The moving spring of David’s design is beautifully suggested in the simple words ‘unto the name of the Lord my God.’ David’s religion was eminently a personal bond between him and God. We may almost say that he was the first to give utterance to that cry of the devout heart, ‘My ...
Show full excerpt
The moving spring of David’s design is beautifully suggested in the simple words ‘unto the name of the Lord my God.’ David’s religion was eminently a personal bond between him and God. We may almost say that he was the first to give utterance to that cry of the devout heart, ‘My God,’ and to translate the generalities of the name ‘the God of Israel’ into the individual appropriation expressed by the former designation. It occurs in many of the psalms attributed to him, and may fairly be regarded as a characteristic of his ardent and individualising devotion. The sense of a close, personal relation to God naturally prompted the impulse to build His house. We must claim our own portion in the universal blessings shrined in His name before we are moved to deeds of loving sacrifice. We must feel that Christ ‘loved me, and gave Himself for me,’ before we are melted into answering surrender. The reason for the frustrating of David’s desire, as here given, is his career as a warrior king. Not only was it incongruous that hands which had been reddened with blood should rear the Temple, but the fact that his reign had been largely occupied with fighting for the existence of the kingdom showed that the time for engaging in such a work, which would task the national resources, had not yet come. We may draw two valuable lessons from the prohibition.