Ezekiel's Temple in Context

Just as the glory of the Lord fills the garden, tabernacle, and temple of Solomon, so, as Ezekiel is given a vision in Ezekiel 40-48 of a new temple, he witnesses the return of God’s glory to this temple (Ezek 43:1-5). These chapters of Ezekiel’s prophecy have produced no small debate. Some readers of Scripture have proposed that Ezekiel is given a vision of a temple that must be built, while others have understood this vision to be symbolic of something greater than a physical temple. Because this is a hot topic, this reflection spends a few moments thinking about how to approach Ezekiel 40-48. It then turns to a crucial question about the historical context of prophecy. It ends with some thoughts for how we might apply these things to New Testament prophecy.

One theologian rightly points out that Old Testament prophecy must be interpreted within the concept of prophetic perspective, or what he calls the law of time relationship. Just as one who looks at a mountain range from a distance loses the perspective of depth and thus cannot discern valleys between mountains, so also the prophet seeing into the distant future cannot discern gaps of time between the events prophesied.[1] This principle is important beyond Ezekiel’s vision, for the prophets so often speak of the Day of the Lord in a way that does not differentiate between fulfillments that have taken place in history and those that are yet to be fulfilled. Thus, it is not inappropriate to parse out certain aspects of OT prophecy that are fulfilled in Christ’s earthly ministry from aspects that will only be realized when Christ comes again.

Often, the line is not entirely clear, though. For example, as Jesus inaugurates his public ministry, he declares that most of Isa 61:1-2 has been fulfilled in the hearing of his audience in Nazareth (Luke 4:16-21). What he does not read in the synagogue is the last line of Isa 61:2, “and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn” (ESV). Sometimes, it is argued that when the OT is quoted in the NT, the whole context of the quote should be brought into the equation for understanding how that quotation is fulfilled. In this particular instance, though, it seems clear that because Jesus specifically stops his reading where he does, he intends to make a distinction between the time of favor that has been fulfilled in their hearing and the day of vengeance or judgment that still waits. This is an example of prophetic perspective in which the distinct ranges are not perceived by Isaiah but are clarified by Christ. And yet, at the same time, Jesus also declares that his coming has an element of judgment to it for those who do not believe. The line is not entirely clear, for the judgment takes on a different emphasis between Christ’s first and second advents.

Applying this to Ezekiel 40-48, it seems clear that Ezekiel’s vision, in light of Christ’s first advent, belongs to a mountain range far off in the temporal distance. But at the same time, the church is called the temple of the Holy Spirit, and so there is a sense in which Ezekiel’s vision has meaning and is fulfilled before Christ’s second advent.

A second question in our approach to this and other OT prophecy is this: How would an Old Testament prophet understand the concept of Yahweh dwelling intimately with his people? Because the tabernacle and later the temple was the location of the special presence of Yahweh, which was signified by the glory of God filling both the tabernacle and the temple, an Old Testament prophet would understand most clearly the intimate presence of Yahweh in relationship to the temple. Thus, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Malachi, when prophesying about the Day of the Lord, the advent of Yahweh, would comprehend Yahweh’s presence in relation to the temple, and therefore would prophesy using that language.

This means that the temple language is the linguistic toolkit that Ezekiel possessed in order to describe something beyond his comprehension. It is not necessary, and I would argue not helpful, to read Ezekiel 40-48 as anything other than apocalyptic language that makes use of concrete images to express inexpressible things. Now, a similar thought process can then be applied to John’s vision of the New Jerusalem in the book of Revelation. John uses language and images available and accessible to him and his audience to express the inexpressible glory that will follow Christ’s second advent. So, just as we want to read Ezekiel 40-48 as symbolic of something greater than the OT temple and sacrificial system, we should also read Revelation as something greater. This does not mean that the new heavens and new earth won’t have a concrete connection with John’s vision; it does mean that we shouldn’t constrain John’s vision to what is available to us in our limitedness.

[1] Ryrie, The Basis of the Premillennial Faith, 39–40.