The Sanctuary's Design

I need some help here. The Bible gives some details, and Mrs. White gives some details, but I have been hard pressed to make sense of them all to understand exactly how the tabernacle in the wilderness was pieced together.

For clarification here, Solomon's temple was based on the same basic design, but enlarged and made permanent instead of with the purpose of being easily taken down and set up during moving. So any dimensions or descriptions given for Solomon's, Ezekiel's, or the second temple in Jerusalem will probably not help us much.

What I'm trying to figure out, in order to make a small-scale replica of it, are the "assembly instructions." God gave Moses some very specific instructions, with precise measures. But the description of how they were to be fitted together doesn't add up.

Looking online, one can find many and various images or sketches of how people think it must have looked. Most of them just are not getting the details right. God is a God of detail, and I'm trying to get it right.

Please help!

(Details will follow.)

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Tabernacle Structure Facts QTY Item Length Width Height Scripture 1 Outer court 100 50 5 Exodus 27:18 46 Gold-plated boards 10 1.5 ? Exodus 26:15-22 2 Corner boards 10 ? ? Exodus 26:23-24 15? Bars ? ? ? Exodus 26:26-29 10 Curtains of fine linen 28 4 ? Exodus 26:1-2 11 Curtains of goat hair 30 4 ? Exodus 26:7-8 1 Hanging at entrance ? ? ? Exodus 26:36-37 5 Pillars at entrance ? ? ? Exodus 26:36-37 1 Hanging (veil) between HP & MHP ? ? ? Exodus 26:31-33 4 Pillars between HP & MHP ? ? ? Exodus 26:31-33 All measurements are given in cubits.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Now, the puzzle to me, is that the entire sanctuary part of the tabernacle, which contained the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place, appears to have been 30 cubits long by ~12 cubits wide, and 10 cubits tall for the golden walls. The boards were connected together to make a solid wall, 20 boards each for the north and south sides, then 6 boards plus 2 corner boards for the west end. But the curtain that was supposed to cover all of this, forming the "tent" over it is given as only 28 cubits long and, if the 4-cubit curtains are joined together side-by-side, 20 cubits wide, with two such curtains.

How were these curtains able to cover the sanctuary? The goat-hair curtain was 30 cubits long, but that still does not leave enough to cover the backside (west), it seems to me, yet God specified it should (see Exodus 26:12).

Also, what style of "roof" did the tabernacle have? Did it look like a traditional tent? or did the curtains drape flatly over the top? If the rains came atop a flat roof like that....

Ideas?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

The Order of Assembly of the Tent of the Tabernacle (The Mishkan)

The Order of the assembly of the Tabernacle

I have not yet been able to satisfactorily account for the placement of the curtains. There seems to be no way to make them fit. There is no specific mention of what they were to be hung upon that I have found.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Perhaps most folk find this level of detail too esoteric to have interest in it, so I may just plod along for the benefit of anyone interested later on.

The covering on the tabernacle could not have been flat, as most of the artist conceptions show. This is because Mrs. White tells us that it was possible to see over the veil between the HP and the MHP, and that for this reason, sometimes the glory of God would drive the priest out of the Holy Place when God descended in the Most Holy. So there was a gap there.

This means there must have been a separate support system for the curtains than was used for the veil. But what? I cannot seem to find any directions for the support of the curtains.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

God was and is particular, even about the details.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

After the Shekinah came down to anoint the altar with His presence in the form of heavenly fire He didn't leave, He just poured out more glory for the acceptance of sacrifice. He delights in our sacrifices to be like His Son. The visible presence was always there in the wilderness for forty years. It never left the temple of Solomon until it left and went to the top of mount Olives then went to heaven just before the Babylonians came.

When the priest would enter the Most Holy place on the Day of Atonement the heavenly light would fill the Holy place which is covered in gold and like a powerful beam of sunshine would stream out of the temple, then out of the court, then out of the eastern gate and everyone standing on the Bridge of the Red Heifer and the Miphkad Altar could look to that light from heaven and their faces would reflect the glory of heaven. This was the only place you could view it.

Before the flood every sacrifice was on an altar just before the eastern gate to heaven and the fire of God literally consumed the sacrifices. I would say this is as much a symbol of the Heavenly tabernacle not made by hands as any of the other temples. I have never heard anyone else ever say that but it's true. If the fire of God comes and consumes a sacrifice I would consider that an accepted place of meeting, like Elijah on Mt Carmel.

"It is believed tht the tabernacle was oblong in form, thirty cubits long, ten cubits wide, and ten cubits high."
According to F.C.Gilbert
Messiah in His Sanctuary p.31

From scripture we have:
Exodus 26:15-29
Exodus 36:20-34


The inner covering would have been
10 strips of 28 X 4 cubits
This was made into two curtains by sewing five strips together for each. Thus we have:

28 cubits by 20 cubits
28 cubits by 20 cubits

These two pieces were then united with special clasps
Thus the covering would cover--
28 cubits by 40 cubits


The first piece would be draped over the front half of the tabernacle covering the first 20 cubits. The second piece would cover the last 10 cubits and the back wall. And they would be clasped together probably at the point where the Holy Place meets the Most Holy.


This covering over a structure 30 cubits long, 10 cubits high,
10 cubits wide would be one cubit off the ground on both sides, and in the back, with one cubit to hang over the front. (where they would put their "first veil" or door curtain)

The outer cover -- goats hair had the extra two cubits to reach to the ground.

The inner veil was hung on four posts with gold hooks. But it also says "Hang the curtain from the clasps" (26:33)
Could these be the same clasps that were part of uniting the two inner coverings?


Many pictures show the inner veil on sort of a curtain rod across the four pillars, with a space between the pillars and the roof.

Thank you, dedication. Some might have it at 10 cubits wide, but some might have it a little more too. There were 8 boards total, counting the two corner boards, on the west side. The six middle boards would have been nine cubits by themselves, so if the corner boards were like them it would have made 12 cubits in width. Also, if the curtains were simply draped flat-wise over the top, what happens if it rains? Only a tent structure would shed rain, and tabernacle means tent or dwelling place.



If the ceiling were tented above, there would have been a gap between the top and the veil below it. But, then we have an even greater distance to account for, and we are short on cloth.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I don't seem to find any mention of the seal skins in the Bible. This quote does give an approximate dimension to the whole thing. It also tells us the curtains were arranged to give "complete protection." Protection from what? Does this merely signify protection from view? or does it include protection from the elements? If there were any precipitation, what keeps it from puddling up and entering the holy or most holy?

Twelve cubits in width would equal about 18 feet given 18 inches per cubit. So Ellen White seems to indicate that the structure was 12 cubits wide. We know the walls were only 10 cubits tall. Are the curtains two cubits above them?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

From the SDABC on Exodus 25:5

Thanks, APL. That helps explain it.

Here's the explanation of the Hebrew word according to blb.org.


Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I never really studied into the exact details how everything fit together so this is rather new territory for me.

Mathematically the curtains do work if the dimensions of the tabernacle are 30 X 10 x 10.

Now you bring up the subject of the boards that make up the actual walls of the tabernacle.

The Boards each had an individual standing in the two silver sockets, but they were strongly connected together by the Bars.
Each board was 10 cubits high and 1 1/2 cubits wide.
The sides had 20 boards sitting in 40 silver sockets. That would equal 30 cubits.
The back had six boards, that would equal 9 cubits.

Now we still have two corner boards -- where do they go?




So it seems to me these corner boards did not add any width to the structure, they were placed in the inside corners as a DOUBLE to strengthen the corners. These extra Boards strengthened the corners.

There is no mention of anything which would cover the trangular opening at the outside ends that would occur if the tabernacle had a sloping roof.
It may very well have had a slight lift in center if they had a ridge pole running the length of the tabernacle. This would have given the roof stability as well as the ability to shed water without adding a lot more width to cover. But I haven't found any verification of that.

I'm not sure I see how the "double" portion of the corner means it was placed against the normal boards. Why would this not be taken to mean that the corner board was a "double" board, such that each of the two boards were placed at 90 degree angle to each other, forming the corner? That is what seems logical to me.

Regarding the "silver sockets," it appears the sockets were in the sides of each board such that it fit snugly into the board beside it. The Bible uses the word "under", but that is a relative term when you do not know from which direction you are looking at the board. Recall that the board is also said to be 10 cubits long, when that is actually its height once put in place. The "tenons" are what fit into the sockets, and a little online research of these taught me that they are most often used to snugly put boards together in side-by-side fashion. So there would have been no way for the boards to shift around. My first thought when I saw "tenons" was attachment for ropes with which to tether it to the ground via stakes. Some artist conceptions show such a design. But it appears that no stakes were needed for the boards.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

The silver sockets seem to be the base.
The boards were held together by the crossbars

I guess I see the two "double" end boards as I do because the dimensions fit. While the other way the coverings are too small.

Some links that might be helpful

Assemblying the Tabernacle

http://www.domini.org/tabern/boards.htm

Anothr Tabernacle construction LINK

The interesting thing is, if the silver sockets are the base, there is no mention of what they are attached to. On the contrary, the sockets are specified as being a part of the same board in which the tenons are made. In other words, each board had two tenons and two sockets positioned opposite those tenons that would correspond to the board right beside it. A little bit like legos.



It really does sound to me like the sockets belong to the board itself.

Look up images of "tenons" online and see what they look like.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

But, I wonder, are the silver sockets the receiving side of the tenons?
Or do the tenons, which are part of the boards, fit into sockets that are not just "holes".
Why would the sockets be made of silver, if they were just the "holes" into which the tenons fit?

In setting up the sanctuary it has been suggested the silver sockets were first arranged on the ground, then each board (which had two tenons at the bottom end) were stood up in their two silver sockets. (The silver sockets, not only receiving the tenons but acting as "feet") Thus the boards could stand by themselves until they could get the crossbars in to firmly link them together.



Messiah's Mansion (a life size model of Moses sanctuary) will be at our camp meeting this summer, so will be interesting to see how they put it together.
Though everyone's concept of what it looked like is a little different, never having seen the original.

If I remember correctly from Leslie Hardinge's With Jesus in His Sanctuary:

The tabernacle was 30x10x10 cubits on the inside. The boards for the walls were 1 cubit thick. So if you measure the outside width, it would be 12 cubits, making the back wall fit perfectly.

Arnold, I have not checked this, but I believe you mean 1 cubit wide.

One cubit thick (~18 inches) would be beams quite impossible to manage on the wilderness journey.

Does this make sense?

___________________

Gordon,

The beams were 1.5 cubits wide, according to the Bible. There is nothing to indicate their thickness that I have found, but considering they have tenons in them and sockets, I think they must have been at least six inches thick. Covered in gold, and being of the "shittim" or "acacia" wood, which is a hard wood, these beams were not toothpicks by any means. They would be carried on a wagon. Only the ark itself was to be carried by hand.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

As GC pointed out, they were 1.5 cubits wide.

Yes, I meant 1 cubit thick. Very thick. But if I understand correctly, they were hollow. Even if only 6 inches thick, they would have been quite hefty if they were solid.

Plus, the cubit was the sanctuary cubit - a cubit and a handbreadth, which ends up at 1.8 feet, and matches the 10 cubits = 18 feet in the SOP. So it's a little bigger than the usual 18 inches. They were large boards.

I would check my book again, but it is still packed away. Despite my vast experience in moving, I still find unpacking a very difficult task. Perhaps someone else has the book handy.

So if these cubits were not ~18 inches, taking Arnold's recollection from the SOP, we get boards:

18 ft. x 32.5 inches roughly.

Green's assertion is at least 6 inches thick, so maybe 8 or even 10 inches?

[BTW, these are not boards, but beams, even at 6 inches. WMD in a windstorm.]

Anyone here worked in forestry or construction?
Especially with hardwood trees?

Arnold, it would help to know the book you refer to for:
* 1 cubit thick
* hollow boards
* a sanctuary cubit

_____________________

At 18 feet x 32.5 inches wide:

Quite roughly & quickly, with online resources,
using dried white oak as a substitute (similar to sugar maple or rock elm in density),
if solid these 'boards' would weigh:

* about 1500 lbs. @ 6" thick
* about 2000 lbs. @ 8" thick
* about 2500 lbs. @ 10" thick

Accacia wood could be denser - quite likely if God was to require the hardest wood available.
Correct these figures if necessary, I'm not a forestry tech.

Are there 54 boards?
That would be 81,000 or 108,000 or 135,000 lbs.

Two or three semi trailer loads.

________________________

With JESUS in His SANCTUARY by Leslie Hardinge. I found an online version here: http://freedownload.is/pdf/leslie-hardinge-with-jesus-in-his-sanctuary-20369641.html


The walls of the Tabernacle consisted of forty-eight acacia planks covered with gold. Each "board" was ten cubits long and a cubit and a half wide. Its thickness must be deduced from the facts given by Inspiration, as we shall see. When fixed side by side, the boards enclosed a building ten by thirty cubits, and ten cubits high (Ex 26:15-30), that is, eighteen by eighteen by fifty-five feet.

Each board was constructed with two tenons at its lower end (Ex 26:17-25). These protrusions were one cubit long, and so arranged as to fit into mortices cut into two wooden bases or "sockets." These base-blocks were overlaid with silver, and attached transversely to the width of the planks. They afforded a plinth one cubit high on which the structure stood. There is no record of the length of these footings, but they must have extended a little distance beyond the width of the boards on either side to spread the weight of the entire structure. The height of the Tabernacle included the one cubit length of these tenons.

Each of the twenty boards, forming the northern and southern sides of the building, was linked to its neighbor. The Mishnah records that letters of the Hebrew alphabet were written "on the boards of the Tabernacle that they might know which adjoined which" (Shabbath 12:3). At each end of the top surface of the boards a semicircular slot was cut, so that, when two boards abutted, these formed an incised circular groove. Into these slots rings of gold were dropped. These held the boards firmly together.

Each of the forty-six boards thus needed a semi-circular slot at each end. But the two special end boards of the western wall required similar semi-circular slots on one side to accommodate the boards of the north and south walls which abutted them. Because of this peculiarity these two boards formed left and right extensions to the six western boards already mentioned. Since the term "board" is used of them, as well as of the other forty-six, we conclude that they were of the same dimensions.

The eight western boards would, therefore, extend to twelve cubits when placed side by side. Since the inside measurement of the Tabernacle is given as ten cubits, the conclusion must be drawn that the boards were one cubit thick! The rabbis ask the question and provide the answer, "What was the thickness of the boards? One cubit" (The Talmud, Mo'ed II, Sabbath II, 98a). Each board measured thirty-three inches wide, twenty-two inches thick and eighteen feet long. Were they made of solid acacia this huge bulk would render them almost immovable! We must, therefore, conclude that the "boards" were hollow panels. (pp. 11-12)


A word regarding the length of the cubit used in the Tabernacle is apropos. The ordinary or secular cubit is the distance along the forearm from the elbow to the end of the middle finger. It measures about eighteen inches (see SL 28, where 60 cubits equal 90 feet), and varies from person to person. The sacred cubit, sometimes called the royal cubit, consisted of this secular cubit plus a hand-breath of about four inches (Ezek 40:5; 43:13). It would thus be l.8 feet, or a fraction shy of 22 inches. It is also called the "great cubit" (Ezek 41:8). By using it the Tabernacle is found to be eighteen feet high and wide, and almost fifty-five feet in length (PP 347), while the court would be ninety by one hundred and eighty feet. The dimensions of the various pieces of furniture found in the Sanctuary, and given in cubits, can be calculated in feet and inches from this unit. (p. 9)

Since this is neither the Bible nor the SOP, just take it FWIW. But it makes sense to me.

Thanks Arnold,

I see the Hardinge book was mentioned earlier. I thought you were referring to an old EGW source like Spirit of Prophecy Vol. 1 or 2.

I don't know about the Sanctuary or Royal cubit. It could be.

The 'one cubit thick hollow boards' seem solely based upon deduction by the rabbis using outside and inside dimensions. For certain there's a problem, but maybe there's another explanation, because hollow panels seem quite improbable without some detailed instruction for this unusual design. Most sanctuary components were explained in careful detail. I noted the measurement discrepancy when previously studying Exodus, but never concluded hollow panels.

One could argue thick hollow panels 'represent' stone walls, but quite impractical for transport, prone to damage. And how are the tenons attached to hollow panels? If they come off one side of the panel, it would need to be min. two inches thick (my guess). And if all sides of the 'box' are two inches... a very heavy and unwieldy box structure. And imbalanced with tenons on one side. And how assembled, etc??

Notwithstanding the interior/exterior dimensions, solid board walls could be about two inches thick. Any less would make the extending tenons too fragile. Tenons of 22 inches do not seem practical either, but I will need to locate it in Exodus, presuming Hardinge did not misquote.

So far, Hardinge's explanation doesn't make sense to me. More questions than answers.

For those with trouble to understand the socket and tenon joint (known as mortise and tenon joint)...

Each vertical wooden board of the sanctuary wall had two tenons projecting from its bottom end. These fit into silver sockets (metal reinforced mortises) in the sanctuary base.




______________________

BTW, how many boards in Exodus 26:15-25?

________

Wow. A flurry of discussion has taken place since I was last here. This is nice, as we are seeing more details. Without taking time to address individual points of all the posts just above, let me address a few details that perhaps will help to fill in some missing pieces.

1) Mrs. White never gives the dimensions. The dimensions she gives are to say it was "no larger" than that. She does not indicate that the actual size was that of her "maximum" amount. So it may well have been somewhat less, and lest we forget, the curtains themselves would add to the overall size, so Ellen White's figure does not address the size of the boards by themselves, because she is speaking of the entire structure.


So we know it was not larger than that, but it could have been smaller. She calls it small.

2) Acacia (shittim) wood was not so hard as to render its density like that of oak. Mrs. White says it was harder than anything else in that region of Sinai, but doesn't claim it was extraordinarily dense.



Actual figures for its density/weight per board foot can be found online, such as HERE. According to that site, acacia wood weighs about 25 pounds per cubic foot, which is the same as aspen. It is one of the lighter woods in the list. (Compare bamboo and white oak at 48 lbs./cu. ft. or balsa at 7.)

Using the 25 lbs./cu. ft. figure above, given a 6" thick plank, I calculated about 300 lbs. per board.

3) Ezekiel's temple was never built. The dimensions it used are unparalleled on earth, and cannot be directly applied to the wilderness sanctuary.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

So,

* 18 ft. long
* 32.5 inches = 2.7 ft wide
* 6 inches thick = .5 feet
-----------------------------

18ft. x 2.7ft. x .5ft. = 24.3cu.ft. per board
-----------------------------

24.3 cu. ft. x 25 lbs. = 607lbs. per board using Arnold's Royal cubit.

or...17 cu.ft. x 25 lbs. = 425lbs. using the 18 inch cubit

Your reference may not be the shittim wood used for the sanctuary. Photos reveal this is more a shrub type thorn bush than a towering giant needed to supply large boards or beams. And there are "1300 species" according to Wikipedia, so 25 lbs./cu.ft. could be half the real density. It may describe a completely different plant than Moses used.

"Biblical woods": http://www.exoticwood.biz/biblicalwoods.htm


A 2" thick board at this density would only weigh 140lbs. with the 18" cubit.
___________________________