1 SCJR 11, no. 1 (2016): 1-3 James H. Charlesworth, Ed. Jesus and Temple: Textual and Archaeological Explorations (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2014), xv + 282 pp. JARED C. CALAWAY jared.calaway@mail.ic.edu Illinois College, Jacksonville, Illinois 62650 This volume contains essays on Herod’s temple by prominent Jewish and Christian scholars of antiquity. They imaginatively gather archaeological and tex- tual fragments in studies of the building’s physical appearance and broader significance. Adapted from papers given at a conference in Boca Raton, Florida, in December 2011, the authors overall argue for a positive relationship between Jesus, his earliest followers, and Galileans with the Jerusalem temple. This volume’s strength is its breadth. James Charlesworth’s preface and in- troduction lay out its sweeping vision, asking what recent archaeological discoveries tell us about the temple, questioning assertions that Jesus and his dis- ciples rejected the temple, and wondering whether the shift from predominantly Jewish to predominately Gentile followers of Jesus affected early Christian atti- tudes toward the temple. Surveying major publications, he discusses the temple as axis mundi, pilgrimage to the temple, the temple as a bank, Herod’s architecture, temple security, and worship, and he also imagines Jesus’ and Hillel’s experienc- es in the temple. The first two chapters reconstruct the temple’s physical space. Leen Ritzmeyer scans visual representations of Herod’s temple, from coins of the Bar Kokhba revolt to modern three-dimensional models. This culminates in Ritzmey- er’s own reconstructions, examining the temple from the outer walls and then working inward. Dan Bahat traces the development of the temple from Ezra and Nehemiah through Herod. Both authors attempt to harmonize the divergent ac- counts of Josephus, the New Testament, and the Mishnah. Bahat, for example, suggests that the Mishnah describes the pre-Herodian structure while the New Testament and Josephus depict Herod’s expansions. Lawrence Schiffman shifts to the temple’s theological importance for ancient Jews. He takes the Dead Sea Scrolls as his primary source, branching out to Jose- phus, Philo, and the Mishnah. He focuses on the temple’s role within a theological tension between God’s immanence and transcendence and on the temple as a centripetal force for ancient Jews. He discusses diverse images of the temple as the place of the divine presence, as the tabernacle, as Eden, as axis Calaway: James H. Charlesworth’s Jesus and Temple 2 mundi, and as a microcosm for the universe. He also considers ideas such as the community as temple, acts of mourning for the temple, and the eschatological temple. However, he does not consider some relevant texts, such as 1 Enoch and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. Mordechai Aviam’s essay on Galilean reverence for the temple provides the linchpin to this volume’s argument. While some scholars suggest divisions be- tween Judean and Galilean estimations of the temple, recent archaeology closes the gap. He argues that Galilean Jews connected to the temple’s holiness by acts of purification illustrated by mikvaot; by using imported stoneware and clay oil lamps from Jerusalem; and by including temple symbols in synagogues, such as found on the Migdal synagogue’s decorated stone, which is a three-dimensional representation of the temple. In the next two chapters, Charlesworth studies Jesus’ and his followers’ atti- tudes toward the temple. He covers the social and theological significance of the temple and temple terminology in the New Testament, and he surveys the views of scholars who have argued that Jesus was critical of the temple. He calls for careful differentiation when describing attitudes regarding Jerusalem, the temple, temple services, cult, financial institutions, and personnel. For example, Jesus could have revered the temple but disdained its personnel. He works through sev- eral pericopae, some of questionable historicity, from Jesus’ birth through resurrection to conclude that Jesus maintained a positive view of the temple. Turning to Jesus’ followers next, Charlesworth differentiates three periods: before 30 CE, 30-70 CE, and 70-150 CE. For the first, he shows that Jesus fre- quented the temple. For the second, he says Acts presents the disciples, based in Jerusalem, engaged in temple activities. Paul presents the community as a temple, but this does not necessarily belittle Herod’s temple’s importance. Charlesworth differentiates between Palestinian Christians, who adhered to the temple, and di- aspora Christians, who laid the foundations for replacement theology, excluding the necessity of a physical temple. Regarding Hebrews, he argues that while some passages suggest supersessionism, cultic language dominates the author’s thought, indicating the temple’s centrality. While Q is ambivalent, the traditions around James indicate reverence for the temple. When adapting to life without a temple in the third period (70-150 CE), he argues that the Synoptic Gospels, Acts, and John shift the locus of holiness from the temple to Jesus, to the community, or to Rome. By contrast, the Odes of Solomon maintain the temple’s holiness. For Revelation, temple symbolism dominates. Charlesworth expresses the hope that his bold argument that Jesus’ earliest followers mostly revered rather than re- placed the temple will spark scholarly dialogue. Harold Attridge identifies multiple attitudes in the New Testament, such as taking the temple for granted, seeing the temple as a symbol, and claiming the community replaces the temple. Except for Jesus’ destruction prediction, Jesus and his disciples took the temple for granted. Attridge speeds through Paul and the evangelists, particularly Luke-Acts, to focus on John and Hebrews. John, when applying temple imagery to Jesus, respects temple traditions generally, but disdained Herod’s temple specifically. Hebrews focuses on the symbols of Israel- 3 Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 11, no. 1 (2016) ite worship in the desert or in a heavenly tabernacle, yet also presents Christ as a high priest greater than the earthly priests and whose self-sacrifice was a new Day of Atonement. 1 Peter, despite an ambivalent relationship with the temple, applies its symbolism to the community, and Revelation regularly alludes to temple wor- ship. Attridge finally turns to 1 Clement, which uses temple and priestly imagery to establish a system of authority, and the Gospel of Judas, which rejects such imagery. He concludes by noting three tendencies: continued adherence to tem- ple; temple and priesthood recast as communal symbols; and appropriation of priestly hierarchy. These contributions are high quality and consistent in covering a range of material. However, while most of the essays are intended to be surveys, George Servos examines in detail a temple scene in the Protoevangelium of James in or- der to reconstruct its sources. He uses the scene to buttress his theory about the redaction of the document rather than using it to illustrate attitudes toward the temple. This chapter does not fit in a volume dedicated to synthesis. A more ap- propriate essay would have surveyed the temple in ancient Christian apocrypha more broadly. Only Gary Rendsburg’s essay on the Psalms as temple hymns addresses tem- ple service. He places this in the context of ancient Near Eastern temple hymns using clues from the biblical narrative (from the Pentateuch to Chronicles-Ezra- Nehemiah) to the Rabbis. This volume’s lack of any other analysis of temple ritu- als, particularly sacrifice, is a striking omission. This volume would have benefited from engaging the increasing number of theoretical approaches to space, whether physical, representational, or symbolic. However, its strong, even if overplayed, thesis and broad synthesis make it an important conversation partner next to John Day’s more comprehensive, Temple and Worship in Biblical Israel (London: T&T Clark, 2007).