ZION: THE BACKGROUND AND MEANING OF A BIBLICAL WORD
Zion as a place-name goes back to pre-Israelite Jerusalem, a Jebusite city-state, where it referred to the hilltop stronghold, which to the Jebusites symbolized safety, security, inviolability, a place of peace. The word ‘Zion’ is a translation of the Hebrew word tsiyyon [pronounced tsee-yon], a word whose original meaning was probably ‘mountain top’ or ‘hillcrest.’ The clue to this meaning may lie in Arabic, a language closely cognate to ancient Hebrew. The Arabic name for Zion is Sihyun, which itself is derived from a term meaning ‘mountainous ridge.’ The Syriac term Tsehyun is also cognate and has a similar meaning. The word Zion occurs in total 154 times in the Hebrew Bible, most frequently in the books of Psalms (38x), and Isaiah (47x).
In the Hebrew Bible the word ‘Zion’ first occurs at 2 Sam 5.6-10, a passage that is part of the narrative of King David’s conquest of the fortified Jebusite city of Jerusalem. In 2 Sam 5.7 there is the phrase ‘stronghold of Zion’ (in Hebrew, mitsudat tsiyyon). This ‘stronghold of Zion’ referred to the city’s highest point, the fortified hilltop that was perched between the Kidron and Tyropoeon valleys, just to the south of the present temple (and Dome of the Rock mosque) site. The steep drops into the valleys made this stronghold very hard to attack and it was apparently well-fortified. The Jebusites, one of many ethnic Canaanite peoples, had never had their city-state conquered before, not even when the initial Israelite invasion occurred under Joshua. And they considered their mountaintop fortress to be an impregnable place of security and peace (a belief embedded even in the name of the city, anciently named for the god Salem, the Canaanite god of ‘twilight,’ and thus also of ‘peace’). [1] As the narrative in 2 Sam 5.6-10 makes clear, the Jebusites boasted that even if they were to put their defense into the hands of persons who were blind and lame they would still be able to withstand the attacking forces of King David. But (5.7) David was able to conquer the city and its mountaintop stronghold (5.9), and (modestly?) renamed it ‘the city of David.’
This invasion of the Jebusite city-state of Jerusalem took place immediately after David had been acclaimed king of all the Israelite tribes and anointed at Hebron (2 Sam 5). David had been at this point ruler of the southern tribes for seven and a half years, with his administrative center at Hebron. The deceased first king, Saul, had been from one of the northern tribes, but a possible successor from his own family line could not be found (thanks in no small measure to political skullduggery). And so it was that with much misgiving, representatives of the northern tribes came to Hebron to throw in their lot with the south to make David now king of all Israel.[2]
The capture of Jerusalem was a brilliant move by David because it enabled him to establish a capital for ‘all Israel’ in this neutral city that had no prior connections to north or south. And by naming it ‘city of David’ this new king of all Israel also put his own personal stamp on the city and in the process further burnished his image as the great military hero who once conquered Goliath and now has vanquished this so-called ‘unconquerable’ fortress city. This new name, however, did not by any means replace the older names. ‘Salem’ eventually became Jerusalem, and Zion, the ancient name of the hilltop stronghold, continued in use with ever expanding meaning, as can be seen from the later text 1 Kgs 8.1. This verse begins the narrative of the dedication of the new temple that Solomon has had built by skilled Phoenician architects and builders very near the old hilltop fortress.[3] The ark of the covenant, this verse says, was carried up to the temple “out of the city of David, which is Zion.” [4] Very early these terms—Zion and city of David—begin to be used interchangeably.
The name Zion appears frequently in the Psalms with expanded meaning. It may be that the move of the ark of the covenant out of the general city area up into the new temple was what led to the name Zion being extended in meaning to include the new temple area as well as the ancient fortification. Ps 125.1-2 proclaims that those whose trust is in God are like Zion, which will never be toppled, but will endure forever. In other words, we should understand that ‘trust in God’ has an inviolability comparable to that of Mt Zion. The reference to Zion in Ps 2.6 clearly appears to cover more than just the temple area and the hilltop. And in Ps 74.2 Zion seems to be synonymous with Jerusalem itself as the psalmist pleads for God’s help and implores God to:
Remember your congregation which you acquired long ago, which you redeemed to be the tribe of your heritage. Remember Mt Zion, where you came to dwell.
Ps 84 sings of the pilgrimage journey that many would make each year up to Jerusalem, and in vs 7 we see that the ultimate aim of these pilgrims is “to appear before God in Zion.” [5] In Ps 84.5, it is said of the many pilgrims who make their journeys up to Jerusalem, climbing to the temple to present themselves and their special pleas to God: “Happy are those. . .in whose heart are the highways to Zion.” This line is a brilliant poetic portrayal of a kind of ‘spiritual geography’ held in the human heart, with its ultimate focus on Zion where one can be in the presence and protection of God. [6]
The name Zion thus gradually became synonymous with the temple area and to some degree with Jerusalem itself. In the Prophets and the Wisdom books the name Zion is easily used as an equivalent of Jerusalem, in the sense that it is the sacred center or religious capital (cf. Isa 28.16). In Isa 10.24, the prophet, speaking for God, encourages “my people who live in Zion” not to fear the Assyrians, whose armies then were marauding all about the nearby territories. Here, it is clear, the name Zion functions metonymically for the larger reality of Jerusalem or its populace. [7]
In the wider cultural and religious tradition of the Ancient Near East the temple mountain was understood as the ‘dwelling place’ of the gods. For the ancient Greeks that temple mountain was the familiar Mt Olympus, and for the Canaanites it was Mt Zaphon, ‘the mountain of the north.’ For the early Israelites, having escaped long years of forced labor in Egypt, the ancient tradition located the mountain of divine presence at Mt Sinai (wherever that actually was!). Sinai was the mountain of revelation where God (in Hebrew, Yahweh) ‘came down’ to the mountaintop to give the instructions (Torah) [8] to Moses.
In the reasoning of the Ancient Near Eastern cultures in general, it is on the mountaintop where the gods dwell because high mountaintops, often enveloped with clouds, were considered sacred places, places where heaven was understood to ‘meet’ earth. But among all the many cultures and peoples of the Ancient Near East it is only ancient Israel that has the concept, not of a mountain of residence, but of a ‘mountain of revelation.’ God, in the Israelite view (and decidedly not ‘gods’) does not ‘live’ there on the sacred mountaintop, but rather God ‘descends’ to that mountaintop to give revelation and instruction. [9] The temple that was constructed for Solomon was actually not free-standing but part of a huge royal palace complex begun in the time of King David. This meant that the temple was actually integrated architecturally, more or less in the way that much later European ‘royal chapels’ were integrated into palace complexes. This feature is significant symbolically for the temple on the Zion heights because that integration represents the joining of the old covenantal blessing of the people with the divine support for the new reality of the Davidic dynasty. Just as in other cultures of the Ancient Near East, this mountaintop temple was situated on the highest point of Jerusalem—the Zion area—and thus this temple could be seen as a kind of earthly microcosm of the heavenly realm from which God is understood to descend to be present to the faithful. [10]
During the 40 year wilderness wandering the portable ‘tent of meeting’ or ‘tabernacle’ served the Israelites as the holy space where God ‘met’ Moses for communicating instructions and hearing concerns. Mt Sinai had been left behind. This sacred tent served that purpose for these escapees from Egypt in the 40 year wilderness wandering and also in their early years of settling into the mountainous areas of Canaan, until this permanent location was secured on the Zion high ground in Jerusalem. And it is when that transfer occurs that Mt Zion, like Mt Sinai in earlier years, also becomes a mountain of revelation. [11] It is a point of curiosity that, as significant as Mt Sinai was—the great mountain of revelation, the place where the Israelites first really became a people in covenant with God—and as important as its Torah legacy would continue to be—the actual location of Mt Sinai is not really known. The traditional site near Jebel Musa in the south of the Sinai peninsula is really only a guess from the Byzantine era, and many scholars have raised serious questions about that location. It may just be that the loss of collective memory regarding the location of Mt Sinai was actually due to the emerging dominance of its replacement—Mt Zion and its splendid temple—as the new mountain of revelation and divine presence.
In Ps 14.7 (and echoed in Ps 53.7) it is said to be ‘from Zion’ that God’s deliverance would come for the people. Pss 128.5 and 134.3 speak similarly of God’s blessing that will come ‘from Zion.’ But in the earliest Israelite poetry it is ‘from Sinai’ that the Lord God ‘marched forth’ to rescue the Israelites and lead them to the land of promise. In Moses’ final blessing of the tribes (Dt 33.2), his first words are: “The LORD came from Sinai.” Ps 68.7-8, part of a very ancient song of praise, exults:
O God, when you went out before your people.
when you marched through the wilderness,
the earth quaked, the heavens poured down rain,
at the presence of God, the God of Sinai,
at the presence of God, the God of Israel.
But in the later tradition of Ps 50.2-3, it is from Zion that God shines forth and comes to rescue:
Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty
God shines forth.
Our God comes and does not keep silence;
before him is a devouring fire,
and a mighty tempest all around him.
At some point after the splendid temple was built, Zion eclipsed much of the memory of Sinai as a place, as the place of God’s presence. The great legacy of Sinai, particularly the covenant and Torah, would never be forgotten, but its location eventually became obscure. Unlike the ancient and obscure Sinai, Zion with its glorious temple was a known place. And, since this temple is the place of God’s presence, its symbolic meaning is of the utmost significance: God is no longer viewed as coming to the people from an unknown place, but has a place of presence right on the mountaintop in the center of the city and people. [12]
Because the temple had been built on the heights of Mt Zion, close by the ancient Jebusite stronghold, that led naturally in time to a coalescence of the themes of divine presence and refuge or place of safety. [13] Though it does not use the term Zion, this is precisely what Ps 46 has in mind: that even though the nations may be in an uproar, mountains shaking, and wars erupting:
God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.
Therefore we will not fear, though the earth should change,
though the mountains shake in the heart of the sea. [46.1-2]
This is because:
God is in the midst of the city; it shall not be moved. [46.5a]
This upshot is for the people of God that we need not fear because God is with us, our refuge and safety. And, again, the line from Ps 125.1-2 comes to mind in this context: those who trust in God are like Mt Zion, which cannot be toppled, but endures forever.
Indeed, Isa 2.2-4 (echoed in Mic 4.2) envisions a glorious future in which Zion has so become the mountain of revelation, the ‘new Sinai,’ that the prophet declares that Torah will go forth from Zion (just as once at ancient Sinai):
In days to come the mountain of the LORD’s house
shall be established as the highest of the mountains,
and shall be raised above the hills.
Many peoples shall come and say,
‘Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
to the house of the God of Jacob;
that he may teach [yarah] us his ways
and that we may walk in his paths.’
For out of Zion shall go forth instruction [Torah]
and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
Zion, in this prophetic vision of the future, has become a new Sinai where the nations will come to have the one true God ‘teach’ them, and thus Isaiah foresees that Zion will be not just the sacred place of God’s presence, nor merely the place of refuge and strength, but also the place of learning and instruction that is a center for reaching out to all the world’s people, the energizing source for being a ‘light to the nations.’ In this light it may not be at all surprising that the name ‘Zion’ has had such a great attraction for newly-formed Christian parishes as they weighed possible name choices. Indeed, this may have something to do with why the name ‘Zion’ was selected by the early Lutherans in German Valley, NJ.
Isaiah’s deep personal experience of worship in the great temple on Zion is briefly described in Isa 6.1-5 in terms conveying his overwhelming sense of mystery, awe and wonder in the presence of God. This experience of awe in the smoke-filled temple as described by Isaiah underscores the Israelite understanding of the temple mountain as the numinous meeting point between heaven and earth, which becomes charged with energy when God descends to communicate and instruct, and to be worshiped. That God could be locally present in the temple on Zion yet also ubiquitous throughout the world at large was not a problem for them because they saw the temple as a kind of microcosm of God’s universe or a ‘miniature’ of God’s heavenly realm. Indeed, even the interior decorative motifs of the temple have links to the Garden of Eden images, signaling that the temple and Zion represent not just refuge and peace, but also in a sense God’s paradise.
In the year 701 BCE, the invincible armies of Assyria under the leadership of King Sennacherib invaded the Judean hill country. 2 Kgs 18.13, 15-16 reports that:
In the 14th year of King Hezekiah, King Sennacherib of Assyria came up against all the fortified cities of Judah and captured them. . . .Hezekiah gave him all the silver that was found in the house of the LORD and in the treasuries of the king’s house. At that time Hezekiah stripped the gold from the doors of the temple of the LORD. . .and gave it to the king of Assyria.
This did not stop the Assyrians from laying siege to Jerusalem and making further threats. Hezekiah consulted the court prophet, Isaiah, who told him that he should continue to hold out because the city and the Zion temple would not fall to the Assyrians (2 Kgs 19). Given the enormous size of the Assyrian forces and their reputation for brutality, this was a very risky policy. But as things turned out the Assyrian armies suddenly left and went back to Nineveh; as we now know, only from Assyrian royal archives, several of Sennacherib’s sons had staged a palace coup in his absence and he had to hurry back to put down this rebellion. Having taken so much loot already from Hezekiah, the Assyrians apparently did not feel the need to return to Jerusalem and did not do so in subsequent years. In less than 100 years the Babylonians under King Nebuchadnezzar had conquered Assyria (609 BCE) and they quickly became the new world power and the great threat on the eastern horizon. Jeremiah the prophet was by that time in his mature years; he saw the new mounting threat and issued warnings to leaders and people alike.
Jeremiah lived dangerously and attempts were made on his life several times because he constantly challenged the self-interested leaders’ complacency and obliviousness to God, and their lack of concern for God’s call for justice and fairness for all citizens. He warned over and over that, because they seemed to care so little for God, God might just let them be overrun by Babylon and even be carried into exile. Jeremiah’s words were not welcome among the self-satisfied, and when he claimed that even the temple on Zion was vulnerable, people were outraged. They reminded him of what Isaiah had said a century ago that the city would not fall. Isaiah had indeed said that it would not fall to Assyria, but that had by Jeremiah’s time been made into a doctrine that the city could never fall to any invader. And the reasoning for that doctrine was that God’s temple was in its midst—the place of God’s presence—and God would surely never let the city fall to conquerors. Jeremiah was much maligned for his ‘temple sermon’ (Jer 7) in which he dared to speak for God at the temple doors, saying:
Do not trust in these deceptive words: ‘This is the temple of the LORD. . . .For if you truly amend your ways and your doings, if you truly act justly one with another, if you do not oppress the alien, the orphan and the widow, or shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not go after other gods to your own hurt, then I will dwell with you in this place. . . .Here you are, trusting in deceptive words to no avail. Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, make offerings to Baal. . .and then come and stand before me in
this house which is called by my name, and say, ‘We are safe!’—only to go on doing all these abominations? [Jer 7.4-10]
Jeremiah’s proof that that such a disaster could happen is Shiloh. 1 Sam 1-4 tells the sad story of Shiloh, the first pilgrimage center set up in Canaan after the Israelite tribes has begun to settle in. It was a more or less central site for the sacred tent and the ark of the covenant to rest, now that the people were no longer on the move, and people from all the tribes were expected to make annual pilgrimages to Shiloh. The elderly priest who administered the holy site was named Eli, and when he handed over the administration to his sons everything went wrong. They were in it only for themselves, corrupt bribe-takers, and cared nothing for what this shrine was actually about. [14]
It was an enormous shock to all the tribes when the Philistines attacked Shiloh, destroyed the place along with the sons of Eli, and even carried away the ark of the covenant, the Israelites most sacred symbol of their unity and faith. The Philistines eventually returned the ark, but the lesson was clear: our God is not like a genie in a bottle, always at our beck and call, and who will always rescue no matter how bad and unjust our actions. And it is this example from the past that Jeremiah flung in the faces of his opponents: when God’s people are so indifferent to God and God’s values, God can let such a disaster happen. Jeremiah’s words were a wake-up call regarding the looming threat of Babylonia. And indeed, the Babylonian armies came to Jerusalem, laid siege, overcame their resistance, carried several large groups of the leadership (including the king) into exile in Babylon, [15] and finally, after looting everything of value, destroyed the city and the great temple and left only ruins in Jerusalem. As the exiles learned over several decades, this was a very hard lesson, but the gift of God’s grace does not exempt people from ethical responsibility. The recovery from Babylonian exile was glacially slow, and though a temple in much reduced form was rebuilt by returnees from exile in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, it would not be until the time of Herod the Great (late 1st century BCE) that it would be rebuilt to anything near its original splendor.
In the time of the restoration after the exile in Babylonia (520 BCE and following), the returnees were able to restore only a very meager version of the temple, and never were able to restore the monarchy. In this regard it is noteworthy that the 2nd section of Isaiah (which addresses the exiles with words of hope) speaks only of the restoration of Zion, but not of the political nation. The so-called ‘Zion poems’ in the 3rd section of Isaiah (Isa 60-62) are very optimistic about the possibilities for restoration after the exile, and are probably thus earlier than other sections which are much more restrained. In these poems the restored Jerusalem is seen as a ‘world capital.’ All the nations are envisaged as coming to its light, and the Israelites in this vision are to be mediators. Zion is seen as the most eminent mountain, as Isa 2.2 has it:
It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of the LORD
shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be raised above the hills, and all the nations shall flow to it.
Indeed, the Zion poem of Isa 60, envisions the offspring of the ones who had been oppressors of the Israelites now coming to Zion to bow before the faithful there, and declares that:
they shall call you the City of the LORD, the Zion of the Holy One of Israel.
[Isa 60.14]
But it must be clear that this envisioned flow of all the nations to make obeisance to the LORD God is in no way a new conquest or triumph theme. It is instead the very opposite of that. The nations are envisaged as coming to Zion, not to be subjected, but to learn the ways of the LORD God and to worship the one true God. In Isaiah’s vision it is from Zion that God’s instruction will go forth. The concluding verse of Isa 2.2-4 makes clear that the future Isaiah sees in this vision is in fact the end of conquest and war and domination, and instead a time of unity, understanding and peace among the world’s peoples. These words in Isa 2.4 conclude this Zion vision:
and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
For the 2nd section of Isaiah it is the theme of mission or outreach that is central, and the striking image of that is the call for God’s people to be ‘a light to the nations.’ This is what Isaiah envisions as the ‘new people’ after the exile catastrophe: a new mission of making known to the world’s peoples that the LORD God alone is God (Isa 43.10-13; 44.8) and has demonstrated that by words and deeds of righteousness and rescue.
In the New Testament
In the New Testament the word ‘Zion’ occurs only 7 times (in the Greek spelling, Sion). Five of these occurrences involve quotations from the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint). Romans 11.26 cites the phrase, “the Redeemer will come from Zion,” from Isa 59.20 (echoed in Ps 14.7). St Paul here uses this citation to make clear that the Redeemer, who was seen by the prophets as coming from Zion, will in the end redeem all of Israel, as well as Gentile believers. Romans 9.33 makes reference to Isa 8.14 and Isa 28.16 (blending rather than quoting either directly), identifying the Christ as a ‘stone of stumbling in Zion’ for those who do not believe, as St Paul here struggles to understand why some Gentiles have come to believe Jesus to be the Christ (Messiah), with no background, while many Israelites, with their scriptural background and expectations, found it hard to do so. 1 Peter 2.6 cites Isa 28.16 also to refer to the Christ: “Thus says the LORD God: ‘Behold I am laying a stone for a foundation in Zion, a tested stone.’” Both Matthew 21.5 and John 12.15 quote the phrase “daughter of Zion” from Zech 9.5, where its meaning is ‘the people’ of Jerusalem in general.
Only Hebrews 12.22 and Revelation 14.1 use the term Sion independently. In Heb 12.22, the word ‘Zion’ clearly now in the late 1st century CE refers to the ‘heavenly Jerusalem,’ within which is understood to be the holy mountain of Zion, now understood as the goal and aspiration of all the faithful followers of Jesus who are on the earthly pilgrimage toward that glorious future kingdom of God. For the early Christians the name ‘Zion’ had a wondrous resonance, conveying to them this extended meaning of the holy place of God, a restful realm of peace and safety in the divine presence, the place to which Christ had gone ahead to prepare a place for them (Jn 14.2). Rev 14.1 is the opening verse of chapter 14’s ‘vision of the Lamb,’ who is seen in the vision standing on Mt Zion (the lamb who was slain, but victorious over death), together with all the redeemed who bear his name. This is a word-picture of future salvation that points back to the prophecy of Joel 2.32:
Then everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved; for in Mt Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls.
Here the term Zion again has the symbolic (or metonymic) [16] meaning of the ‘heavenly Jerusalem,’ the place of salvation, security, rest from earthly travails, rejoicing and peace.
In later Christian Hymns
As can be seen just from the few uses of Zion in the New Testament, Christians found this a resonant word, rich with symbolic meaning. And thus it is no surprise that many parish churches have chosen ‘Zion’ as their church name, undoubtedly to signal with that choice that their church is a place of divine presence, a sacred space of peace and security, as well as a base for mission, for being a light to the world.
The use of Zion in Christian hymns is especially instructive, and that use in hymn-texts also reflects the range of meanings that the term has in the Scriptures as well. The following examples from Evangelical Lutheran Worship (ELW) demonstrate that clearly:
ELW 647 is “Glorious Things of You are Spoken, Zion, City of our God,” a hymn very much beloved among Lutherans because it was traditionally sung to the familiar Haydn tune, Austria, also used for the German national anthem. The text of this hymn was written in the late 1700s by John Newton, the reformed slave-trader who also wrote the autobiographical hymn, “Amazing Grace.” In ELW 647 it is clear right from the opening line that ‘Zion’ functions here as the ‘heavenly Jerusalem’ for all who are pilgrims on their way to God’s glorious future. It is said to be “on the Rock of Ages founded” and “with salvation’s walls surrounded” (stz 1), very obviously presenting a prospect of a destination of unshakeable safety and peace where we will find “solid joys and lasting treasures,” which “none but Zion’s children know” (stz 4). For this hymn, Zion is the goal and destination of the people of God (“Zion’s children”), the heavenly realm of glory.
ELW 625 is “We’re Marching to Zion,” the text of which was written by Isaac Watts, the prolific British writer who has 10 hymns represented in the ELW. In ELW 625 Zion is imaged as “the beautiful city of God” (refr), and we are those who are “marching, through Immanuel’s ground, to fairer worlds on high” (stz 4). And on our way to “the heavenly fields” (stz 3) we joyfully “let our songs abound” (stz 4), proclaiming that “the hill of Zion yields a thousand sacred sweets” (Stz 3) even before “we walk the golden streets” (stz 3).
ELW 313 is “O Lord, Now Let Your Servant Depart in Heavenly Peace,” another hymn in which Zion (here referred to as “your holy hill”) functions as the ‘heavenly Jerusalem,’ the sacred place of salvation and peace. The text is a paraphrase of the ancient “Song of Simeon” (Luke 2.29-35), also known in Latin as the Nunc Dimittis, and was done by the Lutheran hymnist, E. E. Ryden, who has 3 hymn texts in ELW. The Zion allusion is in the 1st stanza: “for I have seen the glory of your redeeming grace; a light to lead the nations unto your holy hill.” Here the holy hill of Zion represents again that holy future destination—“your holy hill”—yet there is also here the implication of the calling of God’s people to let the light of God’s saving grace and love shine out to all people
ELW 392 is “Alleluia, Sing to Jesus,” an Easter hymn that rejoices over Jesus’ victory over death and the grave, and in the assurance of life eternal given to all the faithful by his resurrection to life beyond death. Here the scene is set in the heavenly realms again, where Jesus’ victory over death is being sung, and if we listen: “Hark! The songs of peaceful Zion thunder like a mighty flood: Jesus out of every nation has redeemed us by his blood” (stz 5). Again, Zion is here representing the heavenly realm where the joyous singing (perhaps ironically?) makes ‘peaceful Zion’ roar like a ‘mighty flood.’
ELW 668 is “O Zion Haste, Your Mission High Fulfilling,” and its use of the Zion image is different. Instead of the ‘heavenly Jerusalem’ image the word ‘Zion’ is now used to reference the ‘people of God,’ most particularly in the urgency of their opportunity for mission—“to tell all the world that God is light; that he who made all nations is not willing one soul should perish, lost in shades of night” (stz 1). God’s people (= Zion) are thus to “publish to every people, tongue, and nation that God, in whom they live and move, is love” (stz 2). And, before Christ returns, Zion is urged to “make known to every heart [God’s] saving grace” (stz 3). The refrain sums up the ‘good news’ that Zion is to proclaim: “tidings of peace, tidings of Jesus, redemption and release.”
ELW 533 is “Open Now Thy Gates of Beauty, Zion let me Enter There,” a classic old German hymn sung to a spritely tune by J. Neander. Here ‘Zion” has the same meaning that it had scripturally for the ancient Israelites: it refers to holy place of God’s presence (temple = church), the sacred space where God’s people come to worship God, to pray and give praise and to “wait for God who answers prayer” (stz 1). This is the classic biblical posture of the ancient worshiper as well: coming to the holy place of Zion seeking the presence of God, both to worship God and to hear what God’s guidance is. This is ‘Zion’ used in its ancient sense as the point of meeting, the place (as the ancients viewed it) where heaven meets earth: “Gracious God, I come before thee; come thou also unto me” (stz 2).
ELW 645 is “Christ is Made the Sure Foundation,” its text a 7th century Latin hymn translated into English by J. M. Neale in the mid-1800s, and its music a sturdy Purcell tune. Here again ‘Zion’ functions as the holy place of divine presence where worshipers gather: “To this temple where we call you, come O Lord of hosts and stay; come with all your loving-kindness, hear your people as they pray; and your fullest benediction shed within these walls today” (stz 2). Here Zion is clearly the temple, the worship space, yet there is also the overtone of meaning in this hymn of Zion as the people of God: “Christ is made the sure foundation, Christ our head and cornerstone. . .holy Zion’s help forever and our confidence alone” (stz 1). Here we, God’s people, are referred to as ‘Zion,’ for whom the victorious Christ is our “cornerstone.”
Conclusion
This is but a brief glimpse at the scriptural picture of Zion, endeavoring to provide context for a wider understanding of the meaning and use of this biblical word in the Scriptures, and in later Christian usage. There are clearly several interesting research projects that could be pursued, particularly that of documenting the frequency of use Zion has had in church (and temple) names. The name Zion is clearly one that is rich in meaning and symbolic implications, and Christians have cherished it dearly for its implications of assurance, peace and security in the divine presence, of the future glories of God’s kingdom, and for the urgency of mission for which it calls—to be a light to the world that tells of God’s way, the way of love, justice, compassion, peace and salvation.
****************
This study prepared for the 250th anniversary of founding of Zion Lutheran Church, Long Valley, NJ, by:
David G. Burke, Ph.D.
Dean Emeritus,
Nida Institute for Biblical Scholarship
at American Bible Society. NY, NY 10023
15 July 2008
Cover illustration: Solomon’s Temple on Mt. Zion
from The Learning Bible (American Bible Society, 2000), 924;
editors: Howard C. Kee, David G. Burke, Steven W. Berneking,
Erroll F. Rhodes, Charles S. Houser, and Scott Tunseth
ZION:
THE BACKGROUND AND MEANING
OF A BIBLICAL WORD
A Study Prepared for the 250th Anniversary
Of the Founding of Zion Lutheran Church
Long Valley, NJ
[1] The meaning of the later name of the Jebusite city-state, ‘Jerusalem,’ had the meaning ‘foundation of peace,’ and the Jebusite stronghold and sanctuary of the deity Salem were on the heights of Zion. The Israelites, in taking over this city-state, simply kept these names, Jerusalem and Zion.
[2] This deep skepticism regarding David and the southern tribes will again emerge with vehemence following the reign of Solomon, David’s son and heir, when the northern tribes, disgusted with all the pomp and luxuriousness, greed and forced labor, and bias toward the south, seceded and formed their own northern kingdom under Jeroboam, with its capital eventually built at Samaria.
[3] Solomon, and not David, had to be the temple builder because David had been so thoroughly a ‘man of war’ and because the temple on Mt Zion was to be a place and symbol of peace.
[4] The pressure increased greatly on the northern tribes to be loyal to this united kingdom when the ark of the covenant was first brought up into the ‘city of David,’ and later into the new temple, because wherever the ark was located that place had been from the outset the cultic center for all the federated tribes. Indeed, Jerusalem and Zion remained holy sites for the northern tribes even after they had revolted.
[5] The books of the Hebrew Bible were written originally with consonants only, and the needed vowel sounds were supplied by readers. That was usually not a problem for fluent users of Hebrew, but this meant that there would be some instances where several vowel possibilities would work with the given consonants and make the meaning different. This is one of those instances. With slightly different vowels used, and with no change in the canonical consonantal text, this phrase could also be read: “the God of gods will be seen in Zion” (cf. NRSV). Most scholars think that this is the intended meaning, and that the scribes who much later (7th century CE) supplied vowel marks into the consonantal Hebrew text marked the vowels so that it must be read as “to appear before God in Zion.” The reason for making such an adjustment would have been theological: to avoid the notion that ordinary humans could in some way directly ‘see’ almighty God, when not even the great intermediary Moses could do that. A better sense was considered to be that of ‘being seen’ by God when one visits the holy mountain.
[6] It may be noted as an aside that this line might make an excellent scriptural motto for any Zion church.
[7] Metonymy is the principle by which a smaller thing is used to represent a larger reality.
[8] The Hebrew word Torah literally means ‘instruction, teaching.’ It is in Hebrew a t-prefix noun formed from the verb yarah, meaning ‘to teach, instruct.’ Torah was the term anciently used to reference the first 5 books of the Hebrew Bible (Gen, Ex, Lev, Num, Dt), which envelop all the most ancient histories from Abraham through Moses, the pre-history creation and flood narratives, the saga of the Exodus and wilderness journey, as well as the extensive collections of instructions and commandments. A fateful translation mistake was made when the translators of the word Torah from Hebrew into ancient Greek (already in the 3rd century BCE) chose to translate Hebrew Torah with the Greek word nomos, ‘law.’ When early Christianity was beginning to spread it was this Greek translation (known as the Septuagint) which was its Scripture, and this perception of Torah as ‘law’ rather than ‘instruction’ has been a persistent Christian ‘misreading’ of the Hebrew Scriptures and Judaism to the present age.
[9] This is a point recognized in Solomon’s great prayer at the time of the dedication of the temple near Zion in Jerusalem, when he raises the rhetorical question: “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Even heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you, much less this house that I have built.” Yahweh, the One and only God, Solomon acknowledges, is God of the entire cosmos, having created it all, and therefore could never be confined in a temple of human construction. Nevertheless, the Israelite understanding was that God does ‘visit’ this sacred mountaintop place where heaven meets earth and there hears the prayers of the faithful, receives the offerings of the priests, and communicates revelation to prophets and elders (just as God did in the portable ‘tent of meeting’ in all the years before there ever was a permanent temple).
[10] Ps 48 is a song of praise to God that also declares the glory and strength of Zion. In verses 1-2, this psalm borrows from the language of the Canaanite cosmology, symbolically locating Mt Zion “in the far north” (the Canaanite Mt Zaphon means ‘mountain of the north’), perhaps simply to suggest to Israelites who were familiar with the Canaanite cosmology the prominence and superiority of Mt Zion.
[11] As long as the sacred tent was still the holy place of divine presence the ‘Lord of Hosts’ is typically said to be (invisibly to human beings) ‘enthroned’ above the ark of the covenant (e.g., in 2 Sam 6.2). But once the ark was placed into the Zion temple the language more typically refers to God as ‘the One who dwells on Mt Zion’ (as, e.g., in Isa 8.18).
[12] The temple of Solomon was destroyed by the armies of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon in 586 BCE, but a much later rebuilding program carried out by Herod the Great restored much of its splendor. But when the Roman legions put down the Judean revolt of 68 CE under general Titus (whose arch in the Roman Forum celebrates Judea Capta and depicts the heavy looting of the temple, including the great menorah), they eventually destroyed this Herodian temple also in 70 CE. Yet in the later rabbinic years, the image of the Solomonic temple became so idealized it was possible for the rabbis to construe that the world had been created from Zion. They did this by taking Ps 50.2, “From Zion, perfect in beauty, God shone forth,” to mean that it was ‘from Zion, the place of God,’ that the world in all its beauty was created.
[13] The coalescense of these themes can be dramatically seen in Ps 48.12-14, where the towers, citadels, and ramparts are for all practical purposes equated with the presence of God there on the mountaintop.
[14] Ironically, it was at Shiloh, at this same time, that the young boy Samuel, was being trained as a priest by the aged Eli.
[15] Ps 137 is a mournful dirge expressing how lost and dejected the exiles felt so far away in Babylonia. But their main point of reference, and the doleful focus of their longing, even though it lay in ruins, was Zion: “By the rivers of Babylon—there we sat down and there we wept when we remembered Zion” (137.1). They dared to hope that the temple would one day be restored on Zion to become (in the words of Isa 56.7) “a house of prayer for all peoples.”
[16] See above, footnote 6.
