2 Samuele 7:15 Commento

Still the ark is David's care as well as his joy. In this chapter we have, I. His consultation with Nathan about building a house for it; he signifies his purpose to do it (Sa2 7:1, Sa2 7:2) and Nathan approves his purpose (Sa2 7:3). II. His communion with God about it. 1. A gracious message God sent him about it, accepting his purpose, countermanding the performance, and promising him an entail of blessings upon his family (Sa2 7:4-17). 2. A very humble prayer which David offered up to God in return to that gracious message, thankfully accepting God's promises to him, and earnestly praying for the performance of them (Sa2 7:18-29). And, in both these, there is an eye to the Messiah and his kingdom.

INTRODUCTION TO SECOND SAMUEL 7 This chapter expresses David's concern for building an house for the ark of God, which he communicated to Nathan the prophet, and was approved of by him, Sa2 7:1; and who was that night sent by the Lord to David, to acquaint him, that as he had for many years dwelt in a tent, and had never given directions to the tribes of Israel, and the rulers of them, to build him an house, so neither should David build him one; but his son that would succeed him in the throne should; and also observes to him the many great things he had done for him, and promises him more, and particularly the establishment of his throne and kingdom for ever, in which he has respect to the Messiah, that should spring from him, Sa2 7:4. Then follows a prayer of David, in which he expresses the sense he had of the greatness and goodness of God, and of his own unworthiness to receive such favours from him he had, returns him thanks for the promises he had made, and prays for the performance of them, Sa2 7:18.

But my mercy shall not depart away from him,.... Which is not to be understood of special mercy and grace, though it is true of these with respect to Solomon, and so to all the adopted children of God, see Psa 89:32; but then this here designs such mercy as may be taken away from another, and as it was from Saul, as it follows: as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee; and therefore must be understood of his mercy and kindness, in giving him a kingdom, and setting him on the throne; this should not be taken away from him, as it was from Saul, whom God rejected from being king; not him personally, but his posterity; but so the Lord would not do, nor did he, to Solomon, in whose posterity the kingdom of Judah continued to the Babylonish captivity.

So that you ought rather to desist from the love of strife, and repent before the great day of judgment come, wherein all those of your tribes who have pierced this Christ shall mourn as I have shown has been declared by the Scriptures. And I have explained that the Lord swore, "after the order of Melchizedek," and what this prediction means; and the prophecy of Isaiah which says, "His burial is taken away from the midst," I have already said, referred to the future burying and rising again of Christ; and I have frequently remarked that this very Christ is the Judge of all the living and the dead. And Nathan likewise, speaking to David about Him, thus continued: "I will be His Father, and He shall be my Son; and my mercy shall I not take away from Him, as I did from them that went before Him; and I will establish Him in my house, and in His kingdom for ever." And Ezekiel says, "There shall be no other prince in the house but He." For He is the chosen Priest and eternal King, the Christ, inasmuch as He is the Son of God; and do not suppose that Isaiah or the other prophets speak of sacrifices of blood or libations being presented at the altar on His second advent, but of true and spiritual praises and giving of thanks.

Again, listen concerning the title Son of God, by which we have called him. They [the Jews] say that “though God has no son, you make that crucified Jesus, the firstborn son of God.” Yet he called Israel “my firstborn” when he sent to Pharaoh through Moses and said to him, “Israel is my firstborn; I have said to you, let my son go to serve me, and if you are not willing to let (him) go, lo! I will slay your son, your firstborn.” And also through the prophet he testified concerning this and reproved them and said to the people, “Out of Egypt have I called my son. As I called them, so they went and worshiped Baal and offered incense to the graven images.” And Isaiah said concerning them, “Children have I reared and brought up, and they have rebelled against me.” And again it is written, “You are the children of the Lord your God.” And about Solomon he said, “He shall be a son to me, and I will be a Father to him.” So also we call the Christ “the Son of God” because through him we have gained the knowledge of God; even as he called Israel my firstborn son and as he said concerning Solomon, “He shall be a son to me.”

David consults the prophet Nathan about building a temple for the Lord, and is encouraged by him to do it, Sa2 7:1-3. That night Nathan receives a revelation from God, stating that Solomon, not David, should build the temple, Sa2 7:4-16. Nathan delivers the Divine message, and David magnifies God for his mercies, and makes prayer and supplication, Sa2 7:17-29.

But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul - His house shall be a lasting house, and he shall die in the throne of Israel, his children succeeding him; and the spiritual seed, Christ, possessing and ruling in that throne to the end of time. The family of Saul became totally extinct; the family of David remained till the incarnation. Joseph and Mary were both of that family; Jesus was the only heir to the kingdom of Israel; he did not choose to sit on the secular throne, he ascended the spiritual throne, and now he is exalted to the right hand of God, a Prince and a Savior, to give repentance and remission of sins. See the observations at the end of the chapter, Sa2 7:25 (note). Many have applied these verses and their parallels to support the doctrine of unconditional final perseverance; but with it the text has nothing to do; and were we to press it, because of the antitype, Solomon, the doctrine would most evidently be ruined, for there is neither proof nor evidence of Solomon's salvation.

NATHAN APPROVES THE PURPOSE OF DAVID TO BUILD GOD A HOUSE. (Sa2 7:1-3) the king said unto Nathan the prophet, See now, I dwell in an house of cedar--The palace which Hiram had sent men and materials to build in Jerusalem had been finished. It was magnificent for that age, though made wholly of wood: houses in warm countries not being required to possess the solidity and thickness of walls which are requisite for dwellings in regions exposed to rain and cold. Cedar was the rarest and most valuable timber. The elegance and splendor of his own royal mansion, contrasted with the mean and temporary tabernacle in which the ark of God was placed, distressed the pious mind of David.

David's Resolution to Build a Temple. The Promised Perpetuity of His Throne - 2 Samuel 7 To the erection of a sanctuary for the ark upon Mount Zion there is appended an account of David's desire to build a temple for the Lord. We find this not only in the text before us, but also in the parallel history in 1 Chron 17. When David had acquired rest from his enemies round about, he formed the resolution to build a house for the Lord, and this resolution was sanctioned by the prophet Nathan (Sa2 7:1-3). But the Lord revealed to the prophet, and through him to David, that He had not required the building of a temple from any of the tribes of Israel, and that He would first of all build a house himself for His servant David, and confirm the throne to his seed for ever, and then he should build Him a temple (Sa2 7:4-17). David then gave utterance to his thanksgiving for this glorious promise in a prayer, in which he praised the unmeasurable grace of God, and prayed for the fulfilment of this renewed promised of divine grace (Sa2 7:18-29). (Note: With regard to the historical authenticity of this promise, Tholuck observes, in his Prophets and their Prophecies (pp. 165-6), that "it can be proved, with all the evidence which is ever to be obtained in support of historical testimony, that David actually received a prophetic promise that his family should sit upon the throne for ever, and consequently an intimation of a royal descendant whose government should be eternal. Anything like a merely subjective promise arising from human combinations is precluded here by the fact that Nathan, acting according to the best of his knowledge, gave his consent to David's plan of building a temple; and that it was not till afterwards, when he had been instructed by a divine vision, that he did the very opposite, and assured him on the contrary that God would build him a house." Thenius also affirms that "there is no reason for assuming, as De Wette has done, that Nathan's prophecies were not composed till after the time of Solomon;" that "their historical credibility is attested by Ps 89 (Psa 89:4, Psa 89:5, 20-38, and especially Psa 89:20), Psa 132:11-12, and Isa 55:3; and that, properly interpreted, they are also Messianic." The principal evidence of this is to be found in the prophetic utterance of David in 2 Samuel 23, where, as is generally admitted, he takes a retrospective glance at the promise, and thereby attests the historical credibility of Nathan's prophecy (Thenius, p. 245). Nevertheless, Gust. Baur maintains that "a closer comparison of this more elaborate and simple description (2 Samuel 7) with the brief and altogether unexampled last words of David, more especially with Sa2 23:5, can hardly leave the slightest doubt, that the relation in which the chapter before us stands to these words, is that of a later expansion to an authentic prophetic utterance of the king himself." For example, the distinct allusion to the birth of Solomon, and the building of the temple, which was to be completed by him, is said to have evidently sprung from a later development of the original promise after the time of Solomon, on account of the incongruity apparent in Nathan's prediction between the ideal picture of the Israelitish monarchy and the definite allusion to Solomon's building of the temple. But there is no such "incongruity" in Nathan's prediction; it is only to be found in the naturalistic assumptions of Baur himself, that the utterances of the prophets contained nothing more than subjective and ideal hopes of the future, and not supernatural predictions. This also applies to Diestel's opinion, that the section Sa2 7:4-16 does not harmonize with the substance of David's glorious prayer in Sa2 7:18-29, nor the latter again with itself, because the advice given him to relinquish the idea of building the temple is not supported by any reasons that answer either to the character of David or to his peculiar circumstances, with which the allusion to his son would have been in perfect keeping; but the prophet's dissuasion merely alludes to the fact that Jehovah did not stand in need of a stately house at all, and had never given utterance to any such desire. On account of this "obvious" fact, Diestel regards it as credible that the original dissuasion came from God, because it was founded upon an earlier view, but that the promise of the son of David which followed proceeded from Nathan, who no doubt looked with more favourable eyes upon the building of the temple. This discrepancy is also arbitrarily foisted upon the text. There is not a syllable about any "original dissuasion" in all that Nathan says; for he simply tells the king that Jehovah had hitherto dwelt in a tent, and had not asked any of the tribes of Israel to build a stately temple, but not that Jehovah did not need a stately house at all.) Of the different exegetical treatises upon this passage, see Christ. Aug. Crusii Hypomnemata, ii. 190-219, and Hengstenberg's Christol. i. 123ff.