Ezekiel's Temple

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Clive
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:20 pm

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by Clive »

Umberto Eco writes in Baudolino:

in the Acts of the Apostles it says that God from one man devised our humankind to inhabit the entire face of the earth, its face – not the other side, which doesn’t exist.

“I don’t know if you have ever studied the measurements of the Temple, well don’t, because it is enough to drive you crazy. In Kings it says… In chronicles it says…

The problem however arises when you read the vision of Ezekiel. Not one measurement holds up, and so a number of pious men have admitted that Ezekiel had indeed had a vision, which is a bit like saying he had drunk too much and was seeing double. Nothing wrong with that , poor Ezekiel (he also had a right to his fun), but then Richard of St Victoire reasoned as follows: if everything, every number, every straw in the Bible has a spiritual meaning, we must clearly understand what it says literally, because it is one thing to say , for the spiritual meaning, that something is three long and another’s length is nine, since these two numbers have different mystical meanings.

“The most alert commentators have not succeeded in establishing the exact structure of the Temple. You Christians do not understand that the sacred text is born from a Voice. The Lord, haqadoch baruch hu, that the holy one, may his name always be blessed , when he speaks to his prophets, allows them to hear sounds, but does not show figures, as you people do, with your illuminated pages. The voice surely provokes images in the heart of the prophet, but these images are not immobile; they liquefy, change shape according to the melody of that voice, and if you want to reduce to images the voice of the Lord, blessed always be his name, you freeze that voice, as if it were fresh water turning to ice that no longer quenches thirst, but numbs the limbs in the chill of death,”


I
"We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"
Kris
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 5:48 am

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by Kris »

Reading through these posts makes me think that God is a crappy communicator!!!
Clive
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:20 pm

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by Clive »

Yup, down hill since this one God and his fetishists took over from Homer and the true gods
"We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by DCHindley »

Has anyone ever toyed with the idea that Ezekiel's historical matrix was the deportation under the Assyrians? As noted by others, the names of temple officials he refers to are not known in connection with the Temple in Jerusalem in the Babylonian/Persian periods. I think this is why it has been postulated that there was a minimal amount of cultic practice going on in Jerusalem.

Just more questions than answers ...
Kris
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 5:48 am

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by Kris »

I was going over this post, and wanted to pose the question-- if the Jews ever get around to building another temple, what style do you think it would be in? Would it replicate Herod's Temple, the original 2nd temple, Solomon's temple, or Ezekiel's temple? Or would it be something altogether different? What do the temple proponents propose be built? Does anybody know?
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by DCHindley »

Kris wrote:I was going over this post, and wanted to pose the question-- if the Jews ever get around to building another temple, what style do you think it would be in? Would it replicate Herod's Temple, the original 2nd temple, Solomon's temple, or Ezekiel's temple? Or would it be something altogether different? What do the temple proponents propose be built? Does anybody know?
Probably anything goes.

I doubt it would be Herod's temple, although Judeans and Jews seem to agree that it was magnificent. Solomon's temple would be a nice basic one. Since we do not have any idea what kind of temple was re-built under Persian rule (I assume this is what you mean by the "original 2nd temple"), I don't think it could serve as a model. How about the crazy big one in the book of Revelation, which seems to have been borrowed from Judean source(s)? But if Jews had to choose a divinely revealed temple, I would choose Ezekiel's temple, but perhaps that might be pie in the sky.

Then there's those who would say that a building is not needed, and they should simply recreate the tabernacle and ark and place it where they will. Something like that seems to have been behind the Stephen's speech in the book of Acts, which I take to have been a Judean rationalization after the destruction of Herod's temple.

But if anyone's actually seriously proposing to rebuild one today, I think there must be some sort of ulterior motive, such as the desire to "diss" the Islamic holy site now situated on the likely place of Herod's temple.

JMHO

DCH
austendw
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:10 pm

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by austendw »

neilgodfrey wrote:...If we take it (and other Biblical books) all at face-value then we have in Ezekiel a prophet who was writing contrary to parts of the Mosaic Law and therefore, according to the Mosaic Law, a false prophet......
The "problem" of Ezekiel was recognized in the Rabbinic tradition:
Rab Judah said in Rab's name: In truth, that man, Hananiah son of Hezekiah by name, is to be remembered for blessing: but for him, the Book of Ezekiel would have been hidden [ie not included in the canon], for its words contradicted the Torah. What did he do? Three hundred barrels of oil were taken up to him and he sat in an upper chamber and reconciled them.

(Talmud Bavli - Sabbath 13b)
Call me Ishmael...
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by neilgodfrey »

From pages 109-10 of A New Heart and a New Soul by R.L. Kohn -- pointing out that Ezekiel wrote that his prophecy would fail but no matter, at least the readers would know a prophet had been among them.....
This depiction is a confluence of Priestly and Deuteronomic traditions.
Moses functions as a priest in P, while in D he is primarily a prophet.13 In
both sources, he is above all a legislator. Ezekiel functions as prophet,
priest and legislator; he is a prophet by calling, a priest by birthright. And
Ezekiel 40—48 is the only body of legislation in the HB not placed in the
mouth of Moses.14 Like Moses in P, Ezekiel is warned by Yahweh before
he sets out that his mission will fail
due to the strong resolves and hardened
hearts of others.15 D foretells the coming of a prophet like Moses,
who will be raised up 'from among the Israelites' and in whose mouth
Yahweh will place his words (Deut. 18.18). Ezekiel's mission, regardless
of its success or failure, will signify to Israel that there was 'a prophet
among them' (Ezek. 2.5). Then Ezekiel eats a scroll containing Yahweh's
words; that is, the divine message is literally placed in his mouth (Ezek.
2.10-3.1). Moses receives a design of the Tabernacle in P; Ezekiel similarly
receives a detailed vision of the new Temple.16 Before Ezekiel sees
this vision, he is transported to a high mountain (Ezek. 40.2) and shown
the plan in a manner closely resembling Moses seeing the land of Israel
from Mount Nebo (Deut. 32.49-52).17 Both Moses and Ezekiel receive
laws relating to festivals and sacrifices.18 Ezekiel hears Yahweh speaking
directly to him from the restored Temple, just as God speaks to Moses
inside the Tabernacle in P (Num. 7.89).19 Ezekiel consecrates the new
altar, instructs the priests and oversees the cult, like Moses in P (Exod.
29.36-44; Lev. 8.1, 14-23; 9.1-5).20 Ezekiel may only see in visions the
land about which he has preached. Like Moses in P, he is not permitted to
settle there (Num. 27.12-13; cf. Deut. 32.49-52).21
I guess if it was ignored one can say that it was what God would have wanted at that time but it's too late now.... second best alternatives will have to do.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
austendw
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:10 pm

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by austendw »

neilgodfrey wrote:From pages 109-10 of A New Heart and a New Soul by R.L. Kohn -- pointing out that Ezekiel wrote that his prophecy would fail but no matter, at least the readers would know a prophet had been among them.....
...This depiction is a confluence of Priestly and Deuteronomic traditions. Moses functions as a priest in P, while in D he is primarily a prophet...
Well, I'd argue that point with Kohn. In P Moses absolutely does not function as a priest. P unswervingly attributes such a role to Aaron alone. Moses occupies a unique one-time-only role between God and Aaron.

But that's a quibble.
Call me Ishmael...
austendw
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:10 pm

Re: Ezekiel's Temple

Post by austendw »

Kris wrote:I am trying to understand Ezekiel's temple written about in his book in the OT. Why didn't the Jews coming back from captivity build it to his specs? Did they not know of his prophecies? Did they think they were building it right? Did God give a different temple version because the Jews were sinners and didn't deserve the temple that was given in Ezekiel's vision? ( I saw this argument given by a rabbi once!)Or was it all allegory and representative of something else ? Or is it yet to be built? I think it could've been just failed prophecy of what Ezekel thought would be built and what really was built during the second temple history. Any thoughts?
Assuming that the Ezekiel prophecy was available to them (and avoiding the question of whether it had been written at this point) there may be a crucial if mundane reason: cost and manpower. The province of Yehud and the city of Jerusalem was no major metropolis in the Persian period and it was not till later that anything approaching Ezekiel's blueprint could have been undertaken.

There may be some evidence in the subtle changes in alignment of the extant eastern wall of the temple mount to suggest that at some point prior to the Herodian rebuilding, the temple temenos did indeed measure 500 x 500 cubits, as stipulated in Ezekiel's plan. But when might this have been? It has been argued that it was part of the pre-exilic temple, and that Ezekiel took that as a given rather than ideal dimensions that he envisioned, and such a temenos has been attributed to Hezekiah (eg: here: http://www.ritmeyer.com/2014/11/13/the- ... -hezekiah/) I think this is quite bonkers, and wildly over-interprets the evidence.

However, there was a significant rebuilding project mandated by Antiochus III, as reported by Josephus. Here is his quotation from the Seleucid king's letter:
I also order the work on the temple and the porticoes finished and anything else that ought to be rebuilt. For the materials of wood, let them be brought out of Judea itself and out of the other countries and out of Lebanon tax free, and the same shall be done regarding those other materials which will be necessary in order to render the temple more glorious.
(Ant. XII.141)
This major rebuilding is referred to here as well:
Simon, Onias’ son, was a great high priest.
During his life, he repaired the house
and, in his time, strengthened the temple’s defenses.
He made the foundation for the courtyard wall,
a high fortification for the temple enclosure.

Greatest of his brothers, beauty of his people,
Simeon ben Johanan, the Priest.
In whose generation the house was taken care of/visited
And in whose days the sanctuary was strengthened.
In whose days the wall was built,
The corners of the habitation in the sanctuary of the King.

(Sirach 50:1-2, Greek & Hebrew versions)
At this time, in this period (after 198BCE), with Seleucid sponsorship, an extension of the temple platform to a prophetically mandated 500 x 500 cubit expanse would have been quite possible, and it wouldn't overstretch the extant archaeological/architectural evidence.
Call me Ishmael...
Post Reply