1 Chronicles Chapter 13

King David Brings the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem

A. The attempt to bring the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem

1. (1 Chronicles 13:1-4) The plan to bring the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem

“And David consulted with the captains of thousands and hundreds, and with every leader. And David said unto all the congregation of Israel, If it seem good unto you, and that it be of the Lord our God, let us send abroad unto our brethren every where, that are left in all the land of Israel, and with them also to the priests and Levites which are in their cities and suburbs, that they may gather themselves unto us. And let us bring again the ark of our God to us, for we enquired not at it in the days of Saul. And all the congregation said that they would do so, for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people.”

This passage marks a major spiritual moment early in David’s reign. Having secured Jerusalem and united the nation, David now turns toward restoring proper worship. His desire to bring the ark to Jerusalem reflects his deep conviction that the presence of God must be central to national life. Yet the Chronicler immediately signals a weakness in David’s approach. Scripture notes that David consulted with the captains of thousands and hundreds and with every leader, but it does not say that David consulted with the Lord. The omission is intentional. David and a council of godly leaders would soon make a grave mistake, not because their intentions were sinful, but because they relied on human counsel rather than divine instruction.

This underscores a principle found throughout Scripture. Even good desires pursued in the wrong way can lead to disaster. The Lord had given specific instructions regarding the ark’s handling and transport. Consulting men instead of consulting God opened the door for error. Payne observes that David’s phrase “our brethren everywhere who are left” likely reflects how severely the Philistine oppression had depleted Israel’s population before David defeated them in Second Samuel chapter five verses twenty and twenty five. Those who remained were now summoned to participate in this spiritual renewal.

David proposes, “Let us bring again the ark of our God to us, for we enquired not at it in the days of Saul.” This is an accurate assessment. Saul’s reign was marked by spiritual neglect. He rarely sought the Lord, and when he attempted to do so, he did it improperly. The ark had been in the house of Abinadab for roughly seventy years since its return from Philistine territory in First Samuel chapter seven verse one. During Saul’s reign it had remained out of sight and largely forgotten. David therefore sought to reverse decades of negligence by restoring the ark to the center of Israel’s worship.

The ark itself was the central symbol of God’s presence among His people. God had commanded Moses to make it more than four centuries earlier. It was a wooden chest overlaid entirely with gold, measuring approximately three feet nine inches long, two feet three inches wide, and two feet three inches high. Within it were the tablets of the law, Aaron’s rod that budded, and a golden pot of manna. Its lid, the mercy seat, was overshadowed by the golden cherubim and represented the throne of God on earth. It was the place where blood was sprinkled on the Day of Atonement and where God’s presence was manifested.

David’s desire to bring the ark to Jerusalem was therefore good and theologically sound. Jerusalem was now the political center of the kingdom, and David rightly intended it to be the spiritual center as well. Morgan notes that David understood that he as king was not the true ruler of Israel. Jehovah alone was Israel’s King. Therefore David knew that his own rule must depend upon the counsel and presence of God. Bringing the ark into Jerusalem was a public acknowledgment of divine sovereignty.

The people unanimously agreed, for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people. Their unity reveals the spiritual hunger of the nation. After the long and tragic decline under Saul, Israel longed for God’s presence and blessing. Yet though the motivation was right, their method would soon prove faulty. Right motives never justify disobedience to God’s revealed order. The ark must be approached only as God commands.

This scene therefore prepares the reader for the coming lesson. God desires sincere worship, but He also demands holy reverence and obedience. The attempt to restore the ark will reveal how essential it is to seek God’s will directly, not merely follow the consensus of leaders or the enthusiasm of the people.

2. (1 Chronicles 13:5-8) The procession of the ark from Kirjath Jearim

“So David gathered all Israel together, from Shihor of Egypt even unto the entering of Hemath, to bring the ark of God from Kirjathjearim. And David went up, and all Israel, to Baalah, that is, to Kirjathjearim, which belonged to Judah, to bring up thence the ark of God the Lord, that dwelleth between the cherubims, whose name is called on it. And they carried the ark of God in a new cart out of the house of Abinadab. And Uzza and Ahio drave the cart. And David and all Israel played before God with all their might, and with singing, and with harps, and with psalteries, and with timbrels, and with cymbals, and with trumpets.”

David gathered all Israel from Shihor in Egypt to the entrance of Hamath, meaning from the extreme southern border to the northern boundary of the land. This was not a private ceremony. It was a national event, a moment of deep religious significance, for the ark represented the very presence and glory of God among His people. David and all Israel went up to Baalah, also known as Kirjath Jearim, where the ark had remained in the house of Abinadab since its return from Philistine territory in First Samuel chapter seven verse one. David desired to bring the ark to Jerusalem because he wanted the nation to be alive again with a sense of God’s nearness and holiness. The Chronicler emphasizes that the ark belonged to the Lord who dwelleth between the cherubims, whose name is called on it. This underscores the sacredness of the ark and the seriousness of their task.

The ark was carried on a new cart from the house of Abinadab. This immediately signals a serious deviation from God’s revealed will. According to Exodus chapter twenty five verses twelve through fifteen, the ark was designed to be carried by poles inserted into rings on its sides. According to Numbers chapter four verse fifteen, only the Levites of the family of Kohath were authorized to bear it on their shoulders. The ark was never to be transported on a cart. The Philistines in First Samuel chapter six used a cart because they were ignorant of God’s law, and God mercifully overlooked their ignorance. But Israel had the law and was expected to honor it. By imitating Philistine methodology, Israel embraced human innovation instead of divine instruction.

Meyer observes that the ark was to be carried by consecrated men, not by mechanical means. The work of God must always be advanced by the hands, obedience, and consecration of God’s people, not by the inventions of human ingenuity. Morgan notes that the long neglect of the ark likely contributed to the people’s unfamiliarity with the holy regulations concerning its care. Whether through ignorance or carelessness, the people failed to consult the Lord and failed to heed His Word.

Uzza and Ahio drove the cart. Their names are significant. Uzza means strength and Ahio means friendly. The combination is a fitting illustration of much well intentioned but misguided religious activity. There is strength, enthusiasm, friendliness, and human energy, yet the will of God has not been sought. Good intentions and energetic efforts cannot substitute for obedience. David may have prayed for God’s blessing on their enterprise, but there is no evidence that he asked God how the ark should be transported. This was a good thing done in the wrong way.

David and all Israel played music before God with all their might. The atmosphere was joyful, loud, and celebratory. There were harps, psalteries, timbrels, cymbals, and trumpets. It was a magnificent production, full of national excitement and sincere enthusiasm. Yet the elaborate celebration did not please God. Worship is not measured by how passionately people perform but by whether their worship aligns with the revealed will of God. True worship demands reverence, obedience, and submission to Scripture.

Spurgeon notes that if one reads the story carefully, it appears to be an affair dominated by singing, instruments, enthusiasm, and outward displays, but lacks any mention of humility, solemn awe, or trembling awareness of the holiness of God. The ark was the outward symbol of God’s presence, yet their treatment of it lacked the fear of the Lord. Spurgeon warns that the first attempt to move the ark was too much after the will of the flesh and the energy of nature. Human excitement is no substitute for holy obedience.

This passage sets the stage for the coming judgment. God desires to be worshipped in spirit and in truth, and truth requires adherence to His commands. The ark must be approached as He has ordained, for the holiness of God cannot be reshaped by the enthusiasm of man.

B. The death of Uzza and its aftermath

1. (1 Chronicles 13:9-11) Uzza touches the ark and is killed in judgment

“And when they came unto the threshingfloor of Chidon, Uzza put forth his hand to hold the ark, for the oxen stumbled. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzza, and he smote him, because he put his hand to the ark. And there he died before God. And David was displeased, because the Lord had made a breach upon Uzza. Wherefore that place is called Perez Uzza to this day.”

When the procession reached the threshing floor of Chidon, the moment of crisis arrived. A threshing floor was a place where chaff was separated from grain, and the imagery is intentional. What looked like a magnificent national celebration was, in reality, full of chaff. There was enthusiasm, music, production, festivity, and national unity, but little reverence, obedience, or submission to the holiness of God. At Chidon’s threshing floor, the Lord blew away the chaff and exposed the underlying disobedience of the entire enterprise.

Uzza put forth his hand to hold the ark because the oxen stumbled. The stumbling likely occurred because the oxen reached the scattering of grain on the threshing floor. In that instant Uzza saw the ark shake, and his instinct was to stabilize it. He believed that his hand on the ark was better than the ark resting on the ground. Yet this action directly violated the Word of God. Numbers chapter four verse fifteen clearly commanded Israel that when the holy vessels were transported, the Levites were not to touch any holy thing lest they die. God did not leave this matter vague or open to improvisation. The ark was holy not because of gold or craftsmanship, but because it represented the very presence of the God of Israel. To lay one’s hand upon it was to violate the boundary God Himself ordained.

Uzza’s decision was not merely a reflex. Scripture portrays it as a moral and theological error. God struck him because he put his hand to the ark, and he died there before God. The same God whom David longed to honor manifested His holiness in judgment. The outbreak of the Lord revealed the deeper issues in Uzza’s thinking. He erred in believing that it did not matter who transported the ark, although God had assigned that duty to the Kohathites alone. He erred in believing that it did not matter how the ark was transported, though God had commanded that it must be carried on the shoulders of consecrated men. He erred in presuming that his long familiarity with the ark at his father’s house meant he understood how to handle it, though familiarity with holy things can easily produce carelessness. He erred in believing that God needed his help to steady the ark, as if the sovereignty of God depended upon the arm of man. Most critically, he erred in assuming that his hand was cleaner than the ground. The soil on the threshing floor had never rebelled against God. The hand of man had.

Maclaren notes that Uzza treated the ark as if it were simply an important item, not a sacred vessel set apart by God. His intention was not malicious, but intention does not nullify sacred order. His act showed a lack of awe and a failure to grasp the severe holiness of God.

David became displeased because of the Lord’s outbreak against Uzza. The word displeased carries the idea of anger and confusion. David’s intentions were good. He believed he was honoring God. Yet God judged the event in a way David did not expect. This reveals an important truth. Good intentions do not sanctify disobedience. God is concerned with intentions and actions. David’s anger flowed from the bewilderment of a man who expected blessing but reaped judgment because he did God’s work in man’s way. The place was called Perez Uzza, meaning the breach or outburst against Uzza, a permanent reminder that God’s holiness is never to be redefined by human zeal.

3. (1 Chronicles 13:12-14) David’s fear and God’s blessing on Obed-Edom’s house

“And David was afraid of God that day, saying, How shall I bring the ark of God home to me? So David brought not the ark home to himself to the city of David, but carried it aside into the house of Obed–edom the Gittite. And the ark of God remained with the family of Obed–edom in his house three months. And the Lord blessed the house of Obed–edom, and all that he had.”

When the Lord struck Uzza, David’s entire perspective shifted. Scripture states that David was afraid of God that day, yet the fear he experienced was not the kind of reverent awe that leads to worship. It was a troubled fear rooted in confusion about the holiness of God and about his own missteps. David’s problem was not that God was unpredictable or unsafe, but that David himself had acted in ignorance and disobedience, even though his intentions were noble. There was nothing wrong with God, nothing wrong with the ark, and nothing wrong with the desire to bring it to Jerusalem. The problem was the failure to regard the holiness of God with accurate obedience. The blessing that soon fell upon Obed–edom’s house proved this. The ark itself was not dangerous when handled God’s way. It was dangerous only when handled man’s way.

This moment also confronted Israel with a timeless truth. God’s holiness cannot be contained or shaped to fit human enthusiasm. As Selman has noted, any reader of Chronicles who longed for national restoration needed to understand that the God of Israel is a God whose holiness cannot be reduced to human expectations, shortcuts, or innovations. Enthusiasm, celebration, and sincerity do not sanctify disobedience. David had discovered that the hard way.

David cried out, “How shall I bring the ark of God home to me?” This question arose from a genuine desire to have the ark at the heart of Israel, yet it was temporarily overshadowed by fear. The failed procession made David feel as though obedience to God’s will was now impossible. However, David later discovered that the answer to his question was found in the Word of God. As Isaiah chapter eight verse twenty says, “To the law and to the testimony.” The only correct path forward was obedience to Scripture. David learned that God cares deeply about both the outcome and the method. It would not suffice to say, “As long as the ark gets to Jerusalem, the details do not matter.” God declared through this event that the details do matter, that the process is holy, and that all service to the Lord must be done according to the revelation He has given.

David then took the ark aside into the house of Obed–edom the Gittite. This action was not arbitrary. The narrative in First Chronicles chapter fifteen verses seventeen and eighteen shows that Obed–edom was a Levite, specifically of the Kohathite clan, the very family God commanded to carry the ark according to Numbers chapter four verse fifteen. By sending the ark into his house, David was unknowingly placing it into the care of those whom God had appointed for this task. The ark remained there for three months, and during this time the Lord blessed the house of Obed–edom and all that he had. The blessing was immediate, abundant, and visible enough for David to hear reports of it, which later encouraged him to resume the task with proper obedience.

This blessing demonstrated a crucial truth. The ark was never meant to be a bringer of death or fear. The curse fell only when the holiness of God was ignored. When God’s Word was honored, the ark was a source of blessing. The holiness that brought judgment upon Uzza now brought prosperity upon Obed–edom. Blessing follows obedience. The difference between a breach and a blessing was not the ark, but the posture of those who approached it.

Some have speculated that the description “the Gittite” means Obed–edom was a Philistine from Gath. Selman sees this as an example of God’s undeserved grace to a Gentile sojourner. Yet the evidence is far stronger that Obed–edom was a Levite who had once lived in Gath. Adam Clarke’s observation stands on firmer ground, for First Chronicles chapter fifteen verse seventeen identifies Obed–edom among the Levitical gatekeepers. Therefore, Obed–edom was not a Philistine blessed by accident but a Levite fulfilling his God-ordained role, demonstrating that the moment God’s order is honored, His blessing is released.