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.
the reordering of the tribes. The inviolability of the sanctuary is not due to the measuring of the temple compound but is conveyed by the exceptionally thick walls and gates and by the fact that Yahweh himself has promised to make it his eternal dwelling.
While it may perhaps be argued that Ezek 40–48 resembles the act of measuring in Rev 11 more than the other candidates, it does not automatically follow that the former is the background of the latter. For example, the measuring in Rev 21 is clearly based on Ezekiel’s temple prophecy, but it is also very different from the measuring in ch. 11. That is, Ezek 40–48 and Rev 21,10–22,1 have several elements in common36, whereas there are only two similarities between Rev 11 and the other two measuring accounts, and even these similarities are fairly general: First, a rod or reed of some kind is used for measuring, but while Ezekiel and Rev 21 use ka/lamoj me/trou, ch. 11 has ka/lamoj o#moioj r(a/bdw|37; and second, the object of measuring, whether the New Jerusalem, or its temple or a part thereof, is the eschatological dwelling place that God will build, or is building, for himself. On the other hand, in Rev 11 it is John who is doing the measuring, not an angel38; the measuring is not narrated; and the object of measuring seems to be the sanctuary as a whole rather than the various architectural structures and their dimensions. Therefore, even if one grants that Rev 11 may be influenced by Ezekiel’s account, the lack of affinities suggests that the measuring cannot be adequately explained on the basis of Ezek 40–48 alone.
2. An Alternative Understanding of Measuring
Though the background texts normally cited in support of the traditional view are not able to deliver as advertized, there is a role that Ezek 40–48 can play, together with Zech 2 and Rev 2139, in our