The Ancient Temple Initiation of the High Priesthood

As I stated in my last post, Margaret Barker shows some interesting similarities between Christian baptism and the initiatory rites of the ancient royal high priesthood which generally took place at the temple. While she makes some good points, I think some caution is required. Barker herself states that the ancient temple customs were often “reinterpreted” by the (later) Christians (p. 100, see also p. 133).

An important insight that Barker provides is that the world of the Christians revolved around the Temple and the High Priesthood (which she often refers to as the Royal High Priesthood or the Melchizedek Priesthood).  The ideal vision for Christian worship was John’s Revelation, concerning which Barker points out: The Christians worshipping in John’s vision were all high priests (p. 99). The Christians saw themselves as the royal priesthood “called out of darkness into his marvellous light” (1 Pet 2:9).  That this was the case Barker makes very clear, and so I would like to now focus on some of the insights she gives us concerning the initiatory rites of the ancient high priests.

In the Testament of Levi, we see the patriarch of the priestly tribe receiving the priestly initiatory rites. There are some noteworthy steps involved:

• The heavens open and an angel of the Lord tells Levi that he would be a son (of the Most High) and minister in his presence (T. Levi 4:2)
• Later seven angels come and the first angel anoints him with holy oil and gives him a staff
• The second washes him, gives him bread and wine and puts on him his glorious vestment
• The third puts on him a fine linen garment (over the other clothes?)
• The fourth gives him a purple sash
• The fifth gives him an olive branch
• The sixth puts a wreath on his head
• The seventh gives him the priestly diadem and incense (T. Levi 8:2-11)

According to this text, washing, anointing, and clothing are necessary rites for Levi to undergo in order for him to serve in the (Heavenly) Temple. For a great overview of this text, have a look at Bryce Haymond’s post. As part of this initiation, Levi was given the “Name” of God–literally the letters YHWH written on the diadem, a type of crown with a gold plate affixed over the forehead, upon which the letters were written. The priest, thereafter, would pass the Name on to his “sons”–those who were initiated into the priesthood by him.

It is interesting to note that Testament of Levi is found in an Aramaic version at Qumran, and was likely written by priests who had separated themselves (or were banned) from the Second Temple. Testament of Levi, according to Barker, “is clearly hostile to the corrupt priesthood of the second temple” (p. 106). Joshua, the first high priest of the Second Temple, was vested according to tradition, but was not anointed (Zech 3:1–7). According to tradition, the anointing oil of the temple had been hidden away by King Josiah. Levi warns that for a time there would be corrupt and apostate priests (T. Levi 16:1). These apostate priests would rule for a certain period until the coming of a new priest, over whom the heavens would open. He would be consecrated and receive the glory of the Most High. The Spirit would rest upon him in the water. He would pass on the Name to his sons, open the gates of Paradise and give access to the Tree of Life (T. Levi 18:1-14).

The Significance of Anointing

One of the important differences between the First and Second Temples, as I mentioned above, was that in the Second Temple, the priests were not anointed. We see the importance of anointing restored with Christ and his followers. Christians were “Christs” or “anointed ones,” following the example of Jesus himself (see p. 125).  The were “Christians, the anointed, from Christ the Anointed…” (Apostolic Constitutions 3:15). The Gospel of Phillip declares:

 ”the chrism (anointing) is superior to baptism, for it is from the word chrism that we have been called Christians. And it is because of the chrism that the Christ has his name” (CG II:3:74).

The significance of the anointing, according to Barker, is that the oil was a symbol of theosis, of becoming divine (p. 126). Commenting on Psalm 45:6–7, Eusebius speaks of Christ’s premortal anointing:

The Anointer, being the supreme God, is far above the Anointed, he being God in a different sense…Therefore in these words you have it stated clearly that God was anointed and became the Christ (Proof IV:15).

Eusebius goes on to state that the anointed high priest was “the figure and symbol on earth” of the Second God, the heavenly High Priest.

Those who were anointed received vision and Wisdom. Wisdom was represented by the Tree of Life, and she was the giver of Resurrection (pp. 126-127). The oil that anointed Christ was extracted from the perfumed wood of the Tree of Life, and the oil that was used to anoint the priests/kings in the temple was made to imitate this original oil. In Clementine Recognitions, Peter explains:

The Son of God, the beginning of all things, became Man. Him first God anointed with oil which was taken from the wood of the tree of life…In the present life, Aaron the first high priest was anointed with a composition of chrism which was made after the pattern of the spiritual ointment…If then this temporal grace, compounded by men, had such efficacy, consider how potent was that ointmentextracted by God from a branch of the tree of life (Clem. Rec.  1:45-46).

The Adam legends (like Life of Adam and Eve and Apocalypse of Moses) tell the story of Seth returning to Eden to try to obtain some of the precious oil of the Tree of Life for his dying father Adam, but the angel forbids him, saying that the sacred oil would only be restored later, when all flesh will be raised up and healed (see p. 128). The Gospel of Phillip declared:

The Tree of Life is in the midst of Paradise, and from [it] comes chrism, and from chrism comes resurrection. People who say they will die first and then arise are mistaken. If they do not first recive resurrection while they are alive, once they have died they will receive nothing (CG II:3:73).

Certainly, then, it is essential to receive the anointing in this life, so that we may be raised up and healed afterwards. That is why this world is called the Telestial–because this is the place where the telos, the “initiation,” must be performed.

According to Origen, the Orphite Gnostics had known of the significance of this anointing and had declared: “I have been anointed with the white chrism which flows from the tree of life” (Celsus, 6:27). If there was white chrism, there could also have been white fruit! 

Next time: Back to Baptism…

One of my main intentions when I decided to commence this blog was to share some of the great materials I have come in contact with as I have studied at Marquette University. I have had many great professors in the year I have been at MU.  One of the professors that I find I have most in common with, to the point that I chose him as my academic advisor, is Dr. Andrei A. Orlov.  I spoke of him previously and posted links to some of his groundbreaking research on 2 Enoch here. 

Although well known for his work on Enoch, Dr. Orlov has published well over 30 articles (see www.andreiorlov.com) , many of which are on topics other than the Enoch tradition. Today I wanted to look at a few ideas from an article that he wrote on the Jacob tradition, entitled “The Face as the Heavenly Counterpart of the Visionary,” published most recently as part of his book From Apocalypticism to Merkabah Mysticism: Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism, 114; Leiden: Brill, 2007), pp. xii+481. $207.00. ISBN 90-04-15439-6.

The Ladder of Jacob

In this article, Dr. Orlov discusses the significance of themes found in a Slavonic pseudepigraphal text known as the Ladder of Jacob. Although its origins are obscure, this text was possibly written in the second century AD by Christians, and was based on Jewish traditions. It has many similarities to the Apocalypse of Abraham, the Odes of Solomon, the Gospel of Thomas, and other similar texts.

In Ladder of Jacob, we see a continuation/expansion of Jacob’s dream in Gen 28, where he sees a ladder connecting earth and heaven and sees angels ascending and descending on it and at the top of the ladder is the Lord.  In this text, Jacob seeks further explanation of this dream from the Lord by approaching him in prayer. An angel named Sariel is sent to give Jacob further details about his vision.

The Face as God’s Kavod

Although I won’t spend much time on this topic in this post, Orlov goes into great detail about how the Ladder of Jacob dwells significantly on the subject of the Face of God.  As Jacob ascends and reaches the top of the celestial ladder, he beholds a human face “carved out of fire” that was “exceedingly terrifying” (see p. 402, or p. 4 here).  This face is accompanied by shoulders and arms, a unit which Orlov calls “the fiery anthropomorphic extent, which serves as the embodiment of the deity…” (p. 402).  This Face, explains Orlov, should be understood to be
“related to the glorious celestial entity known in theophanic traditions as God’s Kavod” (p. 403). For a biblical example of this connection, see Exod 33:18-23, where Moses asks to see God’s Glory (kavod) and God responds by saying that Moses would not see his Face. Orlov reasons that when the visionary describes “the Face,” he is describing a vision of the Face of God, an anthropomorphic entity “seated on the fiery Throne of Glory” (pp. 404-405).

Jacob’s Heavenly Counterpart

In Genesis 32, we have the account of Jacob wrestling with a “man” until he is blessed and given a new name, Israel. In Ladder of Jacob, the “man” is the angel, Sariel, Jacob’s angelic guide. Orlov explains that there is likely a link between the angel Sariel and the angel Uriel/Phanuel of other traditions (such as 2 Enoch), who serves as angelus interpres.  The name Phanuel is quite possibly related to the Peniel/Penuel mentioned in Gen 32:30-31. He cites Targum Neofiti to Gen. 32:25–31, which reads:

And Jacob was left alone; and the angel Sariel wrestled with him in the appearance of a man and he embraced him until the time the dawn arose. When he saw that he could not prevail against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh and the hollow of Jacob’s thigh became benumbed in his wrestling with him. And he said: “Let me go because the rise of the dawn has arrived, and because the time of the angels on high to praise has arrived, and I am a chief of those who praise”. And he said: “I will not let you go unless you bless me”. And he said to him: “What is your name?” And he said: “Jacob”. And he said: “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob but Israel, because you have claimed superiority with angels from before the Lord and with men and you have prevailed against them. And Jacob asked and said: “Tell me your name I pray”; and he said: “Why, now, do you ask my name?” And he blessed him there. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel because: “I have seen angels from before the Lord face to face and my life has been spared”.

In Ladder of Jacob, Sariel/Phanuel does not wrestle with Jacob, but rather instructs him regarding the sacred secrets of Heaven. At the conclusion of this instruction, instead of simply being given the new name Israel, Jacob is introduced to his heavenly counterpart, the angel Israel.  Jacob, through the guidance of Sariel, is given the knowledge that he has a heavenly identity–that his celestial “self’ is truly a great luminous being who serves before the Face of God.

The imagery here is very similar to that of the Enoch tradition (1 Enoch 71 and 2 Enoch 22), where Enoch is taken up to Heaven by the angel Uriel, where he is transformed before the Throne of God into the powerful angel Metatron, with the titles (among others) Son of Man and Prince of the World. When Enoch returns to Earth, he tells his children that although they see him as the earthly, human Enoch, there is likewise an angelic Enoch that has stood in the Lord’s Presence (see p. 409).  The idea that a human can have a heavenly double appears to be an ancient Jewish belief that turns up in a number of documents. 

As a note for LDS readers, it is very interesting to compare this idea to Joseph Smith’s teaching that the ancient patriarchs had a pre/post-mortal angelic identity–Adam=Michael, Noah=Gabriel, etc. In fact, every person on earth has a heavenly or spiritual identity. Doctrine and Covenants 107:54–55 is just one expression of this principle.

54 And the Lord appeared unto them, and they rose up and blessed Adam, and called him Michael, the prince, the archangel.
55 And the Lord administered comfort unto Adam, and said unto him: I have set thee to be at the head; a multitude of nations shall come of thee, and thou art a prince over them forever.

Engraved in the Throne of Glory

As if this weren’t enough, Orlov’s discoveries get even more spicy! Not only does Jacob find that he is a celestial reality in Heaven, but that his “image” is fixed or engraved on the Throne of Glory. Dr. Orlov cites a comparable tradition from the Targums (see p. 407). In Targum Pseudo-Jonathan to Gen 28:12 the following description can be found:

He [Jacob] had a dream, and behold, a ladder was fixed in the earth with its top reaching toward the heavens … and on that day they (angels) ascended to the heavens on high, and said, Come and see Jacob the pious, whose image is fixed (engraved) in the Throne of Glory, and whom you have desired to see.

This, in itself, is an amazing idea to ponder. However, Orlov explains that there are further implications possible in this imagery.

Besides the tradition of “engraving” on the Throne, some Jewish materials point to an even more radical identification of Jacob’s image with Kavod. Jarl Fossum’s research demonstrates that in some traditions about Jacob’s image, his “image” or “likeness” is depicted not simply as engraved on the heavenly throne, but as seated upon the throne of glory. J. Fossum argues that this second tradition is original. Christopher Rowland proposed that Jacob’s image is “identical with the form of God on the throne of glory (Ezek. 1.26f.)” (p. 408).

In other words, when Jacob enters the Presence of God and looks at the Throne of Glory, instead of seeing the Lord, he sees himself sitting on the Throne! What an incredible tradition! I certainly don’t think that this was meant to be blasphemous in any way–to the contrary, I think it was meant to show God’s gift to man, his divine potential. This is the end result of deification/theosis. The pious individual has become one with the Glory of God.  As Dr. Orlov notes, Jacob seems to have become a servant of the Divine Face, and identified with it (see pp. 415-419).

I think this idea goes along well with what I presented in my last post, in the section about “throne-sharing.” The washing, anointing, naming, and crowning of the king (or high priest) resulted in his being identified with (or representing) Yahweh. We have the idea (seen in Rev. and elsewhere) of God-and-the-Lamb sitting upon the Throne of Glory. Looking at the grammar, it appears that this was one Figure sitting on the throne. Was it God or was it Christ? It doesn’t really matter, for the enthroned Christ is totally united with the Father and represents Him.  I quote again Margaret Barker’s insight into this principle:

In each case they are one, because in each case it is a human figure who has become divine…The Lamb is, therefore, a human being taken up to the throne and, as he is enthroned, he becomes divine, united with “him who sits upon the throne”. The Lamb is worshipped after he has stood in the midst of the throne (Rev 5:6). When Solomon was made king, there was an exactly similar sequence; it must have been the ancient temple ritual. Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king (1 Chron 29:23) (Barker, Temple Themes in Christian Worship, p. 91).

Although texts like Ladder of Jacob are obscure and somewhat ambiguous, I believe we can gain much from them that can give us background understanding for our modern beliefs, like faded pieces of the Gospel puzzle. There are some great principles that resemble the Plan of Salvation, our Divine Potential, and the teachings of the modern LDS Temple. I feel greatly indebted to Dr. Andrei Orlov for his excellent research on these ancient texts, of which I would hardly have any knowledge of through any other source. 

We now look at the Temple, the place where Heaven is represented on Earth. Eusebius knew that Moses had built the Tabernacle as an imitation of the visions he had be given on Sinai (Exod 25:8, 40):

And Moses himself, having first been thought worthy to view the divine realities in secret, and the mysteries concerning the first and only Anointed High Priest of God, which were celebrated before him in his theophanies, is ordered to establish figures and symbols on earth of what he had seen in his mind in visions (Proof IV:15)(p. 83).

Later, the Temple built by Solomon would follow the same pattern. What went on in the Tabernacle and Temple was to be an imitation of what went on in Heaven. This is an interesting insight for LDS attenders of the modern Temples. Barker has some great insight on the relationship between the earthly and heavenly:

Yahweh was represented in the temple by the high priest.  The temple itself represented the whole creation, visible and invisible, the great hall being the material world and the holy of holies the invisible creation. Philo explained: “The highest, and in the truest sense the holy, temple of God is, as we must believe, the whole universe, having for its sanctuary the most sacred part of all existence, even heaven, for its votive ornaments the stars, and for its priests the angels (Special Laws, 1:66). Since the angels were priests in the temple of creation, the priests in the Jerusalem temple represented the angels…The high priest was the chief of the priests and also the chief of the angels, the LORD of the hosts: “For there are, as is evident, two temples of God: one of them this universe, in which there is also as High Priest His First-born, the divine Logos and the other the rational soul, whose Priest is the real man” (On Dreams1:215). The high priest was the only person permitted to enter the holy of holies, and so he was the link between the visible and invisible worlds, between earth and heaven (pp. 92-93).

The high priests and kings were anointed in ceremonies that involved the Temple in imitation of Christ’s anointing. Eusebius recalled:

Among the Hebrews [the high priests] were called Christs who long ago symbolically represented a copy of the first Christ (Proof IV.10).

 Philo also knew this tradition concerning the original Anointed One:

The [heavenly] High Priest is not a man but a Divine Logos…his father being God who is likewise Father of all, and his mother Wisdom, through whom the universe came into existence. Moreover, his head has been anointed with oil, and by this I mean that his ruling faculty is illumined with a brilliant light, in such wise that he is deemed worthy to “put on the garments” (On Flight 108-110).

 In the temple, the multi-colored veil represented the material creation. The same fabric was used for the outer vestment of the high priest, threaded through with gold (Exod 28:5-6). According to Barker, the high priest only wore this garment when he was in “the world”; when he was in heaven, the holy of holies, he wore a white linen robe in imitation of celestial beings. This was indicative of his two roles: divine and human (see p. 94).

The coloured vestment worn over the white linen indicated the angel robed in transformed matter: incarnation (p. 94).

In the Book of Revelation, John sees Jesus as a fiery high priestly figure, and Barker makes a connection between this description and the figure that Ezekiel saw atop the merkabah throne he saw.  According to Barker, it would seem that this is Christ’s usual mode of appearance, whether pre-mortal or post. He is wearing the vestments of the High Priest. She uses as a further example the Apocalypse of Abraham , a Jewish document believed to have been written towards the end of the first century AD. In this document, Abraham meets a Great Angel named Yahweh-el, who is described both as an angel and the True Prophet. This account is linked to Genesis 15, and we should probably understand that this angelic figure is meant to be Yahweh himself who met with Abraham. Again his appearance is that of a High Priest:

The text is not entirely clear, but it seems that the lower part of his body was like sapphire and his hair was white like snow. He wore the high priestly turban that looked like a rainbow (kidaris, Exod 39:28, Zech 3:5) and purple robes, and he carried a golden staff or sceptre. The heavenly figure had human form, and he came to consecrate and strengthen Abraham…Yahweh-el had been appointed as the guardian angel of Abraham and his descendants (Ap. Abr. 10:16), and he appeared as the High Priest…It was the Lord Yahweh who appeared to Abraham and became the high priestly angel in the Apocalypse of Abraham (pp. 96-97).

The Throne-Sharer

A couple of months ago, Dr. Bill Hamblin wrote a great post on his blog, Things Unutterable, about a model temple from biblical Moab, that demonstrates the synthronos, or dual throne.

 William Dever, archeologist, discussed the discovery of this model in Biblical Archaeology Review (34/2, Mar/Apr 2008). It is Dever’s opinion that the dual throne represented the joint rule of Yahweh and Asherah, God and Goddess, from the Temple. Although there is significant evidence for Asherah as an ancient Hebrew goddess, Dr. Hamblin did not agree that the dual throne was necessarily occupied by the divine Father and Mother. He notes that there are other possible combinations, including father (or mother) and son (or king or perhaps high priest as son).

I found an interesting picture on the internet that depicts a related scene:

I think this picture was supposed to depict an earthly representation of Father, Son and Holy Ghost in ancient Israel, but I think they possibly got the order wrong. It should probably be the King on the main throne, with the High Priest seated to his right. Anyways, this is an interesting depiction.  It is possibly based on Psalm 110:1, where, as Hamblin notes, the king is invited to sit down at the right hand of God. The high priest, however, should not be representing the Father.

The high priest did represent Yahweh (the Son) according to tradition. It would be correct to imagine the high priest as occupying the throne of or with God, as Yahweh the Great High Priest would share the throne of, and represent, God Most High.  We must note, however, that the Davidic king also represented Yahweh, as I explained in the first of this two-part post. I would argue that in ancient Israel, the King was likely more of a high priest than the Aaronic chief priest, but that argument will have to wait for another time. I cite again here, the remarkable verses from  1 Chron 29:23 and also 29:20:

23 Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him.

20 And David said to all the congregation, Now bless the Lord your God. And all the congregation blessed the Lord God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the Lord, and the king. 

So the image becomes one of the king sitting on the throne of/with Yahweh, which we can imagine is in imitation of Yahweh sitting on the throne of/with the Father.  Hamblin gives some great insight into how Jews and Christians saw the shared throne:

Later Jews likewise saw synthronos between God and his son, king, angel, or deified human (Dan 7:9–14), most prominently describing Christ (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Acts 7:55–56; Heb 1:3, 13; 8:1, 12:2).  Metatron (the deified Enoch) is likewise a Jewish synthronos figure (3 Enoch).  Given this biblical context, Israelite synthronos is just as likely to be father-son/king as father-mother. 

Joseph Smith described his modern vision of the Heavenly Throne in an amazingly similar manner:

(I saw) Also the blazing throne of God, whereon was seated the Father and the Son.  

Margaret Barker sees this throne-sharing as a key to understanding Christian “monotheism” (see pp. 89-92). She explains that “there can be no division within the divine state” (p. 89). In Heaven, there exists a perfect divine unity–it is only on Earth that we are separate. This idea is expressed in Jesus’ intercessory prayer in John 17, where Jesus prays:

That they may be one even as we are one, I in them and Thou in me, so that they may become perfectly One, so that the world may know that Thou hast sent me… 

She notes the use in the book of Revelation of a singular verb for the two Gods–the pairing of God-and-the-Lamb or God-and-the-Christ (Rev 5:13; 7:10-11; 11:15; 20:6). In these scriptures it refers to two figures, God and Christ, but then seems to consider them as one, applying a singular verb.  For example the throne of God and the Lamb is seen (in Rev 22:3-4), and his servants shall worship him and see his face. But whose throne is it? God’s or the Lamb’s? Who will be worshipped, and whose face will be seen? According to Barker, this is not an issue.

In each case they are one, because in each case it is a human figure who has become divine…The Lamb is, therefore, a human being taken up to the throne and, as he is enthroned, he becomes divine, united with “him who sits upon the throne”. The Lamb is worshipped after he has stood in the midst of the throne (Rev 5:6). When Solomon was made king, there was an exactly similar sequence; it must have been the ancient temple ritual. Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king (1 Chron 29:23)…At his enthronement, the human king became the LORD.  Whether this was imagined as the incarnation of the LORD, or as the adoption of the king as the divine son is not known (p. 91).

Theosis (deification or becoming divine), according to Barker, is an essential part of understanding the temple worship of both ancient Israel and the early Christians. It is also essential to understanding how Christians could believe in a God who became human and a human who became God. This was standard fare in the religion of the First Temple.  In conclusion, I quote Barker:

Returned to its temple context, and interpreted within temple norms, early Christian worship was binitarian (they worshipped both Father and Son) because all temple worship was binitarian. The human king was the presence or face of the LORD, Immanuel, and so Christain devotion to Jesus the Anointed One as Yahweh the LORD was no innovation. Far from there being no parallel to this Clhristian practice in Hebrew tradition, it was in fact the restoration of the original temple cult.