The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 152

whether the staves, so long as they remained viii 22. At the date of the publice.tion 01 in the rings, could be made to reach to the this book, the temple wa.s of course de- door of the oracle, unless indeed they were stroyed (2 Kings xxv. 9), eo that at that lengthened for the purpose. How then were day the staves were not there. But the ex- they seen ? The following considerations plane.tion is very simple. Our historian may assist us to answer this question. (1) has copied the words he found in the MS. The oracle, of course, in its normal state he was using.] was in perfect darkness (ver. 12). Once a Ver. 9.-There was nothing 1n the a.r11: year, however, a gleam of light was ad- save the two tables of stone which Moses mitted, when the ourtain was drawn par- put there (Exod. xxv. 16 ; xl. 20 ; Dent. x. tially asid,J to permit of the high priest's 6. This statement a.ppea.rs to be at vari- entrance. (2) When the curtain was drawn ance with Hebrews ix. 4, which mentions to one (probably the left) side, the light " the golden pot that ha.d manna., a.nd would fall, not on the ark, but on the ends Aaron's rod that budded," a.s in the a.rk, of the staves projecting from the right or a.long with "the tables of the covenant." north end of the ark, whioh would thus be And it is to be observed that, while our text distinctly visible to the high priest. But excludes these relics from the a.rk (temp. (3) at this time the high priest was not Solomon), no other scripture sa.ve that just alone in the holy place. It was not required cited expressly includes them. In Exod. that " there should be no ma.n in the taber- xvi. 34 a.nd Num. xvii. 25 (Heb. A. V., xvii. nacle of the congregation," except when the 10) they are co=a.nded to be la.id up high priest went in to make a.n atonement "before the testimony," words which no for the holy place (Levit. xvi. 17). At a.n doubt may mean, a.a they were long inter- earlier stage of the service he would preted to mean, "before the tables of testi- seem to have required assistance. Accord- mony in the a.rk "-observe, the words a.re ing to the Mishna. (Yoma), a. priest held the " before the testimony," not "before the basin of blood a.nil stirred it to prevent ark "-but which are now generally thought coagulation, at the time of his first entry. to import '' in front of the ark which con- Moreover (4) it is extremely doubtful whether tained the testimony." We know the book the high priest can have drawn aside the of the la.w was put "a.t the side (1~1;') of ourtain himself. Whether he entered three the a.rk" (Deut. xxxi. 26), a.nd hence it is or four times on that day, at his first entry held by some that the golden pot, &c., occu- his hands ·were certainly full. If he oarried pied a similar position. It seems prefer- " a censer full of burning coe.ls of fire " . . . able, however, considering the distinct "and his hands (l\~?Q, both fists) full of statement of St. Paul, or the author of the sweet incense beaten small " (ib. ver. 12), it Epistle to the Hebrews, which, to say the is clear that some other person must have least, embodies Jewish tradition, to adhere drawn a.side the veil for him. It is to this to the ancient interpretation that the golden person, I to.ke it, the priest who wa.s privi- pot of manna a.nd Aaron's rod were in the leged to draw aside the ourta.in, and possibly o.rk. And this in no wise conflicts with the to others standing near-certainly to the statement of the text, for these treasures high priest-that the ends of the staves might well have been removed by the Philis- were visible. Nor would a reverent look tines, whose first thought, we m11y be sure, directed towards these objects-made origin- would be to opeu their new n.cquisition. It ally for the Levites to handle - involve is not improbable, indeed, thn.t the object of unhallowed curiosity. And if this were so, the men of Bethshemesh in looking into it would help to explain (4) the mention of the e.rk was to see whether these treasures this oircumste.nce by our author. If it were were still there. For if the gohlen pot ever a fa.et that year by year a. gleam of light fell was in the ark, we can hardly suppose it upon the staves, and if priest after priest would escape the rapacity of the Philistines, testified of what he had seen, up to the time who would leave the two tnbles of stone as of writing (" unto this day;" see below), we things of no value. Indeed, it is just pos- oe.n readily understand why a circumstance sible that the trespass offering, the golden of so much interest should be recorded. And mice, &o., were designed as a return for tho we have not an adequate explanation of its golden pot which had been re uoved. And mention here, if we are to understand that the statement of the text, '' there wn.s the staves were seen on the day of dedioa- nothing," &c., nlmost implies that there tion, when of course they must have been had been something there at one time (see visible, and never afterwards, or that the Alford on Heb. ix. 4). It seem probable, stn.ves were partially drawn out of their therefore, that the golden pot anu Aaron's rings in order to show that the ark was now rod were originn.lly depositecl " >efore the 11,t rest], and there they aro unto this day. tertimouy" ill the ark; that they were [Same expression eh. ix. 21 ; xii. 19; 2 Kings removed during its oaptivity (1 Sam. v ., vi.);  1-50 THE FlRST llOOK OF KINGS. [oil. nu. 1-M. o.nd that the se.orilege was disoovered at use of the word by Jewish writers, it would Bethshemcsh (1 Se.m. vi, 19). This last- se_em __ ~o be e. periphrasis for God (Diet. mentioned episode explains how it came to Bib. m. p.1241). We may see in the cloud, ~e known that " ~here wa.s nothing," &c. It however, the seat of the Shechine.h (Kitto 1~ hardly likely r.: ter that memorable visita- Cyclopmdia, iii. p. 821) filled the house oi t10n that Solomon conld have opened the the Lord. ark and taken out the two relics, as Rawlin- son s~ests. Nor have we any warrant for Ver. 11.-So that the priests could not the view that the mercy seat, with the sta.nd to minister because of the cloud cheru~s, :i'"as removed to make way for a [They were overpowered by the manifesta- new lid mthout them, e.nd so the interior of tion, precisely as Moses had been before the ark was disclosed to view (Stanley)] (Exod. xl. 36). It was at the moment when at B:oreb [See Exod. ~ 1 ; xvii. 6; xx:x.iii. 6; the singers and trumpeters, standing at the 1 Kings xix. 8. This name, which means eas~ end of the altar, began their service of dry ground, desert, would appear to have praise-and the re-appearance of the priests belonged to two or three different places in may well have been the signal for them to the wilderness. But as the name of the begin (2 Chron. v.13)-that "the house was place where the law was given e.nd the cove- filled with a cloud." Possibly the priests were nant with God made (Dent. iv. 10, 13) it about to burn incense. Evidently ministra- became subsequently a nomen generale for tions of some sort were intended and were ~e whole of the Sinaitic region (Diet. Bib, interrupted. The exact correspondence with lll, p. 1326). Here the mount of the law Exod. xl. 35 (cf. Ezek. xliv. 4) is not to be is clearly me.ant] when [Heh. whi.ch, ,~~ overlooked. The idea obviously is that the Divine approval vouchsafed to the taber- is ?CCasionall_y found in the_ sense of quum; nacle was now in turn granted to the as m Dent. n. 6; Psa. cxxnx. 15; 2 Chron. temple], for the glory of the Lord had mv. 20; cf. eh. ix. 10 (Gesen., Tbes., s.v.)J filled the house of the Lord. [Is the the Lord made a covenant [Heb. cut; see " glory of the Lord" identical with the note on eh. v.12. n•1.:J. is to be understood. cloud, or is something additional intended Same el:1ipsis in 1 Sam.' :er.. 16; :uii. BJ ,with by these words? It is certainly noticeable the children of Israel when they came that what ver. 10 says of the clouc-that it [Heh. in their coming] out of the land of ''filled the house-ver. 11 says of the glory. Egypt. [Exod. xniv. 27, 28; Dent. iv. 13.J It is also true that there is no mention of Ver. 10.-And it ea.me to pass, when the any light or fire. And the "darkness " of priests were come out [Rather, as the ver. 12 might naturally seem to refer to the priests came out] of the holy place [It has cloud, and therefore to exclude the idea of been snpposed that " the holy" (Ci'J~i'!) is light. But surely the words :~ ii:J:p are to here put for the most holy place, as in be interpreted here by their signification and Ezek. xii. 23. But this is not by any means use elsewhere, and we find "the glory of the the necessary interpretation. The cloud Lord elsewhere mentioned as something may obviously have filled the entire building distinct from the oloud. We must remem- only as the priests left it. It would seem, ber that what by day was a pillar of cloud, by however, from verse 11 as il the priests, night was a pillar of.fire (Exod. xiii. 21, 22). having left the oracle, were about to min- In Exod. xi.x. 9, 16, the mention of the ister in the holy place], that the cloud " thick cloud" is followed by the statement [Observe the article; the well-known cloud that " Mount Sinai was altogether on e. which betokened the Divine presence. It smoke because the Lord descended upon i\ had rested upon the tabernacle on the day in.fire" (ver. 18). Similarly, in Exod. xxiv., that it was dedicated (Exod. xl. 34), bad ac- we are told that " the glory of the Lord companied it in its journeys (ib. ver. 38), appeared upon Mount Sinai, and the cloud and had apparently been specially displayed covered it (the glory?) six days; and the at certain junctures in the history of Israel seventh day He called unto Moses out of (Nu.m. xii 5, 10; xvi. 42; Dent. xxxi. 15). the midst of the oloud. And the sight of It was thus the acknowledged symbol of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire " God's presence, and as such was a vi.E.ible (vers. 16, 17). But perhaps the most de- i;igo tLat He now accepted the temple, as cisive passage in this connexion is Exod. He had formerly accepted the tabernacle, xl. 34, where we are told that "the cloud as His shrine a.nd dwelling-place. It is abode upon" the tent of meeting, while hardly correct to identify the cloud with "the glory of the Lord fillod the (interior "the Sbechine.h of the Targa.ms" (Rawlin- of the) tabernacle." Compare Exod. xvi. 10n), for it is noticea.ble that the 'l'argu.ms 7, 10; '.Levit. ix. 6, 23; Nu.m. xiv. 10; xvi. 19, never render "the cloud " or " the glory " by 42. It would appear, therefore, thf\t " the "'ihe Shechinah." 1D faot, as regards the glory of the Lord " was not the cfoud, but, OB. VIII, 1-06.] THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 151