Art and the Tabernacle
One major principle of interpreting Scripture is that Scripture does not contradict itself. This is why it is important to note that on Mount Sinai God simultaneously gave the Ten Commandments and commanded Moses to fashion a tabernacle in a way which would involve almost every form of representational art that men have ever known. Let us look at this in more detail.

While Moses was on Sinai, God gave him specific instructions concerning the way in which the tabernacle should be made. He commanded Moses to gather from the Israelites gold and silver, fine cloth and dyed ram skins, fine wood and precious gems, and so forth. Then God said, “According to all that I show thee, the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the furnishings thereof, even so shall ye make it” (Ex. 25:9). Where did the pattern come from? It came from God. This is reaffirmed a few verses later, where God said, “And see that thou make them after their pattern, which was shown thee in the mount for, as the Hebrew says, [“which thou wast caused to see”]” (Ex. 25:40). God Himself showed Moses the pattern of the tabernacle. In other words, God was the architect, not man. Over and over in the account of how the tabernacle is to be made, this phrase appears: “And thou shalt make ...” That is, God told Moses what to do in detail. These were commands, commands from the same God who gave the Ten Commandments.

What were some of them? We will concentrate on those con cerned with the art in the tabernacle, the very place of worship itself First, we find this statement about the art in the Holy of Holies: “And thou shalt make two cherubim of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them, at the two ends of the mercy seat” (Ex. 25:18). What are cherubim? They are part of the angelic host. What is being commanded? Simply this: a work of art is to be constructed. What kind of art? Representational art in the round. A statuary of representation of angels was to be placed in the Holy of Holies — the place where only once a year one man, the high priest, would go — and it was to be done by the command of God Himself.

Some may say, “Yes, but this is very special because these are angels that are being pictured. There is a sort of religious subject matter. It’s not ordinary art representing things on the earth.” True enough. But we find that just outside the Holy of Holies lampstands are to be placed: “And thou shalt make a candlestick of pure gold: of beaten work shall the candlestick be made, even its base, and its shaft; its cups, its knobs, and its flowers, shall be of one piece with it: and there shall be six branches going out of the sides thereof, three branches of the candlestick out of the one side thereof, and three branches of the candlestick out of the other side: three cups made like almond-blossoms in one branch, a knob and a flower; and three cups made like almond-blossoms in the other branch, a knob and a flower: so for the six branches going out of the candlestick” (25:31-33), and the description goes on. Thus we have another work of art — a candlestick. And how is it decorated? Not with representations of angels, but with representations of nature — flowers, blossoms, things of natural beauty. And these are to be in the tabernacle at the command of God in the midst of the place of worship.

Later in Exodus, we find this description of the priests’ garments: “And upon the skirts of it thou shalt make pomegranates of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, round about the skirts thereof” (Ex. 28:33). Thus, when the priest went into the Holy of Holies, he was to take with him on his garments a representation of nature, carrying that representation into the presence of God. Surely this is the very antithesis of a command against works of art.

But there is something further to note here. In nature, pomegranates are red, but these pomegranates were to be blue, purple and scarlet. Purple and scarlet could be natural changes in the growth of a pomegranate, but blue isn’t. The implication is that there is freedom to make something which gets its impetus from nature but can be different from it, and it too can be brought into the presence of God. In other words, art does not need to be photographic” in the poor sense of photographic!

It is tempting sometimes to read the Bible as a “holy book,” treating the historical accounts as if they were upper-story situations that had nothing to do with down-to-earth reality. But we must understand that when God commanded these works of art to be built, some artist had to make them. There are two sides to art. It is creative, yes, but art also involves the technical details of how things are to be made. In Exodus 37:7 we are given something of these technical details: “And he made two cherubim of gold; of beaten work made he them at the two ends of the mercy seat.” The cherubim on the ark didn’t suddenly appear out of the sky. Somebody had to get his hands dirty, somebody had to work out the technical problems. The very thing that a modern artist wrestles with, these artists had to wrestle with. We shall see more of this as we discuss the temple.

The Temple
The temple, like the tabernacle, was not planned by man. Once more, the Scripture insists that the plan derived from God. David, the chronicler says, gave Solomon “the pattern of all that he had by the Spirit” for the various parts of the temple (1 Chron. 28:11, 12). And 28:19 reads, “All this, said David, have I been made to understand in writing from the hand of Jehovah, even all the works of this pattern.” David’s experience with God regarding the temple was not just an upper-story religious experience. Part of his experience involved the propositional revelation of how the temple should be made. David knew how to build the temple because God told him. In fact, David said that God made him understand in writing what the temple was to look like. We are not told by what means this writing, this propositional revelation, came, but we are told that David by inspiration of God had such a writing which gave him the pattern of the building.

What, therefore, was to be in the temple? For one thing, the temple was to be filled with art work. “And he (Solomon) garnished (covered) the house with precious stones for beauty” (2 Chron. 3:6). Notice this carefully: the temple was covered with precious stones for beauty. There was no pragmatic reason for the precious stones. They had no utilitarian purpose. God simply wanted beauty in the temple. God is interested in beauty.

Come with me to the Alps and look at the snow-covered mountains. There can be no question. God is interested in beauty. God made people to be beautiful. And beauty has a place in the worship of God. Here in the temple which Solomon built under the leadership of God Himself beauty was given an important place.

The chronicler goes on to say that Solomon “overlaid also the house, the beams, the thresholds, and the walls thereof, and the doors thereof, with gold; and graved (carved) cherubim on the walls” (2 Chron. 3:7). We talked above about the cherubim in the Holy of Holies; they were art in the round. Here is carving, bas-relief. There was bas-relief everywhere you looked. And there was also art in the round: “And in the most holy house he made two cherubim of image work” (3:10).

Then in 3:16 and 17 we read, “And he made chains in the oracle, and put them on the tops of the pillars; and he made a hundred pomegranates, and put them on the chains. And he set up the pillars before the temple, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.” Here are two free-standing columns. They supported no architectural weight and had no utilitarian engineering significance. They were there only because God said they should be there as things of beauty. Upon the capitals of those columns were pomegranates fastened upon chains — art work upon art work. If we understand what we are reading here, it simply takes our breath away. This is something overwhelmingly beautiful.

In 2 Chronicles 4, we are told how Solomon made a huge altar and also a “molten sea” (a pool or bath) that was about fifteen feet in diameter and, according to some estimates, may have had the capacity of just under 10,000 gallons. Under this sea and holding it up was “the likeness of oxen, which did compass it round about, for ten cubits, compassing the sea round about. The oxen were cast in two rows, cast when it was cast. It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the South, and three looking toward the east; and the sea was set upon them above, and all their hinder parts were inward” (2 Chron. 4:3, 4). Here again is representational art in the round placed in the temple. Angels are represented by the bas-relief of cherubim, inanimate nature is represented in carvings of flowers and pomegranates, and animate nature is represented in the form of cast oxen. Representational art of nonreligious subjects was thus brought into the central place of worship.