The Life and Times of


Building God’s House (2 Samuel 7:1-29)



Yüklə 1,06 Mb.
səhifə22/85
tarix28.10.2017
ölçüsü1,06 Mb.
#18771
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   85

Building God’s House (2 Samuel 7:1-29)

Introduction


One of my favorite movies is “Crocodile Dundee,” and one of my favorite scenes is when Dundee is in New York City walking down the street with his girl friend. Suddenly, from out of the shadows, a gang of thugs emerges. One of the hoodlums brandishes a knife and demands that Dundee hand over his possessions. Calmly, Dundee looks at the thugs before responding, “That's not a knife . . . this is a knife!” And he pulls out an incredibly large knife, which makes the would-be mugger’s switchblade look like a penknife as the thugs flee for their lives.

This scene reminds me of our text. David has just completed the construction of his palace. He looks out and sees the ark of the Lord, housed in a tent, and then begins to wonder. . . . A plan begins to formulate in his mind. Why not build a house for God, a temple? So David calls his friend and confidant, Nathan the prophet, and outlines his intentions. Nathan hastily consents, thinking that David's plans for such a “house” will be pleasing to God. But that night, Nathan is corrected by God, and he has to return to David with his revised prophetic evaluation. Through Nathan, God speaks to David. It is as though God were looking down at the blueprints which David had drawn up for God's “house.” God then looks at David and says, in effect, “David, that's not a house, . . . this is a house.” If David thinks he can build a house for God, he is wrong. It is God who plans to build a “house” for David. And what a house that will be. Let us listen carefully to the words of our text and learn what kind of a house God will build for David, and how it surpasses the temple-house David wants to build for God.

This is a very crucial text in the Old Testament. One can hardly over-estimate its importance not only for David, but for Israel and all mankind.

“Walter Brueggemann identifies this David and Nathan story as 'the dramatic and theological center of the entire Samuel corpus . . . one of the most crucial texts in the Old Testament for evangelical faith.'“1

Our text contains what theologians have come to call the Davidic Covenant, one of the great covenants of the Bible. We shall seek to explore the meaning and significance of this covenant in this message.

David's Plan and a Prophetic Approval
(7:1-3)


1 Now it came about when the king lived in his house, and the LORD had given him rest on every side from all his enemies, 2 that the king said to Nathan the prophet, “See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark of God dwells within tent curtains.” 3 Nathan said to the king, “Go, do all that is in your mind, for the LORD is with you.”

David has come a long way from his sheep-tending days as a young lad. It has just begun to dawn on David that God has established him as king over Israel (2 Samuel 5:12). The Philistines have twice sought to overthrow him, and twice David has defeated them. The enemies around Israel are, for the time being, at peace with David. With the help of Hiram, king of Tyre, David has completed his own palace, and he is now living in royal splendor. David now has the time to devote to other enterprises.

After a failed first effort, the ark of God has been successfully brought to Jerusalem, housed in a tent. David may have been looking out from the rooftop of his palace, his eyes fixed on the tabernacle-tent in which the ark was kept. Somehow it seems inappropriate for David to live in such splendor, while the ark of God is kept in such plain and seemingly provisional surroundings. The idea comes to him that he can build another house; this second house will be a temple in which the ark can be kept in far more fitting surroundings.

It is settled in David's mind. That is what he will do. And so David confides in Nathan the prophet, who seems also to be a friend and confidant of the king. How can such a generous gesture possibly be wrong? Why shouldn't God have a more fitting dwelling place? And so, without consulting God, Nathan gives David the go ahead. In effect, Nathan says to David, “Sounds good to me, and I'm sure it will be okay with God as well.” In biblical terms, Nathan says, “God, do all that is in your mind, for the LORD is with You” (verse 3).2


A Vision and a Revision (7:4-7)


4 But in the same night the word of the LORD came to Nathan, saying, 5 “Go and say to My servant David, 'Thus says the LORD, “Are you the one who should build Me a house to dwell in? 6 “For I have not dwelt in a house since the day I brought up the sons of Israel from Egypt, even to this day; but I have been moving about in a tent, even in a tabernacle. 7 “Wherever I have gone with all the sons of Israel, did I speak a word with one of the tribes of Israel, which I commanded to shepherd My people Israel, saying, 'Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?””

I remember years ago when I was a part of the administration of a small college. Actually, there were two schools. One was a college, and the other was a remedial educational program, designed to bring educationally handicapped young people up to a college level. I was not a part of the college program, but of the remedial program. When the college needed a teacher, I thought I had the perfect candidate. The problem was that the dean of the college had already made his decision. Unwisely, I spoke to the president of both schools, and he encouraged me to go to the dean with my idea. That was not a good thing to do. The dean's response to my suggestion caught me completely off guard. “Mr. Deffinbaugh,” he responded rather hotly, “who is running this school, you, or me?” Oops. I was in trouble. By the way, he was right. My idea was just that, and I was not the one running the school.

Nathan could surely identify with how I felt that day. In the middle of the night, God gives Nathan a direct revelation, which he is to convey to David. In a way, it put both Nathan and David in their place. Like me, David had a bright idea, but it did not correspond with God's plan. The question which God asks David sets the tone for what is to follow: “Are you the one who should build Me a house to dwell in?” Oops. I like the way Eugene Peterson puts it:

“But there are times when our grand human plans to do something for God are seen, after a night of prayer, to be a huge human distraction from what God is doing for us. That's what Nathan realized that night: God showed Nathan that David's building plans for God would interfere with God's building plans for David.”3

Before we go any further, it is time for me to point out a couple of significant details. Note that in verses 1, 2, and 3 David is referred to as the king, but when God refers to David, He calls him My servant David (verse 5). I think it is safe to suggest that David is a little too conscious of his position as king. Now in relation to all the people of Israel (and those outside Israel for that matter), David is the highest authority in the land. But in relation to God, David is merely a servant. David is living in a palace, and God is living in a tent, at least in David's mind. David almost appears to be wanting to give God a helping hand. It would be like me, wearing a tuxedo, sending Ross Perot a gift certificate to buy himself some decent clothes. It is for this reason, I believe, that God appears to put David in his place, first by referring to the king as His servant, and second by saying to him, “Who are you to be building Me a house?”

We should note yet another detail here. This very issue of the value of a temple, as opposed to the tabernacle, is addressed by Stephen in Acts 7:

44 “Our fathers had the tabernacle of testimony in the wilderness, just as He who spoke to Moses directed him to make it according to the pattern which he had seen. 45 “And having received it in their turn, our fathers brought it in with Joshua upon dispossessing the nations whom God drove out before our fathers, until the time of David. 46 “David found favor in God's sight, and asked that he might find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. 47 “But it was Solomon who built a house for Him. 48 “However, the Most High does not dwell in houses made by human hands; as the prophet says: 49 'HEAVEN IS MY THRONE, AND EARTH IS THE FOOTSTOOL OF MY FEET; WHAT KIND OF HOUSE WILL YOU BUILD FOR ME?' says the Lord, 'OR WHAT PLACE IS THERE FOR MY REPOSE? 50 'WAS IT NOT MY HAND WHICH MADE ALL THESE THINGS?'“ (Acts 7:44-50).

Stephen had been brought before the Sanhedrin on trumped up charges, one of which was that he spoke against the temple (Acts 6:13). Stephen did not deny the charge brought against him by false witnesses. Instead, he defended himself by pointing out from the Old Testament Scriptures that God was not nearly as impressed with the temple as the Jews were. He argued that God gave Israel the tabernacle, and that the temple was David's idea. He then went on to show that the God who created all things surely cannot be confined to a dwelling made by human hands. In short, God did not need a temple, and He did not ask for one. He allowed David's son to build the temple because David wanted it. It wasn't wrong; it just wasn't God's idea. God did not need a temple, and for some, a temple would convey the wrong message.

Second Samuel 7 is in agreement with Stephen's argument. In verses 6-11a, God explains to David why He does not need a temple made by him. The first reason is given in verse 6 and can be summed up in these words: “If it isn't broken, don't try to fix it.” Think about it. Why buy a new car if your present car performs perfectly? When God gave the law to Moses, He instructed him as to how a tabernacle should be constructed. Throughout Israel's history, from Mt. Sinai to the reign of David, the tabernacle had functioned flawlessly. God was with His people as the ark was kept in the tabernacle. And when the people moved from one place to another, the tabernacle and the ark went with them. God was with His people wherever they went. He gave them victory over their enemies. He gave them the possession of the promised land. Israel's history bore testimony to the fact that there was nothing to fix; the tabernacle did the job very adequately. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.

In verse 7, God gives yet another reason for there being no real need for a temple: “I didn't ask for one.” On Mt. Sinai, God gave Israel the law through Moses, and in this law, He specified how the tabernacle was to be constructed, how it was to be moved, and who was to care for it. God instructed the Israelites to build the tabernacle; He did not even ask for a temple. If a temple were needed, surely God would have asked for one, and since He did not ask, we must conclude it was not necessary.

In verses 8-11a, God gets to the heart of the matter. I want you to notice how often the pronoun “I” is found. This section is very clearly God-centered. I like the way Peterson puts it:

The message that Nathan delivers to David is dominated by a recital of what God has done, is doing, and will do. God is the first-person subject of twenty-three verbs in this message, and these verbs carry the action. David, full of what he's going to do for God, is now subjected to a comprehensive rehearsal of what God has done, is doing, and will do for and in David. What looked yesterday like a bold Davidic enterprise on behalf of God now looks picayune.4

Does David want to offer God a helping hand by building Him a better house in which to live? God reminds David Who is taking care of whom. Would David do something great for God, like build Him a temple? History would remind David (and us) that it has always been God helping us, not us helping God. David, God's servant, should recall that it was He who took him out of the pasture, from following (not leading) the sheep, and made him ruler of all Israel (verse 8). God has been with David, wherever he went, and it was He who gave David's enemies into his hand, resulting in his fame and reputation. It is God who has always come to man's aid, and not man who rescues God.

In verse 10, there is a significant change in the tense of the verbs. Previous verbs are in the past tense, referring back to what God has done in the past. Now, in verse 10, the verbs become future. After pointing out all that He has done for David and Israel in the past, God goes on to say something like: “David, My servant, you have not seen anything yet. The best is yet to come.” God promises to appoint a place for His people where they will be planted. They will have a place of their own (as David intended to give God a “place of His own”), and they will dwell in peace there because the wicked will no longer afflict them. It won't be like it used to be, from the time of the judges till the present. God will give David rest from all his enemies.5 Would David dare to think he could do something for God? It was God who gave David all that he had, and it was God who would give him yet even more.6

The question must arise: when are these promises to David fulfilled? It is clear that they were not yet fulfilled, for they are expressed as a future reality. Some might think they are fulfilled in the next three chapters (8-10), when David prevails over all his enemies who surround Israel. I don't think we can see a complete fulfillment in David's lifetime or even in that of his son Solomon. I believe these promises to David are fully realized only in the coming Kingdom of God, when the Lord Jesus Christ subdues all His enemies and establishes His kingdom on the earth. It is that time spoken of in the last chapters of the Book of Isaiah. These promises are given to David here because they pave the way for the promise God is about to make to David in the following verses, the promise to build a “house” for him.


Yüklə 1,06 Mb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   85




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©muhaz.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

gir | qeydiyyatdan keç
    Ana səhifə


yükləyin