different parts of the book are homogeneous. The visions of the book include both heavenly and earthly scenes; and at certain points the question arises whether heavenly or earthly altar and service are referred to: such a phrase as 'the temple in heaven › is immediately decisive, but the corresponding phrase 'the altar in heaven' does not occur, and the altar intended, whether earthly or heavenly, can only be determined by the context. The first occurrence of the decisive phrase 'the temple in heaven' occurs in Rev. 1119; but already in 81- the context is decisive unless we conjecturally rearrange the text; for we read, 'And when he opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. Then I saw seven trumpets being given to the seven angels who stand before God. And another angel went and stood at the altar, &c.'

On the other hand, down to the eighth chapter no decisive phrase and no altogether unambiguous context occurs; and unless we are prepared to impose upon chs. 4-7 the same conceptions that unmistakably occur in the present text subsequently, there is some reason for seeing in these earlier chapters the conception not of a temple in heaven as there is a temple on earth, but of heaven itself as a temple, an easy development from one of the ideas we have already examined: if the earthly temple is a reproduction in miniature of heaven, as the abode of God, it is no great or difficult step to apply the terms used for God's earthly to his heavenly abode and to call, not some building within heaven, but heaven itself, the temple of God; indeed, in the application of the term E-kur to heaven in Babylonian we should have a close parallel to this. But while in this case there will be no temple in heaven, there may well be and will be other things corresponding to the equipments and appurtenances of the earthly temple, as these in the first instance, according to the cosmic interpretation of the temple, were designed or were interpreted as correspondences to things heavenly.

In this section of the Apocalypse-chs. 4-7-then, we may, and perhaps most naturally, understand the conception of heavenly temple, altar, and sacrificial service as follows: The seer beholds a door of heaven open (4'), as he might see the door of the earthly temple open; he is invited to enter the door and immediately on passing through the door of heaven he catches

sight, not of any further temple-building within heaven, but of a throne with God seated on it (42), just as he might, had he been admitted to the inner chamber of the tabernacle or the first temple, have seen the ark, the earthly throne of God; in front of the throne he sees seven torches of fire burning, as in the earthly temple he would have seen the seven-branched candlestick; and also 'as it were a sea of stars', as before the earthly temple he might have seen the great laver which was termed a' sea'. Once only in this section (715) does the term 'temple' occur; still, in this one passage the scene is unquestionably laid in heaven: and yet the question arises: is the term 'temple' here co-extensive with heaven, or is it used of a temple within heaven? What we are told is that the seer beheld an innumerable company composed of men of every nation on earth standing before the throne; and one of the heavenly company explains to him that these are the redeemed, adding: 'For this they are now before the throne of God, and they serve Him day and night in His temple.' Now we must of course admit that it would be reasonable to conceive of a temple within heaven as of vast dimensions and capable of accommodating many ministrants; but the picture presented here is of virtually the whole population of heaven assembled before the throne and engaged in ministrations that cease neither day nor night. For such an assembly, is a limited building even of heavenly proportions likely to have been pictured by the seer? Or does he not rather mean: standing before the throne in heaven, which is itself as the abode of God one vast temple, they render him unceasing service'? With such an idea the transition to what follows is easier: the Shekinah is limited to no temple within heaven, but extends throughout heaven, overshadowing the redeemed and securing them from sun and heat wherever they go.

Altar and temple are not inseparable: with the conception of heaven itself, not something within heaven, being the heavenly temple, the conception of a heavenly altar is compatible though it is not necessarily associated with it; at the same time the existence of an altar, if it can be proved to appear in this section of the book, need not prove that it was attached to a temple within heaven as distinct from heaven itself. Now as to the altar in chs. 4-7 there are two points to consider, (1) After the opening of

the fifth seal the seer sees underneath the altar the souls of the martyrs (6). This altar is not directly defined-whether it stood on earth or in heaven; and the context does not unambiguously define the scene: the seals are indeed opened in heaven, but the visions that follow the opening of the seals are not confined to heaven. The first four visions are of the heavenly riders starting out from heaven to carry out their commissions on earth; but the sixth vision-that which immediately follows the vision of the altar-is entirely of earth and of sun and moon and stars as seen from earth. Is then the altar of the fifth vision located in heaven as are, primarily, the objects and events seen in the first four visions, or on earth like the objects and events of the sixth vision? The vision itself is in many ways remarkable, but it must suffice here to recall that the retention of the souls under the altar is a variant of another idea, viz. that the souls of the righteous are retained in special chambers or treasuries, and that at least in the earlier references to these, so far from being located in heaven, they are located in Sheol (1En. 221ff; Apoc. Baruch 2123 4 Ezr. 411). It may further be noted that if chs. 4-7 are from the same hand as the writer who is careful to define the heavenly temple as the temple in heaven' we might have expected him to say the altar in heaven' had he intended it, since as it is it is ambiguous. Still, he is at this point in heaven (42): when he defines the temple as the temple in heaven' he is on earth (see 101, 4). On the other hand, the white robes given to the souls under the altar while they remain quiet till their number is completed can perhaps be best explained if the souls are conceived as being chambered in heaven rather than on earth. Yet interpreting chs. 4-7 by themselves the balance in favour of a heavenly altar is by no means marked, if it exist at all. And certainly the golden phials full of incense in the hands of the twenty-four elders is far from proving, as Dr. Charles would have it, that there was an altar of incense.

The second consideration in this connexion is that the section regards the Lamb as a sacrificial victim, now living but once slain, slain, as we must infer unless we adopt an exclusive astronomical interpretation, on earth but living in heaven. How the now living Lamb was recognized as slain is discussed by the Commentators; but it would seem that to a writer who pictured to him

self an altar in heaven nothing could have been more natural than to represent the Lamb in his character of sacrificial victim as connected with, standing on or beside, the altar: this could have been done with results less strange than the picture of the souls of the martyrs under the earthly, still less strange than that of these martyrs under the heavenly, altar. And the picture could have been as easily expressed in words as visualized: instead of 'I saw a Lamb as it had been slain standing before the throne', it would have been easy to write-had the picture been really seen--'I saw a Lamb as it had been slain standing on the altar before the throne'. That this obvious symbolism is not adopted and this clear picture not presented might be regarded as some slight indication that this section of Revelation, or the source on which it rests, did not contemplate an altar in heaven. Be that as it may, in any case the sacrificial act to which the Lamb had been subject necessarily belongs (so far as this section is concerned (not 138)) to heaven just as little as the slaying of the martyrs. It formed and forms no part of any sacrificial service carried on in heaven. Of the nature of other sacrificial service contemplated here or elsewhere in the Apocalypse, its relation to a similar conception within the N.T. and in Jewish thought, I hope to treat in the next lecture.

XI

THE SACRIFICIAL SERVICE IN HEAVEN.

ii

AT the close of the last lecture I suggested that in and by themselves chs. 4-7 of the Apocalypse might imply a belief, native perhaps to a source of the book rather than to the book itself, that the heavenly temple was not some building within heaven, but heaven itself, and further that these same chapters do not unambiguously refer to an altar in heaven, though at the same time an altar may have been pictured as belonging to heaven regarded as a temple rather than to a temple within heaven. It is in the subsequent chapters of the book that the belief in a temple within heaven is expressed with all clearness: 'And the temple of God which is in heaven,1 was opened, and the ark of the covenant in his temple was seen' (1119); and another angel came out from the temple which is in heaven' (1417); ' And the temple of the tabernacle of testimony in heaven was opened and the seven angels came out from the temple' (155f.). In other passages the temple is not defined by the clause which is in heaven'. So in 145 (where rather curiously 'temple' undefined before v. 17, where it is defined), 158 (immediately after 155, 6), and 161, 17; but in these passages identification with the temple defined as in heaven is clear, or in some other way the context shows that the temple in question is located in heaven. It may be admitted that a certain suspicion rests in some of these passages on the originality of the defining clause; it has sometimes the appearance of a glossator's addition; but the several passages taken together-both those in which the defining clause is added and those in which the context indicates a heavenly locality for the temple-indicate that, at least in the present form of the book, the belief in the heavenly temple has exercised an

So defined now because the seer is on earth (cp. 161,4,8), and has referred without definition to the temple on earth (111) previously.