1 Kings 6

DESCRIPTION OF THE TEMPLE, 1 Kings 6:1-38.

The first and greatest work of Solomon was the building of the temple. David had purposed in his heart to build such a house for Jehovah, and made vast preparations for it, but was divinely informed that the great enterprise was to be carried out not by himself, but by his son Solomon. 1 Chronicles 22:6-19; 1 Chronicles 28:10-21. The pattern was, in its principal parts, substantially a repetition of the tabernacle; but in its architectural details it was doubtless modelled, in some degree, after the great Phenician, Assyrian, Babylonian, and perhaps Egyptian temples of that age; drawing more or less from all these sources: for the science of architecture seems never to have received much attention among the Hebrews. Their fathers dwelt in tents; and long after their settlement in Canaan they continued to use the same style of dwellings, as something hereditary which they were loth to abandon. David called in the aid of Phenician architects and workmen in building his own palace on Zion, and Solomon did the same in building the temple. And to the Phenician artists we may reasonably believe were largely left the minor architectural designs and finish. But the great works of Phenician architecture have perished; and all present attempts at a complete restoration of the temple from supposed analogies in Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, or Egyptian monuments, are of doubtful value. Such analogies are of the first importance in the study of comparative architecture, and will greatly help in determining some of the principal parts of the temple; but a restoration of the whole edifice from those sources must be to a great extent conjectural. Our principal authority is the Hebrew text of the Scripture; and a careful study of this, together with the aid of comparative architecture, will enable us to present a substantially correct ground-plan, and some other important features, both of the temple and the palace of Solomon. Beyond this it seems not wise to go; for one might as well attempt to portray a living man from a tolerably well preserved skeleton, as to restore all the details of an ancient Jewish building from a mere verbal description compared with the remains of Persian, Assyrian, and Egyptian architecture especially when the architects employed belonged to neither of these nations.

The SITE of the temple was Ornan’s threshingfloor on Mount Moriah, where the angel of Jehovah had appeared to David. 2 Chronicles 3:1. There is no question but it stood somewhere within the present enclosure known as the Haram Area, but the exact part of this area has become a matter of dispute. Fergusson, Lewin, and Thrupp locate the temple in the southwest corner; but the older opinion, which seems to be confirmed by the most recent research and the nature of the ground, places it nearly on the site of the Haram esh Shereef, which occupies what must have been the rocky ridge of the ancient mountain. Captain Warren observes: “It seems incredible that the temple, a building which was so conspicuous, and which was to perform such an important part in the fortifications of the city, should have been placed down in a hole, or even along the sides of the hill, or anywhere except on the ridge, where there is just room enough for it to have stood.… It is well-known that threshingfloors in Palestine are so placed on the ridges of hills, or on the highest points, that, by exposure to every puff of wind, the corn and chaff may be separated.” Recovery of Jerusalem, p. 245. See, also, note introductory to chap. 7.