Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Chronicles 3:6
And he garnished the house with precious stones for beauty: and the gold [was] gold of Parvaim.
6. precious stones ] Not mentioned in the parallel account, but according to 1Ki 5:17 costly stones (the same expression in Hebrew) were used for the foundations of the house. Probably here also costly rather than precious stones are meant.
Parvaim ] Apparently the name of a place, but nothing certain is known about it.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Precious stones for beauty – Not marbles but gems (compare 1Ch 29:2). The phrase translated for beauty means for its beautification, to beautify it.
Parvaim is probably the name of a place, but what is quite uncertain.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
2Ch 3:6
And he garnished the house with precious stones for beauty.
Cost and beauty in Christian worship
The author of the history of the Jewish Church uses these words concerning the temple of Solomon: As in the Grecian tragedies we see always in the background the gate of Mycenae, so in the story of the people of Israel we have always in view the temple of Solomon. There is hardly any Jewish reign that is not in some way connected with its construction or its changes. In front of the great Church of the Escuriel in Spain–in the eyes of Spaniards itself a likeness of the temple–overlooking the court called by them the Court of the Kings are six colossal statues of the kings of Judah who bore the chief part in the temple of Jerusalem–David, the proposer; Solomon, the founder; Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, Manasseh, the successive purifiers and restorers. The idea there so impressively graven in stone runs through all the subsequent history of the chosen people. Why was this temple built and what was the motive, especially of its enormous costliness and its unrivalled beauty? Solomon did not build and garnish the house with precious stones and with gold of the gold of Parvaim because he was ambitious as a king and a conqueror to outshine his neighbours or to immortalise himself, but because he was bidden to do so. The temple was not an exhibition of wealth or cleverness, or superiority on the part of man, its builder; it was mans education in cost and sacrifice and unsparing labour on the part of God, its designer. There is just one principle that runs through all the teaching of the two Testaments concerning what men do for their Maker, and that is that God does not want, and cannot otherwise than lightly esteem, that which costs us nothing, and that the value of any service or sacrifice which we render for His sake is that, whatever may be its intrinsic meanness or meagreness, it is as from us our very best. This will let us see the insufficiency of the average explanations that are given of the motives that prompt to the enriching and beautifying of our sanctuaries to-day, such as–
1. Such things are necessitated by the inevitable rivalries of the day. It would be said that this is a time, especially in England and on the continent of Europe, of restorations. And what one Church has done, another cannot afford to be behind in doing also. The spirit of the age is the spirit of competition, and competition which is the life of trade is the life of religion too. If this is a very pitiful motive to be alleged for any such work, it is not an altogether surprising one. That competitive temper has so much to do with explaining our personal and social expenditures that it is not unnatural to seek in it the clue to expenditures that are sacred. Think for a moment how much money is spent for dress, for the furnishing and decoration of houses. Now, then, what is it that is sad about all this? its cost? No, but what is too often and too plainly its motive. If our banquets were always the symbols of our eagerness to please, of our desire to give of our best to those whom we love and honour, then their cost and splendour would only so much the more ennoble them. But it is because, too often, our dress, our houses, our entertainments, our equipages, are only so many means by which we strive to outshine and eclipse our neighbour that such expenditure becomes so largely not only the wasteful, but the truly contemptible thing that it is. And yet it is no wonder that so long as we allow such motives to influence us in things secular, we should infer or impute them concerning things that are sacred.
2. When changes are made in our social customs, in our habits of expenditure, and even in our modes of worship, we are often told that they are necessitated because we must keep up with the times, and those who are wedded by very sacred associations to things ancient, are often wounded in their tenderest feelings by being told that they must give up the old in order not to be behind the age. Well, the spirit of the nineteenth century, whatever else may be said of it, is not an infallible spirit, and in many respects it would be better if some of us were behind the age rather than so eagerly and unthinkingly in accord with it. But however this may be, the spirit of the age can never be the guide for the principles of worship or the law of sacrifice. Such cost and beauty is helpful to the instinct of worship and devotion. This motive is a perfectly valid and intelligible one. But the one sufficient motive for cost, and beauty, and even lavish outlay in the building and adornment of the house of God, is the consecrating to Him the best and costliest that human hands can bring. This is the very essence of the Cross of Christ. The power of the Cross over men lies in this, that it is the gift to men, by God, of His very best–His well-beloved Son. (Bp. H. C. Potter.)
.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 6. Gold of Parvaim.] We know not what this place was; some think it is the same as Sepharvaim, a place in Armenia or Media, conquered by the king of Assyria, 2Kg 17:24, c. Others, that it is Taprobane, now the island of Ceylon, which Bochart derives from taph, signifying the border, and Parvan, i.e., the coast of Parvan. The rabbins say that it was gold of a blood-red colour, and had its name from parim, heifers, being like to bullocks’ blood.
The Vulgate translates the passage thus: Stravit quoque pavimentum templi pretiosissimo marmore, decore multo porro aurum erat probatissimum; “And he made the pavement of the temple of the most precious marble; and moreover the gold was of the best quality,” &c.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
See Poole “1Ki 9:26“, &c.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
6. he garnished the house withprecious stones for beautybetter, he paved the house withprecious and beautiful marble [KITTO].It may be, after all, that these were stones with veins of differentcolors for decorating the walls. This was an ancient and thoroughlyOriental kind of embellishment. There was an under pavement ofmarble, which was covered with planks of fir. The whole interior waslined with boards, richly decorated with carved work, clusters offoliage and flowers, among which the pomegranate and lotus (orwater-lily) were conspicuous; and overlaid, excepting the floor, withgold, either by gilding or in plates (1Ki6:1-38).
2Ch3:8-13. DIMENSIONS,&C., OF THE MOSTHOLY HOUSE.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
[See comments on 2Ch 3:1].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(6) Garnished.Overlaid (2Ch. 3:4) the chamber.
Precious stones.See 1Ch. 29:2; and 1Ki. 10:11, which relates that Hirams fleet brought precious stones from Ophir for Solomon. But no mention of this kind of decoration is made in 1 Kings 6. The Vulgate explains the phrase as meaning a floor of costly marble.
Gold of Parvaim.Perhaps Farw, an auriferous region in S. Arabia. Others connect the word with the Sanskrit prva, eastern, and seek Parvaim, like Ophir, in India. The name does not recur in the Old Testament.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2Ch 3:6. And he garnished the house with precious stones for beauty And he paved the floor with beautiful and excellent stones. Houbigant. The Vulgate has it, with marble. Houbigant thinks that the next clause belongs to the 7th verse, where accordingly he places it. The doors thereof with gold, and the gold was gold of Parvaim; which some take for the name of a place, supposed by them to have been the island Taprobanes, now called Sumatra, which abounds with fine gold: while others imagine, that the word is expressive of the quality of the gold, deep and red in its colour, like the blood of bullocks; deriving the word parvaiim from par, a bullock. See Parkhurst’s Lexicon.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
2Ch 3:6 And he garnished the house with precious stones for beauty: and the gold [was] gold of Parvaim.
Ver. 6. And he garnished the house with precious stones. ] Every one of which had some egregious virtue: so, much more hath effectual faith, laborious love, reverent fear, patient hope, right repentance, assured confidence, &c., and – that which holdeth all these together lovely lowly mindedness. See 1Pe 5:5 . See Trapp on “ 1Pe 5:5 “
And the gold was gold of Parvaim.
a Lib. vi. cap. 28.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
garnished: Heb. covered
precious: 1Ch 29:2, 1Ch 29:8, Isa 54:11, Isa 54:12, Rev 21:18-21
Parvaim: Parvaim is supposed by Calmet to be the same as Sepharvaim in Armenia or Media; Bochart is of opinion that it is Taprobanes, now the island of Ceylon, which he drives from taph, a border, and Parvan, i.e., “the coast of Parvan;” but the late Editor of Calmet thinks it the same as the Parvatoi mountains of Ptolemy, at the head of the Indus.
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Ch 3:6-7. He garnished the house with precious stones for beauty A great many precious stones were dedicated to God 1Ch 29:2; 1Ch 29:8, and these were set here and there where they would show to the best advantage. And the gold was gold of Parvaim That is, of Taprobana, or Ceylon, as Bochart hath satisfactorily proved. See note on 1Ki 9:28. With this gold, which was deemed the best, Solomon overlaid even the beams, the posts, the walls, and the doors, graving also cherubim on the walls The finest houses now pretend to no better garnishing than good paint on the doors, posts, and walls: but the ornaments of the temple were more substantially rich. For it was to be a type of the New Jerusalem, which has therefore no temple in it, because it is all temple, and the walls, gates, and foundations of it are said to be precious stones and pearls.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
3:6 And he garnished the house with precious stones for beauty: and the gold [was] gold of {e} Parvaim.
(e) Some think it is Peru.