the Week of Proper 28 / Ordinary 33
Click here to learn more!
Bible Encyclopedias
Cherub
Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
or [the proper name is pronounced Ke´ rub] (Hebrews Kerub´; כְּרוּב, etymolygy uncertain; Sept. Χερούβ v. r. Χαρούβ and Χαρήβ; Vulg. Cherub), a place apparently in the Babylonian dominions, associated with Tel-harsa, Addan, etc., from which some Jewish exiles returned with Zerubbabel, who had lost their pedigree (Ezra 2:59; Nehemiah 7:61). The true construction of these names, however, would rather make this to be that of a man thus unregistered. B.C. 536. (See ADDON).
(Hebrews kerub´, כְּרוּב, in the sing. only in Exodus 25:19; 2 Samuel 22:11; 1 Kings 6:24-25; 1 Kings 6:27; 2 Chronicles 3:11-12; Psalms 18:10; Ezekiel 10:2; Ezekiel 10:7; Ezekiel 10:9; Ezekiel 10:14; Ezekiel 28:14; Ezekiel 28:16; Sept. χερούβ ), plur. CHER´ UBIM (Hebrews kerubim', כְּרוּבַים; sometimes כְּרֻבַים; Sept. χερουβίμ v. r. χερουβείμ, and so in Sirach 49:8, and Hebrews 9:5; Engl.Vers. invariably "cherubims"), the appellation of certain symbolical figures frequently mentioned in Scripture. (See SERAPH).
I. Import of the Name. — The origin and signification of the word it is impossible to determine with any certainty. Those who seek it in a Shemitic root are still divided in opinion, some deriving it from the Chald. כְּרִב, kerab´, to plough, so that cherub ="plougher," i.e. ox, urging the parallel between Ezekiel 10:14; Ezekiel 1:10; others (as Gussetius, L. de Dieu, and Rodiger) take it by a transposition of letters for רְבוּב, rekub´, q. d. divine "beast" (Psalm 23:11), comp. the Arabic karib, a ship of transport; others (see Hyde, De relig. vet. Pers. p. 263) make it i.e. קָרוֹב, karob´, "near" to God, i.e. admitted to his presence; with others (see Maurer, Comment. in Vet. Test. at Isaiah 6:2) it is equivalent to כָּרִם, karam´ (Arabic the same), "to be noble," i.e. chief (comp. seraphim); finally, to pass over other less probable conjectures (e.g. Rosenmü ller, Alterthumsk. I, 1:181; and Paulus ap. Zullig, p. 31), the Talmudists regard it as the Chald. כְּרוּבַיָּא, ke-rubya´, boylike (see Buxtorf, jun., Exercitatt. p. 100; Otho, Lex. Rabb. s.v.). Gesenius at first proposed a derivation from the Syriac kerub, strong, but afterwards, convinced that he was misled by an error of Castell (see his Anecdot. Orient. 1:66), he proposed a new etymology, as = חָרִם, charam´ (Arabic the same), "to prohibit from a common use," to consecrate (Thesaur. p. 711), compare the Ethiopic kindred word for sanctuary; so that the signification would be keeper, or guard, sc. of the Deity against all profane approach. Others (e.g. Eichhorn, Einleit. ins A. T. 3:80; Vatke, Bibl. Theologie, 1:325) think the cherubim were the same with the γρύτες, griffins, of the Oriental imagination, guardians of the golden mountains; and seek the root in the Persic karub, to grasp (Tychsen in Heeren's Ideen, 1:386). Forster even seeks an Egyptian derivation of the name (De bysso, p. 116). Hivernick (Zu Ezekiel p. 5) suggests a derivation from a Syriac root, meaning to cut or carve (Keil on 1 Kings 5:9); so Aben Ezra says that "cherub" is the same as עורה, and means any artistic figure (Schultens, Proverbs Sol. p. 472). An early etymology makes it from כְּרִב, ke-rab´, great-as-it-were, q. d. like Cabeiri = θεοί δυνατοί (see Psalms 103:20; δυνάμεις, 1 Peter 3:22; ἀρχαί, Ephesians 1:21; so Procopius on Genesis 3; Theodorus in Genesis 46 The oldest derivation is from רב and נכר, as though it meant "abundance of knowledge," a meaning once universally adopted (rhilo, Vit. Mos. p. 688; Clem. Alex. Strom. 5:40, ed. Sylb.; Origen, Frag. Hex. p. 114; Jerome on Isaiah 6:2; Dionys. De Cael. Hier. 7:96; Spencer, De Legg. III, 3:1, etc.). Hence the remark of Aquinas, "The name Seraphim is given from their fervor, as belonging to love; but the name Cherubim is given from their knowledge" (I, 1, b. 1087, ch. 7). Fü rst (Concord. p. 571), followed by Delitzsch (Genesis 2:208), regards the root as properly Shemitic, allied to the above sense of grasping (Sanscr. gribh, Engl. grip).
II. History and Classification. —
1. The first occasion on which they are mentioned is on the expulsion of our first parents from Eden (Genesis 3:24), where the office of preventing man's access to the tree of life is assigned to "the cherubim (הִכְּרֻבַים, not as in A.V. 'cherubims') with the flame of the waving sword." They are thus abruptly introduced, without any intimation of their shape and nature, as though they were too well understood to require comment. That some angelic beengs are intended is obvious, and the attempts to refer the passage to volcanic agency (Sickler, Ideen zu einem Vulkan, p. 6), or to the inflammable bituminous region near Babylon (Plin. 2:109, etc.), is a specimen of that valueless rationalism which unwisely turns the attention from the inner spirit of the narrative to its mere external form. We might perhaps conjecture, from the use of the article, that there were supposed to be a definite number of cherubim, and it seems that four is the mystic number usually attached to the conception of them. As the number four has special significance in Hebrew symbolism — being the number to express the world and divine revelation (Bä hr's Symbolik. 1:119 sq.) — this consideration must not be lost sight of.
The word מַקֶּרֶם, there translated "on the east," may signify as well "before or on the edge of." Besides, יָשִׁב, rendered by our translators "placed," signifies properly "to place in a tabernacle," an expression which, viewed in connection with some incidents in the after history of the primeval family (Genesis 4:14-16), seems a conclusive establishment of the opinion that this was a local tabernacle, in which the symbols of the Divine presence were manifested, suitably to the altered circumstances in which man, after the Fall, came before God, and to the acceptable mode of worship he was taught to observe. That consecrated place, with its striking symbols, called "the presence of the Lord," there is reason to believe, continued till the time of the Deluge, otherwise there would have been nothing to guard the way to the tree of life; and thus the knowledge of their form, from the longevity of the antediluvians, could have been easily transmitted to the time of Abraham (Faber, Horae Mosaico, bk. 2, ch. 6). Moreover, it is an approved opinion that, when those emblems were removed at the close of the patriarchal dispensation from the place of public worship, the ancestors of that patriarch formed small models of them for domestic use, under the name of Seraphim or Teraphim, according to the Chaldee dialect (Faber, Origin of Pag. Idol. 1:256).
In like manner were lion-shaped and eagle-formed griffins supposed by the aborigines of Northern Europe (Herod. 3:102, 116) and India (Ctesias, Ind. p. 12) as guardians of the gold-bearing hills (comp. Genesis 2:11); and in Greek mythology (see Creuzer, Symbolik, 2:647) they were sacred to the deities (e.g. Apollo, Minerva, Bacchus). But the cherub was anointed as a divine emblem (Ezekiel 28:14; where some, however, take מַמְשִׁח for מַמְשָׁה, in the sense merely of "extended"), presiding over sacred mountains blazing with precious ores (Ezekiel 28:16); at least the king of Tyre is there compared to such a being, unless, with others, we refer that whole description to the cherubic forms of the Jewish sanctuary (see Henderson, Comment. in loc.).
2. The next occasion on which the cherubim are noticed is when Moses was commanded to provide the furniture of the tabernacle; and, although he received instructions to make all things according to the pattern shown him in the Mount, and although it is natural to suppose that he saw a figure of the cherubim, yet we find no minute and special description of them, as is given of everything else, for the direction of the artificers (Exodus 26:31). The simple mention which the sacred historian makes, in both these passages, of the cherubim conveys the impression that the symbolic figures which had been introduced into the Levitical tabernacle were substantially the same with those established in the primeval place of worship on the outskirts of Eden, and that by traditional information, or some other means, their form was so well known, both to Bezaleel and the whole congregation of Israel, as to render superfluous all further description of them.
Similar figures were to be enwoven on the ten blue, red, and crimson curtains of the tabernacle (Exodus 26:1). The promise that God would "meet and commune with Moses from between the two cherubim" (Exodus 25:22) originates the constant occurrence of that expression as a description of the divine abode and presence (Numbers 7:89; 1 Samuel 4:4; Isaiah 37:16; Psalms 80:1; Psalms 91:1, etc.).
3. Cherubim after this appear likewise in the theophantic descriptions of the prophets and inspired poets (2 Samuel 22:11), especially in the remarkable visions of Ezekiel by the river Chebar (Ezekiel 10). Yet there was no mystery as to those remarkable figures, for Ezekiel knew at once (10:20) the living creatures which appeared in his vision supporting the throne of God, and bearing it in majesty from place to place, to be cherubim, from having frequently seen them, in common with all other worshippers, in the carved work of the outer sanctuary. Moreover, as is the opinion of many eminent divines, the visionary scene, with which this prophet was favored, exhibited a transcript of the Temple, which was shown in pattern to David, and afterwards erected by his son and successor; and, as the chief design of that later vision was to inspire the Hebrew exiles in Babyloa with the hope of seeing, on their return to Judaea, another temple, more glorious than the one then in ruins, it is reasonable to believe that, as the whole style and apparatus of this mystic temple bore an exact resemblance (1 Kings 6:20) to that of Solomon's magnificent edifice, so the cherubs also that appeared to his fancy portrayed on the walls would be facsimiles of those that belonged to its ancient prototype. (See TEMPLE).
Still the question arises, Was the shape already familiar, or kept designedly mysterious? From the fact that cherubim were blazoned on the doors, walls, curtains, etc., of the house, and from the detailed description of shapes by Ezekiel, the latter idea might seem out of place. But if the text of Ezekiel, and the carvings, etc., of the Temple had made them popular, Josephus could not possibly have said (Ant. 8:3, 3), "No one can say or conjecture what the cherubim (χερουβεῖς ) actually were." It is also remarkable that Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1) speaks of them as "living creatures" (חִיּוֹת, ζῶα ) under mere animal forms. Into this description in Ezekiel 10:14, the remarkable expression, "the face of a cherub," is introduced, and the prophet concludes by a reference to his former vision, and an identification of those creatures with the cherubim. On the whole, it seems likely that the word "cherub" meant not only the composite creature-form, of which the man, lion, ox, and eagle were the elements, but, further, some peculiar and mystical form, which Ezekiel, being a priest, would know and recognize as " the face of a CHERUB," but which was kept secret from all others; and such probably were those on the ark, which, when it was moved, was always covered, (See ARK OF COVENANT), though those on the hangings and panels might be of the popular device. What this peculiar cherubic form was is a mystery perhaps impenetrable. It was probably believed popularly to be something of the bovine type (though in Psalm 16:20, the notion appears to be marked as degraded); so Spencer (de leg. Hebr. rit. 3, diss. 5, 4, 2) thinks that the ox was the forma precipua, and quotes Grotius on Exodus 25:18 (Bochart, Hierozoic. p. 87, edit. 1690). Hence the "golden calf." The symbolism of the visions of Ezekiel is more complex than that of the earlier Scriptures, and he certainly means that each composite creature-form had four faces, so as to look four ways at once; was four-sided and four- winged, so as to move with instant rapidity in every direction without turning, whereas the Mosaic idea was probably single-faced, and with but one pair of wings. Ezekiel adds also the imagery of the wheels-a mechanical to the previous animal forms. This might typify inanimate nature revolving in a fixed course, informed by the spiritual power of God. The additional symbol of being " full of eyes" is one of obvious meaning. (See CREATURE (LIVING).)
III. Their Form and Character. — If we may trust the unanimous testimony of Jewish tradition, we must suppose that they had the faces of human beings, according to the positive assertion of Maimonides, Abarbanel, Aben Ezra, etc. (Otho, Lex. Rab. s.v. Cherubim; Buxtorf, Hist. Arc. Fod. p. 100). But, taking Ezekiel's description of them to be the proper appearance that belonged in common to all his cherubic creatures (Ezekiel 1, 10, 41), we are led to conclude that they were compound figures, unlike any living animals or real object in nature, but rather a combination, in one nondescript artificial image, of the distinguishing features and properties of several. The ox, as chief among the tame and useful animals, the lion among the wild ones, the eagle among the feathery tribes, and man, as head over all, were the animals which, or rather parts of which, composed the symbolical figures. Each cherub had four distinct faces on one neck — that of a man in front, that of a lion on the right side, and of an ox on the left, while behind was the face of an eagle. Each had four wings, the two under ones covering the lower extremities, or rather the center of the person (Hebrews the feet), in token of decency and humility, while the upper ones, spread out on a level with the head and shoulders, were so joined together, to the edge of his neighbors', as to form a canopy; and in this manner they soared rather than flew, without any; vibratory motion with their wings, through the air. Each had straight feet (Hebrews "their feet [were] a straight foot," Ezekiel 1:7), and the probability is that the legs were destitute of any flexible joint at the knee, and so joined together that its locomotions must have been performed in some other way than by the ordinary process of walking, or lifting one foot after another. Bahr (whose entire remarks on this subject are valuable and often profound) inclines to think that the precise form varied within certain limits; e.g. the cherubic figure might have one, two, or four faces, two or four feet, one or two pair of wings, and might have the bovine or leonine type as its basis, the imagery being modified to' suit the prominently intended attribute, and the highest forms of creature-being expressing best the highest attributes of the Creator (Symbolik, 1:313 sq.). Thus, he thinks, the human form might indicate spirituality (p. 340). (Comp. Grotius on Exodus 25:18, and Hebrews 9:5.) Some useful hints as to the connection of cherubic with other mythological forms may be found in Creuzer (Symbol. 1:441, 540).
It has been sometimes disputed whether the colossal cherubim of olive wood, overlaid with gold, with outspread wings, touching in the center of the oracle and reaching to either wall, placed by Solomon in the Holy of Holies, were substitutes for or additions to the original golden pair. The latter is probably the truth, for had the Mosaic cherubim been lost we should have been informed of the fact. All that we learn about these figures is that they each had a body ten cubits high (1 Kings 5:23), and stood on their feet (2 Chronicles 3:13), so that the monstrous conception of winged child-faces is an error which should long ago have been banished from Christian iconography (De Saulcy, Hist. de liArt Judaique, p. 25). The expression "cherubims of image work," in 2 Chronicles 3:10 (מִעֲשֵׂה צִעֲצֻעַים, Sept. ἔργον ἐκ ξύλων, Vulg. opere statuario, Marg., of movable work), is very obscure, but would probably give us no farther insight into the subject (Dorjen, De opere Zaazyim in Ugolini Thes. 8, No. 6); but in 1 Chronicles 28:18-19, we learn that David had given to Solomon a model for these figures, which are there called "the chariot of the cherubim" (Vulg. quadriga cherubim). We are not to suppose from this that any wheels supported the figures, but we must take "cherubim" in apposition to "chariots" (Bertheau, ad loc.). The same phrase is found in Sirach 49:8, and is in both cases an allusion to the poetical expression, "He rode upon a cherub, and did fly" (2 Samuel 22:11; Psalms 18:10), an image magnificently expanded in the subsequent vision of Ezekiel, which for that reason has received from the Rabbis the title of מרכבה "the chariot." Although the mere word "cherub" is used in these passages, yet the simple human figure is so totally unadapted to perform the function of a chariot, that we are almost driven to the conclusion arrived at by De Saulcy on this ground alone, that the normal type of the cherub involved the body of an ox, as well as spreading wings and a human face (Hist. de l'Art Judaique, p. 29). If this conjecture be correct, we shall have in these symbols a counterpart, exact in the minutest particulars, to the human-headed oxen, touching both walls with their wings, which have been discovered in the chambers of Nimrû d and Khorsabad. We shall find, further on, the strongest confirmations of this remarkable inference. We may here mention the suspicion of its truth, which we cannot but derive from the strange reticence of Josephus on the subject (Ant. 3:6, 5). Now it is hardly conceivable that an emblem seen daily by multitudes of priests, and known to the Jews from the earliest ages, could be so completely secret and forgotten as this. If the cherubim were simply: winged genii there would have been no possible reason why Josephus should have been ashamed to mention the fact, and, in that case, he would hardly have used the ambiguous word Ζῶον. If, on the other hand, they were semi-bovine in shape, Josephus, who was of course familiar with the revolting idolatry of which his nation was accused (Tacit. Hist. 5:4; Josephus, Apion, 2:7), had the best reason to conceal their real form (Spencer, De leg. Hebr. rit. III, 4:2 ad fin.), and to avert, as far as possible, all further inquiry about them. (See ASS, WORSHIP OF).
Arks, surmounted by mysterious winged guardians, were used in the religious service of most ancient nations, and especially in Egypt (Plutarch, de Isid. 39; Wilkinson's Anc. Egypt. 5:271; (See ARK) ), but none of them involved the sublime and spiritual symbolism of the cherubim on the mercy- seat — at once guardians of the divine oracles and types of God's presence for the expiation of sin. But a question here arises, how the profuse introduction of these figures into the Tabernacle was reconcilable with obedience to the second commandment. It is certain that the rigid observance of this commandment was as serious a hinderance to the plastic arts among the Jews as the similar injunctions of the Koran are to the Mohammedans; and yet no word of condemnation was breathed against the cherubim, though Josephus even ventures to charge Solomon with distinct disobedience to the Law for placing oxen under the brazen sea (Ant. 8:7, 5). The cherubim, indeed, were made in obedience to a distinct command; but how was it that they did not offend the consciences or seduce the allegiance of the theocratic Hebrews? The answer seems to be, that the second commandment only forbids the plastic arts when prostituted to the direct object of idolatry, and Tertullian is right in defending the introduction of cherubim, on the ground that they were a simplex ornamentum (c. Marcion, 2:22); even the Talmudists allowed the use of images for purely decorative purposes (Kalisch. on Exod. p. 346). Besides, they represented created beings as created beings, and also as themselves in the attitude of humility and adoration (Exodus 25:20; 1 Peter 1:12), so that instead of violating the commandment they expressed its highest spirit, in thus vividly symbolizing God's supremacy over the creatures which stood on the highest step of life, and were, in fact, the ideal of absolute and perfect created existence (Bä hr, Symbol. 1:340 sq.). We may add that the danger was less, because, in all probability, they were seen by none but the priests (Cornel. a Lapide on Exodus 25:8); and when, in the desert, the ark was moved from place to place, it was covered over with a triple veil (Numbers 4:5-6), before which even the Levites were not suffered to approach it (Bochart, Hieroz. II, 34, ad fin.). It may even be the case that the shape of the cherubim was designedly considered as indefinite and variable, that the tendency to worship them might still further be obviated. This wavering and indistinct conception of them was due to their symbolical character, a fact so thoroughly understood among all Oriental nations as at once to save the Jews from any strong temptation; and to raise them above the breath of suspicion.
Whether the golden calf constructed by Aaron might be, not the Apis of Egypt, but a representation of the antediluvian Cherubim, as some suppose, from its being made on "a feast to the Lord," and called "the gods of Israel" (Exodus 32:5), and whether Jeroboam, in the erection of his two calves, intended a schismatic imitation of the sacred symbols in the Temple of Jerusalem rather than the introduction of a new species of idolatry (1 Kings 12:28), we shall not stop to inquire. (See CALF). But as paganism is a corruption of patriarchal worship, each nation having added something according to its own taste and fancy, perhaps we may find a confirmation of the views given above of the compound form of the cherubim, in the strange figures that are grouped together in the heathen deities. The numerous ox-heads, for instance, in the statue of the ancient Diana, and particularly the Asiatic idols, almost all of which exhibit several heads and arms attached to one person, or the heads of different animals combined, afford a collateral proof, similar to the universal prevalence of sacrifice, that the form of the primitive cherubim has been traditionally preserved and extended over a large portion of the world. This may indeed be shown by the above actual figures copied from ancient monuments, all of which illustrate some one or more of the notions which we attach to the cherubic forms; and while they afford material assistance to our ideas on the subject, they show that figures of this kind: as sacred symbols, were not peculiar to the Hebrews, and that their presence in the sanctuary was not calculated to excite any surprise among the neighboring nations, or to lead to the notion that the Jews also were worshippers of idols, for even in the pagan monument they never appear as idols, but as symbols; and it was very possibly this fact — that the cherubic figures were not liable to be misunderstood — which induced the Divine wisdom to permit their introduction into the most holy place.
Mr. Layard traces many striking points of analogy 'between the form and position of the above figures, especially between the last ones of the Assyrian group and the cherubim of the Temple: "Within the sacred oracle itself were the two cherubim of olive-wood, ten cubits high, with wings each five cubits long; and Solomon carved all the house around with carved figures of cherubim, and palm-trees, and open flowers, within and without. The cherubim have been described by Biblical commentators as mythic figures, uniting the human head with the body of a lion or an ox, and the wings of an eagle. If for the palm-trees we substitute the sacred tree of the Ninevite sculptures, and for the open flowers the Assyrian tulip- shaped ornament — objects most probably very nearly resembling each other — we find the oracle of the Temple was almost identical, in general form and in its ornaments, with some of the characters of Nimroud and Khorsabad. In the Assyrian halls, too, the winged human-headed bulls were on the side of the wall, and their wings, like those of the cherubim, 'touched one another in the midst of the house.' The dimensions of these figures were in some cases nearly the same, namely, fifteen feet square. The doors were also carved with cherubim, and palm-trees, and open flowers, and thus, with the other parts of the building, corresponded with those of the Assyrian palaces" (Nineveh and Babylon, 2d series, p. 643).
It appears, therefore, that the symbolic figure which the Hebrew generically designates as a cherub, was a composite creature-form, that finds a parallel in the religious insignia of Assyria, Egypt, and Persia, e.g. the sphinx, the winged bulls and lions of Nineveh, etc., a general prevalence which prevents the necessity of our regarding it as a mere adoption from the Egyptian ritual. In such forms (comp. the Chimaera of Greek and the Griffin of north-eastern fables) every imaginative people has sought to embody its notions either of the attributes of Divine essence, or of the vast powers of Nature which transcend that of man. Among the Greeks the dragon (Photius, Cod. 190, p. 250), and among the Indians the griffin (Pliny, 7:2), were especially such creatures of mythological imagination. (See DRAGON). In the various legends of Hercules the bull and the lion constantly appear as forms of hostile and evil power; and some of the Persian sculptures apparently represent evil genii under similar quasicherubic forms. The Hebrew idea seems to limit the number of the cherubim. A pair (Exodus 25:18, etc.) were placed on the mercy-seat of the ark; a pair of colossal size overshadowed it in Solomon's Temple with the canopy of their contiguously extended wings. Ezekiel 1:4-14, speaks of four, and similarly the apocalyptic living creatures, ζῶα (Revelation 4:6), are four. So at the front or east of Eden were posted "the cherubim," as though the whole of some recognized number. They utter no voice, though one is "heard from above them," nor have dealings with men save to awe and repel.
A "man clothed in linen" is introduced as a medium of communication between them and the prophet, whereas for a similar office one of the seraphim personally officiates; and these latter also "cry one to another." The cherubim are placed beneath the actual presence of Jehovah, whose moving throne they appear to draw (Genesis 3:24; Ezekiel 1:5; Ezekiel 1:25-26; Ezekiel 10:1-2; Ezekiel 10:6-7; Isaiah 6:2-3; Isaiah 6:6). The expression, however, "the chariot (מֶרְכָּבָה ) of the cherubim" (1 Chronicles 28:18) does not imply wheels, but the whole apparatus of ark and cherubim is probably so called in reference to its being carried on staves, and the words "chariot" and "cherubim" are in apposition. So a sedan might be called a "carriage," and the masc. form מֶרְכָּב is used for the body of a litter. See, however, Dorjen, De cherub. Sanct. (ap. Ugolini, vol. 8), where the opposite opinion is ably supported. The glory symbolizing that presence which eye cannot see rests or rides on them, or one of them, thence dismounts to the temple threshold, and then departs and mounts again (Ezekiel 10:4; Ezekiel 10:18; comp. Ezekiel 9:3; Psalms 18:10).
There is in them an entire absence of human sympathy, and even on the mercy-seat they probably appeared not merely as admiring and wondering (1 Peter 1:12), but as guardians of the covenant and avengers of its breach. A single figure there would have suggested an idol, which two, especially when represented as regarding something greater than themselves, could not do. They thus became subordinate, like the supporters to a shield, and are repeated, as it were the distinctive bearings of divine heraldry — the mark, carved or wrought, everywhere on the house and furniture of God (Exodus 25:20; 1 Kings 6:29; 1 Kings 6:35; 1 Kings 7:29; 1 Kings 7:36). Those on the ark were to be placed with wings stretched forth, one at each end of the mercy-seat, and to be made "of the mercy-seat," which Abarbenel (Spencer, De leg. Heb. ritual. 3, diss. 5) and others interpret of the same mass of gold with it, viz. wrought by hammering, not cast and then joined on. This seems doubtful; but from the word employed (מַקָּשֶׁה ) the solidity of the metal may perhaps be inferred. They are called "cherubim of glory" (Hebrews 9:5), as on them the glory, when visible, rested; but; whether thus visibly symbolized or not, a perpetual presence of God is attributed to the Holy of Holies. They were anointed with the holy oil, like the ark itself and the other sacred furniture. Their wings were to be stretched upwards, and their faces "towards each other and towards the mercy-seat." It is remarkable that with such precise directions as to their position, attitude, and material, nothing, save that they were winged, is said concerning their shape. (See TABERNACLE).
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
