The Form and Fate of the Tabernacle: Reflections on a Recent Proposal
Richard Elliott Friedman has argued that the Mosaic Tabernacle, described by the pentateuchal Priestly source, stood in the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem Temple. In order for the Tabernacle, usually figured to be ten cubits wide and thirty cubits long, to fit into a space twenty cubits square, Fri...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Penn Press
1995
|
| In: |
The Jewish quarterly review
Year: 1995, Volume: 86, Issue: 1/2, Pages: 127-151 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Richard Elliott Friedman has argued that the Mosaic Tabernacle, described by the pentateuchal Priestly source, stood in the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem Temple. In order for the Tabernacle, usually figured to be ten cubits wide and thirty cubits long, to fit into a space twenty cubits square, Friedman has proposed a radical rearrangement of the Tabernacle's components, thereby shrinking its measurements in comparison to standard reconstructions. Friedman's suggestions have met with a modicum of acceptance in scholarly literature, although the details of his argument have never been evaluated. The present article rejects absolutely every aspect of Friedman's proposal. A review of Exodus 25-40 reconfirms standard Tabernacle reconstructions with some minor alterations. Detailed scrutiny of Friedman's argumentation shows that his innovative plan is based on numerous incorrect and impossible interpretations of crucial passages in the biblical text. The Tabernacle proposed by Friedman is, consequently, completely without textual support. There is also no biblical evidence whatsoever that a Tabernacle of any size or shape ever stood in the Holy of Holies of the Temple. Postbiblical literature occasionally speculates on the whereabouts of the Mosaic Tabernacle, and these speculations represent a topic worthy of future scholarly discussion. But these late musings are products of exegetical questions raised by the extant form of the Bible, and contribute nothing to the historical question of how the Tabernacle was disposed of when the Temple was built. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1553-0604 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The Jewish quarterly review
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.2307/1454824 |