by
Awaiting a Third Temple
‘Destroy
this Temple
and
in three days I will raise it up’.
(John
2:19)
The first Temple of Yahweh in
Jerusalem was built by king Solomon in approximately the C10th BC, and, after
this one was destroyed by the Babylonians (traditionally in c. 587 BC), a
second Temple was built by the Jews returning from the Babylonian Captivity.
This one, in turn, was destroyed
by the Romans under Titus in 70 AD.
A
misinterpretation of biblical prophecies, such as Daniel 9, has led
Fundamentalist Christians to anticipate that a third Temple will soon be built
in Jerusalem. And they expect it to be
built upon the holy Mount Moriah, Har HaMoriyah (the
Muslim Haram el Sharif) where currently stand
the Muslim shrines, the Dome of the Rock and the neighbouring Al Aqsa mosque.
There is a lot
wrong with this whole scenario, as we shall find.
Their sharing of
a common view about this with many Orthodox Jews has caused Fundamentalist
Christians of this persuasion to be very pro-Israel. And so we read at (http://kenraggio.com/KRPN-TheThirdTemple.htm):
Christians
have an interest in Jerusalem and Israel
Christians
around the world are affected by events in Israel. How? For one thing, they are
looking for signs pointing to the second return of Jesus Christ. Perhaps one of
the most significant signs they look for is the reconstruction of the Holy
Temple on Mount Moriah (the Third Temple), and the re-instituting of Old
Testament sacrifices. This would be followed, prophetically, by the appearance
of Man of Sin (Antichrist) in the Temple to shut it all down again - to call an
end to prayers and sacrifices. This is called the Abomination that makes
desolate, or the Abomination of Desolation (Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15; 2
Thessalonians 2:2).
A
great deal of interest has been stirred by the making ready of a qualified
red heifer for the re-instituting of holy sacrifices on the Temple Mount.
In my last trip to Israel, Rabbi Chaim Richman of the Temple
Institute mentioned that there was a red heifer named "Geula"
(see photo on next page) being hidden. This may be the very calf that will be
used to sanctify the Temple Mount for the Third Temple.
[End of quote]
A theme
quite similar to this appears to be the storyline of the highly-touted TV
series DIG, which is often so
convoluted, however, that even many who have followed it closely claim that
they don’t really ‘dig’ it. The series does lay a lot of emphasis on the red
heifer. Here is one review of DIG (http://www.jacksmithprophecy.org/2015/03/31/dig-the-mystery-of-the-biblical-red-heifer-and-the-building-of-the-third-temple-via-hollywood/):
USA Network
mini-series, “DIG” …
champions an end-of-days conspiracy pitting Jewish and Christian
apocalyptics, surprisingly working together to reach the same end-goal —
the coming of Messiah. Of course for Jews, the coming of Messiah will be for
the first time, and for Christians, the coming of Jesus Christ will be for the
second time.
….
The two
apocalyptics are headed in a parallel yet divergent end-game, each a
partner with the other, to hasten the coming of Messiah. The prophetic
fulfillment for both paradigms will require the building of the
Third Temple on the Temple
Mount. As most are aware, the Temple Mount is under the
control of a Jordanian charitable trust (called “waqf”), and its Arab
trustees maintain and control the Mount and the two religious structures,
thereon, the Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa mosque. Israel is responsible for
security on the Temple Mount. Jews may visit the Mount but they cannot pray
upon it. Arabs, through the Jordanian charitable trust’s ownership of the
Mount, claim [sovereignty] over the Temple Mount. Therefore, any attempt
to rebuild the Temple in the modern-day will require Israel to claim
sovereignty over the Temple Mount, an act most certainly leading to the
destruction of both the Dome
of the Rock and Al
Aqsa Mosque, and a near-guarantee of the beginning of World
War III.
…. Palestinian
Arabs have long eschewed any Jewish claim to the Temple Mount, and in
fact, have claimed East
Jerusalem to be their future capital of the future
Palestinian State (where the Temple Mount is located). DIG is Hollywood’s
version of Arab and Jew claims to the holiest and most contested ground in
the world, the Temple Mount, and how apocalyptics could play into a precarious
balance of Arab and Jewish claims over the same piece of ground.
….
I was hooked
on the first episode– dare I say, mesmerized. As of the date of this post, I
have watched the first four episodes, each of which has depicted an
amazingly accurate account of the apocalyptic significance of the
“unblemished red heifer”
in Judaism (Numbers
19:1-2
), and by
extension, to Arabs, Christians – and ultimately, the world.
This female red cow is the rarest of animals, and in fact, none
are known to have existed since the destruction of the Temple by the
Romans in 70 AD (and the Jews have been looking for one ever since). The Mishna,
the compilation of Rabbinical oral law for Judaism, contains a tractate on the
red heifer entitled, “Parah” (Cow), in the 6th Division, “Tohoroth.” ….
The rarity of the red heifer is due to the requirements of
Scripture (as elaborated by the rabbis in the Mishna) that it be “without
defect,” i.e., “unblemished,” without more than two strands of hair, a color
other than red … on which no yoke has ever been placed (Numbers 19:1-2), and not
more than two years old. …. In the mini-series, the red heifer is
named, “Red,” and is raised on a remote farm in Norway. Red’s caretaker is
a Jewish young man who seems to have little knowledge of Red’s importance but
that he has been chosen to keep the animal safe, and in an unexpected turn of
events, to deliver the heifer to a yet unidentified location, presumably
Jerusalem.
), and by
extension, to Arabs, Christians – and ultimately, the world.
This female red cow is the rarest of animals, and in fact, none
are known to have existed since the destruction of the Temple by the
Romans in 70 AD (and the Jews have been looking for one ever since). The Mishna,
the compilation of Rabbinical oral law for Judaism, contains a tractate on the
red heifer entitled, “Parah” (Cow), in the 6th Division, “Tohoroth.” ….
The rarity of the red heifer is due to the requirements of
Scripture (as elaborated by the rabbis in the Mishna) that it be “without
defect,” i.e., “unblemished,” without more than two strands of hair, a color
other than red … on which no yoke has ever been placed (Numbers 19:1-2), and not
more than two years old. …. In the mini-series, the red heifer is
named, “Red,” and is raised on a remote farm in Norway. Red’s caretaker is
a Jewish young man who seems to have little knowledge of Red’s importance but
that he has been chosen to keep the animal safe, and in an unexpected turn of
events, to deliver the heifer to a yet unidentified location, presumably
Jerusalem.
[End of quote]
The points that
I want to emphasise in this article are that, as I see it, even if a temple
were eventually to be raised upon Mount Moriah in Jerusalem, it:
(a) would probably not be located at the correct site for a Temple of
Yahweh;
(b) would have nothing to do with biblical prophecy; and
(c) would be quite meaningless in the context of the New Testament.
In support of (a), to begin with,
I shall take some key excerpts from this important article by Dr. Ernest Martin
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1059310/posts):
Associates for Scriptural
Knowledge ^ |
April 4, 1998 | Dr. Ernest L. Martin
The map
below provides one with an easy glance of where the Temple is said to have
stood (“Today’s Temple Mount”), and where it more likely did stand (“Real
location of Temple Mount”). This makes a big difference and throws into chaos,
for example, the “DIG” theory.
Dr. Martin writes:
…. Once we recognize the actual
situation of the two structures that I show in the illustrations, and once you
realize their dimensions, many points of teaching that we observe in the New
Testament will make much better sense to us. In a word, a true perspective of
those two buildings that occupied the greater part of northeastern Jerusalem
(west of the Mount of Olives and the Mount of Offense) will provide a panoramic
view that will show the sheer beauty and majesty of the Mother City of the Jews
in the early part of the first century. Without doubt, it was a splendid and
awesome display of architectural grandeur at its best.
My
new book "The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot" will present the full
and interesting details.
What
you are about the see in the illustrations at the conclusion of this Report is
the description of the Temple and Fort Antonia as presented by Josephus, the
Jewish historian. He was an eyewitness to the City of Jerusalem before the
Romans destroyed it in A.D.70 ….
A Panoramic View of
Ancient Jerusalem
Let
me start by mentioning a scene that usually occupies the attention of each
person who visits Jerusalem for the first time (or who returns year after year
to see the archaeological remains of the Jerusalem of Herod and Jesus). That
particular scene is observed from the Mount of Olives just in front of the
Seven Arches Hotel. This is where people can obtain the best over-all view of
the ancient and modern City of Jerusalem. ….
My
first visit to Jerusalem was in the year 1961. Since then I have returned to
the city over thirty times from areas in Europe or America where I have lived
.… (from 1958 to 1972). In Jerusalem, I worked personally on a daily basis with
Professor Benjamin Mazar in the archaeological excavations at the western and southern
walls of the Haram esh-Sharif [Temple Mount]. My working association with
Professor Mazar on that site lasted for two months each summer during the years
1969, 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973.
….
With this in mind, let’s return to the top of the Mount of Olives to be
reminded of the splendid panoramic perspective depicting the remnants of
ancient Jerusalem as well as witnessing the vibrant and bustling modern City of
Jerusalem. ….
Observing Jerusalem
from the Mount of Olives
The
view is spectacular. There is no scene from other areas of Jerusalem that can
replicate the grandeur of the ancient archaeological remains of the city. What
dominates the scene, as one looks westward, is a rectangular body of walls with
gigantic stones perfectly aligned with one another in their lower courses.
These four walls present to the observer a feeling of majesty and awe at what
the ancients were capable of accomplishing by their architectural achievements.
These walls surround the area presently known as the Haram esh-Sharif (the
Noble Enclosure). The stones of the lower courses in those walls are in their
pristine positions. They are still placed neatly on top of another without any
major displacement from their original alignments. These lower stones are
clearly Herodian in origin, and in some places in the eastern portion of the
wall they are pre-Herodian. There are certainly more than 10,000 of these
stones still in place as they were in the time of Herod and Jesus. ….
All
of these stones in those four walls survived the Roman/Jewish War of A.D.70-73.
The
grand centerpiece within the whole enclosure is the Muslim shrine called the
Dome of the Rock. It is centrally located in a north/south dimension within the
rectangular area of the Haram. To the south of the Dome and abutting to the
southern wall is another large building called the Al Aqsa Mosque with its
smaller dome … the whole area is overshadowed and dominated by the Haram
esh-Sharif with those ancient walls that impressively highlight the scene.
This
is the view that modern viewers are accustomed to see.
But
let us now go back over 1900 years and imagine viewing Jerusalem from this same
spot. It is from this vantage point that Titus (the Roman General) looked on
the ruins of Jerusalem after the Roman/Jewish War in A.D.70. The description of
what Titus saw is very instructive. We should read his appraisal in the
accounts preserved by Josephus because Josephus and Titus were both
eyewitnesses. Notice not only what Titus observed, but also what he left out of
the narrative (War VII.1,1). This omission will become of prime importance in
our inquiry regarding the true location of the Temple. Titus commanded that
only a part of a wall and three forts were to remain of what was once the
glorious City of Jerusalem. Notice what is stated in War VII.1,1.
"Now
as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there
remained none to be the objects of their fury … Caesar gave orders that they
should now demolish the entire city and Temple, but should leave as many of the
towers standing as were of the greatest eminence; that is, Phasaelus, and
Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the
west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to
lie in garrison [in the Upper City], as were the towers [the three forts] also
spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how
well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the
wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to
the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither
believe it [Jerusalem] had ever been inhabited. This was the end which
Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city
otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind"
(Whiston trans., italics …bracketed … mine).
This
eyewitness account about the total ruin of Jerusalem has given visitors to
Jerusalem a major problem in relation to what we witness of ancient Jerusalem
today.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These descriptions by Josephus are
what he and Titus saw from the Mount of Olives. But this is NOT what we observe
today. We see something remaining from the period of Herod and Jesus that is
quite different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The
fact is, Titus gave orders that the Temple was to be demolished. The only
man-made structures to be left in Jerusalem was to be a portion of the western
wall and the three fortresses located in the Upper City. This was Titus’
intention at first. But within a short time, even that portion of the western
wall and the three fortresses in the west were so thoroughly destroyed that not
a trace of them remained (unless the so-called "Tower of David" near
the present day Jaffa Gate as scholars guess is a part of the foundation of
Hippicus or Phasaelus). At the conclusion of the war, the Tenth Legion left
Jerusalem a mass of ruins. …. by late A.D.70, there was nothing left standing
of the Temple or the buildings of Jerusalem. Josephus stated:
"And
truly, the very view itself was a melancholy thing; for those places which were
adorned with trees and pleasant gardens, were now become desolate country every
way, and its trees were all cut down. Nor could any foreigner that had formerly
seen Judaea and the most beautiful suburbs of the city, and now saw it as a
desert, but lament and mourn sadly at so great a change. For the war had laid
all signs of beauty quite waste. Nor had anyone who had known the place before,
had come on a sudden to it now, would he have known it again. But though he [a
foreigner] were at the city itself, yet would he have inquired for it"
(War VI.1,1).
What the Modern Visitor
Observes
These
descriptions by Josephus are what he and Titus saw from the Mount of Olives.
But this is NOT what we observe today. We see something remaining from the
period of Herod and Jesus that is quite different. Directly to the west, we
view an awe-inspiring architectural relic of the past that is splendidly
positioned directly in front of us. It dominates the whole western prospect of
this panoramic view. That ancient structure is the Haram esh-Sharif. Its
rectangular walls are so large in dimension that the Haram effectively obscures
much of the view of the present old city of Jerusalem. And certainly, without
the slightest doubt, the Haram (in its lower courses of stones that make up its
walls) is a building that survived the Roman/Jewish War. Indeed, it is an
outstanding example of the early architectural grandeur that once graced the
Jerusalem of Herod and Jesus that has withstood two thousand years of
weathering, earthquakes, wars and natural deterioration.
What
is strange, and almost inexplicable at first, is the fact that Josephus
mentioned the utter ruin of the Temple and all the City of Jerusalem, but he
gave no reference whatever to the Haram esh-Sharif or that Titus had commanded
that those walls should remain intact. And through the centuries, up to our
modern period, there are over 10,000 stones still in their original positions
making up the four walls of the Haram. As a matter of fact, in Titus’ time
there were probably another 5,000 stones that were left on the upper courses of
the four walls that have been dislodged and fallen to the ground over the
centuries since the first century. What must be recognized is the fact that
Titus deliberately left the rectangular shaped Haram esh-Sharif practically in
the state he found it when he first got to Jerusalem with his legions.
Strangely, Titus must have ordered that those four walls be retained for all
future ages to see.
Without
doubt, the Haram esh-Sharif with its gigantic walls was a survivor of the war.
But how could Josephus have failed to account for the retention of such a
spacious and magnificent building that was clearly in existence in pre-war
Jerusalem?
The
continued existence of those extensive remains of the Haram esh-Sharif seem (at
first glance) to nullify the appraisal of Josephus and Titus. Remember, they
said that nothing of Jerusalem was left. "It [Jerusalem] was so thoroughly
laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there
was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it [Jerusalem] had ever
been inhabited."
What
is even more strange is the modern belief that the Haram esh-Sharif must be
reckoned as the site of the Temple Mount. If present scholarly opinion is
correct, this means that Titus and the Roman legions did not destroy the outer
walls of the Temple in its middle and lower courses. The Romans left over
10,000 stones in place around the Haram. This modern belief of scholars and
religious authorities (whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian) that the retention
of those 10,000 stones around the Haram represents the remnants of the walls of
the Temple make the above descriptions of their demolition by Josephus and
Titus as being outlandish exaggerations. And true enough, this is precisely how
most modern scholars, theologians, religious leaders and archaeologists view
the matter.
Professor
Williamson, who translated Josephus, said this was the case. He remarked that
the thorough desolation that Titus was supposed to have seen in front of him
was: "An exaggeration. A great deal of the southern part of the Temple
enclosure was spared. The whole of the south wall of its successor, the present
wall round the Haram esh-Sharif, the southern section of the west wall (the
‘Wailing Wall’, where the fall of Jerusalem is still lamented) and a short stretch
of the east wall running up from the southeast corner are Herodian to a
considerable height" (The Jewish War, p.454, note 2). We will see abundant
evidence in my new book that Josephus was not exaggerating. This is because
that enclosure known as the Haram esh-Sharif was NOT the Temple Mount, nor was
the structure then officially reckoned as a part of the municipality of
Jerusalem. ….
Our
modern scholars and religious authorities consistently state that we cannot
believe Josephus literally in his accounts concerning the important
descriptions that he provides. We will discover, however, that it is the modern
scholars and the religious leaders who are wrong and not Josephus. Josephus,
the historian/priest, knew what he was talking about. Jerusalem and the Temple
were totally destroyed and not a stone of them was left in place. The truth is,
the Haram esh-Sharif was NOT the Temple Mount.
Josephus
Was Not Exaggerating
It
is time for us to realize that it is the modern scholars who are wrong, not the
eyewitness accounts of Josephus and Titus.
Jerusalem
and the Temple were indeed destroyed to the bedrock just as they relate.
Regarding
this, there are other sections of Josephus’ accounts to show that he was not
exaggerating. Josephus was keen on telling his readers that all the walls
around Jerusalem were leveled to the ground. Note his observation: "Now
the Romans set fire to the extreme parts of the city [the suburbs] and burnt
them down, and entirely demolished its [Jerusalem’s] walls" (War VI.9,4.).
This
reference shows that all the walls, even those enclosing the outskirts of
Jerusalem, were finally leveled to the ground. To reinforce the matter,
Josephus said elsewhere: "When he [Titus] entirely demolished the rest of
the city, and overthrew its walls, he left these towers [the three towers
mentioned above] as a monument of his good fortune, which had proved [the
destructive power of] his auxiliaries, and enabled him to take what could not
otherwise have been taken by him" (War VI.9,1).
….
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, the majority of
Christian visitors to Jerusalem who first view those huge stones surrounding
the rectangular area of the Haram (and who know the prophecies of Jesus) are
normally perplexed and often shocked at what they see.
And they ought to be.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A
Quandary for Modern Christians
These
facts present a major problem for Christians. If those rectangular walls of the
Haram are indeed the same walls (in their lower courses) that formerly embraced
the Temple Mount, why are these stones (more than 10,000 in number) yet so
firmly on top of one another? The continued existence of those gigantic and
majestic walls would show that Titus did not destroy the walls of the Temple,
if those walls did surround the Temple. Why is this a difficulty for Christian
belief? The reason is plain.
Christians
are aware of four prophecies given by Jesus in the New Testament that there
would not be one stone left upon another either of the Temple and its walls or
even of the City of Jerusalem and its walls (Matthew 24:1,2; Mark 13:1,2; Luke
19:43,44; 21:5,6.). But strange as it may appear, the walls surrounding the
Haram esh-Sharif still remain in their glory with their 10,000+ Herodian and
pre-Herodian stones solidly in place in their lower courses. If those stones
are those of the Temple, the prophecies of Jesus can be seriously doubted as
having any historical value or merit in any analysis by intelligent and
unbiased observers.
Indeed,
the majority of Christian visitors to Jerusalem who first view those huge
stones surrounding the rectangular area of the Haram (and who know the
prophecies of Jesus) are normally perplexed and often shocked at what they see.
And they ought to be. The surprise at what they observe has been the case with
numerous people that I have guided around Jerusalem and Israel. They have asked
for an explanation concerning this apparent failure of the prophecies of Jesus.
Why do those gigantic walls still exist? If those walls represent the stones
around the Temple, then the prophecies of Christ are invalid.
The
usual explanation, however, to justify the credibility to Jesus’ prophecies is
to say that Jesus could only have been speaking about the inner Temple and its
buildings, NOT the outer Temple and its walls that surrounded it. This is the
customary and the conciliatory answer that most scholars provide …). The truth
is, however, this explanation will not hold water when one looks at what Jesus
prophesied.
One
should carefully observe the prophecies of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels. They
plainly state that one stone would not rest on another of the Temple, its
buildings, and his prophecies also embraced its outer walls. The Greek word
Jesus used in his prophetic context to describe the Temple and its buildings
was heiron (this means the entire Temple including its exterior buildings and
walls). Notice what Vincent says about the meaning of heiron.
"The
word temple (heiron, lit., sacred place) signifies the whole compass of the
sacred enclosure, with its porticos, courts, and other subordinate buildings; and
should be carefully distinguished from the other word, naos, also rendered
temple, which means the temple itself — the "Holy Place" and the
"Holy of Holies." When we read, for instance, of Christ teaching in
the temple (heiron) we must refer it to one of the temple-porches [outer
colonnades]. So it is from the heiron, the court of the Gentiles, that Christ
expels the money-changers and cattle-merchants" (Vincent, Word Studies in
the New Testament, Vol. I., p.50).
The
exterior buildings of the Temple including its walls were always reckoned
within the meaning of the word heiron that Jesus used in his prophecies
concerning the total destruction of the Temple. There were several outer
divisions of the Temple that were distinguished from the Inner Temple, and
these outer appurtenances were accounted to be cardinal features of the
Sanctuary. As an example, note the New Testament account stating that Satan
took Jesus to the "pinnacle of the Temple" (Matthew 4:5). The
pinnacle section was the southeastern corner of the outer wall that surrounded
the whole of the Temple complex. The wording in the New Testament shows that
this southeastern angle belonged to the Temple — it was a pinnacle [a wing]
"of the Temple." That area was very much a part of the sacred edifice
to which Jesus referred when he prophesied that not one stone would remain on
another.
There
is an important geographical factor that proves this point. When Jesus made his
prophecy that no stone would be left on one another, Matthew said that Jesus and
his disciples had just departed from the outer precincts of the Temple. This
means that all of them were at the time viewing the exterior sections of the
Temple (the heiron) when he gave his prophecy (Matthew 24:1). The Gospel of
Mark goes even further and makes it clear that the outside walls of the Temple
were very much in the mind of Jesus when he said they would be uprooted from
their very foundations. "And as he [Jesus] went out of the Temple [note
that Jesus and the disciples were standing outside the Temple walls and looking
back toward the Temple enclosure], one of his disciples saith unto him,
‘Master, see what buildings are here!’ And Jesus answering said unto him,
‘Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon
another, that shall not be thrown down’"(Matthew 24:1). Without the
slightest doubt, when Jesus in his prophecy spoke about the destruction of the
Temple, he was certainly including in his prophecy the stones of the outer
walls that enclosed the Temple as well as the buildings of the inner Temple.
The
Whole City of Jerusalem Also to be Destroyed
Jesus
went even further than simply prophesying about the destruction of the Temple
and its walls. He also included within his prophetic predictions the stones
that made up the whole City of Jerusalem (with every building and house that
comprised the metropolis — including the walls that embraced its urban area).
According to Jesus in Luke 19:43,44, every structure of Jewish Jerusalem would
be leveled to the ground —to the very bedrock. ….
Jesus Christ is
“the New Temple”
The quest for a Third Temple has
no biblical relevance if Pope Benedict XVI was correct in this his view that
Jesus Christ is “the new Temple”.
BENEDICT XVI
GENERAL AUDIENCE
Saint Peter's Square
Wednesday, 2 May 2012
Wednesday, 2 May 2012
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
In our
recent Catecheses we have seen how through personal and community prayer the
interpretation of and meditation on Sacred Scripture open us to listening to
God who speaks to us and instils light in us so that we may understand the
present.
Today, I
would like to talk about the testimony and prayer of the Church’s first martyr,
St Stephen, one of the seven men chosen to carry out the service of charity for
the needy. At the moment of his martyrdom, recounted in the Acts of the
Apostles, the fruitful relationship between the Word of God and prayer is once
again demonstrated.
Stephen
is brought before the council, before the Sanhedrin, where he is accused of
declaring that “this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place, [the Temple]
and will change the customs which Moses delivered to us” (Acts 6:14). During
his public life Jesus had effectively foretold the destruction of the Temple of
Jerusalem: you will “destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up”
(Jn 2:19). But, as the Evangelist John remarked, “he spoke of the temple of his
body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that
he had said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had
spoken” (Jn 2:21-22).
Stephen’s
speech to the council, the longest in the Acts of the Apostles, develops on
this very prophecy of Jesus who is the new Temple, inaugurates the new worship
and, with his immolation on the Cross, replaces the ancient sacrifices. Stephen
wishes to demonstrate how unfounded is the accusation leveled against him of
subverting the Mosaic law and describes his view of salvation history and of
the covenant between God and man. In this way he reinterprets the whole of the
biblical narrative, the itinerary contained in Sacred Scripture, in order to
show that it leads to the “place”, of the definitive presence of God that is
Jesus Christ, and in particular his Passion, death and Resurrection. In this
perspective Stephen also interprets his being a disciple of Jesus, following
him even to martyrdom. Meditation on Sacred Scripture thus enables him to
understand his mission, his life, his present. Stephen is guided in this by the
light of the Holy Spirit and by his close relationship with the Lord, so that
the members of the Sanhedrin saw that his face was “like the face of an angel”
(Acts 6:15). This sign of divine assistance is reminiscent of Moses’ face which
shone after his encounter with God when he came down from Mount Sinai (cf. Ex
34:29-35; 2 Cor 3:7-8).
In his
discourse Stephen starts with the call of Abraham, a pilgrim bound for the land
pointed out to him by God which he possessed only at the level of a promise. He
then speaks of Joseph, sold by his brothers but helped and liberated by God,
and continues with Moses, who becomes an instrument of God in order to set his
people free but also and several times comes up against his own people’s
rejection. In these events narrated in Sacred Scripture to which Stephen
demonstrates he listens religiously, God always emerges, who never tires of
reaching out to man in spite of frequently meeting with obstinate opposition.
And this happens in the past, in the present and in the future. So it is that
throughout the Old Testament he sees the prefiguration of the life of Jesus
himself, the Son of God made flesh who — like the ancient Fathers — encounters
obstacles, rejection and death.
Stephen
then refers to Joshua, David and Solomon, whom he mentions in relation to the
building of the Temple of Jerusalem, and ends with the word of the Prophet
Isaiah (66:1-2): “Heaven is my throne, and earth my footstool. What house will
you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest? Did not my
hand make all these things?” (Acts 7:49-50). In his meditation on God’s action
in salvation history, by highlighting the perennial temptation to reject God
and his action, he affirms that Jesus is the Righteous One foretold by the
prophets; God himself has made himself uniquely and definitively present in
him: Jesus is the “place” of true worship. Stephen does not deny the importance
of the Temple for a certain period, but stresses that “the Most High does not
dwell in houses made with hands” (Acts 7:48).
The new,
true temple in which God dwells is his Son, who has taken human flesh; it is
the humanity of Christ, the Risen One, who gathers the peoples together and
unites them in the Sacrament of his Body and his Blood. The description of the
temple as “not made by human hands” is also found in the theology of St Paul
and in the Letter to the Hebrews; the Body of Jesus which he assumed in order
to offer himself as a sacrificial victim for the expiation of sins, is the new
temple of God, the place of the presence of the living God; in him, God and
man, God and the world are truly in touch: Jesus takes upon himself all the
sins of humanity in order to bring it into the love of God and to “consummate”
it in this love. Drawing close to the Cross, entering into communion with
Christ, means entering this transformation. And this means coming into contact
with God, entering the true temple.
Stephen’s
life and words are suddenly cut short by the stoning, but his martyrdom itself
is the fulfilment of his life and message: he becomes one with Christ. Thus his
meditation on God’s action in history, on the divine word which in Jesus found
complete fulfilment, becomes participation in the very prayer on the Cross.
Indeed, before dying, Stephen cries out: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts
7:59), making his own the words of Psalm 31[30]:6 and repeating Jesus’ last
words on Calvary: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (Lk 23:46).
Lastly, like Jesus, he cries out with a loud voice facing those who were
stoning him: “Lord, do not hold this sin against them” (Acts 7:60). Let us note
that if on the one hand Stephen’s prayer echoes Jesus’, on the other it is
addressed to someone else, for the entreaty is to the Lord himself, namely, to
Jesus whom he contemplates in glory at the right hand of the Father: “Behold, I
see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand
of God” (v. 55).
Dear
brothers and sisters, St Stephen’s witness gives us several instructions for
our prayers and for our lives. Let us ask ourselves: where did this first
Christian martyr find the strength to face his persecutors and to go so far as
to give himself? The answer is simple: from his relationship with God, from his
communion with Christ, from meditation on the history of salvation, from
perceiving God’s action which reached its crowning point in Jesus Christ. Our
prayers, too, must be nourished by listening to the word of God, in communion
with Jesus and his Church.
A second
element: St Stephen sees the figure and mission of Jesus foretold in the
history of the loving relationship between God and man. He — the Son of God —
is the temple that is not “made with hands” in which the presence of God the
Father became so close as to enter our human flesh to bring us to God, to open
the gates of heaven. Our prayer, therefore, must be the contemplation of Jesus
at the right hand of God, of Jesus as the Lord of our, or my, daily life. In
him, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, we too can address God and be truly
in touch with God, with the faith and abandonment of children who turn to a
Father who loves them infinitely. Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment