2 Chronicles 7:11 - Exposition

(See now for the parallel 1 Kings 9:1-9 .) The king's house … the house of the Lord … his own house . The expressions that we have in this verse guide us amid some ambiguities to the correct date of the consecration of the temple. The verse purports to speak of the final completion the temple and the king's house or palace, with all whatsoever that was necessary to them in the matter of their furnishing. And, to say the least, the impression naturally produced on the reader is that they are spoken of as being thus completed simultaneously, although, beyond doubt, there was a sense in which the temple was (not utterly finished but) built long before the palace. Accordingly, when the next verse tells us of God's answer vouchsafed to the dedication prayer of Solomon, we are not driven to the supposition that several years had elapsed since the final completion of the temple and the dedication of it on the one hand, nor, on the other hand, a similar interval lost between the dedication prayer and the Divine acknowledgment of it. It may be again stated that the main structure of the temple (not including courts, pillars, furnishing, vessels, etc.) was built after seven years' process, in the eleventh year of Solomon's reign, but the palace only after another complete twelve years ( 1 Kings 7:1 ), in Solomon's twenty-fourth year. A liberal study of the parallel narrative of Kings in its entirety strengthens considerably this view, inasmuch as there the whole account of the palace-building finds its place previous to the account of the dedicating of the temple. However, though there can be little practical doubt as to how the facts of the case stood and stand, yet this occasion must count one to be added to the chronological memorabilia of Scripture, in that, while both the accounts to which we have access leave very vague the very things we should naturally expect to have been stated concisely, they also both seem entirely unconscious of it—a directest outcome of the fact that both writers were but picking their own way in the midst of borrowed material, neither of them the original historian.