THIE IENID

OIF TIHHE BIEGlH\lN]|NG

Re-ve/<ztz'0n 21-22 and the O/at Testament

\X/IIILILII/*\]\/\\ JL lDUll\/\\BIRIElLIL
The End of the Bfigilllling

B1; Dumbrcll, ‘Wi]]ia111 _].

Cop}-'1'ig]1t©19S5 by ]3;1lu:r Book House
ISBN: 1-57910-556-4

Rcprimd bx, VI/ipfend Steak Publishers

' 155' W1-r;r.t Brnndmmv *- E:g,gcm' DR 9?-EH11

Prex-iollsly published by Baker Bonk Hmlse, 1935

CONTENTS

THE NEW’ IERUSALEM

The .Pr.esentation..in_Reeelati.on-.2.1:2.2
1
i.. Isaiah
Is.aiaI1.l—l2
Isaiah I3-23
Isaiah 24~2?
Isaiah .2-.'3—3.3
Isaiah 34-35
Isaiah 36-39
Outline of the Structure of Isaiah
sap
o-ire ‘:+s-ft» Isaiah 40-45
i_ Isaiah 56-66
Summary
ii. Prophetic References to Jerusalem until 58? BC
iii. }ert1s_al_em’s Fall and the Future of Israel’s Institutions
The Books of Kings
iv. Lamentations
st. Ezekiel
sti. Zechariah
The New Testament
i. Gospels
ii. Paul
iii. Hebrews
iv. Revelation Reeonsiderecl

IHEflE

The E1'.esentation.in Revela.tion.2l.-22

The Old Testament
i. Tabernacle and Exodus
Exodus 1'5:1-I8
Sabbath and Creation
Sinai. Conenant
*3‘? Construction Interrupted
F1-!"*
 ii. Tabernacle and Conquest
iii. From Tabernacle to Temple
iv. Kingship and Temple
H David and the Building of the Temple
I9. Daoiaiic Covenant Promises
C. Monarchical Period
V! Ezekiel
a Initial Visions
b. Vision of the New Temple
C. Significance of the Vision
vi. Haggai
vii. Zechariah .
viii. Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah
The New Testament
i. The Gospels
]esus' Tempie En try
Iesus’ Trial
Luke and Stephen 's Speech
F‘-F‘"~‘="F'*Iohn
ii. Paul
iii. Peter
IV. Hebrews
V. Revelation Reconsidered

THE NEW COVENANT

The Presentation in Revelation 21-22

The Old Testament
i. Pre—Euilic Prophetic Attitude to Covenant
ii. Prominence of Covenant Terminology in the Extlic Period
iii. Jeremiah
a. Calland Vocation
iv. Structure
c. ]eremiah3I:3I-34
1 Continuity and Discontinuity
21 Unilateral Nature of the New Covenant
"New" Covenant
Law in the Heart
“Pi” "Newness"
 iv. Ezekiel
v. Isaiah 40-66
vi. Post-Exilic Period
The New Testament
i. Matthew
ii. Paul
a. 2 Corinthians3
ls. Galatians
iii. John and Hebrews
iv. Revelation Reconsidered

THE NEW ISRAEL

The Presentation in Revelation 21-22

The Old Testament
i. Sinai and Israel
a. Moses and the Giving of the Legal Codes
Covenant Renewal
Exodus I9:.3b-6: Abrahamic Emphasis
'tr--5'.1 Patriarchal Narratives
I—Io

iii. Deuteronomy
iv. Pre—Monarchical Period
v. The Advent of Kingship
vi. Monarchical Period; Emergence of Remnant Theology
vii. leremiah
viii. Ezekiel
in. Isaiah 40-55
it. Post-E:-tilic Developments
The New Testament
i. Gospels
a. Matthew
Mark
Luke -— Acts
lohn
in5""?-F"F1‘Epistles
iii. Revelation Reconsidered
 THE NEW CREATION

The Presentation in Revelation 21-22

The Old Testament
i. Creation and Redemption: Exodus 15: 1-13
ii. Creation and Redemption: Genesis 1~11
Genesis 1'.-I-3
Genesis 1:26-28
Genesis 2
Genesis 3
["='F1. 1'1"Z5" $t Genesis 4-II
iii. Isaiah 40-66
iv. Apocalyptic Literature
v. Wisdom Literature
Summary
The New Testament
1 P 3.11 1
a. Colossions I:I5-20
I:-. Other Pauline Statements
ii. New Creation and the Gospel
iii. Paul Again
iv. Revelation Reconsidered
ABBREVIATIONS

AB Anchor Bible
AnBib Analecta biblica
AusBR Australian Biblical Review
AIISS Andrews University Seminary Studies
Bib Biblica
BibOr Biblica et orientala
BSac Bibliotheca Sacra
BT The Bible Translator
BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift for die alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
ConBOT Coniectanea biblica, Old Testament
EvQ Evangelical Quarterly
I-IDR Harvard Dissertations in Religion
I-ISM Harvard Semitic Monographs
HTR Harvard Theological Review
Int Interpretation
IAAR lournal of the American Academy of Religion
IBI. journal of Biblical Literature
IETS lournal of the Evangelical Theological Society
HS Iournal of lewish Studies
ISOT lournal for the Study of the Old Testament
ISS Iournal of Semetic Studies
ITC Journal of Theology and Church
ITS lournal of Theological Studies
NCB New Century Bible .,
NICNT New International Commentary on the NT
NovT Novum Testamentum
NovTSup Novum Testamentum, Supplements
NTS New Testament Studies
OTL Old Testament Library
OTS Oudtestamentische Studien
RTR Reformed Theological Review
SBLDA Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series
SEA Svenslc exegetislc drsbolc
SNTSMS Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series
SOTSMS Society of Old Testament Studies Monograph Series
‘reu have either reached a page that is unavailable forviewing or reached yourviewing limit iorthis
bool-<.
 nvraovucrron
INTRODUCTION

Each of the following five stories deals with a major idea found in
Revelation 21-22 and seeks to answer the question, “Why is this such
an appropriate way not only to finish the Book of Revelation but to
conclude the story of the entire Bible?” This question, of course, leads
to other questions such as, “I/Vhere did these ideas come from?” and
"How have they changed or developed down through the Bible's
story?”
It is these questions which are responsible for the approach taken in
the five studies. We will begin with a brief examination of the
particular idea or theme as it occurs in Revelation 21-22, then trace the
birth and growth of the idea throughout the Old Testament, the
Gospels, and the Epistles, and finally return to Revelation 21-2.2.
At first glance the approach of Revelation 21-22—Old Testament,
Gospels, Epistles-Revelation 21-22 may appear somewhat awkward or
even contrived. Upon further reflection, however, it becomes apparent
this movement serves to answer one basic, yet crucial, question: “I-low
did the seer of Revelation arrive at the content of his panoramic final
vision?"
The approach implemented in the following pages is the method of
biblical-theology. As a discipline biblical-theology often assumes a
wide variety of expressions. Yet at the heart of each of these
expressions is the overriding presupposition that the rich diversity of
Scripture serves its profound unity. Further, this “diversity within
unity” is most clearly seen through a consideration of the historical
development of theological themes. And, this historical progression of
ideas runs from one end of the Bible to the other. In other words, the
entire Bible is moving, growing according to a common purpose and
towards a common goal (thus we can say that the whole Bible is
“escl'1atological"l .
So to discern the origins of Revelation 21-22, the very end of the
Bible’s story, we must go back beyond the important contributions of
the traditions of the Gospels and Epistles all the way to the Old
Testament.
We are not setting out merely to compile a list of favourite “proof-
teitts”, nor to embark on a thorough discussion of only those tents
directly alluded to or quoted in Revelation 21-22. llllhat must be
explored is the Old Testament origin of each of the major themes
present in the heart of John's vision, Rev 21:1~5:
‘feu heave either reeehee e page thet ie uneveileble ferwiewing er reeehee gweurviewing limit ferthie
heel-<.
‘reu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie unavailable ferwiewihg er reaehecl greurviewihg lirhit terthie
heel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reaehecl grpurviewihg lirhit tprthie
peel-<.
 1

THE NEW IERUSALEM

The Presentation in Revelation 21-22

The term "New Ierusalem” only occurs biblically in Rev 3:12 and 21:2;
the former look forward to the reality which the latter describes in
detail. Having come down from heaven this New Jerusalem
emphasizes continuity with the old order by its name, and the
inbreaking of the New Creation by its descent. In fact the New
Jerusalem is mentioned almost in the same breath as the New Creation.
We pass from one image to the other as a matter of course. She comes
down as a bride adorned for her husband; hence, an image which is
frequently employed in the NT for the church (2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:23-32)
indicates that we are not merely dealing with a symbol of government
{i.e., the city) but with the people of God symbolized in terms of the
city.‘ It is important to note that “city” images dominate the
presentation of the eschatological reality at the end of the Bible. This
indicates the completely political direction which the Kingdom of God
assumed. This heavy political emphasis will be sustained as we survey
the origin and development of the Jerusalem symbolism in the Bible.
The notion of the city indicates at once the forms of government by
which the people of God will be regulated.
There is a fluid oscillation between these motifs of governed and
government in Rev 21-22. The nuptial images in 21:2 also indicate the
consummation of history is at hand. This descent of the city is thus the
denouement, the end of all things, the ushering in of the new age.
Clearly, we are operating within the domain of previously erected OT
expectations. The exaltation of lerusalern as both a symbol of divine
government, and the world centre for the governed, is an idea to which
the eschatology of the OT was particularly directed.

1
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forviewihg or reachecl yourviewihg limit torthie
pool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
 THE NEW JERUSALEM

Jerusalem image, and to ask the question why the dominant

eschatological presentation at the end of the Bible is understood in
terms of a city.

The Old Testament

i. Isaiah

Isaiah is dominated by Jerusalem imagery. The bool-Cs structure is, as

we will demonstrate, informed by Jerusalem orientated theology.
Commencing (Isa 1) with a depiction of absolute corruption seizing the
city (c740-o90l3C), the prophecy concludes (6620-24) with the
emergence of a New Jerusalem as God’s holy mountain. Further, it is to
this mountain the world will go in a pilgrimage of worship. It is clear
from the final chapters of this great prophecy that the New Jerusalem
and the New Creation are intimately linked. This link is sharpened in
65:17-18, where the New Jerusalem entails a New Creation. The New
Jerusalem is thus a symbol of the New Creation and is finally presented
as an obvious juxtaposition with the city initially described. There is
thus good reason to see this book as a “tale of two cities” (a motif on
which the book of Revelation is largely based). We will confirm this
preliminary hypothesis by appeal to the particular units comprising the
book of Isaiah.
Ari immediate question is raised: what accounts for the corruption
denounced in Isa 1 and the transition to the New Jerusalem concluding
the work? Before we enter into details we should note it is not merely
the appearance of Jerusalem at the beginning and end of Isaiah which
excites our interest in the developing theme, The first half of this major
work ends with a threatened, exile pronounced upon Hezekiah and his
city Jerusalem (chap. 39). With chapter 40 the second half of the book
begins with an announcement of a prospective return from exile in
general terms (“Comfort Ye, Comfort Yet”). But immediately the
prophet translates this comfort extended to “my people” into the
Jerusalem of verse 2 who is to be spoken to “comfortably”. The
prophet is to tell her that in quantitative terms she has suffered enough
since she has not only reached the limit of her endurance, but the
power of Babylon is now to be curtailed.
Presumably, though not certainly, Isa 40:1-11 is addressed to the
exiles in Babylon, geographically some hundreds of miles away from
the destination to which they are directed. A second Exodus lies before
the people of God, a concept which is outlined in the most elevated

5
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
 THE NEW IER USALEM

The following confession of sin by Isaiah (Isa 6:5) is the key to the
chapter since it too identifies what has been seen as a vision of
judgement. “Woe is me,” he cries, “for I am a man of unclean lips.”
Had the utterance stopped at that point it may have been no more than
a typical prophetic reserve to a divine call. The prophet, however,
proceeds at once to identify himself with his people and to involve
himself in what has been their error and sin. Undoubtedly this vision
caused him to put kingship into proper focus, for he remarks that eyes
have seen the king (v5). Why, we may ask, is this emphasis placed
upon the uncleanness of his and his people's lips? ‘What caused this
reaction? Since it is in response to the confession of the seraphim (v3)
from whose lips he has heard the endorsement of divine kingship as an
act of heavenly worship, it may well be that a clear disparity has been
established. The disparity is between what he has just heard and the
perfunctory acknowledgement of Yahweh's kingship by Jerusalem and
perhaps himself in the Jerusalem cult. Since 6:1-9: .7 deals with kingship
under judgement to be followed by a restored Davidic kingship, it
would seem, then, the sin which is acknowledged clearly involves
Judah’s replacement of trust in Yahweh's kingship with what could be
achieved through political kingship and adept diplomatic
manoeuvring.
Because the prophet’s vision of the worshipping seraphim accounts
for his concern, the tirade against official Jerusalem worship in Isaiah 1
becomes clear. Further, how this tirade relates to the temple vision,
and why the book commences with the denunciation is thereby
explained. It is not difficult to establish the connection given that
official worship in Israel and Judah was pre-eminently an
acknowledgement of divine kingship. The temple on which the
Jerusalem cult was centred was also the divine "palace" and as such was
the seat of Israel's final political authority. lsrael’s worship was
intended to be a recognition of this fact. Perhaps Isaiah is
acknowledging in chapter 6 that he also had uncritically accepted the
prosperity of the age of Uzziah as a mark of divine favour. The
disorders which had effected the central core of Israel's responses to
Yahweh (cf. 1:10-20) represent ultimate rejection of Yahweh’s rule, and
thus an abrogation of the covenant. While the call of the prophet
(chap. 6) directs his attention to this gross national abuse, chapter 1
expresses the condemnation which must inevitably ensue for the nation
treading the path of covenantal rejection.
The voice of the Lord which follows the cleansing (Isa 6:8)
commissions Isaiah to take this terrible message of judgement to Judah
and Jerusalem. There can be no remission. Politically, state and city

9
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that ie unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthie
bool-<.
 THE NEW JERUSALEM

The “high mountain” of Ezek 40:2 resumes the notion of “my holy
mountain” (20:40), the mountain height of Israel, the world centre.
Eden liplgrs are established via 28:14: there the "holy mountain” and the
“gafden of God" (v13) are connected. The fabulous wealth of the
garden, while directly referring to Gen 2:6-14, also reminds the reader
of the extravagant descriptions of Zion in Isa 60-62. Healing streams
flow from under the temple (4?':1-:12), a fact which makes Zion the joy
of all the earth (Joel 3:17-18). No room is made for the pre-exilic sense
of Davidic kingship in Ezek 40-45 (as we will note in more detail under
the New Temple). The “prince” of these chapters, as part of the
dyarchy of prince and priest which Ezekiel contemplates, is not overtly
connected with the house of David. The name of the city “Yahweh is
there” (43:35) may avoid a direct mention of Zion and Jerusalem
because of the connotations still associated with the apostate and fallen
city. Zion is not otherwise mentioned by Ezekiel, which may constitute
an avoidance of Davidic eschatology as well. Further, the name
Jerusalem occurs only once (36:38) in the restoration prophecies after
the report of its destruction in 33:21. The political connotations
ascribed by Ezekiel to the Jerusalem of his prophecy would not have
made the transfer of his eschatological concepts to it an easy matter.
Indeed, a “city of God" concept does not appear in the book until after
the final defeat of the nations in chapters 38-39. lt is thus a concept to
be associated with the final indwelling of God and not with any
prospect of an intermediate reign.

vi. Zechariah

The only other OT book to reflect at length upon the question of

Jerusalem is the book of Zechariah, Zech 1-B is also heavily temple
orientated: emphasizing the rebuilding of the temple, Yahwelfs return
to Jerusalem (1 :16) begins a process of restoration concluded at the end
of the first section of the prophecy by Jerusalem becoming the world
pilgrimage centre (8:20-23). Gentile reaction to this is noted in 8:23 in
the oft repeated confession "God is with you”. Reminiscent of
Abimeleclfs perception of Abraham (Gen 21:22}, it once more is
employed to sum up the blessings extended to the world through the
New Jerusalem.
Zech 9-14 presents roughly the same sequences as chapters 1-8 and
thus appears to be both complementary and interpretative. The details
of Zechariah 9 are bewildering, and it seems preferable to take the
seemingly historical references as symbolic.“ Thus, 9:1-'7' deals with

25
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
book.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
book.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
book.
 THE NEW JERUSALEM

Spirit to the New “Israel” is given in the upper room (John 20:22), and
the Spirit commissions their preaching ministry in Acts 2. But it is from
Jerusalem, as Luke points out, that the church moves out finding its
final centre within the Acts narrative in Rome for the time of the
Gentiles has been conclusively ushered in.

ii. Paul

The command to the disciples in Luke 24:49 and Acts 1:4 to remain in
Jerusalem excites the curiosity of the band. Is the fulfilment of the
kingdom, and thus the restoration of all things (the New Creation),
about to occur? Will Israel's role to the world then be brought into
play? Jesus makes it clear however that Christian ministry must now be
developed. In the remainder of the NT the nature of this ministry is
best demonstrated in the Pauline writings. It is paradoxical that, as the
apostle to the Gentiles, Paul's ministry is Jerusalem centred. For him
the gospel begins in Jerusalem (cf. Rom 15:19) and in their collection
for the poor Jerusalem saints Gentiles must recognize the spiritual
centrality of Jerusalem. Paul organizes this collection as a major
component of his ministry to provide by it a symbol of Jewish-
Christian unity. The first fruits of Paul's Gentile ministry therefore
must be brought in pilgrimage to Jerusalem (vv16—23).
Paul thus endorsed the older prophetic eschatology. Pauline
theology of this character was Abrahamic in its bent as his epistles
make clear (cf, Rom 4; Gal 3). It was a visit to Jerusalem on a mission of
this nature which provoked his arrest. This in turn provided the
occasion for the dismissal of the earthly Jerusalem by Luke (Acts
21:27-29} and its replacement by Rome as the final point of focus
(chap. 23). Paul thereby preserved in his missionary experience the OT
tensions between reality and eschatology as connected with Jerusalem.
By his journey to Rome Paul parallels the journey of Jesus to Jerusalem
which ended in his arrest and death (Luke 9:51-18:14). ln both journeys
the rejection of Israel and Jerusalem had been pronounced.
The unique phrase in Gal 4:26 "the Jerusalem which is above” needs
discussion. Paul appears to be responding to the language of his
opponents, though it must be said that the concept of a “heavenly
Jerusalem" does not seem to be prominent in either intertestamental
literature or late Judaism, even though the notion of a restored
Jerusalem within the eschaton is frequent, His argument in Gal 3-4 is
connected with Abrahamic spiritual descent. Chapter 3 is virtually an

29
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
book.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
book.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
book.
 THE NEW JERUSALEM

9. P.R. Ackroyd, "Isaiah I-XII; Presentation of a Prophet", VT5u_t:I

29 (Leiden: Brill, 1973) 16-43.
10. Verses 18-20 are not placatory in the context. Cf. A.V. Hunter.
Seek the Lord! A Study of the Meaning and Function of the
Exhortation in Arnos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah and Zephaniah
(Baltimore: St. Mary's Seminary and University, 1980) 191-9.
11. The connection between thrones set and judgement in the OT is
drawn out by R. Knierim "The Vocation of Isaiah", VT 18 (1968) 53-4.
Knierim also notes the striking correspondences between Isa o and the
Judgement vision of Micaiah-ben-Imlah at 1 Kgs 22:19.
12. K. Joines ("Winged Serpents in Isaiah's Inaugural Vision", JBL
86 [1967] 410-15) has the evidence.
13. Knierim, "Vocation", 54-6.
14. W.J. Dumbrell, "Some Observations on the Political Origins of
Israel's Eschatology", RTR 36 (1977) 38-9. The material of Isa 2:2-4 is
contained in Mic 4:1-5 and thus seems anterior to both.
15. For the presentation of the Zion traditions and their evaluation
in terms of their probable historical origins, cf. J.J.M. Roberts, "The
Davidic Origin of the Zion Tradition", JBL 92 (1973) 329-44.
16. S. Erlandsson (The Burden of Babylon [ConBOT 4; Lund: CWK
Gleeiup, 1970] 102-5) notes this.
17. ibid, 96-97.
18. Roberts, "Isaiah in Old Testament Theology", Int 36 (1982) 142.
19. W. Millar, Isaiah 24-27 and the Origin ofrilpocalyptic (HSM 30:
Missoula: Scholars, 1976) 30.
20. W.H. Irwin, Isaiah 28-33, Translation with Philological Notes
(BibOr 30: Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1977) 30.
21. On the structure of Isa 40:1-11 note K. Kiesow, Exodastexte int
Jesajabach (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1979) 23-66.
22. ibid, 165.
23. ibid, 57-8.
24. As pointed out by W.A.M. Beuken, "Mispat. The First Servant
Song in its Context", VT 22 (1972) 1-30.
25. PD. Hanson, The Daron of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1975) 32-208. Our indebtedness to his dissection of Isa 56-66
is acknowledged.
26. C. Westermann, Isaiah 40-66 (QTL; London: SCM, 1969) 428.
27. We are dependent upon the outline of J.T. Willis, "The Structure
of the Book of Micah", SEA 34 (1969) 15-42.

33
‘feu heave either reeehee e page thet ie uneveileble ferwiewing er reeehee gweurviewing limit ferthie
heel-<.
‘feu heave either reeeheci e page thet ie uneveiieble ferwiewing er reeeheci gieurviewing limit ferthie
beei-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::i a page that ie uhatraiiaple fprwiewihg er reaeheci grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peek.
 2

THE NEW TEMPLE

The Presentation in Revelation 21-22

In describing the nature of the end-time city of Ierusalem, Rev 21:22

says explicitly that there was no temple there. However, in spite of this
emphatic statement there is good ground for supposing that the
symbolism associated with the concept and function of the temple in
the OT period is present in these concluding chapters of the Bible. The
theology bound up with the concept of the New Temple in the OT and
NT also finds an tmmistakable place.
First of all, as AX. Collins has noted, 1 the Ierusalem appendix to the
book of Revelation (i.e., Rev 21:9-22:5) has been carefully constructed
on the form and content of Ezek 40-45. Blending temple complex and
holy city, the city of Ezekiefs expectation is clearly the New Ierusalem
even though it is not named, probably for polemic reasons associated
with the period. However, Zion and Jerusalem, temple and temple site
itself, had been inextricably bound together in the OT. Thus at the
conclusion of Ezek 40-48 the magnificence of the temple description,
and the blessings conferred by its presence, is given its rationale by
being fitted into the new city structure. The name of that end-time city,
Ezekiel indicates, is fittingly Yahweh Shnmmnh, "Yahweh is present”.
City and temple are therefore again associated in that developed
eschatological presentation from which Rev 21 draws much of its
material.
Secondly, the Holy City comes down as the abode of Yahweh, i.e.,
as the temple of Yahweh had been in the OT. He is thus enthroned in
the New Ierusalem as he was in the QT temple. The point of approach
to God is through entry into the New Jerusalem, as it was the temple in
the OT. In short, in Rev 21 the concept of the sanctuary is enlarged to
be co-extensive with the concept of “holy space” referred to in that

3.’?
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forviewihg or reachecl yourviewihg lirnit torthie
heel-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forviewihg or reachecl yourviewihg lirnit torthie
heel-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
beel-<.
 THE NEW TEMPLE

keeping of the sabbath, completes the Exodus redemption and gives it

this significance. We will have occasion later to note that in Gen 2:1--’-la
the concept of sabbath is associated with a notion involving “rest” or
"perfection".
It is thus revealing that when the rationale for the keeping of the
sabbath is offered in Exod 20:11 this notion of “sabbath rest” is brought
into connection with a further important Hebrew theological concept
of "rest" as dimension is added to the concept of sabbath and a link is
provided between two distinct, but interrelated notions. In Exod 20:11
the Heb. noun menuhnh occurs. This root does not occur in Gen
2:1—4a. It is now brought into connection with sbt “to rest”. The
meaning of this concept is not that expressed under the notion of sbt. It
is rather “ease”, "refreshment", life in an atmosphere where tensions
have been withdrawn.”
Since from a qualitative perspective peace in God's presence is the
goal of all human experiences, the two notions of rest associated with
the sabbath in Exod 20:11 are not remote from each other. Heb. nuah
from which mennhah derives primarily has to do with the undisturbed,
peaceful nature of the life of the people of God in the domain of Go-d's
gift, the land. It therefore conveniently expresses the goal or
completion of God’s promises and thus symbolizes their wider
enjoyment. Nuah and sbt are drawn together not only at 20:11 but also
in 23:22. The notion of rest from labour, however, contained in the
sabbath arrangement of 23:12 and 34:21 is a derivative idea arising
from completion, and therefore not a primary concern.
By placing the tabernacle's erection in close association with an
insistence upon the observation of the sabbath, we are reminded not
only of the connections between sabbath and creation forged by Exod
20:11,“ but also of the nature of Adam’s sanctuary situation in Gen 2.
This, in tum, furthers connections between the Tabernacle and the
creation account. It is interesting to observe that in Ezek 23:11-15 the
parallelism is clear between Eden as the garden of God (v13) and as the
mountain of God (v14). Moreover, fabulous wealth (vv1-5) is
descriptive of this situation (cf. Gen 2:6-14}. Later, in connection with
the temple, we will encounter the notion of the river of God fertilizing
the earth, another concept developed from the Eden material.
It is enough, however, for our purposes here to point to the general
connection made between sanctuary (tabernacle), creation and
restfsabbath.’ If it is the presence of God in Eden which permits the
garden to function as a sanctuary, then tabernacleftemple theology is
designed to enable the promised-land as a whole to serve as a sacred

41
 THE END OF THE BEGINNING

shrine. I/Vhat is more, the resplendent description of the Prince of Tyre

in Ezek 23:11-15 has long since been recognized not only to be
dependent upon the Eden background, but also to have reference
through the precious stones mentioned (v13) to the adornment of the
breast-plate of the High Priest, the tabernacle officiant.-i Indirectly the
biblical writers may have thought Adam’s role to have been priestly.
We recognize that he is also portrayed in Gen 1 in a distinctively royal
role.’
There is doubtless some connection between all of this and the
charge given to Israel in Exod 19:5b-6 to function as a kingdom of
priests. In the progressive separation in the OT between king and priest
institutionally, both function as representative figures. The high
priestly breast-plate points to the -function of the high priest as
intercessor and as representative of Israel as a whole, carrying the
notion of a "royalty of priests" forward in an interesting direction.

c. Sinai Covenant

There is need to return now to the specific function of the tabernacle

within the covenant account of Exodus. The blueprint to build is
offered to Moses as the conclusion of the covenant ratification in Exod
24. In short, this forms the divine response to that ceremony. The
concept of the tabernacle thus expresses the unity of Israel as a
worshipping community under covenant, echoing the frequently
reiterated OT ideal, "My dwelling place will be with them; and I will be
their God, and they will be my people" (cf. Ezek 37:27’). This is
essentially restated in Rev 21:3. God’s presence in Israel, however, is
kingly, a point which Exod 19:5b-6 has made clear. As have, it might
be added, the possible masterfservant features deducible from the
ancient Near Eastern treaty format to which we believe the account of
Exod 19-34 is substantially indebted. Moreover, the notion of
Yahweh's kingship over Israel is explicitly stated in 15:18.
The tabernacle and the later temple thus function as a royal dwelling
and it is therefore apparent why its "pattern" must descend from
heaven, and why the heavenly genesis of the idea is so emphasized in
Exodus. Templef tabernacle and palace are thus united functions. The
intention of this first tabernacle account is now clear. Israel is to
respond in worship and this response is to take the primary form of
acknowledging sovereignty; God's kingship over Israel and the world.
The presence of the tabernacle in Israel's midst is a primary reminder of
Israel's role. In other words, worship is the protocol by which one may
enter the divine presence, and it is in this connection that we may now

42
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
beel-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
beel-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
beel-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit torthis
beel-<.
 THE NEW TEMPLE

not until a visible sign of blessing accompanied the location of the ark
in the house of Obed-Edom the Gittite that David had ventured to
move the ark onwards again. The joyful reception which the ark
received on its return (v15) defined it as the pre-eminent Israelite cultic
object. Its return also heralded a new departure in relationships for the
house of David since, in the closing verses of chapter 6, the house of
Saul in the shape of David's wife Michal is rejected from participation
in the Davidic succession. Thus the ill-based kingship of Saul which
had not been associated with the sacral symbols of the kingdom was
brought to a formal close by Michal’s dismissal from the court.
Ancient Near Eastern connections between dynastic kingship and
temple must now be explored. In Egypt the king was divine and
represented the basic principle of order. It was he who wielded power
to maintain the static order of creation (meat) by which world
structures were regulated. In Mesopotamia and Palestine the concept
of divine kingship did not prevail. Like Israelite kingship,
Mesopotamian rule was god-given. The king in the Mesopotamian
city-state system was the servant, the steward of the deity whose
temple within the city—state complex represented the final locus of
governmental order. Since the image of the deity was located in the
Mesopotamian temples they were regarded as signifying his presence.
Temple, as preserver of stability in the god—given social order, and
kingship, as the human arm by which that stability was maintained,
were the Mesopotamian order.
From this perspective we may note again the logic of the order of 2
Sam 6 and ‘.7’. Yahweh must first endorse Ierusalem before the matter
may be taken further by David in 7:1." We note that the impulse for
the building of a house for Yahweh arose from the fact that Yahweh
"gave rest to David from all his enemies round about" (v1}. Just as
building the tabernacle was the fitting climax to the Exodus redemption
and pointed to its meaning, so here the question of building a temple
comes as the consummation of the conquest now finalized by David's
defeat of the Philistines in chapter 5. We may also note by way of
anticipation that in Ezek 40-48 the building of the temple comes as the
consummation of all things, the goal of eschatology and follows the
final eschatological battle (chaps. 38-39).
The association of the ark with rest in 2 Sam '?:1 therefore, simply
continues the relationship mentioned in Num 10:33 where the ark of
the covenant determined lsrael’s "resting place" (Heb. mghuhahl
during the wilderness wandering period. The ark's significance in the
allotment of the promised land is noted by R.A. Carlson. He refers to

47
 THE END OF THE BEGINNING

Josh 3:11 where at the Jordan crossing the ark is named "the ark of the
covenant of the Lord of all the ea.rth".1' The role of the ark in the
conquest is also attested by its function in the fall of Jericho (Josh 6).
Our attention is further directed to the pointed observation in Josh 18:1
that the distribution of Israel's inheritance of the land coincided with
the erection of the tabernacle at Shiloh. Consistently the themes of rest,
centrality and cult had been carefully interwoven in Dent 12:1-10."
Additionally, Ps 132 provides a liturgical commentary upon 2 Sam 6
and 7 disclosing the search for the ark and its subsequent return to
Jerusalem: a clear endorsement of the Davidic house. Verse 8 may well
have a movement to Jerusalem in mind for it may be translated "Arise
O Lord, and go up from your dwelling place". From this perspective
the Psalm forges a secure connection between the ark and the notion of
rest (cf. v14). The Psalm therefore brings together the concepts of ark,
rest, dwelling, throne and temple, as interrelated terms bound up
finally with the choice of Zion and David. David is thus to understand
the nature of this "rest" which is to be related to his present building
initiative and he is to realize that Israel's worship structure should
reflect this understanding.

a. David and the Building of the Temple

It seems clear that David understands his subordinate role in the

political life of the nation after 2 Sam 6. His first concern is therefore to
capitalize upon the divinely given stability and to build a temple to
symbolize the real factor ensuring national continuance. Only a proper
acknowledgement of Yahweh's kingship will promise security as David
perceived in 7:1. In this same verse the three key terms of "rest",
"dwelling" and "house" are raised, all of them contingent upon divine
blessing. Nathan, whose prophetic advice must be sought, is at first
encouraging. but then requires modification in the light of further
revelation (v5).
The reply in 2 Sam ?:5 functions in two ways. First, it throws into
clear relief the nature of the temple builder. It is "my servant" David
who is addressed. So far this is a title which has been given only to
Moses (Exod 14:31), Caleb (an energizer of the conquest, Num 14:24)
and Joshua (as a "second" Moses, Josh 24:29). David’s leadership role
is further emphasized by reference in 2 Sam 7:11 to the fact that what
the Judges had been unable to do (i.e., complete the conquest) David
accomplished, or at least had set in motion. David has also been
described in surrogate terms as Yahweh's representative (in 5:2) — as
Israel's shepherd. The reply (2:5) thus sets David before us in exalted
terms. Second, however, the reply refuses David permission to build.

48
 THE NEW TEMPLE

In view of David's stature this refusal is often regarded as puzzling,

and reasons for it are usually sought within 2 Sam 7:5. Because of the
similarity between verses 5 and 13 (note the emphatic pronouns Heb.
attah "you" and hu "he" in vv5,13 and the verb to build banalt in
both verses) the "you" in verse 5 must bear considerable emphasis.
Certainly there is a rejection here of the sufficiency of any human
initiative in the matter of temple building. No mere human may
undertake this course without prior divine commissioning. The true
builder of the temple and indeed the builder of the true temple is God
himself. In the more limited sense however it is a rejection of David as
builder for reasons still to be discerned, yet is not an outright refusal to
endorse a temple: verse 13 makes that clear. Temple building as a
human exercise therefore is not rejected in the final sense of the word.
Others suggest it would be offensive to the prophetic consciousness
to build a temple, since prophetic theology belonged to the older tribal
league whose point of reference in worship was the mobile tabernacle
(cf. 2 Sam 7:6). This can hardly be allowed, however. since the
movement of Yahweh to Jerusalem (occurring in chap. 6) is the
endorsement of Jerusalem as sacred space and was thus the precursor
to temple building. Others have located Yahweh’s refusal in
disapproval of David’s understanding of the nature of the temple as
merely a house which Yahweh will indwell — or in which he will be
enthroned, if we were to give l-leb. yasab "to dwell" the customary
meaning which it has in divine references in the OT. This last point is
valid as is indicated by the dedication narrative of 1 Kgs B, though it
does not sufficiently explain the refusal to build. The temple will be a
symbol of the presence. However, the divine presence must never be
presumed upon.
The detail of the following verses need not be developed more
exhaustively except to note that 2 Sam 7:6-9 traces the history of
David’s rise to power and makes it clear his role and influence are to be
seen as the physical fulfilment of the promises to Abraham (cf. Gen
12:2 and the "great name" which God "will make" for David). 2 Sam
7:9b-11 deals with the future of the Davidic dynasty. The
establishment of David's great name will be followed by the
appointment of a "place for Israel" in which they will dwell securely.
Since Heb. maqom "place" is the word often used to describe the
promised land (cf. Deut 11:24; Josh 1:3). David's great name will also
mean Israel's secure occupancy of its allotted territory. All this will be
followed by the rest God will give (2 Sam 7:11), a notion clearly
associated with the gift of the land in the completed sense of a final

49
 Tl-IE END OF THE BEGINNING

conquest (cf. v10). "Rest" (v11) will ensure a stable dynasty for David
but more importantly presupposes divine kingship.
We note, however, that the concentration on temple has now been
replaced with the Davidic dynasty by a play on the word "house"
(Heb. bnyit), the common word for temple in the sense of "inner
shrine" in the OT. Heb. bayit can also function metaphorically, and
embody the sense of "lineage". Nevertheless, 2 Sam 7 contains all the
ingredients of emerging temple theology. The temple in Israel expresses
the political rule of Yahweh over his people, necessarily subordinating
the messianic king. It does not bind Yahweh in terms of static location,
but can only arise from a divine decision and is thus not seen as a mere
concomitant of earthly kingship. Given its representative and political
role as an endorsement of the promised land as a whole, presumably it
may only come when the promised land exists as an entity. The temple
will secure the Davidic line but David will not build it (one must not
miss the oblique reference to Gen 15:13 in the note of "seed" in 2 Sam
7:12). He cannot, it seems, for David’s role is to be the builder of the
empire not the temple.

b. Davidic Covenant Promises

The emphasis in 2 Sam 7 is therefore on David as conqueror and

provider of "rest". 1 Kgs 5:3-4 indicates, however, that David deferred
building because he lacked opportunity. The Kings account is clarified
in 1 Chron 22:8 (cf. 1 Chron 28:3) which ascribes the reason to his
preoccupation with bloody conquest. This is confirmed in the present
sequence in 2. Samuel by the account of David’s wars which follows in
chapters 8-10, obviously structured theologically rather than
chronologically. The eternal kingship to be given to the Davidic line is
referred to in absolute terms in 2 Sam 7:13b. Though the line may be
chastened in terms of particular individuals (v14), these covenantal
promises will not fail (note the use of the word hesecl "mercy" or,
sometimes, "covenant loyalty" in v15).
There is good warrant for supposing that 2 Sam 7 provides the
account of the "Davidic Covenant". Even though the word berit
"covenant" does not occur in chapter 7 it does in material which
reflects upon the chapter (2 Sam 23:5 and Ps 89:33-38). The
ambivalence in the OT between the unconditional nature of the
promises to David (2 Sam 23:5: Ps 89:33-38) and the conditional nature
of the Davidic covenant (Pss 39:29-32,: 132:12; 1 Kgs 2:4; 8:25: 9:4-5)
does not create difficulties. It simply reflects the absolute character of
the promise and the historical situation in which it was applied. In
general terms, the line would not fail. Yet in particular terms its

50
 THE NEW TEMPLE

benefits might be withdrawn from individuals. Indeed, the result of 587

BC, the fall of Jerusalem, and the contribution of abject leadership to
that fall, is the virtual end of the physical line of David. In
eschatological terms, however, as we well know, there was to be a
“great David’s greater Son".
Of course, David appears in 2 Sam 7 as Israel's representative. This
note will be picked up elsewhere when Israel in particular is being
discussed. One further point must be made for our present purposes
from the prayer of David (2 Sam 7:18-29) which responds to the first
half of the same chapter. The tenor of this prayer indicates that David
well understood the issues involved in Nathan's prophecy. We cannot
treat this prayer in detail.

Introduced in 2 Sam Ftlfl, it is summarized by the important but difficult

verse 19 containing the puzzling Heb. hrase in zo’t tornt hn'ndnm {literally
“and this is the law of man"). It needs to be remembered that the Heb. torah is a
word with a wide range of meaning basically havin the sense of "guidance" or
"direction" rather than the full legal overtones of our English word “law”.
There is some doubt whether verse 19b is to be taken as a statement or as a
uestion (cf. the English translations). By carefully analysing the occurrences of
flie phrase wEzo't torttt plus genitive, W.C. liaiser“ has shown that verse 19b
must be taken as a statement and that the Heb, phrase concerned served to
introduce or to summarize (as here) a set of divine instructions. Under the “this”
David has in mind the romises of the first half of the cha ter. That is to sa ,
what must precede the building of the tern le and what will result from it. Tfle
“law of man” sets forth as far as David: understood the 2 Sam 7 promise
implications for the future. This puzzling phrase “law of man" has been shown
to be paralleled by the similar Alclc. terit nise which carries the meaning of a
"fateful oracle for man”.“ The Akk. term carries the notion of an utterance
which controls or provides destiny for mankind. This sense fits the Samuel
context well. Kaiser has thus su ested that the phrase in 2 Sam ?:1§'b be
understood as "this is the charter%y which humanity will be directed.““

David correctly sees that the future and the destiny of the human
race are involved in the promises delivered to him. These promises
have been built upon the broad history of covenant concepts
developed from creation onwards. David has thus seen the full
implications connected with temple and kingship in the history of
salvation.
We should not be surprised to find that in 2 Sam '7 we are dealing
with a broad cross-section of biblical ideals. The age of David saw the
zenith of Israel's historical fortunes. For example, chapters 3-10 detail
the impressive extent of the Davidic empire. However, the Abrahamic
boundaries were in fact not fully achieved.“ This serves to remind us
that the political hopes which rested upon the temple symbolism were
never realized in the OT period. Under Solomon, Israel's heightened
political splendour is world-impressive (cf. 1 Kgs 10], a fact recognized
by the application of Abrahamic fulfilment terminology (cf. 4:20

51
‘tou have either reached a page that is unavailable forviewing or reached yourviewing liinit iorthis
book.
 THE NEW TEMPLE

But the building of the temple also confirms the election of

Jerusalem. What began in 2 Samuel 6 in terms of both place and
dynasty is now authenticated. The Exodus traditions are transferred to
this sacred mount which then became representative for all Israel. Zion
is now the cosmic centre, the point of contact between heaven and
earth. Accordingly, the ark loses its significance and will not be
replaced after its presumed destruction in 5B?'BC, since it is clear from 1
Kgs 8:16 that the act of Davidic dynasty centralization is the climax of
the conquest just as the building of the temple is the consummation of
the Sinai covenant. The Sinai tenor of the dedication is carefully
brought out in 1 Chron 29:10-20. David appears in the posture of a
second Moses assembling willing givers for the building of God's house
(cf. Exod 35:20-29).“ But the Chronicles account reveals this temple is
God's "citadel" (Heb. birnh, cf. 1 Chron 29:1), thereby pronouncing a
patent political note; the temple is built for God not for man.
With the acceptance of this theology of the presence and the
supremacy of Jerusalem and its temple in the divine political designs
for his people, the importance of Jerusalem begins to grow in prophetic
eschatology. This has been dealt with in our treatment of the New
Jerusalem. Until the exilic period, however, the temple does not figure
largely in the historical narratives. This is an ominous omission in the
narratives of 1 and 2 Kings which are concemed with the decline and
fall of historical kingship. Clearly the function of the temple was
corrupted and diminished, so that mention of it is largely restricted to
either the plundering of the Temple by conquerors —~ (1 Kgs 1-1:25-26,
2 Chron 12:9 —- Shishak of Egypt; 1 Kgs 15:18 cf. 2 Chron 16:2 — Ben
I-ladad of Syria; 2 Kgs 12:18 — Hazael of Syria; 2 Kgs 14:14 -—- Jehoash
of Israel) — or the association of pious kings with thorough-going
temple reforms, predominantly Hezekiah and Josiah.
The historical end of the temple came with the advent of Baby-
lonian power. Early in his reign Nebuchadezzar foreshadowed the
end by taking vessels from the house of the Lord to Babylon (Dan
1:2). Total destruction of the temple occured in SSTBC. But Judah
received fair warning through Jeremiah. Particularly in his temple
sermon (Jer 7 and 26, 6098C; cf. 26:1-19), Jeremiah inveighed
against the popular view which regarded the temple as a sort of
talisman. In the common mind the existence of the temple in Jeru-
salem guaranteed the inviolability of that city. Yahweh would
never destroy the sanctuary which is called by his name! Jeremiah
wamed Judah, however, that the temple would suffer the same
fate as Shiloh (cf. Ezek 8-11). We gather from this that the degree of
conuption in the Jerusalem temple in the time of Jeremiah was

53
 THE END‘ OF THE BEGINNING

approximate to that of the Shiloh period! The Josianic reforms

notwithstanding!
In Jer 7:1-5 the prophet reverses the popular opinion. They must
protect the temple, the temple will not protect them! There is a
designed play in this passage on the word "place" (Heb. maqom). In
verse 3, spoken to the men of Judah who are entering the temple
precincts, Jeremiah issues a call to repentance. If they mend their ways
then they may expect to continue to dwell in the land; note the further
use of "place" in verse '7 in the old Deuteronomic sense of "land". In
short, the preservation of the temple by piety protects that which gives
the land its character of a promised land.
T.W. Overholt had noted" that Jeremiah presents Yahweh's case
against the Jerusalem worshippers in the form of a legal brief. Within
this form Jer 7:1-2 is an instruction to the prophet, verses 3-4 contain
the details of the brief (no trust in the physical presence of the temple),
verses 5-11 take note of the social actions generated by a false sense of
security occasioned by the presence of the temple, and verses 12-15
expose the character of their false assumptions by the example of what
happened to Shiloh under parallel circumstances. In this structure
verses 5-7 contain the stipulations of the covenant and verses 8-11 are
the prophetic accusation based upon the popular rejection of these
basic covenant concepts. Jeremiah is thus calling for a radical
reassessment of national direction.
The destruction of the Shiloh sanctuary had been occasioned by a
wanton attitude to Yahweh's rule, a contempt displayed by the
conduct of worship at the shrine. So also in Jerusalem. This house is
called by God’s name. In other words it is identified with God's
revelation in history and thus with his rule (cf. Jer 7:7,10,11,14l. If
Yahweh’s sovereignty is spurned, then the symbol of that sovereignty
must necessarily be destroyed. God would annihilate this temple. Even
the ark would never be missed (cf. 3:16) since symbolism without
reality is of no value. Nowhere in his prophecy does Jeremiah hold out
any hope for the erection of a new temple. God will indwell his people
again by a new covenant. In 31:31-34 there is no mention of that
presence associated with a new temple. We simply note in passing that
a similar silence concerning the Jerusalem temple occurs in the book of
Isaiah. Isa ss-as reports misplaced attitudes to the (restored?) temple
(66:1) in keeping with those denounced in Jer 7 although the subject is
not elaborated.

54
 THE NEW TEMPLE

v. Ezekiel

a. Initial Visions

If restoration only plays a slight role in Jeremiah it is dominant in

Ezekiel, a supremely temple-centred book. With Jeremiah, Ezekiel
categorically tumed his back on those left behind after the initial
deportation in 59?BC in which Ezekiel was involved. Like Jeremiah,
Ezekiel addressed a people who refused to accept the impending reality
that God would forsake his Jerusalem sanctuary {Ezek 1-24), even
though this symbol of his presence had become so denigrated as to
provide a centre for idolatry (8:6). Therefore these two issues,
misplaced trust in the temple and its certain destruction, are major
issues in the first half of the book. The significance of this message must
be evaluated in two ways. First, in the light of the extreme interest
Ezekiel displays in the temple. Second, it must be correlated with the
fact that the eschatology of chapters 40-48 is almost totally directed
towards the erection of a new temple. Our initial attention, however,
must be given to the earlier "temple visions".
It is clear temple language and imagery dominate the first chapter of
the book. The similarity of the mobile throne vision of Ezekiel 1 to the
call narrative of Isaiah 6 has often been noted, and the two chapters are
parallel in terms of a corrunon temple perspective.“ Both passages
reveal after a dating reference how each prophet is overwhelmed by a
vision of the glory of Yahweh. An ominous mood is present in each at
the commencement of the vision. The substance of the visions is
basically the same. Ezek 1:1-14 depicts Yahweh's portable ark-throne
borne as expected by the cherubim (cf. Ps 18:10; note the precise
identification of the "living creatures" as cherubim at Ezek
10:15,20,22). To digress slightly, it is noteworthy that at the
commencement of his prophecy Ezekiel's theology is moving in
concepts which exalt Yahweh's kingship and which ante-dated the
monarchy and the first temple (cf. the ark-throne depicted in 1 Sam
4:4). Such a concept although liturgically preserved (cf. Pss 24, 96,
132, etc.) did not find frequent expression later in the Jerusalem royal
court theology.
Thus the throne appears both in Isa 8 and Ezek 1. A heavenly
dwelling place from which the vision emanates is clearly implied by
Ezek 1:1, just as Isa 6 is best understood as a prophetic vision of a
heavenly judgement scene. In Isa 6 the judgement motifs are obvious;
on the other hand, in Ezekiel the motifs are clearly inferential. Were we
in any doubt, the subsequent course of Ezel<iel's prophecy serves to
validate the judgement character of this first vision. Both Isaiah and

55
 THE END OF THE BEGINNING

Ezekiel place great emphasis upon the divine majesty and

transcendence by their respective use of background and imagery.
Ezek 1:4-28 is bonded by verses 4 and 26-28 as a unit; the details of
verse 4 (storm, surrounding brightness, and the gleam of electmm)"
are described in the reverse order in verses 27-28. The storm images
promote continuity with the old theophanic traditions. Further, the
northern origin of the theophany, the mysterious place which was -the
threatening and portentous area in the exilic period, underscores the
fact that in this theophany Judah will be called to account.“
Specifically, Yahweh has moved out from his heavenly palace and is
proceeding in imminent judgement. Thus the often cited similarity to
Isa 6 is not misplaced.
Ezek 1 sets the tone for the book. The chapter is not only glory
centred (emphasizing divine sovereignty) but temple directed and it is
not surprising to find that the second prophetic vision of judgement has
much the same emphasis. In chapters 8-11 the prophet is brought in
Spirit to Jerusalem. These units present a vision of judgement about to
befall the Jerusalem temple and serve to place chapter 10 in
prominence.“ Verse 1 is concerned with the arrival of the throne of
God at the Jerusalem temple. Since the details almost exactly parallel
1:26 we may deduce that the judgement in 10:1 is the specific
continuation of the general vision of chapter 1. As judgement begins in
the house of God the incense coals purge (Ezek 10:2) rather than
cleanse (Isa 6:6). The glory cloud filling the temple at Ezek 10:4 is again
ominously reminiscent of the incense and smoke which filled the house
resulting from the divine presence in judgement in Isa 6. A detailed
account of the cherubim follows in Ezek 10:8-1'7 during which our
attention moves back from the threshold to the waiting divine chariot.
In verses 18-19 the glory of the Lord moves from the sanctuary to the
chariot and thus the temple, the most sacred symbol of all Israel, is
abandoned.

b. Vision of the New Temple

From this dramatic rejection of the temple, we turn to the grandiose

new temple vision of Ezek 40-48, in which a radical break with the
political past is asserted. While the high mountain in Israel to which the
prophet is brought by the Spirit in 40:2 is not identified, the thought is
somewhat similar to 17:22-24 where the scion of the house of David is
to be plucked from the tip of the cedar tree planted on a high mountain.
In view of the Davidic tenor of chapter 17, the mountain of Ezek 40:1
seems to be Mt Zion.“ This conclusion and its application to chapters

56
 THE NEW TEMPLE

40-48 is further confirmed by the activity of the man with the

measuring rod (40:5), an activity associated with the measurement of
Jerusalem in Zech 2:1-4.
Yet the theology of Ezek 40-48 is hardly Zion or Davidic centred
despite the earlier connections. Dealing with the character of the ideal
Israel these chapters draw their particular theological stance from the
remote past, particularly the period of the tribal confederation. Since
the vision represents a new beginning in these terms, a possibility exists
that Sinai characteristics are also to be associated with this mountain.
This becomes increasingly evident as the blueprint for the new temple
emerges from heaven, as the ttrbnit "pattern" for the older tabernacle
had. There is probably a confluence of traditions here, all of which
underscore the emphasis placed upon divine kingship in these chapters.
Just as the building of the tabernacle completed the Exodus and was its
logical conclusion, eschatology is dominated here by the construction
of the new temple. Just as the meaning of the Exodus was proclaimed in
the "cultic" response of Israel to divine kingship. so here the new
temple will function as Yahweh's kingly setting in the new holy city.
The vision begins with a precise description of the temple, in fact
minute in its precision, emphasizing the writer’s absorption with the
concept. Moving from the outer wall (Ezek 40:5-16) to the outer court
(vv17-2?), then on to the inner court (40:28-41:26), returning to the
outer court (42:1-14), we finally conclude the tour outside the outer
wall (vv15-20).“ Standing at the centre of the material is the structure
of the house itself (40:48-41:26). The elaborate symmetry, its
continuity with and yet distinction from the temple of Solomon, the
emphasized use of symbolic numbers (etc.]l, all serve to indicate that
we are moving in these pictures from what has been historically
experienced to eschatology. Herein the central notion of worship
controls the response of the perfected people of God. Thus, at this
point, the temple vision serves to emphatically state the general tenor
of Ezekiel’s eschatology.
H.D. Parunak“ notes the temple tour recommences with a reference
to the divine presence (cf. Ezek 43:2), phrased in clear echoes of the
older Sinai encounter. Summaries of that encounter (cf. Deut 33:2;
Judg 5:4; Ps 68:8; I-lab 3:3,4) have two features which are emphasized
in Ezek 43:1-5: one, the Lord approaches from the east since Israel is
coming from the west (i.e., Egypt}; and two, the manifestation of the
divine presence is thunderously audible. Verses 3-4 take us back to the
prophet's earlier visions (chaps 1-2, 9-10). The cumulative message of
these visions is a presentation of Israel's history and her future. The
apostate nation is to be judged and then restored to the land under
divine kingship. In the inner court two prophetic pronouncements are

57
 THE END OF THE BEGINNING

delivered concerning the temple (43:5-44:3) and its use in worship

(44:6-46:24). In all this there is a careful removal of the temple from
any former political associations (cf. 42:20; 44:6-9). It is now an
entirely priestly domain which the "prince" (Heb. nest’) may not enter
(44:4-8). The emphasis is now clear. Yahweh is the sole ruler in the new
age (cf. 20:33). To put it differently, the reality which now controls the
future throws the failures of the past into quite clear relief. The
movements of the prince in regard to the sanctuary are quite
circumscribed. Thus the ideals of the Davidic period have been passed
over in the interests of older sacral conventions (particularly the
worship format of the desert period)?‘

c. Significance of the Vision

The purifying and sanctifying influence of the building upon the land is
then outlined in Ezek 4?:1-12 (cf. Exod 15:17-18). Fertilizing waters
flowing from the sanctuary heal the land and restore it to paradise; the
"garden of God". "Trees of life" are planted on either side of the stream
which itself increases to an immeasurable degree (Ezek 47:5). These
trees will be for "food" (v12), and one may eat of their fruit unlike an
earlier time without fear of judgement.” The land, cleansed and
renewed by divine possession, is then divided. No prior conquest is
needed merely purification. The division of the land is undertaken with
regard to the ideal borders expressed in the older traditions (cf. Num
34:1-12). An allotment is given to the seven tribes to be located in the
north (Ezek 48:1-'7). Then like the division of the land in Joshua the
Lmdertaking is interrupted with reference to the sanctuary (cf. Josh
18:1)?’ That is to say, our attention after the first division is directed to
the holy site divided among the Zadokites, the purified priesthood
(Ezek 48:8-12). The Levites, the public, and the prince then receive
attention (W13-22). Land is allotted to the five remaining tribes
(vv23-29}. The handmaid tribes (Gad, Asher, Dan, Naphthalil are
remotest from the temple. The sacred shrine itself is surrounded by the
tribe of Levi, as further sacral protection from contamination. Judah is
now directly to the north of the shrine and Benjamin to the south, thus
obliterating the old northfsouth distinctions. It is probable that the
tribes share equally in the distribution of land. Thus the new society
emerging from this temple description seeks to redress the economic
and political imbalances of the past” by a return to the egalitarianism
of the Exodus period. Though the tribes seem to receive equal
allotments, their position in relation to the city has been determined by
the narratives concerning their origins. The account concludes with the
name of the city, Ynhweh—Shnm tn.-ah — The Lord is There.

58
 THE NEW TEMPLE

Thus the book of Ezekiel begins with an introductory vision of

judgement directly related to the temple, and concludes with a vision
of a new society which is temple controlled and theocratically centred.
The fact that the shrine and the city are no longer in Judah and that
Zion has only been referred to obliquely in these chapters appears to be
an explicit rejection of Jerusalem royal theology. No tribe has received
land east of the Jordan. In short, it is the patriarchal land promises
which are held out to the new people of God in this symbolic
presentation. No pattern evidenced in Israel's history accounts for the
order of the tribes, a fact which further underscores the reality of a
totally new beginning taking Israel back to its patriarchal past. The
tribal arrangement, four square around the sanctuary, is a reflection of
the older Exodus structure and its theology. There are no special
centres for the Levites, i.e., "Levitical cities," thus once again implying
a preconquest structure. The theological structures of the monarchical
period are totally rejected here, particularly the inviolability of
Jerusalem and the first temple.
Clearly we cannot simply speak of a New Temple. This is no mere
blueprint for post-exilic restoration. Rather if Israel is to have a future,
Yahweh himself must do a new thing with himself at the centre. He
alone will be responsible for the future of the people of God. He alone
will erect this temple. Ezekiel's role is simply to relay to Israel the shape
of the future (Ezek 40:4; 43:10-11). The immaculate symmetry to
which we have referred, the holy city removed from direct tribal
contact and thus from political tensions, and the centrality of worship
in the new age, all point to the exalted doctrine of the presence offered
in the book of Ezekiel. From the divine palace there now flows forth the
never ending blessings which will be the product of perfect divine rule.
The holy city has become the world mountain, the centre of the
universe.
Ezek 40-48 makes no provision for Davidic kingship and indeed the
term I-Iebmrrelelc "king" is not used for the political ruler in the future
age; Heb. rrnsi’ "prince" is the preferred term (cf. 44:3; 45:7-8,16—1'.?;
46:2; 48:21-22). This is consistent with the diminished role assigned to
David and to kingship generally in this book. All of this is thoroughly
consonant with Ezekiel’s avowed theocratic aims. In a grand prophetic
panorama we are taken from a picture of the temple under judgement
to the heavenly temple from which that judgement emerged. This
temple is the royal centre around which the new society will be
constructed.

59
 THE END os THE BEGINNING
vi. Haggai

The post-exilic prophets Haggai and Zechariah lean heavily upon

Ezel-ciel's theocratic programme. It is not surprising then to find that a
call to rebuild the temple is central to their message. This is not to
stamp them as priestly in their emphasis or pedestrian in their handling
of lesser issues, nor does it suggest that they present a declining
prophetic voice which ignores the pointed social emphasis of the
classical prophets. Haggai and Zechariah both preserve the prophetic
emphasis upon the fortunes of the nation and deal with issues raised
specifically by the exile. With the backing of Ezel-:iel's theology it is
hardly likely that Haggai or Zechariah should be Davidicf messianic
revivalists, though doubtless their content would be temple centred.
Vifhen Haggai began his ministry to the returned exiles in SZOBC, the
temple lay in ruins.“ The Persian kingdom had been wracked by
revolts after the death of Cambyses in 522.BC"° and Darius I had
assumed firm control only shortly before the opening of the book of
Haggai. Thus whatever hopes the retumees may have entertained of
deriving some political advantage out of the internecine disorders
within the Persian realm vanished. By Haggai's time the community is
given over to apathy. The prophet’s ministry, therefore, is primarily a
challenge to this complacency.
I-Iaggai's message is addressed to the returnees“ who ‘commissioned
by Cyrus’ were to rebuild the temple. Haggai, in effect, invites them to
recommence their history on a similar note to Ezek 40-48 which
pursued the idealism of the OT. In I-lag 1;4—11 the prophet chides his
hearers over the lack of prosperity in the community — a traditional
sign of covenant blessings accompanying the occupation of the land.
This disputation speech has at its heart the demand to rebuild the
temple (v9). Since the denunciations are drawn from the sphere of the
Sinai covenant curse material (vv6,9a),“ the people’s reluctant attitude
to rebuilding is an expression of political revolt from Yahweh's
suzerainty. The rebuilding of the temple must not flow from blessings
received, Haggai argues, but must be the act of faith which precedes
them. In NT terms they must seek first the kingdom of God.
The response of the people is given in Hag 1:12-14. "Hearing my
voice”, “fearing”, and, principally, "I am with you” (v13) all point to
the re—establishment of the divine presence resulting from covenant
repentance. Thus in chapter 1 we have the sequence of sin,
punishment, repentance and grace.“ 1:15-2:9 views the temple as a
world pilgrimage centre — an older prophetic point which the

ED
 THE NEW TEMPLE

theocra tically dominated Ezekiel did not carry forward. In this section,
the frequent mention of "Lord of Hosts" gives the proper focus. It is the
centrality of divine kingship which is being expressed by temple
rebuilding. We also note that the temple becomes the promoter of the
blessing of prosperity (Hag 2:9). Doubtless there is a play upon temple
and land with a subtle underscoring of the influence of the former on
the latter.
In Hag 2:10-14 the mood changes. Unclean people are addressed in
the third person. These are seemingly the ones who had remained in the
land, or who had been resettled after '722BC (cf. Ezra 4:14) and
attempted to join in the rebuilding operations. The remnant
community is to keep its distance from these people (Hag 2:15-19). It is
to be noticed that on the very day in which pagan approaches to
rebuild are spurned, a private oracle is addressed to the Davidide
Zerubbabel as temple builder (vv20-23). Usually the messianism of
Haggai is said to have been brought into full play at this point.
Certainly Zerubbabel is seen as a Davidic restoration figure and as a
replacement for the rejected jehoiachin, the next to last king before the
exile (593-59731:) in whom the exilic congregations placed great hope.
The language of choice applied to Zerubbabel ("chosen", "signet ring",
“servant”) echoes ]eremiah's description of Jehoiachin as a signet ring
to be plucked off (Ier 22:24).
But Zerubbabel is addressed here primarily as the Persian governor
and it is likely that even though we have a note of Davidic continuity
here, the Davidic role is severely down-—played. He is not associated
directly with the temple centred eschatology expressed in the earlier
part of Haggai 2. Zerubbabel quickly vanishes from historical
perspective and the secondary use of his Davidic connection may only
have been to authenticate him as the post—exilic temple builder. Haggai
thus both begins and concludes with a temple emphasis.

vii. Zechariah

Temple building is even more prominently featured in the book of

Zechariah. In the opening address of Zech 1:1-Ea the returnees are
carefully separated from their "fathers". The threefold use of Heb. Sub
"repent" in this section indicates the strength of the prophetic desire for
the returned exiles to strike out in a totally new direction. The visions
which follow (chaps 1-8; chap. 3 stands outside of the sequence“) are
all temple centred. They are structured around chapter 4, the fourth
vision of the seven, which displays the central theme of the first eight
chapters of the book.

61
 THE END‘ OF THE BEGINNING

The interpretative key to the first vision (Zech 1:7-1?) is verse 16,
which announces the rebuilding of the temple as the motive for the
divine return to Ierusalem. However throughout this vision the
prophet expresses concern that the "shaking" of the nations has not yet
occurred for the patrolling horsemen report that "all the earth is at rest"
(v11). Since visions one and seven apparently display the background
of the heavenly assembly“ the setting for the seven visions is clear. The
rebuilt temple will point the worshipper to the heavenly realities which
undergird it. Perhaps as Halpern has suggested,“ the second vision
(vv18-21) dealing with the totality of political opposition under the
form of four "horns" is an allusion to the "horned" altar. The
measurement of the sacred space in 2:1-4 leaves us in no doubt (cf. Ezek
40:3) as to the link i.n this third vision. The fifth vision (Zech 5:1-4) also
has temple points of reference in its depiction of the operation of
covenant curses in the land as part of the purification process. The
scroll on which the curses are written is of the same dimensions as the
"porch" Heb. 'ulnm of Solomon's temple. In the sixth vision (5:51-11)
wickedness in the shape of a woman in a container is removed from the
land and consigned (as is fitting) to the "land of Shinar" (i.e.,
Babylonia), where an anti-temple, a "house", is built for her (v11). The
seventh vision (6:1-8) confirms that preparatory action has been taken
for building, as the apocalyptic riders take Yahweh’s judgement to all
points of the compass. It is the converse of the first vision.
As the central vision of the seven, Zechariah 4 seems to be the point
of focus of the first eight chapters. Mention must be made, however, of
Zechariah 3 where the revestiture of Ioshua the high priest occurs in an
obvious heavenly council setting. The link between his reclothing and
the temple dedication is clear enough given the association of the initial
investiture with the tabernacle dedication in Lev 8:1-30."
In Zech 4 the temple is the point of reference in the vision of the
lampstand. The account is supposedly interrupted by the oracular
material of verses ob-10a, but this interlude actually serves to throw
clear emphasis upon the command to Zerubbabel and grounds the
vision firmly in the historical realities of the period. Zerubbabel is thus
prominently featured as the temple-builder. The two sons of oil,
Joshua and Zerubbabel (v14), are not "anointed ones" (contra RSV)
but rather are sources of community blessing by their association with
temple building.“ As always, temple building must proceed by divine
authority (vb).
Perhaps, as Halpern has suggested, Zech 4:6b-10a proceeds in two
stages. This section is a complete review of Zerubbabel's participation
in the rebuilding operation and a total survey of his involvement.

62
 THE NEW TEMPLE

Verses 6-7 appear to represent the first stage in which the "great
mountain", i.e. , the former temple site, is cleared. In terms of the clear
Mesopotamian parallels Zerubbabel as builder then deposits a stone
removed from the old temple site“ as the first stone of the new temple.
Perhaps, as had been suggested, this first stone is identical with the
seven faceted stone set before Ioshua (3:9) who is also involved in the
rebuilding process. The second address to Zerubbabel in 4:3-10
reasserts his participation in the rebuilding process.“ Customary
temple rebuilding ritual in the matter of foundation deposits of
precious metal may be in ‘view in the reference to the "stone of tin"
(v1Ul."1
Bound up with the rebuilding of the temple on which Zech 4 lays
such heavy weight is the restoration of the social order ushered in by
the two "sons of blessing", Ioshua and Zerubbabel, priest and prince of
the hoped for new age in the Ezekiel blueprint (cf. Zech 3:9). The
arrival in that day of total individual well-being is described under the
traditional imagery of "every one under his vine and his fig tree" (v10).
We should also note verse B where the duties of Zerubbabel as
"branch" presumptively include that of temple builder.
Following upon these visions directly connected with temple re-
erection are questions put to the prophet in Zech 7' relating to cultic
usages developed during the exile. Chapter B returns to the basic theme
of the divine return to Zion and the rebuilt house (v3). Consequently,
covenant renewal results in security and peace for Jerusalem (vv-ti-8).
The visionary and prospective nature of the earlier material is
translated into the language of exhortation to rebuild (vv9-13), and
into an oracle of reassurance (vv14—17). Verses 13-19 return to the
themes of cultic observances raised in 7:1-7. The typical prophetic
eschatology associated with the temple as a world centre to which the
nations come in pilgrimage (8:20-2.3} completes the first half of the
prophecy.
We will treat the second half of Zechariah in association with the
later treatment of the New Creation theme. For now we merely note
that chapters 9-14 seem to function as an apocalyptic commentary
upon chapters 1-8. Later we will have occasion to note that they begin
with Yahweh's triumphant march to the temple, i.e., a return to
Ierusalem and an assertion of theocratic rule (9:1-8),“ and conclude on
the same note of universal pilgrimage to the temple city (14:16-21) as
we have noted in 8:20-23. Zech 9 thus commences with the proposed
return and Zech 14 concludes with the restored and cosmically
acclaimed temple city, carefully following the order and logic of
Zechariah 1-8.

63
 THE END DE THE BEGINNING

viii. Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah

Chronicles commences with the genealogy of Adam and ends with the
edict of Cyrus permitting the exiles to return to Jerusalem in order to
rebuild the temple. Chronicles takes us in panoramic survey from
creation to the consummation of divine purposes as expressed in
temple reconstruction for the Jerusalem city state. Half the contents of
these books are devoted to David and Solomon as plarmer and builder
of the temple respectively.“ As builder Solomon is the "man of rest"
(Heb. mennhah cf. 1 Chron 22:7-10). This temple preoccupation is the
basis for an emphasis on the "reunion" of Israel since the sanctuary
serves as the centre point of theological hopes in a manner similar to
Ezek 40-48. The history of the divided kingdoms is presented so as to
play down division and magnify the reconciling potential of united
temple access by north and south.
Cyrus’ proclamation (2 Chron 36:22.-23) needs to be noted carefully.
He is presented as the divine servant and thus in terms of his role in Isa
40-55 as the promoter of the New Exodus ("The Lord, the God of
heaven has given me all the kingdoms of the earth", 2 Chron 36:23al.
This recognition of divine kingship is followed by the
acknowledgement of responsibility to take charge of the temple
rebuilding in Jerusalem. Thus there is a fusion of the post-exilic
theologies of restoration. Divine kingship, New Covenant and New
Creation theology from Isa 40-55 are implied by the "messianic"
features of the Cyrus proclamation. ln Isa 40-55 Cyrus is the restorer of
the people of God to Jerusalem in what is conceived of as an act of new
creation wrought through this "divine servant". These features are
joined with the kingship and temple notes of Ezekiel by Chronicles.
From this perspective we now see the rationale for the detailed
emphasis given to the work of David and Solomon in Chronicles. All
this was written in the interests of demonstrating continuity between
the first and second temples.
It is curious, however, that Chronicles should end on this note of
expectancy considering the books were probably written or finally
compiled in the early fourth century BC and thus are directed to that
age.“ In other words, this temple theology is in fact eschatology since
these books are not written to support the Ezra-Nehemiah reforms.
Rather they were written to commemorate the great moments in
Israel's history which have been connected with temple or temple
service. Thus they are an attempt to provide an eschatological hope for
a commimity whose enthusiasm is flagging after the failed reforms of
the Ezra-Nehemiah period. Historically, the return from exile and the
decree of Cyrus are long gone. The reality behind the extravagant
theological terms of the presentation of the return in Isa 40-66 is yet to

64
 THE NEW TEMPLE

come. The close of the books of Chronicles alludes to this theology and
thus informs its readers that the best is yet to come, the future is open-
ended.
Chronicles reminds the tired community of fourth century BC
Jerusalem that the tight priestly bureaucracy imposed after the collapse
of the Ezra-Nehemiah reforms and in force until the Maccabaean revolt
(c. 175BC) is not a valid expression of the purpose involved in temple
rebuilding. That purpose ideally had in mind the reunification of all
lsrael under divine leadership and held out the possibility of a cleansed
people of God. This was centred upon a temple concept expressing a
conviction that the building symbolized Yahweh as God of heaven and
Lord of all the kingdoms of the earth (2 Chron 36:23). Thus the
Chronicler was the great revivalist of his day, enthusing the small city
state of Ierusalem by reference to the theological links with the past,
provided by the concept of the existent temple, this second temple in
Jerusalem. His "historical theology" spoke to them of the manner in
which the sanctuary was to be regarded and the hopes which were to be
reposed in it.
The Book of Ezra, which falls chronologically prior to the books of
Chronicles, commences with the edict of Cyrus. lts connection with the
book of Nehemiah is clear. Nehemiah ends with the temple reforms
having been undertaken, but the political situation somewhat
uncertain. Ezra-Nehemiah seems to have been dependent for their
impetus on Malachi, a book which presupposes the existence of the
second temple but calls for its reform so that it might reflect the status
of Yahweh as the "great king" (Mal 1:14). lt is likely that Ezra is the
immediate fulfilment of the prophecy of a "messenger" who would
suddenly appear in the temple (Mal 3:1), since his commission in Ezra T
has much more to do with temple and temple service than with the
imposition of the law." Like Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah project the
vision of a cleansed people of God gathered around the sanctuary and
thus endeavour to implement, under difficult circumstances, the post~
exilic ideals within their own community. Ezra, in particular, is
presented as the temple reformer“ with Nehemiah as his political arm.
Ultimately, however, their reforms seem to have fallen prey to priestly
disputes so that at the end of the fifth century Jerusalem is in the hands
of a Persian governor and an authoritarian state is emerging. It was in
these circumstances that Chronicles was written to inspire hope in a
weary group.
Space dictates we pass over the intertestamental material in this
survey. Although far from uninteresting it does not greatly modify the
basic position developed in the OT of the New Temple as the focal
point of revelation in the new age.”

65
 THE END‘ OF THE BEGINNING

The New Testament

i. Gospels

Mark and Matthew on the one hand, Luke and John on the other each
have differing emphases in regard to the role of the temple. Apart from
Luke's specific interest in the temple, two main issues occur in the
synoptics; the entry into Jerusalem and the cleansing of the temple
(Matt 21; Mark 11; Luke 19), and the curious charge at the trial
recorded only in Mark 14:53. -

a. Jesus’ Temple Entry

The details of the entry vary slightly in each account and we cannot
look at these nuances in this brief survey. The general outline,
however, is clear. The entry as described in Matt 21:5 is an assertion of
kingship in the language of Zech 9:9, yet with the ominous omission of
"bearing salvation". lt is not a meek entry Jesus makes. Rather we must
see Matt 21 as a reference to the total background of Zech 9. The entry
is then Jesus’ claim as the divine king to the temple as "his house" (cf.
Matt 21:12-13).
However, unlike the background from Zechariah, Jesus’ entry does
not bear salvation for Israel even though in its own paradoxical way it
will result in the release of the captives. In all three synoptics there is a
reference to Jer 17:11 indicating the nation is faced with loss of both
temple and land. Traditionally in the OT temple cleansing had been
associated with the revival of political hopes and restoration (Josiah,
Hezekiah, Ezek 40-48 and cf. Judas Maccabaeus). Thus in these NT
accounts there is a sombre reversal of usual expectations. Fittingly as
foreshadowing divine judgement, therefore, theophanic language is
implemented in Matthew to describe the entry (Matt 21:10; the whole
city is "stirred" ; Gk. seio "to shake").
The pilgrim salutation to the temple entrant: "blessed is he who
comes in the name of the Lord" (Ps 118:26} is quickly transmuted by
Jesus into the language of rejection, drawn ominously from the same
Psalm (W42-43, "the very stone which the builders rejected has
become the head of the corner!" cf. Matt 21:42.) Thus the destruction

66
 THE NEW TEMPLE

of the temple foreshadowed in this entry will mean the end of national
Israel. This rejection is further contextually delineated in the synoptics.
Matthew and Mark bring the parable of the barren fig tree into direct
connection with the entry (cf. Matt 21:15: Mark 11:20-25). The
intention is thus clear. A prominent OT symbol of peace and security
under which every man in the new age will sit, the fig tree is now not
only barren (thus reversing the new age expectation) but withers. The
Jerusalem temple has not only failed to be the reality which it
symbolized, it will be destroyed and its destruction will mean the end
of Israel. It is no longer a house of prayer, a point of divine reference
(cf. Matt 21:13). More importantly, it never served as the world centre
and thus as a potential rallying place for all nations. In the allusion to
Isa 56:7 (cf. Matt 21:13) therefore, no mention is made by the synoptic
writers of the phrase "for all nations".

b. Jesus’ Trial

The matter of the charge against Jesus reported in Mark 14:58 is

curious and difficult. What is meant by the charge that Jesus
prophesied the destruction of the temple made "with hands" and the
erection of a new temple "not made with hands" after three days? ln the
OT "made with hands" is the regular synonym for "idolatrous". This
could be the case here also. However, other possibilities exist. Eph 2:11
contrasts the former state of the Gentiles as characterized by
uncircumcision, with the Jew whose circumcision was "made in the
flesh by hands" (cf. Col 2:11). In this context “made with hands" seems
to mean "unspiritual" or "fleshly". 5‘ Jesus may be pointing therefore in
Mark 14:58 to a reality of a different order which will arise as a result of
his resurrection. This possibility appears to be confirmed in Heb 9:11
where "not made with hands" means "not part of this creation", i.e., i

otherworldly, a New Creation. Thus, if this view can be sustained,

Jesus’ assertion in Mark 14:58 signifies that the resurrection which
brings the New Temple into being also gives birth to the reality of the
New Creation— God's rule totally demonstrated through Jesus. As a
piece of theological symbolism the New Temple imagery will be an
important conveyor of the eschatological reality to which the
resurrection points. It was eminently appropriate, therefore, that at the
moment of the death of Jesus the earthly temple was profaned, the veil
was rent (Matt 2?:51). Israel's house was thus left to her "desolate" (cf.
23: 38) .

er
 THE END UF THE BEGINNING

c. Luke and Stephen's Speech

Temple references abound in Luke 1-2 and 19-24. As such they frame
his gospel and underscore the importance of the temple for him. The
temple charge does not appear in Luke's version of the trial since he
wishes to emphasize the political leaders’ responsibility. Having stayed
in Jerusalem, the question is put by the disciples with Israel in view as
to whether Jesus will restore the kingdom (Acts 1:6). In other words,
has the time come for the eschatological pilgrimage of the nations to
the temple? The descent of the Spirit (in underlying Sinai terms) in Acts
25’ answers this question somewhat unexpectedly, and recalls the New
"Israel" to its Exod 19:5b-6 vocation.
Stephen’s speech clearly shows the attitude of the Jerusalem
community to the prevailing temple theology, and constitutes a
decisive break with the temple. Paul will still use it as a base but his
admission of a gentile into the temple (Acts 21:27-29) will occasion his
arrest, imprisonment and voyage to Rome, actions whereby Judaism is
finally rejected. Stephen’s speech begins by noting that the Abrahamic
promise of the land had worship as its aim. That is to say it would be
consummated by temple construction ('?':5"). Israel’s remarkable
preservation as a (potentially) worshipping nation is then narrated.
The Mosaic reference culminates with mention of the building of the
tabernacle, the pattern for worship which God gave to Israel (v44). But
the desert forefathers rejected Moses and gave themselves over to
idolatry. The account of the building of the temple of Solomon closely
follows and leads up to the appraisal that the Jews had looked on it
simply as a "house" (Gk. oikos v-4?), a purely human edifice. An
analogy is thus drawn of constant historical rejection. On the one hand
blatant desert idolatry and a more sophisticated idolatry bound up
with Solomon's "house" on the other.“ Clearly, what is required is
"something not made with hands", i.e., something heavenly. The
account closes with the martyr Stephen directing his worship to just
such a site — the heavenly Son of Man, the New Temple (v56).

d.John

John's gospel as in other things goes its own way in the matter of the
temple. Its emphasis is on Jesus as the New Temple, the new point of
contact and the one to whom divine homage must now be directed.
Although he had come to his own (i.e., Israel), they had not received
him (John 1:11). The new community who had received him (v12)

68
 THE NEW TEMPLE

recognized that in him the glory of God had "tabernacled" (v14). That
is to say, the glory theophany associated with the temple! tabernacle in
the OT is now manifested in Jesus. The vision of awe and fear before
which the people had quailed is now beheld by the “New Israel"! By
dwelling among them, by the fact of the incamation, Jesus revealed
himself as the true tabernacle "pitched" by God. Now Jesus fully
discloses the previously hidden aspects of the divine nature. in his own
person he demonstrates divine kingship (an important theme in John).
I-Ie is thus the new point of revelation, the new Bethe] (v51). Since the
Jerusalem temple was no longer the point of contact betweeri heaven
and earth, Jesus presents himself as its replacement (2:12-25). ‘Worship
would not henceforth be offered at places (Gerizim or Jerusalem) but to
the Father in spirit and in truth (4:20-24). This would be possible since
Jesus, drawing on new temple analogies provided by Ezek 47:1-12,
presents himself as the dispenser of the Spirit, and thus of life and
fertility (John 7:37-38).

ii. Paul

The New Temple concept is applied to the individual believer by Paul

(1 Cor 6:19), though it is possible that the reference here is to the
congregation.“ This temple connotation is a clear mark of God's
lordship (cf. 2 Cor 6:1o—7:1) since the indwelling of the Spirit, closely
associated in both Testaments with the idea of kingdom,“ makes the
believer a temple. Gocl’s rule is manifested in him through the Spirit!
Eph 2:20-22 is an important passage in which the images of growth
and temple are combined. Christ is presented in the wider context of
verses 11-20 as the bringer of cosmic peace in a ministry which
reconciles the universe and removes the barriers between heaven and
earth.“ Language of access and citizenship in the new commonwealth
of the Kingdom dominates this section. Divisions are broken down and
a new unity is created (vv14,15,16,1B).“ The images fluctuate but the
commonwealth is presented as a household which grows into a holy
temple (v21) built upon the NT apostles whose ministry is also
prophetic.“ Viewed as a building, growth on the foundation stone“ is
still occurring. However, this growth is directed towards the
community finally indwelt by God and thus operating as a holy temple
(v21). The mention of "holy" temple (v21) both provides the motif by
which this result will be achieved (i.e.. God’s elective purposes
fulfilled) and at the same time contrasts this new temple with its OT
counterpart.
Whether or not the temple is implied in 1 Tim 3:15 is uncertain, since

69
‘feu have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forviewing er reachecl yeurviewing limit ierthis
book.
 THE NEW’ TEMPl.E

believers as present members of the heavenly Jerusalem, but this

passage serves the interests of covenant conclusion (Sinai and Zion are
contrasted) rather than to carry forward the temple concept.

v. Revelation Reconsidered

R.J. McKelvey notes that Rev 4-20 shows little interest in the theology
of the heavenly temple but that there is major use of the temple
symbolism in these chapters to provide background for the unfolding
events of the prophecy." Clearly the heavenly temple is the place
where universal worship is offered and thus functions as the symbol of
unity under divine kingship. Of particular importance is the throne
room vision of chapter 4 where the spectacle of divine rule is seen as the
body of the book begins. In the face of the world opposition the book
details, this vision will be translated into reality. The long forgotten
ark reappears in the heavenly sanctuary (11:19) at the end of the first of
the two great cycles of visions (1:9-11:19; 12:1-22:5).'" This vision of
the heavenly sanctuary as the conclusion to the first cycle indicates the
direction which the second cycle will take and foreshadows the
conclusion of the book.
We have now completed our biblical survey. The NT analysis
confirms the OT. A temple in the biblical world was conceived as the
dwelling place and manifestation of the deity. This framework coupled
with the OT eschatological hope that God would personally indwell
his people in full covenant blessing in the final age has prepared us for a
theology of Christ's indwelling in the believing community. God
would locate Himself personally and corporately in believers and the
community of the new age." In the OT worship was offered to God as
the Lord of all. Since God's declared purpose in the NT is to sum up all
things in Christ (Col 1:20), it is clear that Jesus is the NT point of
reference for all the temple expectations of the OT. Primarily the
temple has been a symbol of total divine rule. Thus, as the locus of the
New Temple in whom believers are constituted as a temple, Jesus on
the one hand points to a display of divine rule and on the other hand to
the broader motif of a New Creation which incorporates the perfected
New Temple. This last point will be taken up in our final chapter. We
are not surprised, therefore, to find at the end of a book whose
liturgical character has been obvious, the New Jerusalem presented as a
city permanently indwelt by God and thus as a place of continuous and
joyful worship.

71
 THE END OF THE BEGINNING

Notes

1. AX. Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (I-IDR

9; Missoula: Scholars, 1976) 229.
2. Cf. E. Fiorenza, Priester fur Gott (Munster: Aschendorff, 1972)
403.
3. As R.J. Clifford (The Cosmic Mountain in Canaan and the Old
Testament [HSM 4: Cambridge: Harvard University, 1972] 26) notes.
4. Cf. G. Robinson, "The Idea of Rest in the Old Testament and the
Search for the Basic Character of the Sabbath", ZAW 92 (1980) 32-42.
5. ibid, 33-37.
6. Deut 5:15 takes the sabbath command up in terms of redemption
from Egypt. This has seemed to conflict with Exod 20:11. It does not
really do so when it is remembered that creation and redemption are
related as source and consequence.
7. It is to be noted that the consecration of the cult was a seven day
process, thus extending the sabbath idea in the context cf. Exod 29:37,:
34:18.
8. The dependence upon, or narrow relationship of Ezek 28:11-15
with Exod 28:17-20, but with Eden in mind as the ultimate referent, is
recognized by W. Zimmerli, Ezecltiel 25-48 (BKAT XIII)’2,:
Neukirchen-Vluyrl: Neukirchener, 1969) 684.
9. Cf. recently, P. Bird, "Male and Female He Created Them:
Genesis 1:27b in the Context of the Priestly Account of Creation",
HTR 74 (1981) 137-44.
10. M. Haran, Temples and Temple Service in Ancient Israel
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1978) 205-25.
11. ibid, Z60-75.
12. On the function of the glory cloud in the Exodus, cf. J.G.
McConville, "God's ‘Name’ and God's 'Glory'," TynB 30 (1979)
149-63.
13. R.E. Clements (God and Temple [O1-cford: Blackwell, 1965] 94-9)
has taken this basic thesis of G. von Rad a little further.
14. As G. Wenham ("Deuteronomy and the Central Sanctuary",
Tynfl 22 [1971] 113-4) notes.

72
 THE NEW TEMPLE

15. This is by no means a novel view, cf. G.T. Manley, The Book of
the Law (London: Tyndale, 1957) 132.
16. The theological role of the ark in I Gt II Sam is well treated by
A.F. Campbell, The Ark Narrative (SBLDS 16: Missoula: Scholars,
1975) 193-210.
17. On temple building as a task for gods, cf. B. I-lalpem, The
Constitution of the Monarchy in Israel (HSM 25; Missoula: Scholars,
1931) 19-31.
18. R.A. Carlson, David the Chosen King (Stockholm: Almqvist 8:
Wiksell, 1964) 102. We are generally indebted to Carlson for his
perceptive treatment of 2 Sam 7.
19. ibid, 100.
20. W.C. Kaiser, Jr., "The Blessing of David: The Charter for
Humanity", in The Law and the Prophets; Old Testament Studies in
Honor of O. T. Allis ed. J.H. Skilton (Nutley: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1974) 311.
21. Carlson, David, 125, note 4.
22. Kaiser, “Blessing of David", 314.
23. Y. Kaufmann (The Biblical Conquest of Palestine [JerusaIem:
Magnes, 1953] 54) points out that the Davidic empire never included
Tyre and Sidon but included East Jordan territories which formed no
part of the promised land.
24. For the connection of the motifs of temple and ideal garden, cf.
I-I.J. van Dijk, Ezekiel 's Prophecy on Tyre (BibOr 20; Rome: Pontifical
Biblical Institute, 1968) 117.
25. Cf. J.D. Levenson, The Theology of the Program of Restoration
of Ezekiel 40-48 (HSM 10: Ivlissoula: Scholars, 1976) 25-36.
26. As R.B. Dillard (“The Chronicler's Solomon", WT) 43 [1981]
289-300) has pointed out.
27. T.W. Overholt, Threat of Falsehood (London: SCM, 1970) 1-23.
28. Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1-24 (I-Iermeneia: Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979)
98-9.
29. As l'l.D. Parunak ("The Literary Architecture of Ezekiel’s mar ot
'elohim", JBL 99 [1980] 63) suggests.
30. The north in the exilic period was the area from which numinous
judgement was thought to portend, cf. B.S. Childs, "The Enemy from
the North and the Chaos Tradition", JBL 78 (1959) 187-98.
31. Parunak, "Architecture", 66.
32. Levenson, Program, 7-19.
33. Our dependence upon Parunal<’s presentation at this point is
acknowledged, cf. "Architecture", 71.
34. ibid, 72.
35. Cf. N. Poulssen, Konig and Tempel in Glaubenszeugnts des alten
Testamentes (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1967} 150.

73
 THE END OF THE BEGINNING

36. The theme of the temple as bound up with the fountain of life
occurs as Ps 36:7-9 and frequently elsewhere (cf. Gen 2:6-'7: Zech 14:8;
Joel 3:18). The Tree of Life and fateful tree themes are not in Ezek 28
but we note that the beauty of the world tree in 31:1-9 is accounted for
because it draws its strength from the underlying waters of life (v4).
The stream Gihon ("Gusher") in Jerusalem, the underground spring,
may point in the same direction.
3?’. Parunak, "Architecture", 74.
38. Levenson, Program, 124.
39. For the significance of this phrase as indicating that the temple
was at least partially built but was being neglected in worship, cf. F.I.
Andersen, "Who Built the Second Ternple'i'", AusBR 6 (1953) 2.3-27.
40. K. Galling (Studiert zur Gesclticltte Israels irri persischert Zeitaiter
[Tubingen: Mohr, 1964] 43-51) supplies details of this period of Persian
conflict.
41. So W.A.M. Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja I-8 (Assen: Van Gorcum,
1967) 30.
42. Cf. ].W. lNhedbee, "A Question-Answer Schema in Haggai 1":
in Biblical and Near Easterrt Studies: Esays irt Honor of W. S. Lasor ed.
G. Tuttle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 19?8} 192.
43. Beuken, Haggai, 2'7-49.
44. I-I. Gese ("Anfang und Ende der Apokalyptik clargestellt am
Sacharjabuch", ZTK 70 [1913] 25) suggests a structure of seven visions.
He omits Zech 3 because of the doubtful parallels in content and formal
features with the other visions. We believe he is correct and that the
symmetry of the visions clearly indicates a number of seven.
45. Halpem argues this way in "The Ritual Background of
Zechariah's Temple Song", CBQ 40 (1978) 179.
46. ibid, 17?.
4?. ibid, 173.
48. Heb. yishar, "oil" Zech 4:14 is not otherwise associated with
anointing in the OT. Thus anointing may not be on view here, cf. A.5.
van der Woude, "Die Beiden Sohne des Ols (Sach. 4:14)", in Traoels in
the World of the Old Testament, MA. Beek Festschrift ed. H.G.
Heerma van Voss (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1974) 262-8.
49. A. Petitjean (Les Oracles da Proto-Zacharie [Paris: Gabalda,
1969] 258-63) surveys the ancient Near Eastern evidence.
50. The Heb. verb yasad used of "laying the foundation stone" in
Zech 4:9 has a wider meaning than merely the initiation of a building
operation. It can mean ”undertal-ce responsibility for the entire work”
or the like, cf. Andersen, "Second Temple", 15-21.

74
 THE NEW TEMPLE

51. Cf. D.L. Petersen, "Zerubbabel and Jerusalem Temple Recon-

struction", CBQ 36 (1974) 366-72.
52. As PD. Hanson (The Dawn of Apocalyptic [Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1975] 292.-32.4) has perceptively argued.
53. Dillard draws careful attention to the many connections forged
between the Exodus narratives and the Solomonic age, cf. "Solomon",
293-9.
54. For this dating, cf. H.G. Williamson, Israel in the Books of
Chronicles (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1977) 86.
55. I have argued this way in "Malachi and the Ezra-Nehemiah
Reforms", RTR 35 (1976) 42-52.
56. Cf. K. Koch, "Ezra and the Origins of Judaism", J55 19 (1974)
193.
57. The evidence from the Intertestamentary literature, Rabbinic
and Qumran sources is presented in R.J. McKelvey, The New Temple
(Uxford: Oxford University, 1969) 15-41.
58. D. Juel {Messiah and Temple [SBLDS 31,: Missoula: Scholars,
1977} 143-57) carefully surveys the possibilities contained in the
expression "made with hands" in the NT.
59. J. Nolland ("Luke's Readers — a Study of Luke 4:22-8, Acts
13:46, 18:6, 28:28 and Luke 21:5-36" [Ph.D dissertation, Cambridge
University, 1977] 97-99) notes the relationship between Pentecost and
Sinai. He also draws our attention to the fact that the Messiah in Jewish
expectation would be the builder I restorer of the temple, 133-92.
60. Notice this line of reasoning which is advanced by J. Kilgallen,
The Stephen Speech (AnBib 67; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute,
1976) 37-92.
61. Cf. R. Kernpthorne, "Incest and the Body of Christ: A Study of 1
Corinthians vi. 12-ZU", NT5 14 (1963) 563-74.
62. I have noted this association in "Spirit and Kingdom of God in
the Old Testament", RTR 33 (1974) 1-10.
63. Cf. A.T. Lincoln Paradise Now and Not Yet (SNTSMS 43:
Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1981) 150.
64. Cf. E. Roels God's Mission (Amsterdam: Wever, 1962) 145-51.
65. Cf. Wayne A. Grudetn (The Gift of Prophecy in I Corinthians
[Washingtom University of America, 1952] 93-105) offers a recent
discussion of Eph 2:20.
66. As to whether Jesus constitutes the copestone or the foundation
stone of the New Temple is a difficult point and the issues are finely
balanced. On the whole the context appears to support the latter, cf.
ibid, 55-6.

75
 THE END OF THE BEGINNING

67. When Christians in the NT are described as a "temple" the word

used is naos cf. 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19: Eph 2:21. Apart from the reference
at 1 Thess 2:3-4 which refers to the future, the use of Gk. naos and
oilcos must be kept apart.
68. For this community concept at Qumran cf. McKelvey, New
Temple, 128.
69. J .H. Elliott, The Elect and the Holy (NovTSup 12; Leiden: Brill,
1966) 157-69.
70. On the exegesis of the difficult Heb 9:11-12 cf. D.G. Peterson,
Hebrews and Perfection: An examination of the Concept of Perfection
in the Epistle to the Hebrews (SNTSMS 47: Cambridge: Cambridge
University. 1982) 140-4.
71. Mcl(elvey (New Temple, 161-2) points to the use of the heavenly
temple background in seven scenes: Rev 4:2-11, where the elders are at
worship; 5:8-14, the heavenly concourse worships the Lamb ; 7:9-17,
the great multitude drawn from all nations who worship God:
11:15-19, the elders at worship; 14:1-5, the Lamb with the gathered
elect of 144,000 on Mt Zion; 15:2-4, where the redeemed stand at the
edge of the sea and sing the song of the Exodus, the song of Moses and
the Lamb; and 19:1—8, where the multitudes celebrate the marriage of
the Lamb.
72. Collins, Combat Myth, 28.
73. Cf. E. Best, One Body in Christ (London: SPCK, 1955) 168.

76
l|.$.I||I::IIIch-|:1'|n!|.'i1'r|L|d
 THE nvo or THE BEGINNING
NEW COVENANT — SUMMARY

There seems to be no end to the intersection and amalgamations of

motifs in John's panorama. The New Jerusalem in descent is the
realization of the New Covenant, a connection rendered
ummistalceable by the use of Lev 26:11-12 in Rev 21:3. The agenda of
Sinai and hope of Jeremiah meet in the experience of the Bride.
Thought of a New Covenant did not arise until the threat of
imminent exile, for Sinai and nationalism went hand-in-hand. But the
end of nationalism seemed the annulment of the Sinai covenant.
Although presupposed by the pre-exilic prophets, the covenant
assumed prominence in Jeremiah and Lamentations. Straddling the
concept of divine fidelity as the basis of covenant theology and the
record of Israel's history as warranting the curses of Deut 28, Jeremiah
announces the hope of a New Covenant. Not new because it offers a
“new heart", but because this heart will be given to all the people. It
would mean the end of sin. Solid continuity is in Jeremiah’s account
married to radical discontinuity.
Ezel<iel's restoration vision holds forth similar hopes. After the
staging of a New Exodus, Israel will experience the gift of a new spirit.
This injection of edenic life is no less than a resurrection of the whole
people. Isa 40-66 is just as grandiose. Here the covenant renewal
affected by the New Exodus can only have one end — the restoration of
all things, the New Creation. The Servant embodies the covenant and
ensures the fulfillment of the Abrahamic promises and transferral of
the Davidic promises to the entire people.
Ultimately, of course, this Servant is the exalted Son of Man. This
fact is clarified at both the beginning and conclusion of Matthew's
Gospel, by the emphasis on Jesus’ role as the bearer of the Abrahamic
and Davidic promises and creator of the New Community. Paul
further elaborates this christological focus on covenant in 2 Cor 3 in his
exposition of Expd 34. Although originally addressed to all Israel, the
fullness of the Sinai covenant narrows to Moses after the rejection of
Yahweh in the people's worship of the golden calf. Now Moses must
wear a veil whenever he is not acting as mediator and Israel cannot
endure the glory of the divine presence. In Paul’s own day the Jews still
cannot see the glory of Jesus because of the veil covering their hearts.
But in Jesus through the Spirit we are admitted to the full privileges of
the covenant.
Even so we wait for the total realization of the covenant in our
experience. Although possessing a new heart we still remember the
agony of sin as we long for the day of John's vision when sin will be no
more.

78
‘tou have either reached a page that is unavailable forviewing or reached yourviewing limit iorthis
book.
‘tou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forviewing or reachecl yourviewing limit lorthis
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit lortnis
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit lortnis
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit lortnis
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit lortnis
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit lortnis
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit lortnis
bool-<.
‘rou have either reachecl a page that is unavailable forvievving or reachecl vourvievving lirnit lortnis
bool-<.
‘feu heave either reeehee e page thet ie uneveileble ferwiewing er reeehee gweurviewing limit ferthie
heel-<.
‘feu heave either reeeheci e page thet ie uneveiieble ferwiewing er reeeheci gieurviewing limit ferthie
beei-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::i a page that ie uhatraiiaple fprwiewihg er reaeheci grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peek.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::i a page that ie uhatraiiaple fprwiewihg er reaeheci grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peek.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.
‘rpu have either rea=::he=::l a page that ie uhatrailaple fprwiewihg er reachecl grpurviewihg limit tprthie
peel-<.