1 Chronicles22:6–19

Be strong and of good courage: Joshua's commission handed to a builder verbal / quotation: confirmed

The imperatives of v. 13, חֲזַק וֶאֱמָץ followed by the double prohibition do not fear, do not be shattered, are not David's own words. Barnes states it flatly: "David adopts the words of Moses to the Israelites and to Joshua." Cambridge, K&D and Ellicott all name Joshua 1:7-9 and Deuteronomy 31, and Pulpit calls the summons already hallowed language. The Verifier confirms a genuine lexical overlap with Joshua 1:9, and the decisive element is the pair ʼâmats and châthath, both comparatively rare, occurring together in this formula. The effect is to file temple building under conquest: the man who will handle cedar is commissioned with the words given to the man who handled Jericho.

Joshua 1:9 · Deuteronomy 31:6 · 1 Chronicles 28:20

basis: Verifier pair 1 Chronicles 22:13 / Joshua 1:9: shared Hebrew lexemes H553 ʼâmats (freq 41), H2865 châthath (freq 46), H2388 châzaq (freq 266), H6680 tsâvâh (freq 474). The rare pair ʼâmats + châthath carries the link. Deuteronomy 31:6 returns H553, H2388, H3372 yârêʼ; Barnes, Cambridge, Ellicott and K&D all name the Mosaic and Joshua sources.

And the land was subdued: the conquest formula closing at last verbal / quotation: confirmed

David's ground for commanding the princes is וְנִכְבְּשָׁה הָאָרֶץ in v. 18, the Niphal of kâbash. K&D sends the reader to Joshua 18:1 and Numbers 32:22 and 29 for the phrase, and the Verifier records kâbash as a genuinely rare lexeme, appearing in only thirteen verses of the canon, shared here with Numbers 32:29 along with milchâmâh. In Numbers the formula belongs to the Transjordan tribes, who may not take their rest until the land is subdued before the LORD; in Joshua 18:1 it is pronounced when the tent of meeting is set up at Shiloh. David is invoking a formula that has always linked the end of war to the placing of the sanctuary, and claiming that the condition is now met.

Numbers 32:29 · Joshua 18:1 · Numbers 32:22

basis: Verifier candidate Numbers 32:29: shared Hebrew lexemes H3533 kâbash (in 13 vv, rare) and H4421 milchâmâh (in 308 vv). Joshua 18:1 and Numbers 32:22 are K&D's own cited parallels for the phrase nikbᵉshah ha-ʼarets, not Verifier output, and are listed on his authority.

It was with my heart: the chronicler's own idiom, and the speech he tells twice structural / thematic: confirmed

עִם־לְבָבִי in v. 7 is not ordinary Hebrew for intention. Ellicott notes it is common in 2 Chronicles and rare in the older books, and that it recurs at 1 Chronicles 28:2 exactly as here; K&D lists the occurrences across the Chronicler's work and concedes it appears elsewhere only where the sense demands it. At 1 Chronicles 28 David gives the same charge again, in public, with the same vocabulary of building and of the heart. The Verifier confirms the shared lexemes, which are common ones, so the tie is a matter of the Chronicler's compositional habit rather than of quotation: he has one way of narrating David's frustrated intention, and he uses it twice.

1 Chronicles 28:2 · 1 Chronicles 28:3 · 1 Kings 8:17

basis: Verifier candidate 1 Chronicles 28:2: shared H1129 bânâh (in 344 vv) and H3824 lêbâb (in 230 vv), both common, so no verbal claim is made. The precise idiom ʻim lᵉbabî at 28:2 is attested by Ellicott and K&D, who also cite 1 Kings 8:17.

Insight, heart and success: the same three words serving a destroyer structural / thematic: confirmed

David prays for שֵׂכֶל in v. 12 and for tsâlach, success, in vv. 11 and 13. The Verifier finds all three of that cluster, sekel, tsâlach and lêbâb, gathered again in Daniel 8:25, where they serve the ruler of that vision, who makes deceit prosper by his hand and magnifies himself in his heart. Sekel is comparatively rare (sixteen verses). We do not claim Daniel is quoting Chronicles or alluding to Solomon, and we downgrade accordingly. What the shared vocabulary shows is that the language of shrewd, successful rule is morally neutral in Hebrew, which is exactly why David's petition binds it immediately to keeping the Torah, and why 1 Kings 11 can record the same king's wisdom outliving his obedience.

Daniel 8:25 · 1 Kings 3:9 · 1 Kings 11:14

basis: Verifier candidate Daniel 8:25: shared H3824 lêbâb (in 230 vv), H6743 tsâlach (in 64 vv), H7922 sekel (in 16 vv). Sekel is rare enough to justify a verbal tier by frequency alone; we downgrade to structural because no quotation, allusion or dependence is being claimed in either direction, only a shared motif of prospering shrewdness.

Hewers of stone, twice: the first temple's workmen and the second verbal / quotation: confirmed

The חֹצְבִים of v. 15 are stonecutters, from châtsab, a verb the Verifier records in only twenty-two verses. It surfaces again at Ezra 3:7, where the returned exiles give silver to the masons and the carpenters and food and drink and oil for cedar from Lebanon, for the second house. The shared vocabulary is not accidental in a book written for the restoration community: silver, timber and hewers are the standing inventory of temple building in Hebrew, and the Chronicler is describing David's preparations in the very terms his readers had just used for their own. Ellicott makes the same connection forward from v. 14, noting that Solomon did add to the stores (2 Chronicles 2:3, 2:8).

Ezra 3:7 · 2 Chronicles 2:7 · 1 Chronicles 22:2

basis: Verifier candidate Ezra 3:7: shared H2672 châtsab (in 22 vv, rare), H3701 keçeph (in 343 vv), H6086 ʻêts (in 288 vv). The rare lexeme châtsab carries a real verbal link between the two building accounts; no quotation of one text by the other is claimed.

Rest from all his enemies round about: Solomon's own use of the promise structural / thematic: confirmed

The promise of v. 9, I will give him rest from all his enemies round about, is applied by Solomon to himself when he writes to Hiram about building the house (1 Kings 5:4), and Ellicott notes that the same words are used in a somewhat different sense of David at 2 Samuel 7:1. Cambridge cites 1 Kings 5:4 for this verse as well, and adds that Solomon's reign was not wholly peaceful. The Verifier confirms the shared lexemes nûach and çâbîyb. In 1 Kings 5:3 Solomon gives Hiram the other version of the prohibition, that David could not build because of the wars on every side, which is why Cambridge and Ellicott both use that passage to qualify the bloodguilt reason given here.

1 Kings 5:4 · 1 Kings 5:3 · 2 Samuel 7:1

basis: Verifier pair 1 Chronicles 22:9 / 1 Kings 5:4: shared H5117 nûwach (in 139 vv) and H5439 çâbîyb (in 282 vv), both common, so the link is the shared rest-formula rather than a quotation. 1 Kings 5:3 and 2 Samuel 7:1 are cited on the authority of Ellicott and Cambridge.

I will be his Father: where the New Testament actually quotes from flagged: verify source

Gill reads v. 10 with Hebrews 1:5 and Luke 1:32, and he is following the historic Christian reading. The link needs its seams shown. Hebrews 1:5 quotes the adoption formula as it stands in 2 Samuel 7:14 and 1 Chronicles 17:13, not as it stands here, and K&D states that this verse is David compressing the promise of 1 Chronicles 17:12-13. So the apostolic citation reaches 1 Chronicles 22:10 by way of its parallel, not directly. A Greek to Hebrew link cannot rest on shared Strong's numbers in any case. The Verifier does confirm that 22:10 and 17:13 share only common lexemes, which is what one would expect of a compression rather than a copy. We flag the chain rather than assert it, and invite the reader to check each step.

1 Chronicles 17:12-13 · 2 Samuel 7:13-14 · Hebrews 1:5 · Luke 1:32

basis: Cross-Testament, so no shared Strong's basis is possible; Greek to Hebrew links are never tiered verbal here. Verifier pair 1 Chronicles 22:10 / 1 Chronicles 17:13 returns only common lexemes (H589 ʼănîy, H1 ʼâb, H1931 hûwʼ), consistent with K&D's judgment that 22:10 compresses 17:12-13. Hebrews 1:5 demonstrably quotes 2 Samuel 7:14 / 1 Chronicles 17:13, not this verse; Gill's application of Hebrews 1:5 and Luke 1:32 to 22:10 is therefore mediated and is flagged for the reader to verify.

The house the Prince of peace builds ancient/widely-held

⚙ Three of our commentators reach the same conclusion independently and without prompting from the text's surface. Poole: the prohibition is "principally for mystical signification, to teach us that the church (whereof the temple was a manifest and illustrious type) should be built by Christ, the Prince of peace." Benson says the same and adds Zechariah 4:6, not by might nor by power but by God's Spirit. Gill says the house was a type of the church, to be supported not by force of arms but by the preaching of the Gospel of peace. K&D supplies the argument underneath the figure: the kingdom of God is in its essence a kingdom of peace, and war is only a means toward the restoration of peace after the conquest of sin, so the temple, as that kingdom's visible embodiment, cannot come from a warrior's hands. Maclaren draws it practically, that the kingdom is to be furthered not by force but in peace and gentleness. The typology is old and widely held, and the text supports it structurally: the qualification for building is not righteousness but rest, and rest is given.

Isaiah 9:6 · Zechariah 4:6 · Ephesians 2:20-22

Son, Father, and a throne that outlasts its occupants ancient/widely-held

⚙ The formula of v. 10 is legal adoption, marked by the preposition of office: he shall be to-me for-a-son, and I to-him for-a-father. Gill takes it to Hebrews 1:5 and, for the endless throne, to Luke 1:32. Ellicott makes the historical point that gives the reading its force: the verse's condition in v. 13 was not met, the earthly dynasty of David came to an end through disobedience, and yet the word of the Lord does not return unto Him void, for in due time was born an heir of David and Solomon who is at this day the Lord of a spiritual dominion which will endure throughout the ages. That is the apostolic reading, and it is honest about the failure in between. Our thread on this link flags the fact that Hebrews quotes the parallel oracle rather than this verse; the reading stands, and the reader should see the joint.

Hebrews 1:5 · Luke 1:32 · 2 Samuel 7:14

Blood that bars the builder, blood that builds the house novel

⚙ This one is ours, and we mark it as ours: none of the commentators in our sources draws it. The refusal turns on blood poured out on the ground before the LORD's face, and the plural דָּמִים is the vocabulary of bloodguilt, blood that cries and defiles. Geneva's gloss is that God shows here how greatly he detests the shedding of blood; Benson's is that he shows how precious human life is to him. If that principle holds, then the Gospel claim is not that the disqualification was waived but that it was inverted: the one who calls his own body the temple is the builder precisely by the pouring out of blood, and the blood in question is his own, not another's. The distinction between blood shed and blood given is the whole distance between David's hands and those of the son Ellicott points to. We offer this as a reading to be tested, not as an established exposition, and we note that the text of 1 Chronicles 22 says nothing of the kind on its own.

John 2:19-21 · Hebrews 9:11-12 · Genesis 9:5-6