sanctuary

Prophetic Leadership in Old Testament Worship

by

A careful survey of scriptural evidence discloses that the worship of the Lord is most significantly influenced, and often expressly led, by persons functioning in a prophetic role (as opposed to a priestly role). Prophets served as mediators of the covenant; they were closely associated with the sanctuary and vitally concerned with the integrity of worship; they functioned as directors and musicians.

Prophets As Covenant Mediators

The prophets of Israel, as God’s spokesmen (the probable meaning of the Hebrew term navi’), were mediators of the covenant and advocates of the covenant tradition. They called on the people to return to their loyalty to Yahweh, and they proclaimed the judgment of the Lord on an unfaithful people when the provisions of the covenant had been violated through idolatry and injustice. Since the enactment, renewal, and celebration of the covenant were a worship form, the prophets fulfilled a function as leaders in worship.

Moses, Israel’s prophet par excellence, mediated the Sinai covenant (Exod. 19:1–24:8), which had a worship structure incorporating the appearance of the Lord, the review of his historic act of deliverance of his people, the proclamation of his Word or covenant stipulations, the people’s pledge to obey the terms of the covenant, the giving of offerings to the Lord, and the eating of a covenant meal. Moses also presided at a renewal of the covenant, which had a similar structure, just prior to Israel’s entrance into Canaan. The entire book of Deuteronomy is devoted to a description of this ceremony in the form of a farewell address by Moses. Of special note here is the liturgical pronouncement of the covenant sanctions: blessing if the covenant is kept, curse if it is violated (Deut. 27–29). The people were summoned to choose the way of obedience that leads to life (Deut. 30:15–20), and witnesses to the agreement were invoked (Deut. 4:26; 30:19). The ceremony concluded with two songs, the first of which returned to the theme of the judgment inherent in the curse of the covenant (Deut. 32:1–43).

Joshua, though not called a prophet, inherited the mantle of Moses as the spokesman of the Lord’s covenant and presided over the curse liturgy for which Moses had given directions in his farewell address (Josh. 8:30–35). After the conquest of the land of Canaan, he officiated at another ceremony of renewal of the covenant at Shechem (Josh. 24:1–28). This ceremony recapitulated the same treaty-covenant structure familiar from earlier examples: the recitation of the relationship between God and people, the summons to choose between the Lord and other gods, the pledge of the people to serve Yahweh, the invocation of witnesses, and the presentation of the terms of the covenant, its “words,” or statutes.

Prophets and the Sanctuary

Samuel, who was to become Israel’s prophetic leader, was brought up in the sanctuary and “was ministering before the Lord” (1 Sam. 2:18); later his presence was required to “bless the sacrifice” of the feasts of the people (1 Sam. 9:12–13). Bands of prophets were apparently attached to the high places or local sanctuaries; Saul, after being anointed king by Samuel, also encountered such a group and prophesied with them (1 Sam. 10:1–13).

The prophetic association with the sanctuary continued into the period of the Israelite kingdoms; evidently, the festal gatherings of the people provided an audience for the prophet’s utterances, which were usually in the form of poetic compositions. Amos prophesied at the “sanctuary of the king” at Bethel and was ordered by the officiating priest, Amaziah, to return to his own country, Judah, and prophesy there instead (Amos 7:10–17). Isaiah received his prophetic vocation while attending a festival at the temple in Jerusalem (Isa. 6). He apparently was close to the king, a respected adviser to the royal house (Isa. 7:1–17; 37:1–38:22). It has been suggested that Isaiah served as the nation’s “poet laureate,” composing liturgical materials for public worship; the famous prophecy of the “child” who is to take the government upon his shoulder, reigning “on David’s throne and over his kingdom” (Isa. 9:1–7), may have been an oracle for the coronation of a Judean king such as Hezekiah. Jeremiah delivered his indictment of the people’s violation of the covenant while standing “at the gate of the Lord’s house,” addressing the Judeans who came there to worship (Jer. 7:1–2).

The integrity of the worship of the Lord was itself a major concern of the prophets of Israel, all the way from Samuel, who insisted that “to obey is better than sacrifice” (1 Sam. 15:22), to Malachi, who proclaimed that the “messenger of the covenant” would come to his temple, refining the priesthood so they might “bring offerings in righteousness” (Mal. 3:1–4). Elijah officiated at a sacrifice that demonstrated to the people, who had been enticed to worship the Canaanite god Ba‘al, that Yahweh, “he is God” (1 Kings 18:36–39 RSV). The prophet Amaziah encouraged Asa, king of Judah, to undertake a restoration of the sanctuary, accompanied by the renewal of the covenant oath (2 Chron. 15:1–15). During the reign of Josiah, king of Judah, the prophetess Huldah was consulted in connection with the rediscovery of the Book of the Law by the priests; she declared the Lord’s judgment against the temple as a consequence of the violation of the covenant (2 Kings 22:12–20).

Amos declared, in the Lord’s name, “I hate, I despise your religious feasts; I cannot stand your assemblies” (Amos 5:21) because they mask injustice and the violation of the Lord’s covenant with his people. similarly, Isaiah declared that the appointed feasts had become a burden to the Lord (Isa. 1:14) because of the dissolution of the wealthy and their indifference to the plight of the poor, their fellow members of the covenant community.

Jeremiah and Ezekiel, prophets of the early exilic period, were both of priestly families (Jer. 1:1; Ezek. 1:3), and each in his own way was concerned with the integrity of worship. Jeremiah believed that trust in religious institutions, without an inward bond to the Lord, was deceptive (Jer. 7:3–11). Instead, he proclaimed the coming of a “new covenant” written on the heart (Jer. 31:31–34). Ezekiel was more institutionally oriented; his passion was the restoration of the ruined temple, filled once again with the glory of the Lord (Ezek. 40–43), a source of life and healing (Ezek. 47:1–12). In the postexilic period, the prophet Haggai urged Zerubbabel the governor and Joshua the high priest to rebuild the house of the Lord (Hag. 1:1–11).

Prophetic Musicians in Worship

In ancient Israel, prophecy and music were closely associated. (A hint of this association, found in other cultures as well, appears in our English word music, which betrays its derivation from the ancient Greek concept of the muse, the spirit that inspires poets and musicians.) During the Exodus, Miriam the prophetess, sister of Moses and Aaron, took tambourine in hand and led the women in song and dance, celebrating the Lord’s triumph over the Egyptian pursuers (Exod. 15:20–21). As we have seen, Moses concluded his farewell address, an extended reenactment of the covenant ceremony, with a song of judgment and warning. The prophetess Deborah (Judg. 4:4) composed a song celebrating Israel’s victory over a Canaanite army (Judg. 5:1–31). The prophets that Saul encountered coming down from the high place were prophesying to the accompaniment of musical instruments (1 Sam. 10:5).

The prophets of the period of the Israelite kingdoms continued the same alignment between spoken word and music. Second Kings 3:15 records that Elisha called for a “minstrel” (mƒnaggen, a player on a stringed instrument) in order to prophesy to the kings of Israel, Judah, and Edom, assembled for battle against Moab. The prophets who produced the prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible composed lyric oracles, which they probably sang to their hearers—at least to their disciples, if not always to the public. Isaiah’s “song of the vineyard” (Isa. 5:1–7) expresses the Lord’s disappointment with his unfaithful people. Another song in Isaiah 26:1–6, celebrating the Lord’s deliverance of those who trust in him, perhaps was composed as part of a liturgy of entrance into the sanctuary (Isa. 26:2). Jeremiah composed a chant of lament upon the death of King Josiah (2 Chron. 35:25), and his book of Lamentations is a song. Most of the material in the prophetic books is, in fact, poetic song, and some material in the later Prophets, now preserved in prose form, was probably originally written as song. Indeed, prophecy was so closely associated with music that Ezekiel complained that to the public he was simply a musical entertainer (Ezek. 33:32).

It is David the king, however, whose name is most closely linked with prophetic song and musical leadership in the liturgy of the sanctuary. In connection with his bringing the ark of the covenant up to Zion, David instructed the Levites to provide singers and musicians to celebrate the event (1 Chron. 15:16–24). Once the ark had been placed in its tent, he appointed Asaph as chief musician in charge of continual thanksgiving and praise before the ark (1 Chron. 16:1–7). The Levites were priests, but later we learn that David had appointed them to “prophesy”—to give thanks and praise to the Lord (1 Chron. 25:1–7). The description of their activity suggests that these musicians led in a spontaneous and overwhelming outpouring of worship, especially on high occasions such as the dedication of the temple of Solomon (2 Chron. 5:11–14).

David is associated with about half the Psalms, for which he is called a “prophet” in the New Testament (Acts 2:29–31). Many of the Psalms must have originated in the prophetic worship he instituted before the ark on Zion during the period prior to the erection of the temple, when the Mosaic sanctuary with its priestly sacrifices remained at Gibeon (1 Chron. 21:29). This explains the prophetic voice in which God himself speaks in a number of the Psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 46; 50; 81–82; 89; 91; 95; 105; 108; 110; 132), many of which are attributed to David or to the Levitical musicians.

Certain of the sanctuary musicians were appointed to direct the performance of the music (1 Chron. 15:21), and the superscriptions to fifty-five of the Psalms refer to the choirmaster, or “director” (mƒnatztze‡ḥ), often with instructions for performance (Pss. 4–6; 8–9; 12; 22; 45–46; 52–62; 67; 69; 75–77; 80–81; 84; 88). Of these Psalms, thirty-nine are associated with David, nine with the sons of Korah, and five with Asaph. (A similar designation appears in Hab. 3:19.) The director of music evidently played an important leadership role in the worship of the sanctuary from the time of David onward, as the vocal and instrumental praise of the Lord assumed greater importance. The book of Chronicles especially highlights the prominence of the prophetic sanctuary musicians as leaders of corporate worship. A well-known example of their activity occurs in the account of the invasion of Judah during the reign of Jehoshaphat, when Jahaziel, a Levitical musician, prophesied encouragement and victory to the beleaguered king and nation. The musicians then went before the army into battle, praising the Lord in full vesture, and led in celebration of the ensuing victory (2 Chron. 20:14–30). In the restoration of worship after the Exile, Ezra made a point of recruiting more than two hundred Levites for the service of the sanctuary (Ezra 8:18–20).

In Israelite worship, prophetic and musical activity offered virtually the only outlet for leadership in worship on the part of women. The prophetesses Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah have been mentioned. The enumeration of members of the assembly who returned to Jerusalem after the Exile includes 245 male and female singers (Neh. 7:67). Moses expressed the desire that all the Lord’s people might be prophets (Num. 11:29). Indeed, in Psalm 105 the Lord calls all the covenant descendants of Abraham “my prophets” (Ps. 105:8–15). The spirit of prophecy, then, is the rightful heritage of all who are bound to the Lord in covenant.

Furnishings of the Temple of Solomon

by

The furnishings of the sanctuary proper and its surrounding courts all contributed to the grandeur of the worship of the Lord. The sanctuary proper, including the Holy of Holies, contained the ark of the covenant, the lampstands the altar of incense, and the table of shewbread. The great altar of sacrifice stood in the court, outside the sanctuary, together with the bronze sea.

The Sanctuary Furnishings

The ark, with its mercy seat, from the tabernacle, was placed at the back of the Holy of Holies, under the cherubim, which were made of olive wood (1 Kings 6:23–27) and were gold plated. These were ten cubits high, and their wings extended to ten cubits, half the width of the room. They functioned symbolically as guardians of the way to God, solemnizing the heart of the worshiper in this approach to God. Their faces were turned toward the dividing partition. They were composite figures well known to the people of that day, requiring no description of their form. They may have been similar to the four-faced cherubim of Ezekiel and were usually represented with hands and feet, therefore having a basic human body.

In the Holy Place, before the door to the Holy of Holies, was placed the altar of incense (1 Kings 6:20; 7:48; cf. Exod. 30:1–10), probably new and made of cedar, since it was overlaid with gold. Presumably, the table for the shewbread was also new, overlaid with gold, and placed on the right side of the room as in the tabernacle (cf. Exod. 40:22). In this room were the ten candlesticks (or lampstands, RSV), five on the right side and five on the left, all of gold, with their oil cups and ornamentation, to give light in the Holy Place (1 Kings 7:49).

Before the temple, on the platform surrounding the temple, stood the two brass pillars, Jachin and Boaz; Jachin means “sustainer,” stressing the positive side of God’s character, and Boaz means “smiter,” giving the negative aspect of the character of Yahweh as keeper of Israel.

It is questionable that these pillars were for incense burning since their height would make it difficult to reach their tops to replenish the incense. They were approximately four cubits in diameter and eighteen cubits high (1 Kings 7:15) for the shaft, with chapters (capitals, RSV) five cubits high on each. The chronicler (2 Chron. 3:15) gives the total height of both pillars as 35 cubits, apparently just the shaft length. The additional cubit of length most likely was a separate, cast base similar to some that have been found. The capitals are described as “in the shape of lilies” (1 Kings 7:19) and having a bowl-shaped member (1 Kings 7:42; cf. 7:20, belly); lily petals were below, four cubits broad (1 Kings 7:19), probably set downward as examples from this period show. Second Kings 25:17 states them to be three cubits high, but this refers to the chain network; it would appear that this measurement refers to the upper portion of the capital, leaving two cubits for the height of the lily decoration.

The bowls (1 Kings 7:41) had a network (checker work, 1 Kings 7:17) of chains supporting two rows of pomegranates. The chains were seven in number (1 Kings 7:17) and were divided, that is, four chains draped down from the center point at the top and three strands set around the bowl with the pomegranates attached to the bottom strand, fastened one below the other.

Furnishings in the Temple Courts

The prominent feature of the court was the molten sea (1 Kings 7:23), ten cubits in diameter, 30 cubits in circumference, and five cubits high—thus bowl-shaped, with sides about as thick as the hand, and containing two thousand “baths” (1 Kings 7:24–26; 2 Chron. 4:5 gives the number as three thousand “baths”). The figures are possible if one assumes (Ezek. 41:8) the use of the great cubit (royal cubit). On this basis the capacity would have been about ten thousand gallons, using the usual formula for spherical volume. In Chronicles, another method of computation seems to have been used, the volume of a cylinder, which in this case turns out to be three thousand baths. Thus the problem is one of the methods by which the writers viewed the shape of the sea, not an essential contradiction in the text. The sea was located in the altar court to the southeast (2 Chron. 4:10).

The rim was finished off with the petal (lily) work familiar from the pillar capitals. It also had knops (1 Kings 7:24), or knobs, under the brim in two rows of ten per cubit. The sea stood on a base composed of twelve oxen in sets of three, one set toward each of the compass points (1 Kings 7:25). These corresponded to the twelve tribes of Israel bearing the sanctifying witness of God.

The wheeled stands for movable lavers (1 Kings 7:27ff. RSV) were ten in number, formed of boxes four cubits square and three cubits high, the sides made up of divided panels and having ornamental work. The boxes were worked onto short columns (undersetters, 1 Kings 7:30 KJV), to which axles were attached for wheels one and one-half cubits in diameter. The wheels were like chariot wheels, six-spoked as archaeological remains show. As indicated in 1 Kings 7:34, the undersetters extended upward to form the corners of the boxes. The plates of 1 Kings 7:30 were parts of the sides of the box.

Into the stands at the top were fitted lavers containing the water for washing the sacrificial animals (2 Chron. 4:6), for the great laver (sea) was for the ablutions of the priests. These lavers held about forty baths or two hundred gallons of water. They could be moved about as the washings required. Normally they were distributed five on the north side and five on the south side of the court before the temple. In addition, there were ten tables (2 Chron. 4:8) for the flaying of the sacrifices brought by the people. These were placed in the same court as the lavers, probably five on each side.

The focal point in the court was the great brass altar (2 Chron. 4:1). It was twenty cubits square and ten cubits high. Its transportation from the Jordan required its sides to be of panel construction with corner pieces and a grate through which the ashes could fall; some method for removing these also was provided, either by the removal of the grating or through the side panels. Ezekiel’s description (Ezek. 43:13ff.) does not shed much light on the Solomonic altar because too many events occurred between.

Other implements are listed (1 Kings 7:38ff.; 2 Chron. 4:6, 19ff.).There were basins for water and basins to catch the blood of sacrifices, tongs, picks, snuffers, spoons of one sort or another with which to ladle and handle the meat offerings, as well as flat implements such as cake turners for cooking the cake offerings. Likewise, the incense containers for the priests are listed.

The Courts Surrounding the Temple

Little is said in Kings or Chronicles concerning the courts surrounding the temple building. First Kings 6:36 lists an inner court, which, due to the slope of the site, was the upper court (Jer. 36:10 RSV). The latter was formed by an enclosing wall of three courses of cut stone and a row of cedar beams to tie it together (cf. 2 Chron. 4:9, the court of the priests). With the temple on a base of six cubits, the whole presented a terraced scene exposing the temple building for an easy view of its imposing character. The great court, or outer court (1 Kings 7:9, 12), enclosed both the temple and the palace works of Solomon.

The outer court was accessed through gates; though they are not specifically listed, the door leaves for them are enumerated (2 Chron. 4:9). From the outer court, the inner court was also accessed by gates to which the layperson had access (Jer. 36:10). Ezekiel 44:1 mentions the east gate, and because of the departure and return of the glory of God from this gate, it was the principal gate to the outer court of the temple, probably the gate of 2 Chronicles 4:9. Between the temple court (inner) and Solomon’s palace, there was access from the palace court to the inner court through a gate, presumably in the south wall of the inner court, the gate of the guard (2 Kings 11:19). A north gate also existed, known as Sur (2 Kings 11:6).

Purpose of the Temple of Solomon

by

The temple as the focal point of Israelite worship served as a protection against idolatry. It stood for the covenant between the Lord and Israel and was the place where God might be approached in celebration and propitiation.

The outstanding feature of the Solomonic temple is that there was no idol in it, only the mercy seat over the ark and the cherubim overshadowing the mercy seat, declaring to the world that idols are unnecessary to define the presence of God or his sanctity. Because the lightless room could only be reached through a specific ritual, at a specified annual time, for the purpose of making reconciliation for the people, the “house of Yahweh” in Jerusalem was not considered a cosmic house of God but emphasized the way of salvation to the penitent and assured to them the grace of God for their joy and blessing (1 Kings 8:27–30). God was not localized or in any sense conveyed by an image, either Egyptian, Babylonian, or Canaanite, nor bound to any other form such as the ark. The temple, therefore, was not necessary because of God’s nature; he had no need of it (Acts 7:48–49). It was an accommodation to the limitations and needs of his people (1 Kings 8:27–30).

That contemporary peoples had temples is not sufficient grounds to justify the temple of Yahweh in Jerusalem. Though David saw this lack as a problem (2 Sam. 7:2), it was not the reason for which David sought to build God’s house. A sufficient cause, among others, is that found in Deuteronomy 12, where the temple was to be a protective memorial for believing Israel, designed to turn their hearts away from the idols of their Palestinian contemporaries and provide them with an incentive (thus protective) not to practice the iniquities of the Canaanites, and with a memorial to the person of their God, who had delivered them from slavery in Egypt to freedom in the land of Canaan.

In addition to the practical good of centralized worship, a central cultic house was important to the covenant structure of Yahweh with Israel. The loyalty of Israel to Yahweh her God was expressed in the sacrifices and offerings that were presented at the temple. The high places of the various tribes divided the people and were disruptive of their loyalty to God; they diverted from him his rightful due as their Creator and Lord, and for this reason, the high places were roundly condemned. The temple thus became an affirmation by Israel of the covenant. The temple was needed to express clearly Israel’s attachment to the covenant. That David was not allowed to build the temple does not mean that Yahweh would not dwell in one, but rather that the time was not propitious (cf. 2 Sam. 7:5–7, 11; Deut. 12:11).

For Israel, the temple was to be the place where, particularly in three annual festivals, they were to rejoice before their God and remember his great blessings to them (Deut. 12:12). David was the recipient of centuries of this outlook and came to realize the need for this central sanctuary for unity among the people. Thus Israel’s temple in Jerusalem was from the first to differ from those of their contemporaries. Only the place God would choose was to be the center of their worship, where his judgments were to be sought, and where they were to remember particularly their deliverances (Deut. 26:1–3).

The selection of the place of dwelling for the name of Yahweh occurred during the peculiar happenings of David’s numbering the people (2 Sam. 24:1; 1 Chron. 21). On the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite, David was commanded to set up an altar of propitiation to God to stay the plague. This was declared to be the house, that is, the temple, of God and the place of the (sole) altar of the people Israel (1 Chron. 22:1). It became the place of obedience and propitiation for Israel.

This sanctuary symbolized the hearing ear of God (1 Kings 8:27–29), the resort of the stranger (1 Kings 8:41–43), and the house of prayer for all people (Isa. 56:7), to the end that all nations of the earth should fear God (1 Kings 8:43). In the New Testament, it symbolized the body of Christ (John 2:18–21) as the obedient servant of God for propitiating God’s wrath on the sinner. Further, the temple as God’s dwelling place symbolizes the Christian as the dwelling place of God (1 Cor. 3:16).

In the early days of the church, Stephen, slain for his faith, was evidently going to declare that the people were putting the temple above God, forgetting that he did not really need a temple building in the sense of rooms of stone and wood (Acts 7:44–50; cf. Acts 17:24–25) but that he desired the believing heart of flesh (Ezek. 36:26–27) on which he could impress his law, that is, his nature, which would result in obedience and holiness of life. Thus the temple is mediatorial in all ages, justifying Stephen’s position.

The Tabernacle of Moses

by

The central theme of the Mosaic tabernacle is the dwelling of God in the midst of Israel. The actualization of God’s dwelling is expressed in every aspect of the tabernacle, including its structure, materials, courts, sanctuaries, and furnishings including the altars, the lampstand, and the ark of the covenant.

Terminology and References

A number of words and phrases are used in connection with the tabernacle.

(1) “The tent” occurs nineteen times; similar phrases include “tent of the Lord” (1 Kings 2:28–29); “the house of the tent” (1 Chron. 9:23); “the house of the Lord” (Exod. 23:19); and “the tabernacle of the house of God” (1 Chron. 6:48).

(2) “Tent of meeting,” that is, of God and of Israel through Moses, indicates the tabernacle as a place of revelation. This name occurs over 125 times (Exod. 33:7; Num. 11:16; 12:4; Deut. 31:14). The place where the Lord met with Moses and Israel (Exod. 29:42–43; Num. 17:4) was for communication and revelation (Exod. 29:42; 33:11; Num. 7:89). It is equivalent to “tent of revelation,” since here God declared his will for Israel. The rendering “the tabernacle of the congregation” is not exact.

(3) “Dwelling place” or “dwelling” indicates the place where God disclosed himself to his people and dwelt among them. The root is “to dwell.” Exodus 25:8 uses the word to speak of the entire shrine; in Exodus 26:1 it is limited practically to the Holy of Holies.

(4) “The tabernacle of the testimony” also occurs (Exod. 38:21). Less frequently, we see “the tent of the testimony” (Num. 9:15, asv).

(5) The general term Holy Place, or “sanctuary,” appears in Exodus 25:8 and Leviticus 10:17–18. The root is the verb “to be separate, holy.”

The principal passages dealing with the tabernacle are (1) Exodus 25–29; (2) Exodus 30–31; (3) Exodus 35–40; and (4) Numbers 3:25–26; 4:4–6; and 7:1–89.

The Structure of the Tabernacle

The purpose of the structure is stated in Exodus 25:8, 21–22. It was made after the pattern shown to Moses on the mount (Exod. 25:9; 26:30). The entrances to the court and to the structure were from the east. The altar of burnt offering was in the court, then the laver; inside the tabernacle, farthest west, stood the Holy of Holies, or Most Holy Place, which housed the ark of the covenant and was hidden by a veil, or curtain. The second division inside the tabernacle, the Holy Place, contained the table of shewbread, the golden lampstand, and the altar of incense.

In the development of Israelite religion, altars appeared before sanctuaries (Gen. 12:7–8). The tabernacle reflected the monotheism of Israel, and the later temples were modeled after it. The ground plan of the tabernacle is sufficiently clear, although there are various opinions concerning the details. It is customarily held that the shape of the structure was oblong with a flat roof and ornate coverings that hung down at each side and at the back. Another opinion is that the tabernacle had a sloping roof.

The outer court contained the altar of burnt offering and the bronze laver. The tabernacle structure consisted of two divisions: the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, or Most Holy Place. In the former, which was on the north side, stood the table of shewbread (the structure was oriented toward the east); the golden lampstand was on the south; the golden altar of incense was on the west against the veil leading to the Most Holy Place. The innermost compartment held the ark of the covenant, in which were deposited the two tablets of the Law, the pot of manna, and the rod of Aaron that had budded. The ark’s covering, a lid of pure gold, was the mercy seat, or propitiatory, overshadowed by two angelic figures called cherubim. At the mercy seat God met with his people in their need on the basis of shed blood.

Materials and Furniture

The tabernacle was made from the voluntary gifts of Israel. Materials are listed in Exodus 25:3–7 and 35:4–9: gold, silver, bronze; blue, purple, and scarlet material and fine, twined linen; goats’ hair, dyed rams’ skins, goatskins, acacia wood, oil for lamps, spices for anointing oil and fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for the ephod and the breastpiece. The three metals of ancient times—bronze, silver, and gold—were used in meaningful gradation from the outer court to the Most Holy Place. The most artistic use of the metals was found in the cherubim and the golden lampstand. The wood used throughout the structure was shittim, or acacia wood, known for its durability. The material employed was linen, also fine, twined linen, dyed blue, purple, and scarlet (Exod. 25:4). The yarn was spun by women in charge of the weaving (Exod. 35:25–35); the work included embroidery and tapestry.

Framework and Coverings

The framework of the tabernacle (Exod. 26:15–37; 36:20–38) was made of 48 wooden frames, fifteen feet high by 27 inches wide, with three vertical arms, joined by three crosspieces. These were placed in wooden supports, and over them were hung two large curtains. Overall were spread three covers. The framework was constructed of uprights of acacia wood, making three sides of the oblong structure. The front was closed by an embroidered screen (Exod. 26:36–37). The boards, 48 in number, were overlaid with gold. The construction was divided into two compartments, separated by a veil hung from four pillars overlaid with gold and set in sockets of silver. The veil, like the covering of the tabernacle, was woven in blue, purple, and scarlet, with figures of cherubim. The Holy Place was thirty feet long by fifteen feet wide; the Most Holy Place was fifteen feet square. It has been suggested that the tabernacle proper was shaped like a tent, with a ridge pole and a sloping roof.

The coverings of the tabernacle are described in Exodus 26:1–14 and 36:8–9. The wooden framework of the tabernacle had three coverings: the total covering of the tabernacle itself, the covering of goats’ hair, and the covering of ram’s skins and goatskins spread over the entire structure. The first covering was made of ten curtains of fine, twined linen woven in blue, purple, and scarlet, with figures of cherubim. The second covering was of eleven curtains of goats’ hair. The top covering was made of rams’ skins dyed red and goatskins.

Court of the Tabernacle

The court is described in Exodus 27:9–18 and 38:9–20. The court of the tabernacle was a rectangle on an east-to-west plan, one hundred cubits (about 150 feet) long and fifty cubits wide. To the west was the tabernacle proper and to the east, the altar. The court was screened from the camp by five white curtains five cubits high. It was an enclosure 150 feet long by 75 feet wide, with curtains of fine, twined linen, supported on bronze pillars and attached by silver hooks. In the court stood the altar of burnt offering and the laver, the latter being set between the altar and the tabernacle proper (Exod. 30:17–21). The entrance to the court was on the eastern side through a “gate” or “screen” with hangings.

The Altar

The altar of burnt offering is discussed in Exodus 27:1–8 and 38:1–7. It is called “the altar of bronze” for its appearance and “the altar of burnt offering” for its use. The fire on this altar was never to go out (Lev. 6:13). The most important of the contents of the outer court was the altar. It was a hollow chest of acacia wood covered with bronze, five cubits long, five cubits wide, and three cubits high, with a horn at each of the four corners. In the middle of the altar was a ledge (Lev. 9:22) and below it a grating. The altar was carried by bronze-covered poles in bronze rings. The horns of this altar were at times misused for asylum (1 Kings 1:50–51). They were sprinkled with blood at the consecration of the priests (Exod. 29:12), at the presentation of the sin offering (Lev. 4:18–34), and on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:18). The grating on the four sides at the foot of the altar permitted the blood of the sacrifices to be spilled at the base of the altar through the network. Laymen were permitted to approach the altar, for when they brought their sacrifices, they laid their hands on the victim (Lev. 1:4).

The Laver

The laver is described in Exodus 30:17–21. It was for the exclusive use of the priests as they ministered in the ritual of the tabernacle. They neglected this provision at the peril of their lives (Exod. 30:20–21). Made of bronze, the laver had a base, evidently for the washing of the feet of the priests. Some scholars believe the base was a part of the laver proper, whereas others with greater probability maintain that the base was a vessel separate from the laver itself. The record indicates that the bronze was contributed by the ministering women who were engaged in work about the tabernacle (Exod. 38:8).

The Sanctuary Proper

The tabernacle proper is described in Exodus 26:1–14 and 36:8–19. It appears that the curtains, rather than the boards, constituted the dwelling of the Lord (Exod. 26:1). The record of the wooden framework of the dwelling is in Exodus 26:15–30 and 36:20–34. At the inner portion of the court stood the tabernacle, an oblong structure 45 feet long by 15 feet wide, with two divisions, the Holy Place and the Most Holy (Exod. 26:33). These two divisions are found in the Solomonic temple as well (1 Kings 6:5). The area of the Most Holy Place was thirty feet square; the Holy Place measured sixty feet by thirty feet. The two were separated by a veil. On the Day of Atonement the high priest entered the veil, or curtain, at the open end, into the innermost sanctuary. The emphasis in Exodus 26 and 36 is on the tabernacle itself and its curtains, of which there were ten, each 28 cubits by 4 cubits. The ten curtains of colored fabric with woven cherubim were joined in two sets of five along the sides of the tabernacle. Fifty loops of violet thread were sewn onto the curtains, which were to be held together by fifty gold clasps, thus uniting the whole tabernacle (Exod. 26:6). Over all was placed a tent, one covering of goats’ hair with five or six curtains coupled by hooks and clasps, amounting to a total size of fourty cubits by thirty cubits, to make certain the tabernacle was completely covered. The covering overlapped the linen and permitted an extra fold at the front (Exod. 26:9). The tent had two coverings, one of rams’ skins dyed red and another of goatskins (cf. Exod. 26:14; 40:19).

The curtains were held in place by fourty-eight acacia frames. These frames consisted of two arms connected at the top, center, and bottom by rungs with two silver bases for each frame. The silver bases formed an unbroken foundation around the tabernacle. The frames were also held together by five bars. The frames and bars were gold plated. The front of the structure was enclosed by curtains. (Exodus 26:22–25 is difficult to interpret. It may speak of a pair of frames joined at each corner of the west or rear of the framework, sloping upward and inward from their bases to a point under the top bar.) The screen was the entrance to the Holy Place. The veil separated the Holy of Holies, or Most Holy Place, from the Holy Place. The veil was made of variegated material embroidered with cherubim, draped over four pillars of acacia wood, overlaid with gold, and supported by four silver bases. The screen was of the same material as the screen at the entrance to the outer court (Exod. 27:16). It was suspended from golden hooks on five pillars of acacia wood, overlaid with gold, and supported by bronze bases.

The Holy Place

The outer compartment, or Holy Place, contained three pieces of furniture: (1) the table of shewbread; (2) the golden lampstand; and (3) the golden altar of incense. The table was set on the north side of the Holy Place (Exod. 40:22); the lampstand on the south side (Exod. 40:24); and the altar of incense on the west side, before the veil. The table was made of acacia wood covered with fine gold and ornamented with gold molding. Rings and poles were used for carrying the table. A number of accessories were made for the table: gold plates to hold the loaves, dishes for frankincense (Lev. 24:7), and golden vessels for wine offerings. On this table were placed two piles of twelve loaves, or cakes, which were changed each week (Lev. 24:5–9). The dishes, spoons, and bowls were all of pure gold.

On the south side of the Holy Place stood the golden, seven-branched lampstand. It was the most ornate of all the furniture. Of pure gold, it had a central shaft (Exod. 25:32–35) from which sprouted six golden branches, three on either side. The lampstand was adorned with almonds and flowers. Each branch supported a lamp that gave continuous (some say only nightly) illumination (Exod. 27:20; Lev. 24:2–3; 1 Sam. 3:3). Accessories of the lampstand, such as snuffers, snuff dishes, and oil vessels, were all of gold. The lampstand was made of a talent of pure gold (Exod. 25:38). In front of the veil was an altar of incense (Exod. 30:1–5; 37:25–28). Because it is not mentioned in Exodus 25, it is considered by some to be a later addition. It is not mentioned in the Septuagint translation of Exodus 37. It was a small altar, constructed of acacia wood and overlaid with gold, one cubit long, one cubit wide, and two cubits high. It was a miniature replica of the bronze altar (Exod. 30:1–10). Its firewas provided from the main altar. Horns, rings, poles, and a golden molding were made for it. Perpetual sweet-smelling incense was offered on it, and on the Day of Atonement expiation was made on its horns. On the basis of Hebrews 9:4, some believe Exodus 30:6 and 1 Kings 6:22 suggest that the altar of incense was inside the veil, in the Most Holy Place. The writer of Hebrews views the sanctuary and its ritual proleptically, that is, in light of future events: the rent veil and an accomplished redemption. Furthermore, the passages in Exodus and 1 Kings cannot be made to teach a condition contrary to the other passages on the Holy Place. Provision was made for replenishing the oil for the lampstand and the incense for the altar (Exod. 30:22–38).

The Holy of Holies

The smallest of all the parts of the sanctuary was the Holy of Holies, yet it was the most significant because of the ritual that was carried out there on the Day of Atonement and because of the reiterated declaration that God himself dwelt in the tabernacle in the Most Holy, a dwelling represented by the cloud of glory over the innermost sanctuary.

Exodus 25:10–40; 30:1–10; and 37 records the account of the tabernacle, beginning with the construction of the ark (Exod. 25:10). Its measurements were about 3×34 feet by 2×14 feet by 2×14 feet. It was the only furniture in the Holy of Holies. It contained the Ten Commandments (2 Kings 11:12; Ps. 132:12), the pot of manna (Exod. 16:33–34), and Aaron’s rod, which had budded (Num. 17:10). It was covered within and without by pure gold and had golden moldings, rings, and staves. Resting on the ark of the covenant and held securely in place by the gold molding was a solid slab of gold called the mercy seat, or the propitiatory. Wrought on the ends of the covering, or lid, were cherubim of gold (Exod. 25:18; 37:7–8). They faced the mercy seat and their wings touched overhead. Between the cherubim the God of Israel dwelt visibly (Exod. 25:22; 30:6; Num. 7:89) and met with his people through their representatives—first Moses, then Aaron. The rendering “mercy seat” was first employed by William Tyndale, the first English translator of the Bible, who followed Martin Luther’s translation, Gnadenstuhl, based on the Greek hilastērion and the Latin propitiatorium. “Propitiatory” best conveys the concept intended, that is, that of making propitiation for sin; hence the place where God was rendered favorable to his people. The cherubim of pure gold were soldered to the propitiatory, making them “of one piece” with it (Exod. 25:19). They represented angelic ministers of the Lord who guarded the divine throne from all pollution. The ark was carried by poles through four golden rings at the sides of the ark. The ark was lost in the battle of Aphek (1 Sam. 4) but was later returned to Israel and eventually taken to Jerusalem. The second, or restoration, temple of Zerubbabel contained no ark with its propitiatory according to the apocryphal book of Baruch (cf. Bar. 1:6–7).

Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle

The account of the construction and consecration of the tabernacle is in Exodus 25–29. Moses was instructed to erect the tabernacle on the first day of the first month in the second year of the Exodus, nine months after reaching Mount Sinai (Exod. 19:1). God revealed the pattern for his dwelling place (Exod. 25:8; 29:45). The many workmen were led by men of artistic skill who were empowered and illuminated by the Spirit of God: Bezalel the son of Uri and Oholiab the son of Ahisamach (Exod. 31:1–6). When the structure was completed and the furniture installed, the cloud symbolizing the presence of God filled the area. The cloud henceforth signaled to Israel when they were to camp and when to journey. When Israel was encamped, the tabernacle was at the center of the camp with Levites on three sides and Moses and Aaron and his sons on the fourth (east) side: Judah at the center of the east side; Ephraim at the center of the west side; Reuben on the south side. The number of Levites who ministered at the tabernacle was 8,580 (Num. 4:48). The tabernacle manifested what has been termed a “graduated holiness and perfection,” that is, the metal in the Most Holy Place was solid gold; in the Holy Place, ordinary gold; in the court, bronze. The people were allowed in the court, the priests in the Holy Place, and only the high priest in the Most Holy Place (only one day a year). Only the altar is mentioned for consecration (Exod. 29:36–37), but later all the furniture of the sanctuary was included (Exod. 30–31).

The Tabernacle in the New Testament

John, in his prologue (John 1:14), makes much of the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ as the tabernacling among men. The testimony of Stephen (Acts 7:44) is unmistakable. Paul directly equates the cross of Calvary as God’s mercy seat, or propitiatory, in finalizing the redemption of sinful man (Rom. 3:25). In speaking of regeneration (Titus 3:5) he had in mind the laver. The proper interpretation of Colossians 1:19 and 2:9 relates to the dwelling presence of God in the tabernacle of old. The Epistle to the Hebrews is inexplicable without the teaching of the worship of Israel and its priesthood residing in the tabernacle. Passages such as Revelation 8:3–4; 13:6; 15:5; and 21:3 are too clear to need comment.

Two extremes are discernible in discussions of the symbolism of the tabernacle. Some make little or nothing of the symbolism of the sanctuary, despite what has been shown of the New Testament references to that structure. On the other hand, some seek to draw some spiritual truth from every thread and piece of wood. Those somewhere in the middle do not deny symbolism in the colors, where white, blue, and scarlet predominate with their connotations of purity, heavenly character, and shedding of blood. Because some of the early church fathers imagined fanciful interpretations for the appointments of the tabernacle does not make it valid to posit that any figurative interpretations lack a solid basis in the Old Testament. Hebrews gives, at length, the Christian interpretation of the symbolism of the Mosaic tabernacle. The furniture symbolizes man’s access to God. The tabernacle is patterned after a heavenly model (Heb. 8:5); there is a divine prototype (Heb. 8:2, 5; 9:11); it conveyed important spiritual truths in the first century a.d. (Heb. 9:9). Christ appeared and then entered after death into the heavens (Heb. 9:24).

The truth of the tabernacle is inseparably bound up with the fact of the Incarnation (Col. 1:19; 2:9). In fact, the tabernacle may rightly be considered, with its emphasis on the fact of God’s dwelling with man, as the main foreshadowing in the Old Testament of the doctrine of the Incarnation. The tabernacle, rather than the later temples, is the basis of New Testament teaching. Hebrews (Heb. 9–10) refers not to any temple, but to the tabernacle. The tabernacle is the symbol of God’s dwelling with his people (Exod. 25:8; 1 Kings 8:27). This concept progressed until it was fulfilled in the incarnation of God the Son (John 1:14). He is in the church (2 Cor. 6:16), in the individual believer (1 Cor. 6:19), and in the eternal state (Rev. 21:3). In Hebrews the central passages on the New Testament tabernacle represent the earthly and heavenly aspects of Christ’s activity. The Old Testament was the shadow of which Christ is the substance (Heb. 8:5; 10:1). The tabernacle of Christ’s ministry was pitched by the Lord, not by man (Heb. 8:2). He is the high priest of the more perfect tabernacle (Heb. 9:11). He is not in an earthly tabernacle, but appears now before “God for us” (Heb. 9:24). The writer of Hebrews draws his imagery from the ceremonies of the tabernacle and clothes his concepts in the priestly and sacrificial terminology of the sanctuary in the wilderness.

Paul refers to “the washing of regeneration” (Titus 3:5) and to Christ offering himself as a sacrifice to God (Eph. 5:2). The first three Gospels underscore the rending of the temple veil (Matt. 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45) which the author of Hebrews indicates opened the way into the Holy of Holies (Heb. 9:8; 10:19–20).

The Significance of the Tabernacle

The tabernacle, with its priests and their ministry, was foundational to the religious life of Israel. The basic concept was that which underlay the theocracy itself: the Lord dwelling in visible glory in his sanctuary among his people (Exod. 25:8). Even if the tabernacle had no historical validity, which it assuredly had, it still may have value for the readers because of its embodiment of important religious and spiritual concepts. It reveals, first, the necessary conditions on which Israel could maintain fellowship in covenant relationship with the Lord. Second, it reveals the dominant truth of the presence of God in the midst of his people (Exod. 29:25), a dwelling that must conform in every detail with his divine character, that is, his unity and holiness. One God requires one sanctuary; the holy God demands a holy people (Lev. 19:2). Third, it reveals the perfection and harmony of the Lord’s character, seen in the aesthetics of the tabernacle’s architecture: the gradations in metals and materials; the degrees of sanctity exhibited in the court, the Holy Place, and the Most Holy Place; and the measurements of the tabernacle, for example, three, four, seven, and ten, with their fractions and multiples dominating and pervading every detail of furniture and material.

The tabernacle was the first sanctuary reared for the Lord at his command and was rendered glorious and effective by his actual indwelling. The dwelling of God with humanity is the dominant theme of the symphony of the tabernacle, pointing to the future, eternal communion with God. The ark of the covenant, with the propitiatory, was the symbol of God’s meeting with his people on the basis of atonement (Rom. 3:25). The shewbread spoke of God’s sustenance of spiritual life; the lampstand represented Israel as God’s channel of light (Zech. 4); the incense was a symbol of prayer (Rev. 5:8; 8:3–4). The tabernacle was the authorized place of worship. It was the foundation of the theocracy. The mercy seat was the earthly seat of God’s glory where he met with his people for his glory and their blessing. The tabernacle foreshadowed the time when God’s kingdom would be fully realized and established on earth. Note the progress in the self-revelation of God to his people: first, his presence in the tabernacle; second, the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ; third, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in believers; and fourth, the descent of the New Jerusalem to the glorified earth.

Sacrifice in Israelite Worship

by

Sacrifices were a part of the tribute the Israelite worshiper offered to the God of the covenant. The Pentateuch goes into great detail concerning the altar and the sanctuary as the setting for sacrifice and the various types of sacrifices that were enacted in the worship of Israel.

Purposes of Sacrifice

In biblical times, sacrifice often accompanied the making of covenants, as in the cases of Noah (Gen. 8:20–9:17), Abram (Gen. 15:1–21), Isaac (Gen. 26:24–25), Jacob (Gen. 31:43–55; 35:6–12), and Moses on behalf of Israel (Exod. 24:1–8). Sacrifice was also a means of receiving direction from God; military leaders sometimes sacrificed to the Lord before inquiring whether they should go into battle, and Balaam offered a series of sacrifices to the Lord in order to determine whether he might pronounce a curse on Israel (Num. 23:1–30). Upon ascending the throne, Solomon offered extensive sacrifices at the tabernacle in Gibeon that he might receive the Lord’s guidance and wisdom to rule over Israel (2 Chron. 1:5–13). People also brought sacrificial offerings for purposes of thanksgiving, supplication, and atonement. Job was said to have made sacrifices on behalf of his children in case they had sinned against the Lord (Job 1:5).

Although grain, wine, and other foodstuffs were used in some offerings, the primary sacrifice was an unblemished animal. This was the only acceptable offering if the sacrifice were to atone for sin and may explain why the Lord refused Cain’s offering of produce but accepted the lamb brought by Abel (Gen. 4:3–4). Noah offered clean animals as burnt offerings after the Flood (Gen. 8:20); it is interesting that he differentiated between clean and unclean beasts even at this early period, before the law of Moses was given.

Sacrificial Altars

The altar, as the place where sacrifice was offered, occupied a focal position in Israelite worship. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob built altars to the Lord and made sacrifices, at which times it is often said that they “called upon the name of the Lord” (Gen. 12:8; 13:4; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1). An altar could be built of earth or stones, but if stones were used they were to be rough and uncut (Exod. 20:25; Josh. 8:31). An altar built on behalf of the entire nation, as in the case of Elijah’s altar on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:30–32), was often constructed of twelve stones, representing the Israelite tribes. Unlike pagan altars of the same period, no altar used by Israel was to have steps up to it; the omission was to prevent the priest and worshiper from inadvertently exposing themselves to the altar as they approached it (Exod. 20:26).

The Mosaic Tabernacle From the giving of the Sinai covenant, the tabernacle or tent (’ohel), also called the “dwelling” (mishkan), was the central place of sacrifice for Israel; its functions were transferred to the temple or “house of the Lord” after its construction under Solomon. Both tabernacle and temple featured a three-stage approach to the presence of the Lord: the outer court surrounded the sanctuary proper, or Holy Place (miqdash, qodesh), which in turn led to the Holy of Holies, or inner sanctuary.

The Altar. The altar of burnt offering stood just within the entrance to the tabernacle courtyard. It was seven and one-half feet square and four and one-half feet high, constructed of acacia wood covered with brass, with a protruding horn at each corner. On this altar the priests burned the atonement offerings prescribed in the law of Moses. The altar of burnt offering was the first object a worshiper encountered when coming to the tabernacle; its prominent position was a reminder that sin must be dealt with as a matter of first priority.

The Sanctuary and Its Furnishings. Beyond the altar of burnt offering stood the laver, where the priests, who alone were allowed access to the tabernacle proper, washed both hands and feet before entering. The tabernacle structure itself was divided by a heavy, embroidered curtain into two rooms, the Holy Place, or sanctuary, and the Most Holy Place, or Holy of Holies. The sanctuary contained a seven-branched lamp made of gold, a golden table that held the consecrated bread for the priests, and the altar of incense, smaller by far than the brass altar outside and made of acacia wood covered with gold. At specified hours each morning and evening a specially prepared incense was burned on this altar, symbolizing the prayers of the covenant people to Yahweh.

The Holy of Holies. On the other side of the curtain, in the Most Holy Place, the ark of the covenant resided. This small, gold-covered box, with two fierce-looking cherubim guarding its cover, was the place where Yahweh met with Israel, and it symbolized the throne from which he ruled. Entry into the Most Holy Place was restricted to the high priest, who went in only once each year on the Day of Atonement.

Covenant Requirements of Sacrifice

When Yahweh granted his covenant with Israel on Mount Sinai, he gave detailed instructions for the sacrifices that were to be a part of the nation’s covenant responsibility as acts of tribute to the great King. These instructions included provisions for general sacrifices, sacrifices for consecration, and special festival sacrifices.

General Sacrifices. The law given to Moses mandated a variety of sacrifices. In sin offerings and guilt offerings, the blood of the slain animal was sprinkled on the altar to atone for the sin of the worshiper (Lev. 6:24–30; 7:1–6). Peace offerings were of either animals or grain; the worshiper brought these offerings on a voluntary basis as a thanksgiving or for other personal reasons (Lev. 5:14–17; 7:11–36). Whole burnt offerings were eaten by neither the priests nor the worshiper but were burned in their entirety on the altar (Lev. 3:1–17). Unlike pagan nations, which viewed sacrifices as food for the gods, Israel understood that Yahweh received only their “soothing aroma” (Num. 28:2 nasb). Offerings were brought in various combinations for the acts of cleansing required by the law, such as a woman’s purification after childbirth, recovery from certain diseases, and contact with unclean objects or dead bodies. Other sacrifices made restitution for trespasses against one’s fellow Israelites or for inadvertent legal infractions. A man who had completed a Nazirite vow was also to offer a sacrifice. The law specified that particular sacrifices, consisting of a burnt offering along with flour and wine, be made twice daily on behalf of the whole nation. These were doubled on the Sabbath and were always made in addition to sacrifices for special occasions.

Sacrifices for Consecration. The consecration of priests and holy objects also required sacrificing animals and applying the blood to the person or thing being sanctified. After the tabernacle had been completed, Aaron and his sons were cleansed and made holy in this way before assuming the priesthood. The tabernacle itself and all its furnishings were likewise sprinkled with blood before they were fit to be used in the worship of Yahweh.

Festival Sacrifices. The Mosaic laws established three major annual festivals, all of which involved the presentation of sacrifices: Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles, which included the Feast of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement. Specified portions of the offerings of wine, grain, oil, and flesh were given to the priests; internal organs and fat were burned on the altar as a sweet odor to the Lord; and the rest was usually returned to the worshipers as food for themselves and their families. This was particularly true of Passover, the feast that commemorated Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian slavery. Passover was essentially a covenant meal, celebrating the event of the exodus from Egypt, which had established Israel as the Lord’s covenant people. Hence, when the worshiper received back the sacrifice he had given, this was a picture of the Lord hosting his people at his own table and of their participation with him in a reaffirmation of the covenant.

Sacrifice and Atonement

In Israel’s worship, the link between sacrifice and atonement for sin is most clearly seen in the ceremonies associated with the Day of Atonement. On this day each year, the high priest was to enter the inner sanctuary bearing the blood of the sacrifice from the brass altar outside. Sprinkling the blood on the lid of the ark of the covenant, he made atonement for the entire nation. Kapporet, the Hebrew word for the lid that covered the ark, also carries the meaning of atonement or propitiation, in the sense of “covering.” The blood atoned for Israel’s sin by symbolically covering the kapporet so the Lord could no longer see it. Yahweh’s forgiveness was mediated; the sin did not cease to exist, but God refused to look at it or allow it to disrupt his relationship with the covenant nation. “Blessed is he whose transgressions are forgiven,” writes David, “whose sins are covered” (Ps. 32:1). When the principle of parallelism is applied to this verse it is clear that the two phrases are the same: one’s transgression is forgiven when the sin is covered.

It is also true that under Mosaic law the worshipers, mindful of their sin, understood the sacrificed animal as a substitution for their own lives. Because all sin was a violation of God’s law, any transgression was a sin against the Lord himself and punishable by death. Violators could be forgiven only if a death occurred, either their own or that of a substitute. From the Christian point of view, the sacrifices of the tabernacle and temple could not really take away sin (Heb. 10:4); the entire Mosaic sacrificial system is an extended picture of the true atonement that was to come in Jesus, the Lamb of God.

Local and Family Sacrifices

The concept of sacrifice extended beyond the centralized rituals of the Mosaic sanctuary. Apparently the building of altars as acts of personal or family devotion was an accepted practice in Israel, even when the tabernacle was in place with its complement of priests and Levites, who were designated to officiate at sacrificial rituals. Joshua sacrificed to the Lord after the unfortunate episode with Achan and the subsequent victory at Ai (Josh. 8:30–31). The men of Israel built an altar at Mizpah after punishing the tribe of Benjamin (Judg. 21:4). Samuel prepared a sacrifice for the people at Ramah (1 Sam. 7:17). David’s family made sacrifice at the new moon, as did the court of Saul (1 Sam. 20:18–29), although new moon festivals were observed with special sacrificial offerings at the tabernacle site. Despite the Law’s mandate of one sanctuary for the worship of Yahweh (Deut. 12:5; 16:16), these acts are not condemned, as is the continued worship at the various “high places” (1 Kings 22:43; 2 Kings 15:4; and others), probably because they did not pretend to be rites that rivaled those of the central sanctuary.

Davidic Worship and the Sacrifice of Praise

After David became king he installed the ark of the covenant in a tent in Zion. The tabernacle with its daily round of sacrifices was located several miles away in Gibeon, but the Most Holy Place was apparently empty for more than sixty years. The Bible does not tell us what the high priest did on the Day of Atonement when he carried the blood from the altar into the sanctuary, which no longer housed the ark. It does provide a description, however, of the worship activities that were carried on before the ark in David’s tent. Except for the celebration at its initial installation, there is no reference to burnt offerings being made before the ark in Zion; instead the picture is of teams of worshipers singing, dancing, playing instruments, and prophesying in rotating shifts, day and night (1 Chron. 16:1–38; 25:1–8). This is apparently what both the psalmist and the writer of Hebrews have in mind when they speak of the sacrifice of praise or thanksgiving, the fruit of lips that give thanks to the name of the Lord (Pss. 107:22; 116:17; Heb. 13:15).

Neglect and Restoration of Sacrifice

After Solomon built the first temple in Jerusalem, the ark was returned to the inner sanctuary and the altar of burnt offering moved to the temple courtyard. Eventually this temple was destroyed and rebuilt and then destroyed again. During periods of apostasy in Israel the sacrifices to Yahweh were neglected; in times of reform they were reinstituted. At the time of the birth of Christ, Herod’s temple was being built in Jerusalem, and it was to this structure that Jesus was carried when his mother brought sacrifices for her purification according to the law. There is no record that Jesus participated in sacrificial rituals, although he did attend more than one national feast in Jerusalem and ate the Passover lamb with his disciples.