Mythological Influence
1. Introduction
The design and construction of Solomon’s Temple (1 Kings 5–8; 2 Chronicles 2–7) have been a subject of scholarly analysis, especially regarding comparative Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) architecture and religious symbolism. This analysis examines the extent to which Phoenician, Canaanite, and broader ANE temple designs influenced Solomon’s Temple, and how it maintained distinct theological uniqueness.
2. Evidence of Cultural Influence
2.1 Phoenician Collaboration
2.1.1 Hiram of Tyre’s Role
1 Kings 5–7 describes King Hiram of Tyre supplying:
- Cedars of Lebanon and cypress wood
- Skilled artisans, particularly Huram-Abi, a craftsman of mixed Israelite-Phoenician heritage (2 Chronicles 2:13–14).
This reflects political alliance and artistic collaboration with Phoenicia, renowned for temple construction and bronze craftsmanship (Bordreuil & Briquel-Chatonnet, 2009).
2.2 Architectural Parallels
2.2.1 Tripartite Layout
Scholars note that Solomon’s Temple followed the tripartite structure common to Canaanite and Phoenician temples:
| Structure | Layout |
|---|---|
| Solomon’s Temple | Porch (ulam), Holy Place (hekhal), Holy of Holies (debir). |
| Tell Tayinat Temple (Neo-Hittite) | Similar three-room progression. |
| Phoenician temples (e.g. at Byblos) | Porch, main hall, inner sanctum. |
(Hurowitz, 1992; Mazar, 1992).
2.2.2 Decorative Elements
Features such as:
- Bronze pillars (Jachin and Boaz) resemble Phoenician temple façades.
- Cherubim and palm-tree motifs reflect shared ANE iconography symbolising divine throne and paradise (Keel & Uehlinger, 1998).
2.3 Construction Techniques
2.3.1 Stone Masonry and Wood Panelling
Phoenician builders were experts in:
- Ashlar masonry – well-dressed stone blocks.
- Wood overlay techniques seen in both Byblos temples and Solomon’s Temple interior (1 Kings 6:15–18).
3. Theological and Conceptual Uniqueness
3.1 Absence of Cultic Statue
3.1.1 Iconoclasm
Unlike Phoenician or Canaanite temples which housed idols or anthropomorphic representations of deities, Solomon’s Temple:
- Contained no image of Yahweh.
- Housed the Ark of the Covenant, symbolising God’s throne but emphasising divine invisibility and transcendence (Exodus 20:4–5; 1 Kings 8:10–11).
3.2 Monotheistic Reorientation
3.2.1 Covenant Theology
While adopting architectural forms familiar in the ANE, Israel redefined their purpose within a monotheistic, covenantal framework, unlike polytheistic neighbours.
3.2.2 Ethical and Holiness Emphasis
The Temple’s design was not mythological in function but ethical and covenantal, regulating worship to ensure justice and holiness (Deuteronomy 12:5–14; Isaiah 1:11–17).
4. Broader Ancient Near Eastern Parallels
4.1 Cosmic Mountain Motif
The Temple represented God’s cosmic dwelling, reflecting ANE temple-mountain symbolism:
- Babylon’s ziggurats symbolised cosmic mountains connecting heaven and earth.
- Solomon’s Temple was built on Mount Zion, echoing similar cosmological concepts but with Yahweh as the sole sovereign (Levenson, 1984).
4.2 Garden Imagery
Decorations with palm trees, flowers, and cherubim paralleled Mesopotamian and Phoenician temple imagery, signifying divine paradise and life-giving presence (Beale, 2004).
5. Scholarly Perspectives
| Scholar | Viewpoint |
|---|---|
| Hurowitz (1992) | Temple design mirrors Phoenician architectural templates but transforms them theologically. |
| Mazar (1992) | Confirms regional stylistic influence while affirming Israelite religious uniqueness. |
| Keel & Uehlinger (1998) | Emphasise shared iconographic motifs but different theological interpretations. |
| Levenson (1984) | Temple as cosmic symbol unique in Israel’s monotheistic covenant theology. |
6. Conclusion
Solomon’s Temple was architecturally influenced by neighbouring cultures, particularly Phoenician expertise in design and craftsmanship. However:
- Its absence of cultic statues,
- Exclusive monotheism, and
- Covenant-based ethical theology
set it apart from mythologically centred ANE temples.
Israel’s adoption of regional forms did not imply theological syncretism, but rather redeemed and redefined cultural patterns to reflect the holiness, transcendence, and covenant faithfulness of Yahweh.
7. References
- Beale, G. K. (2004). The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God. Downers Grove: IVP Academic.
- Bordreuil, P., & Briquel-Chatonnet, F. (2009). Phoenician Inscriptions. Leiden: Brill.
- Hurowitz, V. A. (1992). I Have Built You an Exalted House: Temple Building in the Bible in Light of Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic Writings. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
- Keel, O., & Uehlinger, C. (1998). Gods, Goddesses, and Images of God in Ancient Israel. Minneapolis: Fortress.
- Levenson, J. D. (1984). Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
- Mazar, A. (1992). Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: 10,000–586 B.C.E. New York: Doubleday.