In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

5 Conclusion As the preceding chapters have shown, the interpreting angel motif underwent considerable development from its first appearance in Ezekiel 40–48 to its full blossoming in Daniel 7–8. In the summary below, I trace the development of this motif through the texts analyzed in the preceding chapters. I then note the influence of imperial administration on Jewish angelology, as evident in the texts under discussion, and religious influences that contributed to the shift from prophetic mediation to angelic interpretation. Finally, I discuss the function and significance of the interpreting angel motif in the texts under discussion and in the context of Second Temple Judaism in general, before offering some observations regarding issues for further research. Ezekiel 40–48: The Emergence of the Interpreting Angel Motif In Ezekiel 40–48, a “man” (‫)איש‬ appears in “divine visions” (‫אלהים‬ ‫)מראות‬ and guides the prophet through a tour of the future temple (Ezek. 40:1-4). This is not the first time such a “man” appears in the book of Ezekiel. Similar figures appear in Ezek. 1:26-28 and 8:2-3, but in these texts the being in question appears to be Yahweh or a hypostasis of Yahweh, whereas the guide in Ezekiel 40–48 is distinct from, although closely associated with, Yahweh (Ezek. 43:6). In Ezekiel 40–48, the man, whom I identify as an angel, functions primarily as a guide and surveyor of the temple, and most of his activity consists of taking measurements of rooms and other features of the temple.1 His stated duties include showing Ezekiel the temple (Ezek. 40:4) and instructing him about its laws and ordinances (Ezek. 44:5), but he periodically explains features (Ezek. 40:45-46; 41:22; 42:13-14; 46:20, 24; 47:8-12). Overall, the angel’s role in Ezekiel 40–48 is primarily that of guide, and only secondarily that of interpreter. 1. As noted in ch. 2, the man’s primary duty is indicated by the measuring reed he holds in his hand (Ezek. 40:3; cf. Zech. 2:1; Rev. 21:15). 173 The angel’s role as interpreter is most prominent in Ezek. 47:1-12, which differs from most of Ezekiel 40–48 in its strongly mythological imagery and its apocalyptically oriented eschatology. Here the angel asks the only question of the tour, “Have you seen, O Son of Man?” (Ezek. 47:6). Without waiting for a reply, the angel explains the meaning of the river that flows from the temple (Ezek. 47:8-12). Throughout Ezekiel 40–48, angelic interpretation of the prophet’s vision stands alongside classical prophetic mediation through oracles (Ezek. 43:7-27; 44:6—46:18; 47:13—48:35). The presence of the interpreting angel does not indicate divine distance, for Yahweh also appears and speaks directly in much of the text.2 Moreover, the close identification of the angel with Yahweh, almost to the point of hypostatization, suggests that the angel represents and extends Yahweh’s presence.3 This understanding is consistent with the function of messengers in the ancient Near East.4 Zechariah 1–6: Heightened Symbolism and Increased Dialogue Significant development of the interpreting angel motif is apparent in Zechariah 1–6. Here, the interpreter of Zechariah’s night visions is unambiguously identified as “the angel who spoke with me” (‫בי‬ ‫הדבר‬ ‫;המלאך‬ Zech. 1:9, 14, 18; 2:3; 4:1, 5; 5:5, 10; 6:4). Zechariah’s visions are more highly symbolic and mythological than those in Ezekiel 40–48—with the exception of Ezek. 47:1-12—and require the angel’s interpretation in order for their meaning to be clear. The necessity of angelic interpretation is apparent in the prophet’s admissions that he does not understand what he sees (Zech. 4:5, 13) and his frequent requests for explanation (Zech. 1:9, 19, 21; 2:2; 4:4, 11, 12; 5:6, 10; 2. Cf. Walther Eichrodt, Ezekiel: A Commentary, trans. Cosslett Quin (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970), 560; Walther Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament (OTL; 2 vols.; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1967), 2:200; W. O. E. Oesterley and Theodore H. Robinson, Hebrew Religion: Its Origin and Development (New York: MacMillan, 1930), 250–51. 3. See Karin Schöpflin, “God’s Interpreter. The Interpreting Angel in Post-Exilic Prophetic Visions of the Old Testament,” in Angels: The Concept of Celestial Beings – Origins, Development and Reception, ed. Friedrich V. Reiterer, et al. (Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook 2007; Berlin/New York: de...

Share