http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=714&b=1%20Kings
The Temple’s Pillar and Capital Heights
by
Eric Lyons, M.Min.
When King Solomon built his magnificent temple, he constructed two
18-cubit-high bronze pillars and set them by the vestibule in the front
of the temple (2 Chronicles 3:15; NOTE: A cubit
is approximately 18 inches). He even gave them names: Jachin on the
right, and Boaz on the left (1 Kings 7:21). On the top of each hollow
pillar was a five-cubit-high capital (called chapiter in the KJV), covered with “nets of network,” “twisted threads of chainwork,” and rows of pomegranates (1 Kings 7:17-18,20, NASB).
When one compares the various biblical accounts that address the temple
pillars and capitals (1 Kings 7; 2 Kings 25; 2 Chronicles 3; Jeremiah
52), two questions immediately come to mind. First, why does 2
Chronicles 3:15 indicate that the two 18-cubit-high pillars (1 Kings
7:15; 2 Kings 25:17; Jeremiah 52:21) were “thirty-five cubits” high?
Second, were the pillar capitals “five cubits” high, as mentioned in 1
Kings 7:16 and Jeremiah 52:22, or “three cubits,” as recorded in 2 Kings
25:17?
First, one must keep in mind that the biblical apologist does not have
to pin down the exact solution to a particular question in order to
exonerate a Bible writer of an alleged mistake. Just as Christians do
not have to know every detail about Jesus obtaining a donkey (Matthew
21:1-7) in order to acquit Him of an alleged theft charge, Bible
believers can reasonably defend the Bible’s integrity without pinning
down the exact solution to a problem. Over a century ago, J.W. McGarvey
commented on this point as follows:
We are not bound to show the truth of the given hypothesis; but only
that it may be true. If it is at all possible, then it is possible that
no contradiction exists; if it is probable, then it is probable that no
contradiction exists.... It follows, also, that when there is an
appearance of contradiction between two writers, common justice requires
that before we pronounce one or both of them false we should exhaust
our ingenuity in searching for some probable supposition on the ground
of which they may both be true. The better the general reputation of the
writers, the more imperative is this obligation, lest we condemn as
false those who are entitled to respectful consideration (1886, 2:32).
Truly, the apologist need show only one or more plausible
possibilities
of harmonization in order to negate the force of the charge that an
inspired penman erred. We abide by this principle in the courtroom, in
our treatment of various historical books, as well as in everyday-life
situations. It is only fair, then, to show the Bible the same courtesy
by exhausting the search for possible harmony between passages before
pronouncing one or both accounts false. Although it may be that no one
knows for sure why differences exist for the pillar and capital heights,
we can offer more than one logical possibility.
At least three feasible explanations exist for the variation in the heights of the temple pillars. First, it is
possible that one or more ancient scribes confused the Hebrew numeral letters
×’×” (35) for
×™×—
(18). Similar to how printing companies today can make slight errors
when printing copies of the Bible, and just as copyists’ errors can be
found in various historical works (e.g., Tacitus, Josephus, etc.)
without corrupting the overall integrity of the text, occasionally Bible
readers will come across numbers, names, etc. that are the result of a
copyists’ errors—not mistakes by the original inspired writers. (To read
our foundational essay on this subject, see
Lyons, 2007).
Second, it may be that whereas 1 Kings 7:15, 2 Kings 25:17, and
Jeremiah 52:21 give only the height of the pillars, the chronicler also
included the heights of the base, the capitals, and all other
decorations on the pillars. Consider a somewhat parallel illustration of
two people measuring the height of a modern church building. One person
climbs the steps and measures from the floor of the porch to the
underside of the roof, and obtains a measure of 25 feet. Another person,
however, measures from the base of the building, up the seven steps,
over the roof, to the top of the steeple. He calculates the height at 55
feet. Is it possible for both calculations to be accurate? Indeed. They
are accurate measurements of what the inspectors chose to include in
the “height of the church building.” Regarding the temple pillars, it
may be that the figure in 2 Chronicles simply includes more materials
than the number recorded in 1 and 2 Kings and Jeremiah.
Third, it is also possible that the height of each pillar was more
specifically 17½ cubits, or that a half of a cubit of each pillar was
hidden in the roundness of the capitals, and that the number 35
represents the length of both pillars added together. Interestingly, 2
Chronicles 3:15 does
not indicate that “each” pillar
was 35 cubits high, but simply that the “two pillars” were “thirty-five
cubits high.” Translators of the New International Version believed this
explanation was probable, and actually inserted “together” (in
brackets) into their translation of 2 Chronicles 3:15. Thus, “in the
front of the temple he made two pillars, which
[together] were thirty-five cubits long.”
So what about the capital heights? Why does 2 Kings 25:17 refer to them
as being three cubits high, rather than five? As with the pillar
heights, it is possible that the numeral “three” represents a copyist’s
error. The Hebrew numeral letter
×’ (3) in 2 Kings 25:17 may have been mistakenly put for
×”
(5), as is found in 1 Kings 7:16 and Jeremiah 52:22. However, another
explanation, which John Wesley postulated in the 18th century, also
exists. In his commentary on 1 Kings, he suggested “the word chapiter is
taken either more largely for the whole, so it is five cubits; or, more
strictly, either for the pommels..., 2 Chronicles 4:12, or for the
cornice or crown, and so it was but three cubits, to which the
pomegranates being added make it four cubits..., and the other work upon
it took up one cubit more, which in all made five cubits” (n.d.). Thus,
both “three” and “five” could be correct, depending on exactly what the
writers were including in the measurement of the capitals.
What are the correct answers to the questions at hand? Why
exactly
do differences exist in the numbers given for the pillar and capital
heights? No one can be certain. But reasonable answers can be offered
without assuming the original penmen erred.
REFERENCES
Lyons, Eric (2007), “Inspired Writers and Competent Copyists,” [On-line], URL:
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3268.
McGarvey, J.W. (1886),
Evidences of Christianity (Cincinnati, OH: Standard).
Wesley, John (n.d.),
Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible, [On-line], URL: http://bible.crosswalk.com/commentaries/WesleysExplanatory Notes/wes.cgi?book=1ki&chapter=007.
For
several years, Rob Bell, the minister of the Mars Hill Bible Church has
been mulling over the idea of hell. In his latest book, Love Wins: A Book about Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived,
Bell contends that the “traditional” view of hell, in which those who
do not believe in Christ are lost, is ill-conceived and needs
re-working. Jon Meacham, column writer for TIME magazine, noted
that Rob Bell “suggests that the redemptive work of Jesus may be
universal—meaning that, as his book’s subtitle puts it, ‘every person
who ever lived’ could have a place in heaven, whatever that turns out to
be” (2011). In essence, Rob Bell is little more than a recent advocate
of a modified version of universalism.
