Unto the Lord; <\/B>to the building of Gods temple. So he showed his affection to God and his house, in preparing for it when he was not permitted to build it. <\/P> <\/p>\nFuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
11. Which also king David diddedicate unto the Lord<\/B>Eastern princes have always beenaccustomed to hoard up vast quantities of gold. This is the firstinstance of a practice uniformly followed by David of reserving,after defraying expenses and bestowing suitable rewards upon hissoldiers, the remainder of the spoil taken in war, to accumulate forthe grand project of his lifethe erection of a national temple atJerusalem.<\/P><\/p>\nFuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Which also King David did dedicate unto the Lord<\/strong>,…. He devoted it to sacred uses, particularly to the building of the house of the Lord, as he also had the gold and the brass he took from Hadadezer: together<\/p>\n with the silver and the gold he had dedicated of all nations which he subdued<\/strong>; who are after particularly mentioned; he did not convert the spoils he took to his own use, but observed the law God gave to the kings of Israel, that they should not greatly multiply to themselves silver and gold, De 17:17<\/span>. He set it apart, and laid it up for the service of the sanctuary; and this accounts for the abundance of gold, silver, and brass, which David had amassed together, and left to his son Solomon to build the temple with; see 1Ch 28:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n David also sanctified Toi’s presents to the Lord (handed them over to the treasury of the sanctuary), together with the silver and gold which he had sanctified from all the conquered nations, from Aram, Moab, etc. Instead of the text of the Chronicles has , which he took, i.e., took as booty. Both are equally correct; there is simply a somewhat different turn given to the thought. <\/p>\n (Note: Bertheau erroneously maintains that , which he took, is at variance with 2Sa 8:7<\/span>, as, according to this passage, the golden shields of Hadadezer did not become the property of the Lord. But there is not a word to that effect in 2Sa 8:7<\/span>. On the contrary, his taking the shields to Jerusalem implies, rather than precludes, the intention to devote them to the purposes of the sanctuary.)<\/p>\n In the enumeration of the conquered nations in 2Sa 8:12<\/span>, the text of the Chronicles differs from that of the book before us. In the first place, we find “from Edom” instead of “from Aram;” and secondly, the clause “and of the spoil of Hadadezer, son of Rehob king of Zobah,” is altogether wanting there. The text of the Chronicles is certainly faulty here, as the name of Aram (Syria) could not possibly be omitted. Edom could much better be left out, not “because the conquest of Edom belonged to a later period,” as Movers<\/em> maintains, but because the conquest of Edom is mentioned for the first time in the subsequent verses. But if we bear in mind that in 2Sa 8:12<\/span> of both texts not only are those tribes enumerated the conquest of which had been already noticed, but all the tribes that David ever defeated and subjugated, even the Ammonites and Amalekites, to the war with whom no allusion whatever is made in the present chapter, we shall see that Edom could not be omitted. Consequently “from Syria” must have dropped out of the text of the Chronicles, and “from Edom” out of the one before us; so that the text in both instances ran originally thus, “from Syria, and from Edom, and from Moab.” For even in the text before us, “from Aram” (Syria) could not well be omitted, notwithstanding the fact that the booty of Hadadezer is specially mentioned at the close of the verse, for the simple reason that David not only made war upon Syria-Zobah (the kingdom of Hadadezer) and subdued it, but also upon Syria-Damascus, which was quite independent of Zobah.<\/p>\n (11) Which also.<\/strong>The dedication of the gifts of Toi is especially mentioned, because these were not, like those of 2Sa. 8:7<\/span>; 2Sa. 8:11-12<\/span>, the spoils of conquered <\/em>nations. David, forbidden himself to build the temple, makes every provision possible for its erection.<\/p>\n Metheg-ammah <\/strong> Margin, the bridle of Ammah; <\/em> literally, the bridle of the mother. <\/em> It is not a proper name, but a figurative expression for the capital city of a province the government of the mother city. <\/em> So Gesenius and Furst. There is an Arabic proverb: “I give thee not my bridle,” that is, I do not yield the control of myself to thee. Instead of this expression we have in 1Ch 18:1<\/span>: Gath and her towns; <\/em> Hebrew, Gath and her daughters. <\/em> On this capital city of the Philistines see on Jos 11:22<\/span>. Ewald explains it as the bridle of the arm; <\/em> that is, David tore from the Philistines the power by which they curbed Israel, as a rider curbs his horse by the bridle which his arm controls.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n 2Sa 8:11 Which also king David did dedicate unto the LORD, with the silver and gold that he had dedicated of all nations which he subdued;<\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n Ver. 11. Which also king David did dedicate unto the Lord.<\/strong> ] For the building and beautifying of his temple. So did Christ, when he went forth conquering and to conquer, Rev 6:2 make use of the spoils he took from the world for the good of his Church, and for the building up of that spiritual temple; – the precious arts, for instance, which, as in the first plantation of the gospel in Europe, he shipped before into Greece, as his munition, meaning to send his soldiers soon after. So in the reviving of the gospel by the late happy reformation, there was sent before it as a harbinger, a general resurrection of all learning. The Greek tongue, by the sack of Constantinople, was sent by the Turk, though for no good will, into these western climates. The art of printing, which the Chinese say they had amongst them long before, was here made use of: and by that means, among other excellent books, conducing to the reformation, was published the Complutensian Bible in six volumes, A.D. 1515, at the charge of Cardinal Ximines, Archbishop of Toledo, two years before Luther stirred. An excellent work surely, and such as may well be reckoned among those means and instruments whereby the truth was restored, and Popery profligated: since both the original languages of the Bible, before only in the hands of the Jews and Grecians, together with the Chaldee, were now generally made known. Neander telleth us that that Bible, set forth by a limb of Antichrist ( ducatorum sexcentis millenis millibus impensis<\/em> ), was a singular help to Luther. a<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> Geogr., <\/em> part 1.<\/p>\n Which: 1Ki 7:51, 1Ch 18:11, 1Ch 22:14-16, 1Ch 26:26-28, 1Ch 29:2, Mic 4:13 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Num 31:28 – levy Jos 6:19 – all the silver 1Ch 20:2 – and he brought 2Ch 32:23 – gifts<\/p>\n Which also king David did dedicate unto the LORD, with the silver and gold that he had dedicated of all nations which he subdued; Unto the Lord; to the building of Gods temple. So he showed his affection to God and his house, in preparing for it when he was not permitted to build it. … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Samuel 8:11”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8232","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8232","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8232"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8232\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8232"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8232"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8232"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"