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.

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. 

Thanks for your interest!

Many people do not know the most basic things about the Temple, such as its  location on Mt. Moriah , II Chronicles 3:1, or that Moriah was the place where Abraham bound Isaac for sacrifice (Genesis 22:2), or even that this very place is occupied today by sparkling Muslim gold-domed mosque as shown at right. 

The place is holy to Muslims because from here Mohammed ascended to heaven on a white stallion, it is said; and it has the respect of Christianity because of Jesus’  visits there;  and finally, both Jews and Christians believe King Messiah will rule from there in a newly rebuilt future temple. My purpose is to raise the awareness level of the Temple beyond the scant information provided by the general news media, and one way of doing this is to write about its symbolism and meaning in plain language without use of theological double-talk or pedantic phraseology. If this message has interested you, it may be of interest to your friends and relatives. Tell them about it! 

* Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. 4, p. 714 (1988 edition), leaning heavily on Jewish sources, simply states that the Holy Place of Herod’s Temple was 60 cubits high and its porch 100 cubits tall.

1 II Kings 25:17 records a height of only three cubits for the capitals; but it seems the capitals were divided into two bowls, an upper and lower one, and therefore one of these bowls was probably three cubits, the other two (see small Jachin-Boaz graphic).

2 Temple Man's 35 cubit legs/pillars (I kings 7:21) also relate to the 35 lights inside the Temple's Holy Place.  II Chronicles 4:7 informs us that Solomon made ten gold lamp stands, placing five on the right side and five on the left.  But these were surely in the form of the single lamp stand in the Mosaic tabernacle that had seven lights, Exodus 25:37.  Therefore, Solomon's 10 lamp stands with seven lights each yielded 35 lights on the right side and 35 on the left of the Holy Place, relating to Temple Man's 35 cubits for each of Temple Man's pillar/legs.  Is this mere coincidence?  Not likely.  It tells us, rather, that Israel - as the presumed light to the nations (Isaiah 42:6) - was supposed to journey forth to the four corners of the world (i.e., west, east, north, and south, Genesis 28:14) and bring the message of the true God - the message is the "light" - to a Gentile world steeped in idolatry; and journeying forth relates to the pillar/legs because walking is the most common means of locomotion.  But as national Israel engaged the Gentile world she fell into idolatry and turned away from the Lord, as did Solomon later in his reign, I Kings 11:1-9.

3 That the Golden Altar of Incense was closer to the Dividing Curtain than either the Showbread Table or Menorah is seen by this:
Beginning with I Kings 6:19-32 the text deals almost entirely with the Holy of Holies, and of key importance is v.22 that mentions the gold-plated “Altar of the Shrine,” (Tanakh, Jewish Publication Society ). The Holy of Holies is called the “Shrine” in this translation, see v.16. But notice that this verse says the “Altar OF the Shrine,” not IN the Shrine. For only the Ark and two statues of the Cherubim were there. Hence, respectable bible commentators explain that while the Gold Altar was “by” the Holy of Holies, it was physically located in the Holy Place. In other words, the author of I Kings intimately linked the Gold Altar with the Holy of Holies – i.e., linked the heart with the head – by his very phrasing; for Moses had previously said that the Gold Altar of the Mishkan was to be: “in front of the curtain,” Exodus 30:6, 40:26; and before the Ark," 40:5.  See also Secrets of the Holy Place.

What Others are Saying about this Website

Below are reactions to TEMPLE SECRETS. I get very few negative ones, such as one person saying I was a ‘fool’ for thinking Solomon and his temple ever existed, and another who said I was writing science fiction, "that’s all." 

Actually temples similar but not identical to Solomon’s were well known in the ANE (Ancient Near East) and scholars refer to their style as long temples. While long temples had a similarity, no two were identical no matter who built them. 

A kabbalah oriented Israeli rabbi remarks,

You have done a momentous discovery about the human form of the Temple of Solomon. The question is, how come it was not done before? All of what you brought and the many Kabbalah interpretations point to it ... I know of related works, Schwaller de Lubicz did it for the temple at Luxor Egypt, and On Zayit did it for the tabernacle. But (at least for me) you are the first to make this point cogently.
Y.H., Jerusalem

An Israeli Jewish film and video producer,

(After reviewing Temple Secrets he compares it to Ezekiel's temple and says...) Are you aware of the similarity between the human body and the Third Temple, that is Ezekiel's Temple? It is astounding
C.C.

A Jerusalem rabbi replies,

You will find it interesting that the Midrash says that God really should have taken His anger out on the Jewish people thus destroying them, but in His mercy, He chose to destroy the Temple, instead. As the place where God and man communicate, the Temple resembles the perfected man in more ways than one!

With blessings from Jerusalem,
S.S.

An Israeli rabbi has questions ...

Dear Tony,
Your work is so special. Who are you? Where are you? Do you know any of the folks here in Israel that I might know? Have you seen the commentaries of the Gaon of Vilna and the Malbim on the Mishkan? Shalom.
A.S.

A secular writer and editor remarks,

I have just checked your site out, and I am very impressed by its clear layout and correlation with de Lubicz' work ... Thanks for letting me know of your research.
A.B.

'Wonderful research,' Christian says,

I think you have very interesting information on King Solomon's Temple and I would love to check out a copy of your complete research paper. If this is in any way possible, please respond at this address. Thank you, and again congratulations on a wonderful piece of research.
D.J. 

Christian wants more material,

I've just finished reading some of your work concerning the Metallic Messiah and I must say it was fascinating! I have believed and taught for some time that the Temple and Tabernacle were made after the model of the human body (or perhaps vice-versa), but your research make the picture crystal clear. Do you have more material available online?
C.H.B.

	Visitors Since 11/8/99