Deeper Commentary
2Ch 4:1 Then he made an altar of brass, twenty cubits in length, and
twenty cubits in breadth, and ten cubits in height-
An altar of 15 feet high and 30 feet square was impractical for
use, just as the molten sea / laver was too huge to ever be used. Again we
have the impression Solomon was simply into religious showmanship rather
than encouraging spirituality. This was far larger than the altar of the tabernacle, which was 5 x 5 x 3.
Clearly the idea was that far more animals were going to be offered. And yet
David and Solomon were forgetting the lesson taught through the sin with
Bathsheba, Solomon's mother; God doesn't want sacrifice, but rather broken,
contrite hearts (Ps. 40:6-8). Just as God didn't want a physical house built
to Him, but rather wanted to build a house of people with humble hearts open
to the working of His Spirit. The altar was of brass, whereas that of the
tabernacle was of common, weak acacia wood (Ex. 27:1,2). This taught that
the basis of acceptable sacrifice and approach to God is the recognition of
our common weak humanity, and sacrifice is offered to God upon that basis.
But Solomon had no recognition of his own moral frailty and humanity, and
was convinced that as David's son and the Messianic seed [as he imagined],
he was therefore perfect. And it seems David too somehow rationalized his
sin with Bathsheba by the end of his life, and lacked grace and humility.
2Ch 4:2 Also he made the molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round
in compass; and its height was five cubits; and a line of thirty cubits
encircled it-
This gives the circumference of the laver as “thirty cubits”,
although it was ten cubits broad. Taking ‘pi’ to be 3.14, it is apparent
that the circumference would have been 31.4 cubits; but the Spirit says,
summing up, “thirty”. Sometimes the Biblical record is vague, other times
exact. This reflects how God is not seeking to cover His back against
critics. He is of an altogether higher nature than that. There are times
when the Spirit uses very approximate numbers rather than exact ("about
the space of four hundred and fifty years", Acts 13:20 cp. 1 Kings 6:1).
The reference to "seventy" in Judges 9:56 also doesn't seem exact. Seven
and a half years (2 Sam. 2:11) becomes "seven years" (1 Kings 2:11); three
months and ten days (2 Chron. 36:9) becomes "three months" (2 Kings 24:8).
This is not how we are used to history being written; but we are reading
the Hebrew genre of history, not our own.
2Ch 4:3 Under it was the likeness of oxen which encircled it for ten
cubits, encircling the sea. The oxen were in two rows, cast when it was
cast-
There is no record of this huge laver ever being used in practice.
The urgent requirement for true cleansing was turned into mere external
ritualism, something which was to be seen and admired rather than
personally participated it.
2Ch 4:4 It stood on twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, three
looking toward the west, three looking toward the south and three looking
toward the east. The sea was set on them above, and all their back parts
were inward-
This massive laver was therefore a political statement, implying the
twelve tribes of Israel were only to be cleansed by this huge laver. I
discussed on 1 Kings 4 how Solomon sought to bring all Israel under his
personal control. He constantly mixes spiritual appearance with his own
unspiritual agendas.
2Ch 4:5 It was a handbreadth thick; and its brim was worked like the brim of
a cup, like the flower of a lily. It received and held three thousand baths-
"Shushan" is the Hebrew word for "lily", which was iconicly associated with
the Jerusalem temple (s.w. 1 Kings 7:19,22,26).
Shushan
was where the palace of Persia was (Esther 1:2), and
sets the scene for the impression discussed on
Esther 1:7
that we have
there
a fake, imitation kingdom and temple of Yahweh.
1 Kings 7:26 says it held 2000 baths, perhaps describing the quantity
of water actually used, although it had the capacity to hold 3000.
2Ch 4:6 He made also ten basins, and put five on the right hand and five
on the left, to wash in them. Such things as related to the burnt offering
they washed in them; but the sea was for the priests to wash in-
The massive laver described above was for show, it was too large to
realistically be used for ritual cleansing; in practice, the ten smaller
lavers would have to be used. But even they were far more than the single
laver of the original tabernacle. This was because David and Solomon
envisaged offering huge numbers of animals for offerings, requiring far
more priests than did the tabernacle system of worship. David and Solomon
were forgetting the lesson taught through the sin with Bathsheba,
Solomon's mother; God doesn't want sacrifice, but rather broken, contrite
hearts (Ps. 40:6-8).
2Ch 4:7 He made the ten lampstands of gold according to the command
concerning them; and he set them in the temple, five on the right hand and
five on the left-
"The candlestick" or menorah is only ever spoken of in the law of
Moses in the singular, but in 1 Chron. 28:15 David had decided there were
to be multiple such candlesticks. By doing so, he ignored the symbolism of
the one candlestick, such was his obsession with mere religion. "According
to the command" may therefore refer to David's command rather than God's.
Or perhaps Solomon carefully made each of the ten lampstands according to
the specification for the one lampstand.
2Ch 4:8 He made also ten tables, and placed them in the temple, five on
the right side and five on the left. He made one hundred basins of gold-
The table of show bread was to be made of acacia wood (Ex. 25:23),
but David planned to make it of pure gold, and even worked out the weight
of gold required for it (1 Chron. 28:16). And Solomon indeed made it of
gold (1 Kings 7:48), leading to it being known as "the pure table" (2
Chron. 13:11). And he made "tables" plural, as he made candlesticks (:7),
although the law only required one candlestick. See on :19. Religion had overtaken spirituality, form had eclipsed
content. Likewise the "tables of silver" David ordered to be made (1
Chron. 28:16) do not feature in the tabernacle. He was missing the point-
that God wanted His holiest symbols made of common, weak things like
acacia wood. For His strength and glory is made perfect in weakness. David
claims these plans were from God (1 Chron. 28:19), although as discussed
on 1 Chron. 28:12, they were in fact from his own mind. The way these
things were taken into captivity, with no record of this golden table ever
being returned, surely reflects God's judgment upon this kind of religious
show. He prefers a humble house church in an inner city room, rather than
a gold plated cathedral. The way some exclusive churches speak of
'maintaining a pure table' suggests they have made the same essential
mistake as David did.
So many vessels were not required by the tabernacle service. This was a completely different, grandiose religious system of David's own device; and in the end, all these vessels of mere religion were taken off into captivity (2 Kings 25:14-16 emphasizes this).
2Ch 4:9 Furthermore he made the court of the priests, and the great court,
and doors for the court, and overlaid their doors with brass-
The "court of the priests" is that of
1 Kings 6:36; 7:12: "He built the inner court with three courses of cut
stone, and a course of cedar beams". This would be
the "higher court" of Jer. 36:10. Perhaps it was made "higher" by the
three layers of stone and the cedar decking placed upon it. Perhaps the
idea was that the people in the outer court could see what the priests
were doing. We wonder however what exactly was the “middle court” (2
Kings 20:4). The brass doors contrast with the "hangings for the court of
fine twined linen" (Ex. 27:9), representing righteousness (Rev. 19:8). Yet
brass can represent the flesh. The desire to make the temple solid and
permanent meant that the fine symbolism of the tabernacle was crudely
overlooked.
2Ch 4:10 He set the sea on the right side of the house eastward, toward
the south-
This confirms that the right side was the south. The description is
as of a person standing facing the temple from the west side of it. But
this was not where the entrance was. Solomon was describing it from his
perspective and not that of a worshipper entering the temple from the
east.
2Ch 4:11 Huram made the pots, the shovels and the basins. So Huram made an
end of doing the work that he did for king Solomon in God’s house-
This gives the lie to David's confident statements that he had all
the human and material resources prepared for the temple. He was in the
grip of obsession, and convinced he had empowered and resourced the temple
to go ahead. But in reality, Solomon needed more materials and the workmen
provided by David, or those he had in mind, were in fact apparently not
used in making the finer work for the temple.
2Ch 4:12 the two pillars, and the bowls, and the two capitals which were
on the top of the pillars, and the two networks to cover the two bowls of
the capitals that were on the top of the pillars-
We now have a summary of all the work done, as if Solomon itemized it
all and boasted in the inventory. This glorification of human works and
achievement revealed so much about his lack of true spiritual perception;
see on :14.
2Ch 4:13 and the four hundred pomegranates for the two networks; two rows
of pomegranates for each network, to cover the two bowls of the capitals
that were on the pillars-
There were 100 in each row (1 Kings 7:20), but on one row there were
96 facing the courts, meaning the other four were at the corners (Jer.
52:23). The internal corroboration between records written hundreds of
years apart is impressive, and reflects Divine inspiration of the entire
Old Testament.
I consider that any attempt to find spiritual significance in the pomegranates used in Solomon's building is misplaced, because I don't think he was at all thinking in that way. Rather is this another example of his simply copying what he had seen in Egypt, from where his queen came from. For such pomegranate designs are common in Egyptian architecture of the time, and Egypt was famed for pomegranates (Num. 20:5).
2Ch 4:14 He made also the bases, and the basins he made on the bases-
There is much stress upon all the 'making' of things and the "work"
done (1 Kings 7:40,51). Solomon had quite missed the lessons learned by
his father David [and his mother Bathsheba], that God wants broken,
contrite hearts more than works and sacrifices. He wanted to build a house
of people, rather than have a house built for Him.
2Ch 4:15 one sea, and the twelve oxen under it-
We wonder whether David and Solomon saw in this huge laver some kind
of representation of their power, with all twelve tribes of Israel
subservient to them. There was no equivalent of this huge laver in the
tabernacle, and in practical terms, the ten smaller lavers would have been
used. In 18 out of 21 occurrences, the Hebrew word translated "scaffold"
in 2 Chron. 6:13 is translated "laver". The huge podium or "laver" from
which Solomon proudly addressed Israel was perhaps basin shaped. This
confirms the suggestion here that the laver with the 12 oxen beneath it
was really a statement of Solomon's power over the 12 tribes of Israel,
with them serving him and being his power base. Spiritual functionality
was therefore replaced by a political, religious agenda- as happens so
often in the history of God's people.
2Ch 4:16 Huram his father also made the pots, the shovels, the forks, and
all its vessels for king Solomon for the house of Yahweh of bright brass-
The idea is of polished copper.
2Ch 4:17 The king cast them in the plain of the Jordan, in the clay ground
between Succoth and Zeredah-
"The king cast them" suggests Solomon's personal involvement with the
work. This reflects how he admits in Ecclesiastes that he followed his
obsession with building and architecture to a degree not possible for most
men. His zeal was therefore more an expression of his own personality type
and personal interests, than true love for God.
Zarethan where Solomon cast the lavers for the temple with their pagan motifs (1 Kings 7:46) is called Zaredathah in 2 Chron. 4:17, which is a form of Zeredah (1 Kings 11:26), the birthplace of Jeroboam son of Nebat. It doesn't therefore have good connections. We wonder if the golden calves were cast there too.
2Ch 4:18 Thus Solomon made all these vessels in great abundance; for the
weight of the brass could not be estimated-
As noted on :12, Solomon itemized his work and boasted in
the inventory. But he gave up weighing all the brass vessels. This
glorification of human works and achievement revealed so much about his
lack of true spiritual perception.
2Ch 4:19 Solomon made all the vessels that were in God’s house, the golden
altar also, and the tables with the showbread on them-
This confirms that there was no longer one table for the showbread
but in fact ten tables. There were therefore presumably also more loaves
of showbread used than stipulated under the Mosaic law for the tabernacle.
See on :8. Religion had overtaken spirituality, form had eclipsed content.
2Ch 4:20 and the lampstands with their lamps, to burn before the oracle
according to the commandment, of pure gold-
"The candlestick" or menorah is only ever spoken of in the law of
Moses in the singular, but in 1 Chron. 28:15 David had decided there were
to be multiple such candlesticks. By doing so, he ignored the symbolism of
the one candlestick, such was his obsession with mere religion. "According
to the command" may therefore refer to David's command rather than God's.
Or perhaps Solomon carefully made each of the ten lampstands according to
the specification for the one lampstand.
2Ch 4:21 and the flowers, and the lamps, and the tongs, of gold (perfect
gold)-
Pure gold as a soft metal was not the right metal for tongs, but the
concern was clearly religious show and opulence, rather than functionality
in the true service of God. The "flowers" may refer to the "knops" of
1 Kings 7:24 and elsewhere, called "buds" in the NEV. "Buds" is a guess
at translation, for the Hebrew word is very obscure, literally "wild
gourds", a poisonous plant (s.w. 2 Kings 4:39). It is unlikely this plant
is in view. But there are observable similarities with the decoration of
Egyptian holy places. Seeing that Solomon had married an Egyptian, and the
Song of Solomon reflects Solomon's deep admiration for things Egyptian, it
seems likely that even in the temple, Solomon allowed Gentile influence.
And that was to be a theme of this temple until its destruction. .
2Ch 4:22 and the snuffers, basins, spoons and fire pans, of pure gold. As
for the entry of the house, the inner doors of it for the most holy place,
and the doors of the main hall of the temple were of gold-
The inventory here is similar in style to that of the vessels of the
tabernacle on Ex. 25-30. It seems Solomon wished to present what he had
done in terms of building a new tabernacle, with himself thereby presented
as Moses. And yet we have seen hints throughout the record that he built
it with pagan influences throughout it.
Previous Chapter
