HAS GODS ATTITUDE TOWARD THE JERUSALEM TEMPLE CHANGED FROM OLD - TopicsExpress



          

HAS GODS ATTITUDE TOWARD THE JERUSALEM TEMPLE CHANGED FROM OLD COVENANT TO NEW COVENANT? (PART #1 of two parts) Some Christians today simply assume that, since the Jerusalem temple Herod had built was destroyed by Rome in 70 A.D., this was the culmination of a new attitude by God that was precursored by Jesus’ seemingly derogatory comments about the temple and its worship, climaxing in Christ’s inauguration of the New Covenant and the subsequent pouring out of God’s Holy Spirit as recorded in Acts chapter 2. The stone-and-mortar temple was replaced by the believer’s body as the “temple [of the Holy Spirit],” individually (1Cor 6:19) and corporately (1Cor 3:16, 17). Any future rebuilt temple in Jerusalem would therefore be an affront to the work of Christ, right? But can such an assumption be sustained by the biblical evidence – that God’s attitude toward His temple in Jerusalem has somehow changed? Was God, in connection to the Mosaic/Sinaitic Covenant, originally positive toward the Jerusalem temple, or at least ambivalent? ... but then, after the inauguration of the New Covenant, His attitude changed into a negative one toward the temple, its liturgical worship, and the Levitical priesthood? Let’s see … One biblical witness often cited by Christians who hold this assumption is Stephen. The first Christian martyr Stephen spoke the following words to “the people [of Israel], the elders [of Israel] ... the scribes [of Israel] ... the council/Sanhedrin [of Israel] ... [the] false witnesses ... [and] the high priest” (Act 6:12-7:1). He spoke them shortly before he was unjustly executed. Please keep in mind that Stephen’s words below were spoken sometime **after** Jesus had inaugurated the New Covenant and **after** the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon all flesh: “Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as [God] appointed ... until the days of David, who found favor before God and asked to find a dwelling for the God of Jacob. But Solomon built Him a house. However, the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands, as the prophet says: Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool. What house will you build for Me? says the LORD, Or what is the place of My rest? Has My hand not made all these things? (Act 7:44-50). Some observations and questions based on a careful analysis of Stephen’s synopsis: 1. God Himself appointed the Israelites in the wilderness to construct the tabernacle of witness, of which it was written with approval in the Torah/Law that the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle (Exo 40:34). Was it okay for the glory of the LORD [to have] filled the tabernacle that God Himself appointed the Israelites in the wilderness to construct? Back then under the Mosaic/Sinaitic Covenant, of course … 2. David found favor [grace] before God and asked to find a dwelling for the God of Jacob. Why is found favor [grace] before God,” as a descriptor of David, placed in the sentence before the next clause: “and asked to find a dwelling for the God of Jacob? Was David’s request to find God a more permanent “dwelling” illegitimate? Or was it okay with the LORD? (2Sam 7:4-13; 1Kgs 5:5). 3. But Solomon built Him a house. At first blush, without dipping back into the past written revelation to Israel, the contrast Stephen made might seem to be between Davids dwelling for God, and Solomons house for the same. A non-permanent dwelling (such as the tabernacle) versus house (i.e. the more permanent stone-and-mortar temple). However, when we visit the biblical passages that Stephen is referencing, and we see there, among other things, that David’s desire too was to build a “house” (i.e. the more permanent stone-and-mortar temple) for the LORD (2Sam 7:1ff; 1Kgs 5:5), it becomes clear that Stephen’s contrast is NOT at all between dwelling and house, but between David and Solomon (1Kgs 5:3-5; 1Chr 22:7-19). God approved of Solomon build[ing] Him a house,” but would not allow the blood-guilty David to do so (1Chr 22:7-11). In fact, just as in the case of the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness (Exo 40:34), the LORD demonstrated His approval of the dwelling / house which Solomon had constructed on behalf of the LORD, and in obedience to Solomon’s father David. We read similarly that the glory of the LORD filled [Solomons] temple (2Chr 7:1), just as it had filled the tabernacle. The LORD also later appeared to Solomon in a vision and confirmed His approval of the Jerusalem stone-and-mortar temple by saying to Israels king, I have consecrated this house which you have built to put My name there forever, and My eyes and My heart will be there perpetually (1Kgs 9:3). “Forever … perpetually. Therefore, can anyone honestly think that God did not approve of Solomons temple? But maybe that was God’s attitude toward the stone-and-mortar temple under the Mosaic Covenant. Maybe His positive attitude about the temple has now changed to a negative one since the inauguration of the New Covenant and/or since the pouring out of His Holy Spirit as recorded in Acts chapter 2. But does Scripture really support this theory? Going on with my observations and questions regarding Stephen’s speech … 4. On the one hand, Stephen stated quite clearly that the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands ... On the other hand, he added these important words: as the prophet says … Q: Which prophet? A: Isaiah! ... 700 years before Jesus’ inauguration of the New Covenant and Stephens post-Pentecost speech (See Isa 66:1, fully cited in PART #2 of this study). Therefore, we must conclude that the notion that the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands ... is not Stephens original New Covenant contribution! Neither is it built upon some veiled statements by Christ about himself being a temple (Joh 2:19-21), which maybe Stephen was referring to. No, this notion that the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands ... had already been around for centuries before Stephen, and before even Jesus first advent. Stephen uses the [so-called] Old Testament to confirm his case. (PART #2 of two to follow)
Posted on: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 23:43:19 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015