The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frankenfurter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Frankenfurter

Guest
I recently visited the biblical tabernacle in Lancaster PA. The veil that the bible speaks of was a thick, 4 -layer curtain separating the inside room of the tabernacle from the holy of holies. It’s great to be able to stand inside this recreation an get a feel for it. I highly recommend taking a trip there and getting a feel for the place.

Anyway, the guide noted the Christian interpretation that the curtain being torn represented that God is no longer separate, but with us.

I am questioning this interpretation. What other interpretations are there? What is the Catholic interpretation?
 
I recently visited the biblical tabernacle in Lancaster PA. The veil that the bible speaks of was a thick, 4 -layer curtain separating the inside room of the tabernacle from the holy of holies. It’s great to be able to stand inside this recreation an get a feel for it. I highly recommend taking a trip there and getting a feel for the place.

Anyway, the guide noted the Christian interpretation that the curtain being torn represented that God is no longer separate, but with us.

I am questioning this interpretation. What other interpretations are there? What is the Catholic interpretation?
That is the basic interpretation, that God and man are now reconciled and no longer separated. Only the high priest was allowed to go beyond the curtain to make atonement for the sins of Israel, and Christ who is the fulfillment of the High Priest caused the veil to be torn because His one eternal sacrifice redeemed mankind and reconciled us with God and there would be no longer a need for a high priest to make atonement for the sins of Israel because Christ accomplished that once and for all hence the veil being torn.

Protestants try to twist the tearing of the veil into support of their argument for there being no need for a NT priesthood but that is not what the tearing of the veil is about. It is not about having to go through a priest to reach God in certain ways, it is about how our sins separate us from God and by Christ providing the ultimate sacrifice for sin has the power to forgive them and reconcile us with the Father.
 
Notes from the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament.

Matthew 27:51
The veil was a sign that God’s infinite holiness could not be approached by sinners. With Jesus’ saving death forgiveness is secured for man and access to heaven is reopened. This is announced by God Himself, Who tears the veil from top to bottom.
Mark 15:38
as the curtain ripped from top to bottom, the barrier between the face of God and His people was removed, and the termination of the Old Covenant was prophetically announced.
 
What an incredible, visual representation of the work of Our Lord, Jesus Christ! How great is our God!
 
Here are a few opinions…

From Haydock’s commentary on Matthew 27:51:
… Both these veils seem to have been rent at Christ’s death: and by their being broken down, was signified first, that the ceremonies of the ancient law were to be abolished by the law of Christ; and also that heaven should be open to all.
From A Commentary on the New Testament, prepared by the Catholic Biblical Association, 1942, pages 192-193, on Matthew 25:51:
…nor are Catholic interpreters agreed about the significance of this rending of the curtan: some see in it the visible token of God’s displeasure with Judaism, the abolition of the temple as God’s special abode (cf. Matthew 23:38), etc.; others prefer to understand this as a sign that God then took away the barrier between Jew and Gentile (cf. Ephesians 2:14), that all men are admitted to the worship of the true God (cf. Hebrews 6:19 f; 9:8; 10:19 f), etc.
 
After Easter Sunday, I was thinking about how the Jews in Jerusalem might have viewed the events of the prior week. I wrote it as a brief news account called Torn Temple Curtain.
 
There is another reason for the tearing, and I don’t think it conflicts with the previous explanations.

If you recall, the high priest tore his robe in response to Jesus “blaspheming” that He was the Messiah, the Son of God. This tearing of the robe was a practice of the high priest when in the presence of blasphemy. I understand that his robe was specially designed that a single thread kept it bound, and the tearing of this thread literally ripped the robe open. It was then rather easy to resew the thread, making the robe whole again. But in the practice, the high priest would rend his garment, I believe from top to bottom.

Again, the significance was that blasphemy had occurred in his presence.

By the tearing of the veil of the holy of holies, God was announcing the blasphemy committed by the Jewish leaders in executing their Messiah and Lord, Jesus Christ.
 
Wasn’t the Bread of the Presence kept behind the veil, or was that kept in the outer room in front of the veil?

I’m grasping at a Eucharistic meaning here, with the Bread of the Presence now being accessible to all.

Previously the Bread of the Presence could only be eaten by the priests.

Am I mistaken about where the bread was kept?

-Tim-
 
Wasn’t the Bread of the Presence kept behind the veil, or was that kept in the outer room in front of the veil?

I’m grasping at a Eucharistic meaning here, with the Bread of the Presence now being accessible to all.

Previously the Bread of the Presence could only be eaten by the priests.

Am I mistaken about where the bread was kept?

-Tim-
No, the bread of the presence wouldn’t have been in the holy of holies. It was in the Holy Place which is next to the Holy of Holies.

Here’s what I got from Agape Bible Study.com
An acacia wood table covered with pure gold. It will hold 12 loaves of unleavened bread, one loaf for each tribe of Israel. It is to be placed in the Holy Place on the north side opposite the lamp-stand.
Look at page two of the following document: agapebiblestudy.com/exodus/Exodus_Lesson_13_Handouts.pdf
 
Jews also tore their garments to express pain and sorrow upon hearing of the death of a loved one. God dwelled in the Holy of Holies and rent His garment, the veil, when Christ died on the cross.

The tearing of the veil was significant and seems to symbolize many different things.
 
No, the bread of the presence wouldn’t have been in the holy of holies. It was in the Holy Place which is next to the Holy of Holies.
Thanks NW. I’m still gonna argue with Evangelicals. 😃

I agree with them that the tearing of the veil means that we have direct access to God. But when they say that it means we can confess directly to God and don’t need a priest, I counter that it means we have direct access to God in the Eucharist. 👍

By the way, my mother’s Jewish boyfriend still says, “I thought I was going to tear my sleeves off” when he is shocked by something. The idea, if not the practice of rending one’s garment is in common use to this day.

-Tim-
 
Jews also tore their garments to express pain and sorrow upon hearing of the death of a loved one. God dwelled in the Holy of Holies and rent His garment, the veil, when Christ died on the cross.

The tearing of the veil was significant and seems to symbolize many different things.
Although I agree with your conclusion, I would say that God did NOT dwell in the Holy of Holies, ever since Jeremiah removed the Ark of the Covenant from the Temple shortly before the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon.
 
Interesting answers all.

At the recreation in Lancaster, the bread of presence is outside the Holy of Holies.

The image of the smoke rising from the tabernacle so that all could see it for miles and know that God is with them is something I still recall. The guide noted how comforting it must have been to know God was with them. They followed him too and would never move their tents without being able to see the smoke.

The direct analogy to the Eucharist presence in our churches seems inescapable.
 
Although I agree with your conclusion, I would say that God did NOT dwell in the Holy of Holies, ever since Jeremiah removed the Ark of the Covenant from the Temple shortly before the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon.
To NotWorthy:
Yours is the first and only reference I have found that states what I believe - that the Ark was not behind the veil at the time of Jesus’ death because it had been taken away at the time of the Babylonian captivity. Without the Ark there was no mercy seat on which to sprinkle the blood of atonement, so the high priest could only pretend to make atonement.

To what, then was access given by the tearing of the veil? Is it possible this tearing of the veil was to reveal the absence of the Ark and the futility of the Old Testament rite of atonement?
 
It wasn’t a secret to anybody that the Ark wasn’t there.

It was still the duty of the priests to go into the Holy of Holies and offer on the designated day, up to Jesus’ death. After that, Jesus took over as High Priest, and he ascended to the Father, to the actual Holy of Holies in Heaven, to present Himself His own Sacrifice.
 
I am wondering if there is any extra-Biblical evidence for the tearing of the temple veil?

That would seem to have been something also carefully recorded by Jews, commented on, atoned for, etc. I’ve got the (jewish) Annotated New Testament. I’ll have to look this up tomorrow when I get some time.

I think what I’ve read tends to agree with the interpretation of the Temple period coming to an end.
 
Although I agree with your conclusion, I would say that God did NOT dwell in the Holy of Holies, ever since Jeremiah removed the Ark of the Covenant from the Temple shortly before the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon.
I mostly agree with you except for the Jeremiah bit. 😛
 
Wasn’t the Bread of the Presence kept behind the veil, or was that kept in the outer room in front of the veil?

I’m grasping at a Eucharistic meaning here, with the Bread of the Presence now being accessible to all.

Previously the Bread of the Presence could only be eaten by the priests.

Am I mistaken about where the bread was kept?

-Tim-
The Bread of the Presence was kept in The Holy Place, not in the Most Holy Place. Here’s an illustration of the tabernacle in Moses’ tent of meeting:



This is Herod’s temple in the time of Jesus:

 
Here is the only source for Herod’s Temple, from Josephus. I suppose you can cook up whatever drawing you want from this, and don’t forget the cleaning holes and ladders!

"As to the holy house itself, which was placed in the midst [of the inmost court], that most sacred part of the temple, it was ascended to by twelve steps; and in front its height and its breadth were equal, and each a hundred cubits, though it was behind forty cubits narrower; for on its front it had what may be styled shoulders on each side, that passed twenty cubits further. Its first gate was seventy cubits high, and twenty-five cubits broad; but this gate had no doors; for it represented the universal visibility of heaven, and that it cannot be excluded from any place. Its front was covered with gold all over, and through it the first part of the house, that was more inward, did all of it appear; which, as it was very large, so did all the parts about the more inward gate appear to shine to those that saw them; but then, as the entire house was divided into two parts within, it was only the first part of it that was open to our view. Its height extended all along to ninety cubits in height, and its length was fifty cubits, and its breadth twenty. But that gate which was at this end of the first part of the house was, as we have already observed, all over covered with gold, as was its whole wall about it; it had also golden vines above it, from which clusters of grapes hung as tall as a man’s height. But then this house, as it was divided into two parts, the inner part was lower than the appearance of the outer, and had golden doors of fifty-five cubits altitude, and sixteen in breadth; but before these doors there was a veil of equal largeness with the doors. It was a Babylonian curtain, embroidered with blue, and fine linen, and scarlet, and purple, and of a contexture that was truly wonderful. Nor was this mixture of colors without its mystical interpretation, but was a kind of image of the universe; for by the scarlet there seemed to be enigmatically signified fire, by the fine flax the earth, by the blue the air, and by the purple the sea; two of them having their colors the foundation of this resemblance; but the fine flax and the purple have their own origin for that foundation, the earth producing the one, and the sea the other. This curtain had also embroidered upon it all that was mystical in the heavens, excepting that of the [twelve] signs, representing living creatures. "
 
Here is the only source for Herod’s Temple, from Josephus. I suppose you can cook up whatever drawing you want from this, and don’t forget the cleaning holes and ladders!

"As to the holy house itself, which was placed in the midst [of the inmost court], that most sacred part of the temple, it was ascended to by twelve steps; and in front its height and its breadth were equal, and each a hundred cubits, though it was behind forty cubits narrower; for on its front it had what may be styled shoulders on each side, that passed twenty cubits further. Its first gate was seventy cubits high, and twenty-five cubits broad; but this gate had no doors; for it represented the universal visibility of heaven, and that it cannot be excluded from any place. Its front was covered with gold all over, and through it the first part of the house, that was more inward, did all of it appear; which, as it was very large, so did all the parts about the more inward gate appear to shine to those that saw them; but then, as the entire house was divided into two parts within, it was only the first part of it that was open to our view. Its height extended all along to ninety cubits in height, and its length was fifty cubits, and its breadth twenty. But that gate which was at this end of the first part of the house was, as we have already observed, all over covered with gold, as was its whole wall about it; it had also golden vines above it, from which clusters of grapes hung as tall as a man’s height. But then this house, as it was divided into two parts, the inner part was lower than the appearance of the outer, and had golden doors of fifty-five cubits altitude, and sixteen in breadth; but before these doors there was a veil of equal largeness with the doors. It was a Babylonian curtain, embroidered with blue, and fine linen, and scarlet, and purple, and of a contexture that was truly wonderful. Nor was this mixture of colors without its mystical interpretation, but was a kind of image of the universe; for by the scarlet there seemed to be enigmatically signified fire, by the fine flax the earth, by the blue the air, and by the purple the sea; two of them having their colors the foundation of this resemblance; but the fine flax and the purple have their own origin for that foundation, the earth producing the one, and the sea the other. This curtain had also embroidered upon it all that was mystical in the heavens, excepting that of the [twelve] signs, representing living creatures. "
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)



(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1097/5101360736_bf558e02a9.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top