Hiram, king of Tyre, sent envoys to Solomon to congratulate him on becoming king after his father David. Hiram had always been friendly with David. Solomon decided to build a temple for God, as David had wanted to. Solomon arranged with Hiram to provide timber from Lebanon in exchange for wheat and olive oil. Hiram agreed and sent skilled workers to help prepare the materials for building the temple. Commentators note the contrast between God originally wanting a spiritual house of people rather than a physical temple, but that God accommodated the temple project.

1. 1 KI GS 5 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Preparations for Building the Temple
1 [a]When Hiram king of Tyre heard that
Solomon had been anointed king to succeed his
father David, he sent his envoys to Solomon,
because he had always been on friendly terms
with David.
BAR ES, "Hiram, king of Tyre - Menander of Ephesus, who wrote a history of
Tyre in Greek, founded upon native Tyrian documents, about 300 B.C., mentioned this
Hiram as the son of Abibaal king of Tyre, and said that he ascended the throne when he
was nineteen; that he reigned thirty-four years, and, dying at the age of fifty-three, was
succeeded by his son Baleazar. Menander spoke at some length of the dealings of Hiram
with Solomon.
Sent his servants - This appears to have been an embassy of congratulation.
CLARKE, "Hiram king of Tyre - It must have been at the beginning of Solomon’s
reign that these ambassadors were sent; and some suppose that the Hiram mentioned
here is different from him who was the friend of David; but there seems no very solid
reason for this supposition. As Hiram had intimate alliance with David, and built his
palace, 2Sa_5:11, he wished to maintain the same good understanding with his son, of
whose wisdom he had no doubt heard the most advantageous accounts; and he loved the
son because he always loved the father, for Hiram was ever a lover of David.
GILL, "And Hiram king of Tyre sent servants unto Solomon,.... His
ambassadors, to condole him on the death of his father, and congratulate him on his
accession to the throne; this king is called by the Phoenician historians (s) Hirom, and
by Eupolemus (t) Suron, as he is Huram in 2Ch_2:3; and by Theophilus of Antioch (u)
Hierom the son of Abelmalus, in the twelfth year of whose reign the temple was built:
for he had heard that they had anointed him, king in the room of his father;
that the Israelites had anointed him king:

2. for Hiram was ever a lover of David; a friend and ally of his; and we never read of
the Tyrians being at war with him, or assisting any of his enemies.
HE RY, "We have here an account of the amicable correspondence between Solomon
and Hiram. Tyre was a famous trading city, that lay close upon the sea, in the border of
Israel; its inhabitants (as should seem) were none of the devoted nations, nor ever at
enmity with Israel, and therefore David never offered to destroy them, but lived in
friendship with them. It is here said of Hiram their king that he was ever a lover of
David; and we have reason to think he was a worshipper of the true God, and had
himself renounced, though he could not reform, the idolatry of his city. David's
character will win the affections even of those that are without. Here is,
I. Hiram's embassy of compliment to Solomon, 1Ki_5:1. He sent, as is usual among
princes, to condole with him on the death of David, and to renew his alliances with him
upon his succession to the government. It is good keeping up friendship and communion
with the families in which religion is uppermost.
JAMISO , "1Ki_5:1-6. Hiram sends to congratulate Solomon.
Hiram ... sent his servants unto Solomon — the grandson of David’s
contemporary [Kitto]; or the same Hiram [Winer and others]. The friendly relations
which the king of Tyre had cultivated with David are here seen renewed with his son and
successor, by a message of condolence as well as of congratulation on his accession to
the throne of Israel. The alliance between the two nations had been mutually beneficial
by the encouragement of useful traffic. Israel, being agricultural, furnished corn and oil,
while the Tyrians, who were a commercial people, gave in exchange their Phoenician
manufactures, as well as the produce of foreign lands. A special treaty was now entered
into in furtherance of that undertaking which was the great work of Solomon’s splendid
and peaceful reign.
K&D, "Solomon's negotiations with Hiram of Tyre. - 1Ki_5:1. When king Hiram of
Tyre heard that Solomon had been anointed king in the place of David, he sent his
servants, i.e., an embassage, to Solomon, to congratulate him (as the Syriac correctly
explains) on his ascent of the throne, because he had been a friend of David the whole
time (‫ים‬ ִ‫מ‬ָ‫י‬ ַ‫ל־ה‬ ָⅴ, i.e., as long as both of them David and Hiram were kings). On Hiram and
the length of his reign, see the remarks on 2Sa_5:11. This is passed over in the
Chronicles as having no essential bearing upon the building of the temple.
BE SO , "1 Kings 5:1. Hiram sent his servants unto Solomon — amely, as soon
as he heard of his succession in the throne, as the following words show, he sent to
congratulate him, as the manner of princes is. For Hiram was ever a lover of David
— And therefore was desirous to continue in friendship with his son. This Hiram
was probably the son of him who sent David timber and artificers to build his
palace. Josephus assures us, that in his time, the letters which passed between him
and Solomon were preserved in the archives of Tyre.
COFFMA , "It is almost incredible to this writer that no commentator whom we
have consulted has challenged Solomon's arrogant assumption in this passage that

3. he himself was that promised `seed' of David whom God would establish eternally
upon David's throne, declaring emphatically that, "I (God) will establish the throne
of his kingdom forever (2 Samuel 7:13)."
The subsequent events in the history of David's earthly dynasty demonstrated most
effectively the error of Solomon's conceited assumption. Furthermore, Solomon had
been elevated to David's throne during David's lifetime, with whom, for a season,
Solomon Was actually co-regent; and the promise of 2 Samuel 7:12 regarding that
`seed' whose throne would last for ever stressed that he would rise at a time, "When
David should sleep with his fathers and after David's days on earth had been
fulfilled." (See our full discussion of this in our Commentary on Second Samuel in
chapter 7.)
Solomon is not the only one who misunderstood that heavenly promise; because the
Jewish people themselves quickly concluded that the extravaganza of Solomon's
kingdom was scheduled to last eternally. However, the enormous taxation, the
forced labor, and the heartless selfishness of Solomon's reign quickly issued in the
resentment and bitterness that split the kingdom.
A EARTHLY TEMPLE WHICH GOD DID OT WA T
The fact of God's accommodation to Solomon's Temple, and his use of it during the
following history of Israel should not obscure that fact that God had made it
perfectly clear to David that God did not Desire a Temple (2 Samuel 7:4-7). In that
passage, God stated that he had never said to any Israelite, "build me a house
(temple)." And we must point out that God never commanded Solomon to build him
a house. If so, where is the commandment? It was Solomon's project, first, last, and
always. In our whole series of Bible Commentaries, we have frequently stressed the
fact of both the monarchy and the Temple being contrary to God's will. If it had not
been so, why would God have destroyed it twice?
It is refreshing to note that La Sor, writing in The ew Bible Commentary (Revised)
raised a question: "Solomon utilized the skills of the Phoenicians, the slave-labor of
conquered peoples, and the enforced labor of the Israelites, even mortgaging a part
of his kingdom; and at last he had a splendid Temple, and probably an even more
splendid palace. But was it right"?[1] Of course, La Sor assumed it was right,
basing his assumption upon the fact that God surely used it, but we cannot believe
that God's use of the Temple was any more proof of its being right than was his use
of the monarchy.
That Temple proved to be a millstone around the necks of God's people as long as it
stood. As Stephen the Martyr observed in his Farewell Address, "All of God's great
victories for Israel came, not in the days of the Temple, but in those of the
Tabernacle" (Acts 7:44-46). Furthermore, Stephen's remark, that, "Solomon built
him (God) a house" can be nothing but sarcasm. Also, the sacred author of Hebrews
made no mention whatever of Solomon's Temple, but repeatedly stressed the
significance of the Tabernacle. This bypass of Solomon's Temple by the inspired

4. author of Hebrews is extremely significant. It is obvious that God never approved of
the Temple.
What is wrong with a Temple? As Stephen put it, "God dwelleth not in Temples
made with hands" (Acts 7:39). What is wrong with a temple, any temple? It
purports to say that "God is there," but that is a lie. The Temple of Solomon
became a center of pagan worship (Ezekiel 8); and that prophet recorded the
departure of God's Spirit from it (Ezekiel 10-11).
"I will give thee hire, ... according to all that thou shalt say (1 Kings 5:6). "This
amount was so enormous (according to 1 Kings 5:11,220,000 bushels of wheat and
180,000 gallons of oil) that we are not surprised to find out later that Solomon
apparently went bankrupt and had to cede part of his territory to settle the
debt."[2]
This alliance with Hiram king of Tyre was mutually advantageous both to him and
to Solomon. "The corn-growing (wheat) districts of northern Palestine were the
granary of the Phoenicians in the times of Solomon, no less than in the days of
Herod (Acts 12:20)."[3] Also Solomon controlled the trade routes both from the
East and from Egypt.
Solomon's arrangement here with Hiram was to procure sufficient timber for the
proposed Temple from the great cedar forests of Lebanon, which were controlled by
Hiram, and which were located, "Two days journey north of Beirut by the village of
Bjerreh on the way to Baalbek near the loftiest summit of the Lebanon
Mountains."[4] "Hiram also agreed to bring the timber down, probably via the Dog
River to the Mediterranean, and thence by raft to a harbor in Israel."[5] The
account in Chronicles identifies that harbor as Joppa (2 Chronicles 2:16).
COKE, ". Hiram king of Tyre— It was at the beginning of Solomon's reign that
Hiram sent ambassadors, to condole with Solomon upon the death of his father, and
to renew the league of friendship which he had with him. Josephus assures us, that
in his time the letters which passed between Hiram and Solomon were preserved in
the Archives of Tyre. This Hiram appears to have been the son of him who sent
David timber and artificers to build his palace. ote; (1.) When we are at rest from
outward trials, we should give greater diligence to build up the spiritual temple
within. (2.) We may put our hands comfortably to that work, in which we have the
Divine promise to encourage us. (3.) They have often most of this world's ingenuity,
who have no knowledge of Israel's God. (4.) God can employ those in building his
church, who have themselves no part nor lot in it. (5.) Every country has its staple
commodity; by exchange of which, intercourse is maintained with its neighbours. It
is our happiness, that with the corn of Canaan we possess also the shipping of Tyre
PETT, "Solomon Arranges With Hiram King Of Tyre For His Country’s Assistance
In The Building Of The Temple (1 Kings 5:1-18).

5. The next example of Solomon’s glory and splendour is found by the writer in the
building of a Temple to YHWH. Such a step on ascending the throne was well
known among foreign kings, as they sought to show their gratitude to their gods,
and win their continuing favour by building them a splendid temple. Solomon was
no different, and he sought to justify doing the same thing on the grounds of
YHWH’s covenant with David (2 Samuel 7:13), although it is doubtful whether that
was what YHWH originally intended (2 Samuel 7:5-7). Indeed, in spite of God’s
initial lack of enthusiasm for the project, David himself had taken it at least partly
in the that way (2 Samuel 8:11; 1 Chronicles 22; 1 Kings 8:51; 1 Chronicles 26:25).
It was not really surprising. It was difficult for even spiritual men like David men to
think solely in spiritual terms in those days (as indeed there are many in the same
position today who are unable to get away from the idea of a physical temple and
physical sacrifices). They felt very much bound to earth.
But while the writer was building up a picture of Solomon’s glory, he was at the
same time doing it with reservations. Underneath all the splendour he could already
see the cracks appearing.
For the house that YHWH had really wanted Solomon to build had been a spiritual
house made up of his sons and descendants, not a house of wood and stone. Careful
scrutiny of 2 Samuel 7 indicates that the concentration throughout is not on the
building of a Temple, but on the building of a dynastic house which would result
finally in the arrival of the Coming King. ‘YHWH tells you that he will make you a
house (dynasty) -- your seed -- he will build a house (a dynasty) for My ame and I
will establish the throne of his kingship for ever -- and your house (dynasty) and
your kingship will be established for ever before you, your throne will be established
for ever’ (2 Samuel 7:11; 2 Samuel 7:13; 2 Samuel 7:16, compare 1 Kings 7:26).
YHWH’s emphasis was thus on the promise of the foundation of a dynasty which
would finally result in the everlasting King. The truth is that in building the
physical house, and being satisfied with it and putting too much emphasis on it,
Solomon did in fact miss out on the need to build a spiritual house. It would only be
as a result of God’s activity that that spiritual house would come to a reality in our
Lord Jesus Christ. On the other hand, God did in His graciousness accept the
physical house from their hands, simply because He knew that they were bringing it
to Him from a right attitude of heart. He recognised and made allowance for man’s
weakness. (We saw a similar situation with regard to the kingship in 1 Samuel - 1
Samuel 8-9).
The result of Solomon’s dreams was that when Hiram the King of Tyre, whose
countrymen were skilled in fine building techniques, contacted Solomon in order to
congratulate him on his safe accession to the throne, it must have seemed to
Solomon like a gift from Heaven (which in one sense it was), and he took advantage
of Hiram’s friendly approach in order to obtain the assistance of his experts in the
building of his planned Temple, pointing out that he had to build it because it had
been required by YHWH.

6. His major need was the right kind of timber, selected and dressed by experienced
timber experts, and he called on Hiram to provide this for him in return for
adequate compensation. On hearing this Hiram replied with the right noises (he
stood to gain a good deal from the venture), and arranged for the timber to be cut,
delivered and dressed, in response to which Solomon paid him the first instalment of
the agreed payment. Meanwhile Solomon himself arranged for the cutting out of
stones suitable for the Temple by using huge amounts of forced labour. Then
Solomon’s builders and Hiram’s builders and the Gebalites (expert carpenters from
Gebal/Byblos) got together to prepare the timber and the stones, ready for building
the Temple.
As we read the following narrative we should perhaps bear in mind the contrast
between this Sanctuary, and the one that YHWH had requested, for the prophetic
writer does appear to wish for us to make the comparison.
ote On The Contrast Between The Tabernacle And The Temple.
In 2 Samuel 7:5-7 YHWH asks David, “Shall you build Me a house for Me to dwell
in? For I have not dwelt in a house since the day that I brought up the children of
Israel out of Egypt even to this day, but have walked in a Tent and in a
Dwellingplace (shaken - Tabernacle). In all the places in which I have walked with
the children of Israel, did I speak a word with any of the tribes of Israel, whom I
commanded to feed My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built me a house of
cedar?’ ” And He then went on to point out rather that He would build a house for
David, a house of flesh and blood which would inherit the throne. The emphasis in 1
Kings 5:11-16 is on that house (1 Kings 5:11; 1 Kings 5:13; 1 Kings 5:16). While 1
Kings 5:13 may be slightly ambiguous out of context, in the context it is quite plain.
There is not the slightest indication anywhere else in Samuel that a literal Temple
was in mind. The ‘house’ that Solomon was to build was to result in the establishing
of the kingdom and the permanent occupation of the throne (The Temple
accomplished neither).
In view of this lack of positive reference to the building of the Temple we should
perhaps compare the two in the light of what we find in Exodus and Kings.
1). The Tabernacle Was To Be Built Of Free-will Offerings From Those Whose
Hearts Were Willing. The Temple Was Built Out Of Enforced Taxation.
A comparison between the Tabernacle and the Temple soon brings out the
discrepancy between the two, and is in fact deliberately and patently brought out at
one stage by the writer of Kings. Consider for example the Tabernacle. It was to be
built of free-will offerings; ‘of every man whose heart makes him willing you will
take my offering’ (Exodus 25:2). What a contrast with the building of the Temple
where Hiram’s ‘gifts’ turned out to be very expensive indeed (1 Kings 5:10-12),
helping to cripple the economy of Israel, and none of the people had any choice in
the matter. And there was very little of free-will offering in the levies that Solomon
raised out of Israel for the purpose (1 Kings 5:13-18). Indeed we learn very clearly
about the ‘goodwill’ involved in 1 Kings 12:4; 1 Kings 12:14. As the author makes

7. clear they lay at the root of the division that occurred between Israel and Judah.
2). The Tabernacle Was Built At YHWH’s Specific Request According To His
Pattern. The Temple Was Specifically ever Requested.
Then YHWH adds, ‘And let them make me a Sanctuary that I may dwell among
them. According to all that I show you, the pattern of the Dwellingplace
(Tabernacle), and the pattern of all its furniture, even so shall you make it’ (Exodus
25:8-9). So it was to be made of freewill offerings, gladly given, and was to be made
according to YHWH’s pattern, and we have already noted that it was said to be in
total contrast to David’s idea for a Temple (see above). Here in Exodus YHWH had
asked them to make Him a Sanctuary. In 2 Samuel 7:5-7 YHWH specifically says
that He has OT asked for a Temple, while in 1 Kings 5:5 it is Solomon who says, ‘I
purpose to build a house for the ame of YHWH my God’, (with the emphasis on
the ‘I’), relying on a misinterpretation of 2 Samuel 7:13.
Furthermore it will be noted that far from being built on a pattern determined by
YHWH, the furniture of the new Temple was very much seen to be a combination of
the ideas of Solomon (1 Kings 6:14-36; 1 Kings 7:47-51) and Hiram The Metal-
worker (1 Kings 7:13-46) as the author specifically brings out.
3). The Tabernacle Was Built Under The Jurisdiction Of A Trueborn Israelite Who
Was Filled With The Spirit Of God, And By Willing, Responsive, Workers, The
Temple Was Built Under The Jurisdiction Of A Half-Pagan With o Mention Of
The Spirit Of God, And By Enforced Levies.
Having commanded the building of His Sanctuary YHWH later then called to
Moses again and said, ‘See, I have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, the son of
Hur, of the tribe of Judah, and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, in wisdom,
and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship’
(Exodus 31:2; compare Exodus 35:31). And Moses then called men in order to give
instructions as to how the work was to proceed, ‘and Moses called Bezalel and
Oholiab and every wise-hearted man, in whose heart YHWH had put wisdom, even
everyone whose heart stirred him up to come to the work to do it’ (Exodus 36:2).
ote how voluntary it all was.
In contrast the account in 1 Kings 7:13-14 commences with Solomon sending for a
man named Hiram (not the king) whom he fetches out of Tyre. And here there
appears to be a deliberate attempt in the description of him to bring to mind
Bezalel, the skilled worker who made the Tabernacle furnishings and
embellishments (Exodus 35:30-33), for Hiram is described as being ‘filled with
wisdom (chokmah), and understanding (tabuwn), and skill (da’ath) to work all
works in bronze’. With this we can compare the description of Bezalel, ‘He has
filled him with the Spirit of God, in wisdom (chokmah), and in understanding
(tabuwn), and in knowledge (da’ath), and in all manner of workmanship --.’
But it is the differences that are significant:
o Bezalel was called by YHWH from among His people Israel, from the very
heart of the camp, Hiram was sent for by Solomon out of pagan Tyre, being only
half Israelite.
o Bezalel was ‘filled with the Spirit of God’ in wisdom, understanding and
knowledge, Hiram was simply filled with wisdom, understanding and knowledge
(mention of the Holy Spirit is consciously dropped).
It will be noted indeed that the author of Kings makes no attempt to pretend that

8. Hiram was filled with the Spirit of God.
4). The Tabernacle Was Built Of Freely-given Cloth And Jewels Which Displayed
All Their Pristine Glory, The Temple Was Built Of Blood-stained And Sweat-
stained Stones, Which Were Then Covered Over With Timber And Gold, Bought
With Taxation or Resulting From Tribute And Trade.
Especially in view of the facts in 3). we find it very difficult to avoid in all this the
suggestion that these contrasts were all in the mind of the author of Kings. He
wanted us to see the distinction. They would appear to reveal that as a prophet he
was not so entranced by the Temple as many of his compatriots appear to have
been, seeing rather within it the seeds of its own destruction. owhere does he
suggest that it was their attitude towards the Temple itself which lay at the root of
the failure of the kings of Israel and Judah. His theme with regard to both was
rather their attitude towards the setting up of false high places in contrast with the
true. In view of the fact that Elijah set up genuine high places which the author
clearly saw as acceptable, we cannot argue that his generally expressed attitude
towards ‘high places’ necessarily reflected on their attitude towards the Temple. It
reflected on their deviation from the truth. And in so far as it did reflect on the
Temple it was not because of the Temple per se, but because of its position as the
Central Sanctuary.
By the author’s day, of course, an open attack on the Temple would not have been
wise (as Jeremiah discovered), but what he was certainly doing was laying seeds of
doubt as to how much its building had really been of God. The only Temple which
YHWH is in fact specifically said to have required was the Second Temple,
outwardly a far inferior version to Solomon’s, but built with willing hands and
hearts (Haggai 1:2; Haggai 1:14; compare how the author of Kings would appear to
approve of this approach - 2 Kings 22:4).
End of ote.
Analysis.
a And Hiram king of Tyre sent his servants to Solomon, for he had heard that
they had anointed him king in the room of his father, for Hiram was ever a lover of
David (1 Kings 5:1).
b And Solomon sent to Hiram, saying, “You know how it was that David my
father could not build a house for the name of YHWH his God because of the wars
which were about him on every side, until YHWH put them under the soles of his
feet. But now YHWH my God has given me rest on every side. There is neither
adversary, nor evil occurrence” (1 Kings 5:2-4).
c “And, behold, I purpose to build a house for the name of YHWH my God, as
YHWH spoke to David my father, saying, ‘Your son, whom I will set on your throne
in your room, he will build the house for my name’.” (1 Kings 5:5).
d “ ow therefore do you command that they cut me cedar-trees out of
Lebanon, and my servants will be with your servants, and I will give you hire for
your servants in accordance with all that you shall say, for you know that there is
not among us any who knows how to cut timber like the Sidonians” (1 Kings 5:6).
e “And it came about that, when Hiram heard the words of Solomon, he

9. rejoiced greatly, and said, “Blessed be YHWH this day, who has given to David a
wise son over this great people” (1 Kings 5:7).
f And Hiram sent to Solomon, saying, “I have heard the message which you
have sent to me. I will do all your desire concerning timber of cedar, and concerning
timber of fir” (1 Kings 5:8).
g “My servants will bring them down from Lebanon to the sea, and I will make
them into rafts to go by sea to the place that you shall appoint me, and will cause
them to be broken up there, and you will receive them, and you will accomplish my
desire, in giving food for my household” (1 Kings 5:9).
f So Hiram gave Solomon timber of cedar and timber of fir according to all his
desire. And Solomon gave Hiram twenty thousand measures of wheat for food for
his household, and twenty measures of pure oil. Thus did Solomon give to Hiram
year by year (1 Kings 5:10-11).
e And YHWH gave Solomon wisdom, as he promised him, and there was peace
between Hiram and Solomon, and they two made a league together (1 Kings 5:12).
d And king Solomon raised a levy out of all Israel, and the levy was thirty
thousand men, and he sent them to Lebanon, ten thousand a month by courses; a
month they were in Lebanon, and two months at home; and Adoniram was over the
men subject to task-work (1 Kings 5:13-14).
c And Solomon had threescore and ten thousand who bore burdens, and
fourscore thousand who were hewers in the mountains, besides Solomon’s chief
officers who were over the work, three thousand and three hundred, who bore rule
over the people who wrought in the work (1 Kings 5:15-16).
b And the king commanded, and they hewed out great stones, costly stones, to
lay the foundation of the house with wrought stone (1 Kings 5:17).
a And Solomon’s builders and Hiram’s builders and the Gebalites fashioned
them, and prepared the timber and the stones to build the house (1 Kings 5:18).
ote that in ‘a’ Hiram sent his servants to Solomon on hearing of his anointing as
king, and in the parallel their builders got together to prepare to build the Temple
for YHWH. In ‘b’ Solomon declared that all hindrance to the building of the
Temple had been removed, and in the parallel the stonework for the task was
prepared. In ‘c’ Solomon declared that his purpose was to build a house for
YHWH’s ame, and in the parallel those who would do the work were described. In
‘d’ Solomon calls on Hiram to set his carpenters to the work, and in the parallel sent
over his own levies to give assistance. In ‘e’ Hiram blessed YHWH for the wisdom
that He had given to Solomon so that he could rule his people, and in the parallel the
giving and consequences of that wisdom were described. In ‘f’ Hiram confirmed
that his workmen would prepare the timber as requested, and in the parallel Hiram
gave the timber to Solomon. Centrally in ‘g’ the means of getting the timber to
Solomon was described, along with the request for payment.
1 Kings 5:1
‘And Hiram king of Tyre sent his servants to Solomon, for he had heard that they
had anointed him king in the room of his father, for Hiram was ever a lover of
David.’
On hearing that Solomon had been anointed king of all Israel, and of the empire

10. beyond, Hiram, king of Tyre, hastened to send his servants to Solomon in order to
offer him his congratulations, a normal courtesy extended by friendly kings on the
accession of another. And the writer tells us that it was because of his love and
respect for David. But it was unquestionably also very expedient. Solomon was now
the king of the strongest country around, with the possible, but marginal, exception
of Egypt, and had control of the main trade routes which fed Tyre’s maritime trade.
Israel was also an important source of grain and olive oil. There was therefore
within his gesture a determined attempt to maintain the treaty between the two
countries to the advantage of both.
The name Hiram is possibly a shortening of Ahiram (‘my brother is exalted’ or ‘my
brother is Ram’), which was a good Phoenician name and is attested for a king of
Byblos in about 1200 BC. It was also the name of the royal architect who will appear
later.
Tyre was at this time mainly an island city, built on an island a short distance off
shore, but with some of its environs established on the mainland. The island city
itself was almost impregnable (until Alexander the Great came along later).
ELLICOTT, "In contrast with the brief notes of the previous chapter, the fifth
chapter begins another section of the fuller history (1 Kings 5:1 to 1 Kings 9:9),
describing in great detail the building and consecration of the Temple, and evidently
drawn from contemporary documents.
Verse 1
(1) Hiram is first mentioned in 2 Samuel 5:11 (and the parallel, 1 Chronicles 14:1) as
having sent workmen and materials to David for the building of his house. He is
described as a “lover of David.” Ancient tradition makes him a tributary or
dependent monarch; and his attitude, as described in Scripture, towards both David
and Solomon agrees with this. Josephus (100 Apion, i. 17, § 18) cites from Dios, a
Phœnician historian, and Menander of Ephesus, a description of Hiram’s parentage,
of his prosperous reign and skill in building; and quotes, as from the Tyrian
archives (Ant. viii. 11, §§ 6, 7), letters passing between him and Solomon. The
embassy here noticed from Hiram is clearly one of congratulation, perhaps of
renewal of fealty. (In 2 Chronicles 2:14-15 occur the phrases, “my lord, my lord
David thy father.”)
EBC, "THE TEMPLE
1 Kings 5:1-18; 1 Kings 6:1-38; 1 Kings 7:1-51
"And his next son, for wealth and wisdom famed, The clouded Ark of God, till then
in tents Wandering, shall in a glorious temple enshrine."
-Paradise Lost, 12:340.

11. AFTER the destructive battle of Aphek, in which the Philistines had defeated Israel,
slain the two sons of Eli, and taken captive the Ark of God, they had inflicted a
terrible vengeance on the old sanctuary at Shiloh. They had burnt the young men in
the fire, and slain the priests with the sword, and no widows were left to make
lamentation. {Psalms 78:58-64} It is true that, terrified by portents and diseases, the
Philistines after a time restored the Ark, and the Tabernacle of the wilderness with
its brazen altar still gave sacredness to the great high place at Gibeon, to which
apparently it had been removed. evertheless, the old worship seems to have
languished till it received a new and powerful impulse from the religious earnestness
of David. He had the mind of a patriot-statesman as well as of a soldier, and he felt
that a nation is nothing without its sacred memories. Those memories clustered
round the now-discredited Ark. Its capture, and its parade as a trophy of victory in
the shrine of Dagon, had robbed it of all its superstitious prestige as a fetish; but,
degraded as it had been, it still continued to be the one inestimably precious historic
relic which enshrined the memories of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, and the
dawn of its heroic age.
As soon as David had given to his people the boon of a unique capital, nothing could
be more natural than the wish to add sacredness to the glory of the capital by
making it the center of the national worship. According to the Chronicles, David-
feeling it a reproach that he himself should dwell in palaces celled with cedar and
painted with vermilion while the Ark of God dwelt between curtains-had made
unheard-of preparations to build a house for God. But it had been decreed unfit
that the sanctuary should be built by a man whose hands were red with the blood of
many wars, and he had received the promise that the great work should be
accomplished by his son.
Into that work Solomon threw himself with hearty zeal in the month Zif of the
fourth year of his reign, when his kingdom was consolidated. It commanded all his
sympathies as an artist, a lover of magnificence, and a ruler bent on the work of
centralization. It was a task to which he was bound by the solemn exhortation of his
father, and he felt, doubtless, its political as well as its religious importance. With
his sincere desire to build to God’s glory was mingled a prophetic conviction that his
task would be fraught with immense issues for the future of his people and of all the
world. The presence of the Temple left its impress on the very name of Jerusalem.
Although it has nothing to do with the Temple or with Solomon, it became known to
the heathen world as Hierosolyma, which, as we see from Eupolemos (Euseb.,
Praep. Evang., 9:34), the Gentile world supposed to mean "the Temple (Hieron) of
Solomon."
The materials already provided were of priceless value. David had consecrated to
God the spoils which he had won from conquered kings. We must reject, as the
exaggerations of national vanity, the monstrous numbers which now stand in the
text of the chronicler; but a king whose court was simple and inexpensive was quite
able to amass treasures of gold and silver, brass and iron, precious marbles and
onyx stones. Solomon had only to add to these sacred stores.

12. He inherited the friendship which David had enjoyed, with Hiram, King of Tyre,
who, according to the strange phrase of the Vatican Septuagint, sent his servants "to
anoint" Solomon. The friendliest overtures passed between the two kings in letters,
to which Josephus appeals as still extant. A commercial treaty was made by which
Solomon engaged to furnish the Tyrian king with annual revenues of wheat, barley,
and oil; {Comp. Ezekiel 27:17 Acts 12:20} and Hiram put at Solomon’s disposal the
skilled labor of an army of Sidonian wood-cutters and artisans. The huge trunks of
cedar and cypress were sent rushing down the heights of Lebanon by schlittage, and
laboriously dragged by road or river to the shore. There they were constructed into
immense rafts, which were floated a hundred miles along the coast to Joppa, where
they were again dragged with enormous toil for thirty-five miles up the steep and
rocky roads to Jerusalem. For more than twenty years, while Solomon was building
the Temple and his various royal constructions, Jerusalem became a hive of
ceaseless and varied industry. Its ordinary inhabitants must have been swelled by an
army of Canaanite serfs and Phoenician artisans to whom residences were assigned
in Ophel. There lived the hewers and bevellers of stone; the cedar-cutters of Gebal
or Biblos; the cunning workmen in gold or brass; the bronze-casters who made their
moulds in the clay ground of the Jordan valley; the carvers and engravers; the dyers
who stained wool with the purple of the murex, and the scarlet dye of the trumpet
fish; the weavers and embroiderers of fine linen. Every class of laborer was put into
requisition, from the descendants of the Gibeonite ethinim, who were rough
hewers of wood and drawers of water, to the trained artificers whose beautiful
productions we’re the wonder of the world. The "father," or master-workman, of
the whole community was a half-caste, who also bore the name of Hiram, and was
the son of a woman of aphtali by a Tyrian father.
Some writers have tried to minimize Solomon’s work as a builder, and have spoken
of the Temple as an exceedingly insignificant structure which would not stand a
moment’s comparison with the smallest and humblest of our own cathedrals.
Insignificant in size it certainly was, but we must not forget its costly splendor, the
remote age in which the work was achieved, and the truly stupendous constructions
which the design required. Mount Moriah was selected as a site hallowed by the
tradition of Abraham’s sacrifice, and more recently by David’s vision of the Angel
of the Pestilence with his drawn sword on the threshing-floor of the Jebusite Prince
Araunah. But to utilize this doubly consecrated area involved almost superhuman
difficulties, which would have been avoided if the loftier but less suitable height of
the Mount of Olives could have been chosen. The rugged summit had to be enlarged
to a space of five hundred yards square, and this level was supported by Cyclopean
walls, which have long been the wonder of the world. The magnificent wall on the
east side, known as "the Jews’ wailing-place," is doubtless the work of Solomon,
and after outlasting "the drums and tramplings of a hundred triumphs," it remains
to this day in uninjured massiveness. One of the finely beveled stones is 38 1/2 feet
long and 7 feet high, and weighs more than 100 tons. These vast stones were hewn
from a quarry above the level of the wall, and lowered by rollers down an inclined
plane. Part of the old wall rises 30 feet above the present level of the soil, but a far
larger part of the height lies hidden 80 feet under the accumulated debris of the

13. often captured city. At the southwest angle, by Robinson’s arch, three pavements
were discovered, one beneath the other, showing the gradual filling up of the valley;
and on the lowest of these were found the broken voussoirs of the arch. In
Solomon’s day the whole of this mighty wall was visible. On one of the lowest stones
have been discovered the Phoenician paint-marks which indicated where each of the
huge masses, so carefully dressed, edge-drafted, and beveled, was to be placed in the
structure. The caverns, quarries water storages, and subterranean conduits hewn
out of the solid rock, over which Jerusalem is built, could only have been
constructed at the cost of immeasurable toil. They would be wonderful even with
our infinitely more rapid methods and more powerful agencies; but when we
remember that they were made three thousand years ago we do not wonder that
their massiveness has haunted the imagination of so many myriads of visitors from
every nation. It was perhaps from his Egyptian father-in-law that Solomon, to his
own cost, learnt the secret of forced labor which alone rendered such undertakings
possible. In their Egyptian bondage the forefathers of Israel had been fatally
familiar with the ugly word Mas, the labor wrung from them by hard task-masters.
{Exodus 1:2} In the reign of Solomon it once more became only too common on the
lips of the burdened people. 1 Kings 4:6; 1 Kings 5:13-14; 1 Kings 5:17-18; 1 Kings
9:15; 1 Kings 21:12-18.
Four classes were subject to it.
1. The lightest labor was required from the native freeborn Israelites (ezrach). They
were not regarded as bondsmen yet 30,000 of these were required in relays of 10,000
to work, one month in every three, in the forest of Lebanon.
2. There were strangers, or resident aliens (Gerim), such as the Phoenicians and
Giblites, who were Hiram’s subjects and worked for pay.
3. There were three classes of slaves-those taken in war, or sold for debt, or home-
born.
4. Lowest and most wretched of all, there were the vassal Canaanites (Toshabim),
from whom were drawn those 70, 000 burden-bearers, and 80, 000 quarry-men, the
Helots of Palestine, who were placed under the charge of 3600 Israelite ofricers. The
blotches of smoke are still visible on the walls and roofs of the subterranean
quarries where there poor serfs, in the dim torchlight and suffocating air "labored
without reward, perished without pity, and suffered without redress." The sad
narrative reveals to us, and modern research confirms, that the purple of Solomon
had a very seamy side, and that an abyss of misery heaved and moaned under the
glittering surface of his splendor. {1 Kings 5:13; 1 Kings 9:22 2 Chronicles 8:9}
(Omitted in the LXX) Jerusalem during the twenty years occupied by his building
must have presented the disastrous spectacle of task-masters, armed with rods and
scourges, enforcing the toil of gangs of slaves, as we see them represented in the
tombs of Egypt and the palaces of Assyria. The sequel shows the jealousies and
discontents even of the native Israelites, who felt themselves to be "scourged with
whips and laden with heavy burdens." They were bondmen in all but name, for

14. purposes which bore very little on their own welfare. But the curses of the wretched
aborigines must have been deeper, if not so loud. They were torn from such homes
as the despotism of conquest still left to them, and were forced to hopeless and
unrewarded toil for the alien worship and hateful palaces of their masters. Five
centuries later we find a pitiable trace of their existence in the 392 Hierodouloi,
menials lower even than the enslaved ethinim, who are called "sons of the slaves of
Solomon"-the dwindling and miserable remnant of that vast levy of Palestinian
serfs.
Apart from the lavish costliness of its materials the actual Temple was
architecturally a poor and commonplace structure. It was quite small-only 90 feet
long, 35 feet broad, and 45 feet high. It was meant for the symbolic habitation of
God, not for the worship of great congregations. It only represented the nascent art
and limited resources of a tenth-rate kingdom, and was totally devoid alike of the
pure and stately beauty of the Parthenon and the awe-inspiring grandeur of the
great Egyptian temples with their avenues of obelisks and sphinxes and their
colossal statues of deities and kings
"Staring right on with calm, eternal eyes."
When Justinian, boastfully exclaimed, as he looked at his church, "I have
vanquished thee, O Solomon," and when the Khalif Omar, pointing to the Dome of
the Rock, murmured, "Behold, a greater than Solomon is here," they forgot the vast
differences between them and the Jewish king in the epoch at which they lived and
the resources which they could command. The Temple was built in "majestic
silence."
" o workman’s axe no ponderous hammer rung.
Like some tall palm the noiseless fabric sprung."
This was due to religious reverence. It could be easily accomplished, because each
stone and beam was carefully prepared to be fitted in its exact place before it was
carried up the Temple hill.
The elaborate particulars furnished us of the measurements of Solomon’s Temple
are too late in age, too divergent in particulars, too loosely strung together, too much
mingled with later reminiscences, and altogether too architecturally insufficient, to
enable us to reconstruct the exact building, or even to form more than a vague
conception of its external appearance. Both in Kings and Chronicles the notices, as
Keil says, are "incomplete extracts made independently of one another." and vague
in essential details. Critics and architects have attempted to reproduce the Temple
on Greek, Egyptian, and Phoenician models, so entirely unlike each other as to show
that we can arrive at no certainty. It is, however, most probable that, alike in
ornamentation and conception, the building was predominantly Phoenician. Severe
in outline, gorgeous in detail, it was more like the Temple of Venus-Astarte at
Paphos than any other. Fortunately the details, apart from such dim symbolism as

15. we may detect in them, have no religious importance, but only a historic and
antiquarian interest.
The Temple-called Baith or Hekal-was surrounded by the thickly clustered houses
of the Levites, and by porticoes through which the precincts were entered by
numerous gates of wood overlaid with brass. A grove of olives, palms, cedars, and
cypresses, the home of many birds, probably adorned the outer court. This court
was shut from the "higher court," {Jeremiah 36:10} afterwards known as "the
Court of the Priests," by a partition of three rows of hewn stones surmounted by a
cornice of cedar beams. In the higher court, which was reached by a flight of steps,
was the vast new altar of brass, 15 feet high and 30 feet long, of which the hollow
was filled with earth and stones, and of which the blazing sacrifices were visible in
the court below. Here also stood the huge molten sea, borne on the backs of twelve
brazen oxen, of which three faced to each quarter of the heavens. It was in the form
of a lotus blossom, and its rim was hung with three hundred wild gourds in bronze,
cast in two rows. Its reservoir of eight hundred and eighty gallons of water was for
the priestly ablutions necessary in the butcheries of sacrifice, and its usefulness was
supplemented by ten brazen caldrons on wheels, five on each side, adorned like "the
sea," with pensile garlands and cherubic emblems, Whether "the brazen serpent of
the wilderness," to which the children of Israel burnt incense down to the days of
Hezekiah, was in that court or in the Temple we do not know.
On the western side of this court, facing the rising sun, stood the Temple itself, on a
platform elevated some sixteen feet from the ground. Its side chambers were "lean-
to" annexes (Hebrews, ribs; Vulg., tabulata) in three stories, all accessible by one
central entrance on the outside. Their beams rested on rebatements in the thickness
of the wall, and the highest was the broadest. Above these were windows "skewed
and closed," as the margin of the A.V. says; or "broad within and narrow without";
or, as it should rather be rendered, "with closed crossbeams," that is, with
immovable lattices, which could not be opened and shut, but which allowed the
escape of the smoke of lamps and the fumes of incense. These chambers must also
have had windows. They were used to store the garments of the priests and other
necessary paraphernalia of the Temple service, but as to all details we are left
completely in the dark.
Of the external aspect of the building in Solomon’s day we know nothing. We
cannot even tell whether it had one level roof, or whether the Holy of Holies was like
a lower chancel at the end of it; nor whether the roof was flat or, as the Rabbis say,
ridged; nor whether the outer surface of the three-storeyed chambers which
surrounded it was of stone, or planked with cedar, or overlaid with plinths of gold
and silver; nor whether, in any case, it was ornamented with carvings or left blank;
nor whether the cornices only were decorated with open flowers like the Assyrian
rosettes. or do we know with certainty whether it was supported within by pillars
or not. In the state of the records as they have come down to us, all accurate or
intelligible descriptions are slurred over by compilers who had no technical
knowledge and whose main desire was to impress their countrymen with the truth
that the holy building was-as indeed for its day it was-"exceeding magnifical of fame

16. and of glory throughout all countries."
In front of or just within the porch were two superb pillars, regarded as miracles of
Tyrian art, made of fluted bronze, 27 feet high and 18 feet thick. Their capitals of 7
1/2 feet in height resembled an open lotus blossom, surrounded by double wreaths
of two hundred pensile bronze pomegranates, supporting an abacus, carved with
conventional lily work. Both pomegranates and lilies had a symbolic meaning. The
pillars were, for unknown reasons, called Jachin and Boaz. Much about them is
obscure. It is not even known whether they stood detached like obelisks, or formed
Propylaea; or supported the architraves of the porch itself, or were a sort of
gateway, surmounted by a melathron with two epithemas, like a Japanese or Indian
toran. The porch (Olam), which was of the same height as the house (i.e. 45 feet
high), was hung with the gilded shields of Hadadezer’s soldiers which David had
taken in battle, and perhaps also with consecrated armor, like the sword of Goliath,
{2 Samuel 8:7, 1 Chronicles 18:7} to show that "unto the Lord belongeth our
shield," {Psalms 89:18} and that "the shields of the earth belong unto God."
{Psalms 47:9} A door of cypress wood, of two leaves, made in four squares, 7 1/2 feet
broad and high, turning on golden hinges overlaid with gold, and carved with palm
branches and festoons of lilies and pomegranates, opened from the porch into the
main apartment. This was the Mikdash, Holy Place, or Sanctuary, and sometimes
specially called in Chaldee "the Palace" (Hekal, or Birah). {Ezra 5:14-15, etc.}
Before it, as in the Tabernacle, hung an embroidered curtain (Masak). It was
probably supported by four pillars on each side. In the interspaces were five tables
on each side, overlaid with gold, and each encircled by a wreath of gold (zer). On
these were placed the cakes of shewbread. At the end of the chamber, on each side
the door of the Holiest, were five golden candlesticks with chains of wreathed gold
hanging between them. In the center of the room stood the golden altar of incense,
and somewhere (we must suppose) the golden candlestick of the Tabernacle, with its
seven branches ornamented with lilies, pomegranates, and calices of almond
flowers. othing which was in the darkness of the Holiest was visible except the
projecting golden staves with which the Ark had been carried to its place. The Holy
Place itself was lighted by narrow slits.
The entrance to the Holiest, the Debir, or oracle, which corresponded to the Greek
adytum, was through a two-leaved door of olive wood, 6 feet high and broad,
overlaid with gold, and carved with palms, cherubim, and open flowers. The
partition was of cedar wood. The floor of the whole house was of cedar overlaid
with gold. The interior of this "Oracle," as it was called-for the title "Holy of
Holies" is of later origin-was, at any rate in the later Temples, concealed by an
embroidered veil of blue, purple, and crimson, looped up with golden chains. The
Oracle, like the ew Jerusalem of the Apocalypse, was a perfect cube, 30 feet broad
and long and high, covered with gold, but shrouded in perpetual and unbroken
darkness.
o light was ever visible in it save such as was shed by the crimson gleam of the
thurible of incense which the high priest carried into it once a year on the Great Day
of Atonement. In the center of the floor must apparently have risen the mass of rock

17. which is still visible in the Mosque of Omar, from which it is called Al Sakhra, "the
Dome of the Rock." Tradition pointed to it as the spot on which Abraham had laid
for sacrifice the body of his son Isaac, when the angel restrained the descending
knife. It was also the site of Araunah’s threshing-floor, and had been. therefore
hallowed by two angelic apparitions. On it was deposited with solemn ceremony the
awful palladium of the Ark, which had been preserved through the wanderings and
wars of the Exodus and the troublous days of the Judges. It contained the most
sacred possession of the nation, the most priceless treasure which Israel guarded for
the world. This treasure was the Two Tables of the Ten Commandments, graven (in
the anthropomorphic language of the ancient record) by the actual finger of God;
the tables which Moses had shattered on the rocks of Mount Sinai as he descended
to the backsliding people. The Ark was covered with its old "Propitiatory," or
"Mercy-seat," overshadowed by the wings of two small cherubim; but Solomon had
prepared for its reception a new and far more magnificent covering, in the form of
two colossal cherubim, 15 feet high, of which each expanded wing was 7 1/2 feet
long. These wings touched the outer walls of the Oracle, and also touched each other
over the center of the Ark.
Such was the Temple.
It was the "forum, fortress, university, and sanctuary" of the Jews, ‘and the
transitory emblem of the Church of Christ’s kingdom. It was destined to occupy a
large share in the memory, and even in the religious development, of the world,
because it became the central point round which crystallized the entire history of the
Chosen People. The kings of Judah are henceforth estimated with almost exclusive
reference to the relation in which they stood to the centralized worship of Jehovah.
The Spanish kings who built and decorated the Escurial caught the spirit of Jewish
annals when, in the Court of the Kings, they reared the six colossal statues of David
the originator, of Solomon the founder, of Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and
Manasseh ‘the restorers or purifiers of the Temple worship.
It required the toil of 300, 000 men for twenty years to build one of the pyramids. It
took two hundred years to build and four hundred to embellish the great Temple of
Artemis of the Ephesians. It took more than five centuries to give to Westminster
Abbey its present form. Solomon’s Temple only took seven and a half years to build;
but, as we shall see, its objects were wholly different from those of the great shrines
which we have mentioned. The wealth lavished upon it was such that its dishes,
bowls, cups, even its snuffers and snuffer trays, and its meanest utensils, were of
pure gold. The massiveness of its substructions, the splendor of its materials, the
artistic skill displayed by the Tyrian workmen in all its details and adornments,
added to the awful sense of its indwelling Deity, gave it an imperishable fame.
eeding but little repair, it stood for more than four centuries. Succeeded as it was
by the Temples of Zerubbabel and of Herod, it carried down till seventy years after
the Christian era the memory of the Tabernacle in the wilderness, of which it
preserved the general outline, though it exactly doubled all the proportions and
admitted many innovations.

18. The dedication ceremony was carried out with the utmost pomp. It required nearly
a year to complete the necessary preparations, and the ceremony with its feasts
occupied fourteen days; which were partly coincident with the autumn Feast of
Tabernacles.
The dedication falls into three great acts. The first was the removal of the Ark to its
new home; {1 Kings 8:1-3} then followed the speech and the prayer of Solomon (1
Kings 8:12-61); and, finally, the great holocaust was offered (1 Kings 8:62-66).
The old Tabernacle, or what remained of it, with its precious heirlooms, was carried
by priests and Levites from the high place at Gibeon, which was henceforth
abandoned. This procession was met by another, far more numerous and splendid,
consisting of all the princes, nobles, and captains, which brought the Ark from the
tent erected for it on Mount Zion by David forty years before.
The Israelites had flocked to Jerusalem in countless multitudes, under their sheykhs
and emirs from the border of Hamath on the Orontes, north of Mount Lebanon, to
the Wady el-Areesh. The king, in his most regal state, accompanied the procession,
and the Ark passed through myriads of worshippers crowded in the outer court,
from the tent on Mount Zion into the darkness of the Oracle on Mount Moriah,
where it continued, unseen perhaps by any human eye but that of the high priest
once a year, until it was carried away by ebuchadnezzar to Babylon. To indicate
that this was to be its rest for ever, the staves, contrary to the old law, were drawn
out of the golden rings through which they ran, in order that no human hand might
touch the sacred emblem itself when it was borne on the shoulders of the Levitic
priests. "And there they are unto this day," writes the compiler from his ancient
record, long after Temple and Ark had ceased to exist.
The king is the one predominant figure, and the high priest is not once mentioned.
athan is only mentioned by the heathen historian Eupolemos. Visible to the whole
vast multitude, Solomon stood in the inner court on a high scaffolding of brass.
Then came a burst of music and psalmody from the priests and musicians, robed in
white robes, who densely thronged the steps of the great altar. They held in their
hands their glittering harps and cymbals, and psalteries in their precious frames of
red sandal wood, and twelve of their number rent the air with the blast of their
silver trumpets as Solomon, in this supreme hour of his prosperity, shone forth
before his people in all his manly beauty.
At the sight of that stately figure in its gorgeous robes the song of praise was swelled
by innumerable voices, and, to crown all, a blaze of sudden glory wrapped the
Temple and the whole scene in heaven’s own splendor. {2 Chronicles 5:13-14} First,
the king, standing with his back to the people, broke out into a few words of
prophetic song. Then, turning to the multitude, he blessed them-he, and not the high
priest-and briefly told them the history and significance of this house of God,
warning them faithfully that the Temple after all was but the emblem of God’s
presence in the midst of them, and that the Most High dwelleth not in temples made
with hands, neither is worshipped with men’s hands as though He needed anything.

19. After this he advanced to the altar, and kneeling on his knees {2 Chronicles 6:13}-a
most unusual attitude among the Jews, who, down to the latest ages, usually stood
up to pray-he prayed with the palms of his hands upturned to heaven, as though to
receive in deep humility its outpoured benefits. The prayer, as here given, consists of
an introduction, seven petitions, and a conclusion. It was a passionate entreaty that
God would hear, both individually and nationally, both in prosperity and in
adversity, the supplications of His people, and even of strangers, Who should either
pray in the courts of that His house, or should make it the Kibleh of their devotions.
After the dedicatory prayer both the outer and the inner court of the Temple reeked
and swam with the blood of countless victims-victims so numerous that the great
brazen altar became wholly insufficient for them. At the close of the entire festival
they departed to their homes with joy and gladness.
But whatever the Temple might or might not be to the people, the king used it as his
own chapel. Three times a year, we are told, he offered-and for all that appears,
offered with his own hand without the intervention of any priest burnt offerings and
peace offerings upon the altar. ot only this, but he actually "burnt incense
therewith upon the altar which was before the Lord,"-the very thing which was
regarded as so deadly a crime in the case of King Uzziah. Throughout the history of
the monarchy, the priests, with scarcely any exception, seem to have been passive
tools in the hands of the kings. Even under Rehoboam much more under Ahaz and
Manasseh-the sacred precincts were defiled with nameless abominations, to which,
so far as we know, the priests offered no resistance.
PARKER, "The Co-operation of Hiram
1 Kings 5
HIRAM is first mentioned in 2 Samuel 5:11, and a parallel passage will be found in
1 Chronicles 14:1, from which we learn that he sent workmen and materials to
David for the building of his own palace. According to tradition, Hiram was a
tributary or dependent monarch. The embassy which Hiram sent on this occasion
was evidently meant to express the congratulations of the king of Tyre,—in 2
Chronicles 2:14-15 we find the words, "My lord," "My lord David thy father."
There is a notable mixture of affection and reverence in the spirit which Hiram
showed to Solomon; Hiram was "ever a lover of David," and yet he speaks of David
in terms which an inferior would use to a superior. Hiram preserved the continuity
of friendship, and herein showed himself an example, not only to monarchs but to
other men. "Thine own friend, and thy father"s friend, forsake not." Solomon in
returning an answer to the congratulations of Hiram was faithful to history as
embodied in the person of his own father, and therefore was by so much qualified to
continue what he believed to be the purpose and covenant of God. Solomon looked
facts steadily in the face. In the book of Chronicles the condemnation which the
Lord pronounced upon David is still more emphatically set forth: "But the word of
the Lord came to me, saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made

20. great wars: thou shalt not build an house unto my name, because thou hast shed
much blood upon the earth in my sight" ( 1 Chronicles 22:8, 1 Chronicles 28:3; 2
Chronicles 2:3).
Although Solomon was blessed with "rest on every side," and was enabled to look
upon a future without so much as the shadow of an adversary upon it, yet he was
determined not to be indolent. "And, behold, I purpose to build an house unto the
name of the Lord my God "—this is the language of a strong man; this is the
strength which increases by its own exercise. Suppose a man to come into the
circumstances which we have described as constituting the royal position of Song of
Solomon , and suppose that man destitute of an adequate and all-controlling
purpose, it is easy to see how he would become the victim of luxury, and how what
little strength he had would gradually be withdrawn from him. But at all events in
the opening of Solomon"s career we see that the purpose was always uppermost, the
soul was in a regnant condition, all outward pomp and circumstance was ordered
back into its right perspective, and the king pursued a course of noble constancy as
he endeavoured to realise the idea and intent of heaven. The same law applies to all
prosperous men. To increase in riches is to increase in temptation, to indolence and
self-idolatry: to external trust and vain confidence, to misanthropy, monopoly, and
oppression; the only preventive or cure is the cultivation of a noble "purpose," so
noble indeed as to throw almost into contempt everything that is merely temporal
and earthly Solomon not only had inward and spiritual wisdom which comforted his
mind, but he had an intention which required him always to travel out of himself,
and to work for the glory of his kingdom and the benefit of his people. Every
master, every great Prayer of Manasseh , every leader should build a house for God,
a school for the ignorant, an asylum for the destitute, or in some other way realise a
sublime purpose in life. Then let riches come tenfold, and they will not be too much
to carry out a benevolence which knows no bound.
GUZIK, "A. Solomon’s arrangements with Hiram of Tyre.
1. (1 Kings 5:1-6) Solomon’s message to Hiram of Tyre.
ow Hiram king of Tyre sent his servants to Solomon, because he heard that they
had anointed him king in place of his father, for Hiram had always loved David.
Then Solomon sent to Hiram, saying: You know how my father David could not
build a house for the name of the LORD his God because of the wars which were
fought against him on every side, until the LORD put his foes under the soles of his
feet. But now the LORD my God has given me rest on every side; there is neither
adversary nor evil occurrence. And behold, I propose to build a house for the name
of the LORD my God, as the LORD spoke to my father David, saying, “Your son,
whom I will set on your throne in your place, he shall build the house for My name.”
ow therefore, command that they cut down cedars for me from Lebanon; and my
servants will be with your servants, and I will pay you wages for your servants
according to whatever you say. For you know there is none among us who has skill
to cut timber like the Sidonians.

21. a. For Hiram had always loved David: David was a mighty warrior against the
enemies of Israel. But he did not regard every neighbor nation as an enemy. David
wisely built alliances and friendships with neighbor nations, and the benefit of this
also came to Solomon.
i. “Hiram is an abbreviation of Ahiram which means ‘Brother of Ram,’ or ‘My
brother is exalted,’ or ‘Brother of the lofty one.’ . . . Archaeologists have discovered
a royal sarcophagus in Byblos of Tyre dated about 1200 B.C. inscribed with the
king’s name, ‘Ahiram.’ Apparently it belonged to the man in this passage.” (Dilday)
b. Then Solomon sent to Hiram: “According to Josephus, copies of such a letter
along with Hiram’s reply were preserved in both Hebrew and Tyrian archives and
were extant in his day (Antiquities, 8.2.8).” (Dilday)
c. You know how my father David could not build a house for the name of the
LORD his God: This means that David told Hiram spiritual things, things that one
might think Hiram could not understand or be interested in. In some ways, David
spoke to Hiram as if Hiram were already an Israelite.
i. This chapter deals with Solomon’s work in obtaining the materials to build the
temple. Yet David was so interested in this work that he had already gathered many
of the supplies needed to build the temple (2 Chronicles 22:4).
d. Until the LORD put his foes under the soles of his feet: “To put enemies under
the feet was the symbolic act marking conquest. In contemporary art enemies were
often depicted as a footstool (as Psalms 110:1).”
e. There is neither adversary nor evil occurrence: The word adversary here is
literally Satan. The Latin Vulgate translates this, “nor a Satan.”
f. I propose to build a house for the name of the LORD my God: Of course, Solomon
did not build a temple for a name but for a living God. This is a good example of
“avoiding” direct mention of the name of God in Hebrew writing and speaking.
They did this in reverence to God.
i. Solomon also used this phrase because he wanted to explain that he didn’t think
the temple would be the house of God in the way pagans thought. “It is to be ‘an
house for the name of the LORD.’ That is not the same as ‘for the LORD.’ Pagan
temples might be intended by their builders for the actual residence of the god, but
Solomon knew that the heaven of heavens could not contain Him, much less this
house which he was about to build.” (Maclaren)
g. Cut down cedars for me from Lebanon: The cedar trees of Lebanon were
legendary for their excellent timber. This means Solomon wanted to build the
temple out of the best materials possible.

22. i. “The Sidonians were noted as timber craftsmen in the ancient world, a fact
substantiated on the famous Palmero Stone. Its inscription from 2200 B.C. tells us
about timber-carrying ships that sailed from Byblos to Egypt about four hundred
years previously. The skill of the Sidonians was expressed in their ability to pick the
most suitable trees, know the right time to cut them, fell them with care, and then
properly treat the logs.” (Dilday)
ii. It also means that Solomon was willing to build this great temple to God with
“Gentile” wood and using “Gentile” labor. This was a temple to the God of Israel,
but it was not only for Israel. Only Jews built the tabernacle, “but the temple is not
build without the aid of the Gentile Tyrians. They, together with us, make up the
Church of God.” (Trapp)
PULPIT, "SOLOMO A D HIRAM—The somewhat detailed description which
we have had in 1 Kings 4:1-34. of Solomon's pomp and power and wisdom, is
followed in 1 Kings 5:1-18. sqq. by an account of what, in Jewish eyes, was the great
undertaking of his reign, and, indeed, the great glory of Hebrew history—the
erection and adornment of the Temple. And as this was largely due to the assistance
he received both in the shape of materials and labourers—from the Tyrian king, we
have in the first place an account of his alliance with Hiram.
1 Kings 5:1
And Hiram (In 1 Kings 5:10, 1 Kings 5:18, the name is spelled Hirom ( ‫ִירוֹם‬‫ח‬ ), whilst
in Chronicles, with one exception (1 Chronicles 14:1, where the Keri, however,
follows the prevailing usage), the name appears as Huram ( ‫ם‬ ָ‫חוּר‬ ). In Josephus it is
εἰρωµος. This prince and his friendly relations with the Jews are referred to by the
Tyrian historians, of whose materials the Greek writers Dins and Menander of
Ephesus (temp. Alexander the Great) availed themselves. According to Dins (quoted
by Josephus contr. Apion, 1.17) Hiram was the son of Abibaal. Menander states that
the building of the temple was commenced in the twelfth year of Hiram's reign,
which lasted 34 years. Hiram is further said to have married his daughter to
Solomon and to have engaged with him in an intellectual encounter which took the
shape of riddles] king of Tyre [Heb. ‫,צוֹר‬ rock, so called because of the rocky island
on which old Tyro was built, sometimes called ‫ֹר‬ ‫צ‬ ‫ַר‬‫צ‬ְ‫ב‬ִ‫מ‬, the fortress of, or fortified
Tyro (Joshua 19:29; 2 Samuel 24:7, etc.) The capital of Phoenicia. In earlier times,
Sidon would seem to have been the more important town; hence the Canaanites who
inhabited this region were generally called Zidonians, as in verse 6] sent his servants
[legatos, Vatablus] unto Solomon [The Vat. LXX. has here a strange reading, "To
anoint Solomon," etc. The object of this embassy was evidently to recognize and
congratulate the youthful king (the Syriac has a gloss, "and he blessed him," which
well represents one object of the embassy) and at the same time to make overtures of
friendship. An alliance, or good understanding, with Israel was then, as at a later
period (Acts 12:20) of great importance to them of Tyre and Sidon. Their narrow
strip of seaboard furnished no corn lands, so that their country depended upon
Israel for its nourishment]; for he had heard that they had anointed him king in the

23. room of David his father [i.e; he had heard of the death of David and the accession
of Solomon; possibly of the events narrated in Hebrews 1:1-14.]: for Hiram was ever
[Heb. all the days: i.e; of their reigns; so long as they were contemporary sovereigns]
a lover.
MACLARE , "GREAT PREPARATIONS FOR A GREAT WORK
The building of the Temple was begun in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign (1Ki_6:1).
The preparations for so great a work must have taken much time, so that the
arrangement with Hiram recorded in this passage was probably made very early in the
reign. That probability is strengthened if we suppose, as we must do, that the embassy
from Hiram mentioned in 1Ki_5:1 was sent to congratulate Solomon on his accession. If
so, the latter’s proposal to get timber and stones from the Lebanon would be made at the
very commencement of the reign. Three years would not be more than enough to get the
material ready and transported. Great designs need long preparation. Raw haste wastes
time; deliberation is as needful before beginning as rapid action is when we have begun.
I. 1Ki_5:3-5 set forth very forcibly the motives which impelled the young king to the
work, and may suggest to us the motives which should urge us to diligence in building a
better temple than he reared. He begins by reference to his father’s foiled wish, and to
the reason why David could not build the house. Not only was it inappropriate that a
warlike king should build it, but it was impossible that, whilst his thoughts were
occupied and his resources taxed by war, he should devote himself to such a work. In
Assyria and Egypt the great warrior kings are the great temple-builders, but a divine
decorum forbade it to be so in Israel.
Solomon next thankfully describes his own happier circumstances. Observe his
designation of Jehovah in1 Kings 5:4 as ‘my God,’ and compare with 1Ki_5:3, where He
is called David’s God. The son had inherited the divine protection and the father’s sense
of personal relation to Jehovah. That is a better legacy than a throne. Well had it been
for Solomon if he had held by the faith of his first days of royalty! Such a sense of a
personal bond of love protecting on the one hand, and love trusting and obeying on the
other, is the spring of all true service of God, whether it is busied in temple-building or
in anything else.
We note also the grateful recognition of benefits received, and the tracing of peace and
outward prosperity to God’s care. There was not a cloud in the sky. The horizon was
clear all round, and it was ‘the Lord my God,’ who had made this ease for Solomon. We
are often more ready to recognise God’s hand in sorrows than in joys. When He smites,
we try to say ‘It is the Lord!’ Do we try to say it when all things are smooth and bright?
The effect of blessings should be thankfulness, and the proof of thankfulness is service.
So Solomon did not take prosperity as an inducement to selfish luxurious repose, but
heard in it God’s call to a great task. If all the rich men and all the leisurely women who
call themselves Christians would do likewise, there would be plenty of workers and of
resources for Christ’s service, which now sorely lacks both. How many of such ‘lay up
treasure for themselves, and are not rich toward God’! How many fritter away their
leisure in vanities, having time for any amusement or folly, but none for Christian
service!
The man whom Jesus called ‘Thou fool!’ not the wise king, is the pattern for a sad
number of professing Christians. ‘Thou hast much goods laid up for many years.’ What

24. then? ‘I purpose to build an house for the name of the Lord’? By no means. ‘I will build
greater barns, and that will give me something to do, and then I will take mine ease.’
We note, too, that Solomon was impelled to his great work by the knowledge that God
had appointed him to do it. The divine word concerning himself, spoken to his father,
sounded in his ears, and gave him no rest till he had set about obeying it (1Ki_5:5). The
motives of the great temple-builders of old, as they themselves expound them in
hieroglyphics and cuneiform, were largely ostentation and the wish to outdo
predecessors; but Solomon was moved by thankfulness and by obedience to his father’s
will, and still more, to God’s destination of him. If we would look at our positions and
blessings as he looked at his in the fair dawning of his reign, we should find abundant
indications of God’s will regarding our work.
Solomon uses a remarkable expression as to the purpose of the Temple. It is to be ‘an
house for the name of the Lord.’ That is not the same as ‘for the Lord.’ Pagan temples
might be intended by their builders for the actual residence of the god, but Solomon
knew that the heaven of heavens could not contain Him, much less this house which he
was about to build. We are fairly entitled, then, to lay stress on that phrase, ‘the Name.’
It means the whole self-revelation of God, or, rather, the character of God as made
known by that self-revelation.
The Temple was, then, to be the place in which the God who fills earth and heaven was
to manifest Himself, and where His servants were to behold and reverence Him as
manifested. The Shechinah was the symbol, and in one aspect was a part, of that self-
revelation. However, in common speech the Temple was spoken of as the house of
Jehovah. The same thought which is expressed in Solomon’s fuller phrase underlay the
expression,-He dwelt ‘not in temples made with hands’ but His name was set there, and
the structure was reared, not so much for Him as that worshippers might there meet
Him.
II. The rest of the passage deals with Solomon’s request to Hiram, and the preparation
of the material for the Temple. Solomon’s first care was to secure timber and stone. His
own dominions can never have been well wooded, and there are many indications that
the great central knot of mountainous land, which included the greater part of his
kingdom, was comparatively treeless. He therefore proposed to Hiram to supply timber
from the great woods on Lebanon, which have now nearly died out, and offered liberal
payment.
The parallel account in 2 Chronicles makes Solomon offer specified quantities of
provisions for Hiram’s workmen, and makes Hiram accept the terms. 1Ki_5:11 of this
chapter says that the provisions named there were for the Tyrian king’s ‘household.’ This
may possibly mean the workmen, who would be regarded as Hiram’s slaves, but, more
probably, ‘household’ means ‘court,’ and Solomon had not only to feed the army of
workmen, but to supply as much again for the great establishment which Hiram kept up.
The little slip of seacoast, with the mountain rising sharply behind, which made Hiram’s
kingdom, could not grow enough for his people’s wants. His country was ‘nourished’ by
Palestine, long centuries after this time (Act_12:20), and the same was the case in
Solomon’s period. In 1Ki_5:11, the quantity of oil is impossibly small as compared with
that of wheat. 2 Chronicles reads ‘twenty thousand’ instead of ‘twenty,’ and the
Septuagint inserts ‘thousand’ in 1Ki_5:11, which is probably correct.
With all his Oriental politeness and probably real wish to oblige a powerful neighbour,
Hiram was too true a Phoenician not to drive a good bargain. He was king of ‘a nation of
shopkeepers,’ and was quite worthy of the position. ‘Nothing for nothing’ seems to have

25. been his motto, even with friends. He would love Solomon, and send him flowery
congratulations, and talk as if all he had was his ally’s, but when it came to settling terms
he knew what his cedars were worth, and meant to have their value.
There are a good many people who get mixed up with religious work, and talk as if it
were very near their hearts, who have as sharp an eye to their own advantage as he had.
The man who serves God because he gets paid for it, does not serve Him. The Temple
may be built of the timber and stones that he has supplied, but he sold them, and did not
give them, therefore he has no part in the building.
How different the uncalculating lavishness of Solomon! He knows no better use for
treasures than to expend them on God’s service, and ‘all for love, and nothing for
reward.’ That Is the true temper for Christian work. He to whom Christ has given
Himself should give himself to Christ; and he who has given himself should and will
keep back nothing, nor seek for cheap ways of serving the Lord, He who gives all, be it
two mites, or a fishing-boat and some torn nets, or great wealth like that which Solomon
found in his father’s treasuries and devoted to building the Temple, gives much; and he
who gives less than he can gives little.
Solomon’s work was, after all, outward work, and fitter for that early age than the
imitation of it would be now. The days for building temples and cathedrals are past. The
universal religion hallows not Gerizim nor Jerusalem, but every place where souls seek
God The spiritual religion asks for no shrines reared by men’s hands; for Jesus Christ is
the true Temple, where God’s name is set, and where men may behold the manifested
Jehovah, and meet with Him. But we have work to do for Christ, and a temple to build in
our own souls, and a stone or two to lay in the great Temple which is being built up
through the ages. Well for us if we use our resources and our leisure, for such ends with
the same promptitude, thankful surrender, and sense of fulfilling God’s purpose, as
animated the young king of Israel!
BI 1-19, "Hiram king of Tyre sent his servants unto Solomon . . . to build the house.
The co-operation of Hiram
According to tradition, Hiram was a tributary or dependent monarch. The embassy
which Hiram sent on this occasion was evidently meant to express the congratulations of
the King of Tyre—in 2Ch_2:14-15, we find the words, “My lord,” “My lord David thy
father.” There is a notable mixture of affection and reverence in the spirit which Hiram
showed to Solomon; Hiram was “ever a lover of David,” and yet he speaks of David in
terms which an inferior would use to a superior. Hiram preserved the continuity of
friendship, and herein showed himself an example, not only to monarchs but to other
men. Although Solomon was blessed with “rest on every side,” and was enabled to look
upon a future without so much as the shadow of an adversary upon it, yet he was
determined not to be indolent. Suppose a man to come into the circumstances which we
have described as constituting the royal position of Solomon, and suppose that man
destitute of an adequate and all-controlling purpose, it is easy to see how he would
become the victim of luxury, and how what little strength he had would gradually be
withdrawn from him. But at all events, in the opening of Solomon’s career, we see that
the purpose was always uppermost, the soul was in a regnant condition, all outward
pomp and circumstance was ordered back into its right perspective, and the king
pursued a course of noble constancy as he endeavoured to realise the idea and intent of
heaven. The same law applies to all prosperous men. To increase in riches is to increase
in temptation, to indolence and self-idolatry: to external trust and vain confidence, to

26. misanthropy, monopoly, and oppression; the only preventive or cure is the cultivation of
a noble “purpose,” so noble indeed as to throw almost into contempt everything that is
merely temporal and earthly. Even the noblest purpose needs the co-operation of
sympathetic and competent men. Thus the Jew seeks assistance from the Gentile in
building the house of the Lord. How wonderful are the co-operations which are
continually taking place in life! so subtly do they interblend, and make up that which is
lacking in each other, that it is simply impossible to effect an exhaustive analysis, Nor
would it be desirable that such an analysis should be completed. We should fix our
minds upon the great fact that no man liveth unto himself, that no man is complete in
himself, that every man needs the help of every other man, and thus we shall see how
mysteriously is built the great temple of life, and is realised before the eyes of the
universe the great purpose of God. Co-operation is only another word for the
distributions which God has made of talent and opportunity. In vain had Hiram
responded in the language of generous sympathy if Israel itself had been a divided
people. This must be the condition of the Church as a great working body in the world. It
will be in vain that poetry, history, literature, music, and things which apparently lie
outside the line of spiritual activity, send in their offers, tributes, and contributions, each
according to its own kind, if the Church to which the offer is made is a divided and self-
destroying body. When all Israel is one, the contributions of Tyre will be received with
thankfulness and be turned to their highest uses. A beautiful picture is given in verse 14.
The picture represents the difference between cutting down and setting up; in other
words, the difference between destruction and construction. It was easier to cut down
than it was to build up. The two operations should always go on together. The business
of the Church is to pull down, and to build up; even to use the materials of the enemy in
building up the temple of the living God. The picture has aa evident relation to the ease
with which men can pull down faith and darken hope and unsettle confidence. Thus the
work of foreign missions should help the work of missions at home. Every idolatry that
is thrown down abroad should be turned into a contribution for the upbuilding and
strengthening of the Church at home. The care shown of the foundation is another
instance of the wisdom of Solomon. The stones which were used in the foundation were
in no sense considered insignificant or worthless. The stones which Solomon used are
described as “great stones, costly stones, and hewed stones”; the terms which are used to
describe the foundation which was laid in Zion are these—“A stone, a tried stone, a
precious corner-stone, a sure foundation.” We read also of the foundations of the wall of
the city which John saw in vision—“The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in
them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” A curious illustration of the union
between the permanent and the temporary is shown in all earthly arrangements.
Solomon laid foundations which might have lasted as long as the earth itself endured.
Judging by the foundations alone, one would have said concerning the work of Solomon,
This is meant for permanence; no thought of change or decay ever occurred to the mind
of the man who laid these noble courses. It is the same with ourselves in nearly all the
relations of life. We know that we may die to-day, yet we lay plans which will require
years and generations to accomplish. Yet we often speak as having no obligation to the
future, or as if the future would do nothing for us, not knowing that it is the future which
makes the present what it is, and that but for the future all our inspiration would be lost
because our hope would perish. Let us see that our foundations are strong. A beautiful
illustration of contrast and harmony is to be found in the distribution which Solomon
made of his workers and the labour they were required to undertake. Here we find
burden-bearers, hewers in the mountains, officers, and rulers. There was no standing
upon one level or claiming of one dignity. Each man did what he could according to the
measure of his capacity, and each man did precisely what he was told to do by his

27. commanding officer. It is in vain to talk about any equality that does not recognise the
principle of order and the principle of obedience. Our equality must be found in our
devotion, in the pureness of our purpose, in the steadfastness of our loyalty, and not in
merely official status or public prominence. The unity of the Church must be found, not
in its forms, emoluments, dignities, and the like, but in the simplicity of its faith and the
readiness of its eager and affectionate obedience. (J. Parker, D. D.)
2 Solomon sent back this message to Hiram:
CLARKE, "Solomon sent to Hiram - Made an interchange of ambassadors and
friendly greetings. Josephus tells us that the correspondence between Hiram and
Solomon was preserved in the archives of the Tyrians even in his time. But this, like
many other assertions of the same author, is worthy of little credit.
GILL, "And Solomon sent to Hiram,.... A letter, either by the hand of his
ambassadors when they returned, as Kimchi thinks, or by ambassadors Solomon sent on
purpose. Josephus (w) appeals to the Tyrian archives for the genuineness of these letters
that passed between Hiram and Solomon; and Eupolemus, an Heathen writer (x) has
both this which Solomon sent to Hiram, and that which Hiram sent in answer to it,
which agree with those in the sacred records:
saying: as follows.
K&D, "1Ki_5:2-3
Solomon thereupon communicated to Hiram, by means of an embassy, his intention
to carry out the building of the temple which his father projected, and asked him for
building wood from Lebanon for the purpose. From the words, “Thou knowest that my
father David could not build,” etc., it is evident that David had not only been busily
occupied for a long time with the plan for building a temple, but that he had already
commenced negotiations with Hiram on the matter; and with this 1Ch_22:4 agrees. “To
the name of Jehovah:” this expression is based upon Deu_12:5 and Deu_12:11 : “the
place which the Lord shall choose to put His name there, or that His name may dwell
there.” The name of Jehovah is the manifestation of the divine nature in a visible sign as
a real pledge of His presence (see at 1Ki_12:5), and not merely numen Jovae quatenus
ab hominibus cognoscitur, colitur, celebratur (Winer, Thenius). Hence in 2 Sam 7, to
which Solomon refers, ‫ת‬ִ‫י‬ ַ ‫י‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫ה‬ָ‫נ‬ ָ (1Ki_5:5, 1Ki_5:7) alternates with ‫י‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫ת‬ִ‫י‬ ַ ‫ה‬ָ‫נ‬ ָ (1Ki_

28. 5:13). On the obstacle which prevented it, “because of the war, with which they (the
enemies) had surrounded me,” see at 2Sa_7:9. On the construction, ‫ב‬ ַ‫ב‬ ָ‫ס‬ with a double
accusative, compare the very similar passage, Psa_109:3, which fully establishes the
rendering we have given, so that there is no necessity to assume that ‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫ח‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ‫,מ‬ war, stands
for enemies (Ewald, §317, b.).
PETT, "1 Kings 5:2-3
‘And Solomon sent to Hiram, saying, “You know how it was that David my father
could not build a house for the name of YHWH his God because of the wars which
were about him on every side, until YHWH put them under the soles of his feet.”
Solomon was delighted to receive Hiram’s messengers and accept his good wishes,
for his plans for building the Temple included the need to obtain help from Hiram.
So he explained to Hiram what he was about, and what follows in 1 Kings 5:2-6 is
typical of diplomatic correspondence in those days. He names the addressee, refers
to previous contacts, and makes the opening moves towards an economic treaty.
Hiram, who had previously helped David to build his palace (2 Samuel 5:11) no
doubt already knew about the plans for the Temple because it had originally been
David’s intention to build it (2 Samuel 7:2), and even had we not read about it in 1
Chronicles 22, we would have suspected that David had begun making preparations
for it (see 1 Kings 8:51; 1 Chronicles 26:25). For while YHWH had not been
enthusiastic about his suggestion, and had firmly countered it, it is clear that David
had failed to allow YHWH’s words (2 Samuel 7:5-7) to sink deeply enough into his
mind for them to replace his own fixed idea. His view was that every nation around
had built a splendid temple or more to their gods. Why then should Israel be the
exception? And because his heart was filled with love for YHWH he wanted it to be
the very best. Yet even he, the Psalmist of Israel, was not spiritual enough to
recognise that no earthly Temple could be remotely acceptable to, or suitable for,
the God of Sinai. As we have seen, a careful exegesis of the covenant in 2 Samuel
7:8-16 makes clear that the ‘house’ mentioned in 1 Kings 5:13 was not a physical
house (the passage as a whole only has in mind a ‘house’ that signifies descendants -
1 Kings 5:11; 1 Kings 5:16) but was paralleled with the idea of the everlasting
throne. 1 Kings 5:16 can thus be seen as explaining the fulfilment of 1 Kings 5:13.
God would give David a house (1 Kings 5:11), and his seed would build it to the
glory of YHWH (1 Kings 5:13), and it would be everlasting (1 Kings 5:16).
However, both David and Solomon wrongly interpreted YHWH’s words in a
physical fashion, and in His graciousness YHWH went along with them because He
could see that they desired it and that it was from the right attitude of heart (just as
God often goes along with us in our plans, even though they must sometimes make
Him cringe). It is not difficult to understand why they failed in their understanding.
The full concept that God had given them was beyond the grasp of their spiritual
comprehension, even though David certainly partially grasped it (1 Kings 5:18-18),
and Solomon was himself aware of the inadequacy of the Temple as a dwelling-place
for YHWH (1 Kings 8:27). Such understanding would await the illumination of the

29. great prophets.
Solomon then explained to Hiram his view that David had been unable to build the
house ‘for the ame of YHWH his God’ because of the wars that were about him on
every side. But that again was something that Solomon was, at least to some extent,
giving a misleading impression about (we must ever remember that Solomon’s
words, while an accurate record of what he said, do not necessarily always
themselves express Scriptural truth, any more than Satan’s words do elsewhere).
For we have specifically been told that David himself had wanted to build the
Temple himself precisely because the wars had ceased (2 Samuel 7:1; 2 Samuel
7:11). In other words his enemies had been put under his feet at that time, and thus
that could not be the basic reason for his failing to build the Temple.
It was, however, politic of Solomon to suggest that as the reason, rather than saying
that it was because his father was ‘a man of blood’. And 1 Chronicles 22:9 does
reveal that there was enough truth in it for it not to be totally false. In fact, however,
1 Chronicles 22:8 tells us that the main reason that David did not build the Temple
was because the word of YHWH came to him saying ‘You have shed blood
abundantly and have made great wars. You shall not build a house to My ame
because you have shed much blood on the earth in My sight’. After which YHWH
had then yielded to David’s desire for his son to build it and had gone on to permit a
physical interpretation of the prophecy first given in 2 Samuel 7:13. What God was
doing was making it clear that, even though shed necessarily, the wholesale
shedding of human blood by human beings was contrary to all that God was.
YHWH’s allowing of the building of the Temple would have caused no problem if
only Israel (and later the Jews) had recognised that the physical Temple was but a
symbol of the ‘spiritual house’ that YHWH would establish in the Coming King.
How different history would have been in that case. But while they did partly grasp
it in the idea of the coming of the Messiah, they had totally wrong ideas about Him,
and on the whole both failed to recognise Him when He came, or to recognise that
His coming signalled the demise of the Temple which had lost its significance with
His coming. They had become wedded to the Temple. To them the Temple had
become more important than the Messiah. Similar blindness to some extent
pervades much of the church today. They too are looking for the building of a
physical Temple, where non-Scriptural sacrifices of their own invention will be
offered, and have failed to recognise that the physical Temple has outlived its
usefulness and is no longer a valid option, and that it has been more than fully
replaced by:
1). Jesus Christ Himself (John 2:19).
2). The spiritual Temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 3:16; 2 Corinthians 6:16-
18; Ephesians 2:20-22), the Temple which is made up of the conjoined body in
Christ of all true believers, the true Zion, the everlasting Sanctuary (Galatians 4:26;
Hebrews 12:22), of which Revelation 11:1-12 is a part picture.
3). The heavenly Temple, first visualised by Ezekiel as being on earth for a time,
invisibly but effectively (Ezekiel 40-42), and finally being transported into Heaven

30. where its effectiveness is revealed in Revelation.
“For the ame of YHWH his God” probably has in mind the Ark of God for in 2
Samuel 6:2 we read of, ‘the Ark of God, whose ame is called by the ame of
YHWH of Hosts Who dwells between the Cherubim’. As far as Israel were
concerned where the Ark was the ame was. ‘The ame’ in essence indicates all
that God is, and from a human viewpoint that was closely wrapped up with the Ark,
with its revelation of the covenant God had made with them held within it and its
seat of propitiation above it, indicating to them both God’s covenant requirements
and His continual and everlasting mercy, while also emphasising His invisibility.
Any reference here to Deuteronomy 12:5 is therefore secondary, if it existed at all.
The idea of ‘the ame of YHWH’ comes as early as Genesis 13:4 where we read
that, ‘Abram called on the ame of YHWH’ (and even earlier in Genesis 4:26). In
Exodus 20:24 YHWH speaks of ‘the places where I record My ame’, closely
linking His ame with His temporary sanctuaries. In Exodus 23:21 YHWH could
say of the Angel of YHWH, ‘My ame is in Him’. Thus in all cases ‘the ame’
represented YHWH’s own presence. Again in Exodus 33:19 YHWH ‘pronounced
the ame of YHWH’ before Moses as an indication of His revealed presence,
compare Exodus 34:5. We can see therefore why the Ark of God which symbolised
His presence was ‘called by the ame of YHWH’ (2 Samuel 6:2), and why building
the ‘Dwellingplace of YHWH’ was considered as being in order to house His ame,
because it housed the Ark, and because He had revealed His ancient glory there.
The origin of the idea had therefore little to do with Deuteronomy 12 ff. It was much
older. Right from the beginning men had looked to, and worshipped, the ame of
YHWH at their sanctuaries, a ame which, however, was not limited to their
sanctuaries but went forth as YHWH went forth. Like 2 Samuel references in
Deuteronomy 12 ff rather look back to the above references (see Deuteronomy 12:5;
Deuteronomy 12:11; Deuteronomy 14:23-24; Deuteronomy 16:2; Deuteronomy 16:6;
Deuteronomy 16:11; Deuteronomy 26:2).
“Put them under the soles of his feet.” The conqueror would expect the defeated
enemy to prostrate themselves before him while he symbolically put the soles of his
feet on their heads.
ote On The Temple.
The impression given in 2 Samuel 7 is that God did not want a Temple built to His
ame, which is why He initially dissuaded David from doing so. It is very doubtful
whether 2 Samuel 7:13 initially had in mind the building of a physical Temple for
the emphasis in the whole passage is on the coming ‘house of David’ made up of his
son and his descendants. But once the idea had become lodged in David’s mind he
found it difficult to dismiss. To him it seemed logical that YHWH should have a
Temple, and the best Temple possible. He would not see that it simply brought
YHWH down to the same level as other (false) gods.
There are then clear hints in Samuel that David had not given up on the idea. See,
for example, 2 Samuel 8:11. The Chronicler thus points out that after the incident of

31. the pestilence and the threshing floor (2 Samuel 24) David again began to prepare
for the building of such a Temple at which point he was dissuaded from it by being
reminded of how much blood he had shed (1 Chronicles 22:8). But he was still
insisting on interpreting what God had said in His covenant as referring to a
physical Temple. God then seems to have made a concession in allowing his son to
build such a Temple because he wanted it so much. There is a very similar parallel
between this building of a Temple, which God did not really want, and the original
establishment of kingship in 1 Samuel, which God did not really want. In both cases
YHWH had not wanted it, but in the end allowed it as a concession.
The idea that then arose was that if such a Temple was to be built it should be as the
foundation of the coming successful kingdom of peace, it not being seen as seemly
that YHWH’s unique and holy Temple should be founded on the shedding of men’s
blood. It was to be a harbinger of joy and peace not of success in war. And
Solomon’s reign was being hailed as the beginning of that kingdom of peace. Sadly
that kingdom of peace would only too quickly prove abortive because of Solomon’s
own failings, but at least the right idea had been conveyed. If only Solomon had
rather concentrated on building the right kind of house, a righteous house made up
of his sons and descendants, and had given his own time and effort to training them
wisely, much of what follows could have been avoided. Instead he thought that he
had done enough by building a physical Temple and as a result went wildly wrong,
leaving a bad example for his children.
End of note.
PULPIT, "And Solomon sent to Hiram. [According to Josephus (Ant. 8.2. 6), he
wrote a letter, which together with Hiram's reply (1 Kings 5:8) was preserved
among the public archives of Tyro. The account of 2 Chronicles 2:1-18; which as a
rule is more detailed than that of the Kings, begins here. It does not notice, that is to
say, the prior embassy of the Phoenician king, as the object of the chronicler is
merely to narrate the measures taken for the erection of the temple], saying [The
return embassy gave Solomon the opportunity to ask for the timber, etc; that he
desired.]
3 “You know that because of the wars waged
against my father David from all sides, he could
not build a temple for the ame of the Lord his
God until the Lord put his enemies under his feet.