Revelation Chapter 11 Commentary

1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.  2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. 3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.   4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth. 5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed. 6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will. 7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. 8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.  9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves. 10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth. 11 And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.  12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them. 13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.

Then we begin a new section at verse 14 where we read: 

14 The second woe is past; and, behold, the third woe cometh quickly. 15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. 16 And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God, 17 Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned. 18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.  19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

Alright, back to verse one.

The first thing to notice is that chapter eleven is a continuation of chapter ten all the way through the first fourteen verses. At that point we open with the seventh trumpet and what comes with it.  So after eating the “little scroll” and being told that he must (again), “prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.”  John writes:

11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.

He does not say who gave him the measuring reed, but the logical conclusion would be that it came from the “mighty angel” (who we said in Chapter 10 was the glorified Christ).  This word translated reed describes a plant with a jointed hollow stalk that typically grows in wetlands. It also refers to the stalk as it was cut for use, as in a measuring-stick or, as in the case of Matthew 27:29-30, for a mock scepter in the hand of the Lord.  It is also designed to be a writing utensil (as mentioned in 3^rd John 1:13).  

The reed that was put into John’s hands was like this type of rod or staff in respect to size and was therefore convenient for handling. The word “rod” is also used to describe a measuring-pole in Psalms 74:2; Jeremiah and Ezekiel.   The line here in the King James, “And the angel stood, saying,” is lacking in most MSS and is rejected by most as a spurious addition.   For whatever that is worth.

And the command was given:

“Rise, and measure the temple of God.”

Now, if this Revelation was received in 90 or 95 AD we might wonder why John doesn’t ask, “What temple?  For it was destroyed 25 years ago.”  And if it was John being told to measure a new, future temple that would be built some 2000 years plus later, we would think that John would have said something like, “And I looked and saw a new temple, like I had never before beheld” (or something like that).  But John seems to take this command in stride -  which tells me that this Revelation was given well before the destruction of the only Temple that John would have been familiar with.  This little insight gives us more evidence for Revelation to have been given well before the Destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.

Now some may say, “but this is all in vision.  So whether it was standing or destroyed John would have been measuring a temple seen in vision.”  This is true.

But I still maintain that the Angel (or God) would have told John to measure the “temple that once stood,” OR “the temple that would be” if this was written after the temple was destroyed.  But we get nothing out of the ordinary so I suggest that the Temple was still standing which is one of the most compelling proofs that Revelation was written before Jerusalem was destroyed.   Listen to the full context (and content) of the verse one more time:

1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.”

How else can we tell that this was the temple of the first century and not some future one?  First, there is not one verse in the entire Bible that speaks of a "rebuilt" Jewish Temple. Not one. That alone should be proof enough.   What people do is infer that a temple will be rebuilt because it would be physically impossible for the “man of sin” (discussed in 2^nd Thessalonians 2:4) to "sit as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God" if there is no temple.  They also say that it is physically impossible to take away the "daily sacrifice" (mentioned in Daniel 8:11-13) if no daily sacrifice is being offered. 

Likewise, Daniel 8:14 explicitly says that after 2300 days "then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Again, it is physically impossible to cleanse a sanctuary that does not exist.
But Ezekiel does not explicitly say that the new temple will be built. Instead he describes the future temple in great detail, and explicitly says it is "the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever." (Ezekiel 43:7)  From this people assume that such a temple will be rebuilt.

I am going to quote from some work by a man named Steve Gregg.  His article first appeared in the Practical Hermeneutics column of The Christian Research Journal, volume 35, number 03 (2012).   

“The book of Ezekiel closes with a vision of a temple and its associated rituals. In chapter 40, the prophet is transported in vision from his home among the exiles in Babylon to Israel, where a divine messenger holding a measuring rod appears to him.  The messenger gives Ezekiel a tour of the temple, measuring the various walls, gates, and courts. At one point, the glory of the Lord, which was seen departing from the temple in an earlier vision (chap. 10), is seen returning to inhabit the temple (43:1–4). Then in the following chapters describe various sacrificial rituals performed by priests.  Special attention is given to the role of one who is referred to as “the prince.”  Near the end, a river is seen flowing out of the temple from under the threshold. The book closes with portions of the land assigned to various tribes.  Biblical scholars acknowledge that the temple vision, which occupies the last nine chapters of Ezekiel, presents special challenges in its interpretation.  Some have even described it as the most difficult passage in the Old Testament.  As with the descriptions in Exodus of the tabernacle and its furnishings, many readers will find this section of Ezekiel tedious, due to its many arcane details, but this is not the greatest difficulty presented by these chapters. By far, the greater difficulty has to do with identifying the time and manner of the fulfillment of the vision.”

First of all, let’s ask: Is It Solomon’s Temple? When Ezekiel saw the vision (573 BC), there was no temple standing in Jerusalem. Solomon’s temple, which had previously stood there, had been destroyed thirteen years earlier by Nebuchadnezzar, when he conquered Jerusalem and deported the citizens to Babylon.   This means that Ezekiel was not seeing Solomon’s temple, or any temple that was actually standing at the time.  What temple, then, was he shown?

Perhaps the answer that first comes to mind would be that this was the temple that came to be built, under the leadership of Zerubbabel, on the return of the Jews from Babylon to Jerusalem.  However, this solution seems to be ruled out by the fact that Zerubbabel’s temple ended up being much smaller, and less elaborate, than the one Ezekiel describes. If Ezekiel was prophesying that the temple built by the returning exiles would fit this description, the prophecy failed to come true and this is not an option for those who believe the inspiration of Scripture.  Other interpretations, therefore, have been offered by evangelical scholars.

Some Christian commentators have understood the content of these chapters as an apocalyptic vision, which is best interpreted spiritually.   They point out that the church, in the New Testament, is often referred to as God’s “temple” or habitation.  Each Christian is seen as a “living stone” (1 Peter 2:5), built, along with others, “upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Ephesians 2:20) into a “temple of God” (1st  Corinthians 3:16).  On this view, the features of temple worship—priests, altars, sacrifices, blood rituals—would be seen as pertaining to spiritual, rather than literal realities, and applied to our worship of God in the present time.   In particular, Ezekiel provides a description in chapter 47 of a flowing river which would seem to support a nonliteral interpretation.   If this is the correct view, we would be required either to see many of the tedious details as being either superfluous or as corresponding to spiritual ideas that would be very difficult to identify with confidence.

Another view of this vision, commonly held among dispensationalists (futurists), is that Ezekiel’s temple will be established after the second coming of Christ and will serve as the worship center for all people during the “millennium.”  On this view, the one described as “the prince” is often identified as Christ Himself, ruling over the millennial kingdom.  

In choosing among these options, we are compelled to decide between differing hermeneutical priorities.  Hermeneutics is a term that describes the manner in which we approach the interpretation of scripture.  One of the chief hermeneutical principles recommended by dispensationalist scholars is that of maintaining a consistently literal interpretation.  This would mean that “spiritualizing” the text must be seen as a departure from the most faithful handling of Scripture. Therefore, dispensationalists argue for a literal, physical building to be established in fulfillment of Ezekiel’s vision.  Since the temple erected after Ezekiel’s time did not fit Ezekiel’s description, they believe that there must be another temple in the future that will do so more admirably.  There are some problems with this view, however.

The most obvious is presented in the book of Hebrews (especially chapter 10:1–18) which speaks of the death of Christ on the cross as a termination of the efficacy of bloody animal sacrifices, such as those Israel offered in the temple.  If Ezekiel’s vision applies to a future time, why do we again find the offering of animal sacrifices?   The dispensationalist answer is that the millennial sacrifices will not be intended to atone for sins. The blood of Christ precludes any need for that. Just as the Old Testament sacrifices anticipated the death of Christ as a future event, it is suggested that the future millennial sacrifices will commemorate the death of Christ as a past event.  The text of Ezekiel, however, seems to preclude this, since the various offerings in the temple are said to “make atonement for the house of Israel” (Ezekiel 45:17).  Therefore, we cannot get around that the sacrifices described in Ezekiel are presented as an atonement for sin, not as a memorial. Do you recall what Christ Himself recommended to use in the commemoration of His death?  Wine and bread (1st Corinthians 11:24–26).  Why would God replace this with animal sacrifices which God admits (throughout scripture) that He never found any particular pleasure? (Psalm 40:6; 51:16; Hebrews 10:6).  Furthermore, Ezekiel says that “the prince” will offer a sin offering “for himself and for all the people” (Ezekiel 45:22).  If the prince is required to offer sacrifices for his own sins, this would militate against any theory that identifies him with Christ, who never sinned.

Other objections to the idea that Ezekiel’s vision describes a future worship include the fact that his vision presents a centralized worship (in a specified geographical place) as happening. This was the common expectation in the Old Testament where people were expected to approach the tabernacle and later the temple from all locations to one location.   But Jesus told the Samaritan woman that the time of centralized worship was soon to end and to be replaced with spiritual worship, which does not depend on being in any particular place (John 4:21–24; Acts 7:48–50).

Also, Ezekiel’s vision, the Levites and Aaronic priesthood are seen in their former places of service. According to the New Testament, there has been a change of the priesthood (Hebrew 7:12) and the Jewish priesthood has been replaced by a different priesthood (1^st  Peter 2:5) and a non-Aaronic high priest (Jesus).  This modification will not be reversed, for Christ is said to be “a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek” (Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 7:17, 21).

These difficulties of the dispensational interpretation are insurmountable, and while literal interpretation is good when it is best there is another hermeneutic principle that overrides literalism—namely, the superior revelation given in Christ, which is abundantly supported, especially in the Book of Hebrews.  For example, Hebrews 1:1–3 affirms that, while God spoke to Israel through various prophets in the past, the revelation that has come through Christ is more comprehensive because He is no mere prophet, but “the brightness of [God’s] glory and the express image of His person.”  The New Testament is not a mere appendix added to the writings of the Old Testament prophets. It is a revelation of the new order in Jesus Christ, in whom all previous revelation finds its fulfillment, and through whom all previous revelation must be understood.

People insist on going back to the Old Testament and saying, “Well this needs to happen and that needs to happen” when in reality it has all happened and been fulfilled in and through His Son.  This is easily forgotten when people place the written word and a literal interpretation of it over the fact that God, in these last days, has said it all through His Son.  Remember, Jesus Himself said that the scriptures spoke of Him.  This being the case, it would be foolish for us to seek a meaning of the prophets contrary to that which Christ and the apostles taught. 

It is their witness that provides the strongest objections to any literalistic interpretation of Ezekiel 40–48.   In Christ’s new order (which, unlike the old order, is permanent and unchangeable), the temple, priesthood, and sacrifices are all spiritual. Lose sight of this and you lose sight of Jesus having had the victory.  

So, how then are we to understand the temple vision? 

First, one might reasonably refer to the vision as that which “might have been,” had the Jewish exiles in Babylon exhibited a more thorough repentance than they did. There is  a strong indication that the realization of this vision in Israel’s future was contingent on the people being sufficiently ashamed, or repentant, of their past sins: 

“Son of man, describe the temple to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities; and let them measure the pattern. And if they are ashamed of all that they have done, make known to them the design of the temple” (Ezekiel 43:10–11).

The response of the Jews to their opportunity to return and to rebuild their temple was notoriously tepid.   Only a small remnant opted even to return to Jerusalem, while the rest were content to remain in Babylon. As a result, the temple they built proved to be inferior to the one that Ezekiel described.  Though the Jews did not meet the conditions to have such a temple as Ezekiel’s, the pattern preserved in these chapters stands as a description of an intended order, which, had it materialized, would have testified, as the tabernacle once did, as a type and shadow of “heavenly things” (Hebrews 8:5)—the new order in Jesus Christ.  This, we may assume, was the long-term purpose served by the vision.   Though some features of the vision were probably intended symbolically from the start (e.g., the seemingly miraculous, ever-deepening river), it is probable that the temple and its rituals would have been literally instituted, as here described, had Israel met God’s conditions. Whether or not the temple had ever actually been rebuilt, the new revelation in Christ encourages us to see its pattern as having been fulfilled in Jesus Christ Himself, who is the final atoning sacrifice and the eternal high priest of God’s people.