1 Kings 8:4; 2 Chronicles 5:5

When all the elders of Israel arrived, the priests took up the ark, and they brought up the Ark of the LORD and the Tent of meeting and all the sacred furnishings in it.

We know that the Mosaic Tent of Meeting was at the town of Gibeon during the reign of David and at the beginning of Solomon's reign.

2 Chronicles 1:3-4

...and Solomon and the whole assembly went to the high place at Gibeon, for God's Tent of Meeting was there, which Moses the servant of the LORD had made in the desert. Now David had brought up the ark of the God from Kiriath Jearim to the place he had prepared for it, because he had pitched a tent for it in Jerusalem.

But when it came time for Solomon's Temple to take precedence as the place of worship, we were told that the Ark, the furnishing, and the Tent of Meeting were installed—brought up—there. But these were "brought up" from Zion, the city of David (1 Kings 8:2).

So was it really David's "tent" the one that was carried up to the Temple, not the Tent at Gibeon? Even though these verses used the wording "Temple of Meeting", which was oft referred to the Mosaic tent, could it also refer to David's Tent of worship? The Ark and Tent are mentioned in the same sentence together as being brought up from Zion, so it seems to lend to this interpretation.

David's "Tent" is mentioned in Amos 9:11 and Acts 15:16, so it seemed to be quite important in the redemptive plan of God. The Apostles used it as a pre-figure, not the Temple of Solomon, for including the nations (Gentiles) in the Church. Just as the Mosaic Tent was important in the Old Testament Exodus, David's tent was important in the New. Did then, the introduction of David's Tent make the Gibeon Tent obsolete, and ready to be destroyed (Though ceremoniously, out of respect, just as worn-out sacred scrolls are respectfully destroyed in the synagogue culture.)?

Out with the old, in with the New! (Though both serve as important instruments in the history of salvation.)

1 Answer 1


There is more than one question here.

First, regarding which tent was "installed" in the Temple, the answer is probably neither. The ark was installed in the inner sanctum of the Temple. After that, both tents were no longer needed. But if the question is which of them was "carried" to Jerusalem, the answer seems to be "both."

Second, the installation of the ark in David's tent somewhat downgraded the high place at Gideon but did not make it obsolete by any means. The Bible calls it a "great high place," perhaps greater in prominence that any other sanctuary (such as Gilgal, Shiloh, Bethel, Beersheba etc.) Sacrifices were offered to the Lord there at least until the Temple was dedicated, and probably beyond - although tradition declared such sacrifices illegitimate once the Temple of Jerusalem was established. Moreover, during the time David's tent served the people of Jerusalem, God reportedly appeared to Solomon after a major offering in Gibeon.

1 Kings 2

4 The king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there, because that was the great high place. Upon its altar Solomon sacrificed a thousand burnt offerings. 5 In Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream at night. God said: Whatever you ask I shall give you.

Finally, Acts 15:16 conflates two OT prophecies. Isaiah 16:4-6 speaks of David's tent in the sense of David's house, encouraging the nation of Judah to care of Moabite (gentile) war refugees. Amos 9:11 similarly uses a fallen tent to refer to the House of David, prophesying that the Davidic kingdom will soon fall but will be restored after the Babylonian Exile. Acts combines the two prophecies to emphasize God's plan to include Gentiles on an equal footing with Jews in the church, but it speaks of the "fallen tent" of David in the sense of the House of David - which Jesus had restored - not the tent that David erected to contain the ark.

Conclusion: Neither tent was installed in the Temple, but both were brought up to Jerusalem. The high place at Gibeon still operated as a major Israelite sanctuary until the Temple was established. The prophecies about David's tent/hut in Amos and Isaiah (paraphrased in Acts) are about the House of David, not the tent in which he placed the ark.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.