Did David err in envisioning the Temple?

In Exodus elaborate details are given for the construction of the Tabernacle and this was where God was to meet with the Israelites on the mercy seat in the Holy of Holies. The Tabernalce signified that God was not localised to one place but was mobile and could be anywhere. This was a concept foreign to the Palestinians and when Saul took the Tabernacle to war the Philistines were perturbed by the same.

It made the Jews aware that Yahweh was God of the world and not just of the Jews.

But when David envisaged the Temple and encouraged Solomon to build it, Yahweh became the od of Jerusalem and not of the world. The very concept of God changed with the Temple. Considering that God did not ask for the Temple anywhere, but accepted it when it was made, it raises the question was the very premise of a Temple faulty?

What exactly is the tree of knowledge of good and evil?

Genesis 2 and 3 speak of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It is said in Gen 2:9 that it was set in the midst of the garden along with the tree of life. In Gen 2:17 they are permitted to eat of all the trees except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They were warned that if they ate of the same they would die.

In Genesis 3 Satan says that they will not die but will become gods who know good and evil Gebn 3:5. When they did eat of the fruit of this tree they did not die immedeiately, but God said "Behold man has become like one of us to know good and evil" indicating that what Satan had told Eve was correct.

What did it mean to become like God, knowing good and evil?

What we do know is that they spiritually died. Whether they had physical immortality before the fall or not is not clear. Most assume that they had, but lost it, but it is not necessary from the text.

How does the tree give them this "knowledge of good and evil" and make them like God? Was there something in the tree?

The word knowledge can mean to "experience" good and evil, because "knowledge" in the Hebrew is always experiential unlike the Greek. The difficulty with this interpretation, which is most satisfying is that in Gen 3:22 it says that God has the knowledge of good and evil and there it cannot mean experience.

The other meaning which I find satisfying is "the ability to decide what is right and what is wrong." So man became independent of God and began taking decisions on what is right and wrong on his own.

In either case, the knowledge comes from disobeying God and not from the fruit of the tree. It is because of the command the tree gets involved. It is like what Paul says in Romans 7 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." Sin comes in because of the Law.

So it is the command that made the tree special and breakage of the command made Adam independent of God and made Adam experience sin in himself.