Book Review: Temple of Presence: The Christological Fulfillment of Ezekiel 40-48 in Revelation 21:1-22:5

ANDREA L. ROBINSON EUGENE, OR: WIPF AND STOCK, 2019. XXVIII + 205 PP. ISBN 9781532664410. $28.00 USD.

In this book, Andrea L. Robinson presents a study on John’s use of Ezekiel’s temple vision (Ezek 40–48) in the new creation vision of Revelation (Rev 21:1–22:5). The book is Robinson’s slightly edited and now published PhD dissertation. Essentially, Robinson argues that in John’s portrayal of the new creation in Revelation he “portrayed the Messiah as the fulfillment of Ezekiel 40–48” (181).

The book is divided into four parts spanning seven chapters. First, Robinson details the methodological position from which she has carried out the research, and where her study sits within the field (Chs 1–2). Second, Robinson proceeds to survey the various interpretations of Ezekiel’s temple vision (Ezek 40–48) and states her own position (though quite broadly) [Ch 3]. Third, Robinson traces the themes of temple and Messiah throughout the literature of the Second Temple period leading up to Revelation (Chs 4-5). Fourth, she traces John’s allusions to Ezekiel 40–48 in Revelation 21:1–22:5 and presents her conclusion that the Messiah fulfils Ezekiel’s temple vision (Chs 6–7).

The book has a noticeable lack of attention to certain historical background features, such as the dating and authorship of Revelation. The date is assumed to be late first century, after Jerusalem’s fall (78); and there is no statement on who John is specifically (xxiii). Lacking elements such as this is almost certainly due to the need to narrow the scope, especially given the book was originally a dissertation. However, I do not find the study to be significantly lacking because of this; although I expect considerations of such aspects would be beneficial to a larger study. Delimiting the study as she has, enables it to focus almost exclusively on how John is alluding to Ezekiel’s temple vision. This allowed Robinson to contribute to the field in the way she has – at the time of writing “no comprehensive study of the intertextual relationship between Ezekiel 40–48 and Revelation 21–22 has been published.”

A key part of Robinson’s methodology is using Beale’s classifications for determining an allusion’s validity. Based on the level of confidence an interpreter has on the presence of an intertextual allusion, Beale and Robinson classify it as a clear, probable, or possible allusion (xxv). This approach has benefits in providing a structured way to approach intertextual allusions. However, confidence of an allusion’s presence may not fully capture what is occurring in the text itself, especially the complex relationship between author and reader in the discernment and formation of meaning in human communication. The approach does not explicitly allow for an author to unconsciously allude to a prior text and for the audience to then pick up the allusion, without knowing whether the author intended it. Implications can be drawn from a text that the author did not intend, yet which are permitted by the intent and message of the author, and even contribute to the formation of meaning. However, Robinson does recognize that “schemas for the categorization of intertextual references abound” (xxv).

Another point of caution towards a focus on classifying allusions according to the confidence of their presence is that it may distract from the actual implications of the allusion. However, the methodology employed by Robinson (with its roots in Beale’s work) does stand up to scrutiny by succeeding to draw out the implications of John’s allusions to Ezekiel. Part of this fruitful work comes from a focus on how the allusion is functioning within the text, in addition to discussions of categorising it as a clear, probable, or possible allusion. The following example of detecting and evaluating an intertextual allusion illustrates this well.

In Revelation 21:22, Robinson posits that there is a clear allusion to Ezekiel 40–48 (overall; 164). She discusses various factors which contribute to affirming this allusion (158–163). However, Robinson does not stop there. She posits that John’s statement functions as a “fulfilment” of Ezekiel’s temple vision in this context (164) and proceeds to draw out the implications of this. She convincingly demonstrates that John viewed his vision as a retelling and clarifying fulfilment of Ezekiel’s vision. The difference being that John explained the vision of the new creation in light of the Messiah, interpreting it christologically – when “the centerpiece of the vision, the temple is absent [in Revelation 21:22], hearers are expected to understand that the Messiah embodies all that the temple represented” (179).

With her significant survey of temple and Messiah in Second Temple literature, she insightfully demonstrated that the “portrayal of the messiah at the center of the heavenly city and as the embodiment of the temple is fully at home in the literary and theological milieu of the time” (183). The implication of this is that John is revealing an understandable reality that the Lamb becomes the place where God and humanity meet, creating “unadulterated access to God’s presence, freedom from oppression, and eternal security” (184). This christological embodiment of the temple is convincingly connected to the city representing God’s people, creating a fascinating image of the people of God being united with the Lamb as one temple-city in the new creation (183). This statement is well at home in the theology of the New Testament, with exciting implications for Christian belief about the new creation rooted in Scripture.

The above conclusions regarding Robinson’s methodology and subsequent results characterize the quality of the entire book; the methodology may be too narrow, but the work Robinson presents is exemplary. She has contributed to the field of intertextual studies of Revelation in a significant way. Her conclusion regarding John’s use of Ezekiel 40–48 in Revelation 21:1–22:5, culminating in a christological fulfilment of Ezekiel’s temple vision, generally agrees with and extends the work of scholars in the field like Beale in a unique way. All future students and scholars who study John’s use of the Old Testament in Revelation, especially his use of Ezekiel in his new creation vision, will do themselves and their work a great favour by engaging with Robinson’s work.

Jeremy Tattersall is a Master of Theology student at Laidlaw College in Auckland, researching on Revelation 21-22. He also currently works part-time as a Graduate Teaching Assistant in New Testament studies at Laidlaw College.