1 Kings 7:21–22 (ESV)

21 He set up the pillars at the vestibule of the temple. He set up the pillar on the south and called its name Jachin, and he set up the pillar on the north and called its name Boaz.

1 Kings 7:21–22 informs the reader of the setting up of the pillars at the vestibule of the temple. The vestibule or porch is explained in the comment on 1 Kings 6:3. Notice here the ESV’s choice of the preposition at rather than in or on. They rightly see the pillars as free-standing objects, not inside the temple building or even the porch.

The pillars were set on the south and north sides of the vestibule. Unique in all of the temple furnishings, each pillar was given a personal name. The one on the south was named Jachin and the one on the north was named Boaz. How ought we to understand the giving of personal names to these pillars?

Their positioning as free-standing objects rather than weight-bearing architectural structures may give us a hint. Throughout Israel’s early history, dating back to the time of the patriarchs, pillars or other objects were set up as witnesses to the Lord and what he had done or would do for his people. For example, Jacob set up a pillar at Bethel in witness to God’s faithfulness from the time of the vision he had received there until his return to the land of his birth after his sojourn with Laban (Genesis 35:14). Another example is the twelve stones of witness set up by Joshua to commemorate the people of Israel crossing the Jordan river on dry ground (Joshua 5:8).

The matters mentioned in the preceding paragraph present the idea of objects being used at the command of God to serve as witnesses to His people. We suggest that the two pillars set up at the temple's porch were to serve as pillars of testimony to the God whose house the temple was. This fact would be emphasized by the naming of these two pillars.

The name Jachin means he will establish. The name Boaz means “he is mighty." The pillars, therefore would give witness to the One whose might established Israel and who will be its continued strength.

This suggestion seems to be the only explanation as to why seven verses in this chapter should be given to two objects of temple furnishing that have no discernable reference to the ritual services of the temple. This is more than half the number of verses that the writer uses to describe the entire complex of the royal palace.