This argument is important to my understanding of how Ezekiel's Prophecies and Revelation relate. Something I laid out the gist of last year in my post about New Jerusalem passages being misapplied to The Millennium.
There are two different Hebrew words translated "Temple" in the King James Authorized Version of The Hebrew Bible. Both are also used of the pre-Solomonic Tabernacles. "Beth" is used more commonly but it's translated "House" on those occasions.
Heykal is the Hebrew term that some want to treat as very technically applicable to Solomon's Temple but not any prior Tent based Tabernacles. And yet 1 Samuel 1:9 and 3:3 do use that word of the Tabernacle at Shiloh. In 2 Samuel 7 YHWH says through Nathan that He hadn't dwelt in any House like what David was wanting to build since He brought Israel out of Egypt. So whatever Heykal technically etymologically means, it must have also been applicable to the Mosaic Tabernacle even if it is was used more rarely then. It actually never became super common even while Solomon's Temple was standing with words like Beth and Mikadesh (Sanctuary in the KJV) being more common ways to refer to the main place of worship. Again both of those were also applicable to The Tabernacle. Psalm 78:60 also confirms that the Tabernacle at Shiloh was still a Tent(Ohel).
Heykal is also used in 2 Samuel 22:7 and Psalm 18:6 which are just different recordings of the same Davidic Psalm. You could interpret that as referring to The Temple is Heaven but according to Paul in Hebrews it was the Tabernacle of Moses modeled after The Temple in Heaven, not Solomon's Temple.
In The Hebrew Bible no single word seems to be used for what Solomon's Temple was that the Tabernacles of Moses and David were not. 2 Samuel 7 helps define that for us but makes no single word an easy signifier for it. However there is a word that is the opposite, that applies to The Tabernacles but not Solomon, Zerubbabel or Herod's Temples.
There are three Hebrew words that get translated Tabernacle. Sukkot isn't a synonym for the Holy Place at all but refers to the Tabernacles of the Feast of Tabernacles. Mishkan is most literally translated Habitation and is also applicable to Solomon's Temple even if The Hebrew does so rarely. However Ohel is the literal word for Tent. 1 Kings 8:4 and 2 Chronicles 5:5 and what follows them basically describe the retiring of the Ohel as The Ark is removed from it and and then placed in Solomon's non Ohel Temple.
Ezekiel 40:1 clearly defined the Heykal this very long Prophecy is about as an Ohel, a term consistently not applicable to Solomon's Temple. If we take that detail as literally as most of us Futurists do everything else in these chapters, then we shouldn't be picturing Walls made of Stone or Wood but a Tent. I don't think you can find anything in these chapters to contradict that.
Other Prophecies that use Ohel of the Place of Worship in the Eschatological Messianic Kingdom include Isaiah 16:6 and 33:20. The former specifically says the Tabernacle of David which was set up in Zion the City of David which is in Ephratah not Jerusalem according to Psalm 132. Amos 9:11 also refers to the Tabernacle of David but using Sukkot oddly, James in Acts 15 quotes that verse with Luke using the Greek equivalent of Ohel. The Greek Equivalent for Ohel is also used when Revelation 21 calls New Jerusalem The Tabernacle of God.
More then one Greek word is translated Temple just like in the Hebrew, one is based on a word for Holy, one is also a word for House. Naos, is the word that many may wish to treat as equivalent to Heykal, but I have some issues with that. And I don't care how the Septuagint used Naos because I inherently distrust the Septuagint.
Stephen in Acts 7:48 and Paul in Acts 17:24 says God doesn't dwell in Naos made of human hands. Literally that would exclude a Tent as much as a building made of Stone or Wood, and ultimately I believe it does, but Stephen's context in Acts 7:44-50 is tying that idea to his distinguishing Solomon's Naos from the Tabernacles of Moses and David.
What Naos meant in it's Pagan Greek context was also rather technical and precise in a way that I feel makes it not very applicable to how Heykal was used, at least not always. The Naos referred specifically to a building that housed the Idol or representation of the god being worshiped and not the outdoor courtyards where sacrifices were made. It's known usage in Egypt was the same, and as a Weeb I'd also say it equate it to the Honden of a Shinto Shrine. Meaning if we translate that to how Herod's Temple worked it referred to the building that contained the Holy Place and Holy of Holies but not the outdoor area where The Brazen Altar was.
Perhaps if any Hebrew term is equivalent to Naos it's Dbiyr a word used only of the Inner Sanctuary of Solomon's Temple (the KJV translates it Oracle but not every Oracle in the KJV is this word) in 1 Kings 6:5-31, 7:49, 8:6-8 and 2 Chronicles 3:16, 4:20, 5:7-9 but was never part of The Torah's description of The Tabernacle.
So when Revelation 21:22 says New Jerusalem has no Naos for the Lamb is The Temple like He is The Light, it is chiefly a Temple like Solomon's or Herod I feel is meant. A literal Tent based place of worship is perhaps equally as unnecessary, but not as definitely said to not be present. And whether literal Tents are physically involved or not the text of Revelation 21 enthusiastically associates that Greek word with this future Worship.
The significance of the Naos being gone would then be the same as the significance of the Veil being torn.
No comments:
Post a Comment