Since the day that I brought forth my people Israel out of Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to build an house, that my name might be therein; but I chose David to be over my people Israel.
Jump to: Barnes • Benson • BI • Cambridge • Clarke • Darby • Ellicott • Expositor's • Exp Dct • Gaebelein • GSB • Gill • Gray • Haydock • Hastings • Homiletics • JFB • KD • KJT • Lange • MacLaren • MHC • MHCW • Parker • Poole • Pulpit • Sermon • SCO • TTB • WES • TSK
EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)I chose no city.—In this verse, as in some other cases, for coherence of idea, it seems necessary to correct from the fuller version in 2Chronicles 6:5-6, by an addition after the word “therein.” It should run: “Neither chose I any man to be ruler over my people, but I have chosen Jerusalem, that my name might be there, and I have chosen David to be over my people Israel.” The parallel in the two points referred to is exact. As there were temporary resting places for the ark—such as Gilgal, Shiloh, Kirjathjearim, and Zion—so there were rulers raised up successively for a time, and then removed. Now there was to be one fixed place as the Sanctuary of God, and one royal house of David to continue for ever.Since the day that I brought forth my people Israel out of Egypt, until David’s time; for then he did choose Jerusalem.
I chose no city, i.e. I did not declare my choice of it; for so choosing is used for declaring or executing one’s choice, as Deu 12:1 2 Chronicles 6:5 Zechariah 2:12, and things are oft said to be done when they are only manifested or declared to be such; in which sense God is said to be justified, Psalm 51:4, and men to be guilty, Hosea 5:15. Otherwise, to speak properly, whatsoever God chooseth, he chooseth from eternity.
That my name might be therein; that my presence, and grace, and worship, and glory might be there.
I chose David, and in and with him the tribe of Judah, of which he was, and Jerusalem, where he dwelt; which is here implied by the opposition of this to the former part of the verse. 1 Kings 6:1.
I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to build an house, that my name might be therein; he had chosen one in his mind from all eternity; but he had not made known this choice, nor the place he had chosen; he gave hints by Moses, that there was a place which he should choose, or declare he had chosen to put his name in, but did not express it, Deuteronomy 12:5 but now it was a clear case that he had chosen Jerusalem, and that was the city he always had in view, see 2 Chronicles 6:6,
but I chose David to be over my people Israel; to be their king, and to him he gave the first hint of the place where the temple was to be built, 1 Chronicles 22:1, and he chose no man, and his family with him, before him, to rule over Israel, and be concerned in such a work, see 2 Chronicles 6:5.Since the day that I brought forth my people Israel out of Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to build an house, that my name might be therein; but I chose David to be over my people Israel.
EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)16. that my name might be therein] The expression in the Pentateuch is constant about the place which is dedicated to the worship of God: ‘God records His name there’ (Exodus 20:24); ‘God chooses it to put His name there’ (Deuteronomy 12:5); ‘God chooses it to cause His name to dwell there’ (Deuteronomy 12:11). In Exodus 20:24 the phrase is ‘in all places,’ because by that code it was contemplated that the place set apart for worship would be changed from time to time, and before the one permanent place was fixed upon, there would be many places where God was worshipped. Deuteronomy represents the ideal to be aimed at when the people were established in Canaan.
but I chose David] This is expanded in 2 Chronicles 6:6 so as to include both the place and the person. ‘But I have chosen Jerusalem that my name might be there; and have chosen David to be over my people Israel.’ The LXX. also has the same clause. The language of this verse in Kings seems almost to imply some opposition (or difference in the way of choice) between the material structure and the person.Verse 16. - Since the day that I brought forth my people Israel out of Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel, to build a house, that my name might be therein [The chronicler adds here, "Neither chose I any man to be ruler," etc. Probably our account comes nearer to the words actually spoken. The speech in the Chronicles looks as if it had been somewhat amplified, though it only completes the sense (Rawlinson)], but I chose David to be over my people Israel. [Cf. Psalm 78:70. This psalm pursues much the same line of thought as this address.] Exodus 40:34-35); and so was it now. When the priests came out of the sanctuary, after putting the ark of the covenant in its place, the cloud filled the house of Jehovah, so that the priests could not stand to minister. The signification of this fact was the same on both occasions. The cloud, as the visible symbol of the gracious presence of God, filled the temple, as a sign that Jehovah the covenant-God had entered into it, and had chosen it as the scene of His gracious manifestation in Israel. By the inability of the priests to stand, we are not to understand that the cloud drove them away; for it was not till the priests had come out that it filled the temple. It simply means that they could not remain in the Holy Place to perform service, say to offer an incense-offering upon the altar to consecrate it, just as sacrifices were offered upon the altar of burnt-offering after the dedicatory prayer (1 Kings 8:62, 1 Kings 8:63).
(Note: Bertheau's opinion (on 2 Chronicles 5:14), that the priests could not remain in the hall and in front of it on account of the cloud, namely, "the cloud of smoke, which, ascending from the sacrifices burned upon the altar of burnt-offering, concealed the glory of the Lord," is decidedly erroneous. For the cloud which hindered the priest from performing the service was, according to the distinct words of the text, the cloud which filled the house; and the explanatory clause, "for the glory of the Lord filled the house of Jehovah," indicates in the most unmistakeable terms that it was the vehicle of the glory of God, and therefore was no a cloud of smoke formed by the burning sacrifices, but the cloud in which God manifested His invisible being to His people, - the very same cloud in which Jehovah was to appear above the Capporeth, when the high priest entered the Most Holy Place on the day of atonement, so that he was commanded not to enter it at all times, and, when he entered, to cover the Capporeth with the cloud of the burning incense (Leviticus 16:2, Leviticus 16:13).
The glory of the Lord, which is like a consuming fire (Exodus 24:17; Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 9:3), before which unholy man cannot stand, manifested itself in the cloud. This marvellous manifestation of the glory of God took place only at the dedication; after that the cloud was only visible in the Most Holy Place on the great day of atonement, when the high priest entered it. - The Chronicles contain a long account at this place of the playing and singing of the Levites at these solemnities (vid., 2 Chronicles 5:12-14).
Links1 Kings 8:16 Interlinear
1 Kings 8:16 Parallel Texts
1 Kings 8:16 NIV
1 Kings 8:16 NLT
1 Kings 8:16 ESV
1 Kings 8:16 NASB
1 Kings 8:16 KJV
1 Kings 8:16 Bible Apps
1 Kings 8:16 Parallel
1 Kings 8:16 Biblia Paralela
1 Kings 8:16 Chinese Bible
1 Kings 8:16 French Bible
1 Kings 8:16 German Bible