The promises Yahweh made to David here are an important key to understanding God's program for the future.
God rejected David's suggestion that he build a temple for the Lord and gave three reasons. First, there was no pressing need to do so since the ark had resided in tents since the Exodus (v. 6). The tent it currently occupied was the one David had pitched for it in Jerusalem (6:17), not the tabernacle that stood then at Gibeon (1 Chron. 16:1, 39). Second, God had not commanded His people to build Him a permanent temple (v. 7). Note in verse 7 that before God raised up Israel's kings He Himself had dealt with the tribes of Israel, during the judges period. At that time the leaders of the tribes were responsible to shepherd the Israelites in their areas.102Third, David was an inappropriate person to build a temple since he had shed much blood (v. 5; 1 Chron. 22:8; 28:3). David had become ritually unclean because of all the killing he had been responsible for during his long reign. This was not true of Solomon (cf. 1 Kings 6:1).
"Fine temples both hinder and help the worship of God; it all depends on the worshipper."103
"The real issue is that both the initiative to build a temple and the choice of the person for the task must come from God and not from an individual king."104
Notice that it was not because God was disciplining David or had rejected him that He prohibited David's good intention. God was simply redirecting His servant.105He was to be a ruler (v. 8), not a temple builder. Similarly God does not always permit us to carry out our desires to honor Him, such as becoming a pastor or missionary. He sometimes makes this impossible because He wants us to serve Him in other ways. A realization of this fact would relieve many Christians from false guilt and shattered dreams.
"The irony in v. 6 must not be missed: Although God condescends to accompany his people on their journey with a tent as his dwelling (v. 6b), a tent carried by them, all along they have in fact been carried by him (v. 6a)."106
God had blessed David in the past by choosing him as Israel's shepherd-king, by being with him in blessing, and by cutting off all David's enemies (vv. 8-9a). He would bless him in the future with a famous reputation (v. 9b), rest from all his enemies (v. 11a), and an everlasting dynasty (house, vv. 11b-16).107Thus some of God's promises to David would find fulfillment during his lifetime (vv. 8-11a) and others after his death (vv. 11b-16).108
"The promise of a great name' is reminiscent of God's covenant with Abraham (Gn. 12:2), and suggests (though the word covenant' nowhere appears in these verses) that the Davidic kingship is being incorporated into the Abrahamic covenant. This is reinforced by the reference to God's people Israel dwelling in their own place, undisturbed by enemies (v. 10), a reference to Genesis 15:18-21 and Deuteronomy 11:24. Moreover, the covenant word hesed, God's steadfast love' (v, 15), ensures the fulfillment of the promises, which are here unconditional, though the need for chastisement is foreseen."109
David would have a seed for whom God would establish a kingdom (v. 12). God repeated to David at this time that his successor would be Solomon (cf. 1 Chron. 22:9-10). This son would build the temple David wanted to construct (v. 13). His right to rule, symbolized by the throne, would remain forever (v. 13).
"Up to this time, there had been no dynasty in Israel. Saul's son had generously and spiritually submitted himself to David. Now God promised David an eternal seed and an eternal throne. One of David's own sons would succeed him to the throne, and his throne, like David's, would be established forever. Much of the rest of 2 Samuel deals with the identification of that son. . . . God's sovereign choice of David's line will never be abrogated even though discipline must come when disobedience takes place. This theme underlies much of the argument of 1 and 2 Kings."110
The importance of this promise of a house (i.e., dynasty) is apparent in that references to it frame the future hope (vv. 11a, 16).
Verse 12 poses a chronological problem. It seems to say that Solomon had not been born yet. However if God gave the Davidic Covenant late in David's reign, Solomon must have been alive since he began ruling shortly after this as an adult. The solution lies in the meaning of the Hebrew word zeratranslated "descendant."This word means seed. Zeraand "seed"are both collective singulars in their respective languages and can refer to either one descendant or many descendants (Gen. 13:15; 17:18; cf. Gal. 3:16). Part of what God promised David here pertained to Solomon, part to all David's posterity, and part to Jesus Christ (cf. Matt. 3:17). In verse 12 it seems to be David's posterity that is in view as coming forth from him.111
"In the Old Testament the relation between father and son denotes the deepest intimacy of love; and love is perfected in unity of nature, in the communication to the son of all that the father hath. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into His hand (John iii. 35). Sonship therefore includes the government of the world. This not only applied to Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, but also to the seed of David generally, so far as they truly attained to the relation of children of God."112
If David's son sinned, God would discipline him, but He would never remove the right to rule from him (vv. 14-15). Thus David's house (dynasty), his kingdom (the people of Israel and their land), and his throne (the right to rule) would remain forever.
"In general terms the line would not fail. Yet in particular terms, benefits might be withdrawn from individuals."113
"The failure of the kings generally leads not to disillusion with kingship but to the hope of a future king who will fulfill the kingship ideal--a hope which provides the most familiar way of understanding the significance of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ coming in his kingdom."114
"YHWH irrecoverably committed himself to the house of David, but rewarded or disciplined individual kings by extending or withholding the benefits of the grant according to their loyalty or disloyalty to His treaty [i.e., the Mosaic Covenant]."115
Note that God did not promise that the rule of David's descendants would be without interruption. The Babylonian captivity and the present dispersion of the Jews are interruptions (cf. Rom. 9-11). However the privilege of ruling over Israel as king would always belong to David's descendants.
"This promise, generally described as the Davidic covenant, is technically in the form of a royal grant by which a sovereign graciously bestowed a blessing, usually in the form of land or a fiefdom, upon a vassal. This may have been in return for some act performed by the vassal in behalf of his lord, or it may have been simply a beneficence derived from the sheer love and kindness of the king116The latter clearly is the case here, for the promise of eternal kingship through David had been articulated long before the birth of David himself. From the beginning it was the purpose of God to channel his sovereignty over his own people (and, indeed, over all the earth) through a line of kings that would eventuate in the divine Son of God himself. That line, David now came to understand, would begin with him."117
The Davidic Covenant is an outgrowth of the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 12:1-3, 7).118There God promised a land, seed, and blessing to the patriarch. In time God gave further revelation regarding each of these promised blessings (cf. Deut. 30:1-10; 2 Sam. 7:5-16; Jer. 31:31-34). The Davidic Covenant deals with Abraham's descendants primarily and God's provision of leadership for them specifically. In Deuteronomy 30 God explained the land aspects of His promise more fully, and in Jeremiah 31 He expounded the blessing promise. These are the major revelations that clarify God's promises to Abraham, but they are not the only ones.
"The Davidic Covenant is the centerpiece of Samuel and Kings. David, as a type of the ideal king (both in position and often in practice), appears between the lines' in chapters 1-15 and dominates the lines in chapters 16-31. Seeing the centrality of the Davidic Covenant enables the reader to pick up the argument of 1 Samuel and to see how it moves inexorably toward 2 Samuel 7."119
"After the conquest of Canaan when Israel's loyalty to YHWH lapsed, YHWH's protection of his people also lapsed. By the time of Samuel and Saul, the Philistines threatened the very existence of Israel. The institution of the Davidic covenant, vested in a vassal [the Davidic king] loyal to the suzerain [Yahweh], constituted an earnest of protection, vouchsafed but virtually impossible to realize in the Sinaitic covenant. The suzerain-vassal model as a legal framework for both the Sinaitic and Davidic covenants validated the basis on which YHWH's protection was to be obtained. There now existed no provision for national protection other than within the framework of a suzerain-vassal type of relationship with YHWH. But the Davidic covenant did away with the necessity that all Israel--to a man--maintain loyalty to YHWH in order to merit his protection. In the analogy of suzerain-vassal relationships, David's designation as YHWH's son' and firstborn' (2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:6-7; 89:27) legitimized him as Israel's representative--as the embodiment of YHWH's covenant people, also called his son' and firstborn' (Exod 4:22). With regard to Israel's protection, the Davidic covenant superseded the Sinaitic covenant, but only because of Israel's regression in her loyalty toward YHWH (compare 1 Sam 8:7). Henceforth, the king stood as proxy between YHWH and his people."120
The descendant of David through whom God will fulfill His promises completely is Jesus Christ.121In view of what God said of Him in Luke 1:32-33, there are five major implications of the Davidic Covenant for the future. God must preserve Israel as a nation. He must bring her back into her land. Jesus Christ must rule over her in the land. His kingdom must be earthly, and it must be everlasting.122
"All conservative [Christian] interpreters of the Bible recognize that the promise has its ultimate fulfillment in Christ. Again the amillennial and premillennial differences in explaining eschatology come to the fore, however. The amillennial position is that Christ is now on the throne of David in heaven, equating the heavenly throne with the earthly throne of David, whereas the traditional premillennial view is that the Davidic throne will be occupied at the second coming of Christ when Christ assumes his rule in Jerusalem."123
"The difficult questions that separate dispensational and non-dispensational interpreters relate to how many of the covenant promises have been fulfilled in Christ's first coming and present ministry and how many remain for the future. Two key elements of the covenant promise stand at the center of the controversy: (1) a royal dynasty or house, and (2) a kingdom with universal blessing."124
God did not condition His promises to David here on anything. Therefore we can count on their complete fulfillment.
"The overriding theological principle is that Yahweh's word is infallible."125
