p. 7 | J. O. CORLISS by J. O. Corliss

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Mar 10, 1910

J. O. CORLISS

By J. O. Corliss

The History of the Hebrew Sanctuary—No. 7

J. O. CORLISS

Preparation for Its Permanent Home

The transfer of the ark to the ancient Amorite city of Jebus, was destined materially to affect not only the future name of that city,—Jerusalem, “Possession of Peace,”—but also the entire subsequent history of Israel. From that time the city of the ark’s repose was to be known as “The Holy City.” The day of the transfer of the ark which conferred this name upon a once almost unknown location, was one among the greatest days of David’s career. He was the presiding genius of the occasion throughout. He was poet, musician, and priest. The sacrifices of the day were offered by him, and at the close of the exercises, his benediction pronounced the blessing upon his family, and upon all Israel. 2 Sam. 6: 13, 17, 18, 20.

From this time forth the ark was to wander no more. Its resting-place was found; for “the Lord hath chosen Zion; he hath desired it for his habitation. This is my rest forever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it.” Ps. 132: 13, 14. Mount Zion was become “the joy of the whole earth” (Ps. 48: 2), because there the Lord reigned, and was great, above all the people. Ps. 99: 1-3. In this place, and over its sacred surroundings, David was still the presiding spirit. He was king, and while not technically a priest, he exercised the priestly functions, as already seen, during the removal of the ark to its final resting-place.

Two high priests, representing the two branches of the house of Aaron, were chosen, one to preside over the wilderness tabernacle, still located at Gibeon, and the other to oversee the services in Jerusalem. 1 Chron. 24: 2, 5. Zadok, of the family of Eleazar, remained in charge at Gibeon (1 Chron. 16: 39), and Abiathar, a descendant of Ithamar, was placed over the work at Jerusalem. Abiathar, however, afterward was deposed from the priesthood by Solomon because of some supposed design of that priest upon the throne. 1 Kings 2: 27. By this act, the prediction of the prophet Samuel that God would cut off entirely the house of Eli from the priesthood was fulfilled. 1 Sam. 2: 31-35. Zadok was thus left as the head of the Aaronic family. 1 Chron. 27: 17.

It would almost seem as if reference were made to David in 1 Sam. 2: 35, where God said that he would raise up a “faithful priest” to do all that was in his heart. At least, David not only assumed all the duties of the priesthood at one time, but he also acted in the prophetic order, by naming the priests who were to fill special positions. 1 Chron. 25: 1. He thus not only ruled the state, but the church as well. The fact that Solomon deposed one priest, and set up another in his place without opposition, is evidence that Israel had been educated to recognize the king as the dictator in religious things. Whether or not it was God’s plan to institute another theocracy under the kings of Israel, may not be positively known. One thing that is made known, and that is that David came to be regarded as “the light” and the splendor “of Israel.” 2 Sam. 21: 17.

It is possible that the “ruler of Israel,” being recognized as God’s “anointed light” (Ps. 132: 16-18) and priest-king, yet not being of Levitical descent, was designed to be a type of the heavenly Messiah (who also was born “King of the Jews”), the anointed Son of God. At least the king was called many times “the Lord’s anointed.” 2 Sam. 19: 21; 22: 51; 23: 1; Ps. 18: 50, etc. And yet, like one who was really in the image of God (Gen. 1: 26), David was “tempted” to do that which greatly displeased Jehovah. He had a census of the people taken. Who tempted him thus, and the probable object of the enumeration does not concern the point to be gained in this article, and so may be passed by without prejudice.

The “death” pestilence which followed as a judgment upon the people, “in the days of wheat harvest,” destroyed many thousands, and threatened even Jerusalem with utter desolation. Just outside of the city walls lived a wealthy chief (probably king. 2 Sam. 24: 23), of the country’s conquered race. Araunah and his sons were thrashing wheat, when above the thrashing-floor appeared an angel stretching out a huge naked sword over the devoted city. David and his counselors, in penitent garb, had already passed the city’s gateway, on the way to sacrifice at Gibeon (1 Chron. 21: 28-30), but were halted at Araunah’s thrashing-floor, by the awful sight which met their gaze. Application was immediately made for a part of the thrashing-floor on which to erect an altar. The petition was honored, the altar was erected, sacrifice was offered, and the plague was stayed.

From this event the entire hill received the name of Moriah, that is, “the view of Jehovah.” Then David said of it: “This is the house of the Lord God, and this is the altar of the burnt-offering for Israel.” 1 Chron. 22: 1. On this spot, then, instead of the “high place” of Gibeon, was to be erected the Lord’s sanctuary. So all the “strangers” of Israel were impressed to hew stones, prepare iron and brass, for the fittings, and cedar wood for the building of the “house of God.” Verses 3-5.

David designed to go forward and complete the “Lord’s house” himself, as soon as the materials were all on the ground. 1 Chron. 28: 2. But for certain reasons (1 Chron. 17: 4, 11; 28: 3, 4), God forbade David to go on with the work, telling him that his son Solomon—“The Peaceful”—would be better adapted to found a place of peaceful worship. In fact, when giving his first charge to Solomon regarding this work, David told his son that his birth had been predicted at the time when the first thought of building the temple had been entertained. 1 Chron. 22: 9, 10.

When the ark was separated from its sacred tent to be carried to the field of battle in Philistia, it did not seem fitting that it ever should return thither, but was to be accommodated within the walls of a house. The houses of Abinadab and Obed-edom therefore were privileged to become temporary temples for its reception.

From the very time of the capture of Jebus, David planned to “find out a place for the Lord, an habitation for the mighty God of Jacob.” Ps. 132: 5. As already learned, a tent was erected, and the ark was brought to Zion and placed in the tent. But the permanent “house” for its residence was reserved for another to build. David had been the proposer, but Solomon was to be the builder of the sacred structure. Others were to be its purifiers and restorers. But these phases of its history must await their due order.

Mountain View, Cal.