SOLOMON’S TEMPLE

While the primary portions of the temple were the Holy and Most Holy compartments, in front of the Holy (toward the E) there was a massive porch that served as an entranceway to the temple. The porch was 20 cubits (27.5 feet or 8.4 meters) long (running along the width of the temple) and 10 cubits (14.6 feet or 4.4 meters) deep. (1 Ki. 6:3) It was 120 cubits (175 feet or 53.3 meters) high. Second Chronicles 3:4 presents the height of the porch in the context of other measurements for the house, measurements that are generally accepted and that harmonize with those in First Kings. (Compare 2 Chronicles 3:3, 4 with 1 Kings 6:2, 3, 17, 20.) Thus the porch would have appeared as a tall, evidently rectangular tower that extended high above the rest of the temple building. In front of it stood two massive copper pillars named Jachin and Boaz. (1 Ki. 7:15-22; 2 Chron. 3:15-17) The porch also had doors (King Ahaz closed these up but his son Hezekiah later opened and repaired them). (2 Chron. 28:24; 29:3, 7) Especially in the morning when the sun rising in the E shone directly on it, the lofty temple porch must have been a most impressive sight.

EZEKIEL’S TEMPLE VISION

Quite a number of porches are mentioned in the vision Ezekiel had of a temple sanctuary. The temple building itself had a porch in front (toward the E), as did Solomon’s temple. However, this porch was 20 cubits (c. 34 feet or 10.4 meters, based on the long cubit [Ezek. 40:5] of about 20.4 inches) in length and 11 cubits (c. 18.7 feet or 5.7 meters) in width; the height is not stated. This porch had pillars as well as side pillars, and there was a wood canopy, probably near the top. (Ezek. 40:48, 49; 41:25, 26) Each of the three elaborate outer gateways (approaching from the E, S, and N) incorporated a porch with windows of narrowing frames. Apparently, one ascending the stairs into the gateway passed three guard chambers on each side and then, by crossing a threshold, came into the porch before entering the outer courtyard. (Ezek. 40:6-17) Each of the three inner gateways also had a porch, perhaps just as one ascended the steps and entered the gate. The porch in the gateway approached from the N contained four tables for slaughtering the whole burnt offering.—Ezek. 40:35-42.

PORCH OF PILLARS

One of the official buildings Solomon constructed in the temple area sometime after he completed the temple. (1 Ki. 7:1, 6) In view of the mention of the Porch of Pillars between comments about the House of the Forest of Lebanon and the Porch of the Throne, it is quite possible that the Porch of Pillars was S of the temple and between these other two official buildings. Thus, one coming from the S might pass through or around the House of the Forest of Lebanon and then enter the Porch of Pillars, walking through it into the Porch of the Throne.

Discussing these buildings, the Cyclopœdia by M’Clintock and Strong (Vol. VII, p. 541) observes: “There are few tasks more difficult or puzzling than the attempt to restore an ancient building of which we possess nothing but two verbal descriptions.” Hence, at best only a suggested description of the Porch of Pillars can be made, and this is based on 1 Kings 7:6, for the information Josephus gives is scanty and obscure.

The building was 50 cubits (c. 73 feet or 22 meters) long and 30 cubits (c. 44 feet or 13 meters) wide. Its very name suggests that it was made up of rows of impressive pillars. First Kings 7:6 mentions another porch in front with pillars and a canopy. Perhaps this means that one first came to a porch having an extending canopy supported by pillars. Then this porch merged right into the Porch of Pillars proper. If the dimensions given apply just to the Porch of Pillars, then the size of the canopied portion is not given.

This building may have served as a grand entranceway to the Porch of the Throne and as a place where the king conducted the ordinary business of the kingdom and received some visitors.

PORCH OF THE THRONE

An important building that Solomon constructed after the temple was completed. (1 Ki. 7:1, 7) The “porch of judgment” referred to in the text seems to be synonymous with the “Porch of the Throne.” So the “Porch of the Throne” evidently was where Solomon placed his ornate ivory and gold throne and did judging.—1 Ki. 10:18-20.

The entire description of this building is: “He made the porch of judgment; and they covered it in with cedarwood from the floor to the rafters.” (1 Ki. 7:7) The Masoretic text actually says, “from floor to floor,” leading some to believe that there was cedar from the floor of this building to the floor of the Porch of Pillars mentioned in the preceding verse. However, the Syriac Peshitta Version reads “from floor to ceiling,” and the Latin Vulgate says “from floor to top.” So, certain translators believe that the cedar was some sort of splendid paneling from the floor of the Porch to its rafters or ceiling. (NW, RS, JB, Ro) Though other architectural details are lacking, this would suggest a building not having open pillars on a side or sides, as may have been the case with the House of the Forest of Lebanon and the Porch of Pillars.

Since the Porch of the Throne is listed right after the Porch of Pillars, it is possible that this latter building served as a grand entrance to the Porch of the Throne. A person coming from the S may have had to walk through the Porch of Pillars to enter the porch of judgment.

PORCUPINE

A large rodent distinguished by its protective spines or quills. There is considerable dispute as to the exact meaning of the Hebrew word qip·podhʹ, variously rendered “bittern” (AV, Da), “hedgehog” (AT, Le) and “porcupine (s)” (AS, NW). (Isa. 14:23; 34:11; Zeph. 2:14) In the light of Hebrew etymology, G. R. Driver (Palestine Exploration Quarterly, May-October 1955, p. 137) rejects the rendering “bittern” and suggests that the Hebrew qip·podhʹ may apply both to the porcupine and to a bird. But he recommends “ruffed bustard” as a likely translation for qip·podhʹ in the above texts. Koehler (Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros, p. 845) prefers “hedgehog” at Isaiah 14:23; 34:11, but “short-eared owl” at Zephaniah 2:14. That one Hebrew word may apply to two entirely different animals is illustrated by the term tin·sheʹmeth, which denotes both a flying creature, the “swan,” and a swarming creature, the “chameleon.”—Lev. 11:18, 30.

Despite the uncertainty, however, there is good basis for consistently translating qip·podhʹ as either “porcupine” or “hedgehog,” rather than “bittern.” Both older and modern lexicons generally list “hedgehog” or “porcupine” as defining qip·podhʹ in all cases. These renderings have the support of the Septuagint and the Vulgate, as well as of Hebrew etymology and related languages such as Aramaic, Arabic and Ethiopian. The fact that both the porcupine and the hedgehog roll themselves up when in danger harmonizes with the root word (meaning “to gather together or roll up”) from which qip·podhʹ is believed to be derived.

On the basis of inferences drawn from Isaiah 14:23 and Zephaniah 2:14 regarding the desolation of Babylon and Nineveh, some raise the objection that the porcupine (or the hedgehog) could not be the animal intended, since this creature does not frequent reedy pools of water, nor can it sing or climb to the top of columns. However, according to Isaiah 14:23, not the reedy pools, but Babylon was to become the possession of porcupines. Interestingly, one explorer of Babylon’s ruins reported finding “quantities of porcupine quills.” Similarly, the reference to a voice “singing in the window” at desolated Nineveh can apply to any bird that might perch in a deserted window or even to the sound of the wind and need not apply to the porcupine. (Zeph. 2:14) As to the porcupine’s ‘spending the night among the pillar capitals [the top portion of the pillars],’ it must be remembered that the picture drawn is of a city in ruins. Hence, it is certainly possible that the pillars are here considered as fallen to the ground.

PORPHYRY

(porʹphy·ry).

A kind of stone usually dark red, purple or sometimes green and containing feldspar crystals. Together with marble and pearl, it was used as pavement in the Persian palace at Shushan in the days of King Ahasuerus.—Esther 1:6.

PORTENT

The English word “portent” (referring to something that presages future events or situations; also, a marvel) at times is an appropriate translation of the Hebrew moh·phethʹ and the Greek teʹras.

Moh·phethʹ generally carries the idea of a “miracle,” as in the miracles performed through Moses and Aaron in Egypt. However, in some cases the term is definitely used in the sense of a “portent,” as with regard to the prophet or dreamer who offers a sign or portent (to be fulfilled in the future) to lend support to his prophecy.—Deut. 13:1-3.

The portent (moh·phethʹ) might be a miraculous act manifesting divine power, as when the altar of Jeroboam was ripped apart by God, portending the still future and greater execution of his adverse judgment regarding that altar and those serving at it. (1 Ki. 13:1-5; compare the fulfillment some three hundred years later at 2 Kings 23:16-20.) Or it might be just an unusual action performed by someone, as when Isaiah went naked and barefoot to portend the circumstances due to come on Egypt and Ethiopia at the hands of the king of Assyria (Isa. 20:3-6), or Ezekiel’s making a hole in the wall (likely the wall of his residence) and taking out his luggage through it as a portent of the exile facing Judah.—Ezek. 12:5-11; compare 24:18-27.

Since a portent is a sign pointing to future things or circumstances, one writer may use the word moh·phethʹ (“portent” or “miracle”) while another uses ʼohth (“sign”) to describe the same thing. (Compare 2 Chronicles 32:24 with 2 Kings 20:8, 9.) A “sign” may serve as a guide or indicator for the present, as well as for the future, whereas a “portent” relates primarily to the future. The designating of something as a “sign” stresses that it has significance, whether for the present or the future. Its being called a “portent” stresses its significance as relating to the future.

Thus, when referring to Joel 2:30, which foretold “portents [plural of moh·phethʹ] in the heavens and on the earth,” the apostle Peter spoke of “portents [plural of teʹras] in heaven above and signs [plural of se·meiʹon] on earth” (Acts 2:14, 19), which is the way the text in Joel reads in the Greek Septuagint Version. In the Christian Greek Scriptures teʹras is consistently used in combination with se·meiʹon (“sign”), both terms being used in the plural form.—Acts 7:36; 14:3; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12.

Basically, teʹras refers to any act or thing exciting wonderment, hence it is properly translated “wonders” in some cases. (Matt. 24:24; John 4:48) Where the future is more clearly involved, “portent” is more appropriate. Serving as credentials that Jesus was God’s “Sent One” were the “powerful works and portents and signs that God did through him.” (Acts 2:22) The miraculous cures and resurrections he performed not only excited wonderment; they also portended what he would do on a greater scale in the future. (John 6:54; compare John 1:50, 51; 5:20, 28.) Some acts were portents of his future activity as God’s High Priest, forgiving sins and acting as Judge. (Matt. 9:2-8; John 5:1-24) Others served as evidence of his future authority and power to act against Satan and his demons, abyssing them. (Matt. 12:22-29; Luke 8:27-33; compare Revelation 20:1-3.) All such acts pointed forward to his Messianic Rule as God’s Anointed King.

Similarly, Jesus’ disciples, as witnesses of his teachings and resurrection, were backed up by God with “signs as well as portents and various powerful works.” (Heb. 2:3, 4; Acts 2:43; 5:12) These gave evidence of God’s dealings with the newly formed Christian congregation and portended his future use of that congregation to carry out his will and purpose.—Compare John 14:12.

As false prophets arose in Israel, so the foretold apostasy in the Christian congregation would produce a “man of lawlessness” whose presence would be evidenced by “the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and portents.” (2 Thess. 2:3-12) Thus, the evidence marshaled to support the apostate movement would not be weak or puny but would manifest Satan’s might. The portents would be lying ones, however, either fraudulent on their face or deceptive as to the conclusions to which they would lead. Appearing to manifest God’s benevolence and blessing, they would in reality divert persons from the source and path of life.—Compare 2 Corinthians 11:3, 12-15; see MIRACLES; POWER, POWERFUL WORKS; SIGN.

POT

See COOKING, COOKING UTENSILS.

POTIPHAR

(Potʹi·phar) [shortened form of Potiphera, he whom Ra gave].

An Egyptian court official and chief of Pharaoh’s bodyguard. He was Joseph’s master for a time and, it appears, was a man of wealth. (Gen. 37:36; 39:4) Potiphar purchased Joseph from the traveling Midianite merchants, and, observing what a good servant Joseph was, eventually put him in charge of his whole house and field, which establishment Jehovah blessed on Joseph’s account.—Gen. 39:1-6.

Potiphar’s wife was not as faithful to him as was his servant Joseph, however. She repeatedly endeavored to seduce Joseph and one day, when no other men were around, grabbed hold of him, but Joseph still refused and ran out. When Potiphar came home, he heard his wife’s frustrated barrage of false accusations. Instead of having Joseph executed, Potiphar angrily had him thrown into prison.—Gen. 39:7-20.

This prison seems to have been connected with Potiphar’s house or at least came under his jurisdiction as “chief of the bodyguard.” Thus, the record speaks of Pharaoh’s chief cupbearer and chief baker being thrown into this same jail, the “jail of the house of the chief of the bodyguard,” “the jail of [Joseph’s] master’s house.” (Gen. 39:1; 40:1-7) However, it seems unlikely that Potiphar is to be equated with the “chief officer of the prison house” who “gave over into Joseph’s hand all the prisoners who were in the prison house.” (Gen. 39:21-23) This officer was probably a subordinate of Potiphar.

Potiphar’s title “court official” translates the Hebrew word sa·risʹ, literally meaning “eunuch,” but which in its broader usage meant a chamberlain, courtier or trusted officer of the throne. The “court official [sa·risʹ] that had a command over the men of war” when Jerusalem fell in 607 B.C.E. was no doubt a high government official, not a castrated person lacking masculinity. (2 Ki. 25:19) So, also, Potiphar was a military man, chief of the bodyguard, as well as a married man, facts that militate against the idea that he was a eunuch in the more common sense.

POTIPHERA

(Pot·iʹphe·ra) [he whom Ra gave].

Joseph’s father-in-law, whose daughter Asenath bore Manasseh and Ephraim. (Gen. 41:45, 50; 46:20) Potiphera was the priest, likely of the sun-god Ra, officiating at On, a center of Egyptian sun worship. In the Cairo Museum there is a stele or funeral pillar discovered in 1935, that has on it the name, “Potiphare.”