as many other kingdoms are. It
originated in the wisdom, grace, and power of the Most High. Moreover, not only
does this kingdom originate with Him, but it is so formed and constituted as to
glorify the Lord. “My glory,” saith Jehovah, “will I not give to another, neither My
praise to graven images.” In the formation and constitution of the kingdom which
God calls His own—“Mine house and My kingdom”—the subjects are a royal seed; of
royal blood; of royal birth; “kings and priests unto God.” My hearer, of what
kingdom art thou? If thou art not of the kingdom of God’s grace, thou art of the
kingdom of darkness, a slave of Satan, and on the highroad to destruction.
2. Yet further observe, the laws are immutable.
3. Then further, I notice the privileges, the high spiritual privileges of the kingdom.
Pardon, peace, joy in the Holy Ghost.
II. I come to the investiture of the king.
“I will settle him in Mine house and in My kingdom.” Solomon was settled for a time,
and reigned long and peacefully over Israel; but he is not reigning now. “A greater than
Solomon is here.” He is invested with sovereignty, absolute and universal: “I will settle
Him in My kingdom.” He is invested with sovereignty, absolute and universal. “I have set
My King upon My holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the Lord has said unto Me,
Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee the
heathen for Thine inheritance and uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession.”
Moreover, if we speak of His absolute sovereignty for a moment, you know it is written
expressly, that “none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest Thou?”
III. This national establishment; for there is that word in my text—“establish.” There is a
44

45. great deal said in Scripture about establishment. Immutable decrees are the basis of the
establishment. Oh! I could bring out some twenty or thirty instances under my own
notice in which all the schemes and powers and efforts of men have passed by; and God,
in a moment and by a word, through some of His sent servants, has accomplished it all.
IV. The glorious perpetuity—“I will settle Him in Mine house and in My kingdom for
ever; and His throne shall be established for evermore.” (Joseph Irons.)
15 Nathan reported to David all the words of this
entire revelation.
David’s Prayer
JAMISON, "According to all ... this vision — The revelation of the divine will
was made to the prophet in a dream.
ELLICOTT, " (15) According to all these words, and according to all this vision.—
The matter of this prophecy (1 Chronicles 17:3-15) undoubtedly rests upon
authentic tradition. Neither the compiler of Samuel, however, nor the chronicler
professes to give an exact report of the words of Nathan, as if they had been taken
down on the spot, as they were uttered, by some shorthand reporter. The modern
demand for literal accuracy was unknown to Oriental antiquity. Where the two
narratives vary, sometimes Samuel, sometimes the Chronicle, contains the more
original form of the tradition. 1 Chronicles 17:15 (2 Samuel 7:17), in fact, seems to
imply that the essence rather than the actual words of the oracle is given.
2. David’s prayer (1 Chronicles 17:16-27). The remarks on 1 Chronicles 17:15 apply
generally to this section also. The prayer undoubtedly breathes the genuine Davidic
spirit, even if it be merely an ideal soliloquy. But why may not David himself have
recorded the substance of it as a memorial?
45

46. 16 Then King David went in and sat before the
Lord, and he said:
“Who am I, Lord God, and what is my family,
that you have brought me this far?
CLARKE, "And what is mine house, that thou hast brought me hitherto? - I
am not of any regal family, and have no natural right to the throne.
HENRY 16-17, "We have here David's solemn address to God, in answer to the
gracious message he had now received from him. By faith he receives the promises,
embraces them, and is persuaded of them, as the patriarchs, Heb, 1Ch_11:13. How
humbly does he here abase himself, and acknowledge his own unworthiness! How highly
does he advance the name of God and admire his condescending grace and favour! With
what devout affections does he magnify the God of Israel and what a value has he for the
Israel of God! With what assurance does he build upon the promise, and with what a
lively faith does he put it in suit! What an example is this to us of humble, believing,
fervent prayer! The Lord enable us all thus to seek him! These things were largely
observed, 2 Sa. 7. We shall therefore here observe only those few expressions in which
the prayer, as we find it here, differs from the record of it there, and has something
added to it.
I. That which is there expressed by way of question (Is this the manner of men, O Lord
God?) is here an acknowledgment: “Thou hast regarded me according to the estate of a
man of high degree. Thou hast made me a great man, and then treated me accordingly.”
God, by the covenant-relations into which he admits believers, the titles he gives them,
the favours he bestows on them, and the preparations he has made for them, regards
them according to the estate of men of high degree, though they are mean and vile.
Having himself distinguished them, he treats them as persons of distinction, according
to the quality he has been pleased to put upon them. Some give these words here another
reading: “Thou hast looked upon me in the form of a man who art in the highest, the
Lord God; or, Thou hast made me to see according to the form of a man the majesty of
the Lord God.” And so it points at the Messiah; for, as Abraham, so David, saw his day
and was glad, saw it by faith, saw it in fashion as a man, the Word made flesh, and yet
saw his glory as that of the only-begotten of the Father. And this was that which God
46

47. spoke concerning his house for a great while to come, the foresight of which affected him
more than any thing. And let it not be thought strange that David should speak so plainly
of the two natures of Christ who in spirit called him Lord, though he knew he was to be
his Son (Psa_110:1), and foresaw him lower than the angels for a little while, but
afterwards crowned with glory and honour, Heb_2:6, Heb_2:7.
JAMISON, "And what is mine house, that thou hast brought me hitherto? -
I am not of any regal family, and have no natural right to the throne.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 17:16. Who am I? &c. — We have here David’s solemn
address to God, in answer to his gracious message. How humbly does he here abase
himself, and acknowledge his own unworthiness! How highly does he advance the
name of God, and admire his condescending favour! With what devout affections
does he magnify the God of Israel: with what assurance build upon the promise!
What an example this of believing, fervent prayer! The Lord enable us all thus to
seek him!
COFFMAN, "These verses are parallel to 2 Samuel 7:18-29; and, "The Chronicler
followed his source quite closely, with insignificant variations."[2]
We have written three pages of comments on these verses in our Commentary on
2Samuel, pp. 85-97.
There is a strong likelihood that David, at first, understood that "house" which the
Lord said would be built as a reference to the physical temple later erected by
Solomon; but there is every reason to believe that David later realized that the
promise included the coming of one much Greater than Solomon, that the true
temple of God was in heaven, and that God's Israel was in no manner whatever
limited to any race of men.
The Messianic promises of the Psalms, especially in many of them that were written
by David, abundantly prove this ultimate understanding on David's part.
The critical notion that this text teaches that Solomon would be the builder of that
promised "house" is effectively refuted by 1 Chronicles 17:25, above, in which
David made it crystal clear that he understood the builder of that house to be, not
Solomon, or any other mortal, but God Himself.
47