<- Previous   First   Next ->

Ex. 25:8; Lev. 12:4; 21:12; Num. 10:21; 18:1).

( c ) But the usual name of the Tabernacle is ‘the tent of meeting,’ d[e/m

lh,ao . This title occurs constantly in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers (from Ex.

27:21 onwards), but once only in Deuteronomy (31:14). It is translated in the
LXX. by the same phrase as ‘the tent of witness,’
hJ skhnh; tou' marturivou , and in the Vulg. (following the Old Latin) by tabernaculum testimonii (Ex. 27:21; 35:31 c Num. 2:17; 3:7; 17:7, 10), and, habitually in Numbers, by tabern. foederis (Ex. 31:7; 33:7; Lev. 24:3; Num. 1:1 & c.). Two interpretations have been given of it: ‘the tent of the congregation,’ the place where the congregation of Israel was gathered together (A. V. the tabernacle of the congregation ), and ‘the tent of meeting,’ the place where God revealed Himself to His people (so R. V.). Both senses are defensible on linguistic grounds; but the second is clearly required by the narrative itself. The Tabernacle was the place where God made Himself known (Ex. 25:8, 22), speaking to the representatives of the nation (Ex. 29:42 f.; Num. 17:4 [19]); and it could not truly be said that the people were assembled in ‘the tent’ (yet see Matt. 23:38). The ‘tent of meeting’ was so completely identified with the revealed Presence of the Lord that it is said to ‘dwell with the people in the midst of their uncleannesses’ (Lev. 16:16).

Taking then these three general titles of the Tabernacle we see that the structure was held to represent provisionally in a sensible form three truths, ( a ) the Presence of God with men, ( b ) His righteousness, ( c ) His ‘conversableness.’ It is scarcely necessary to add that the idea of a ‘dwelling’ of the Lord in no way tended to confine His Presence to one spot: it simply gave a distinct reality to the fact of His Presence. So again the conditions of the ‘witness’ and the ‘meeting’ were not absolute. They emphasised the truths that God Himself determines the terms and mode under which He offers Himself to men conformably to His own Nature.

If now we consider the account of the building and arrangement of the Tabernacle we shall recognise that it was fitted to convey most impressively the three lessons which it embodied. It was held to be wholly of divine design. No part was originated by human invention. It was reared after the pattern in which God prescribed the details of the way in which He should be approached (Ex. 25:9, 40; Heb. 8:5). So the people confessed that if God is to be known, He must reveal Himself.

Again: it was framed substantially out of free-will offerings (Ex. 25:2). There was indeed ransom-money, equal in amount for every one, which was used in the structure (Ex. 38:25 ff.), but this was employed for definite purposes; and the narrative emphasises the willingness with which the people contributed to ‘the work of the tent, and all the service thereof’ (Ex. 35:20 ff.; 36:5 ff.). A revelation comes from God only, but it is for man to embrace it from the heart and give form to it.

The general plan of the Tabernacle suggested, even to the simplest worshipper, the Majesty of God, Who hides Himself even when He comes among men. The three divisions of the whole fabric, the sacred inclosure

( rxej;h, , LXX. hJ aujlhv , Vulg. atrium , Ex. 27:12 ff.; 35:17 f. & c.) and the twofold

Tabernacle, ‘the Holy Place,’ and ‘the Holy of Holies’ ( vd<Qoh' , LXX. to; a{gion ,

Vulg. sanctuarium; and : yvid:q’h' vd<qo , to; a{gion [ ta; a{gia ] tw'n aJgivwn ,

sanctuarium sanctuarii [ sanctum, -ta, sanctorum ], Ex. 26:33 f.; Num. 4:4, 19;


<- Previous   First   Next ->