Matthew Henry on 2 Chronicles 5:1-10
This agrees with what we had Kg1 8:2, etc., where an account was given of the solemn introduction of the ark into the new-erected temple. 1. There needed no great solemnity for the bringing in of the dedicated things, Ch2 5:1. They added to the wealth, and perhaps were so disposed as to add to the beauty of it; but they could not add to the holiness, for it was the temple that sanctified the gold, Mat 23:17. See how just Solomon was both to God and to his father. Whatever David had dedicated to God, however much he might have liked it himself, he would by no means alienate it, but put it among the treasures of the temple. Those children that would inherit their godly parents' blessing must r…
Read the whole note in the consoleJamieson-Fausset-Brown on 2 Chronicles 5:9
there it is unto this day--that is, at the time when this history was composed; for after the Babylonish captivity there is no trace of either ark or staves.
Adam Clarke on 2 Chronicles 5:9
They drew out the staves - As the ark was no longer to be carried about, these were unnecessary.
John Gill on 2 Chronicles 5:1
See Chapter Introduction
Keil & Delitzsch on 2 Chronicles 5:4-9
Instead of הלויּם, we have in 2 Kings הכּהנים, the priests bare the ark; and since even according to the Chronicle (Ch2 5:7) the priests bare the ark into the holy place, we must understand by הלויּם such Levites were also priests. - In Ch2 5:5, too the words הלויּם הכּהנים are inexact, and are to be corrected by Kg1 8:4, והלויּם הכּהנים. For even if the Levitic priests bare the ark and the sacred utensils of the tabernacle into the temple, yet the tabernacle itself (the planks, hangings, and coverings of it) was borne into the temple, to be preserved as a holy relic, not by priests, but only by Levites. The conj. ו before הלוים has probably been omitted only by a copyist, who was thinking o…
