A respectful evangelical protestant reader of TempleStudy.com has asked this question:
Paul tells us in the sermon at Mars Hill that the Lord does not “dwell in houses built by hands” (Acts 17:24-25, Stephen echoes this in ch 7 of the same book) but rather that the Holy Spirit of God dwells in us; that is, that WE are His temples (1 Cor. 3:16-17). Interestingly, not only is this a contradiction to D&C teachings regarding the temple (see D&C 97), but it also appears to be a strong witness to the Trinity, at least in part (demonstrating an equivalency between the Father and the Spirit – “you are a temple of God […] the Spirit of God dwells in you”). I am curious how you interpret these scriptures.
I think this gets to the heart of the doctrinal argument over the necessity/validity of the temple in the post-Messianic age. I know where I stand, but I welcome your counterpoint!
This is an honest question; unfortunately the scriptures in question to support the claim are misunderstood.
I’m unsure about how these scriptures are evidence for the Trinity, particularly between the Father and the Spirit, for if that were the meaning we would have to be the Father and the Spirit dwelling in us, which seems incongruous. But even then, the Spirit of God would be dwelling in us, instead of being us, depicting the Holy Spirit’s own traits of individuality. Rather, the scripture says that we are “a temple of God,” meaning a sacred place where His Spirit, the Holy Ghost, may dwell when invited by righteousness and obedience to God’s commandments.
But the root of this question is in regard to the validity or necessity of a physical temple since the time of the sacrifice, death, resurrection, and ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ, and if this atoning work wrought by the Savior superseded the physical temple and made it obsolete forevermore. First let’s examine the scriptures in question, namely Acts 17:24-25 and 1 Cor. 3:16-17, during which we will look to history to see if this interpretation is in concert with the ancient Israelite nation in the Old Testament, and the early Christian disciples of the New.
In Acts 17 the Apostle Paul was on a missionary trip passing through Athens, and while waiting there finds the city engrossed in idolatry (Acts 17:16). So Paul began his preaching of Christ among the Athenians in the synagogues and in the streets (Acts 17:17). He came in contact with certain learned philosophers who thought they knew a lot, calling Paul a “babbler” (Acts 17:18). So they went together to Areopagus, where they could discuss these issues in a better setting. (Areopagus is the Greek word for the Hill of Ares or Mars in Athens to the west of the Acropolis where the highest judicial Athenian council met, but this gathering was most likely an informal one) ((cf. Areopagus, Bible Dictionary)). There they begin to question Paul on this “new doctrine” that they had not heard before (Acts 17:19-21). It is here that Paul stood on Mars’ Hill, among idolaters, and said:
23 …Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
24 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
25 Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.
30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. (Acts 17:23-31)
Paul makes it very clear here that the Athenians were idol worshipers, believing that their god or gods were in idols made of “gold, or silver, or stone,” made by man. It was these idols that the Greeks worshiped, instead of that God who “made the world and all things therein.” Indeed, at least one of the gods that they worshiped they believed to be “unknown,” or perhaps unknowable, something akin to what traditional orthodox Christianity believes today from what became known as the Nicene Creed, undoubtedly influenced by Greek philosophy:
These various evolutions and iterations of creeds—and others to come over the centuries—declared the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be abstract, absolute, transcendent, immanent, consubstantial, coeternal, and unknowable, without body, parts, or passions and dwelling outside space and time. In such creeds all three members are separate persons, but they are a single being, the oft-noted “mystery of the trinity.” They are three distinct persons, yet not three Gods but one. All three persons are incomprehensible, yet it is one God who is incomprehensible.
We agree with our critics on at least that point—that such a formulation for divinity is truly incomprehensible. ((Jeffrey R. Holland, “The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent,” October 2007 General Conference, http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-775-15,00.html.))
Yet Paul declared just the opposite to the Greeks, that God was not in idols, was a real being, could be known, and began describing Him in a very detailed language, including indicating our very literal familial relationship to Him as His offspring.
I believe that the meaning of Paul’s words are two-fold. Not only is he telling the Athenians where God is not, he tells them where He is:
- When Paul says that God “dwelleth not in temples made with hands,” he is making allusion to those man-made idols to which the Greeks were making their devotions. That isn’t where God was found, he says. God made the heavens and the very earth whereupon we stand, and is not found in the small objects made by man from the materials with which he organized the earth, the planets, and the stars. God is superior to and above his creation. From the beginning man has been commanded:
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; (Exodus 20:3-5) - Paul is also teaching where God’s literal dwelling place is. He is giving the same lesson about God’s heavenly temple which Stephen gave:
48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,
49 Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?50 Hath not my hand made all these things? (Acts 7:48-50)Paul also taught this in another place:
11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; . . .
23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: (Hebrews 9:11, 23-24)
But do Paul’s words suggest that God’s presence cannot be had within earthly temples which mirror the heavenly temple? I don’t believe so, because I don’t believe they are earthly. Dr. John Tvedtnes has explained that the words “‘without hands’ suggest something not made by mortals, but by God” (cf. Col. 2:11) ((John Tvedtnes, “The Temple of God,” Meridian Magazine, http://www.meridianmagazine.com/gospeldoctrine/nt/070816nt33sf.html.)). In every case of God’s dealing with man on earth He has commanded his servants to build sacred sanctuaries (temples) wherein He may reveal Himself and His will to His people. In such cases God has been the director of the building of these structures, not man. The very detailed instructions God gave to Moses for the construction of the Tabernacle in the wilderness is a great example. Hence, even these physical temple buildings are really not “made with hands,” at least not mortal ones. God reveals His will to man, and man obeys. It is God’s holy house, even a “mountain of the Lord’s house” (Isa. 2:2-3). We are taught as much by Paul in Hebrews 8:
1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices . . .
5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount. (Hebrews 8:1-3, 5)
It is interesting to note at this point that D&C 97, which section our reader believes to be in contradiction to the Bible, uses very similar language when describing the divine direction of the building of the Kirtland temple:
10 Verily I say unto you, that it is my will that a house should be built unto me in the land of Zion, like unto the pattern which I have given you. . . .
15 And inasmuch as my people build a house unto me in the name of the Lord, and do not suffer any unclean thing to come into it, that it be not defiled, my glory shall rest upon it;
16 Yea, and my presence shall be there, for I will come into it, and all the pure in heart that shall come into it shall see God.17 But if it be defiled I will not come into it, and my glory shall not be there; for I will not come into unholy temples. (D&C 97:10, 15-17. See especially 2 Chr. 5:14; Lev. 16:2; Matt. 5:8; 1 Kings 8:10-11)
Dr. Lawrence H. Schiffmann, the Director of Judaic Studies at New York University, has explained the very purpose of temples on earth:
When it comes to the temple, I think one of the ideas is that a person that comes into the structure is supposed to be overcome spiritually, to feel that he or she is literally in the presence of God. ((“Between Heaven and Earth,” DVD.))
If God “dwelleth not” in these temples which He commanded and instructed His people on earth to construct for the very purpose of being in the divine presence, then why did Christ refer to the temple in Jerusalem as his “Father’s house”? What of Paul’s own worship and practice in the temple following the ascension of Christ, including a theophanic vision. Dr. Bill Hamblin has shown:
… it is quite clear that the New Testament apostles continued to worship in the Jerusalem temple after Christ’s ascension (Acts 2:46, Acts 3:1-10, Acts 5:20-42). Even Paul worshipped there (Acts 21:26-30, Acts 22:17, Acts 24:6-18, Acts 25:8, Acts 26:21). Paul is explicitly said to have performed purification rituals (Acts 21:26, Acts 24:18), and prayed in the temple (Acts 22:17, cf. Acts 3:1); he claims that he has not offended “against the temple,” implying he accepts its sanctity (Acts 25:8). Indeed, Paul also offered sacrifice (prosfora) in the temple (Acts 21:26, cf. Num 6:14-18), a very odd thing for him to do if the temple had been completely superceded after Christ’s ascension. Finally, and most importantly, Paul had a vision of Christ (“The Just One” ton dikaion) in the temple (Acts 22:14-21), paralleling Old Testament temple theophanies, and strongly implying a special sanctity in the temple, where God still appears to men even after Christ’s ascension. ((Bill Hamblin, “Temple Obsolete After Christ,” FAIR, http://en.fairmormon.org/Temple_obsolete_after_Christ.))
If Paul’s words to the Athenians were to be taken at face value, Paul would have no regard for the temple structure whatsoever, let alone be found worshiping there or having the divine presence being made manifest to him there.
Even Solomon acknowledged this discrepancy [i.e., God commands us to build Temples, yet He doesn’t dwell in Temples made with hands] when he dedicated the Temple he built:
Nevertheless, God’s presence is in His Temples — not because He physically lives there, but as Solomon points out:
We don’t believe we have to build God a house because He needs one [like the Athenians believed]. We believe the Temple is the place where we make covenants with Him, and that He observes the work we do, with His eyes on us always, from His real throne in Heaven.
Bryce,
You have given a very clear explanation of the continuing importance of the temple. I will look forward to the next installment.
Temples require priesthood, ritual, and revelation outside of mere Biblical authority. It is understandable why Protestants would be uncomfortable with the concept. But, Paul’s life showed a clear interest in the functions of the temple. To me, this fact exposes a big hole in many standard Christian theologies.
Good answer, Bryce! As many scholars (like Margaret Barker) are realizing, the Christian world revolved around the Temple. My last post on my blog talks about this subject–it covers chapters 2 and 3 of Margaret Barker’s book “Temple Themes in Christian Worship.” Barker goes into much more detail than I could include in my post, and shows how Christians truly expected to have a physical temple to worship in.
Unfortunately, they usually did not have a temple building in which to worship. Christ and the Apostles were frequently in the Temple in Jerusalem. However, according to the evidence Barker provides, it appears that the Christians were soon considered “anathema” by the Jews and expulsed from the Temple. Subsequently, as expected by the Christians, the Temple was destroyed. The destruction of the corrupt Temple had been part of the Messianic expectation, and the Christians awaited the return of Jesus to rebuild the Temple at his Second Coming.
In the meantime, it was important for them to have a belief in the Heavenly Temple and to see the Church, or their own body, as a spiritual temple. The Christians maintained the temple tradition even when they had no physical temple to worship in.
That does not mean, however, that they did not expect there to be a real physical temple for them some day in the future. It is true that, especially after the second century, Christians increasingly favored the spiritual temple. The reason for this, however, is likely due to the fact that many of the first Christians expected Jesus to return soon to rebuild the Temple (which Paul had warned against in 2 Thes. 2:3). When he did not fulfill that expectation, many began to see these things as allegorical, or “spiritual.” Not all Christians, however, lost sight of the promise of a new temple. Barker notes that both Constantine and Justinian built edifices in Jerusalem that were built like, and intended to be, that new temple. Perhaps they felt it was their duty to fulfill this long held expectation. Unfortunately, by that time, the Christians had lost the true doctrines and ordinances of the Temple.
This is all spelled out in great detail in Margaret Barker’s book. You can tell your evangelical reader that Barker is not Mormon, she’s a Methodist.
I agree with the idea that what God directs His servants to do/make and what He sanctifies is not in effect “built by hands” but may be considered as being built by God (it was done under His command and according to His holy order).
Margaret Barker’s article, Fragrance In The Making Of Sacred Space: Jewish Temple Paradigms Of Christian Worship (http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/FragranceintheMakingofSacredSpace.pdf) states, “In Hebrew tradition, all the instructions for worship were revealed by God. King David received a writing from the hand of the Lord about building the temple (1 Chronicles 28.19), and Moses had been told on Sinai exactly how the tabernacle was to be built and furnished, how the priests were to be vested and how the perfumes were to be blended (Exodus 25.9). . . . Moses was told to copy what he had seen in his vision on Sinai.”
The Lord instructed Moses to make an ointment, “it shall be an holy anointing oil” (Ex 30:25).
“26 And thou shalt anoint the tabernacle of the congregation therewith, and the ark of the testimony,
27 And the table and all his vessels, and the candlestick and his vessels, and the altar of incense,
28 And the altar of burnt offering with all his vessels, and the laver and his foot.
29 And thou shalt sanctify them, that they may be most holy: whatsoever toucheth them shall be holy.” (Ex 30:26-29).
The anointing had the effect of sanctifying the temple. Thus, the temple which is technically made of earthly matter and built by mortals was considered sanctified and holy through God’s power. A true temple, build under the direction and order of God and sanctified by His power, is not “built by hands” (i.e. hands of men) but is built by God.
Since the Apostle Paul declared that we are temples and the Spirit of God dwells in us if we keep ourselves as holy temples (see 1 Cor. 3:16-17), we must ask the same question of our own bodies as temples. Are they made by human hands? Yes, our human parents had an important part in this making of human temples but this human parental function is only part of the whole work to “bear the souls of men” (D&C 132:63). This work is the work and glory of God under His direction.
Mark Greene
Great Posts at TempleStudy.com « Heavenly Ascents
[…] God Dwelleth Not in Temples Made With Hands? –Part I […]
You mentioned Hebrews 8, illustrating the idea that temples/priesthood are part of God’s pattern but I think you are leaving some important verses out. If you read the whole chapter, i believe it gives a very different view.
Anyways, for the first verses 1-5 it talks about the old testament shadows of heavenly things and patterns but then the next verse, verse 6 reading to 13, it says “But now” he has created a better covenant …. making the old covenant obsolete and old getting ready to vanish. All the prophets/temples/priests were under the old covenant.
Looking at verse 4 and 5, Old testament priests served as the copy and shadow of the heavenly things. The Levitical priesthood served as a copy and shadow of our heavenly High Priest. Just like how the animal sacrifices, prophets, and temples were foreshadows of something so much better, Jesus. Since Jesus came, there is no need to sacrifice animals anymore. In the past, we were guided by God through prophets, but Jesus fulfilled and now Jesus speaks and leads us instead (Hebrew 1:1-2). Prophets do have a purpose today in the church- they prophesy but don’t hold the same leadership responsibility like Moses. Old and New Testament prophets have many women prophets also as the bible depicts, not just men only.
Looking at verse 4 again explains why Jesus could not have been a priest on earth by the mosaic law. According the law, in order to be an aaronic priest you had to be of the tribe of Levi. Christ couldn’t even be an aaronic priest because he was not from the tribe. (also in Heb 7:13:14). I’m not really sure how LDS can have aaronic priests who are not from the tribe of Levi. Jews know their priests must be from the tribe of levi. (Sorry, a little off topic)
You bring up a good point with Paul and apostles worshiping at the Temple. I believe that they continued to worship there for a number of reasons. One of them was because most were jews before their conversion to Christianity and were accustomed to worship there. Also, it gave them a good advantage to preach the gospel to their own people. There was a transition period of Jewish customs and habits.
I believe you can find God anywhere and that you can make covenants with God anywhere. I don’t have to go to the temple to be in the presence of God. Also, if temples were so important to the apostles, they would have expounded in great detail the importance of attending the temple. They also would have talked about the important temple ceremonies and rituals if there were any, but they didn’t. If they existed, the apostles would have definitely talked about them and their importance. But there is hardly anything talked about in the temple in the new testament. It just isn’t there
Well, i know that everyone will probably disagree with me, but that’s alright, that’s what discussions are for.
Cheers,
Zack
Hi Zack,
Thanks for the comments and discussion. I’d like to address some of the topics you brought up.
I assume when you say “old covenant” that you are talking about the Mosaic law/covenant that pervades most of the Old Testament. What most people don’t realize is that there were priests, prophets, and temples even before God established the “old covenant” with Moses. Melchizedek was said to be a “priest” long before Moses was around (Gen. 14:18). And certainly those patriarchs that lived before Moses were God’s prophets – Adam, Enoch, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph. Temples also existed before the old covenant was instituted. Adam and his family set up altars and offered sacrifices (Gen. 4). God established a covenant with Noah (Gen. 6:18), and also builds altars and offers sacrifices (Gen. 8:20). God made a covenant with Abraham (Gen. 12:2-3; Gen. 13:16; Gen. 15:5, 18), who also built altars, and saw the Lord (Gen. 12:7-8; Gen. 13:3-4). Etc.. All these things happened before God established the Mosaic covenant. In other words, there was a superior covenant to the Mosaic formerly, and this is what Christ brought back. He was a “high priest” after the “order of Melchizedek,” and not of Aaron or Moses or Levi. He restored a more ancient covenant. But since priests/prophets/temples had existed prior to the Mosaic covenant, there isn’t any reason they couldn’t exist when that former covenant was brought back in Christ.
I think of the Mosaic covenant as a subset of the more ancient covenant that Christ restored. The Mosaic covenant had only the Aaronic/Levitical priesthoods, but the higher covenant (also called the new covenant) includes those priesthoods but also has the Melchizedek priesthood. In other words, the Mosaic dispensation lost the higher priesthood/covenants because of iniquity in Israel. They could not directly come into the presence of God, but had to send in an intermediary (Moses) to speak with God. All of this priesthood has been restored today. That is why we have Aaronic/Levitical priesthoods, and Melchizedek priesthood.
The early Christians kept the customs, rituals, symbolism, architecture, imagery and memory of the temple long after the ascension of Christ. I book I recommend on the subject is Solomon’s Temple: Myth & History by Drs. Hamblin and Seely. It talks extensively about how the temple symbolism continued throughout early Christianity, as well as many of the other topics I’ve mentioned. Also note that the temple in Jerusalem was not only where Christ and the apostles taught, but where the apostles continued ritual activity and the Lord appeared to them there after his ascension (Acts 21:26; Acts 22:17-18). The temple continued to be the place of worship and revelation.
In all of scripture God’s people have never been able to make covenants with Him anywhere or under any circumstances. God established priesthoods, temples, sacred spaces, rituals, covenants, ordinances (like baptism), authority, prophets, teachers, deacons, bishops, and priests for the reason of establishing these covenants in particular ways and in particular settings. God is order, and does things in orderly and patterned ways. That is the only way we can recognize God’s doings, because they have a pattern.
The apostles did teach and preach the importance of temples. The early Christians were “continually in the temple,” worshiping and praising God (Luke 24:53; Acts 2:46; Acts 5:42). They wouldn’t have been there doing those things if it were not important. They could have met anywhere to worship, but they chose the temple. No one expounded on the specifics of the rituals of the temple at the time because they are sacred, and are not given to those who are not prepared. But Christ did tell them that He would endow them with power at that sacred place (Luke 24:49).
The New Testament is saturated with the temple, if you look for it. It starts at the very beginning speaking of Zachariah in the temple receiving a vision of Gabriel announcing the birth of John the Baptist (Luke 1). The baby Jesus was taken to the temple to present Him to God (Luke 2). The twelve-year-old Jesus stayed at the temple to hear and teach the Jews (Luke 2). Christ cleansed the temple of those who would defile it with a whip (John 2:15), and called the temple “My house,” and a “house of prayer” (Matt. 21:13), and “my Father’s house” (John 2:16). Christ healed at the temple (Matt. 21:14). Christ frequently taught at the temple (Luke 21:37-38; John 8:2, 20; Mark 12:35; Luke 22:53; John 7:14, 28).
I hope that helps give a little more perspective about the temple in the New Testament, early Christianity, and in the restoration of the Gospel in these latter days.
Protester - LDS Mormon Forums
[…] you go: God Dwelleth Not in Temples Made with Hands? – Part 1 __________________ 1 Cor 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, …we shall be […]