Hypothesis Hurdles

Needless to say, this hypothesis and research that I was about to begin would be—by its very definition—unorthodox; and I must confess that embarking upon the journey was as disconcerting as it was exciting. After all, I strongly suspected that there would be nobody—dead or alive—that could show me the path, and even if I did succeed, those entrenched in the religious establishments were almost certain to doubt and even discourage me along the way. After all, in the world of expert theologians, I’m officially an untrained and uncredentialed nobody. Moreover, apart from Moses’ account, there would be no historical archives upon which I could rely, and what I was about to attempt was completely without precedent—at least in modern times among religious institutions and academic circles. Thus, even if I could prove everything from science and Scripture, tradition and institution alike would logically be reluctant to accept proof or argument contrary to the status quo.   

Apart from potential opposition from schools and scholars, the historical artifacts and literature that have survived from Jerusalem’s first and second temple periods are relatively few and far between (the existence of the Temples themselves is even subject to ongoing debate), and relative to that more recent era, the amount of archaeological evidence dating back to the Exodus and Tabernacle times (around 1440 BC) is all the more scarce and scientifically inconclusive. Thus, lacking authentic Tabernacle remains or other physical evidence, historians and archaeologists without hard data will ultimately find themselves at the mercy of religious tradition, such as Josephus’ dimensional description of a rectangular Tabernacle, which obviously could not have been obtained by means of a personal observation. After all, given the ten century gap of time between Josephus and the Tabernacle, it stands to reason that Josephus’ writings were gleaned from other fragmented second-hand accounts of unknown origins and questionable sources, particularly as they contradict Moses’ instructions in several places. Nevertheless, because a source is from the ancient world and in agreement with present day traditions, scholars tend to presume that it must be true, and would be reluctant to treat Josephus’ regurgitated account as if it is mere conjecture or hearsay.

Similarly, it would be unlikely for scholars to consider that Josephus' record is a byproduct of a thousand years of other influences, including urban architecture, catastrophic exile, bad scholarship or careless inference.

Of course to the contrary, history is replete with round building precedents. Apart from the Bible, indigenous and nomadic people alike on every continent have a heritage of dwelling in round structures, be they igloos, grass huts, or nomadic tents, dating back thousands of years. Curiously, the Hebrew word גר meaning “to sojourn” and pronounced “ger” is phonetically identical or at least similar to the word used to describe a round tent in multiple languages spanning continents of Asia, Africa, and Europe (typically called a yurt, ger, or gert). Hence, simple etymological correlations and ancient construction practices also keep the round Tabernacle hypothesis from sounding like a ridiculous or far-fetched idea—even though such reasonable arguments cannot be presented as anything but circumstantial evidence.

Proof of Concept Scale Tabernacle Modeling

Not long after returning from my Israel trip, three different engineers (two civil and the other mechanical) contacted me after hearing about my research from Rob Skiba, who did a follow-up video covering Adam’s Breaking Israel News article. Brian, the first of the two to contact me, was curious as to the scope and content of the “Exodus Engineering Exegesis” drawings that I was advertising on my website. As I made efforts to respond to Brian’s request for clarification, it became evident that Brian had interest in building a physical model. As Brian and I talked, it was clear that we had a good rapport, and shortly thereafter, I explained to Brian that I had developed a completely different set of prints that I had created six months prior that was intended for the explicit purpose physical model fabrication, as well as for the erection procedure.  

After receiving my extended stack of fabrication and erection plan drawings, Brian was impressed, and offered to help fund a “Home Depot” version of the Tabernacle model. When I say a “Home Depot” version of the model, I mean a model that could be constructed from materials that were readily available at local lumberyard and/or hardware store. As it turns out, some of the materials, such as 2x4’s, could be locally sourced; however, some of the materials (e.g., dowels and metal rods) needed to be ordered specially because they were not quite popular consumer grade materials. As we began to discuss optimization of materials, credible fabrication processes, and substitution requirements, we eventually settled on a fractional scale model prototype design that was about 7 feet high and 22 feet in diameter. This size enabled us to base an economical model upon modified 2x4’s; however, the economy of the initial materials became a trivial factor in the overall effort relative to the labor and special tooling required to fabricate the parts according to specification.  

As for modeling objectives, one of the principle goals in building a physical model would be to establish “proof of concept” for the Tabernacle model that I had deciphered from the Exodus texts. Could the Tabernacle structure really be built exactly as the Hebrew Exodus Tabernacle texts had described the structure to be? When I say, “exactly as... Tabernacle texts had described”, I mean in exact proportion to the full size model. After all, if the length and weight proportions between the smaller scale model and the large model did not match, however impressive it would be to fabricate, the purpose behind building a “proof of concept model” would be negated.

As I already knew relatively well what the full size model would require with respect to fabrication processes and tolerances from the fabrication plans that I had developed six months prior, I knew that I had to get the services of—or access to—specialized talent or tools. Although I did get some budget quotes for fabricating some of the specialized pieces, I also came to conclude that it would ultimately be the most economical for me to fabricate the parts with special shapes and features myself—provided that I could get access to the special tooling. Because operation of a precision computer controlled woodworking is not a common skill set, and because prototyping can be a very iterative process, I decided to join the Milwaukee Maker Space, which is tool co-op group that shares a large rented shop space, whereby I could get access to computer controlled machines and a fully equipped wood and metal shop.   

In addition to a computer controlled Tormach metal milling machine, and a programmable wood router featuring 3-axis control and a large 4’x8’ bed, membership granted me 24 hour access to bandsaws, chop saws, table saws, jigsaws, drill presses, taps, dies, welders, buffers, grinders, sanders, lathes, jointers, planers, laser cutters, weaving looms, and leather working station. Not only was the tool and equipment arsenal impressive, but the access to knowledge and talent was impressive as well. As “the space” consisted of approximately 200 members and volunteers, including carpenters, machinists, welders, computer gurus, electricians, engineers, artists, and too many other eclectic specialists to mention, help was never too far away—and no job was impossible for the crew at the Milwaukee Maker Space. But this is not to say that all of the tasks that I performed under the Maker Space roof are expedient and efficient.

Knowing that this Tabernacle model was a prototype, I knew one thing—that I didn’t know quite what I should expect or how long it would take. Although I have worked as a professional engineer in a variety of industries, most of my practical “hands-on” wood and metal shop experience dates back to high school, and the three numerically controlled machines that I needed to use required special training. Sometimes there were equipment access conflicts, sometimes equipment was broken down or left in disrepair, and materials needed to be stowed away at the end of every workday. Also, I had to both redesign and remake a number of prototype parts from scratch, as it was clear that I didn’t have a few of the minor fabrication details thought through very well from the beginning. Given these factors, what I had hoped to accomplish in four weeks took more like four months. Of course, “hope” is never a good basis for a practical estimate, but my professional experience never left me with the knowledge base to estimate such a project with so many unknowns with any level of precision or accuracy. When I set out, I wasn’t so naïve as to think that I would be able to finish the modeling project with no setbacks or in accordance with personal timeline preference, but it is nevertheless discouraging when things take longer than expected.

Once the fabrication of the individual frame parts was completed in March of 2017, I was ready to commence with the prototype erection procedure. That is, sort of... Unfortunately, at the conclusion of my hardware fabrication, I still lacked an indoor facility for frame setup. I needed a space with a level floor that was climate controlled and out of the elements (lest they warp or require rework as a result of water damage), such that I could leave the parts in an interim state for a number of weeks as I worked through the details of the initial installation procedure. To this end, my friend Josh was kind enough to allow me to use his garage and workshop—although it was not exactly what I had in mind for an “empty space”. After I came by and surveyed the space, taking some measurements and figuring out what would be required for equipment relation, I figured we could probably make it work—but just barely. From my calculations, it looked like the extremities of the erected structure would probably fit within just a few inches of the walls.

After some serious reorganization of Josh’s garage goods, I began to set up the large wooden frame—almost exactly the same way that I outlined in the procedure that I had developed the year before. While I was not exactly trying to erect something as large as six stories in height, I didn’t exactly have thousands of Levite helpers at my disposal, either. While I believe that the scale model erection process might be accomplished by ten trained men over the course of an hour or two, erection of the 22 foot scale model used one or two erecting the frame over the course of a week or two with a few hundred feet of rope for frame rigging—straddling some of Josh’s garage shelving and fitting within the garage by mere inches—exactly as predicted. If my memory serves me correctly, the erection iteration began on or around 3/14/5777 on the Hebrew calendar (June 8th), as was completed on or around 6/28 (which is curiously 2 x 3/14) of 2017, which is interesting, considering that the project went public on 3/14/15. From time to time, it leaves me wondering if my efforts weren’t thwarted in part and stalled from time to time for these very reasons.

As I did learn a number of things about God’s dwelling place itself over the course of the “proof of concept” model fabrication and erection process, the completion of the scale model structure marked a major project milestone. Not only do does this model serve as an effective “proof of concept”, but the whole exercise really refined my understanding of some of the Hebrew nuance, which in turn gave me an even greater respect for the brilliance of the design that is so concisely conveyed by a handful of divinely inspired Hebrew words in a mere chapter of the Bible text. Granted, the model did reveal that there remains room for learning on my end and that there is room for many small engineering design improvements, but overall, the modeling exercise proved to be a success, and proved to me beyond a reasonable doubt that my original vision is more than a mere product of my own creativity or my own overactive imagination—as many members of the general religious public are likely to assume. It is practical and can be built exactly according to Exodus texts, unlike the clunky counterpart rectangular “shoebox” models that I had surveyed in Israel the previous summer. The first “proof of concept” model, of course, is a far cry from what I believe needs to be built for future project purposes under crowdfunding endeavors, but as they say, the horse needs to come before the cart.   

Tabernacle Media Products in Development

When writing the first Tabernacle book, it was my intention to make it appeal to widest possible audience; and in order to make  The House of El Shaddai the most inviting to native English speakers, detailed Hebrew references were deliberately excluded. So, after completing THOES—the book I felt compelled to write—I immediately began writing  Exploring God’s House (EGH), which is the book that I really wanted to write in order to address particulars of the Hebrew Exodus.

Although THOES covers the essential exegetical points, EGH was written using a different approach for a different audience and with a different intention.  Unlike the progressive narrative format used for THOES, EGH uses a verse-by-verse approach, typically dedicating two pages of written content per each Bible verse.  Being a Hebrew-centric extrapolation of THOES, EGH includes supplementary language tools and references for readers ranging from religious professionals and Biblical Hebrew enthusiasts (empowering everyday English readers with no Hebrew experience). Created for advocates and antagonists alike, EGH is written to allow readers to understand the deeper aspects of the ancient Hebrew revelation, which also preemptively defend the Tabernacle rediscovery against any pseudo-academic criticisms that might otherwise be levied against it.  

Given the thorough and systematic approach, the final EGH draft is about 260 pages (as opposed to the nominal 200 pages of THOES).  EGH editing is still underway and  tentatively scheduled for 2020 publication. 

With EGH nearly complete and THOES on the market, I began dedicating time towards other Tabernacle video, media, and modeling projects.  

The first project initiated is one that I'm referring to as The Body in God's House or perhaps The Body of El Shaddai (either BIGH or BOES) which is a product series designed to correlate similarities between the Exodus Tabernacle (as God's dwelling place) and the human body (which is also understood to be a place of divine habitation).  Where EGH is created as an essential guide to understanding the Exodus Tabernacle and its exegesis, BIGH is designed to build upon that knowledge and highlight the anatomical typology that is inherent to the divine Tabernacle design.  Unlike the traditional rectangular "shoebox", this  BIGH material is highlights the etymological, functional, geometric, and numerical similarities that show how the house of Betzalel or the "house in God's image" is really designed.

Conceptual media projects in this BIGH series range in complexity, tentatively including a coffee table book featuring professional artwork and illustrations, video presentations (PowerPoint and documentary style), and an academic / educational volume as well. Based upon the significance of this material, experienced videographers, publishers, and medical professionals are invited to contact Project 314 in order to partner with and participate in BIGH research, content development,  and marketing efforts.  

In conjunction with BIGH, another project entitled Receiving a Jewish Messiah (RJM) is underway, which is ultimately intended to help mend fences between Jews and Christians through Tabernacle-based revelations.  

For centuries, Jews have accused Christians of eisegesis, which is the "process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases", in order to advocate New Testament writings and church doctrines.  Of course, given the Project 314 round Tabernacle discovery, it's clear that Christianity has been doing more than reading into the text as many Christians have tried to "put God in a box", superimposing and force-fitting their christology into a shoebox Tabernacle design.  Conversely, Jews have likewise modeled perhaps hundreds of synagogues in accordance with the presumed shoebox proportion.  

The irony, of course, is that both Jews and Christians have been sitting on traditions, texts, and revelations that do speak to a Jewish messiah.  With the Tabernacle being central to understanding the true Jewish messiah, RJM shows how the entire picture of the Tabernacle is a great fulfillment of Ezekiel's prophecy, whereby the two half-houses of Israel are  joined together like a stick in God's hand.  A studio PowerPoint production is currently in development (target release summer 2020).  

Tabernacle STEM and Educational Modeling Kit Projects

As explained in the pages above, the past five years of this Tabernacle journey might best be described as another wilderness wandering—and a long, strange trip at that.  Since the initial 3/14/15 launch of the Project 314 website and declaration of the big-picture "research and restoration" project mission statements, public response and public engagement might best be described as "mixed".  To my knowledge and to my surprise, there have been no real attempts to reaffirm, research, or refute this model from the original Hebrew language—independent of my deliberate engagements—even though much of the design could be "reverse engineered" from free and preexisting Project 314 images. While more widespread understanding of God's dwelling place may be completely a matter of providential timing, it seems that those in favor of the Tabernacle rediscovery have largely been inclined to accept it on intuition or perhaps blind faith, whereas opponents apply similar intuition and respond via apathetic skepticism.  

In any case, based on the historical return of the Jews to Jerusalem both in recent years and as well as in the the time of prophets Ezra and Haggai, this mixed and somewhat lukewarm response is something that can be expected.  After all, many of the Jews that had been exiled into Babylon came out speaking like Babylonians (Nehemiah 13:24), which would indicate that they were largely ignorant of their own Scriptures.  Even though the returning Jews were formally tasked with King Cyrus' mission statement to build God's house (Ezra 1:2-3), they refrained from doing their job for well over a decade.  In other words, even though they were fully funded and liberated for such a purpose, it seems that ignorance and apathy were the greatest obstacles to building God's dwelling place then, and it stands to reason that little has since changed.  This status and sentiment needs desperately to change.

To date, the Project 314 round Tabernacle discovery and journey has made two unfortunate truths evident: 1) Technically-inclined professionals are ignorant of scientific revelations and important details contained in Bible texts, and 2) Religious professionals are generally not trained, equipped, or inclined to handle relatively simple technical detail.  

Fortunately, The solution to these two overlapping problems should be obvious; that is, the restoration of cross-disciplinary education. To that end, the Project 314 Bible STEM program was envisioned, whereby the Exodus Tabernacle revelation can be employed in teaching in the so-called STEM curriculum, which include Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.   

As was the case in Nehemiah's day, you can't take the kids out of Babylon until you stop putting Babylon into the kids.  Those interested in learning more about Bible-centered STEM materials should click on the button below.

Request P-314 Bible STEM Information

Finally, after recent design and development work, the prototype for the first generation Tabernacle scale model kit is complete!

Given the need for a "hands-on" learning tool designed for children and adults alike, it seemed fitting to develop a Tabernacle model kit to facilitate a real-world Bible study, as well as facilitating dozens, if not hundreds of STEM-oriented lessons. With the overall dimensions scaled at 1 inch = 2 cubits, the assembled unit measures 50 inches across to bear resemblance to the dimensions listed in the Exodus texts.  Furthermore, the Project 314 kit is comprised of over 400 pieces—unlike other Tabernacle model kits in the religious marketplace—to allow for direct 1:1 comparison to the hundreds of elements described in the Biblical narrative.

Apart from being the most accurate model available, the Project 314 Tabernacle kit is easy-to-assemble, making it ideal for home, church, or synagogue Bible study.  As all parts are made to precision dimensions, the kit requires no measuring, no cutting, no glue, no mess, no complicated instructions, and no special tools for assembly.  Young children may require supervision, as assembly requires some fine motor skills with smaller parts, and as some of the parts have sharp ends and could be choking hazards.  Finally, in addition to being easy to assemble, the kit is also designed to be easily disassembled so the model may be easily stored and reused.

Due to specialized manufacturing processes, this first generation Tabernacle model will only be produced in a limited production run.  Click the button below for further inquiries or pre-order to ensure you are among those first limited-edition production slot!

More P-314 Tabernacle Kit Information