The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The ... - josephprestonkirk

LOREN L. JOHNS 267
of the New Testament.” 38 There seems to be little in common between
New Jerusalem and Revelation that is not also found in Ezekiel. For
instance, all three plans speak of twelve gates in the city wall, with three
on each side, named after the twelve tribes of Israel (Ezek 48:30–34;
11QT [11Q19] 39.11–13; 4Q554 frag. 1 1.9–2.10; Rev 21:12–14).
There are, however, two possible exceptions to the pattern of common
but unconnected dependence upon Ezekiel. First, both New Jerusalem and
Revelation expand the size of the city in comparison with Ezekiel. New
Jerusalem expands it tenfold and Revelation a thousandfold. Ezekiel’s
measurements imply a city circumference of around six miles (48:16, 35).
New Jerusalem’s circumference is around sixty miles (4Q554 frag. 1 cols.
1–2). 39 However, the new Jerusalem in Revelation (21:16) is about six
thousand miles in circumference—nearly as large as Europe—and equally
as high! A second difference is that both New Jerusalem and Revelation
describe the precious materials used in the building of the city—something
we also see in Isa 54:11–12 and Tob 13:16, but not in Ezekiel (cf.
also Exod 39:8–14; 1 Pet 2:4–8). 40
One important difference between the scrolls and Revelation stands
out sharply: the vision in Ezekiel, New Jerusalem, and the Temple Scroll
include both a new Jerusalem and a new temple. But the new Jerusalem
in John’s vision has no temple, because “its temple is the Lord God
Almighty and the Lamb” (Rev 21:22 NRSV). Both communities envisioned
an eschaton that would be marked by the intimate presence of God.
We see this in Rev 21:3 and in 11QTemple (11Q19) 29.7–9. In Revelation
the presence of God vitiates the need for a temple, but in 11QTemple, the
eschatological temple will be built by God himself.
38. García Martínez, ““The ‘New Jerusalem’ and the Future Temple,” 186. García
Martínez is more judicial and uses slightly more caution in his encyclopedia article:
“The description of the city and temple in the New Jerusalem is located midway
between Ezekiel’s description of the future Jerusalem and the Heavenly Jerusalem of
the New Testament Book of Revelation 21–22.” See García Martínez, “New Jerusalem”
in EDSS 609. It may well be one link in a chain with several missing links, but probably
not the missing link. A broader understanding of the scope of traditions like the
renewed temple in a renewed Jerusalem is useful, such as that reflected in Victor
Aptowitzer, The Celestial Temple as Viewed in the Aggadah (ed. J. Dan; Studies in Jewish
Thought 2; New York: Praeger, 1989).
39. This figuring is based on measurements of 140 stadia by 100 stadia, as suggested
by García Martínez, “New Jerusalem” in EDSS, with each stadium being oneeighth
of a mile.
40. Whether the Jerusalem in New Jerusalem is a “heavenly” or earthly Jerusalem is
a contested matter. Sometimes readers assume that this Jerusalem is heavenly and
interpret New Jerusalem as one of many expressions of “Urbild und Abbild,” but the text
itself does not make this clear. See, e.g., García Martínez, “New Jerusalem” in EDSS.
That this new Jerusalem is idealized does not necessarily mean that it is celestial.