Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

The second king of Israel (r. 1010970 BC), founder of a dynasty that continued with his son Solomon (r. 970–931 BC), who ruled all of Israel; subsequently the remaining “sons of David” ruled the southern kingdom, Judah, until 586 BC.

Human kingship is a late development in Israel, but a number of ancient texts anticipate the establishment of the institution (Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20) and specifically the rise of a king from Judah (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:17). Thus, it is surprising that the first king of Israel is not from Judah, but from Benjamin. When the people ask Samuel for a king, he anoints Saul (1Sam. 8–12), who proves to be a tremendous disappointment. He forfeits the establishment of his dynasty when he shows a lack of confidence in God by rashly offering prebattle sacrifices (13:13–14). God then rejects Saul as king because he does not execute God’s full judgment against the Amalekites as he knows he should (15:23).

Eventually Saul’s moment of judgment comes. Saul’s final battle is against the Philistines, the major foreign force still inside the borders of the promised land. Both Saul and Jonathan meet their end on Mount Gilboa, and David sings songs that express his sadness over their deaths (1Sam. 31–2Sam. 1).

Even with Saul out of the way, David’s rise to kingship is not easy. He is immediately crowned king of Judah (2Sam. 2:1–7), but the northern tribes choose to follow Ish-Bosheth, the son of Saul. War erupts between the two kingdoms. Eventually, though, the powerful general Abner abandons his support of Saul’s son, sealing the end of that dynasty. Ish-Bosheth is killed by his own men, and soon David becomes king over all Israel (5:1–5).

David’s kingship leads to significant victories that, in essence, complete the conquest of Canaan by finally subduing all the internal enemies. His men take the city of Jerusalem from the Jebusites, and he makes it his capital (2Sam. 5:6–16). He also defeats the Philistines, who have been a thorn in the side of Israel for years (2Sam. 5:17–25; for other victories, see 8:1–14). In celebration, David brings the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2Sam. 6).

The David narrative reaches its apex when God enters into a covenant with him that establishes his dynasty (2Sam. 7; 1Chron. 17). After David dies, his son will succeed him, and indeed his dynasty lasts for many hundreds of years (see below).

David is a good king, but not a perfect king. A turning point in his reign comes in 2Sam. 11. Up to this point, David has been content with what God has given him. He does not grasp for anything that does not belong to him. However, when he sees the beautiful Bathsheba bathing, he sends messengers to bring her to his house, where the two have sexual intercourse and she becomes pregnant. In an attempt to conceal this sin of adultery, he orders the death of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. Thus, he adds the crime of murder to that of adultery.

David thinks that the sin is secret, but nothing is hidden from God, who sends his prophet Nathan to confront David (2Sam. 12; cf. Ps. 51). The difference between Saul and David is not that the latter is perfect but rather that David, as opposed to Saul, repents when he sins. Thus, God allows his reign to continue. Even so, David feels the consequences of his sin. First, the son that Bathsheba bears from her illicit union with David is struck with illness and dies. And ever afterward, David’s family life is troubled, with great impact on the political life of Israel. Son is pitted against son (Amnon and Absalom [2Sam. 13]), as well as son against father (Absalom and David [2Sam. 15–18]). Absalom temporarily deposes his father from the throne, but David eventually regains the kingship, though at the cost of the heartbreaking loss of his son.

Even at the very end, there is conflict within David’s house. When David has grown old, another son, Adonijah, attempts to take the throne, with support from powerful people such as Joab and Abiathar. At the instigation of Bathsheba and Nathan, however, David places the son of his choosing, Solomon, on the throne (1Kings 1). David then dies after a reign of forty-one years, seven in Hebron and the rest over all Israel (1Kings 2:10–12).

David’s greatest legacy is the dynasty that bears his name. Beginning with Solomon, however, his successors do not continue his spiritual legacy. Although a number of kings do some good, only Hezekiah (r. 727–698 BC) and Josiah (r. 639–609 BC) are given unqualified approval. Eventually, the Davidic rule comes to an end in Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians (586 BC). But God is not done with his redemptive purposes, and his promise to David is that he will have a ruler on the throne “forever” (2Sam. 7:16). The NT recognizes that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of this promise. He is the greater son of David, the one who is the Christ or Messiah, the anointed king. Jesus is the one who reigns forever in heaven. The life and the rule of David foreshadow the messianic rule of Jesus Christ.

Biblically speaking, to forgive is less about changing feelings (emotions) and more about an actual restoration of a relationship. It is about making a wrong right, a process that usually is both costly and painful. To capture the biblical sense, the English word “pardon” may prove more helpful.

Forgiveness expresses the character of the merciful God, who eagerly pardons sinners who confess their sins, repent of their transgressions, and express this through proper actions. Forgiveness is never a matter of a human right; it is exclusively a gracious expression of God’s loving care. Human need for forgiveness stems from actions arising from their fallen nature. These actions (or nonactions), whether done deliberately or coincidentally, destroy people’s relationship with God and can be restored only by God’s forgiving mercy (Eph. 2:1).

Under the Mosaic covenant, sin placed offenders under God’s wrath among the ungodly. Rescue from this fate could be obtained by God’s forgiveness alone, which was attained through repentance and sacrifice. Although sacrifice was necessary to express true repentance, it is a mistake to consider it a payment that could purchase God’s forgiveness (1Sam. 15:22; Prov. 21:3; Eccles. 5:1; Hos. 6:6). The forgiveness of God remains his free, undeserved gift.

Although the sacrificial system is done away with, or rather completed, through Christ (Heb. 10:12), NT teaching continues to recognize conditions for forgiveness. Since forgiveness restores relationship, the offender remains involved and must desire the restoration (Luke 13:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38). God does not grant his forgiveness without consideration of the offending party.

Jesus expresses this most clearly in the parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:1124). The son rebels against his father, squanders his wealth, and violates their relationship. The gracious and loving father remains willing to restore the relationship, but the reunion does not occur until the prodigal replaces rebellion with repentance; then, before he can even utter his sorrow, the eager father welcomes him back to a restored relationship. God remains free to forgive or not forgive, but, because of God’s nature and mercy, sinners can rest assured of God’s relationship-restoring forgiveness when they seek it in repentance. The forgiveness that God grants is full and restores things to an “as before” situation (cf. Ps. 103:12; Jer. 31:34), a point that the older son in the parable (Luke 15:25–32), who exemplifies religious self-righteousness, did not comprehend.

At times simply indicating a wish (2Cor. 11:1), in the Bible the word “hope” most often designates a disposition of soul, the grounds for one’s hope, or the outcome for which one hopes. At its core, biblical hope is hope in God, rooted in God’s covenant faithfulness (Ps. 62:58; Jer. 14:8; 17:13; Rom. 4:18; 5:1–5). Hope trusts God in the present and lives even now on the strength of God’s future accomplishments (Gal. 5:5; Heb. 11:1).

In the NT, hope is closely associated with Christ and his saving work. Christians now live by hope in Christ (Eph. 1:12; 1Pet. 1:3; 3:15); indeed, he is “Christ Jesus our hope” (1Tim. 1:1), and his future appearing is “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). Thus, hope refers to eschatological glory (2Cor. 3:11–12; Eph. 1:18). It is “the hope of the resurrection” (Acts 23:6; cf. 24:15; 26:6–9), our transformation into Christ’s likeness (1John 3:1–3). That expectation stimulates various hopes for God’s plans to be realized in one’s own or others’ lives (1Cor. 9:10, 13; Phil. 2:19, 23; 2Tim. 2:25; 2John 12). So hope is named repeatedly as an essential Christian attribute (Rom. 12:12; 15:4, 13; 1Cor. 13:13).

Mark’s Gospel is a fast-paced, action-packed narrative that portrays Jesus as the mighty Messiah and Son of God, who suffers and dies as the servant of the Lord—a ransom price for sins. Mark’s purpose is to provide an authoritative account of the “good news” about Jesus Christ and to encourage believers to follow Jesus’ example by remaining faithful to their calling through persecution and even martyrdom. A theme verse is Mark 10:45: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Mark’s narrative may be divided into two main parts. The first half of the story demonstrates that Jesus is the mighty Messiah and Son of God (1:18:26); the second half reveals that the Messiah’s role is to suffer and die as a sacrifice for sins (8:27–16:8).

Unlike Matthew and Luke, Mark does not begin with stories of Jesus’ birth but instead moves directly to his public ministry. As in the other Gospels, John the Baptist is the “messenger” who prepares the way for the Messiah (cf. Isa. 40:3; Mal. 3:1). John preaches a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins and announces the “more powerful” one, the Messiah, who will come after him (1:7). When Jesus is baptized by John, the Spirit descends on him, empowering him for ministry. After his temptation (or testing) by Satan in the desert, Jesus returns to Galilee and launches his ministry, proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) that “the time has come.... The kingdom of God has come near” (1:15).

During his Galilean ministry, Jesus demonstrates extraordinary authority in teaching, healing, and exorcism. He calls fishermen from their occupation, and they drop everything and follow him (1:16–20). He claims authority to forgive sins (2:10) and authority over the Sabbath command (2:28). He reveals power over natural forces, calming the sea (4:35–41), walking on water (6:45–52), and feeding huge crowds with a few loaves and fishes (6:30–44; 8:1–13). The people stand “amazed” and “astonished” (a major theme in Mark) at Jesus’ teaching and miracles, and his popularity soars.

Jesus’ authority and acclaim provoke opposition from the religious leaders of Israel, who are jealous of his influence. The scribes and Pharisees accuse him of claiming the prerogative of God (2:7), associating with undesirable sinners (2:16), breaking the Sabbath (2:24), and casting out demons by Satan’s powers (3:22). They conspire to kill him (3:6).

A sense of mystery and awe surrounds Jesus’ identity. When he calms the sea, the disciples wonder, “Who is this?” (4:41), and King Herod wonders if this might be John the Baptist risen from the dead (6:16). Adding to this sense of mystery is what has come to be called the “messianic secret.” Jesus silences demons who identify him as the Messiah and orders those he heals not to tell anyone what has happened. This secrecy is not, as some have claimed, a literary device invented by Mark to explain Jesus’ unmessianic life; rather, it is Jesus’ attempt to calm inappropriate messianic expectations and to define his messianic mission on his own terms.

The critical turning point in the narrative comes in 8:27–33, when Peter, as representative of the disciples, declares that Jesus is the Messiah. The authority that Jesus has demonstrated up to this point confirms that he is God’s agent of salvation. Yet Jesus startles the disciples by announcing that his messianic task is to go to Jerusalem to suffer and die. Peter rebukes him, but Jesus responds, “Get behind me, Satan! ... You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns” (8:33). Jesus will accomplish salvation not by crushing the Roman occupiers, but by offering his life as a sacrifice for sins.

In the second half of the Gospel, Jesus journeys to Jerusalem, three times predicting that he will be arrested and killed (8:31–32; 9:31; 10:33–34). The disciples repeatedly demonstrate pride, ignorance, and spiritual dullness (8:33; 9:32–34; 10:35–41), and Jesus teaches them that whoever wants to be first must become last (9:35); that to lead, one must serve (10:45); and that to be Jesus’ disciple requires taking up one’s cross and following him (8:34).

When he comes to Jerusalem, Jesus symbolically judges the nation by clearing the temple of merchants (11:15–17) and by cursing a fig tree (representing Israel), which subsequently withers (11:12–14, 20–21). He engages in controversies with the religious leaders (chaps. 11–12) and teaches the disciples that Jerusalem and the temple will be destroyed (chap. 13). Judas Iscariot, one of Jesus’ own disciples, betrays him. Jesus is arrested and brought to trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin, which finds him guilty of blasphemy. That council turns Jesus over to the Roman governor Pilate, who accedes to his crucifixion (chaps. 14–15).

The crucifixion scene in Mark is a dark and lonely one. Jesus is deserted by his followers, unjustly condemned, beaten by the soldiers, and mocked by all. Apparently deserted even by God, Jesus cries out from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (15:34). Yet the reader knows by this point in the story that Jesus’ death is not the tragedy that it seems. This is God’s means of accomplishing salvation. Upon Jesus’ death, the curtain of the temple is torn, opening a new way into God’s presence. The Roman centurion at the cross cries out, “Surely this man was the Son of God!” (15:39). The death of the Messiah is not a defeat; it is an atoning sacrifice for sins. Three days later Jesus rises from the dead, just as he has predicted. When Jesus’ women followers come to the tomb, the angel announces, “He has risen! He is not here” (16:6). Jesus the Messiah has turned tragedy into victory and has defeated sin, Satan, and death.

Mercy is a distinguishing characteristic of the nature of God. God is called “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV [NIV: “Father of compassion”]). God is “rich in mercy” (Eph. 2:4; cf. 2Sam. 24:14; Dan. 9:9). God’s mercy was demonstrated in his covenantal faithfulness to his people (1Kings 8:2324; Mic. 7:18–20). God redeemed the oppressed Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh because of his mercy, which was stirred when he heard their groaning and cry for help.

Jesus Christ lived a life full of mercy. He is, in a sense, the bodily manifestation of God’s mercy. Jesus expressed deep mercy whenever he saw the sick and the lost. The writers of the Gospels describe Jesus’ demonstrations of mercy when he healed the blind, the lame, the deaf, the leprous, the demon-possessed, and the dead (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; Luke 7:13; John 11:33). Jesus especially had compassion on the crowds, who did not have a spiritual leader, and he compared them to “sheep without a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).

What is the proper response to God’s mercy and compassion? God expects believers to show the same kind of mercy toward other people. One of the best examples is the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23–35).

More than a simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the grace of the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classical texts use the Greek word apolytrōsis (“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given to release a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. The group of words based on the Greek term lytron (“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. The corresponding Hebrew word padah is a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.

The experience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religious significance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included the dedication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:1213). Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), was redeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up to describe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continued to broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance from all Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included the whole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or the new age to come).

The NT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). When Jesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slavery of sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the cross accentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17; 7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christian idea of ransom followed the accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death (Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with a ransom (Col. 1:13–14).

Although redemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future (Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor. 15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions of redemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expects redemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption is universal; it restores the relationship between creation and the Creator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.

The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OTperiod, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of differentlengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributedto Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 andPs. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millenniumBC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship andprivate devotion.

HistoricalBackground

Mostpsalms have a title. In the Hebrew text this title comprises thefirst verse, whereas English translations set it off before the firstverse. Titles vary. Many name an author (e.g., David [Ps. 3]; Asaph[Ps. 77]; sons of Korah [Ps. 42]), while others provide informationabout genre (e.g., Psalms of Ascent [Pss. 120–134]), tune(e.g., “Do Not Destroy” [Ps. 75]), use in worship (Ps.92), and a circ*mstance that led to composition (Ps. 51). Informationin the title gives hints concerning how psalms were written andbrought into a final collection.

Composition

Asmentioned, the titles of the psalms often give indications ofauthorship and occasionally name the circ*mstance that led to thewriting of the psalm. A good example is Ps. 51, where the titlestates, “For the director of music. A psalm of David. When theprophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery withBathsheba.” The title connects the psalm with the eventsrecorded in 2Sam. 11–12 and suggests that David wrote thesong in response to his sin and Nathan’s confrontation.

Althoughonly a handful of the psalms have such a historical title, it islikely that most psalms were composed in response to some specificcirc*mstance that encouraged the author to write. Interestingly,though, the psalmists do not speak about the specific circ*mstance inthe psalm itself. Psalm 51, for instance, fits perfectly with thesituation that the title describes in that it expresses guilt towardGod and asks for forgiveness, but nowhere does it speak specificallyabout adultery. The psalmists do this intentionally because they arewriting the song not as a memorial to an event, but rather as aprayer that others who have had similar though not identicalexperiences can use after them. Thus, Ps. 51 has been used as a modelprayer for many penitents, whether they have sinned like David or inanother way.

Mostmodern hymns have a similar background. John Newton, for instance,was inspired to write “Amazing Grace” because of awe thathe felt at his conversion to Christianity from the evil of being aslave trader. However, when he wrote it, he wanted others to sing itas reflecting not on his conversion but on their own.

Collection

Thepsalms were composed over a thousand-year period. Thus, it appearsthat the book of Psalms was a growing collection until it came to aclose at an unknown time between the writing of the two Testaments.

In1Chron. 16:7–36 we may get a glimpse of how the processworked. The text describes David turning a musical composition overto the Levitical musician Asaph and his associates. It is likely thatthe priests kept an official copy of the book of Psalms in the holyplace (the temple while it stood). The psalms, after all, were thehymns of ancient Israel. Their primary function was as a corporatebook of prayer, though certainly they could be used in privatedevotions (note Hannah’s prayer in 1Sam. 2:1–10 andits relationship to Ps. 113).

Organizationand Structure

Thepsalms have no obvious organization that explains the location of allthe psalms. They are not organized in terms of genre, authorship,time of composition, or length. There is only one statement aboutorganization, found in Ps. 72:20: “This concludes the prayersof David son of Jesse.” In the light of this comment, it issurprising that a number of Davidic psalms appear in subsequentsections (Pss. 101; 103; 108–110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138–145).The best explanation is that at one point Ps. 72 concluded theDavidic psalms, but there was a reorganization before the canonicalorder was permanently closed.

Anumber of contemporary theories try to find some deep structure tothe book, but it is best to refrain from speculation in regard to theoverall structure. Nonetheless, a few structural characteristics areobvious. First, the division of Psalms into five books seems toreflect the fivefold division of the Pentateuch:

I.Book 1 (Pss. 1–41)

II.Book 2 (Pss. 42–72)

III.Book 3 (Pss. 73–89)

IV.Book 4 (Pss. 90–106)

V.Book 5 (Pss. 107–150)

Eachbook ends with a doxology. Such an intentional association with thePentateuch would lend support to the Psalter’s claim toauthority. Although these are prayers to God, they are also God’sword.

Second,within the Psalter there are subcollections. That is, there arepsalms that came into the book not individually but as a group. Thebest-known such group are the Psalms of Ascent (Pss. 120–134),probably so named because worshipers sang them while going up(ascending) to the Temple Mount during one of the annual religiousfestivals in Jerusalem.

Third,it appears that psalms are intentionally placed at the beginning andat the end of the book to serve as an introduction and a conclusion.Psalms 1–2 serve as an introduction that alerts the reader tothe twin important themes of law and messiah. Psalm 1 pronounces ablessing on those who love God’s law. The psalms, after all,are an intimate and personal conversation with God. One must be onthe side of the godly to enter such a holy textual space, just as onemust be godly to enter the precincts of the temple. After the readerenters, Psalm 2 provides an encounter with God and his anointed one(messiah). At the end of the book, the last five psalms (Pss.146–150) constitute a tremendous doxology of praise.

Thisleads to the final observation on structure. Psalms of lamentpredominate at the beginning of the book, but they give way to hymnsof praise toward the end. It is almost as if one enters the Psaltermourning and leaves it praising. Indeed, the Psalter brings thereader into contact with God and thus transforms the reader fromsadness to joy.

LiteraryConsiderations

Genre.The individual psalms may be identified as songs, prayers, or poems.Specifically, they are lyric poems (expressing the emotions of thepoet), often addressed to God, and set to musical accompaniment.Although the categories overlap, seven different types of psalms canbe recognized, with the first three being by far the most common.

• Lament.The largest single group of psalms are the laments, characterized bythe expression of unhappy emotions: sadness, disappointment, anger,worry. The lamenters call on God to save them, even while at timescomplaining about God’s actions toward them (Ps. 42:9–10).Some laments contain petitions for forgiveness (Ps. 51), while othersassert innocence of any wrongdoing (Ps. 26). A few laments evencontain curses directed toward the enemies who are trying to harm thepsalmist (Ps. 69:19–28). Most laments end by praising God orreaffirming confidence in God (Ps. 130:7–8). Usually the reasonfor the change from mourning to rejoicing is not given, but Ps. 77pinpoints the reason as the memory of God’s great salvationevents in the past (vv. 10, 16–20). One psalm, Ps. 88, lamentsbut never makes the turn, remaining in the pit of despair. Yet evenhere we have a glimmer of hope in that the one who laments is stillspeaking to God.

• Thanksgiving.When God answers a lament, the response is thanksgiving. Psalms ofthanksgiving are very similar to hymns (see below), but they cite anearlier problem that God has addressed. Psalm 30 praises God forrestoring the psalmist’s good fortune and health after hesuffered due to his earlier arrogance that led him to forget God (vv.6–7).

• Hymn.Hymns are psalms of unalloyed praise directed toward God. Thepsalmists often call for others to join their worship of God (Ps.100).

• Remembrance.While many psalms evoke memories of God’s actions in the past(as the lament in Ps. 77 recalls the exodus), certain psalms focus onrehearsing the actions of God in the past. Psalm 136 is one of themost memorable examples. As a liturgical psalm, it recites a divineaction (“[God] swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea”[v.15]) followed by a congregational response (“His loveendures forever”).

• Confidence.These psalms are defined by their mood of quiet trust in God even inthe midst of trouble. They often present a reassuring image of God.The picture of God as a shepherd in Ps. 23 or as a mother in Ps. 131are good examples.

• Wisdom.Some psalms meditate on the law (Pss. 1; 119) or have interestssimilar to those of wisdom literature, such as Job, Proverbs, andEcclesiastes (Pss. 49; 73).

• Kingship.A number of psalms praise God as king (Ps. 47) or the human king ashis agent (Pss. 20–21) or both (Ps.2).

Style.The psalms are poems, and so their style is characterized by the useof parallelism and figurative language. Poetry is also notable forits short lines. A poet packs a lot of meaning into very few words.So it is important to slow down and reflect on a psalm in order toderive its maximum effect. Besides brevity of expression,parallelism, and figurative language, poets create interest by usingother literary tools. The psalmists use these poetic devices not onlyto inform their readers’ intellect but also to stimulate theirimagination and arouse their emotions. (See also Acrostic; Imagery;Poetry.)

TheologicalMessage

Althoughthe psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about Godand their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalmsis a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe whohe is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examplesinclude God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98),and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Eachone of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and alsothe nature of our relationship with God. After all, theaforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’speople as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.

Connectionto the New Testament and Today

Jesushimself draws attention to Psalms as a book that anticipated hiscoming suffering and glorification (Luke 24:25–27, 44). TheGospels recognized that Jesus’ zeal for God was well expressedby Ps. 69:9 (John 2:17). When at the apex of his suffering on thecross, Jesus uttered the words found in Ps. 22:1 (Matt. 27:46). TheNT writers also saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenantthat promised that a son of David would have an everlasting throne(2Sam. 7:16). Accordingly, the royal psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 110)often were applied to Jesus, who is the Messiah (the Christ, “theanointed one”).

Todaywe read Psalms not only as an ancient witness to the coming work ofChrist but also, as John Calvin put it, as a mirror of our souls. Thepsalms were written for worshipers who came after them with similarthough not identical joys and problems. The psalms should becomemodels of our prayers.

A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OTperiod, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of differentlengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributedto Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 andPs. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millenniumBC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship andprivate devotion.

HistoricalBackground

Mostpsalms have a title. In the Hebrew text this title comprises thefirst verse, whereas English translations set it off before the firstverse. Titles vary. Many name an author (e.g., David [Ps. 3]; Asaph[Ps. 77]; sons of Korah [Ps. 42]), while others provide informationabout genre (e.g., Psalms of Ascent [Pss. 120–134]), tune(e.g., “Do Not Destroy” [Ps. 75]), use in worship (Ps.92), and a circ*mstance that led to composition (Ps. 51). Informationin the title gives hints concerning how psalms were written andbrought into a final collection.

Composition

Asmentioned, the titles of the psalms often give indications ofauthorship and occasionally name the circ*mstance that led to thewriting of the psalm. A good example is Ps. 51, where the titlestates, “For the director of music. A psalm of David. When theprophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery withBathsheba.” The title connects the psalm with the eventsrecorded in 2Sam. 11–12 and suggests that David wrote thesong in response to his sin and Nathan’s confrontation.

Althoughonly a handful of the psalms have such a historical title, it islikely that most psalms were composed in response to some specificcirc*mstance that encouraged the author to write. Interestingly,though, the psalmists do not speak about the specific circ*mstance inthe psalm itself. Psalm 51, for instance, fits perfectly with thesituation that the title describes in that it expresses guilt towardGod and asks for forgiveness, but nowhere does it speak specificallyabout adultery. The psalmists do this intentionally because they arewriting the song not as a memorial to an event, but rather as aprayer that others who have had similar though not identicalexperiences can use after them. Thus, Ps. 51 has been used as a modelprayer for many penitents, whether they have sinned like David or inanother way.

Mostmodern hymns have a similar background. John Newton, for instance,was inspired to write “Amazing Grace” because of awe thathe felt at his conversion to Christianity from the evil of being aslave trader. However, when he wrote it, he wanted others to sing itas reflecting not on his conversion but on their own.

Collection

Thepsalms were composed over a thousand-year period. Thus, it appearsthat the book of Psalms was a growing collection until it came to aclose at an unknown time between the writing of the two Testaments.

In1Chron. 16:7–36 we may get a glimpse of how the processworked. The text describes David turning a musical composition overto the Levitical musician Asaph and his associates. It is likely thatthe priests kept an official copy of the book of Psalms in the holyplace (the temple while it stood). The psalms, after all, were thehymns of ancient Israel. Their primary function was as a corporatebook of prayer, though certainly they could be used in privatedevotions (note Hannah’s prayer in 1Sam. 2:1–10 andits relationship to Ps. 113).

Organizationand Structure

Thepsalms have no obvious organization that explains the location of allthe psalms. They are not organized in terms of genre, authorship,time of composition, or length. There is only one statement aboutorganization, found in Ps. 72:20: “This concludes the prayersof David son of Jesse.” In the light of this comment, it issurprising that a number of Davidic psalms appear in subsequentsections (Pss. 101; 103; 108–110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138–145).The best explanation is that at one point Ps. 72 concluded theDavidic psalms, but there was a reorganization before the canonicalorder was permanently closed.

Anumber of contemporary theories try to find some deep structure tothe book, but it is best to refrain from speculation in regard to theoverall structure. Nonetheless, a few structural characteristics areobvious. First, the division of Psalms into five books seems toreflect the fivefold division of the Pentateuch:

I.Book 1 (Pss. 1–41)

II.Book 2 (Pss. 42–72)

III.Book 3 (Pss. 73–89)

IV.Book 4 (Pss. 90–106)

V.Book 5 (Pss. 107–150)

Eachbook ends with a doxology. Such an intentional association with thePentateuch would lend support to the Psalter’s claim toauthority. Although these are prayers to God, they are also God’sword.

Second,within the Psalter there are subcollections. That is, there arepsalms that came into the book not individually but as a group. Thebest-known such group are the Psalms of Ascent (Pss. 120–134),probably so named because worshipers sang them while going up(ascending) to the Temple Mount during one of the annual religiousfestivals in Jerusalem.

Third,it appears that psalms are intentionally placed at the beginning andat the end of the book to serve as an introduction and a conclusion.Psalms 1–2 serve as an introduction that alerts the reader tothe twin important themes of law and messiah. Psalm 1 pronounces ablessing on those who love God’s law. The psalms, after all,are an intimate and personal conversation with God. One must be onthe side of the godly to enter such a holy textual space, just as onemust be godly to enter the precincts of the temple. After the readerenters, Psalm 2 provides an encounter with God and his anointed one(messiah). At the end of the book, the last five psalms (Pss.146–150) constitute a tremendous doxology of praise.

Thisleads to the final observation on structure. Psalms of lamentpredominate at the beginning of the book, but they give way to hymnsof praise toward the end. It is almost as if one enters the Psaltermourning and leaves it praising. Indeed, the Psalter brings thereader into contact with God and thus transforms the reader fromsadness to joy.

LiteraryConsiderations

Genre.The individual psalms may be identified as songs, prayers, or poems.Specifically, they are lyric poems (expressing the emotions of thepoet), often addressed to God, and set to musical accompaniment.Although the categories overlap, seven different types of psalms canbe recognized, with the first three being by far the most common.

• Lament.The largest single group of psalms are the laments, characterized bythe expression of unhappy emotions: sadness, disappointment, anger,worry. The lamenters call on God to save them, even while at timescomplaining about God’s actions toward them (Ps. 42:9–10).Some laments contain petitions for forgiveness (Ps. 51), while othersassert innocence of any wrongdoing (Ps. 26). A few laments evencontain curses directed toward the enemies who are trying to harm thepsalmist (Ps. 69:19–28). Most laments end by praising God orreaffirming confidence in God (Ps. 130:7–8). Usually the reasonfor the change from mourning to rejoicing is not given, but Ps. 77pinpoints the reason as the memory of God’s great salvationevents in the past (vv. 10, 16–20). One psalm, Ps. 88, lamentsbut never makes the turn, remaining in the pit of despair. Yet evenhere we have a glimmer of hope in that the one who laments is stillspeaking to God.

• Thanksgiving.When God answers a lament, the response is thanksgiving. Psalms ofthanksgiving are very similar to hymns (see below), but they cite anearlier problem that God has addressed. Psalm 30 praises God forrestoring the psalmist’s good fortune and health after hesuffered due to his earlier arrogance that led him to forget God (vv.6–7).

• Hymn.Hymns are psalms of unalloyed praise directed toward God. Thepsalmists often call for others to join their worship of God (Ps.100).

• Remembrance.While many psalms evoke memories of God’s actions in the past(as the lament in Ps. 77 recalls the exodus), certain psalms focus onrehearsing the actions of God in the past. Psalm 136 is one of themost memorable examples. As a liturgical psalm, it recites a divineaction (“[God] swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea”[v.15]) followed by a congregational response (“His loveendures forever”).

• Confidence.These psalms are defined by their mood of quiet trust in God even inthe midst of trouble. They often present a reassuring image of God.The picture of God as a shepherd in Ps. 23 or as a mother in Ps. 131are good examples.

• Wisdom.Some psalms meditate on the law (Pss. 1; 119) or have interestssimilar to those of wisdom literature, such as Job, Proverbs, andEcclesiastes (Pss. 49; 73).

• Kingship.A number of psalms praise God as king (Ps. 47) or the human king ashis agent (Pss. 20–21) or both (Ps.2).

Style.The psalms are poems, and so their style is characterized by the useof parallelism and figurative language. Poetry is also notable forits short lines. A poet packs a lot of meaning into very few words.So it is important to slow down and reflect on a psalm in order toderive its maximum effect. Besides brevity of expression,parallelism, and figurative language, poets create interest by usingother literary tools. The psalmists use these poetic devices not onlyto inform their readers’ intellect but also to stimulate theirimagination and arouse their emotions. (See also Acrostic; Imagery;Poetry.)

TheologicalMessage

Althoughthe psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about Godand their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalmsis a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe whohe is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examplesinclude God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98),and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Eachone of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and alsothe nature of our relationship with God. After all, theaforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’speople as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.

Connectionto the New Testament and Today

Jesushimself draws attention to Psalms as a book that anticipated hiscoming suffering and glorification (Luke 24:25–27, 44). TheGospels recognized that Jesus’ zeal for God was well expressedby Ps. 69:9 (John 2:17). When at the apex of his suffering on thecross, Jesus uttered the words found in Ps. 22:1 (Matt. 27:46). TheNT writers also saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenantthat promised that a son of David would have an everlasting throne(2Sam. 7:16). Accordingly, the royal psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 110)often were applied to Jesus, who is the Messiah (the Christ, “theanointed one”).

Todaywe read Psalms not only as an ancient witness to the coming work ofChrist but also, as John Calvin put it, as a mirror of our souls. Thepsalms were written for worshipers who came after them with similarthough not identical joys and problems. The psalms should becomemodels of our prayers.

“Expiation” refers to the atonement of sin andthe removal of guilt, while “propitiation” refers to theappeasem*nt or satisfaction of wrath. Both ideas are present in theone Greek word hilasmos (and its cognates) used in the LXX and theNT. It is difficult to translate hilasmos into English using onecorresponding word, so two words, “expiation” and“propitiation,” are often used. This is problematicbecause neither term precisely captures the nuances of the Greekword. The problem persists because, as noted above, “expiation”and “propitiation” have different meanings in English.Because no single English word conveys the full sense of hilasmos,“expiation” and “propitiation” areconveniently combined in the NIV’s “sacrifice ofatonement” or “atoning sacrifice” (Rom. 3:25;1John 2:2; 4:10).

GreekBackground

Inclassical Greek, hilasmos referred to a sacrifice that would somehowavert a god’s wrath. When a worshiper sinned against a god andviolated the god’s holiness, the worshiper paid the properamount, through some kind of sacrifice, so that the god’s wrathwas then averted. It was a means of turning the god from anger to afavorable attitude, and it functioned by giving the god something(via sacrifice) that compensated for the offense. This sacrifice wasintended not as atonement for the worshiper’s sin but rather toappease the wrath of the god. The worshiper was the subject whooffered the sacrifice to the god as the object in an effort toappease the god’s wrath.

OldTestament

TheOT shares this Greek usage to a degree but also expands it to includethe more familiar biblical notion of expiation or atonement. The LXXuses hilasmos to convey the ideas of expiation as well aspropitiation. The word group associated with hilasmos is used indifferent contexts throughout the Bible, so context must determinethe meaning in each case. A prominent use occurs in Lev. 25:9, whereit refers to the Day of Atonement. Here hilasmos involves the removalof guilt effected by a sacrifice. A similar use is found in Num. 5:8,where hilasmos is used in connection with the ram with which peoplemake atonement for their sins. Ezekiel 44:27 uses the same term whenreferring to the sin offering that a priest must make for his ownsins upon entrance into the holy place. Each of these examples useshilasmos to translate the biblical concept of expiation: theatonement of sin and the removal of guilt. The unholy worshiper whosins against God is made holy once again by offering a sacrifice toatone for his or her sin.

Hilasmosalso conveys forgiveness. Forgiveness is closely connected withatonement. The LXX uses a related term hilastērion twenty-eighttimes to refer to the mercy seat, the cover of the ark of thecovenant over which God appeared on the Day of Atonement and on whichsacrificial blood was poured. The mercy seat was where both atonementand forgiveness were found. The term is used in Heb. 9:5 to refer tothe same mercy seat or “atonement cover” (NIV). Hereagain, mercy and forgiveness are linked to the idea of atonement.Psalm 130:4 (129:4 LXX) also uses hilasmos to convey the connectionbetween atonement and forgiveness: “But with you there isforgiveness/atonement [hilasmos].”

Insome cases, hilasmos bears the sense of propitiation—turningaside wrath. An interesting use occurs in the story of Jacob and Esauin Gen. 32. Jacob goes out to meet his brother Esau but is afraidbecause he had deceived their father, Isaac, into giving him theblessing that belonged to Esau (Gen. 27). Esau holds a grudge againstJacob and intends to kill him after mourning the death of theirfather (27:41). After years of separation, the brother reunite;Jacob, fearing the wrath of his brother, plans to avert his brother’sanger with gifts: “I will pacify him with these gifts I amsending on ahead; later, when I see him, perhaps he will receive me”(32:20 [32:21 LXX]). Here exilaskomai, a verb related to hilasmos, isused when Jacob says that he hopes to “pacify” Esau. Thiscontext suggests not expiation or atonement but appeasem*nt (cf.NRSV, NET). Jacob fears the wrath of his brother. To avert thatwrath, he sends gifts.

Theidea of propitiating God’s wrath occurs throughout the OT.Granted, it does not amount to bribery, as was potentially the casein pagan usage, where a god was “paid off” by asacrifice, with no sense of atonement for sin, but the notion ofaverting God’s wrath is common. For example, Moses is directedby God to take a census of the people to count them, and each one isto pay God a ransom so that no plague will come upon them (Exod.30:12). This sum of money is then said to “make atonement”for their lives (30:16). Through the offering of ransom money to God,his wrath is turned away from the people, so that no plague will comeupon them. The idea of propitiating God’s wrath is found inother places in the OT: Exod. 32:30; Num. 8:19; 16:46; 35:31; Prov.16:6; Isa. 47:11. All of this suggests that the notion of atonementin the OT is best understood comprehensively to include both thecleansing and the forgiveness of the sinner (expiation) and theturning away of God’s wrath (propitiation).

NewTestament

Expiationand propitiation are combined in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. He isboth the expiation for sin and the sacrifice that averts God’swrath. The Bible combines both expiation and propitiation into theone word hilasmos, and Jesus himself is the hilasmos for sin (Heb.2:17; 1John 2:2; 4:10; cf. Rom. 3:25 [hilastērion]). Theone action of Christ’s sacrifice has the double effect ofexpiating sin and thereby propitiating God. In the Bible, God’swrath results when his holiness is offended by sin. So there is needfor both expiation and propitiation. His wrath must be appeased sothat forgiveness for the sinner may result. Whereas expiation dealswith sin—satisfying the penalty incurred because ofsin—propitiation deals with wrath. Jesus accomplished both bybecoming the “atoning sacrifice” for our sins. He is theultimate mercy seat, the ultimate place of atonement and expiation(Heb. 9:5). He is also the ultimate sacrifice (Rom. 3:25).

TheNT is very nuanced regarding the sacrifice of Christ. Although itincludes both expiation and propitiation, these differ significantlyfrom Greek paganism and the OT. On one hand, God is too holy andrighteous for fallen humanity to expiate sin and satisfy his demandfor holiness by offering a sacrifice. On the other hand, God is notcapricious in that he simply needs to be pacified through a gift inorder to avert his wrath. The Bible teaches that no human being canoffer a sacrifice worthy enough to expiate his or her own sin or toavert God’s holy wrath. The pagan idea of propitiation isimpossible for fallen humanity. God’s holiness is so great thathe is rightfully wrathful at our sin, and our sin demands expiation.But we are unable to offer a sacrifice pure enough for our ownatonement. So God himself offers the sacrifice that both expiates oursin and averts his own wrath. Biblical propitiation is distinct frompagan propitiation. In the latter, human beings are the subjects ofthe action, the ones who are offering the propitiating sacrifice,while the gods receive the action and are thus propitiated. But Godis the subject of the action in the Bible. God has the right to bewrathful because of sin, to be righteously indignant. But he sendshis own Son to handle that wrath. God himself sends the sacrifice; heis the sacrifice; he is the place where that sacrifice is offered(Rom. 3:25).

Thereare three elements that help to summarize expiation/propitiation inthe Bible: (1)God was rightfully wrathful because of our sin,(2)God offered the sacrifice that averted his own wrath, and(3)God was the sacrifice that atoned for our sin. “Thisis love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Sonas an atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1John 4:10).

Temples have always been the domain and house of the godsthroughout the ancient Near East. As the abode of the God of Israel,the Jerusalem temple served the same purpose. The temple played animportant role in the social, religious, and political life ofancient Israel. No archaeological remains of the actual templebuilding exist today; nevertheless, the temple has dominated biblicalscholarship. The Jerusalem temple was originally built by Solomon in953 BC and was destroyed by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar in 586BC. After the exile, the temple was rebuilt and then rededicated byZerubbabel in 515 BC (Ezra). Herod the Great significantly expandedand changed the temple, but it was eventually destroyed by the Romansunder the direction of Titus in AD70.

Thebiblical text refers to the temple in several ways: temple, house ofGod/Yahweh, and sanctuary/shrine. These terms all refer to thedwelling or house of God and an area of sacredness. The sources forinformation on the temple are biblical texts, Josephus, and theMishnah (tractate Middot). The most detailed accounts of theconstruction of the Solomonic temple are found in 1Kings 6–8;2Chron. 2–4. In addition to these major sections, thereare several references to building activities and repairs to thetemple throughout the OT. Another major text is Ezek. 40, but it isdebated whether this represents the actual temple or an ideal temple.There are several references in the NT that directly or indirectlyrefer to functions and specific components of the Temple Mountcomplex.

ArchaeologicalInvestigation

Thelocation of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem has been undisputed.Current scholarly opinion locates the temple on the spot of thecurrent Muslim shrine, the Dome of the Rock. Today the largerenclosed area is referred to as the harem esh-sharif (the noblesanctuary). Explorers in the nineteenth century did not attemptarchaeological research of the temple itself, although variousexplorations focused on recording visible features and conductingsoundings along the sides of the Temple Mount. Even after theunification of Jerusalem in 1967, with three major excavations in thecity, no archaeological investigation of the temple was conducted.Due to the political and religious variables associated with theMuslim holy sites, there are no foreseeable archaeologicalinvestigations. A recent renovation of the Mosque of Omar, located onthe southern end of the Temple Mount, removed truckloads of earth.Unfortunately, there was no archaeological supervision of the projectand no archaeological excavations of the site were conducted.

Inspite of the limited archaeological excavations, several popularaccounts of alternate locations of the temple have been proposed.Most of these place the temple somewhere other than the Dome of theRock, but none of these proposals has garnered scholarly support torival the current location.

FirstTemple: Temple of Solomon

Throughoutthe ancient Near East, temples served as monumental edifices thatprovided divine legitimacy for the king or dynasty. While templesshould be considered part of the religious sphere of society, theirconstruction, maintenance, and associated activities are interlinkedwith the political sphere. The construction of the temple inJerusalem is also linked to state formation by the Israelites. TheSolomonic temple ushered in a new period of religious activity amongthe ancient Israelites. Previously, Israel had worshiped at variousshrines and sanctuaries, and its central religious practice wasassociated with the tabernacle. With the establishment of themonarchy, dynastic kingship and centralized authority were created.Although the biblical text credits Solomon as the Israelite king whobuilt the temple, the project was initiated under David. David unitedthe Israelite tribes, captured Jerusalem and made it the capital ofthe kingdom, and built a royal palace. He made Jerusalem thepolitical capital but also the religious center when he brought theholy ark, the visible symbol of Yahweh’s presence, to Jerusalem(2Sam. 5–6). David intended to build Yahweh a permanentdwelling (2Sam. 7:2).

Location.Thebiblical text preserves multiple traditions and accounts of thelocation and acquisition of land for the temple. In the ancient worldthe city temple was commonly located on the acropolis (highest point)of the city. The temple is located on the highest point of a ridgewhere the OT city of Jerusalem is located (Jebusite city, later theCity of David). There are two accounts of the purchase of the land:the threshing floors of Araunah (2Sam. 24:18–25) and ofOrnan (1Chron. 21:15–30; 2Chron. 3:1 [here the NIVsupplies “Araunah,” but see, e.g., the NET, NASB, ESV]).It is possible that Araunah and Ornan were kin, but most likely theyare the same person, with Samuel and Chronicles using variant names.However, the two accounts disagree further on the amount paid for theland: fifty silver shekels (2Sam. 24:24) and six hundredshekels of gold (1Chron. 21:25). One theory explains thisdiscrepancy as arising from two separate transactions. First, Davidpurchased the threshing floor to build an altar to Yahweh, and helater purchased the whole mountain to build a temple. Later traditionassociates the hill where David built an altar with the locationwhere earlier Abraham built an altar to sacrifice Isaac (MountMoriah).

Constructionand dimensions.Solomon started to build during the fourth year of his reign(2Chron. 3:1), and construction lasted for seven years. Theplan of the temple was revealed to Solomon during a night in thesanctuary at Gibeon (2Chron. 1:7–13). The king obtainedbuilding materials, specifically cedar from Lebanon (2Chron.2:3–10), and construction and design expertise from Phoenicianartisans (1Kings 7:13–14, 45). The Solomonic templeconsisted of a tripartite plan similar to other temples inSyro-Palestine during this period. There are two accounts for theconstruction and dedication of the first temple (1Kings 6–8;2Chron. 3–7). Both accounts offer similar descriptionsbut there are some differences in measurements. Most scholars accountfor these differences by viewing the dimensions in the book ofChronicles as reflecting the temple measurements after Hezekiah’srepair and rebuilding projects.

Thebasic plan was a rectangle, 70 cubits long (120ft. 7in.)and 20 cubits wide (34ft. 5in.) on a straight axis facingeast; the height was 30 cubits (51ft. 7in.). Thesemeasurements refer to the inside dimensions (1cubit=20.67 in.). The three distinct architectural units formed threedistinct rooms where various functions were performed and alsoreflected levels of holiness. The three units were the ’ulam(“porch” or “vestibule”), the hekal (“cella”or “nave”), and the debir (the innermost sanctuary, themost holy place). In the biblical accounts the whole building iscalled the “house [bayit] of the Lord,” and the word“temple” is used for the hekal. There was a three-storystructure built around the sides and back of the temple (see below).

Theporch was 10 cubits (17ft. 2in.) by 20 cubits (34ft.5in.). The account in Kings does not provide its height; theaccount in Chronicles gives the height as 120 cubits. In itsdescription and measurements in the biblical text, the porch isconsidered separate from the temple (bayit, house). The porchcontained two pillars of bronze: yakin (“he will establish”)on the right side and bo’az (“in strength”) on theleft (see Boaz; Jakin). The pillars were bronze, 18 cubits (35 cubitsin Chronicles) in height, with elaborate double capitals. The bottomcapital was 5 cubits, round in shape, and surrounded by nets withpomegranates. Above this was another capital, 4 cubits high, shapedlike a lily.

Thehekal was 40 cubits long and 20 cubits wide and was the only partwith windows (1Kings 6:4). The debir was a cube, 20 cubits perside. The debir is also called the “holy of holies.” Thedifference in height (10 cubits shorter than the hekal  )is due to the rise in the bedrock. This measurement is confirmedtoday in the interior of the Dome of the Rock.

Thewalls of the house (hekal and debir) were built of whole stonesdressed in the quarry, as “no hammer, chisel or any other irontool was heard at the temple site while it was being built”(1Kings 6:7). The roof was made of cedar wood (1Kings6:10), with crossbeams and intersecting boards. The stone walls werecovered from ground to ceiling with boards of cedar wood, and thefloor was made of cypress wood, covered with gold (1Kings6:30). The wood had carved engravings of cherubim, palm trees, andopen flowers. The hekal and the debir were separated by a partitionmade of olive wood.

Thethree-story structure surrounding the temple was constructed of cedarwood. Each story was 5 cubits. The width of the first floor was 5cubits, the middle 6 cubits, and the top 7 cubits. This structure wasentered from the right side of the temple, and the floors wereconnected by openings with ladders. This structure formed chambersand storage for the activities of the priests.

Infront of the temple was a courtyard surrounded by a wall. Inside thecourtyard was a great bronze basin (known as “the Sea”).This basin rested on the backs of twelve bronze oxen. Ten smallerbasins in groups of five were set on elaborate wheeled stands. Alarge altar also was located in this courtyard.

Inthe holy of holies stood two large cherubim of olive wood coveredwith gold. They were 10 cubits in height, with a wingspan of 10cubits. These cherubim stood over the ark of the covenant. In thehekal were the golden altar, the golden table, and ten lampstands.

History.FromSolomon to Zedekiah, the temple was used for political and religiouspower shifts. Kings of Israel raided the temple treasury to pay offinvaders, closed the temple, or placed idols in the temple in periodsof apostasy. During periods of reform they repaired and rebuilt thetemple and its furnishings.

UnderRehoboam’s reign, Shishak king of Egypt ransacked the templeand removed all its treasures (1Kings 14:25–28; 2Chron.12:9). Asa and his father, Abijah, added to the treasure of thetemple with silver, gold, and other vessels (2Chron. 15:18) butused these to pay Ben-Hadad of Syria to help him fight Baasha king ofIsrael (16:2–3). Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (2Chron. 17)ruled during a time of prosperity and reform. It was under his rulethat the court in front of the temple probably was enlarged (20:5).The sons of Athaliah broke into the temple and worshiped Baal. Duringthe reign of Amaziah the temple was plundered by Jehoash king ofIsrael (2Chron. 25). Uzziah ruled for a long period ofprosperity (787–736 BC) but attempted to burn incense on thealtar in the hekal, a ritual kept solely for the priests. A laterking, Jotham, built the Upper Gate of the house of Yahweh (2Kings15:35; 2Chron. 27:3). Jotham’s son Ahaz took the silverand gold from the temple and sent it as a present to the king ofAssyria. He moved and changed various vessels of the temple and shutit* doors (2Chron. 28:24).

Hezekiahson of Ahaz ruled during a time of prosperity and revival. Hereopened the temple doors (2Chron. 29), cleaned out the temple,and created a 500-cubit-square mount around the temple. Hezekiahconducted many building projects in Jerusalem and reforms throughoutthe land. He also “stripped off the gold with which he hadcovered the doors and doorposts of the temple of the Lord” topay a ransom to Sennacherib king of Assyria (2Kings 18:16). Dueto his building activities, most scholars attribute major changes tothe temple to Hezekiah’s reign. The differences in the templedescriptions in Kings and Chronicles probably reflect two differentperiods of history concerning the temple (e.g., Kings represents thetemple during the period of Solomon, while Chronicles represents thechanges to the temple by Hezekiah). Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son,undid the work of his father by building altars in the temple.

Thelast resurgence of the temple in the life of the people of Israel wasunder Josiah. He instigated a reform throughout the land and acleansing of the temple. Hilkiah the high priest found a copy of the“Book of the Law” (2Kings 22:8). After a reading ofthe law in the public square, a collection was taken from the peopleto be given to workers for temple repair. The Babylonians took someof the temple treasure (2Chron. 36:7) under the rule ofJehoiakim. The last two kings of Judah, Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, alsolost temple treasure to Babylon, and eventually the temple wasdestroyed during the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC (2Chron.36).

SecondTemple: Zerubbabel and the Temple of Herod the Great

Zerubbabel’stemple.Solomon’s temple was rebuilt by the Jews who returned fromexile under the decree of the Persian king Darius (Ezra 6:1–5).The temple was built under the direction of the governor Zerubbabelwith the support of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah (Ezra 6:13–18)and was dedicated in 515 BC. This would have been a poorer temple dueto the poverty of the inhabitants of Judah. During the Hasmoneanperiod (152–37 BC) a platform and a fortress were constructed.Not much is known about the temple during this period. It would begreatly eclipsed by the work of Herod the Great.

Templeof Herod the Great.Herod invested heavily in building projects throughout his kingdom.He was keen on bringing Hellenistic culture to the Jews but also onupholding traditional Jewish religious practices, especially when itcame to the temple. Just as the first temple mimicked the religiousarchitecture of the ancient Near East, the second temple reflectedthe massive sacred architecture of the classical world. John 2:20indicates that thus far it had taken forty-six years (beyond Herod’slife) to build. Herod could not alter the dimensions of the temple,but he was able to make additions to the outside, alter its outerfurnishings, and expand the compound and platform to match thegrandeur of Greco-Roman temples. Today scholars refer to all thesebuildings and the temple as the Temple Mount complex.

Herodexpanded the space of the Temple Mount by building a “box”around the mountain. This was a massive wall with varying height dueto the topography. This wall is still visible today, especially thecurrent religious site of the Western Wall. This construction allowedfor a level platform with various buildings and plazas on the top.The leveling was done by filling in the gaps and buildingsubterranean arches in low areas. One of these areas is located onthe southeast corner (the underground arched supports are erroneouslycalled “Solomon’s Stables” today). The whole areawas surrounded by a colonnaded portico (Solomon’s Colonnade[John 10:23; Acts 3:11; 5:12]). On the northwest corner was theAntonia Fortress (Acts 21:35), and the southern end of the complexcontained the Royal Stoa, a basilica-style building (four rows offorty columns) that housed the Sanhedrin and had other religious andpolitical functions (Luke 22:66).

Thiscomplex became the religious and political center of the city ofJerusalem, and Herod built many auxiliary components. Severalentrances and bridges from the Upper City were built. The publicentered the complex from the south. A southern complex consisting ofmonumental stairs (210 feet wide) and entrance and exit gates (Doubleand Triple Gates) took pedestrians from the outside up throughunderground tunnels to the top of the temple compound. These stairsbecame an area for public forums. In addition, several shops (Mark11:15–17) were built around the complex, as well as a largebathhouse for ritual cleansing. In order to facilitate the manysacrifices, Herod built a complex hydrologic system that broughtwater into the city. This was accomplished by various aqueducts andstorage pools. The Temple Mount had many cisterns and a new pool onthe northeast end of the Temple Mount complex, the Pool of Israel.Although Herod could not alter the dimensions of the temple itself,he was able to enlarge the facade, added storage chambers andauxiliary buildings, build a second story above the temple, andconstruct several courtyards and various buildings associated withthem. In keeping with the earlier tripartite level of holiness, theseadditional temple buildings and courtyards retained the same lineardegree of holiness and exclusion.

Josephuscalled Herod’s temple “a structure more noteworthy thanany under the sun” (Ant. 15.412). Herod built a new monumentalfacade in front of the existing temple and added a second story.Herod’s temple measured 100 cubits (172 ft.) in all threedimensions. It stood on top of a foundation that gave it addedheight. It had two stories, each one 45 cubits (77.5 ft.) in height.On the roof was a parapet, 3cubits in height, which containedgolden spikes, 1 cubit in height, to prevent birds from perching onthe roof’s edge. The temple was decorated with gold overlay.The opening between the ’ulam (“porch”) and thesanctuary was 20 cubits high and 10 cubits wide (34 ft. by 17 ft.).There were two sets of double folding doors. The sanctuary containedthe golden menorah, the table of the bread of the Presence, and thealtar of incense. Between the sanctuary and the holy of holies was alarge tapestry (veil) (Matt. 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45). The holyof holies had gold plating on its walls. Around the temple werethirty-eight cells built in three stories (m.Mid. 4:3–4).All of the cells were interconnected by openings between adjoiningcells and by one in the ceiling to reach the cell above. To thenorth, between the outer wall of the temple and the cells, was aninner stairway with access to the top of the temple and the upperchamber (second story of the temple). The upper chamber allowedpriests to service the holy of holies. They would be suspended inbaskets, covered on three sides, through openings in the floor toclean the gold overlay in the holy of holies.

Thetemple courtyard was surrounded by various gates and buildings. Thesewere specific entrances and buildings that the priests used for thevarious functions of the sacrifices and offerings (Mark 13:1–2).These included the Kindling Gate, Wood Chamber, Gate of theFirstlings, Golah Chamber, Water Gate, Chamber of the Hearth, Gate ofJeconiah, Rinsing Chamber, Gate of the Offering-Women, Salt-ParvaChamber, and Gate of the Flame-Singers. In front of the temple weretwo narrow courts: the court of the priests to the west and the courtof the Israelites (men) to the east. Inside the temple court was thealtar of burnt offering. During the Second Temple period it was astationary, square-shaped altar constructed of unhewn stones.According to the Mishnah (m.Mid. 3:1), this altar was 32 cubitssquare at the base and about 10 cubits in height. A ramp 32 cubitslong, also built of unhewn stones, led the priests up to the altarfrom the south. A laver, the great bronze basin known as “theSea,” stood west of the altar between the altar and the templeporch (’ulam) for the washing of hands and feet. North of thealtar was the place of slaughtering.

Thecourt of the women, 135 cubits square, was in front of the temple tothe east. This court had four smaller courts, one at each corner.Women could enter the temple only as far as this court. It wassurrounded by a colonnade. Inside these porches (porticoes) werethirteen collection boxes for money. This is where Jesus saw the poorwidow donating two copper coins (Luke 21:1–3). The court hadfour large lampstands nearly half the height of the temple. TheMishnah states that each of the corner chambers was 40 cubits squareand roofless. The central area was exposed to the sky, with a porticoaround each courtyard—typical of Mediterranean buildings. Thechamber to the immediate right of the court’s entrance(northeast) was the chamber of the woodshed, where priests examinedlogs for impurities (e.g., parasites). To the left (southeast) wasthe chamber of the Nazirites. To the northwest was the chamber of thelepers. A leper who had been healed brought an offering and thenbathed in this chamber before coming to the priests for theperformance of rituals. In the southwest corner was the chamber ofthe house of oil. Between the court of the women and the temple courtwas the Nicanor Gate. Fifteen semicircular steps led up to this gate.It was on these steps that the Levites sang the fifteen Psalms ofAscent (Pss. 120–134).

Surroundingthe temple and the court of the women was a balustrade or railingthat served as a boundary beyond which no Gentile could enter.Outside this boundary was the court of the Gentiles (see John12:20–22; Acts 21:27–29). Archaeologists have found aninscription that forbids Gentiles, upon pain of death, to enter anyfarther. Herod’s temple was destroyed in AD 70. The TempleMount continued to be used and considered sacred, as Roman temples,Crusader churches, and Muslim shrines marked the sacredness of thelocation.

Roleof the Temple

Thetemple was the dwelling place of Yahweh. It was the domain of thereligious leaders, priests, and Levites. It also represented therelationship/covenant between God and the nation of Israel. Variouskings used the temple for their political maneuvering and attempts toshift the religious worship of the nation. The temple was the visiblepresence of God and embodied the political and religious aspirationsof the people. The temple sat on top of a sacred mountain.

Duringturbulent political times the temple was central to God’sprotection and judgment. From the Babylonian and Roman periods, twotexts spoke of a future temple. Ezekiel’s vision saw afuturistic temple measuring 500 cubits square surrounded by a massivecourt measuring 3,000 cubits square (Ezek. 40:1–47:12). Amongthe DSS, the Temple Scroll also talks about a rebuilt temple. Todaymany Christians and Jews look to a future rebuilding of the temple.

“Expiation” refers to the atonement of sin andthe removal of guilt, while “propitiation” refers to theappeasem*nt or satisfaction of wrath. Both ideas are present in theone Greek word hilasmos (and its cognates) used in the LXX and theNT. It is difficult to translate hilasmos into English using onecorresponding word, so two words, “expiation” and“propitiation,” are often used. This is problematicbecause neither term precisely captures the nuances of the Greekword. The problem persists because, as noted above, “expiation”and “propitiation” have different meanings in English.Because no single English word conveys the full sense of hilasmos,“expiation” and “propitiation” areconveniently combined in the NIV’s “sacrifice ofatonement” or “atoning sacrifice” (Rom. 3:25;1John 2:2; 4:10).

GreekBackground

Inclassical Greek, hilasmos referred to a sacrifice that would somehowavert a god’s wrath. When a worshiper sinned against a god andviolated the god’s holiness, the worshiper paid the properamount, through some kind of sacrifice, so that the god’s wrathwas then averted. It was a means of turning the god from anger to afavorable attitude, and it functioned by giving the god something(via sacrifice) that compensated for the offense. This sacrifice wasintended not as atonement for the worshiper’s sin but rather toappease the wrath of the god. The worshiper was the subject whooffered the sacrifice to the god as the object in an effort toappease the god’s wrath.

OldTestament

TheOT shares this Greek usage to a degree but also expands it to includethe more familiar biblical notion of expiation or atonement. The LXXuses hilasmos to convey the ideas of expiation as well aspropitiation. The word group associated with hilasmos is used indifferent contexts throughout the Bible, so context must determinethe meaning in each case. A prominent use occurs in Lev. 25:9, whereit refers to the Day of Atonement. Here hilasmos involves the removalof guilt effected by a sacrifice. A similar use is found in Num. 5:8,where hilasmos is used in connection with the ram with which peoplemake atonement for their sins. Ezekiel 44:27 uses the same term whenreferring to the sin offering that a priest must make for his ownsins upon entrance into the holy place. Each of these examples useshilasmos to translate the biblical concept of expiation: theatonement of sin and the removal of guilt. The unholy worshiper whosins against God is made holy once again by offering a sacrifice toatone for his or her sin.

Hilasmosalso conveys forgiveness. Forgiveness is closely connected withatonement. The LXX uses a related term hilastērion twenty-eighttimes to refer to the mercy seat, the cover of the ark of thecovenant over which God appeared on the Day of Atonement and on whichsacrificial blood was poured. The mercy seat was where both atonementand forgiveness were found. The term is used in Heb. 9:5 to refer tothe same mercy seat or “atonement cover” (NIV). Hereagain, mercy and forgiveness are linked to the idea of atonement.Psalm 130:4 (129:4 LXX) also uses hilasmos to convey the connectionbetween atonement and forgiveness: “But with you there isforgiveness/atonement [hilasmos].”

Insome cases, hilasmos bears the sense of propitiation—turningaside wrath. An interesting use occurs in the story of Jacob and Esauin Gen. 32. Jacob goes out to meet his brother Esau but is afraidbecause he had deceived their father, Isaac, into giving him theblessing that belonged to Esau (Gen. 27). Esau holds a grudge againstJacob and intends to kill him after mourning the death of theirfather (27:41). After years of separation, the brother reunite;Jacob, fearing the wrath of his brother, plans to avert his brother’sanger with gifts: “I will pacify him with these gifts I amsending on ahead; later, when I see him, perhaps he will receive me”(32:20 [32:21 LXX]). Here exilaskomai, a verb related to hilasmos, isused when Jacob says that he hopes to “pacify” Esau. Thiscontext suggests not expiation or atonement but appeasem*nt (cf.NRSV, NET). Jacob fears the wrath of his brother. To avert thatwrath, he sends gifts.

Theidea of propitiating God’s wrath occurs throughout the OT.Granted, it does not amount to bribery, as was potentially the casein pagan usage, where a god was “paid off” by asacrifice, with no sense of atonement for sin, but the notion ofaverting God’s wrath is common. For example, Moses is directedby God to take a census of the people to count them, and each one isto pay God a ransom so that no plague will come upon them (Exod.30:12). This sum of money is then said to “make atonement”for their lives (30:16). Through the offering of ransom money to God,his wrath is turned away from the people, so that no plague will comeupon them. The idea of propitiating God’s wrath is found inother places in the OT: Exod. 32:30; Num. 8:19; 16:46; 35:31; Prov.16:6; Isa. 47:11. All of this suggests that the notion of atonementin the OT is best understood comprehensively to include both thecleansing and the forgiveness of the sinner (expiation) and theturning away of God’s wrath (propitiation).

NewTestament

Expiationand propitiation are combined in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. He isboth the expiation for sin and the sacrifice that averts God’swrath. The Bible combines both expiation and propitiation into theone word hilasmos, and Jesus himself is the hilasmos for sin (Heb.2:17; 1John 2:2; 4:10; cf. Rom. 3:25 [hilastērion]). Theone action of Christ’s sacrifice has the double effect ofexpiating sin and thereby propitiating God. In the Bible, God’swrath results when his holiness is offended by sin. So there is needfor both expiation and propitiation. His wrath must be appeased sothat forgiveness for the sinner may result. Whereas expiation dealswith sin—satisfying the penalty incurred because ofsin—propitiation deals with wrath. Jesus accomplished both bybecoming the “atoning sacrifice” for our sins. He is theultimate mercy seat, the ultimate place of atonement and expiation(Heb. 9:5). He is also the ultimate sacrifice (Rom. 3:25).

TheNT is very nuanced regarding the sacrifice of Christ. Although itincludes both expiation and propitiation, these differ significantlyfrom Greek paganism and the OT. On one hand, God is too holy andrighteous for fallen humanity to expiate sin and satisfy his demandfor holiness by offering a sacrifice. On the other hand, God is notcapricious in that he simply needs to be pacified through a gift inorder to avert his wrath. The Bible teaches that no human being canoffer a sacrifice worthy enough to expiate his or her own sin or toavert God’s holy wrath. The pagan idea of propitiation isimpossible for fallen humanity. God’s holiness is so great thathe is rightfully wrathful at our sin, and our sin demands expiation.But we are unable to offer a sacrifice pure enough for our ownatonement. So God himself offers the sacrifice that both expiates oursin and averts his own wrath. Biblical propitiation is distinct frompagan propitiation. In the latter, human beings are the subjects ofthe action, the ones who are offering the propitiating sacrifice,while the gods receive the action and are thus propitiated. But Godis the subject of the action in the Bible. God has the right to bewrathful because of sin, to be righteously indignant. But he sendshis own Son to handle that wrath. God himself sends the sacrifice; heis the sacrifice; he is the place where that sacrifice is offered(Rom. 3:25).

Thereare three elements that help to summarize expiation/propitiation inthe Bible: (1)God was rightfully wrathful because of our sin,(2)God offered the sacrifice that averted his own wrath, and(3)God was the sacrifice that atoned for our sin. “Thisis love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Sonas an atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1John 4:10).

Temples have always been the domain and house of the godsthroughout the ancient Near East. As the abode of the God of Israel,the Jerusalem temple served the same purpose. The temple played animportant role in the social, religious, and political life ofancient Israel. No archaeological remains of the actual templebuilding exist today; nevertheless, the temple has dominated biblicalscholarship. The Jerusalem temple was originally built by Solomon in953 BC and was destroyed by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar in 586BC. After the exile, the temple was rebuilt and then rededicated byZerubbabel in 515 BC (Ezra). Herod the Great significantly expandedand changed the temple, but it was eventually destroyed by the Romansunder the direction of Titus in AD70.

Thebiblical text refers to the temple in several ways: temple, house ofGod/Yahweh, and sanctuary/shrine. These terms all refer to thedwelling or house of God and an area of sacredness. The sources forinformation on the temple are biblical texts, Josephus, and theMishnah (tractate Middot). The most detailed accounts of theconstruction of the Solomonic temple are found in 1Kings 6–8;2Chron. 2–4. In addition to these major sections, thereare several references to building activities and repairs to thetemple throughout the OT. Another major text is Ezek. 40, but it isdebated whether this represents the actual temple or an ideal temple.There are several references in the NT that directly or indirectlyrefer to functions and specific components of the Temple Mountcomplex.

ArchaeologicalInvestigation

Thelocation of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem has been undisputed.Current scholarly opinion locates the temple on the spot of thecurrent Muslim shrine, the Dome of the Rock. Today the largerenclosed area is referred to as the harem esh-sharif (the noblesanctuary). Explorers in the nineteenth century did not attemptarchaeological research of the temple itself, although variousexplorations focused on recording visible features and conductingsoundings along the sides of the Temple Mount. Even after theunification of Jerusalem in 1967, with three major excavations in thecity, no archaeological investigation of the temple was conducted.Due to the political and religious variables associated with theMuslim holy sites, there are no foreseeable archaeologicalinvestigations. A recent renovation of the Mosque of Omar, located onthe southern end of the Temple Mount, removed truckloads of earth.Unfortunately, there was no archaeological supervision of the projectand no archaeological excavations of the site were conducted.

Inspite of the limited archaeological excavations, several popularaccounts of alternate locations of the temple have been proposed.Most of these place the temple somewhere other than the Dome of theRock, but none of these proposals has garnered scholarly support torival the current location.

FirstTemple: Temple of Solomon

Throughoutthe ancient Near East, temples served as monumental edifices thatprovided divine legitimacy for the king or dynasty. While templesshould be considered part of the religious sphere of society, theirconstruction, maintenance, and associated activities are interlinkedwith the political sphere. The construction of the temple inJerusalem is also linked to state formation by the Israelites. TheSolomonic temple ushered in a new period of religious activity amongthe ancient Israelites. Previously, Israel had worshiped at variousshrines and sanctuaries, and its central religious practice wasassociated with the tabernacle. With the establishment of themonarchy, dynastic kingship and centralized authority were created.Although the biblical text credits Solomon as the Israelite king whobuilt the temple, the project was initiated under David. David unitedthe Israelite tribes, captured Jerusalem and made it the capital ofthe kingdom, and built a royal palace. He made Jerusalem thepolitical capital but also the religious center when he brought theholy ark, the visible symbol of Yahweh’s presence, to Jerusalem(2Sam. 5–6). David intended to build Yahweh a permanentdwelling (2Sam. 7:2).

Location.Thebiblical text preserves multiple traditions and accounts of thelocation and acquisition of land for the temple. In the ancient worldthe city temple was commonly located on the acropolis (highest point)of the city. The temple is located on the highest point of a ridgewhere the OT city of Jerusalem is located (Jebusite city, later theCity of David). There are two accounts of the purchase of the land:the threshing floors of Araunah (2Sam. 24:18–25) and ofOrnan (1Chron. 21:15–30; 2Chron. 3:1 [here the NIVsupplies “Araunah,” but see, e.g., the NET, NASB, ESV]).It is possible that Araunah and Ornan were kin, but most likely theyare the same person, with Samuel and Chronicles using variant names.However, the two accounts disagree further on the amount paid for theland: fifty silver shekels (2Sam. 24:24) and six hundredshekels of gold (1Chron. 21:25). One theory explains thisdiscrepancy as arising from two separate transactions. First, Davidpurchased the threshing floor to build an altar to Yahweh, and helater purchased the whole mountain to build a temple. Later traditionassociates the hill where David built an altar with the locationwhere earlier Abraham built an altar to sacrifice Isaac (MountMoriah).

Constructionand dimensions.Solomon started to build during the fourth year of his reign(2Chron. 3:1), and construction lasted for seven years. Theplan of the temple was revealed to Solomon during a night in thesanctuary at Gibeon (2Chron. 1:7–13). The king obtainedbuilding materials, specifically cedar from Lebanon (2Chron.2:3–10), and construction and design expertise from Phoenicianartisans (1Kings 7:13–14, 45). The Solomonic templeconsisted of a tripartite plan similar to other temples inSyro-Palestine during this period. There are two accounts for theconstruction and dedication of the first temple (1Kings 6–8;2Chron. 3–7). Both accounts offer similar descriptionsbut there are some differences in measurements. Most scholars accountfor these differences by viewing the dimensions in the book ofChronicles as reflecting the temple measurements after Hezekiah’srepair and rebuilding projects.

Thebasic plan was a rectangle, 70 cubits long (120ft. 7in.)and 20 cubits wide (34ft. 5in.) on a straight axis facingeast; the height was 30 cubits (51ft. 7in.). Thesemeasurements refer to the inside dimensions (1cubit=20.67 in.). The three distinct architectural units formed threedistinct rooms where various functions were performed and alsoreflected levels of holiness. The three units were the ’ulam(“porch” or “vestibule”), the hekal (“cella”or “nave”), and the debir (the innermost sanctuary, themost holy place). In the biblical accounts the whole building iscalled the “house [bayit] of the Lord,” and the word“temple” is used for the hekal. There was a three-storystructure built around the sides and back of the temple (see below).

Theporch was 10 cubits (17ft. 2in.) by 20 cubits (34ft.5in.). The account in Kings does not provide its height; theaccount in Chronicles gives the height as 120 cubits. In itsdescription and measurements in the biblical text, the porch isconsidered separate from the temple (bayit, house). The porchcontained two pillars of bronze: yakin (“he will establish”)on the right side and bo’az (“in strength”) on theleft (see Boaz; Jakin). The pillars were bronze, 18 cubits (35 cubitsin Chronicles) in height, with elaborate double capitals. The bottomcapital was 5 cubits, round in shape, and surrounded by nets withpomegranates. Above this was another capital, 4 cubits high, shapedlike a lily.

Thehekal was 40 cubits long and 20 cubits wide and was the only partwith windows (1Kings 6:4). The debir was a cube, 20 cubits perside. The debir is also called the “holy of holies.” Thedifference in height (10 cubits shorter than the hekal  )is due to the rise in the bedrock. This measurement is confirmedtoday in the interior of the Dome of the Rock.

Thewalls of the house (hekal and debir) were built of whole stonesdressed in the quarry, as “no hammer, chisel or any other irontool was heard at the temple site while it was being built”(1Kings 6:7). The roof was made of cedar wood (1Kings6:10), with crossbeams and intersecting boards. The stone walls werecovered from ground to ceiling with boards of cedar wood, and thefloor was made of cypress wood, covered with gold (1Kings6:30). The wood had carved engravings of cherubim, palm trees, andopen flowers. The hekal and the debir were separated by a partitionmade of olive wood.

Thethree-story structure surrounding the temple was constructed of cedarwood. Each story was 5 cubits. The width of the first floor was 5cubits, the middle 6 cubits, and the top 7 cubits. This structure wasentered from the right side of the temple, and the floors wereconnected by openings with ladders. This structure formed chambersand storage for the activities of the priests.

Infront of the temple was a courtyard surrounded by a wall. Inside thecourtyard was a great bronze basin (known as “the Sea”).This basin rested on the backs of twelve bronze oxen. Ten smallerbasins in groups of five were set on elaborate wheeled stands. Alarge altar also was located in this courtyard.

Inthe holy of holies stood two large cherubim of olive wood coveredwith gold. They were 10 cubits in height, with a wingspan of 10cubits. These cherubim stood over the ark of the covenant. In thehekal were the golden altar, the golden table, and ten lampstands.

History.FromSolomon to Zedekiah, the temple was used for political and religiouspower shifts. Kings of Israel raided the temple treasury to pay offinvaders, closed the temple, or placed idols in the temple in periodsof apostasy. During periods of reform they repaired and rebuilt thetemple and its furnishings.

UnderRehoboam’s reign, Shishak king of Egypt ransacked the templeand removed all its treasures (1Kings 14:25–28; 2Chron.12:9). Asa and his father, Abijah, added to the treasure of thetemple with silver, gold, and other vessels (2Chron. 15:18) butused these to pay Ben-Hadad of Syria to help him fight Baasha king ofIsrael (16:2–3). Asa’s son Jehoshaphat (2Chron. 17)ruled during a time of prosperity and reform. It was under his rulethat the court in front of the temple probably was enlarged (20:5).The sons of Athaliah broke into the temple and worshiped Baal. Duringthe reign of Amaziah the temple was plundered by Jehoash king ofIsrael (2Chron. 25). Uzziah ruled for a long period ofprosperity (787–736 BC) but attempted to burn incense on thealtar in the hekal, a ritual kept solely for the priests. A laterking, Jotham, built the Upper Gate of the house of Yahweh (2Kings15:35; 2Chron. 27:3). Jotham’s son Ahaz took the silverand gold from the temple and sent it as a present to the king ofAssyria. He moved and changed various vessels of the temple and shutit* doors (2Chron. 28:24).

Hezekiahson of Ahaz ruled during a time of prosperity and revival. Hereopened the temple doors (2Chron. 29), cleaned out the temple,and created a 500-cubit-square mount around the temple. Hezekiahconducted many building projects in Jerusalem and reforms throughoutthe land. He also “stripped off the gold with which he hadcovered the doors and doorposts of the temple of the Lord” topay a ransom to Sennacherib king of Assyria (2Kings 18:16). Dueto his building activities, most scholars attribute major changes tothe temple to Hezekiah’s reign. The differences in the templedescriptions in Kings and Chronicles probably reflect two differentperiods of history concerning the temple (e.g., Kings represents thetemple during the period of Solomon, while Chronicles represents thechanges to the temple by Hezekiah). Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son,undid the work of his father by building altars in the temple.

Thelast resurgence of the temple in the life of the people of Israel wasunder Josiah. He instigated a reform throughout the land and acleansing of the temple. Hilkiah the high priest found a copy of the“Book of the Law” (2Kings 22:8). After a reading ofthe law in the public square, a collection was taken from the peopleto be given to workers for temple repair. The Babylonians took someof the temple treasure (2Chron. 36:7) under the rule ofJehoiakim. The last two kings of Judah, Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, alsolost temple treasure to Babylon, and eventually the temple wasdestroyed during the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC (2Chron.36).

SecondTemple: Zerubbabel and the Temple of Herod the Great

Zerubbabel’stemple.Solomon’s temple was rebuilt by the Jews who returned fromexile under the decree of the Persian king Darius (Ezra 6:1–5).The temple was built under the direction of the governor Zerubbabelwith the support of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah (Ezra 6:13–18)and was dedicated in 515 BC. This would have been a poorer temple dueto the poverty of the inhabitants of Judah. During the Hasmoneanperiod (152–37 BC) a platform and a fortress were constructed.Not much is known about the temple during this period. It would begreatly eclipsed by the work of Herod the Great.

Templeof Herod the Great.Herod invested heavily in building projects throughout his kingdom.He was keen on bringing Hellenistic culture to the Jews but also onupholding traditional Jewish religious practices, especially when itcame to the temple. Just as the first temple mimicked the religiousarchitecture of the ancient Near East, the second temple reflectedthe massive sacred architecture of the classical world. John 2:20indicates that thus far it had taken forty-six years (beyond Herod’slife) to build. Herod could not alter the dimensions of the temple,but he was able to make additions to the outside, alter its outerfurnishings, and expand the compound and platform to match thegrandeur of Greco-Roman temples. Today scholars refer to all thesebuildings and the temple as the Temple Mount complex.

Herodexpanded the space of the Temple Mount by building a “box”around the mountain. This was a massive wall with varying height dueto the topography. This wall is still visible today, especially thecurrent religious site of the Western Wall. This construction allowedfor a level platform with various buildings and plazas on the top.The leveling was done by filling in the gaps and buildingsubterranean arches in low areas. One of these areas is located onthe southeast corner (the underground arched supports are erroneouslycalled “Solomon’s Stables” today). The whole areawas surrounded by a colonnaded portico (Solomon’s Colonnade[John 10:23; Acts 3:11; 5:12]). On the northwest corner was theAntonia Fortress (Acts 21:35), and the southern end of the complexcontained the Royal Stoa, a basilica-style building (four rows offorty columns) that housed the Sanhedrin and had other religious andpolitical functions (Luke 22:66).

Thiscomplex became the religious and political center of the city ofJerusalem, and Herod built many auxiliary components. Severalentrances and bridges from the Upper City were built. The publicentered the complex from the south. A southern complex consisting ofmonumental stairs (210 feet wide) and entrance and exit gates (Doubleand Triple Gates) took pedestrians from the outside up throughunderground tunnels to the top of the temple compound. These stairsbecame an area for public forums. In addition, several shops (Mark11:15–17) were built around the complex, as well as a largebathhouse for ritual cleansing. In order to facilitate the manysacrifices, Herod built a complex hydrologic system that broughtwater into the city. This was accomplished by various aqueducts andstorage pools. The Temple Mount had many cisterns and a new pool onthe northeast end of the Temple Mount complex, the Pool of Israel.Although Herod could not alter the dimensions of the temple itself,he was able to enlarge the facade, added storage chambers andauxiliary buildings, build a second story above the temple, andconstruct several courtyards and various buildings associated withthem. In keeping with the earlier tripartite level of holiness, theseadditional temple buildings and courtyards retained the same lineardegree of holiness and exclusion.

Josephuscalled Herod’s temple “a structure more noteworthy thanany under the sun” (Ant. 15.412). Herod built a new monumentalfacade in front of the existing temple and added a second story.Herod’s temple measured 100 cubits (172 ft.) in all threedimensions. It stood on top of a foundation that gave it addedheight. It had two stories, each one 45 cubits (77.5 ft.) in height.On the roof was a parapet, 3cubits in height, which containedgolden spikes, 1 cubit in height, to prevent birds from perching onthe roof’s edge. The temple was decorated with gold overlay.The opening between the ’ulam (“porch”) and thesanctuary was 20 cubits high and 10 cubits wide (34 ft. by 17 ft.).There were two sets of double folding doors. The sanctuary containedthe golden menorah, the table of the bread of the Presence, and thealtar of incense. Between the sanctuary and the holy of holies was alarge tapestry (veil) (Matt. 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45). The holyof holies had gold plating on its walls. Around the temple werethirty-eight cells built in three stories (m.Mid. 4:3–4).All of the cells were interconnected by openings between adjoiningcells and by one in the ceiling to reach the cell above. To thenorth, between the outer wall of the temple and the cells, was aninner stairway with access to the top of the temple and the upperchamber (second story of the temple). The upper chamber allowedpriests to service the holy of holies. They would be suspended inbaskets, covered on three sides, through openings in the floor toclean the gold overlay in the holy of holies.

Thetemple courtyard was surrounded by various gates and buildings. Thesewere specific entrances and buildings that the priests used for thevarious functions of the sacrifices and offerings (Mark 13:1–2).These included the Kindling Gate, Wood Chamber, Gate of theFirstlings, Golah Chamber, Water Gate, Chamber of the Hearth, Gate ofJeconiah, Rinsing Chamber, Gate of the Offering-Women, Salt-ParvaChamber, and Gate of the Flame-Singers. In front of the temple weretwo narrow courts: the court of the priests to the west and the courtof the Israelites (men) to the east. Inside the temple court was thealtar of burnt offering. During the Second Temple period it was astationary, square-shaped altar constructed of unhewn stones.According to the Mishnah (m.Mid. 3:1), this altar was 32 cubitssquare at the base and about 10 cubits in height. A ramp 32 cubitslong, also built of unhewn stones, led the priests up to the altarfrom the south. A laver, the great bronze basin known as “theSea,” stood west of the altar between the altar and the templeporch (’ulam) for the washing of hands and feet. North of thealtar was the place of slaughtering.

Thecourt of the women, 135 cubits square, was in front of the temple tothe east. This court had four smaller courts, one at each corner.Women could enter the temple only as far as this court. It wassurrounded by a colonnade. Inside these porches (porticoes) werethirteen collection boxes for money. This is where Jesus saw the poorwidow donating two copper coins (Luke 21:1–3). The court hadfour large lampstands nearly half the height of the temple. TheMishnah states that each of the corner chambers was 40 cubits squareand roofless. The central area was exposed to the sky, with a porticoaround each courtyard—typical of Mediterranean buildings. Thechamber to the immediate right of the court’s entrance(northeast) was the chamber of the woodshed, where priests examinedlogs for impurities (e.g., parasites). To the left (southeast) wasthe chamber of the Nazirites. To the northwest was the chamber of thelepers. A leper who had been healed brought an offering and thenbathed in this chamber before coming to the priests for theperformance of rituals. In the southwest corner was the chamber ofthe house of oil. Between the court of the women and the temple courtwas the Nicanor Gate. Fifteen semicircular steps led up to this gate.It was on these steps that the Levites sang the fifteen Psalms ofAscent (Pss. 120–134).

Surroundingthe temple and the court of the women was a balustrade or railingthat served as a boundary beyond which no Gentile could enter.Outside this boundary was the court of the Gentiles (see John12:20–22; Acts 21:27–29). Archaeologists have found aninscription that forbids Gentiles, upon pain of death, to enter anyfarther. Herod’s temple was destroyed in AD 70. The TempleMount continued to be used and considered sacred, as Roman temples,Crusader churches, and Muslim shrines marked the sacredness of thelocation.

Roleof the Temple

Thetemple was the dwelling place of Yahweh. It was the domain of thereligious leaders, priests, and Levites. It also represented therelationship/covenant between God and the nation of Israel. Variouskings used the temple for their political maneuvering and attempts toshift the religious worship of the nation. The temple was the visiblepresence of God and embodied the political and religious aspirationsof the people. The temple sat on top of a sacred mountain.

Duringturbulent political times the temple was central to God’sprotection and judgment. From the Babylonian and Roman periods, twotexts spoke of a future temple. Ezekiel’s vision saw afuturistic temple measuring 500 cubits square surrounded by a massivecourt measuring 3,000 cubits square (Ezek. 40:1–47:12). Amongthe DSS, the Temple Scroll also talks about a rebuilt temple. Todaymany Christians and Jews look to a future rebuilding of the temple.