Abstract
This monograph is a revised and abbreviated version of the author’s doctoral dissertation submitted to the University of Otago, New Zealand, in 2012. Philip Church deals with a number of preliminary matters in the introductory chapter: he presents the goal and thesis of the study, defines some key terms, summarizes the argument of Hebrews, touches upon some introductory matters pertinent to Hebrews, and outlines the organization of his study. Church’s stated goal of the study is “to examine the role and significance of the temple symbolism found in Hebrews” (p. 1). He proposes that Hebrews does not view the heavenly temple as the “eternal archetype of the wilderness tabernacle” (p. 1). Rather, the heavenly temple figuratively refers to “the eschatological dwelling of God with his people in the world to come where Christ is now enthroned” (p. 1).
Church views Hebrews primarily as an epistle (as opposed to a sermon) with a tripartite structure. The author cannot be identified, and the most likely destination of the epistle is either Rome or Jerusalem. The rhetoric of the epistle suggests that it was written while the temple was still standing. Church adopts the theory that because the author wanted the audience to distance themselves from the cultic rituals of the temple, Hebrews employs tabernacle language as an indirect way of attacking the temple cultus, lest the audience reject the message outright. He espouses a “modified relapse theory;” to say that the audience wanted to return to Judaism from Christianity is anachronistic, as these categories did not exist yet. Instead, the author urges readers to follow Jesus and not return to the practices of the old covenant.
The main body of the study divides into two parts. Part 1, consisting of chapters 2 through 5, deals with attitudes toward the Jerusalem temple in the literature of Second Temple Judaism. Part 2, consisting of chapters 6 through 8, focuses on temple symbolism in Hebrews.
In chapter 2, Church examines several texts that reflect a positive attitude toward the temple (Sirach, the Letter of Aristeas, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sibylline Oracle book 3, Philo, and 2 Enoch). Chapter 3 explores temple symbolism in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which rejected the temple. Chapter 4 considers texts that exhibit dissatisfaction with the temple (1 Enoch, Jubilees, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Testament of Levi, and the Testament of Moses). Chapter 5 reviews texts that respond to the fall of the temple (4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, 3 Baruch, the Apocalypse of Abraham, Pseudo-Philo, Sibylline Oracles books 4 and 5, the Ladder of Jacob, and Josephus). While few of these texts had direct influence on Hebrews, they reveal a wide range of attitudes and conceptualizations regarding the temple. The survey helps situate Hebrews within the larger conversation regarding the temple in Second Temple Jewish literature.
Chapter 6 deals with the eschatological orientation of Hebrews. Church engages in a detailed exegetical analysis of key portions of Hebrews 1–2. Hebrews 1 declares that Jesus has been exalted to the right hand of God, thus inaugurating the eschatological age. Jesus rules alongside God with the same authority and power. Hebrews 2 indicates that the world to come has been subjected to humanity, but this is not yet fully evident. Through the exaltation of Jesus, God is restoring to humanity their rightful dominion.
In chapter 7, Church highlights the eschatological goal of the people of God by investigating key passages in Heb 3:1–4:11 and 11:1–13:16 that deal with temple symbolism. He demonstrates that the various images employed by the author (God’s house, God’s rest, the city with foundations, Mount Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, the unshakeable kingdom, etc.) all refer to the same reality: the heavenly, eschatological temple of God. In most of the passages, access to the heavenly temple is a future hope, but one passage indicates that this access is proleptically available in the present (12:22–24). This suggests to Church that “the heavenly temple is a metaphor for God’s dwelling with his people” (p. 368).
The study culminates in an examination of key passages in the central section of the epistle (4:14–10:25) that deal with temple symbolism. Church argues that the heavenly temple is not the archetype for the earthly tabernacle. In other words, it is not a bipartite structure containing a curtain separating the holy of holies. Rather, it symbolizes the eschatological dwelling of God that has now been made accessible to the people of God in the present. A key part of his argument centers on his interpretation of 8:5. He interprets the phrase ὑποδείγματι καὶ σκιᾷ … τῶν ἐπουρανίων as a hendiadys meaning “symbolic foreshadowing of the heavenly things.” Moreover, he argues from 9:11–14 that Christ did not enter into the heavenly holy of holies to offer his own blood to God. Rather, Christ entered the heavenly temple by means of his blood, that is, by his sacrificial death. Finally, Church briefly summarizes the results of his study in chapter 9.
This study exhibits several strengths. Church writes with fluid prose; he engages in detailed, exegetical analysis; and he extensively interacts with both primary and secondary literature. His survey of the diverse attitudes toward the temple in Second Temple Jewish literature will be a valuable resource for future studies on the issue. However, it would have been helpful to have included a summarizing conclusion after Part 1. What is the precise take-away that he wants us to get from his extensive survey?
Although Church usually supports his claims with firm exegetical backing, occasionally he engages in some novel readings that readers may find surprising. For example, in examining Heb 4:14, he argues that the phrase διεληλυθότα τοὺς οὐρανούς should be translated “going about the heavens,” indicating not that Jesus had “passed through the heavens” but that he is currently actively ministering before God in heaven. Church has provided us with an important study on the temple symbolism in Hebrews that is sure to provoke ongoing and spirited debate on this issue.