Marko Jauhiainen, «The Measuring of the Sanctuary Reconsidered (Rev 11,1-2)», Vol. 83 (2002) 507-526
The act of measuring in Rev 11,1-2 does not portray the Church as spiritually protected but physically vulnerable, as normally thought. Not only are there lexical and interpretive difficulties with the traditional view, it is also not supported by the OT and extra-biblical evidence commonly adduced. Reading two kai/j differently and recognizing an allusion to Ezek 8:16 LXX addresses both the lexical and interpretive issues. The act of measuring is used to communicate the fact that contrary to Ezek 8–9, this time God will not abandon his earthly sanctuary, though idolatry among his people will still be judged.
This vulnerability is then frequently interpreted to mean that the Church is protected "spiritually", but will be exposed "physically"5.
However, this view, although attractive and commonly accepted, raises both lexical and interpretive questions. While we perhaps should not expect too much of John in terms of his Greek, it is nevertheless worth investigating whether at least some of the following lexical questions can be resolved without recourse to the peculiarities of John’s language.
1. Lexical Issues
First, the verb metre/w in this context — whatever its figurative meaning may be — clearly means taking the spatial dimensions of something6. The sanctuary and the court outside the sanctuary can be measured, and possibly even the altar, but the worshipers cannot thus be measured (or at least it would be very odd). Three solutions have been offered to this problem. One is exemplified in the NIV where metre/w is translated twice but with two different senses, the latter being "to count"7. This would be similar to saying something like, "He missed the point and the train" in English. Yet it would seem that "counting" the worshipers only compounds the complexity of the passage8. Another solution sometimes invoked is that this is an instance of zeugma, a special type of ellipsis, where "one verb is used with two objects... but suits only one"9. However, in the case of zeugma, the missing verb is usually either self-evident or supplied from the immediate context, neither of which necessarily applieshere. Again, even if we follow Swete and supply a verb such as katariqme/w, we are merely turning a lexical difficulty into an exegetical one10. The third and always available alternative is to