live of my life

Monday, April 6, 2009

The Temple Hidden's sexual symbolism

by Tony Badillo

For certain Solomon’s Temple displays sexual symbolism in quite specific ways, but not in the manner bible scholars imagine. According to them, the twelve oxen that supported Solomon’s enormous Sea of Bronze were fertility bulls, and the two bronze pillars named Jachin and Boaz were twin phalli (male sex organs), something they have been alleging for decades in their ponderous biblical commentaries. And while they are partially correct – there is sexual symbolism involved – they are also amiss in key ways.

It might be asked, Why would the Temple involve sex? – and the short answer is 1) because it displays a definite Edenic theme in its decorations and architecture and 2)Eden itself was a place of fertility, displaying the Creator’s powers to produce all manner of life in abundance and 3) the land of Israel, ‘the Promised Land,’ is biblically presented as a new Eden. And finally, and most important of all, 4) the Divine plan for mankind’s spiritual redemption is portrayed through the human birthing process; and since this process involves sex, the Temple portrays spiritual redemption in human sexual terms. See also God and Sex.

There is no need to explain each point. Let us, instead, see how this sexual symbolism appears through the Temple. Forget notions about pagan fertility rites and sacred prostitutes associated with pagan temples. The Temple design includes human procreation, true, but pagan rituals have little to do with it. Instead, the symbolism appears as an ingenious, covert architectural diagram whose demystification was possibly reserved for us and our time, it seems to this writer.

An Architectural Puzzle

Bible students have long known that there are some features of the Temple’s description that appear contradictory or at least puzzling, and perhaps the most well known concerns the true height of the Temple’s porch (Heb., ulam, also rendered as hall, portico orvestibule). Was it 30 cubits high, or 120 as recorded in II Chronicles 3:4? To appreciate this puzzle and how it relates to the Temple’s sexual symbolism, compare the two temples at the right. The First is King Solomon’s (circa 950-586 BC), and the Second (circa 20 BC – AD 70) is King Herod’s. The porch of Herod’s Temple was 100 cubits high – much higher than Solomon’s – as it attempted reaching the 120 cubit height recorded II Chronicles 3:4, it seems. But was this a wise move or a colossal error? See First Temple vs. Second Temple on this website.

The Chronicles verse has given scholars headaches for decades because it cannot be easily reconciled with First Kings 6:2 where the interior height of the holy “house” (Holy of Holies and Holy Place combined) is recorded as 30 cubits. Only II Chronicles gives us the specific height of the porch, First Kings never does. Why is this important? Because II Chronicles 3:4 is the master key to understanding the Temple’s hidden sexual symbolism, as we will see shortly. Here is how scholars deal with this odd verse:

1) The verse is simply ignored. This is a wonderful way of “solving” bible difficulties!
2) The chronicler was exaggerating the porch’s height to inflate the Jewish national ego, some say.
3) Some scribal error occurred. A scribe intended writing 20 cubits but wrote 120 instead.
4) Or maybe the porch truly was 120 cubits high, after all.

The first two points do not merit any comment. As for point three, most bibles, whether distributed by Jewish or Christian publishing houses, retain the Masoretic text with its 120 cubit height for the porch. However, not too long ago the New International Version (NIV) broke with this tradition and now gives the height as 20 cubits. Its footnote informs us that some Syriac and Septuagint manuscripts contain this smaller measure. This, of course, would make the porch 10 cubits shorter than the remainder of the Temple building. Pertaining to the last point (4), various scholars dismiss an 120 cubit porch saying that a) the porch is nowhere called a tower, but ulam, which is always translated as porch, portico, hall, or vestibule. And b) a porch this high would probably be unsafe in a strong wind because of its narrow base. Is point three adopted by the NIV bible the most logical, therefore? I think not.

Jacob and the Architectural Puzzle

Drawing below: This shows what Solomon’s Temple would look like with a building height of 30 cubits (I Kings 6:2) and a porch of 120 (II Chronicles, 3:4). Not a very appealing . No ancient or modern architect would want to lay claim to this miscreation, the porch is four times the height of the main structure!



The solution lies in the Temple’s symbolism of fertility. To portray this it was created as a miniature Garden of Eden, while simultaneously depicting key events in Israel’s history. In this way Solomon’s Temple had a universal aspect (Eden) and a particular one (Israel). It was built on Jewish soil, yet was meant as a “house of prayer for all nations” (Isaiah 56:7). Even Jesus recognizes this universal aspect in Mark 11:17. And in Isaiah 2:2-4 the prophet links the house of God (the Temple) with the name Jacob, Jerusalem, and a reference to all nations.
Therefore, it should be no surprise that Adam’s “deep sleep” while Eve was being created (Genesis 2:21, 22) corresponds to Jacob’s sleep at Bethel (Solomon’s Astonishing Temple Secrets). Jacob is the “Adam” of the Jews. Adam was a father of the world, Jacob the father of the Israelites. Jacob was fleeing his brother’s wrath when he left for Mesopotamia, but he also had a second motive: to find a wife and start a family; and in the dream, the Lord assures him that he will have descendants whose number will be like the “dust of the earth,” (28:14). In similar manner, Adam is given a wife so that he could be “fruitful and multiply, fill the earth” (1:28). Consequently for both men – one in the Garden and the other at Bethel – their sleep is linked with their wives and raising a family, i.e., ‘building a house’. Adam builds the world, Jacob builds national Israel, both of which involve sex and fertility and make both men super-fathers.



Yet there is a spiritual aspect to it which is this: They were to produce children in God’s “image and likeness,” which means God’s inward character, otherwise Israel and/or the world becomes corrupt and irredeemable, as portrayed by Noah’s flood.

The Sexual Solution and its Meaning

The 120 cubit porch is the male genital organ, symbolizing Jacob fathering the nation of Israel; and its entrance, which likely had no doors, is the woman’s vaginal opening , because Temple Man’s genitalia is androgynous depicting both genders. The 120 cubits, therefore, signifies national Israel’s birth and also a ten-fold increase (10 x 12 tribes = 120).



The Temple is also about the human birth process as an analogy to spiritual redemption, which itself signifies being renewed or reborn. But here the emphasis is on the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham that his offspring would multiply as the stars of heaven, Genesis 15:5; a promise then passed unto Isaac; and from Isaac to Jacob, who was then ordered to obtain the blessings of his grandfather Abraham by going forth and becoming an assembly of peoples, 28:1-5.

And this is what is being was depicted here, the fulfillment of the Abrahamic promise, but through the Temple as Jacob’s body at Bethel where the promise was given again in a dream.




Hence, the 120 cubits are figurative, symbolizing begetting and increase; but the 30 cubits (interior measure) are literal and apply to height of the entire building,, porch included. For the spiritual rebirthing also being portrayed above, see the Portrayal and Ascension of the Immortal Soul or Spirit.

The Sexual Symbolism of the Jachin and Boaz Pillars

While the twin bronze pillars named Jachin and Boaz are not phallic symbols as some bible scholars have claimed for decades, they do play a sexual role according to the symbolism of the Temple. Moreover, given their description in I Kings. 7:15-22 they were not “fire altars,” as claimed in some Christian sources. Therefore, we may set aside this age-old notion made popular by Robert Smith and W.F. Albright. Maybe the pillars’ glossy capitals did catch the “first glint of the Jerusalem sunrise” but they still were not flaming cressets, fire altars, or giant torches lighting up the night, nor were their bowl shaped capitals ever filled with burning oil. The pillars, rather, portrayed two trees or plants.

The drawing at left:Jachin and Boaz depict two identical large plants. The plant was a hybrid creation whose capital symbolized a giant water lily and its stem the trunk of a palm tree. The lily had a metallic netting or network upon which were suspended decorative pomegranates (7:20, 42). Some sources say that the Hebrew wording implies two bowls for each pillar (Tanach, Stone Edition, p.818). If so, the lower bowl was inverted, representing the drooping leaves of a palm tree, but the top bowl depict- ing a lily cup, was upright, as shown at upper left. The lily was the love flower of the Ancient Near East and in this instance symbolizes God’s love for David and Solomon, the two kings who had the most to do with founding and establishing Israel as a kingdom and planning for and constructing the Temple. David means “beloved” and Solomon’s second name Jedidiah (II Sam. 12:24, 25) “beloved of God.” Palm trees depict peace and prosperity, the mark of King Solomon’s reign. For a very different but complementary view see: Secrets of the Jachin-Boaz Pillars (explains why the pillars were given these personal names). This is new information, well illustrated.


If the lily cup (the top bowl of the capital) symbolizes love, exactly how does this make Jachin and Boaz sex symbols? Observe Temple Man as Jacob sleeping at Bethel (large drawing above) that the capitals (red arrow) seem attached to the porch (the male genital organ); and further, they are high up on his legs. What else can they be except his testes? Above right: The Temple measurements and Temple Man show again why the capitals of the pillars are his testes; and this is also why the capitals had a netting or network with 200 pomegranates attached to them (I Kings 7:41, 42). The netting depicts the rough, textured skin of the scrotum, while the pomegranates’ copious seeds relate to malesperm . The pillars which are his legs, were only 18 cubits high with 5 cubit capitals, 23 cubits total. (I Kings 7:15, Jeremiah 52:21). However, II Chronicles 3:15 records a height of 35 cubits for each pillar and 5 cubits for each capital for a total of 40 cubits. But again the Chronicler is writing symbolically, as should be obvious by now. At 23 cubits, Temple Man’s legs would be too short for the size of his upper body.

The Measure of Temple Man – Standing straight as the Metallic Messiah, Temple Man is 130 cubits tall (above right) from head to foot. But as Jacob at Bethel the image shows us something very different: all Israel being reborn spiritually (Ezekiel.11:19, 20; 36:25-28) through the porch as “a kingdom of priests and holy nation,” in accord with Exodus 19:6. However, this verse was never fulfilled in its entirety because of Israel’s unbelief and disobedience, such as the sin of the Golden Calf, Exodus 32:1-8. Instead, the Levites alone were “bestowed with the blessing” of the priestly duties pertaining to the Tabernacle (and later the Temple), 32:26-29. Exodus 19:6 will yet be fulfilled in its totality, but only in the Messianic Age when all Israel shines as alight to the nations (Isaiah 42:6).






What is meant by the subheading The Virgin Mary of the Tanach’s Lord God? Look where the 120-cubit porch is explained as the male genital organ and notice that Temple Man is said to be androgynous, depicting both genders. How? The porch had no doors at the entrance, or if so they typically remained open (compare II Chronicles 29:3 with vv. 5-7) symbolizing the female vulva, the vaginal opening . But the double doors at itssecond wall - at the entrance to the Holy Place - relate to the hymen (golden lines), the seal or membrane that only virgins have. Regarding Temple Woman, the golden doors symbolize a betrothed or married woman who keeps her virtue by remaining faithful to her Lord. The hymen symbolizes her faithfulness; but not all Israel was faithful. Joel 1:8, 9 mentions a woman (national Israel ) who mourns like a “ virgin” (Heb. bethula, Jerusalem [Jewish] Bible, Koren Publishers),yet has or once had a “husband,” the Lord God. Possibly we are to think of two Israels here: one faithful, obedient and chaste; the other disobedient, unfaithful, and adulterous (i.e., idolatrous). And, therefore, partially for the sake of the faithful minority, Israel will be restored. Her mission in life is or was to become and remain holy, bear her Divine Husband priestly children having his “image and likeness,” (Genesis 1:26, 27; i.e., having inward holiness, Leviticus 11:44, 45); and declare his name to the pagan Gentiles. Finally, Temple Woman’s double doors were actually gold-plated, I Kings 6:33-35, as shown above at left. Also see: God and Sex.



Is “Temple Man” a Jewish Idea?

Yes! – but it should be called the Mishkan Man or Tabernacle Man idea, because it was proposed perhaps about 150 years ago by Rabbi Meir Leibush (see text within the graphic below). Since then various Jewish writers have referred to it, some without giving Leibush any credit. One clear and concise Jewish explanation with a simple graphic is: Thinking Outside the Box - Torah.org :
www.torah.org/learning/outsidethebox/5764/terumah.html. Another, though not so concise, is Introduction to the Concept of the Temple by the Cohen-Levi Family Heritage at:
http://www.cohen-levi.org/temple_studies/introduction_to_the_temple.htm. Scroll far down until you see The Importance of the Temple. A third source is a book titled, The Holy Temple Revisited by Rabbi Leibel Reznick, Jason Aronson, publishers. For more Internet sources use Google terms: Mishkan+ eyes, nose, mouth.

Whether the above Jewish writers are referring to the Mishkan or Solomon’s Temple, their explanations are nearly identical: The Ark is the mind, the Menorah is one eye and the Shulcan (Showbread Table) is the other, and the Golden Altar of Incense is the nose, while the entrance to either structure is the mouth, they assert. But is this arrangement logical? Compare below.




Problems and Solutions

Mishkan refers to the structure’s interior form made of fine linen curtains, whereastent (ohel) seems a reference to its outward surface, Exodus 26:1, 7; II Samuel 6:7. On the diagram above at left, the Mishkan (Tabernacle, ref. Exodus 25:8; 9.) is one huge human head. The Holy of Holies is the forehead (the mind), while the Holy Place is the face. And as may be readily seen, Mishkan Man has no arms, no hands, no legs, no feet and no torso! and therefore, the stomach – the Sacrificial Altar outside– has no link to the head. Moreover, the Menorah (lamp stand) and Showbread Table depicting the eyes have very different shapes. But is your left eye radically than your right one? Not likely. Or again, does the pink area (sanctuary or courtyard) remotely resemble a human body? But contrarily, the Temple Floor Plan clearly reveals a Temple Man figure through its design and furnishings. For the meaning of the Menorah and the Showbread Table within Solomon’s Temple see Secrets of the Holy Place.

It is also claimed that the Golden Altar of Incense is the nose. But is it? The small Golden Altar was not for inhaling or smelling aromas, but for producing them! This is exactly why sweet smelling incense was burned upon it. It is, rather, the Ark with its extended poles (nostrils) that depicts the nose (see More Ark Secrets); while the Golden Altar symbolizes the heart, heart, heart! – and its sweet incense smoke depicts ideal Israel’s spiritual life and prayers ascending to Paradise, the head of Temple Man, which symbolizes heaven, God’s dwelling . Temple Man’s eyes are the twin large cherubim of I Kings. 6:23-28. Moreover, the Gold Incense Altar was much closer to the Dividing Curtain (blue line) than indicated by the Mishkan Man diagram whose furniture arrangement is somewhat amiss.

We may say, therefore, that Mishkan Man is an incomplete or embryonic figure (i.e., too many body parts missing) in the Tabernacle, but becomes a whole and sharply-defined adult human being in Solomon’s Temple.

by STEVIE @ 12:30 PM.