EZEKIEL – CHAPTER 46

TRUE WORSHIP BY THE PRINCE AND THE PEOPLE

Verses 1-15:

Verse 1 directs that the gate of the inner court of the house of the Lord, facing the east shall be shut on the six working days of the week, 1Sa 20:19. But it shall be opened on the sabbath and during the day of the new moon, Heb 4:9-10. There is a time for prayer and a time for work. On work days men are to work. Work is honorable. And one who will not work should not eat, Gen 3:19; 2Th 3:10-12; Eph 4:28.

Verse 2 specifies that the prince or ruler of Israel should enter the temple area by way of the porch of the gate to the outer court from the east, and stand by the post of the gate, without the inner court. Eze 44:3. The priests shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace offering and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate. Then he shall go out from the place, but the gate was not to be shut until the evening, about 6 p.m. of that day, Mat 25:10.

Verse 3 provides that in the same manner the people of the land of Israel were to worship at the entrance of this gate on the sabbaths and the new moon, Psa 100:4; Luk 1:10; Heb 10:19-22.

Verse 4 explains that the prince’s burnt offering on the sabbath should be made with six lambs and one ram, each without a blemish, symbolizing the purity and holiness necessary for the sacrifice, Num 28:5; Num 28:9; Num 28:11-12; Eze 45:17.

Verse 5 adds that the meat offering should be an ephah for a ram, and the meat offering for the lambs, as he shall be able or willing to give of his hand, with an hin of oil to an ephah, Deu 16:17; 2Co 8:12.

Verse 6 further instructs that on the day of the new moon, monthly, the offering should be of a young bullock, without blemish, a type of Jesus Christ, the sinless offering, Heb 7:26. Added to this there were to be six lambs and a ram, also without blemish offered on that same day. In this no mention was made of “blowing of the trumpets,” part of the former new moon festival, Num 10:19. Thus it may be noted significant changes were made in the new provision, for the order of restored worship in Israel.

Verse 7 adds that the prince shall also prepare a meat offering with an ephah for a bullock and an ephah for a ram. And for the lambs a free will offering of whatever his hands are willing to give. He shall also provide an hin of oil for each ephah for this sacrifice to the Lord. The meat offering was literally a meal offering, v. 5 and Lev 5:11; Lev 12:8; 2Co 8:1; 2Co 8:12.

Verse 8 restates that when the prince shall enter the temple area to worship he should enter by way of the porch, within the east gate, and depart by the same way, c. 2.

Verse 9 directs that the people of Israel, upon entering the holy temple area, during the solemn feasts, whether entering the north gate or the south gate, were not to turn around, but depart the temple from the opposite direction of their entrance, so that the ingress traffic would not be impeded, Exo 23:14; Exo 23:17; Exo 34:23; Deu 16:16; Psa 84:7.

Verse 10 provides that the prince (ruler or king), as David did, shall go in with the people, mingling with the multitude of worshippers as an equal with them, before God, to animate or encourage them in their devotions, praise, and worship; And he too shall also go forth from the throng through the north or south gate, upon departing the occasion, Psa 42:4.

Verse 11 prescribes that in the feast there shall be offered in the solemnities a meat (meal) offering of an ephah for each bullock, and an ephah for each ram; and as one was able to give for the lambs; and an hin (about six quarts) of oil was to be given to be used in making each ephah of the meat offering, v. 5; Eze 45:24.

Verses 12-15 No Commentary

Verse 16, 17 direct that if the prince give a gift to any of his sons, from the land grant apportioned to him; it shall be the inheritance for his sons’ possession, ownership and management, to provide for their needs, that they might not resort to extortion or bribes from the people of Israel, as Ahab did Naboth’s vineyard, 1 Kings ch. 2. But should the prince give a gift (dowry) of his inheritance to a servant, it would remain with the servant to the year of liberty or jubilee. Then it would revert to the prince. Upon the death of the prince all his inheritance was to fall to his sons, in perpetuity, Lev 25:10. There will be a Grand Jubilee, at the coming of the Lord, Isa 61:2-3.

Verse 18 warns that the prince (king or civil ruler) should not take the people’s inheritance by oppression, to drive them out of their possession; But he was directed to give his sons’ inheritance, out of his own possession, so that his family would not be scattered from their possession. It appears that the prince was to give to his sons, upon their marriage, for their use, a portion of his possessions that were to be theirs legally upon his decease anyway. Such would both provide for the needs of his sons and prevent their engaging in oppression against any Israelite or servant, Eze 45:8.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

AN IMPOSING SPECTACLE OF WORSHIP IN THE TEMPLE (Chap. 46)

EXEGETICAL NOTES.Eze. 46:1. The gate of the inner court opened. The inner east gate of the Temple, otherwise shut, shall be opened on the Sabbath and new moon. This rule does not interfere with chap. Eze. 44:1. There the outer gate is expressly named. This also here remains shut, as indeed chap. Eze. 47:2 presupposes that it is shut once for all; otherwise it would have been opened for the prince.Hengstenberg.

Eze. 46:2. The prince shall stand by the post of the gate and the priests prepare his burnt-offering. The King of the future is the Messiah; the princedom shines in His light, in the brightness of the glory that entered through the east gate, which in view thereof is shut for ever toward the outside. A clear distinction is drawn between prince and priest, to avoid interference with each others functions.

Eze. 46:3. The people worship at the door of this gate. The people may not enter the inner gate; they worship at the opened door, through which they catch a glimpse of the altar of burnt-offering, which the prince sees better from a nearer point. The upper pavement on either side of the eastern gate provided room for such worshippers.

Eze. 46:4-5. The burnt-offering and the meat-offering. These Sabbath offerings are larger than those of the Mosaic law, to imply that the worship of God is to be conducted by the prince and people in a more munificent spirit of self-sacrificing liberality than formerly. Moses prescribed for the burnt-offering two lambs, and for the meat-offering two tenth deals of flour mingled with oil. As he shall be able to giveliterally, the gift of his hand. As he shall be willing to give, the amount being left to the will of the giver. The same meaning in the slightly varied expression of Eze. 46:7.

Eze. 46:6. The new moon. No mention is made here of the blowing of trumpets, which was an important part of the New-Moon Festival (Num. 10:10).

Eze. 46:10. The prince in the midst of them. Not isolated as at other times, but joining the throng of worshippers at their head, after the example of David (Psa. 42:4): the highest in rank animating the devotions of the rest by his presence and example.

Eze. 46:12. The prince shall prepare a voluntary burnt-offering. Not only is he to perform official acts of worship on holy days and feasts, but in voluntary offerings daily he is to show his individual zeal, surpassing all his people in liberality, and so setting them a princely example.

Eze. 46:13. Thou shalt prepare it every morning. The evening sacrifice is omitted, because the seer is not enumerating the sacrifices of the law, but selecting a few of them with a particular object in view.

Eze. 46:16. If the prince give a gift unto his sons. The prince was to be provided with possessions of his own to prevent him having recourse to exactions from his subjects, and lest in the course of time he might be tempted to such exactions, enactments are added to prevent the alienation of the princes land. The mention of the princes sons is another argument against Messiah being meant by the prince.

Eze. 46:20. The place where the priests shall boil the trespass offering. The paschal lamb was to be eaten roasted. The flesh of the other sacrifices was to be sodden or boiled (Lev. 6:28; 1Sa. 2:13; 2Ch. 24:14). The meat-offering (flour and honey) was baked (Lev. 2:4).

Eze. 46:22. There were courts joined. Smaller courts joined or attached to the walls of the courts, at the corners of the latter.

Eze. 46:24. The places where the ministers boil the sacrifice of the people. The careful provision made to keep the offerings of priests and people separate was to prevent collision between them, as the enactments of Eze. 46:16-18 were to secure their respective rights to prince and people. All this implies that no longer are the common and unclean to be confounded with the sacred and divine, but that in even the least things, as eating and drinking, the glory of God is to be the aim (1Co. 10:31).

HOMILETICS

THE TRUE WORSHIP OF JEHOVAH

(Eze. 46:1-15.)

I. Unites all classes in its sacred exercises (Eze. 46:1-3). Prince, priests, and people become one in the act of worship; as they are all alike dependent on God, so they all bow down before Him and adore and praise His goodness. Rank, wealth, display, sink for the time being into insignificance; it is simply a congregation of human souls, with common wants and weaknesses, craving help and blessing from a common Father. The monarch is never so great as when he bends in lowly homage at the feet of God. It is a sublime sight to see king and peasant kneeling together in prayer and adoration. The sincere worship of God is a great power in unifying the human race; inequalities are forgotten, asperities toned down, national peculiarities are more kindly interpreted, and a universal solvent is discovered that melts and blends the hearts of men into a spiritual brotherhood. The grand bond of union in the future will be evidenced in the unceasing worship of Jehovah.

II. Demands generosity in giving proportionate to ability (Eze. 46:4-12). The offerings mentioned here are on a scale of liberality exceeding anything known under the Mosaic regimen. The prince set an example in generous giving, which the people cheerfully imitated. Our gifts to Gods cause should not be more nor less than our circumstances justify. It is a great help in worship, and an important feature of it, to come to Gods house with a gift in our hand. The more heartily we enter into the spirit of worship the more clearly shall we understand and practise the science of proportionate giving. A missionary was staying with a wealthy Christian philanthropist, whose house was richly ornamented with paintings and sculpture, and was eulogising an exquisite marble statue of Silencethe figure of a boy with his finger to his lips. They had known each other from boyhood, and were free and confidential in conversation. Do you admire that statue? asked the friend of the missionary. I never saw anything in my life equal to it for grace, replied he. What do you think I gave for it? I cannot imagine. I gave ninety guineas. And what did you give at the collection to-night? asked the missionary. Oh, I gave five pounds. Five pounds! said the missionary. Shame on you! Here you give ninety guineas for a marble statue of Silence and five pounds towards sounding the Gospel all over the earth. That is badly laid out money.

III. Is to be constantly rendered (Eze. 46:13-15). The burnt-offering was presented dailyevery morningand the meat-offering continually by a perpetual ordinance unto the Lord. The dawn of every day should be welcomed with prayer and praise. The day is well begun when it is begun with God; and the religious character of the day will be decided by the way in which we spend its first hour. It is said that the spider mends its broken web every morning, and always begins in the middle. So we before entering on our daily calling should be careful to repair the broken webs of our lives, beginning each morning with the heart. There is a flower called the Gummy Cystus, which blooms every morning, unfolding a large, beautiful, snow-white flower. By its example this flower invites the soul every morning to unfold the blossom of a holy and fervent devotion. Work is worship, and the life of each day should be one glad psalm (Psa. 55:17).

LESSONS.

1. Temple-work is worship.

2. Worship promotes the fellowship of hearts.

3. The soul reaches its highest good in the worship of God.

GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES

Eze. 46:1-5. Sabbath Privileges

1. Rest from anxious toil (Eze. 46:1).

2. An open Sanctuary (Eze. 46:1).

3. An opportunity for all classes to worship God (Eze. 46:2-3).

4. Should be characterised by generous offerings (Eze. 46:4-5).

Eze. 46:1-2. Royalty and Worship.

1. Princes must not enter into the inner court, and may not change anything in the worship of God.
2. They are to countenance and maintain the worship of God.
3. They must worship the Lord publicly on Sabbath-days and on special occasions as well as other people.
4. They must not impede the worship of God.Greenhill.

Eze. 46:1. Work does not hinder holiness, but furthers it

1. By preventing temptation.
2. By nourishing experience of Gods bounty and providence.
3. By filling the heart with objects of heavenly thought.
4. By stirring up to prayer and praise for each days mercies.Trapp.

There is a time for prayer and a time for work. On work-days we are not to rest as on the Sabbath. He who does not work ought not to eat, whatever his pretences are. The door to the Father, the source of all grace, opens itself to us when the gracious light of the love of God again shines forth, as it often does after great darkness.Lange.

Eze. 46:2. The chief magistrate was always obliged to attend the public worship of God, as well as the priest, to show that the civil and ecclesiastical States were both under the same government of the Lord, and that no one was capable of being prince or priest who did not acknowledge God in all his ways. Ungodly priests and profligate magistrates are a curse to any land.A. Clarke.

The gate shall not be shut until the evening. The gate is open till the evening; be ready therefore. When the Bridegroom has once gone in, the gate is shut and fools excluded (Matthew 25).Trapp.

Eze. 46:3. In the old covenant it is said before the Lord; in the new covenant in the Lord.

Eze. 46:4-15. The offerings here prescribed are generally in excess of those enjoined by the law, to note the greater devotion and magnificence under the new state of things. Still, as of old, there was a certain liberty left to give in such proportion as the will might prompt or the ability permit, and the seer contemplates in his vision of better times a willing king and a people ready to give of their substance to the utmost of their means.Speakers Commentary.

Eze. 46:4. The Lords day is a day in which especially liberal gifts to the Lords cause are the appropriate accompaniments of the worship of the Sanctuary, attesting that we do not desire to offer to our best Benefactor a service which costs us nothing (2Sa. 24:24). If the Israelite was not to appear before the Lord at the Passover empty (Exo. 23:15), much less ought the Christian, who enjoys such vastly superior privileges, to offer grudging and stinted gifts.Fausset.

Eze. 46:8-10. Religious Decorum

1. Should be rigidly observed by king and people.
2. Regulates the manner of entering and leaving the Sanctuary.
3. An aid in the public worship of God.

Eze. 46:8. The influence of love shall extend into the whole world from the south to the north, so that they from the north and from the south shall go to meet one another, in order to receive and embrace one another as brethren.No one should go out of the church as he came into it; he should always take home with him something for his edification (Ecc. 4:16; Act. 16:14).Lange.

Eze. 46:9-15. A beautiful picture of a religious people; the highest in rank freely mingling with the mass of worshippers, and inspiriting their devotions by the elevating influence of his presence and example. But to show that his worship was not merely to be of a public and official nature, that it should spring from a heart truly alive to Divine things, the prophet passes from those holiday services to the voluntary offerings, which the prince was also to present to the Lord. The proper head of a religious people, he was to surpass them all in the multitude and variety of his acts of homage and adoration.Fairbairn.

Eze. 46:9.

1. The Lord expects not only prince and priests to worship Him in a public way, but the people also.
2. The way of Gods servants is a straight and right-forth way.
3. The shortness of mans life is here represented: he enters the world, goes on a little way, and then goes out of it again.Greenhill.

1. Teaches us not to turn our backs upon the holy ordinances.
2. To make straight paths for our feet, and be making daily progress towards perfection.
3. That our memories are frail, and here we shall meet with many things that will withdraw us from thinking upon God.
4. That our life is but shorta passage from one gate to another. One being asked, What is life? made an answer answerless, for he presently went his way.Trapp.

Eze. 46:10. The Divine Leader

1. Is ever in the midst of His people.
2. Guides to the best spheres of religious and secular work.
3. Superintends and overrules all the changes of human life.
4. Guarantees all needed help in the Church and in the world.

Prince and peasant stand on the same level in worshipping before God, who is no respecter of persons; yet those in exalted positions, as princes and nobles, exercise a powerful influence over men, and may accordingly be the instruments of great good when they set a godly example before those beneath them.Fausset.

Eze. 46:13-15. Morning Prayer.

1. A duty we owe to God.
2. Decides the character of the days experience.
3. Essential to religious growth.
4. Should be offered in an earnest and thankful spirit.

Eze. 46:15. Grace makes the heart free, and so also willing. As Gods grace is new every morning, so also ought our devotion to Him to be renewed every morning. Our whole life should be a sacrifice from morning to night, and next morning again. Since Christs appearance the night has disappeared and the day has come; there are now only morning sacrifices.Lange.

HOMILETICS

JUSTICE AND GENEROSITY

(Eze. 46:16-18.)

I. That property rights are founded in universal justice. The earth is the Lords, and the fulness thereof, and it is He who gives power to get wealth. Property acquired by industry, merit, and by just regard to the rights of others is secured by recognised law. Yet the law knows nothing of absolute ownership: man has but a life-interest in his possessions, for we brought nothing into this world, and we can carry nothing out. The law which protects property also limits the exercise of the owners power over it.

II. That ample possessions afford opportunity for acts of corresponding generosity. Property has its duties as well as its rights. Great wealth means great responsibility; it furnishes increased facilities for doing good. Few men give in proportion to their means. Liberality is measured not by what a man gives, but by what he has left. It is degrading to spend ones life in getting and securing what we get; the soul is shrivelled into a miserly selfishness. Giving expands our human sympathies and widens a mans outlook. There is a pleasure in accumulating, but there is a nobler pleasure in giving. Gonsalvo, the great Spanish captain, used to say, Never stint your hand. There is no way of enjoying ones property like giving it away; and he acted up to his own precept.

III. That it is neither justice nor generosity to give away what belongs to another (Eze. 46:16-18). The prince was amply provided for that he might be generous both to his family and his servants; but he was prohibited from indulging generosity by seizing the possessions of others. Some are generous enough with what belongs to others. It is mistaken generosity; it is fraud and robbery. Justice demands that a man must be generous only with what is his own. The prince gains power and affection, not by violating but by guarding the rights of his subjects. Property is sweetened and seasoned by acts of judicious liberality.

LESSONS.

1. Property is a sacred trust, for which we are accountable to God.

2. Property acquired by oppression is unsafe.

3. We must be just before we can be generous.

GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES

Eze. 46:16-18. The Duty of the Wealthy

1. To provide for their own family (Eze. 46:16).

2. To be liberal towards their dependents (Eze. 46:17).

3. To respect the laws by which their possessions are governed (Eze. 46:16-17).

4. To avoid oppression and protect the rights of others (Eze. 46:18).

It is an exhibition, by an individual trait, of the pure righteousness and settled order which should pervade the Kingdom of God when set up in its new and more perfect form. Everything should now be ruled by the principles of eternal rectitude, and no license given, no occasion even, or pretext afforded for the usurpations of tyrannical violence.Fairbairn.

Eze. 46:17. As Alexander the Great, who, going to subdue a great part of the habitable world, gave away to his servants almost all he had, and when one of his officers asked what he would leave for himself, he answered, Hope.Trapp.

He who is profuse in giving is easily compelled to take from others what belongs to them.Hengstenberg.

Eze. 46:18. Ill accidents attend such princes as affecting to be absolute in power, will be too resolute in will or dissolute in life, oppressing their subjects to enrich their servants and parasites.Trapp.

How blessed shall that state be wherein alike the temptation from without and the inclination from within to do wrong shall no longer have place! This is the model towards which we ought to aspire; and in this respect this picture of the future Israel may serve as the ideal according to which, in the spirit if not in the letter, our State politics should be framed.Fausset.

HOMILETICS

THE MORAL SIGNIFICANCE OF DAILY FOOD

(Eze. 46:19-24.)

I. That the supply of daily food is a constant evidence of the Divine care. There is not a single meal for which we are not indebted to the Divine thought-fulness and blessing. God smiles upon the soil, and it teems with plenty for man and beast. The wants of the tiniest insect, the most solitary bird, are not overlooked. Famine is mans handiworkthe result of sin, of indolence, or lack of foresight, and is sometimes a punishment for his lavish extravagance and wrong-doing. God is the munificent benefactor and food-provider for His countless offspring (Psa. 145:16).

II. That all the possible needs of man are satisfied in connection with Divine worship. The priests who ministered before the Lord and the people who worshipped were fed with the sacrifices they offered (Eze. 46:20-24). Workers for God are promised an unfailing supply of physical food (Psa. 37:3). Their work is not to suffer by undue anxiety concerning temporal things. He who provides for the higher needs of man will not neglect the lower: the greater includes the lesser (Mat. 6:33).

III. That every meal should be enjoyed in a spirit of devout thankfulness. Every meal should be a miniature sacrament. We should remember that God always sits down at the table with His children; His presence makes every meal a joyous feast. Eating and drinking cannot degenerate into sensual excess when we remember the Provider of the feast is present. We can make no adequate return for His goodness, but we can and must be thankful. A thankful heart glorifies God (1Ti. 4:4; 1Co. 10:31; Php. 4:6).

LESSONS.

1. The law of supply and demand is Divinely regulated.

2. There is no lack to those who serve God.

3. The prayer is Divinely taughtGive us this day our daily bread.

GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES

Eze. 46:19. In the Kingdom of God, as in the kingdom of nature, and in the full sense of the expression, everything has its own place. Only the things of men are in disorder because they are sinners, and sin is disorder in every respectLange.

Eze. 46:20. Ministers should indite good matters in their hearts for the use of the people, and then their tongues shall be as the pen of a ready writer. They shall not feed their hearers with crude and undigested stuff, but such as is well boiled and baked with the fire of the Holy Spirit, kindled on the hearth of their own hearts, that from the heart they may speak to the heart.Trapp.

To cook is to bring to a proper condition, so that the food tastes well and is agreeable; so ought also the truth to be prepared.Is not homiletics a kind of sacred cookery?Lange.

Eze. 46:24. Spiritual Food

1. Should be studiously prepared by the faithful minister.
2. Should be partaken of by the minister himself.
3. Should be provided for the worship of the Sanctuary.
4. Is essential in nourishing and strengthening the soul.

In Gods Church there shall always be provision both for His ministers and people. Those who have but from hand to mouth have their bread hot, as it were, from Gods hand, which is best of all.Trapp.

Thus in one part of the house was food for the body, and in another food for the soul. In this view heaven shall greatly exceed earth, for there we shall not need the bread that perisheth. He that eateth of the tree of life shall live for ever.Sutcliffe.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

3. The sabbath and new moon (46:17)

TRANSLATION

(1) Thus says the Lord GOD: The gate of the inner court that looks toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath day it shall be opened, and on the day of the new moon it shall be opened. (2) And the prince shall enter by the way of the porch of the gate without and shall stand by the post of the gate; and the priests shall prepare his burnt-offering and his peace-offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate: then he shall go forth; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening. (3) And the people of the land shall worship at the door of that gate before the LORD on the sabbaths and on the new moons. (4) And the burnt-offering that the prince shall offer unto the LORD shall be on the sabbath day six lambs without blemish and a ram without blemish; (5) and the meal-offering shall be an ephah for the ram, and the meal-offering for the lambs as he is able to give, and a hin of oil to an ephah. (6) And on the day of the new moon it shall be a young bullock without blemish, and six lambs and a ram; they shall be without blemish: (7) and he shall prepare a meal-offering, an ephah for the bullock, and an ephah for the ram, and for the lambs according as he is able, and a hin of oil to an ephah.

COMMENTS

On the sabbath day and on the new moon (first day of the month) the eastern gate of the inner court was to be opened (Eze. 46:1).[535] on these occasions the prince would be allowed to enter the eastern gate. He was the official representative of the people who would present to the priests the sacrifices which were to be offered on behalf of the nation. From his vantage point at the post of the gate (i.e., the western end of the gateway) he would worship as the priests offered his sacrifices within his view upon the altar, Even after he departed from the Temple, the inner gate was to be left open until evening (Eze. 46:2). At the door of that open gate the people of the land would worship throughout those sacred sabbath days (Eze. 46:3).

[535] This gate is not to be confused with the eastern gate of the outer court which was never to be opened (Eze. 44:2).

The offerings prescribed for the sabbath and new moon of the new Temple age do not correspond with those prescribed in the Law of Moses (cf. Num. 28:9; Num. 28:11-15).[536] The prince is to offer each sabbath day six lambs and a ram (Eze. 46:4); an ephah of meal with the ram; an unspecified amount of meal for each lamb; and at least a hin of oil (Eze. 46:5). On the new moon the prince would offer the regular sabbath offerings but add to them an unblemished bullock and another ephah of meal (Eze. 46:6-7).

[536] To reconcile this account with the Pentateuch some Jewish scholars have proposed that these sacrifices are special, additional sacrifices required during the sabbaths of the dedication period for the new Temple.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XLVI.

The first fifteen verses of this chapter belong to Ezekiel 45. The prince was required to provide and bring the sacrifices for himself and for the people (Eze. 45:17); therefore, as soon as the yearly festivals have been described, directions are given (Eze. 46:1-3) for the conduct of the prince at these sacrifices. He was required to be always present, while attendance on the part of the people was obligatory only at the yearly festivals. The prophet then goes on to provide for the sacrifices for the Sabbaths and new moons, for free-will offerings, and for the daily sacrifices.

(1) The gate of the inner court.It has already been provided (Eze. 44:1-3) that the outer gate on the east should be kept closed, except for the prince. The same thing is now commanded for the east gate of the inner court also; and, further, the days are specified, the Sabbaths and new moons, on which it shall be used by the prince.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Activity In The Earthly Temple.

It is anticipated that the earthly temple will have at least one gate, and possibly only one, leading into the inner court, and two leading into the temple precincts. The fact that all attention is focused on the east gate of the inner court and its opening and shutting might suggest that there is in fact only expected to be one gateway to the inner court. Access for the priests would still be gainable, presumably by a small door in the gate ready for their use. The activity being described here is for the post-exilic community. The prince clearly represents the people as their prince. But he is a far cry from the Messianic Prince.

The Opening Of The East Gate to the Inner Court on New Moons and Sabbaths.

‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh, “The gate of the inner court which looks towards the east shall be shut on the six working days, but on the sabbath day it shall be opened, and on the day of the new moon it shall be opened. And the prince will enter by the way of the porch of the gate, and will stand by the post of the gate, and the priests will prepare his whole (burnt) offering, and his peace offerings, and he will worship at the threshold of the gate. Then he will go out, but the gate will not be shut until the evening. And the people of the land will worship at the door of that gate before Yahweh on the sabbaths and on the new moons.” ’

This description appears to suggest only one gateway into the inner court. It would give access to the inner court to the priests through a door in the gate at all times, but the gate itself was to be shut except on new moons and sabbaths. In other words it would only be open at times of special worship. This would probably also include special feast days when the prince had to supervise special offerings (and note Eze 46:12). If there were two other gates always open, the opening and the closing of the gate would not have been so impressive, and not have provided the same lesson. The impression given is that this is expected to be the only gate into the inner court.

On the other hand the point may be that the other two gates were seen as not looking straight onto the entrance to the sanctuary. But this appears to be unlikely. The fact that they were open and that worshippers could gather at them would largely nullify the impact of the closing of the east gate.

(The reason for the closure of this gate had nothing to do with the reason for the permanent closing of the east gate into the outer court of the heavenly temple. That was because Yahweh had entered by it and it was very holy. No such idea is expressed here. This was in order to stress that open access to God was limited to special occasions. This should not, however, hide from us the fact that the people knew that they could pray to God at any time. It was more the immediacy of His presence that was in question, not their ability to pray to Him).

The new moon marked the beginning of each month, which lasted for a cycle of the moon. It was the major measure among the ancients of the orderly passage of time, and its steady course was thus evidence of the continual fulfilment of God’s covenant with Noah (Gen 8:22). The non-appearance of the moon was a sign of catastrophe (Eze 32:7; Isa 13:10; Joe 3:15). The sabbath was specific to Israel and commemorated the deliverance from Egypt and the giving of the covenant (Deu 5:15) and was linked with the fact of creation (Exo 20:11). Thus both were seen as of vital importance.

So on those days, when the prince and the people came to worship Yahweh, the east gate would be opened. The prince was given the special privilege of being able to go through the gateway and stand at the inner court end of the gateway, at ‘the post of the gate’, so that he could actually see into the inner court and the offering of his offerings on the altar. But even he could not set foot in the inner court. This was why a special place away from the inner court was allocated for him where he could eat a sacral meal before Yahweh (Eze 44:3). The ordinary people stood at the outer court end of the gateway. They could come no further.

The official opening of the gate confirmed that access to Yahweh was available to all His covenant people, for when the gate was open there was no physical barrier between them and the inner sanctuary, and they shared to a large extent the privilege granted continually to the levitical priests. But it also declared that this access was limited for them in order to stress His holiness. He was not available at their beck and call. And in no way could they enter the inner court.

‘And the prince will enter by the way of the porch of the gate, and will stand by the post of the gate, and the priests will prepare his whole (burnt) offering, and his peace offerings, and he will worship at the threshold of the gate. Then he will go out, but the gate will not be shut until the evening.’ As the supervisor of the offerings it was necessary for the prince to be able to see the offerings in order to ensure that all was properly carried out. Thus he could stand at the inner end of the gateway from where, having presented his prepared offerings, he could plainly see the altar and the activity going on there. As well as giving him a privileged position of worship, there may also have been here the idea of a check on the non-Zadokite priests to ensure that they were fulfilling their responsibilities in accordance with cultic requirements. They had not proved faithful in the past and had to serve under the watchful eye of the prince, acting for the people.

But the gate was not closed when the prince left. It remained open for worshippers to gaze through, and worship at, until the end of the sabbath. All this would not have been feasible if the number of worshippers were expected to be huge, but provision was made for fairly large numbers to participate by ensuring that they moved in orderly fashion (Eze 46:9).

The temple would presumably be open for worship daily, it was only the gate into the inner court that was closed.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The New Temple ( Eze 40:1 to Eze 48:35 ).

The book of Ezekiel began with a vision of the glory of God and the coming of the heavenly chariot throne of God in order to speak directly to His people through Ezekiel (chapter 1). He then recorded the departure of God’s glory from Jerusalem and the Temple because of the sins of Israel (chapters 8 – 11). This was followed by the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Now it ends with another vision, the return of God’s glory to the land and to His people (chapters 40 -48) depicted in the form of a heavenly temple established on the mountains of Israel to which the glory of God returns, resulting in the final restoration of ‘the city’ as ‘Yahweh is there’. Thus this part of the book follows both chronologically and logically from what has gone before.

Furthermore at the commencement of the book Ezekiel received his divine commission as a prophet (chapters 1 – 3), then he pronounced oracles of judgment against Judah and Jerusalem for their sins, declaring that Jerusalem must be destroyed (chapters 4 – 24). He followed this up with oracles of judgment against the foreign nations who had opposed Israel (chapters 25 – 32). Then on hearing of Jerusalem’s fall (Eze 33:21), the prophet proclaimed messages of hope for Israel, declaring that God would fulfil His promises to deliver and bless His people Israel, and would restore them to the land of their fathers and establish them in the land.

Yes, more, that they would be established there everlastingly under a new David, with an everlasting sanctuary set up in their midst (stressed twice – Eze 37:26; Eze 37:28) (chapters 34 – 39). And now he declares the presence of that new Temple, even now present in the land, invisible to all but him and yet nevertheless real in so much that it can be measured. It is ‘the icing on the cake’, the final touch to what has gone before (40-48). God is back in His land. For such an invisible presence, a glimpse of another world, present but unseen except by those with eyes to see, compare Gen 28:12; 2Ki 2:11-12; 2Ki 6:17; Zec 1:7-11. Indeed without that heavenly temple the glory could not return, for it had to be guarded from the eyes of man.

The heavenly temple can be compared directly with the heavenly throne with its accompanying heavenly escort which Ezekiel saw earlier (chapter 1). That too was the heavenly equivalent of the earthly ark of the covenant, and huge in comparison. So Ezekiel was very much aware of the heavenly realm and its presence in different ways on earth, for he was a man of spiritual vision.

But there is one remarkable fact that we should notice here, and that is that having been made aware of the destruction of Jerusalem, and looking forward to the restoration of Israel and its cities and the Satanic opposition they will face, and even speaking of the building of a new Temple, Ezekiel never once refers directly by name to Jerusalem in any way (in Eze 36:38 it is referred to in an illustration). This seems quite remarkable. It seems to me that this could only arise from a studied determination not to do so. He wants to take men’s eyes off Jerusalem.

Here was a man who was a priest, who had constantly revealed his awareness of the requirements of the cult, who had been almost totally absorbed with Jerusalem, who now looked forward to the restoration of the land and the people, and yet who ignored what was surely central in every Israelite’s thinking, the restoration of Jerusalem. Surely after his earlier prophecies against Jerusalem his ardent listeners must have asked him the question, again and again, what about Jerusalem? And yet he seemingly gave them no answer. Why?

It seems to me that there can only be two parallel answers to that question. The first is that Jerusalem had sinned so badly that as far as God and Ezekiel were concerned its restoration as the holy city was not in the long run to be desired or even considered. What was to be restored was the people and the land, which was his continual emphasis. Jerusalem was very secondary and not a vital part of that restoration. And secondly that in the final analysis the earthly Jerusalem was not important in the final purposes of God. Jerusalem had been superseded. His eternal sanctuary would be set up, but it would not be in the earthly Jerusalem (chapter 45 makes this clear). Rather it would be set up in such a way that it could more be compared to Jacob’s ladder, as providing access to and from the heavenlies (Gen 28:12) and a way to God, and yet be invisible to man. It is a vision of another world in its relationships with man (compare 2Ki 6:17). It was the beginnings of a more spiritual view of reality. And it would result in an eternal city, the city of ‘Yahweh is there’ (Eze 48:30-35).

Now that is not the view of Jerusalem and the temple of men like Nehemiah (Neh 1:4) and Daniel (Dan 9:2; Dan 9:16; Dan 9:19), but they were God-inspired politicians thinking of the nearer political and religious future not the everlasting kingdom. (Daniel does of course deal with the everlasting kingdom, but he never relates Jerusalem to it. He relates the everlasting kingdom to Heaven). Nor do the other prophets avoid mentioning Jerusalem, and they do see in ‘Jerusalem’ a place for the forwarding of the purposes of God (e.g. Isa 2:3; Isa 4:3-5; Isa 24:23; Isa 27:13; Isa 30:19; Isa 31:5; Isa 33:20-21; Isa 40:2; Isa 40:9; Isa 44:26-28; Isa 52:1-2; Isa 52:9; Isa 62:1-7; Isa 65:18-19; Isa 66:10-20; Jer 3:17-18; Jer 33:11-18; Joe 2:32; Joe 3:1; Joe 3:16-20; Oba 1:17-21; Mic 4:2-8; Zep 3:14-16; Zec 2:2-4; Zec 2:12; Zec 3:2; Zec 8:3-8; Zec 8:15; Zec 8:22; Zec 9:9-10; Zec 12:6 to Zec 13:1; Zec 14:11-21; Mal 3:4), although some of these verses too have the ‘new Jerusalem’ firmly in mind. And certainly God would in the short term encourage the building of a literal Temple in Jerusalem (Haggai and Zechariah). Thus all saw the literal Jerusalem as having at least a limited function in the forward going of God’s purposes, simply because it was central in the thinking of the people of Israel. Although how far is another question. However, Ezekiel’s vision went beyond that. It seems to be suggesting that in the major purposes of God the earthly Jerusalem was now of little significance. It was not even worthy of mention. It is now just ‘the city’.

Yet we find him here suddenly speaking of the presence of a new Temple in the land of Israel. But even here, although it is referred to under the anonymous phrase ‘the city’ (Eze 40:1), Jerusalem remains unmentioned by name. And the temple is not sited in Jerusalem. Jerusalem is simply a place called anonymously ‘the city’, whose future name, once it is redeemed and purified, is ‘Yahweh is there’ (Eze 48:35). What Ezekiel is far more concerned to demonstrate is that the glory of Yahweh, and His accessibility to His own, has returned to His people in a new heavenly Temple, which has replaced the old, and is established on a mysterious and anonymous mountain, rather than to stress His presence in an earthly Jerusalem. Indeed he will stress that this temple is outside the environs of Jerusalem (Eze 45:1-6).

This should then awaken us to the fact that Ezekiel is in fact here speaking of an everlasting sanctuary (Eze 37:26; Eze 37:28). This is no earthly Temple with earthly functions. There is no suggestion anywhere that it should be built, indeed  it was already there and could be measured. It is an everlasting heavenly Temple of which the earthly was, and will be, but a shadow.

It is true that a physical temple would be built, and they are specifically told that the altar described (but pointedly not directly ‘measured’) is to be made (Eze 43:18), for physical sacrifices would require a physical altar, and that will be the point of contact with the heavenly temple, but the important thing would be, not the physical temple, but the invisible heavenly temple, present in the land, of which the physical was but a representation. The ancients regularly saw their physical religious artefacts as in some way representing an invisible reality, and so it is here. A fuller picture of the heavenly temple is given throughout the Book of Revelation. And this temple was now ‘seen’ to be established in the land even before a physical temple was built. God had again taken possession of His land, and awaited the return of His people for the ongoing of His purposes.

But a further point, putting these verses firmly in its context, is that this will make them realise that once they have come through the trials brought on them by Gog and his forces, fortified by the presence of God in their midst, they will be able to enter the eternal rest promised them by God, for His heavenly, everlasting temple was here so that He could dwell among them in an everlasting sanctuary. This was thus putting in terms that they could understand the heavenly future that awaited His people. It was a fuller and more perfect sanctuary (Eze 37:26-28; Heb 9:11). And it had relevance from the beginning as the sign that God had returned to His land.

This section about the ‘heavenly’ temple can be split into five parts. The first is a brief introduction in terms of the vision that Ezekiel experienced (Eze 40:1-4). This is followed by a detailed description of the new temple complex with the lessons that it conveyed (Eze 40:5 to Eze 42:20), the return of Yahweh to His temple (Eze 43:1-9), the worship that would follow as a result of that temple (Eze 43:10 to Eze 46:24), and the accompanying changes that would take place with regard to His people as they ‘repossessed the land’ with the final establishment of a heavenly city (chapters 47-48), all expressed in terms of what they themselves were expecting, but improved on. To them ‘the land’ was the ultimate of their aspirations, a land in which Yahweh had promised them that they would dwell in safety and blessing for ever. So the promises were put in terms of that land to meet with their aspirations. But there are clear indications that something even more splendid was in mind as we shall see. The land could never finally give them the fullness of what God was promising them, and once the temple moved into Heaven, ‘the land’ would move there too.

But we should perhaps here, in fairness to other commentators, pause to recognise that there are actually a number of main views (with variations) with regard to these chapters, which we ought to all too briefly consider for the sake of completeness, so as to present a full picture. As we consider them readers must judge for themselves which one best fits all the facts, remembering what we have already seen in Ezekiel the details of a vision that reaches beyond the confines of an earthly land. We must recognise too that accepting one does not necessarily mean that we have to fully reject the others, for prophecy is not limited to a single event, but to the ongoing action and purposes of God. Nevertheless we cannot avoid the fact that one view must be predominant

1) Some have considered that what Ezekiel predicted was fulfilled when the exiles returned and re-established themselves in the land, rebuilding the physical temple and restoring the priesthood. However nothing that actually took place after the return from Babylon matches the full details of these predictions. Neither the temple built under Zerubbabel’s supervision, nor the temple erected by Herod the Great, bore any resemblance to what Ezekiel describes here. In fact, there has been no literal fulfilment of these predictions. And there does not seem to have been a desire for it. Thus this view disregards many of the main facts outlined and dismisses them as unimportant. It sees them as mainly misguided optimism or permissible exaggeration.

2) Others have interpreted this section spiritually. They have seen these predictions as fulfilled in a spiritual sense in the church, and certainly the New Testament to a certain extent confirms this view. Consider for example the use of the idea in chapter 47 in Joh 7:38. But many consider that this approach fails to explain the multitude of details given, such as the dimensions of the various rooms in the temple complex. They point out that Ezekiel’s guide was careful to make sure that the prophet recorded these details exactly (Eze 40:4). The reply would be that what they indicate symbolically is God’s detailed concern for His people. This view presupposes that the church supersedes the old Israel in God’s programme (as many believe that the New Testament teaches) and that many of God’s promises concerning a future for Israel find part of their actual fulfilment in the church as God’s temple and as the new Israel, symbolically rather than literally. There is certainly some truth in this position.

3) Still others believe that these chapters describe a yet future, eschatological temple and everlasting kingdom in line with Eze 37:24-28, and following 38-39, but that they again do so only symbolically. These interpreters believe that the measurements, for example, represent symbolic truth concerning the coming everlasting kingdom, including the dwelling of God among His people, the establishing of true and pure worship, and the reception by His people of all that He has promised them in fuller measure than they can ever have expected, but they do not look for a literal temple complex and the establishment of temple worship. Indeed they consider that such would be a backward step in the progress of God’s purposes.

It is claimed by those who disagree with them that this view also overlooks the amount of detail given, so much detail, they would claim, that one could almost use these chapters as general blueprints to build the structures in view. To this the reply is partly that the detail is in fact not sufficient to prepare efficient blueprints, and partly that they bear their own message. Indeed they argue that all the many attempts to make a reliable blueprint have failed. If taken literally, they argue, there are problems with the detail that cannot be surmounted. They are therefore far better seen as depictions of the concern of God for perfection for His people.

4) Still others also take this passage as a an apocalyptic prophecy but anticipate a literal fulfilment in the future. While they accept that some of the descriptions have symbolic significance as well as literal reality, and that some teach important spiritual lessons, and can also be applied to the eternal state, nevertheless, they argue, the revelation finally concerns details of a literal future temple to be built to these specifications, details of a system of worship and priesthood which will be literally established, and actual physical changes in the promised land, which will occur when a people identifying themselves specifically as Israel, not the church, dwell there securely (i.e. during what they call the Millennium).

Those who disagree with them point among other things to the impracticality of the plans for the temple, the impossibility of now establishing a genuine Zadokite priesthood, the contradiction of establishing a system of sacrifices when the New Testament points to a better sacrifice, made once for all, which has replaced all others, the discrepancies and difficulties with regard to the siting of the temple, and the unfeasability of dividing the land in the way described.

5) And finally there is the view that we are proposing here, that the Temple of Ezekiel was never intended to be built by man, but was rather a genuine and real presence of the heavenly temple which was from this time present invisibly on earth (invisible to all but Ezekiel, as the armies of God were present but invisible to all but Elisha –2Ki 6:17). It is saying that God has established Himself in His own invisible temple in the land ready to carry out His campaign into the future. This can then be seen as connected with the temple seen in Revelation in heaven, with the earthly temples to be built as but a shadow of the heavenly, and with the final temple in the everlasting kingdom. The strength of this position will appear throughout the commentary. Suffice to say at this point that there is nowhere in the chapters any suggestion that the temple should be built from the description presented (in complete contrast with the tabernacle – Exo 25:40). And this is even more emphatically so because instructions  are  given to build an altar for worship. Given Ezekiel’s visionary insight this fact in itself should make us hesitate in seeing this as any but a visionary temple already present in Israel at the time of measuring.

Whatever view we take we cannot deny that the New Testament does see God’s temple as being present on earth in His people (Eph 2:20-22; 1Co 3:16-17 ; 2Co 6:16; Rev 11:1), and that John in Revelation refers throughout to a temple in Heaven, and to a new Jerusalem, clearly related to some of the things described in these chapters. Furthermore his description of the eternal state, of life in ‘the new earth’ after the destruction of the present earth, is partly based on chapter 47-48 (Revelation 21-22). And we might see that as suggesting that once the Messiah had been rejected God’s heavenly temple was thought of as having deserted Israel, and as having gone up into Heaven where it was seen by John, although still being represented on earth, no longer by a building, but by His new people.

Bearing all this in mind we will now consider the text.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Israel’s Glorification Eze 35:1 to Eze 48:35 deals with the topic of Israel’s glorification. The description of the restored land of Israel and the new Temple and its worship (36-48) reveals a building and nation more majestic and beautiful that that found during the time of Solomon. These passages reveal the glorification that God has in planned for His people Israel. This glorification is different than what He has planned for the Church. The prophecies of this passage signify the fact that God has a much greater blessing in store for His people than any earthly kingdom in the past, even greater than Israel in its golden age of King Solomon. The future glories of the heavenly kingdom will far exceed the earthly. The Book of Jubilees (4.26-27) tells us that this Mount Zion will be sanctified in the new creation for a sanctification of the earth; through it will the earth be sanctified from all (its) guilt and its uncleanness throughout the generations of the world.

From these last chapters in the book of Ezekiel we know that the full restoration of Israel involves three key events that will take place in order to make their restoration complete and everlasting. These events will involve the restoration of Israel as a nation (36-37), the battle against Gog and its allies (38-39), and the restoration of the Temple and its worship (40-46) and its land (47-48).

Here is a proposed outline:

1. Judgment upon Edom Eze 35:1-15

2. The Restoration of Israel as a Nation Eze 36:1 to Eze 37:28

3. The Battle against Gog and its Allies Eze 38:1 to Eze 39:23

4. The Restoration of the Temple and its Worship and Land Eze 40:1 to Eze 48:35

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Restoration of the Temple Eze 40:1 to Eze 46:24 deals with the issue of the restoration of the Temple in Jerusalem.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Various Sacrifices

v. 1. Thus saith the Lord God, The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days, just like the outer portal, 44:1; but on the Sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon, another day of peculiar sanctity, it shall be opened.

v. 2. And the prince shall enter by the way of the porch of that gate without, from the outer court, and shall stand by the post of the gate, by a pillar of the gate leading to the Court of the Priests, and the priests shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace-offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate, offering his prayers from that point; then he shall go forth, returning the same way in which he had come; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening. “As, on the one hand, the prince is unreservedly acknowledged in his special exaltation, so, on the other, his rights appear in due limitation, in reference to encroachment of any kind on the priestly prerogatives. ” (Haevernick. )

v. 3. Likewise the people of the land shall worship at the door of this gate before the Lord, through which they could get a glimpse of the altar of burnt offering and of the priests engaged in the work of their ministry, in the Sabbaths and in the new moons, thus partaking in all the privileges granted the prince, but at a greater distance.

v. 4. And the burnt offering that the prince shall offer unto the Lord in the Sabbath-day shall be six lambs without blemish, and a ram without blemish. “The offerings on the Sabbaths are larger than those of the Mosaic Law, to imply that the worship of God is to be conducted by prince and people in a more munificent spirit of self-sacrificing liberality than formerly. ”

v. 5. And the meat-offering, usually in the form of flour, shall be an ephah for a ram, also an increase of that of the Mosaic dispensation, and the meat-offering for the lambs as he shall be able to give, with correspondingly increased faithfulness and devotion, and an hin of oil to an ephah, this again representing an advance over the ancient rites.

v. 6. And in the day of the new moon it shall be a young bullock without blemish and six lambs and a ram, this sacrifice presenting a decrease over that formerly required, Num 28:11-12; they shall be without blemish.

v. 7. And he shall prepare a meat-offering, an ephah for a bullock and an ephah for a ram, and for the lambs according as his hand shall attain unto, the factor of voluntary sacrifices standing out prominently throughout the passage, and an hin of oil to an ephah.

v. 8. And when the prince shall enter, he shall go in by the way of the porch of that gate, and he shall go forth by the way thereof, this repetition of verse 2 serving to connect the next ordinances with those pertaining to the Sabbaths and new moons.

v. 9. But when the people of the land shall come before the Lord in the solemn feasts, at the set time and assembling of the congregation, he that entereth in by the way of the north gate to worship shall go out by the way of the south gate, to prevent disorder and tumult; and he that entereth by the way of the south gate shall go forth by the way of the north gate; he shall not return by the way of the gate whereby he came In, but shall go forth over against it, so that all confusion might be avoided at the time of divine worship, for our God is a God of order.

v. 10. And the prince in the midst of them, joining the great throng of worshipers as one of them, when they go in, shall go in, Psa 42:4; and when they go forth, shall go forth. We have here a “beautiful picture of a religious people: the highest in rank freely mingling with the mass of worshipers and inspiriting their devotions by the elevating influence of his presence and example. ”

v. 11. And in the feasts and in the solemnities, when there are two festival days in succession, the meat-offering shall be an ephah to a bullock and an ephah to a ram and to the lambs as he is able to give, and an hin of oil to an ephah, the factor of voluntary offerings once more appearing at this point.

v. 12. Now, when the prince shall prepare a voluntary burnt offering or peace-offerings voluntarily unto the Lord, by reason of special inward impulse, a joyful readiness to serve the Lord, one shall then open him the gate that looketh toward the east, and he shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace-offerings, as he did on the Sabbath-day, this rule therefore applying to all festivals; then he shall go forth, and after his going forth one shall shut the gate, so that the rule concerning its being closed would always be observed. The passage rightly sets forth the fine rivalry which may exist between the various ranks and classes of people in their acts of homage and adoration to God.

v. 13. Thou shalt daily prepare a burnt offering unto the Lord, as by the Mosaic ordinances, Exo 29:38; Num 28:3, of a lamb of the first year without blemish; thou shalt prepare it every morning, literally, “morning for morning. ”

v. 14. And thou shalt prepare a meat-offering for it every morning, Cf Lev 2:6; Lev 2:14-16, the sixth part of an ephah and the third part of an hin of oil, to temper with the fine flour, for the sacrificial cakes; a meat-offering continually by a perpetual ordinance unto the Lord. If the evening sacrifice was thus to he discontinued, the increase of the meat-offering in the morning was probably intended to compensate for it.

v. 15. Thus shall they prepare the lamb and the meat-offering and the oil every morning for a continual burnt offering. The considerable, in part radical, departures from the Mosaic ordinances almost throughout again indicate that the entire description is symbolical of the Messianic era, when the essence of worship would be voluntary homage to the Lord.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

This chapter fails into three divisions. The first (Eze 46:1-15) gives supplementary directions for the prince and the people of the land when engaged in solemn acts of worship; the second (Eze 46:16-18) furnishes the prince with instructions as to how he may dispose of his portion or inheritance; the third (Eze 46:19-24) adds particulars about the sacrificial kitchens for the priests and for the people.

Eze 46:1-15

The supplementary directions contained in these verses relate to the worship of the prince and the people on the sabbaths and the new moons (Eze 46:1-7) and at the appointed feasts generally (Eze 46:5-15).

Eze 46:1

Like the preceding sections which introduced distinctly new enactments in Ezekiel’s Torah (see Eze 44:9; Eze 45:9, Eze 45:18), this properly opens with a Thus saith the Lord God, since it refers to the worship that should be celebrated at the gate of the inner court which looketh toward the east. Ewald, after the LXX. ( ), changes the text so as to read the outer court gate, and understands the statement here made to be a qualification of that contained in Eze 44:1-3. It is, however, the inner east gate to which the present clause alludes, and the announce-meat made concerning it is that, like the outer east gate, it should be shut on the six working days; literally, the six days of the business; but that, unlike the outer east gate, it should be opened on the sabbath (literally, in the day of the sabbath) and in the day of the new moon, both of which clays had been marked under the Law, and should in future continue to be marked, by special sacrificial celebrations.

Eze 46:2

The reason for the opening of this inner east gate should be that the prince might enter it as far as its threshold, and stand there worshipping by the posts of the gate, while his burnt offerings and his peace offerings were being prepared by the priests, who, rather than the prince, were the proper ministers for conducting the sacrificial ceremony. The prince should reach his station at the threshold of the inner gate, by the way of the porch of that (or, the) gate without; but whether this signified that he should pass through the eastern gate of the outer court, and so advance towards the inner east gate, as Ewald, Keil, Kliefoth, and Plumptre assume, or, as Hengstenberg, Schroder, and Smend suppose, that he should enter the inner gate by the way of the porch of the gate, i.e. from the outside, from the outer court into which he had previously entered through either the north or the south outer gates, cannot be decided. In favor of the former may be urged the consideration that it seems more natural to apply to the outer gate than to the outer court, since no, one could enter the inner gate except from the outer court, unless he were already in the inner court; but in favor of the latter is

(1) the stringent character of the language in Eze 44:1-3, which expressly declares that the outer east gate should not be opened, and that no man should enter in by it, thus scarcely admitting of an exception; and

(2) the statement in Eze 44:9, Eze 44:10 of the present chapter, that in the “appointed feasts” the prince and the people alike should enter the outer court either by the north or the south gate, since, if any of these “feasts” fell upon a sabbath, this regulation would not be practicable, if the prince and the people were required to enter by different doors. The question, however, in itself is immaterial. The points of importance are that the prince should worship in the porch of the inner gate, and that, on finishing his worship, he should retire, and that the gate should not be shut; until the evening.

Eze 46:3

Likewise (or, and) to the people of the land should be accorded permission to worship at this inner gate, only not like the prince, in its porch, but at its door, yet on the same occasions as he, in the sabbaths and in the new moons. Kliefoth, who takes “this gate” to signify the outer gate, through which, according to his interpretation of Eze 46:2 (see above), the prince should pass so as to reach the inner east gate, conceives the import of the present verse to be that, while the prince should be permitted on the sabbaths and new moons to pass through the eastern gate, the people “should remain standing in front of the outer east gate, and, looking through it and the opened inner east gate, should pray before Jehovah.” This, however, is unnatural, even on the hypothesis that the prince should pass through the outer east gate, and the view of Keil is greatly preferable, that “this gate” was the inner east gate, and that the people should reach it (even if the prince did not) by entering the outer court through the north gate or the south.

Eze 46:4, Eze 46:5

describe the sacrifices the prince should offer unto the Lord on the sabbaths.

(1) A burnt offering of six lambs and a ram, all without blemish. The Mosaic Law, or so-called priests’ code, demanded two yearling lambs (Num 28:9).

(2) A meat offering, consisting of an ephah of fine flour for a ram, and for the lambs as he shall be able to give; literally, a gift of his handnot a handful, but, as Eze 46:7 explains, what his hand can attain unto (comp. Le 14:31; 25:26), i.e. as much as he can, with a hin of oil to an ephah, for which again the Law required two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mingled with oil (Num 28:9).

Eze 46:6, Eze 46:7

specify the corresponding sacrifices for the new moons.

(1) A burnt offering of a young bullock without blemish, six lambs, and a ram, with which may be compared the two bullocks, one ram, and seven lambs of the Mosaic Torah (Num 28:11-15).

(2) A meat (or, meal) offering of an ephah for the bullock, an ephah for the ram, and for the lambs according as his hand shall attain unto (comp. Eze 46:5; and the similar expressions in Le Eze 5:7, Eze 5:11; Eze 12:8), with a hin of oil to an ephah. This also is less than that which had been demanded by the Law, viz. three-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mingled with oil for each bullock, two-tenths for the ram and one-tenth for every lamb (Num 28:11-15). The Torah of Ezekiel omits the sin offering of a he-goat, which had a place in the Torah of Moses.

Eze 46:8

begins an ordinance relative to the mode of conducting worship at the appointed festivals (Eze 46:9; comp. Eze 36:38; Eze 45:17; Le Eze 23:2; Hos 12:9), by indicating first how the prince should enter and depart from the temple. According to Kliefoth and Keil, the prince’s entrance and departure should be by the way of the porch of the outer, according to Hengstenberg, Smend, and Currey, of the inner, east gate (see on Eze 46:2).

Eze 46:9

But when the people of the land shall come before the Lord. As the preceding verse referred to the prince’s entrance into and departure from the inner gate, this was intended to regulate the movements of the prince’s subjects when they should enter the outer court at any of the festal seasonsnot the high festivals alone, such as the Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles, which are usually denominated , but the ordinary appointed feasts (), including, besides the high festivals, the sabbaths and the new moons and such other religions celebrations as were or should be prescribed in the new Torah. In order to prevent confusion, and that all might be conducted with propriety, no one should depart by the gate through which he had entered, but by the opposite, i.e. he who had entered by the north gate should retire through the south gate, and vice versa. Hengstenberg thinks the reason for this regulation “cannot be sought in the endeavor to avoid a throng,” since “in that case it must have been ordained that all should go in by the same gate and go out by the opposite one;” it must, he holds, have been “a theological one,” viz. “to signify that each should go out of the sanctuary another man than he came in.”

Eze 46:10

And the prince in the midst of them, when they go in, shall go in, etc. Schroder, but without reason, would restrict this regulation to the celebrations of the first and seventh days of the first month (Eze 45:18, Eze 45:20); Hengstenberg would confine it to the high festivals (Eze 45:21, Eze 45:25); Kliefoth, Keil, and commentators generally apply it to all the statutory feasts or appointed seasons and times for united sacrificial worship. The regulation seems to teach that in such observances at least the prince should stand on a level with the people, and both enter and retire by the same door as they.

Eze 46:11

specifies the meat (or, meal) offering which should be presented in the feasts (), or high festivals, as the Passover and Feast of Tabernacles, and in the solemnities (), or appointed feasts generally, viz. an ephah to a bullock, and an ephah to a ram, and to the lambs as he is able to give (comp. Eze 46:5, Eze 46:7), with a hin of oil to an ephah. This is the same meat offering as was appointed for the new moons (see Eze 46:7), but slightly different in quantity from, though the same in principle as, that stipulated for the seven days of the Passover (Eze 45:24).

Eze 46:12

determines the procedure in case of the prince resolving to offer privately, on his own account, a voluntary burnt offering or peace offering; better, a free-will offering (), a sacrifice prompted by the heart of the offerer, as opposed to one legally enjoined (Exo 35:29; Le Exo 22:23), which might be either a burnt or a peace offering. In this case the east inner gate should be opened to him as on the sabbath days (see Eze 46:1), but, differently from what occurred on the sabbath, it should not remain open till the evening (Eze 46:2), but should be shut immediately the prince’s offering was done.

Eze 46:13-15

supply closing instructions for the daily sacrifice. The daily burnt offering should be a lamb of the first year; literally, a son of his year; whereas the Law of Moses required a lamb twice a day (Exo 29:38-42; Num 28:1-8). The daily meat (or, meal) offering to accompany this should be the sixth part of an ephah, instead of a tenth as under Moses, and the third part of a hin of oil, instead of a fourth as prescribed by the earlier legislation, to temper with (from , a word peculiar to Ezekiel), to moisten or mix withthe fine flour. These sacrifices should be offered every morning; literally, morning by morning; but not every evening as in the Mosaic Law. This difference was not accidental, but intentional, though why in the new order of things the evening sacrifice should have been omitted does not appear. Currey thinks Ezekiel did not intend to enumerate all the sacrifices of the Law, but only a few of them, and that, though not mentioned, the evening sacrifice may have been designed to be retained. The presentation of these sacrifices was not to be the special duty of the prince, but should devolve upon the community as a whole, who are now addressed as “thou” (verses 13, 14) and “they” (verse 15), and who should act in its fulfillment through their priests.

Eze 46:16-18

Instructions for the prince as to how he should deal with his property are summarized in three regulations, introduced by the solemn formula of “Thus saith the Lord” (comp. Eze 46:1; Eze 45:9).

Eze 46:16

The first regulation. The prince might dispose of a portion of his royal property (see Eze 45:7, Eze 45:8) by presenting part of it as a gift to any of his sons. In this case what was gifted should belong to his son or sons in perpetuity, should be his or theirs as his or their possession by inheritance; it should never again revert to the prince.

Eze 46:17

The second regulation. Should the prince, however, bestow a portion of his inheritance on one of his servants, what was thus bestowed should not belong to that servant in perpetuity, but should be regarded simply as a temporary loan which should be his till the year of liberty, , i.e. the year of free flowing generalcomp. Exo 30:23, , pure myrrh (Authorized Version) or flowing myrrh (Revised Version)hence the year of release; after which it should return to the prince. Smend thinks Ezekiel could hardly have had in view the year of jubilee (Le Eze 25:10; Eze 27:24), else he would not have employed the term “liberty,” which Jeremiah (Jer 34:8, Jer 34:15, Jer 34:17) uses to denote the freedom regained by Hebrew bondmen in the seventh year (Exo 21:2; Deu 15:12). But

(1) the seventh year was only a year of the release of bondmen, not of the reversion of property, and to this rather than to that Ezekiel refers.

(2) The year of jubilee might properly be called the “year of liberty,” since in it both slaves were emancipated and property was liberated. And

(3) Ezekiel’s phraseology is not framed (nor is Jeremiah’s) in imitation of either Exodus or Deuteronomy, the latter of which in particular speaks of “the year of release” ( ), but adheres closely to the style of Leviticus, which, in fact, it presupposes. can only signify the year of the release, i.e. the well-known year of emancipation. The last clause should be rendered, as in the Revised Version, “As for his inheritance (generally), it shall be for his sons,” or, as Keil translates, “Only his inheritance it is,” i.e. the prince’s; “as for his sons, it shall be for them.”

Eze 46:18

The third regulation. The prince in all cases should endow his sons (or others) out of his own, and not out of his subjects’ possessions, of which they have been violently robbed. A good rule for other princes besides this, and for owners of property in general

Eze 46:19-24

The sacrificial kitchens for the priests and for the people. This passage has been transferred by Ewald to Eze 42:1-20; and inserted after Eze 42:14; but the Exposition will show it must have originally stood where it is.

Eze 46:19

After (or, and) hei.e. the measuring man, who had hitherto acted as the prophet’s conductorbrought me through the entry, which was at the side of the gate. This was the inner north gate, from which the prophet had been conducted to the front of the house in order to receive the sacrificial Torah (Eze 44:4), and to which, when this was finished, he had been seemingly led back. From this gate, then, he was taken by his guide along the entry or passage (Eze 42:9), which ran towards and extended in front of the holy chambers of (or, for) the priests, which looked toward the north, and which had already been described (Eze 42:1-14). Arrived at the western corner of the chambers, he perceived a place on the two sidesor, on the hinder part (Revised Version)westward. The translation in the Authorized Version was obviously suggested by the dual form , which properly signifies “on both sides” but when applied to the tabernacle (Exo 26:23) or temple (1Ki 6:16), always describes the back part or rear. That a similar “place” existed on the south side is more than probable; though Smend thinks there was not a “place” on the south. The LXX. omits the words after “place,” and supplies , “separated.” Keil finds in the description here given of the passage towards the holy chambers a proof that this section could not have steed originally after Eze 42:14, as in that ease no such description would have been needed. Nor would the language in Eze 47:1, “and he brought me back,” have been required or appropriate had the prophet not in the mean while changed his place, which he does to visit the holy chambers.

Eze 46:20

The “place” was designed as a kitchen where the priests should boil the trespass and the sin offerings and bake the meat (or, meal) offering, i.e. cook the portions of the sacrifices they should eat in their official capacity (see Eze 42:13). The Law of Moses (Le 8:31) required the flesh to be boiled (and probably also the flour to be baked) at the tabernacle door. The last clause, that they, i.e. the priests, bear them, i.e. the offerings, not out into the utter (or, outer) court, to sanctify the people, is by most interpreters understood in the sense of Eze 44:19 (which see). To this, however, Kliefoth objects that the conception of deriving ceremonial sanctity from contact with such offerings is completely strange to the Old Testament (see Hag 2:12), and accordingly he connects the words. “to sanctify the people,” with the “baking” and “boiling” of the preceding clause.

Eze 46:21, Eze 46:22

The prophet next observed, as his guide led him round the outer area, that in every corner of the court there was a courtliterally, a court in a corner of the court, a court in a corner of the courtand hat these were courts joined of forty cubits long and thirty broad. The word “joined” ) has been variously translated: by Gesenins (see ‘Hebrews Lex.,’ sub voce), as “vaulted” or “roofed,” with which Hitzig seems to agree; by the LXX; whom Bottcher and Ewald follow, , equal to contracts; by Kliefoth, “uncovered;” by Havernick, “firm,” “strongly built;” by Smend,” separated;” by Hengstenberg and Schroder, after the Talmudists (fumum exhalantia), “smoking” or “made with chimneys”; but is probably best rendered by the Revised Version, Keil, Currey, after Gesenius, “enclosed,” meaning muris cineta et januis elausa. According to the last clause of Eze 46:22, these four corners were of one measure; or, one measure was to the four cut-away places, i.e. corners, being the hoph. participle of , “to cut off.” This last word is omitted in the LXX. and the Vulgate, Hitzig, and Smend, the puncta extraordinaria showing that the Massorites regarded it as suspicious.

Eze 46:23

And there was a row of building round about in them; but whether meant a “wall,” “fence,” or “enclosure,” as Gesenius, Havernick, and Ewald translate, or “row,” “series,” “a shelf of brickwork which had several separate shelves under which the cooking-hearths were placed,” as Keil explains, the obvious intention was to describe the range of boiling places which were built along the inside walls of these corner courts, as the next verse states.

Eze 46:24

These are the places (literally, houses) of them that boilhence kitchenswhere the ministers of the house (or, romple)e.g. the Levites (see Eze 44:11, Eze 44:12)shall boil the sacrifice of the people; i.e. the portions of the people’s offerings which fall to be consumed by the priests.

HOMILETICS

Eze 46:3

The people’s worship.

Although there was an elaborate hierarchical system in the Hebrew religion, care was taken that the people generally should take an important part in the service. They were not admitted to the most sacred parts of the temple enclosure, but they were expected to come up to the temple and share in its worship.

I. GOD LOOKS FOR THE PEOPLE‘S WORSHIP. If this was expected under the Law, much more is it looked for in the gospel dispensation, according to which all the Lord’s people are priests, and all are admitted to the most holy place through the rent veil God has personal dealings with each soul, and it is right for each soul to come up before him in grateful adoration. The service in which the people do not take part cannot be said to be of much use to them. It is true that there is value in intercession, and we should all plead one for another. Still, we cannot grant to any priest a power of attorney to execute our religious contracts in our stead.

II. THE PEOPLE CAN ENJOY WORSHIP. When the heart is in it, no joy on earth can be more rich and full.

“Lord, how delightful ’tis to see
A whole assembly worship thee!”

The dreariness of Sunday just arises from the fact that so many people who go to church really take no part in the service. It must be wearisome to sit as spectator of a feast of which one does not partake. But when once a living interest is taken in the worship, and the spectator becomes a guest at the table, the whole character of the scene is changed, and the joy of worship is experienced. Then it is possible to say, “How amiable are thy tabernacles, O Lord of hosts! my soul longeth, yea, even fainteth for the courts of the Lord;” and “I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord.”

III. WORSHIP SHOULD BE ADAPTED TO THE PEOPLE. It may not be possible to make it all that we would desire in form and external expression. Indeed, popular worship can never reach the standard of fastidious aestheticism. In trying to satisfy the refined taste of one or two cultured persons, we may simply destroy the means of worship for the majority of a congregation. In that case the service, while it reaches the perfection of art, loses its spiritual character and degenerates into a mere musical performance. We should always bear in mind the practical end of worship, always see that it is in touch with the people and expresses and helps the devotion of the congregation generally. The church should be the people’s home of worship, not the shrine of a privileged aristocracy. Christ was one of the people.

IV. WORSHIP MUST NOT BE DEGRADED IN ORDER THAT IT MAY BE MADE POPULAR. There is considerable danger of running into this opposite extreme in the effort to attract and interest the indifferent. But then the whole object is defeated. We may get the people and amuse them for a while, but what is the use of doing so if we sacrifice the great end of assembling togetherthe reverent adoration of the holy God? Fine art may be sacrificed, but spiritual reality must be retained. Religion, the essence of which is reverence, cannot be helped by mere vulgarity. The people’s worship must be worship.

Eze 46:10

The Prince in the midst of them.

The center of the glory of restored Israel was to be found in her prince. No prince appeared, however, who was able to accomplish the expectations of prophecy until the advent of Jesus Christ. He is “the Prince in the midst of his people.”

I. CHRIST IS THE PRINCE OF HIS PEOPLE.

1. He is one of them. The Jew’s Prince was a Jew, not a foreigner. Christ is “the Firstborn among many brethren.” He is a true Man, the Son of man. He has been over the Christian course, and has himself lived the pattern Christian life.

2. He is their Head. Christ stoops to save, but he rises again to rule. Even during his earthly humiliation he plainly took the lead among his disciples. Now he is seated on his throne in heaven, reigning over his Church.

II. CHRIST IS IN THE MIDST OF HIS PEOPLE. During his earthly ministry he dwelt among men. Unlike John the Baptist, who retired to the solitude of the wilderness and to whom people had to come by leaving their homes, Jesus went about through the towns and villages of Israel, eating and drinking with all sorts and conditions of men. Although he is no longer visible, we have his assurance that he will be always with his true disciples (Mat 28:20). Christ does not simply visit his people in moments of great need; he is always with them. He does not select some choice followers for his companionship, to the neglect of the great body of his people, like a prince who enjoys himself with his courtiers and takes little or no notice of the bulk of the nation. Jesus is in the midst of his people, right in the center of the population of the kingdom of heaven.

III. CHRIST ENTERS INTO HIS PEOPLE‘S WORSHIP. When the people go in, i.e. to the temple, the Prince shall go in. The Prince must worship with his people. Prince and peasant must bow together before their common Lord. Every purely human prince needs to confess his sins as a penitent and to utter the publican’s prayer, “God be merciful to me a sinner!” Christ the sinless cannot take part in our confession except by sympathy. But he is with us throughout our worship. Christian worship at its highest is communion with Christ. In that most sacred act of worship, the Lord’s Supper, we seek especially for the living presence of Christ. For surely every Protestant must admit that there is a real Presencenot in the bread or winebut in the hearts of Christ’s worshipping people.

IV. CHRIST GOES WITH HIS PEOPLE INTO THE WORLD. When the people go forth their Prince is to accompany them. It would be sad if Christ only met his people in their worship. He is more needed in work, in temptation, in trouble. Christ is with us in the world as well as in the Church. He does not confine his sympathy to ecclesiastical circles. But when we have some hard task to accomplish or some severe trial to face his presence may be especially looked for. The good leader will be in the thick of the fight, cheering his soldiers just where the battle is hottest. Our Captain of salvation accompanies us in the holy war against sin. If courage fails, this should be our cheering thoughtthe Prince is in the midst of us!

Eze 46:13

The homing sacrifice.

I. THE MORNING SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO GOD. Then especially worship is fitting. It is sad to begin the day without prayer. But the fresh morning devotion has a preciousness of its own.

1. Then we awake from sleep. It is happy indeed to wake to some good thought of God. He has preserved us through the long hours of darkness. New strength has come by refreshing rest, and this is God’s gift. Therefore grateful thoughts should rise with morning worship.

2. Then we commence a new day. Has the fig tree been fruitless hitherto? Yet in his long-suffering patience the Master has not cut it down. Here is another opportunity for fruit-bearing. Shall this new one be wasted as were so many of bygone clays?

“Lo! here hath been dawning

Another blue day:

Think, wilt thou let it

Slip useless away?

Out of eternity

This new day is born;

Into eternity

At night will return.

“Behold it aforetime

No eye ever did;

So soon it forever

From all eyes is hid.”
(Carlyle.)

II. EVERY NEW MORNING SHOULD BE DEDICATED ANEW. We may think we have dedicated our lives to God. Yet we need to renew the dedicationto dedicate our clays as well as our years. Every day brings its fresh duties, and these need the grace of Christ, that they may be rightly discharged. Every day also brings its new temptations. We cannot live today in the grace of yesterday. The manna fell daily to feed the Israelites in the wilderness, and it would not bear keeping for the morrow. Christ teaches us to pray for daily bread: “Give us this day our daily bread.”

III. THE BEST DEDICATION OF THE NEW DAY IS BY SACRIFICE. The Israelites dedicated each day with morning burnt offerings. Although we have outgrown the necessity of using these symbolical offerings, we can never outgrow the requirement of sacrifice. It is well to begin the day in the spirit of sacrifice. First there should be the desire to slay all sin and renounce all bad habits. Then comes the positive self-denial and cross-bearing for the sake of Christ. Is there any new sacrifice of love that may be offered on the new day? Throughout the day this thought should pervade the mind of the Christian: “I am a servant of Christ. It is my part today to study my Master’s will, and live for his glory.”

IV. THE DEDICATED DAY WILL BE A BLESSED DAY. It may not see any great event. But it will be a day spent for God, in lowly service, perhaps, yet in holy living. Such a day is one sure stepping-stone towards heaven.

Eze 46:16, Eze 46:17

The son and the servant.

The Jewish Law made careful provision to prevent the alienation of land from the families to which it originally belonged. The son might inherit permanently; but the servant could only receive a gift of land for a time, which would cease at the year of jubilee. Here was a marked distinction between the privileges of sonship and those of service. Now St. Paul draws attention to this distinction from another point of view, when contrasting, the gospel with the Law. There is a religion of worship, and one of service.

I. THE LIFE OF WORSHIP HAS A PERMANENT INHERITANCE. This is the case with the spiritual experience of Christianity.

1. The Christian is a son.

(1) He is begotten by God.

(2) He is adopted by God.

(3) He owns Christ for his Brother.

(4) He is admitted into God’s presence as a child at home.

(5) He has the liberty of a son and his privileges.

“The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him.” God makes his counsels known to true Christians.

2. The son‘s inheritance is permanent.

(1) For life, the grace of God given to the true Christian child will not desert him in after-years if he still looks for it and follows its guidance. God does not treat his people as the favorites of a day, whom a prince pampers while the whim is on him, and then capriciously flings aside; his favor is enduring like his eternal love.

(2) After death. The Christian inheritance is but tasted on earth; the better part of it awaits us beyond the grave. It is like the inheritance of Israel, a small part of which was on the coast of the Jordan, while that river had to be crossed before the main portion could be reached. “Godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come” (1Ti 4:8). We do not resign our Christian inheritance when we lie down to die; on the contrary, then we prepare to enter into the Promised Land in all its length and breadth.

II. THE LIFE OF SERVITUDE HAS BUT TEMPORARY PRIVILEGES.

1. The promises of the Mosaic religion were for this world, as Bishop Warburton proved with redundancy of argument, in his famous book on the ‘ Divine Legation of Moses’ Therefore the Jew stood below the Christian in regard to his prospects of future good. But there are far lower lives of servitude than that of the pious Jew.

2. Christ spoke of the slavery of sin (Joh 8:34). Now, this degraded servitude has its rewards. Sin gives gifts to its slaves. But they are not enduring possessions.

3. The bondage of worldliness holds many men. This thraldom promises great rewards. Riches and pleasures come in its train. The chains are forged of gold, and at first the weight of them is not felt. But the rewards of sin and worldliness are of brief duration. Their fruits may be sweet at first, but the after-taste of them is unendurably bitter. Even if no disappointment is met on earth, the worldly inheritance must be resigned at death. The slave of sin and the world can carry none of his treasures with him to the unseen future.

Eze 46:18

A warning to the great.

I. THE GREAT ARE RESPONSIBLE TO GOD. The prince is the leader and supreme ruler of Israel. His rank and privilege lift him into the most exalted position. Yet he is responsible to God, and his duty is definitely marked out for him. Even the most “irresponsible” ruler of a despotic state cannot escape from responsibility in the sight of Heaven. Prince as well as peasant will have to give account of himself before the judgment-seat of God. Moreover, God directs and controls the movements of the most powerful earthly magnates. He who said to the sea, “Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further; and here shall thy proud waves be stayed,” “put his hooks” in the proud ruler of Egypt (Eze 29:4).

II. THE GREAT ARE TEMPTED TO EXCEED THEIR RIGHTS. Men who enjoy the largest scope and who own the widest possessions must come to the confines of their territory. The biggest park has its fence. Now, a common temptation is to despise the best things within a man’s right, in envy for what lies beyond them. Thus, with all the wealth of the royal demesne, Ahab is sick with covetousness for Naboth’s vineyard (1Ki 21:4). The possession of considerable power aggravates the temptation of the great to go beyond their rights. It is difficult for the despot to avoid degenerating into a tyrant.

III. THE GREAT ARE WARNED AGAINST OPPRESSING THE PEOPLE. The danger of power passing over to tyranny is the besetting temptation of persons in influential positions. This danger alone raises a question as to the wisdom of entrusting overmuch power even to the best men. In the abstract, an irresistible paternal government might seem to be likely to secure the greatest good of a nation. But for this to be satisfactory we must not only endue the ruler with supreme wisdom, we must also eliminate from his character every atom of selfishness.

IV. THE GREAT ARE NOT MORE FAVORED BY GOD THAN ARE OTHER PEOPLE. They have unique privileges, but these are bestowed in the form of a solemn trust. God is no respecter of persons. He cares for all his children. He is the people’s God, and the Friend of the poor. They who can find no earthly protector may look to Heaven for deliverance, for he who heard the cry of the Hebrews when they groaned under the oppression of the Egyptian bondage, and saved them from Pharaoh and his host, is still mighty to help the needy.

V. GOD‘S EQUAL GRACE FOR THE PEOPLE AS WELL AS THE GREAT SHOULD LEAD ALL TO TRUST HIM. If God only favored the so-called privileged classes, the multitude might well turn aside from religion in despair. But since God has ever been on the side of the oppressed, and has ever cared for the people, it is foolish to distrust him, and ungrateful to disregard his goodness. Whatever else the great may seize upon, they cannot take away the poor man’s religion. Here is a prize of permanent possession. It would be well if all knew and loved the God who cares for all.

HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON

Eze 46:3

Worship.

The prophet, having described by anticipation the sacred city and temple, having represented the several duties of prince, priest, and people, having given regulations for sacrifices and festivals, now proceeds to depict the sacred services for which all this preparation has been undertaken. The rulers of the nation, the ministers of religion, and the people of the land are beheld uniting in the solemn function of spiritual worship. This is the loftiest exercise of the Church, whether upon earth or in heaven. The worship of the individual soul yields in beauty and in grandeur to that sacrifice of worship in which multitudes, willingly, gratefully, and joyfully unite.

I. THE OBJECT OF WORSHIP IS GOD ONLY. In this a distinction existed between Israel and the heathen people around; for whilst these worshipped gods many and lords many, the chosen people worshipped Jehovah, and him alone. In the Church of Christ, whilst many of the great and holy in former times are remembered with gratitude and veneration, worship, in the strict and proper sense of the term, is reserved for the Supreme and Eternal, who shares his honor with none beside. His glorious perfections demand the homage and adoration of his intelligent creatures; and the more his character is studied, the more will it appear worthy of all the admiration and reverence which can be brought into his sacred presence.

II. THE WORSHIPPERS ARE THE CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD. The great and the small, the young and the old, the learned and the lay, are all qualified to present to the Eternal the spiritual tribute which is his due. For it is in virtue of their humanity, their participation in human nature, experience, and powers, and not in virtue of any peculiar possession or acquisition, that they are summoned to unite in the worship of their Creator. The idea of the prophet was one in a high degree expanded and comprehensive; yet even this fell short of the great reality as apprehended by the Apocalyptic seer.

III. THE SEAT OF ACCEPTABLE WORSHIP IS THE HEART. It is true that this spiritual doctrine is especially that of Christianity, of the New Testament. But the attentive reader of the Psalms and prophecies of the old covenant is aware that the enlightened Hebrews were superior to a merely formal and mechanical view of worship. Sacrifices and offerings were known and felt to be of no avail unless they expressed the deep and sincere emotions of the inner nature. Thus it must ever be; he who is a Spirit must be worshipped in spirit and in truth.

IV. THE CHARACTER OF TRUE WORSHIP CORRESPONDS WITH THE NATURE AND NEED OF THE WORSHIPPERS.

1. There must he acknowledgment of the Divine attributes, contemplated with reverence.

2. There must be humiliation and confession of sin.

3. There must be the presentation of the due offering of gratitude to him from whom all blessings proceed.

4. There must be petitions and intercessions for needed good.

V. THE EXPRESSION AND FORM OF WORSHIP MUST VARY WITH THE INDIVIDUAL WORSHIPPER AND HIS CIRCUMSTANCES. It is narrow bigotry to insist upon one form of spiritual service or of uttered adoration and prayer. There are occasions upon which worship may be spontaneous and ejaculatory; and other occasions upon which it may be elaborate, artistic, and protracted. The worship of the individual who is momentarily touched by what is beautiful in nature, or impressive in the Word of God, is as acceptable as the liturgy of a cathedral service, or as the fervent service of praise in which expression may be given to a nation’s gratitude for signal favors.

VI. THE SEASONS FOR WORSHIP ARE BOTH OCCASIONAL AND CONTINUOUS. The text speaks of the “new moons” and the “sabbaths” as opportunities for solemn and public services of devotion. Yet we read a little later of the daily offering. The truth is that there is no season when worship is unsuitable on the part of man or unacceptable So God. Yet there is wisdom in the appointment both of regular and of special seasons and occasions of worship. None can worship God too much, or too reverently, or too fervently.

“From every place beneath the skies
Let the Creator’s praise arise!
Let the Redeemer’s Name be sung
In every land, by every tongue!”

T.

Eze 46:11

Feasts and solemnities.

In all religions there are instituted festivals and public functions, which serve to manifest and to sustain the religious life of the community. This was especially the case with Judaism, which prescribed many stated solemnities. Even the Christian religion has its appointed sacraments, and, in addition to these, which were instituted by the Divine Founder, the Church has at various periods set apart times and seasons for certain public observances, participation in which has been found conducive to religious earnestness and vitality, as well as to ecclesiastical prosperity.

I. RELIGIOUS FESTIVALS AND SOLEMNITIES ARE JUSTIFIED AS HARMONIZING WITH THE VERY NATURE OF THE HUMAN MIND. It is not in human nature to proceed in one undeviating and monotonous course. Life is best lived when the regular and stated order of things is varied by occasional diversities. As in ordinary existence, so in the religious life, it is well that there should be variety, and that men should be invited to special engagements of a spiritual nature, whether of humiliation or of rejoicing, whether commemorative or anticipatory. Men do not cease to be men because they are Christians, and Christianity is not only compatible with, it is promoted by, special sacred festivals, fasts, and other observances.

II. RELIGIOUS FESTIVALS AND SOLEMNITIES ARE JUSTIFIED BY THE NATURE OF DIVINE INTERPOSITIONS WHICH ARE OCCASIONAL AND SPECIAL. The Jews had, in the course of their national history, experienced wonderful interventions of Divine mercy upon their behalf. And it is evident that the solemnities, which formed so beautiful a feature of the Jewish religion, were for the most part designed to celebrate the great things which God had done for his chosen people. The treatment of the nation by God had not been of a uniform and regular character; and it was natural that there should be a correspondence between the national history and the national religion, between what Jehovah had effected on behalf of his chosen people, and what that people did in acknowledgment of the Divine mercy. Similarly with our Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide; we celebrate the special mercy of God in the advent, the death, and the resurrection of our Savior, and in the fulfillment of “the promise of the Father” in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

III. RELIGIOUS FESTIVALS AND SOLEMNITIES ARE JUSTIFIED BY THE SUCCESSIVE GENERATIONS WHO NEED TO BE IMPRESSED BY THE SAME GREAT SPIRITUAL TRUTHS. With reference to the Jewish Passover, we are expressly assured that one purpose of its observance was to train the rising generation in the reverent memory of the signal favors of God. When the son of the household asked, “What mean ye by this service?” the answer was given that it commemorated the loving-kindness and faithfulness of the God of the Hebrews, who had delivered his chosen people from destruction and assured to them his lasting protection. How much more powerfully was such a lesson taught by such ordinances than by words! The youthful mind is especially impressed by sacred solemnities, and by their observance provision is made that the attention of successive generations shall be directed to the glorious truth that God has visited and redeemed his people.T.

Eze 46:12

A free-will offering.

There were certain sacrifices and offerings which the pious Jew was bound to present. To omit compliance with certain regulations upon these observances would have been disloyalty. But there were other offerings which were optional, which were left to the feelings and to the circumstances of the worshipper. They were only brought when there was an especially lively sense of the Lord’s goodness, and an especial desire to express consecration and devotion. Gifts prompted by gratitude and love are the only gifts which are of value in the sight of him who searcheth and looketh upon the hearers.

I. FREE–WILL OFFERINGS ARE BECOMING ON THE PART OF MAN. Man’s nature is distinguished by the glorious prerogative of liberty. There is for him no moral excellence or beauty in constraint. The heart is free, and it is the only gift which in God’s sight is precious; all other gifts have value so far only as they are the expression of the love and loyalty of the spiritual nature. Whatever is dedicated to God of the worshipper’s free-will is a human and a worthy offering, such as a being with man’s prerogative of liberty may justly offer.

II. FREE–WILL OFFERINGS ARE ACCEPTABLE TO GOD. False religions sometimes extort from devotees, by the motive of terror, gifts and offerings services and sacrifices which would otherwise be withheld. They must be fictitious’ deities that are represented as gratified with such offerings as these. But the character of God is such as assures us of his willingness to receive what is freely and cheerfully presented. Not that he can be enriched by anything that his creatures can present. “Of thine own,” they acknowledge”of thine own have we given thee.” But all is precious to him that reveals a loyal, loving, and grateful heart.T.

Eze 46:13

The daily offering.

There is nothing inconsistent in the combination of special solemnities observed upon certain occasions with the regular daily worship. They are not contradictory of, but complementary to, each other. If there is an adaptation between annual festivals and one principle of human nature, there is an equal adaptation between another tendency of that nature and the constantly recurring daily sacrifice of prayer and praise. Accordingly, in this same chapter are found directions as to the yearly feasts and instructions concerning the daily sacrifice. How just and reasonable is this latter provision for our religious life is apparent from

I. THE DALLY MERCIES WHICH HAVE TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED. The tokens of God’s goodness and bounty, forbearance and grace, do not come to us at long intervals. They are incessantly bestowed. He daily loadeth us with benefits. He giveth us day by day our daily bread. The mind that is at once observant and sensitive is, at the contemplation of renewed, unceasing favors, ready to exclaim, “Every day will I praise thee, and I will bless thy Name for ever and ever.”

II. THE DAILY SINS WHICH HAVE TO BE CONFESSED, AND FOR WHICH FORGIVENESS HAS TO BE ASKED. The offerings and sacrifices of the temple included not only thank offerings, but sin and trespass offerings. The Israelitish worshipper appeared before Jehovah as a penitent supplicating forbearance and pardon. There is no human worshipper who has not occasion to come into the presence of the God of holiness with shame and confusion of face. Daily transgressions and omissions call for daily acts of humiliation and daily entreaties for mercy. The self-righteous may conceal from themselves this fact, and the hypocritical may seek to conceal it from God. But those who know themselves, and are sincere in their devotions, will implore the clemency and the forgiveness promised by the righteous Sovereign to those who seek reconciliation through the mediation of the Divine Redeemer.

III. THE DAILY GUIDANCE AND STRENGTH WHICH ARE NEEDED, AND WHICH HAVE TO BE SOUGHT FROM GOD. Devotion is primarily the offering of the heart, its love and grateful praise, to God. But it includes also the seeking of blessings which it is his prerogative to bestow. There is no day which does not bring with it duties that can be properly fulfilled only with Divine assistance, trials which can only be passed through securely and beneficially through the direction which God’s Holy Spirit alone can vouchsafe. If this is so, how reasonable is the provision for daily communion with God! Thus only can we be assured of that grace which will enable us so to pass through the discipline of earth that it may be the means of meeting us for the service and the joys of heaven.T.

HOMILIES BY J.D. DAVIES

Eze 46:1-3

The consecration of time.

God has mercifully imparted to human life a pleasant variety. It might have been, especially as the result of transgression, a dull monotony. It might have been day without night; a continuous season, neither summer nor winter; working days in perpetual succession. But as in nature he has given to us the delightfu1 spectacle of mountain and valley, land and. water; as in the circumstance and experience of life we have youth, manhood and. old age; so also we have secular days and sacred.

I. NATURAL OBJECTS ARE APPOINTED AS LESSON–BOOKS IN RELIGION. Sun and moon and stare not only serve as luminaries of our earth, they are appointed as signs. They signify unseen and spiritual realities. The sun speaks to us of another Fount of lightthe Sun of Righteousness, who illuminates man’s soul. The moon, with her many phases, serves as an emblem of the Church, receiving her light and. heat from the Sun. Every mountain appeals to us to rise above the common level of a mortars life. Every flower points to spiritual beauty and. usefulness, while it preaches likewise a lesson of man’s brief opportunity. So when the gate that looked towards the east was opened, it was that the worshippers might be moved and lifted heavenward, by the sight of the rising sun. This privilege was repeated on the day when the new moon appeared. Incarnate as we are in flesh and blood, we need to learn from every quarter lessons of spiritual moment. God deigns to instruct us by the service of a thousand, teachers. If our eyes are open wide we may learn gospel lessons on every side.

II. GOD IS SPECIALLY ACCESSIBLE TO MEN AT SPECIAL SEASONS. He came near to Jacob in a special manner by the vision at Bethel. He came down on Horeb, and. talked, with Moses as a man talketh with his friend. Especially he has ordained the sabbath as a time when he will commune with men. Even ignorant men have discovered that rest of body and. intellect one day in seven is a benefit to the man and. to the nation. But without doubt God sees a deeper reason for the institution of the sabbath than do we. Certain it is that in the olden time he regarded the observance of the sabbath as emphatically the maintenance of men’s covenant with him. The violation of the sabbath obtained his withering frown. And the intrinsic value of the day is as great now, although its violation be not followed by the summary punishment of God. The sabbath day is peculiarly a day “in which he may be found.” Having spread the banquet for human souls, the King comes near to see his guests.

III. FOR THE HIGH ENJOYMENT OF GOD‘S PRESENCE THE INNER DOOR OF THE HEART MUST BE OPENED. The hindrance to intimate intercourse with God is on our side. On God’s side there is eager willingness. “We are not straitened in him.” He is prepared to make his presence a joyous reality as much as ever he did to saints in the olden time. We may walk with him as Enoch did, if we will. We may have communications with him as Abraham did, if we will. The hindrance is in our own will. If only the door of the heart be unbarred, if only our strongest affections wait on the threshold to give him welcome, he will meet with us, and give us all the comforts of his friendship. Other guests are often entertained, such as vain ambitions, animal inclinations, worldly cares, evil companionships, and we are ashamed to bring in the heavenly King. Alas! too often the door is locked on the inside.

IV. IN RELIGION ONE CAN BE HELPFUL TO MANY. The prince exerts an influence either for evil or for good over multitudes. His example is especially contagious. If he is sincerely pious, he can induce many to serve the Lord. But even the prince may not bring the sacrifice near to God. His rank and office are limited by Divine authority. In the service of the sanctuary he may not be supreme. Even the king must draw nigh to God through the offices of the priest. The priest likewise renders useful service to multitudes. He speaks for them to God. He conveys substantial good from God to them. So every man, in proportion to his faith and piety and prayerfulness, may win over others to the side of virtueto the side of God. Each of us occupies a center, and by a holy character we can draw, by the magnetic power of love Godward, men and women from a wide circumference. As “one sinner destroyeth much good,” so one saint may save alive a myriad of his fellow-men.

V. OUR HOLIEST WORSHIP ON EARTH IS ONLY ON THE THRESHOLD OF THE TRUE TEMPLE. So encompassed are we with a material nature, that we can get no further than the margin of the eternal kingdom. We can see the great realities “only through a glass darkly.” Yet we make them more obscure by our spiritual indolence and our undue attachment to earthly pursuits. Above everything, candor and openness of soul are needed to allow the light of truth to stream in. We can make earthly and carnal all the sensibilities of our souls by the habitual neglect of God’s presence. But if we wish honestly and earnestly to know God more, and to have friendly intercourse with him, we can. The open door of the heart will be a welcome to God well understood.D.

Eze 46:9

The soul’s growth in goodness.

The wisdom of God has been clearly evinced in the spiritual training of the human family. The forbidden fruit was the wisest test that God could impose on Adam. The simple sacrifice of a lamb was the fittest training of men’s souls during the patriarchal age. And as the race developed from infancy into youth, and from youth to manhood, God’s methods for unfolding and maturing the spiritual nature have been singularly appropriate. The highest good man can obtain is the development of his spiritthe expansion of his highest powers. To this end all religious worship is designed to contribute.

I. MAN‘S SPIRITUAL LIFE BEGINS AT ZERO. In all God’s works we see development from a simple germ to highest perfection. For high reasons God does not produce perfected natures at a single stroke. Even this unconscious earth passed through long stages of preparation before it was fit for human habitation. The rose does not reach perfection except by patient culture. Everything about us is in transition, and is moving onward in a course of development. Art is not yet perfected. Our bodily nature begins with a microscopic germ, and slowly develops towards maturity. If anything is plainly revealed in Scripture, it is thisthat the life of the soul begins at the lowest point and is intended to reach the highest. We do not begin our earthly career with robust faith in the unseen God, nor yet with a sensitive conscience, nor yet with strong aspirations after moral excellence. All this is the result of research and self-discipline and prayer. Clearly there is an intimate analogy between all the varieties of life known to us. With respect to the grain there is first the seed, then the blade, then stalk, then ear, then full corn in the ear. With respect to the body there is babyhood, infancy, youth, manhood, maturity. And the life of the soul begins with a thought, a feeling, a wish, a prayer. It begins in the understanding, passes into the conscience, touches the emotions, moves the desires, constrains the will, moulds the life. It begins in feebleness and develops into world-controlling power. Probably the main reason for this is that the spiritual life, to have any beauty or excellence, must be the spontaneous desire and endeavor of the man himself. If, by the constitution of his nature, a man must be holy and benevolent, there would be no merit in holiness, no worth in benevolence. Therefore scope is given to a man, greater or lesser, to foster the young germ of spiritual life, and to develop it unto the noblest perfection. This is our supreme business during our mortal career.

II. MAN‘S SPIRITUAL LIFE CAN BE NOURISHED BY ACTS OF PUBLIC WORSHIP. The temple in the olden time, and Christian sanctuaries now, are designed by God for this end.

1. Instruction is provided. In the former ages this was furnished in the form of rite and emblem; now, almost entirely, by oral utterance. There is conveyed information respecting God, his nature, his kingdom, his will, his doings; information respecting man, his nature, his fall, his redemption, his possible elevation to purity, his destinies in a future state.

2. Access to God is allowed. Self-inspection is encouraged. Interior sin, in inclination and desire, is detected. The eye is turned inward upon the soul. The best sensibilities of the heart are strengthened and expanded. A vision of holiness is obtained. New aspirations begin to bud. The sacred influence of God is felt upon the soul. True prayer is stimulated.

3. Right habits are confirmed. Every man is more or less influenced by his fellow-man, so contact with holy men produces salutary impressions upon every sensitive mind. The forceful presentation of truth upon the moral nature tends to elevate it. Convictions of religious duty are inwrought. Regard for God’s revelation and for God’s will is deepened. Resolution to follow a right course is often formed. The energies of the soul are braced up for high endeavor. Familiarity with God and with eternal things is increased. As a plant grows and buds under the influence of the vernal sun, so a man’s soul unfolds amid the surroundings of public worship.

4. A Divine influence is present.

III. MAN‘S SPIRITUAL LIFE IS EITHER HELPED OR CHECKED BY EVERY VISIT TO THE SANCTUARY. This is the main truth taught in this verse. Men were not allowed, in the second temple, to retrace their steps. They might not depart by the same path as that by which they approached the altar. Without doubt this was ordained in order to leave an impressive lesson on their minds. The law yet remains. It is written on man’s spiritual constitution. It is written in the very structure of the temple. No man leaves God’s house precisely the same man as he went in. He is either worse or better for his visit. If he has yielded in any measure to the claims of God, he is the better. If he has resisted them afresh, he is the worse.

1. Let us contemplate the foolish man.

(1) If he enter by the gate of self-righteousness he will in all probability leave by the gate of insensibility. His soul will be hardened under the process. The sun that melts wax hardens clay.

(2) If he enter by the gate of unbelief he will leave by the gate of despair. Foregone conclusions fasten like a bandage upon the eyes. The root of blindness is a perverse will. The man without God is without hope.

(3) If he enter by the gate of formal custom he will leave by the gate of bondage. His carnal fetters will have been more firmly riveted by the visit.

2. Let us contemplate the wise manthe beneficial visit.

(1) He who enters by the gate of inquiry leaves by the gate of knowledge.

(2) He who enters by the gate of penitence leaves by the gate of peace.

(3) He who enters by the gate of prayer leaves by the gate of triumph.

(4) He who enters by the gate of consecration leaves by the gate of immortal hope.D.

Eze 46:13-15

The essence of religion.

Inasmuch as true religion is a daily help and solace to men, it was needful to impress this upon the minds of the Jews by a daily sacrifice. In order to obtain the highest good from God, we must dedicate our whole self to God. It is in giving that we receive. Our interests and God’s interests are not distinct; they are identical. Yet this is a difficult lesson for men to learn. They persist in judging that time taken from secular pursuits is time misspent; that money removed from material fructification is property waste. Surely God does not need our poor gifts. And if he accepts them, it is in order that they may be made channels of blessing to the worshipper. The essence of religion is hearty self-sacrifice.

I. RELIGION CONSISTS IN COMPLETE SELF–CONSECRATION. The burnt offering was wholly consumed. Outward and formal acts of worship do not constitute acceptable religion. The ceremony may only be the show and not the substance, the shell without the kernel, the body without the soul, the channel without a living stream of love. If love be the central germ of piety, then love constrains the dedication to God of all I amall I have. Such dedication is only reasonable. I cannot lay my finger on any organ of my body, or on any virtue in my soul, or on any item of my substance, which does not belong to God by right; hence in completest consecration I only fulfill my obligation; I give no more than is due. God has given to his children all he hashas not withheld his Son; therefore the obligation is intensified. No lesser repayment of the debt would be complete. Self-dedication is God-like. As when a man carries his gold to the royal mint that it may become current coin for exchange, he receives it back with the image and superscription of the sovereign upon it; so, when we give ourselves wholly to God, we get a nobler self; God’s image is super-added. We’re most our own when most completely his.

II. RELIGION IMPOSES ON MEN A PERPETUAL OBLIGATION. The burnt offering was to be repeated “every morning.” The surrender of self to God is not an isolated act done once for all. It means the continuous habitude of the soul. As we open our shutters every morning or withdraw our blinds in order to let in the light, so every morning we need to open all the doorways of the soul afresh to give access to God. The tempter is ever at hand to induce us to forget God; our fleshly nature asserts itselfthrusts itself in between us and God; therefore there is daily need to renew our sacred vows. As the fields are refreshed every summer morning by another baptism of dew, so may our souls be refreshed by new communion with God. Each day God wisely requires fresh service; we cannot withhold it. Each day will bring new cares, new toils, new opportunities for making God known; therefore we require new strength. Each day God has some new blessing to convey: we should be ever ready to receive it. Self-devotement should be repeated with the dawn of every day. As new as God’s gifts to us should be our dedication to him.

III. RELIGION AIMS AT PRODUCING HOLY CHARACTER. The lamb was required to be “without blemish.” This was a daily and emphatic reminder that God expected, for his society and his service, a perfect character. Better still, this was a tacit promise that God would, by his gracious expedients, make us perfect. We aspire after perfection. We are ashamed of our imperfections. And we give ourselves up to God, that, by his creative Spirit, he may mould us unto perfection. This is our confident hope that perfect trust may lead to perfect holiness. By daily consecration of every thought and feeling and purpose, we shall step by step attain the likeness of our Savior. This is God’s purpose, and it cannot be frustrated.

IV. RELIGION ASKS THE DEVOTEMENT OF OUR YOUNG LIFE, The daily offering consisted of a “lamb.” Why this particular sacrifice was commanded can have but one explanation; viz. that our earliest years should be consecrated to God. While religion in its final end is sublime, in its essential principle it is simple enough. It is lovelove to the worthiest Being, and a child has capacity to love. God takes especial interest in children. When Jesus took into his arms young infants and blessed them, he said substantially, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father!” Inasmuch as God regards things which are not as yet as though they were, he smiles with Fatherly complacency on faith in embryoon the tiny buds of character not yet unfolded. The first breath of prayer ascends to heaven more fragrant than temple incense.

V. RELIGION REQUIRES FOR ITS ACTS DUE PREPARATION. “Thou shalt prepare.” As considerable pains were required to prepare the burnt offering, so thought and self-inspection are required for acts of piety. To gain advantage and enjoyment from worship, we must bring to the exercise concentration of mind, tender feeling, intelligent expectation, steadfast trust. The farmer has to plough and pulverize his soil before he casts in his seed, and, unless our hearts have their farrows open, the seed of truth will disappear as soon as sown. The eye must be trained in order to gain vision; the hand must be trained in order to dexterous industry; so too the soul must be trained in order to enjoy high communion with God. Desultory talk is not prayer; for prayer is the outgoing of the whole man Godward.D.

Eze 46:16-18

Earthly sovereignty not absolute.

Great temptations surround kings, inducing them to tyranny. Their own will is enveloped within military force. Obsequious flatterers pander to royal power. For self-interest, soldiers usually take sides with the prince. Hence a first lesson for princes to learn is that right is superior to might. The voice of justice is the voice of God.

I. THE PRINCE IS A SUBJECT OF A HIGHER MONARCH. No earthly king holds absolute sway over his subjects. In truth, the mightiest monarch is only a vassal-king. He rules in the place of God. He has to listen to the summons, “Thus saith the Lord.” He is appointed to administer the laws of God. He is amenable to a superior authority, and must render an account of his rule at the judgment-bar of heaven. To no king has God transferred the right of absolute rule. The term of a tyrant’s rule is entirely at the disposal of God. At any moment the King of kings can terminate a prince’s rule, and require a report of his doings. At the very height of a boastful tyranny he has often suffered an humiliating fall. A prince is simply a superior servant.

II. THE PRINCE IS UNDER OBLIGATION TO HIS SONS. As he is not absolute master of his subjects, neither is he absolute master of his possessions. Even a king has no freehold in his property. It is held under lease. He has only a life-enjoyment in it. Death dissolves all earthly covenants. If he has sons, they are his heirs. By the indisputable law of God they have a right in reversion. As the prince had full enjoyment of his estates during his mortal life, so his sons shall have undiminished enjoyment of the estates during their life. By no principle of law or justice can a prince claim to extract from the ancestral estates more than a life-enjoyment, nor encumber his estates for successors. He must learn to identify himself with his children, to treat them as part and parcel of himself. Checks on selfishness God everywhere imposes. In the household of God sonship carries with it complete heirship.

III. THE PRINCE IS UNDER OBLIGATION TO HIS SUBJECTS. Obligations among men are mutual. Kingship has duties as well as rights. If subjects are under obligation to serve and support their ‘prince, so too princes are under obligation to protect the lives and property of their subjects. Rightly understood, the prosperity of the people is identical with the prosperity of the king. The throne cannot be strong if the people are impoverished. The king and his people are united by a common bond of interest. The invasion of his subjects’ rights is suicide to his authoritysuicide to kingship. “No man liveth unto himself.” A selfish and avaricious policy is moral madness. No other principle is so favorable to prosperity and joy as wise benevolence.

IV. THE PRINCE IS UNDER OBLIGATION TO HIS SERVANTS. No man is more dependent upon the service of others, no man so dependent, as a prince. His time and strength are as limited as any other man’s, yet the demands of duty are enormous. For his personal needs he requires servants; for his family wants he requires servants; and for every department of public government he requires servants. In proportion to the value of the services, remuneration must be made. If the prince be accounted mean or parsimonious, he will lose dignity, reputation, and influence. Yet his generous impulses must never be allowed to violate principles of justice. He must never trench on others’ possessions to discharge a personal debt. Yet, alas! this has often beer, done! Kings stand among the greatest criminals. Secret service to the king has been paid in stolen coin. Yet restitution must some day be made, for God is always on the side of righteousness. And to every prince he says, “Be just before you are generous.”D.

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

Eze 46:2, Eze 46:3, Eze 46:10

Distinction and equality in the kingdom of God.

We have here a distinction drawn between one citizen and all the rest. The prince was to enter by the way of the porch of the east gate and stand by the post of the gate, “at the porch of the inner court,” while the people were to stand at a distance, at the outer gate (Eze 46:2, Eze 46:3); yet on other occasions the prince and the people together were to enter in and to go forth together without regard to social distinction (Eze 46:10). We are thus invited to consider that, in the coming kingdom, of which this whole vision was prophetic, there were to be both distinction and equality. And we have both.

I. DISTINCTION WITHIN THE KINGDOM. In the gospel of Jesus Christ there are:

1. Higher posts in the Church to be occupied by a few; there have been (or are) apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers, deacons, etc.; and there is a sense in which these have a priority of position over the ordinary members of the Church.

2. Higher order of service to be rendered by some. While every citizen of the kingdom of God has to serve by living the truth, by illustrating its essential principles in daily action in every sphere, it is given to some to commend the saving truth by powerful and persuasive utterances, or by unanswerable and imperishable literature; and yet again it is given to others to contribute still nobler service by suffering, or even dying, “for the sake of the Lord Jesus” and in confirmation of the truth (see Act 5:41; Php 1:29; Rev 7:13, Rev 7:14).

3. Longer period of service granted to some than given to others.

(1) There are those who are called and blessed from childhood to old age, who serve Christ and his cause through all the stages of human life, with the gathered wisdom of long and varied experience.

(2) There are those who have not heard the Divine summons until the greater part of life is over, and these can only bring their wasted and rapidly declining faculties to the altar of holy service. Yet is there essential

II. EQUALITY IN THE KINGDOM. Inasmuch as:

1. All must enter at the same gate. To one and all alike, however favored or however denied, Jesus Christ is the one open Door by which to come (Joh 10:7).

2. All must advance by the same spiritual courseby means of watchfulness and prayer and holy usefulness, by learning of God, by gaining from God, by working for God.

3. All must give account of the? Christian life, and the use they have made of their the opportunity (Luk 19:12-26; 2Co 5:10).

4. All will be judged on principles of perfect equity (Mat 25:20-23; Luk 12:48; 2Co 8:12).C.

Eze 46:4-12

The optional and the obligatory in the kingdom of God.

1. Here are minute and positive prescriptions, requiring exact conformity and allowing no deviation. The burnt offering was to be six lambs and one ramno more and no less (Eze 46:4). In the day of the new moonat that particular timethe offering was to include a young bullock (Eze 46:6). They who entered in by the north gate were to go out by the south gate, and vice versa (Eze 46:9). These (and other) instructions were in full and careful detail, and there was to be no departure from them.

2. On the other hand, the prince might, at certain hours and on occasion, bring an offering that was purely “voluntary;” one that was “voluntarily” presented unto the Lord (Eze 46:12). Room was left for spontaneity, even in the midst of these very specific requirements. In the kingdom of Jesus Christ we have these two orders of servicethe obligatory and the optional, the plainly and positively enjoined, and the voluntary; and that Christian life is not complete which is lacking in either.

I. THE OBLIGATORY. Of those things pertaining to our Christian life which are indispensable there are:

1. At its entrance:

(1) humility (or penitence); and

(2) faith, that living faith in Jesus Christ which includes the acceptance of him as the Savior of the soul and the Lord of the life.

2. Throughout its course:

(1) worship, or the approach of the human spirit to the Divine in prayer, in thanksgiving, in consecration;

(2) obedience, or the conformity of conduct to those precepts which are an essential part of Christian morals;

(3) love, including not only the “love of the brethren,” or a special attachment to those who are the friends and followers of Jesus Christ, but also a genuine pity for those who are far from him and need to be brought nigh, and a practical determination to seek and to win these erring souls.

II. THE OPTIONAL. There is room for the voluntary as well as for the necessary in our Christian life.

1. In the particulars of our worship. We have one main principle binding upon all men everywhere (Joh 4:23, Joh 4:24), but it is left to our individual choiceto our own judgment and conscienceat what times, in what forms, within what buildings, with what kind of human ministry, we shall draw nigh to God in true and pure devotion.

2. In the minutiae of obedience. What shall be the rules and the regulations we shall lay down for the observance of the great principles of purity, of temperance, of equity, of veracity, of reverential speech, of courtesy.,these are not to be found in any Christian directory; they are to be decided upon m the sanctuary of every consecrated spirit and of every cultivated conscience.

3. In the measure and methods of loving service. What proportion of our income, what amount of our time, what order of personal effort, we shall devote to the cause of Christ and in the interest of our fellow-men,this rests with every individual Christian man to decide. These must be, in some sense and degree, “voluntary offerings.”C.

Eze 46:18

Losing and keeping the inheritance.

The subject of this commandment is “the inalienable nature of the prince’s possession, and the sacred regard he must pay to the peoples'” its object was to legislate so that “no temptation might exist to spoil the people of their proper inheritances, as had been too often done in the days that were past.” By the words of the text we are brought in contact with

I. THE HEBREW IDEAL OF FAMILY INHERITANCE. The Mosaic legislation contemplated keeping the land in the occupancy of the same tribe and of the same family from generation to generation. It was not in the power of the occupier to sell it or to will it away from the family; and although it might be mortgaged, it reverted to the original possessor (or his family) at the year of jubilee. The ideal was that of all the families of the nation being interested and engaged in the happy, honorable, and fruitful employment of agriculture. In this case there would be no superabounding wealth on the one hand, and no degrading poverty on the other hand; while every Israelite would have the deepest interest in preserving the integrity of his country’s freedom, and would be contributing to its wealth. Such an ideal as this is hopelessly impossible in such a time as this, but in a primitive and pastoral age it was one calculated to secure the largest possible measure of individual happiness, domestic comfort, and national prosperity.

II. ITS PARTIAL FAILURE AND ULTIMATE DISAPPEARANCE. Such a provision must have been attended with great difficulties in the way of realization. Dissipation on the one hand and avarice on the other would almost inevitably lead to loss and to appropriation. And there is no doubt they did. As time went by the land became lost to the families to whom it was originally apportioned (Jos 19:51). And when the time came for the great and sad deportation to other lands, the entire arrangement was broken up; finally the Jews were “scattered, every man from his possession;” and, dispersed among the Gentiles, they became the least pastoral or agricultural, and the most trading and financing, of any people on the earth. Where, then, does this prediction find

III. A PLACE IN THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST? It will find it, in substance, in

1. Provision for the material well-being of the people of the land. As the result of Christian principle acting at both ends of the body politic, elevating the character and therefore the condition of those at the bottom, and leading those at the top to devote their resources and employ their (legislative and other) opportunities in the interest of the people, there will gradually ensue a wide distribution of comfort and prosperity. Abject poverty and superfluous possession will give place to universal competence, education, morality, pietyin fact, national well-being. Many forces will have to contribute to this result, and it may be a long time coming, but it must be the issue of a true and practical Christianity. There are other “inheritances” beside that of land and wealth which need to be preserved, and which a Christian family or a Christian Church should devoutly determine to maintain. There must be:

2. The perpetuation of the fair heritage of an honorable name, a reputation for family goodness or wisdom that has come down many generations.

3. The preservation of the precious deposit of sacred truth.C.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

CHAPTER 46

1Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; and on the Sabbath day it shall be opened, and on the day of the new moon it shall be opened. 2And the prince cometh the way of [to] the porch of the gate from without, and will stand at the post of the gate; and the priests offer up his burnt-offering and his peace-offerings; and he worships at the threshold of the gate, and 3will go out; and the gate shall not be shut until the evening. And the people of the land worship at the door of this gate in the Sabbaths and in the new moons before Jehovah. 4And the burnt-offering which the prince shall offer to Jehovah on the Sabbath day is six lambs without blemish, and a ram without blemish. 5And the meat-offering [shall be] an ephah for the ram, and for the lambs the meat-offering [shall be] what his hand gives, and 6oil a hin to the ephah. And on the day of the new moon without blemish a bullocka young steer, and six lambs and a ram; without blemish shall 7they be. And an ephah for the bullock and an ephah for the ram shall he make the meat-offering, and for the lambs so much as his hand will attain to, and oil a hin to the ephah. 8And when the prince cometh he shall come the way of the porch of the gate, and by the same way shall he go out. 9And when the people of the land come before Jehovah in the set times, he that cometh the way of the north gate to worship shall go out the way of the south gate, and he that cometh the way of the south gate shall go out the way of the north gate; he shall not return the way of the gate by which he came, but they shall go out each straight before him. 10And the prince shall come in their midst; when they come and when they go out, they shall go out [together]. 11And in the feasts and in the set times the meat-offering shall be an ephah for the bullock and an ephah for the ram, and for the 12lambs what his hand gives, and oil a hin to the ephah. And when the prince shall offer a free-will offering, burnt-offering, or peace-offering, as a free-will offering to Jehovah, then one opens to him the gate that looketh toward the east, and he offers his burnt-offering and his peace-offering, as he will do on the Sabbath day; and he goeth out, and one shuts the door after 13his going out. And a lamb a year old without blemish shalt thou daily 14offer as a burnt-offering to Jehovah; every morning shalt thou offer it. And a meat-offering shalt thou offer with it every morning, the sixth of an ephah, and oil the third of a hin, to moisten the fine flour,a meat-offering to 15Jehovah, ordinances perpetual, continual. And they offer the lamb and the meat-offering and the oil every morning, as a continual burnt-offering. 16Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: When the prince shall give a gift to one of his sons, it [is] his inheritance, to his sons shall it be [become], their possession 17as an inheritance. And when he shall give a gift from his inheritance to one of his servants, then it is his until the year of freedom, when it returns to 18the prince; only his inheritance of his sons shall belong to them. And the prince shall not take of the peoples inheritance to thrust them out of their possession; from his own possession he may endow his sons, that My people 19be not scattered every man from his possession. And he brought me, in the entry which was at the side of the gate, to the chambers of holiness, to the priests, that look toward the north; and, behold, there was a place on the 20hinder side westward. And he said to me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the guilt-offering and the sin-offering, where they shall bake the meat-offering, so as not to bring it forth to the outer court, to sanctify 21the people. And he brought me forth to the outer court, and made me pass on to the four corners of the court, and, behold, in each corner of the court was a court. 22In the four corners of the court were smoking courts, forty [cubits] long and thirty [cubits] broad; one measure was to them to the four 23corner-rooms. And a range was round about in them, round about the four 24of them, and cooking-places were made under the ranges round about. And he said to me: These are the house of the cooks, where the ministers of the house shall boil the slain-offering of the people.

Eze 46:2. Sept.: … Vulg.: stabit in limine

Eze 46:3. …

Eze 46:4. K.

Eze 46:6. Another reading: and ; all the old translations read singular as the latter.

Eze 46:9. … . Vulg.: sed e regione illius egredietur. (Another reading: , also Eze 46:10.)

Eze 46:10. … , . .

Eze 46:11. …

Eze 46:12. … .

Eze 46:13. … (Another reading: , also Eze 46:14.)

Eze 46:14. Sept.: … (15) . Vulg.: cata mane sacrificium domino legitimum, juge atque perpetuum.

Eze 46:15. Faciet cata mane mane(Qeri: .)

Eze 46:16. … . ,

Eze 46:17. … . . . Vulg.:.. hreditas autem ejus filiis ejus erit.

Eze 46:18. Vulg.: per violentiam et de possession eorum,

Eze 46:19. … .

Eze 46:20. … . . , , (22) . . , Vulg.: in angulo atrii, atriola singula per angulos atrii.

Eze 46:22. Vulg: atriola disposita

Eze 46:23. . , . Vulg.: Et paries per circuitum ambiens quatuor atriola subter porticus

Eze 46:24. … Vulg.: domus culinarum

EXEGETICAL REMARKS

Eze 46:1-12. The Prince and People at Sacrifice

Eze 44:1 sq. treated of the outer east gate, while here the inner east gate comes into consideration. There the prince appears as sitting feasting upon the offerings; here he is viewed as standing, in accordance with his duty of offering. Both passages accord to him precedence of the people. In Keils view the two passages supplement each other in this way, that we have here the exceptions to the rule there. But Ezekiel 44 permits no exception in regard to the shutting of the gate (comp. on Eze 43:5, also Eze 47:2); and besides, it is the outer gate that is spoken of there, whereas here it is the inner. If one is to call it a case of supplementing, he can say: whereas Ezekiel 44 shuts the outer east gate always, the inner east gate also, according to our passage, should as a rule be shut; the Sabbath day and the day of the new moon are to form the exceptions.

Eze 46:2. We are told in Ezekiel 44 how the prince arrives at the outer gate; namely, by the way of the porch of the gate (); that same way, only in respect to the inner east gate,which, however, as we have seen on Eze 40:31, has its porch likewise turned to the outer court,the prince comes here also, so that means just the same as in (Eze 44:3): from the outer court, into which he entered by the north or south gate. only makes the gate intended, but not expressly named in Eze 46:2, more plain as the inner gate, the gate that leads into the inner court. [Hengst. takes it as: without, beyond; he makes the prince proceed through the opened door of the inner east gate as far as its threshold and post; not pass through the porch, but remain standing on this side of it, beyond the gate-opening, but close by it, on the threshold between the gate-opening and the porch. Keil, again, understands as meaning from outside of the temple through the outer east gate. Ewald makes as correction in Eze 46:1 the gate of the outer court.] The mention again of the east gate repeats, in reference to the prince, the distinction conferred upon him in Ezekiel 44. It is, however, rather a distinction from the people, or a distinction of the people in his person, than a distinguishing approximation of the prince to the priests. Compare with what is here said Solomons probably pulpit-like brazen scaffold, on which he knelt, and which thus was situated before the altar of burnt-offering in the inner court (2Ch 6:13); likewise 2Ki 11:14; 2Ki 23:3; 2Ch 23:13; 2Ch 34:31. According to the passage before us, the position even of the prince inside of the environs of the temple suffers a noteworthy modification. A definite, fixed, elevated standing place, a suggestus for the bearer of princely power at the entrance into the inner court, as occupied since Solomon by the pre-exile kings, is no longer spoken of. The king of the future is the Messiah; the princedom shines in His light (Doct. Reflec. 14), in the brightness of the glory that entered through the east gate, which in view thereof is shut for ever toward the outside, and it (namely, the east gate) is temporarily opened only toward the interior, to be shut again at even. The Messianic idea dominates the modification of the prerogative of the possession derived from the pre-exile kingdom within the architectonic symbolism of the theocracy. Hengst. says: What is treated of here is not merely a subordination of the prince to God; there is also as regards worship a sharp line drawn between prince and priest. Hvernick observes: As on the one hand the prince is unreservedly acknowledged in his special exaltation, so on the other his rights appear in due limitation, in reference to encroachment of any kind on the priestly prerogatives. With regard to this, a position is assigned to him at the post of the gate leading to the inner court, on the threshold of the gate, hence at the head of the people, yet not in the priests court proper. While he stands, the priests do what the prince cannot do, but must cause to be done by them. , (, to bow), Hithp. with as reduplication of the third radical, reflexive.And will go out by the way that he came (Eze 44:3). As what has been said invests the prince with privileges only above the people, Eze 46:3 fixes the peoples place at worship. [Hengst.: opposite the opened door, through which they catch a glimpse of the altar of burnt-offering, which the princethis is the only difference (? he enters the inner east gate, however)sees from a nearer point] is, according to Klief., equivalent to: through the opening of the gate, inasmuch as the people before the outer east gate have to look at the temple through it, and also through the inner gate (comp. Eze 46:9). The arrangement intimates that the people shall worship outside of the threshold of the inner east gate, the gate spoken of (). Psa 95:6.

Eze 46:4. The Sabbath-offerings to be brought and offered by the prince are instead of: two lambs of the first year without blemish for a burnt-offering, and two-tenth deals of flour and oil for a meat-offering and drink-offering (Num 28:9); in future: three times as many lambs and a ram besides.

Eze 46:5. This increase of offerings extends also to the meat-offering: an ephah for the ram (Eze 45:24). This may, and doubtless does, imply a proportionate increase with respect to the lambs likewise; , however, which does not necessarily mean the same as the formula in Eze 46:7, expresses free-willingness as the other element in the ordinance. A range of freedom along with the obligation, as Hengst., is not, however, so much the thought here, as, on the one hand, greater richness and splendour, which on the other presupposes a liberal and munificent disposition in the individual. The disposition has become changed; with the greater blessings, demands higher than hitherto present themselves. But the more the amount to be spent is left to the free will of the individual, the more of zeal and faithfulness is presupposed (Hv.).

Eze 46:6. The new-moon offerings, on the contrary, show a decrease; namely, instead of: two bullocks, one ram, seven lambs (Num 28:11 sq.), we have here only: one bullock, one ram, six lambs. Hengst., indeed, disputes this; the number of bullocks, he says, is left to the free judgment, only it may not fall short of the two required by the law. In support of this view he takes as collective (an ideal unity), and appeals to the plural , which certainly cannot be interpreted as referring to the frequent recurrence of the feast. (According to Keil, it is a blunder of the transcriber for .) Not only one bullock and one ram, however, but also the goat for the sin-offering (Num 28:15) is wanting here.

Eze 46:7. The increase appears to be retained only through the meat-offering (comp. Eze 45:24), and to be expressed by the formula: , which takes as measure, not the free will, like Eze 46:5, but ability (Lev 14:30).

In order to pass over from Sabbaths and new moons to other seasons of worship, Eze 46:8 first repeats what has been said in Eze 46:2. =by the same way.

Eze 46:9. Keil notices as a distinction from Eze 46:3, that there the people were spoken of only incidentally ( provided some of them came), since they were not bound to come on Sabbaths and new moons. Such a distinction, however, would require to be more definitely noted. In reality, Ezekiel as much supposes the people coming in Eze 46:3 as here, where the coming and going of individuals () is expressly mentioned. Something similar to Deu 16:16 is not exactly expressed here. The most that can be said is, that (this is what makes the distinction from Eze 46:3) () the set time and assembling of the communitythe coming and going of the people, might make more of a throng, so that here the relative rank of people and prince, expressed in Eze 46:3, is not so much regarded, but care is taken for due order in the temple; and while in Eze 46:2-3 the prince was distinguished from the people, here he and they are taken together. [Fairbairn: At the great festivals the prince was to depart from the state of isolation which it was proper for him to observe at other times, and at the head of the people join in the great throng of worshippers that were to pass through the temple courts from one side to another. It reminds us of David, who in this was doubtless the exemplar in the eye of the prophet: I had gone with the multitude, I went with them to the house of God, with the voice of joy and praise, with a multitude that kept holy-day. A beautiful picture of a religious people: the highest in rank freely mingling with the mass of worshippers, and inspiriting their devotions by the elevating influence of his presence and example.W. F.] ( The reason of the regulation in Eze 46:9 can only be a theological one, that each should go out of the sanctuary another man than he came in (Php 3:13); to avoid a throng, all must have been obliged to go in by the same gate, and out by the opposite one.Hengst.) Hengst. renders here: in the feast seasons; in Eze 46:11 : on the feast days; in order to assure himself of the continuance of the great day of atonement; and hence he renders : on the joyous feasts. Keil makes comprehend Sabbaths, new moons, and the day of atonement, all the seasons and days sanctified to the Lord. This in itself cannot be disputed, but in the connection here in Ezekiel may be very questionable. Keil at all events overthrows by this his own distinction of Eze 46:9-10 from Eze 46:3, which rests on the ground that Eze 46:9-10 speak of the high feasts, at which every one has to appear. in Eze 46:9 points rather to the two days appointed for the first month, Eze 45:18; Eze 45:20.Since mention is made of two ways of coming, the singular Qeri () must be rejected.

Eze 46:10, very suitably for the two days of the first month, views the prince and people together. Here, too, the Qeri is to be rejected; are prince and people. Hengstenberg rightly compares Psa 42:5 [4].

Eze 46:11 introduces the feasts strictly so called (see Eze 45:21; Eze 45:25) in addition to the set seasons (Eze 45:18; Eze 45:20); but, as the statement of the meat-offering shows, the are chiefly meant, for as to the feasts comp. the meat-offering ordained in Eze 45:24 sq., while the lambs are explained from Eze 46:6 of our chapter, which tells of those for the new moon. Hence what is there mentioned for burnt-offering must hold good also in Eze 45:18-20, and likewise the meat-offering here, for which comp. Eze 46:7 of our chapter. While the formula there measures according to ability, the one here expresses also that which corresponds to free-will, and this the more appropriately as free-will offerings are treated of in what follows.

Eze 46:12. (Psa 110:3), from , to impel, is the peculiar inward impulse, the joyful readiness for good and for all sacrifices which comes from the Spirit of God (Psa 51:14 [12]). The expression is used, as of the impulse originally, so of that to which one feels himself impelled, of the gift, and especially of the sacrifice to which a man was bound by no vow (Lev 22:23). The repetition in our verse of this element makes it specially prominent. [Fairbairn: To show that his worship was not merely of a public and official nature, that it should spring from a heart truly alive to divine things, and itself delighting in fellowship with God, the prophet passes from those holiday services to the voluntary offerings and the daily morning sacrifice, which the prince was also to present to the Lord. In a word, the proper head of a religious people, he was to surpass them all, and be an example to them all, in the multitude and variety of his acts of homage and adoration.W. F.] Keil observes on the modified regulation in regard to opening and shutting the gate, as compared with Eze 46:2, that the freewill offering could be brought on any day of the week; Hengst. points to the distinction that in the free-will offering the prince appears as an individual, in the Sabbath-offering as the representative of the people.

Eze 46:13-15. The Daily Sacrifice

Eze 46:13. The address to the people (), where hitherto we have had to do with the prince, and the comparison of what was imposed on him in Eze 45:17, make it probable that the daily sacrifice is to be an affair of the community, which the priests have to provide (Keil). Yet, observes Hengstenberg, the conclusion is not certain; the transition from the prince to the people is an easy one, since in the foregoing passage also the prince represents the people. Eze 45:18-20 likewise began with the address to the people, and undoubtedly the close here corresponds to the beginning there; the prince is encompassed on both sides by the people. According to Num 28:3 sq., two such lambs were to be offered daily for a burnt-offering, namely, one in the morning and the other in the evening. The more exact statement here: , that it shall be done every morning, either abolishes the evening burnt-offering (Keil), or silently supposes it (Hengst.). The aim is, corresponding to Eze 45:18 sq., a similar sanctification of the commencement of the day as of that of the month and year; hence the sanctification of the whole of time in all its divisions, in distinction, perhaps, from the significance of the evening for Israel (Exo 12:6). If the evening sacrifice is to be discontinued, the increase of the meat-offering every morning in Eze 46:14 (compared with Num 28:5, one-tenth of an ephah and one-fourth of a hin) perhaps comes into consideration for the deficit., from , to rend, to scatter, to sprinkle. Hengst. and Keil: to moisten., probably from (but of doubtful signification; Meier: to split, to widen; Gesen.: to lift up, to oscillate), is the finest wheat meal. The plural refers both to the burnt-offering in Eze 46:13, and the meat-offering here. The significance of such a solemnity every morning is emphasized by the strengthening the , for which, with Hitzig, Lev 23:14; Lev 23:21; Lev 23:31 is to be compared.

Eze 46:15. Keil takes as imperative; it is preterite with yav. The Qeri reads the imperfect.Again the emphatic . ( That which is to be done daily forms a contrast to the festivities; it is to be acknowledged and honoured in due dignity and significance as a perpetual burnt-offering, Hv.) Hengst.: We move here entirely on the realm of Old Testament worship, and there is not the slightest (?) indication that, by the sacrifice of bulls, lambs, and goats, other forms of worship are here denoted. Even if the details were only colouring and means of representation, yet an intimation in regard to the whole should not be wanting (neither is it wanting, it is manifest throughout the whole and in every part!) if the announcement were to extend to a time when, by the offered sacrifice of Christ, a total revolution in the worship was produced. This is certainly correct; although the prophecy refers primarily to the restoration of the Old Testament worship, and in this respect has long ago found its fulfilment, and indeed a fulfilment that has long disappeared again,the disappearance was proclaimed by the word of Christ: Behold, your house is left unto you desolate;yet at the same time it conceals in the details the kernel of a general truth,the imperishability of the worship in the community of God on earth, which is demonstrated among other things also by this, that as the worship here predicted had to perish by the Roman destruction, the worship in the Christian Church rose again gloriously. Any misunderstanding, as if Ezekiel should have predicted the Roman or Greek-Catholic worship, or a new evangelical worship of kindred form, might have been obviated by the consideration, that in everything here relative to the service of the temple of the future, the object aimed at is to give to the idea an expression as distinct as possible, although in terms of the Old Testament, and so in a symbolizing prophetic form, here specially to the idea, that whereas the Church Militant is a teaching church, the Church Triumphant of eternity ( ) will on the contrary be a liturgic one; as also the so much debated question of constitution will be overcome, because solved.

Eze 46:16-24 Appendices:

Eze 46:16-18. The Right of the Prince as regards the Disposal of his Property.

Eze 46:19-24. The Sacrificial Kitchens.

Just as supplementary matter to the temple building is appended in Eze 41:15 sq. in the transition to the service of the temple, so we have here a supplementary statement in reference to the prince and the priests,the former as the procurer and defrayer of the material of worship, the latter as the persons formally celebrating it, after the order of worship was finished in the foregoing.

Eze 46:16-18. The Prince and his Possession

Eze 46:16. expressly introduces what follows as a divine ordinance, and not the fancy of the prophet; and this connects itself with that which was assigned to the prince in Eze 45:8 as his possession in Israel. As we know from that passage, reference is made here too to the former despotic regime. When Hengstenberg says that the prophet does not set himself up as a lawgiver, but only seeks to give a representation of the thought that the princes of the future are to be no despots, are to beware of the unjust absolutism of the princes of the past, it is clear, and Hengstenberg cannot deny it, that an ideal future is kept in view. But the ideality of the whole Old Testament is the future of the Messiah. Hengstenberg, indeed, observes quite correctly: The prince cannot be Christ. He is one who may have several sons of his own body; who in the prospect of his death disposes of his property; who does not stand beyond the region of sin, else he should not need to be warned against it. The concession in respect of one of his sons preserves the character of the princely possession; it becomes an inheritance, but it remains in the princely family. Hengstenberg connects with the principal clause, and makes the suffix refer to the prince: this shall become his inheritance (surely: his possession, which in this case he bequeaths) to his sons. It is more natural to connect it with , and to make the suffix refer to the princes son in question: the inheritance shall be his, bequeathed to him by his father (comp. on Eze 46:18); and this is confirmed by the immediately following clause, which does not generalize, so that, with Keil, the suffix in should now revert to the prince; but his sons are the sons of the just-mentioned princes son, and the idea of the is only farther carried out: it shall be their possession, so that it can be bequeathed () to their sons also.

Eze 46:17. The idea of inheritance remains the key-note as formerly, so that the farther concession in respect of a meritorious or favourite servant of the prince does not indeed forbid a present to the servant in land from that which the prince possesses as hereditary property, but yet alienation and so lessening of the crown estates is guarded against by the limitation: until the year of freedom. (from ), which denotes free outflowing (Exo 30:23), is free motion in general, freedom, as the year of jubilee is consequently named in Lev 25:10; Lev 25:13. The reversion is the same as in the case of an Israelitish heritable landed possession, when it passes by sale to another.The meaning of the phrase: only his inheritance of his sons, is clear from the foregoing: only what the prince has presented to his sons from his inheritance shall remain to them. [Keil: only his inheritance is it (?); as regards his sons, to them it shall belong.]

Eze 46:18. That which is to be preserved in the case of the prince, is also to be preserved for the people: inheritance in their case as in his. , to oppress, in general, hence: to exercise violence, to treat one with violence (Eze 18:7 sq., 45:8), here with .On , comp. Ezekiel 34 (1Sa 8:14; 1Sa 22:7).

Eze 46:19-24. The Sacrificial Kitchens for Priests and People

Ewald inserts this section after Eze 42:13-14, as he does the preceding Ezekiel 45 between Eze 46:8-9. The prophet, who has not changed his standing-place since Eze 44:4 sq., is brought to the described in Eze 42:1 sq. (which comp.).On , comp. on Eze 42:9.As the chambers in question are the priests, Hengst. explains the appositional phrase: to the priests, as in Roman Catholic countries one may say, for example: to the Carmelites, etc.The description: that look toward the north, refers of course to chambers. The gate, accordingly, is the north inner gate; according to Hengst., the entry leads from the inner court gate on the west to the east entrance gate of the fence-wall of the priests cells., Keil: At the cells on the extreme hinder side toward the west; Hengst.: Thus the kitchens are in the cell building, not by and outside of it.The Qeri has (Hengst.: , on their west side; singular, as in Gen 49:13; the suffix refers in fact to the chambers, in form to the priests, including under them the chambers). Gesenius derives the dual from the original signification: limb.

Eze 46:20. Here the guilt-offering comes first, whereas in Eze 40:39; Eze 42:13; Eze 44:29, it always comes after the sin-offering, as it did in the law also, and hence appeared as a subordinate kind of sin-offering, ordained merely for certain cases; in accordance with the leading thought that the sinner should not only desire atonement of his sin before God by a sin-offering, but likewise endeavour as far as possible to pay what was owing, make good the damage, make restitution for the crime committed. , to swell; hence, naturally: to ripen; artificially: to cook (Piel)., properly: to draw together, is: to bake. Comp. moreover, Eze 42:13., to be understood as in Eze 44:19, which comp.; , namely: out of the kitchens, which were situated in the corners of the outer court, like those which follow, where the priests had to pass through the crowd in order to get to their cells. To the outer court, mentioned to prepare for what follows, forms the transition to Eze 46:21.The repetition: , repeats in words what was repeatedly seen: a court in the corner of the court, and again a court in the corner of the court (as Hengst.), so that Eze 46:22 first gives the exact number of four.The being brought forth to the outer court is explained by its distinction from the inner, the priests court, against whose wall the cells and kitchens rested, as belonging to the sanctuary. Comp. Eze 46:19.

Eze 46:22. These kitchens for the people are distinguished by the detailed description given from those formerly mentioned for the priests. Hengst. considers them: as off-rooms of the chambers of the people in the sides of the court, and translates : smoking courts, saying that the ascending smoke is the characteristic mark of these buildings, and asserting that the verb , with all its derivatives, signifies in Hebrew only: to exhale, to smoke, etc. Gesenius assumes another root, , to bind, to close, and understands: closed (partic. pass.) with walls and doors. This latter description would express as little as the other meanings, which Keil rightly rejects, and which the expression cannot have, such as uncovered (Klief.), firm (Hv.), pressed over (Hitzig.), and the like. The description from the smoke has, on the other hand, something pictorial and emblematic, in so far as it might point to this, that in these kitchens meat to cook will never be wanting., plur. and , is: corner, from , to cut off.The Sept. and Vulgate omit , the last word of the verse, and the Masoretes, by points placed over it, mark it as suspicious. Hengst. holds it to be a kind of priestly proper name for those rooms (Hv.: a peculiar technical term for: placed in the corner), which Ezekiel here brings forward as a fond reminiscence. It is part. Hophal, and signifies: cornered, a corner room, as Hengstenberg says; according to Keil: cornered off, cut off in corners (apposition to the suffix in ). Hvernick observes that the word still depends upon .

Eze 46:23. is something on which one walks round. Keil translates: a row of standing places was in it round about. [Klief.: a framework was in it round about.] Evidently the range of cooking-places (, literally: which cause to cook, partic. Piel), running below the court-walls () and along them, is meant to be described. [Keil: a tier of wall-work had several single tiers, under which the cooking-hearths were constructed. Hv.: the surrounding boundary-wall rises so high above the kitchens, that these are constructed below the wall.]

Eze 46:24. is in fact: the kitchen-house, but formally: the house where the cooks cook.The ministers of the house, as formerly, are the mere Levites, in contradistinction from the priests.Not without reason is only the slain-offering mentioned (the name bearing reference to the form; earlier the name denoted the essence: Shelamim), in distinction from the sin and guilt-offerings to be prepared in the kitchens of the priests. Only with the slain-offerings, such offerings as are akin to common slaughtering, was a communion connected. The greater part fell to the offerers, and was consumed in the sacrificial meals. But the slain-offering was not allowed to be prepared by the people themselves (Hengst.).

HOMILETIC HINTS

On Ch. 46

Eze 46:1. There is a time for prayer and a time for work. On work-days we are not to rest, as on the Sabbath. He who does not work ought not to eat, whatever his pretences are. The door to the Father, the Source of all grace, opens itself to us when the gracious light of the love of God again shines forth, as it often does after great darkness. The way to the Father, on which Christ preceded us when He prayed for us, now stands always open to us, for the Sabbath is eternal, and we see the door to the inner sanctuary of the temple: only in a figure through a glass do we see the glory of the Lord (Heim-Hoff.).At the door, but not at the altar.The temporal power, moreover, ought, in reverence for what is sacred,which is and ought to remain sacred to its subjects,not to overstep the privileged position assigned to it, not to command or forbid when it has no authority for the one or the other.Princes and lords should abide in their calling (Cr.).But the temporal power and teachers and preachers ought also to live in harmony with one another, and to assist one another in furthering the glory of God, 2Ch 19:11 (W.).

Eze 46:3 sq. Prayer and diligent attendance on divine service are becoming alike for people and prince.In the Old Covenant it is said: before the Lord; in the New Covenant: in the Lord.

Eze 46:8 sq. Every one has his assigned path under Gods guidance, and on it he should abide.Gods guidance demands quiet; where the foot itself makes a noise, the will of the eternal Father is exchanged for our own choice (Zinzendorf).But many shall come from the north and from the south to worship in the Lords house, Mat 8:11(Starke).The influence of love shall extend into the whole world from the south to the north, so that they from the north and they from the south shall go to meet one another, in order to receive and embrace one another as brethren (Berl. Bib.).He that will serve God must never go backward, but always forward, growing in grace, 2Pe 3:18(Starck).No one should go out of the church as he came into it; he should always take home with him something for his edification, Eccles. 4:17 [Ecc 5:1]; Act 16:14 (Starke).The prince has to go in the midst of his people, that his prerogative be not perverted into injustice; for the people do not exist for the sake of the prince, but the prince for the sake of the people.When magistrates and authorities give a good example to subjects and subordinates, that is a stronger motive than much teaching and exhortation, 2Sa 6:15 (Starke).

Eze 46:11 sq. Grace makes the heart free, and so also willing. Voluntariness is a measure of grace, as mercifulness is a sign that we ourselves shall obtain mercy.He who confines his prayers and devotions to Sundays and festivals does not yet know what it is to serve God, what it is always to pray (Luk 18:1) and to worship God in spirit and in truth. Daily ought we to exhort and arouse ourselves, that we fall not again into sin; daily ought the praise of God to be heard from our mouth, Heb 3:13 (Starke).In every gift God looks on the givers heart: My son, give me thine heart.A people that shall be pure willingness, the prospect held out in Psalms 110.As Gods grace is new every morning, so also ought our devotion to Him to be renewed every morning.The whole life of man ought to be a life consecrated to God.Our whole life should be a sacrifice, from morning to night, and next morning again (Berl. Bib.).The consecration of time.Since Christs appearance the night has disappeared, and the day has come; there are now only morning sacrifices.Watchman, what of the night? was a question of pre-Christian longing. Is there not yet light towards Hebron? was the daily question of the priest in the old temple.The whole section is of the deepest importance for us, inasmuch as it instructs us to live in the word, when Gods grace does not make itself known to us in the visible (Hengst.).

Eze 46:16 sq. If the prince is understood to be the Messiah, then according to that view Christs gifts here to the children are different from those to servants, which are only temporary, and taken from them again !The year of freedom shall be the day of revelation of righteous judgment, which is already exercised in secret. The hypocrites, who are condemned by the silent judgment of their heart, shall one day be manifest also to the world (Heim-Hoff.).Rulers ought not to invade the rights of their subjects, 1Ki 21:2 sq. (Tb. Bib.)He who is profuse in giving is (easily) compelled to take from others what belongs to them (Hengst.).The kingdom of Christ is very different from an earthly one, for He supports His subjects, not His subjects Him, Joh 10:11 (Starck).In Christs kingdom injustice has no formula, either socially or judicially.Spiritual things ought to be left in the spiritual order, and temporal in the temporal; confusion in this particular confuses the position of the people in other particulars also (Heim-Hoff.).

Eze 46:19 sq. In the kingdom of God, as in the kingdom of nature, and in the full sense of the expression, everything has its own place. Only the things of men are in disorder, because they are sinners, and sin is disorder in every respect.Servants of the Church should have the gift of distinguishing times and places, and above all, of discerning the spirits.Consideration for the people, an important part of pastoral prudence.To cook is to bring to a proper condition, so that the food tastes well and is agreeable; so ought also the truth to be prepared.Is not homiletics a kind of sacred cookery?When teachers have rightly experienced whole some truths in their heart, then they understand also how to set them rightly before others, Mat 13:52 (Starke).The same kind of food does not do for the simple and children and for grown men (Berl. Bib.).

DOCTRINAL REFLECTIONS ON CH. 4046

1. Hvernick rightly finds the nervous and lofty unity in the prophecies of Ezekiel manifested in this section also. The visions of the prophet find here their fairest completion and perfect rounding off. Already in the exposition (on Eze 40:1 sq.) the harmony with the former part of Ezekiels prophecy has been remarked. Eze 43:3 expressly refers back to Ezekiel 1, 8. The free conformity in expression between our chapters and the whole closing portion generally, and the earlier chapters, has been often proved (comp. Philippson, p. 1294). The proof is the more striking when we consider the complete difference of the subject. That we have a vision here too harmonizes not only with Ezekiel 1, 8, but in general with the prophetic character of Ezekiel, Ezekiel 8, 15, 17. The prophet has repeatedly hinted at this close of his book. Thus Eze 11:16; Eze 20:40; Eze 36:38; Eze 37:26 sq. The last passage in particular might be regarded as the text for Ezekiel 40 sq. The eighth and following chapters required by the necessity of the idea our conclusion of the book.

2. In regard to analogies in the other prophets, Ezekiels contemporaries, as we may well conceive, will chiefly come into consideration. Hence, above all, Ezekiels fellow-labourer Jeremiah. Jeremiah represents the restoration and renewal of Israel as a rebuilding of Jerusalem, Jer 31:38 sq. (with this comp. in our prophet, Eze 47:13 sq., Ezekiel 48). Jer 33:18 is similar to Eze 44:9 sq. Hag 2:7 sq. follows entirely the thought here of a new temple, insisting on its glory in view of a meagre present. But still more analogous are the night-visions of Zechariah (Eze 2:5 [1] sq., Ezekiel 4, Eze 6:13 sq., Ezekiel 14).

3. The parallel between Isaiah and Ezekiel, as it stands in relation to the vision in Ezekiel 1 (p. 41), is not completed by citing Isaiah 60 as corresponding to the close of our book; but we shall have to seek the culminating point of Isaiahs prophecy for the culmination of Ezekiels, in accordance with the office of this prophet to be the prophet of Jehovahs holiness to obdurate Israel, just as for the commencement Isaiah 6 is covered by Ezekiel 1not so much in the close as in Ezekiel 53. The corresponding pendant to our closing chapters is the life-like description given there of the Messiah and His sacrifice of Himself. It is this self-sanctification of Jehovah through His servant Israel which in Isaiah corresponds to the self-glorification of Jehovah in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40 sq.) by means of the new sanctuary and the new nationality; and this, again, accords with Ezekiels office, to behold the glory of Jehovah in the misery of the exile. In this respect Ezekiel stands to Isaiah somewhat as Easter and Pentecost do to Good Friday.

4. The different views, especially regarding the vision of the temple, may be distinguished generally as subjective and objective. I. The views which derive the explanation of Ezekiel 40 sq. solely or chiefly from Ezekiels subjectivity: (1) Already Villalpandus saw everywhere here only reminiscences of Solomons temple and of Solomons era, and consequently a similar line of thought to that in Ezr 3:12. Similarly Grotius, only that he reconciled the differences between Ezekiels temple and that of Solomon by ascribing them to the temple at the time of its destruction, just as Bunsen refers in this connection to 2 Kings 16. According to both these expositors, Ezekiel traced out from reminiscences a pattern for the future restoration. Thus, according to Ewald, Ezekiel becomes a prophetic lawgiver. Such an undertaking, quite unusual in the case of earlier prophets, is explained from the predominating thoughts and aspirations of the better class of those days for the restoration of the subverted kingdom. Ezekiel probably meditated long, with passionate longing and lively remembrance, on the institutions of the demolished temple, etc.; what appeared to him great and glorious became impressed upon his mind as a pattern, with which he compared the Messianic expectations and demands, etc., until at length the outline of the whole arrangement which he here writes down pressed itself upon him! Above all, he sketches the holy objects, temple and altar, with the utmost exactness and vividness, as if a spirit (!) impelled him, now when they were destroyed, at least to catch up their image in a faithful and worthy form for the redemption that will one day certainly come; so that he must have diligently instructed himself in these matters from the best written and oral sources (!). Thus it is quite in keeping with Ezekiels way of prophesying, that he introduces everything as if he had been borne in spirit into the restored and completed temple, accompanied throughout by a heavenly guide, and had learned exactly from him all the single parts of this unique building as to their nature and use. The paragraph Eze 47:1-12 is, in Ewalds opinion, from its great, all-embracing sense, quite adapted to bring to a close briefly and pithily all these presentiments! Yet when precepts more moral are to be given, or the perfected kingdom has to be described in its extent, reaching even beyond the temple, this assumed form (!) easily passes over into the simple prophetic discourse. (2) While the foregoing view looks to realization, Hitzig, for example, entirely rejects the idea that Ezekiel considered such things (as our chapters contain) possible, feasible, or probable, and relatively commanded and prescribed them. One does not or did not reflect that the prophets calling was to express the demands of the idea, indifferent in the first instance about their realization. All is pure fancy, a mere castle-in-the-air, a kind of Platonic sketch, as Herder expresses himself. The self-criticism of this view of our chapters can hardly be more suitably given than when Hitzig continues: Inasmuch as this or that could be set in order otherwise than he imagines, he would not in regard to plans and proposals have resisted obstinately, but would have known how to distinguish the unessential of the execution from the essential of the thing itself. He sketches the future in the form he must wish it to take, in which it really would have the fairest appearance. If the reality falls short of the image, then the idea is defectively realized; but the fault lies in the reality, not in the idea, and Ezekiel is not responsible for it. This, moreover, is merely what already Doederlein and others have held with respect to the closing portion of our book. Similarly Herder: Ezekiels manner is to paint an image entire and at length; his mode of conception appears to demand great visions, figures written over on all sides, even tiresome, difficult, symbolical acts, of which his whole book is full. Israel in his wandering upon the mountains of his dispersal, among other tongues and peoples, had need of a prophet such as this one was, etc. So also as regards this temple. Another would have sketched it with soaring figures in lofty utterances; he does so in definite measurements. And not only the temple, but also appurtenances, tribes, administration, land, etc. How far has Israel always, so far as depended on his own efforts, remained below the commands, counsels, and promises of God! (3) Bttcher has attempted to combine both views, and after him Philippson, who expresses himself to the following effect: Ezekiel the prophet, sunk in himself, brooding over matters in the distance and in solitude, had not, like Jeremiah, upon whom the immediate reality pressed, viewed the occurrences simply as punishment of defection and degeneracy, but was conscious also of their inward signification, which came to him in the appearance of a vision. Hence he represented the destruction of the temple as a suspension of the relation of revelation between God and Israel; and so much the more necessary was it to represent the restoration of that same relation as the return of God into the restored sanctuary. Now, from the peculiar character of Ezekiel, this necessarily had to assume a form at once ideal and real,ideal in its entirety as something future, real as individual and special, matter of fact in its appearance. As the indubitable motive of the prophet, the following is given: to keep alive in the exiles in the midst of Babylonian idolatry the idea of the one temple, and the priestly institute consecrated to it, as the centre of the religion of the one God; and at the return into Palestine to confirm the life of the people in their calling, by the removal of all elements of strife, and by approximation to the Mosaic state of things. Hengstenbergs view is surprisingly near the above one; he says: With the exception of the Messianic section in Eze 47:1-12, the fulfilment of all (!) the rest of the prophecy belongs to the times immediately after the return from the Chaldean exile. So must every one of its first hearers and readers have understood it. Jeremiah, whom Ezekiel follows throughout, had prophesied the restoration of the city and temple 70 years after the beginning of the Chaldean servitude, falling in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. Thirty-two years had already elapsed. Forty years after the devastation of Egypt (Eze 29:13), the nations visited by the Chaldeans shall get back to their former state. According to Eze 11:16, the restoration is to follow in a brief space after the destruction of the temple. We have before us a prophecy for which it is essential (!) to give truth and poetry (! !), which contains a kernel of real thoughts, yet does not present them naked, but clothed with flesh and blood, that they may be a counterpoise to the sad reality, because they fill the fancy, that fruitful workshop of despair, with bright (!) images, and thus make it an easier task to live in the word at a time when all that is visible cries aloud, Where is now thy God? The incongruity between the prophecy of Ezekiel and the state of things after the exile, vanishes at once by distinguishing between the thoughts and their clothing, and if we can rightly figure to ourselves the wounds for which the healing plaster is here presented, and at the same time the mental world of the priest (Ezekiel), and the materials given in the circumstances surrounding him, for clothing the higher verities which he had to announce to the people. II. The views which above all look to and keep hold of the objectivity of the divine inspiration of Ezekiel. The very regard which must, in one way or other, be paid to the circumstances under which the people for whom, and the Babylonian exile in which, Ezekiel prophesied, objectivizes in some measure his subjectivity, so that not all the views hitherto cited of our chapters and the ones that follow are to be designated as purely subjective; the properly objective, however, will be, that the hand of Jehovah was upon him, that he was brought in visions of God to the land of Israel. Here the distinction is drawn by his own hand between the prophet of Israel and the fanciful Jewish priest; and not only this, but the unavoidable and irreconcilable alternative presents itself: either Ezekiel was a man of God, or a deceiver, for whom the fact that he had deceived himself also with assumed divine objectivity were no excuse, but would only be his self-condemnation. The case of Ezekiel, for the sake of truth, is too solemn for thinking of poetic clothing in the case before us. The subjective for the form before us, is to keep in mind when considering it what that form is. It has pleased God to speak to us through men. If we take full account of the national peculiarity of Israel in general during the whole old covenant, and of the peculiar personality in the case of our vision here, that is, that Ezekiel is the priest-prophet, that he above all other prophets is, as Umbreit says, a born symbolist ( in the temple which he erects he makes known his greatness as a symbolist, as well by what he says as by what he passes over in silence),if we concede to Umbreit the surprising skill in popularizing instruction which he observes in Ezekiel, we shall have to accept as the ultimate ground why Israel was the mediator of the worlds salvation, and Ezekiel was chosen to behold the temple of the future, divine wisdom and its purpose for the world, that is, the objective above everything subjective. In accordance with this principle, we have to judge of (1) the view objectivized in this sense of a model for the rebuilding of the temple after the return from the exile, the supporters of which assume a building-plan issued under divine authority, given by Jehovah through the prophet. Although there is a resemblance between Exo 25:9; Exo 25:40 and Eze 40:4, yet it is not said to Ezekiel regarding Israel: according to all that I show thee, the pattern of the dwelling, etc., even so shall ye make it; the prophet is only to convey, announce () all that he sees to the house of Israel. From this circumstance, and not because the reality fell short of the idea (Hitzig, Herder), or, as Philippson adduces here, the similar fate of so many Mosaic precepts, the fact is explained that the post-exile temple was built without any regard to our vision. Only the fundamental reference to Solomons temple, which in general obtains in Ezekiel also, meets us in Ezr 3:12. This fact, the more remarkable considering the nearness of time, shows that Eze 40:4, soon after it was written, and when fully known, was not regarded as a divine building-specification. We do not need, therefore, to express, as Hengst., the obvious impossibility of erecting a building according to the specifications here given. The circumstance that the building materials are not given has at least not prevented the temple of Ezekiel from being, with more or less success, constructed and fashioned after his statements. Bunsen says that the temple here forms a very easily realized, congruous whole, of which an exact outline may be made, as the prophet also has evidently done. Umbreit, too, holds this latter view. And although we have to do not with an architect but with a prophet, yet nothing stands in the way of our believing that the subjectivity of Ezekiel was preeminently qualified for this vision, from the fact that he possessed architectural capacity (Introd. 7). (2) The symbolical view. It corresponds generally to the character of Holy Writ. (Comp. Lange, Rev. Introd. p. 11.) In particular it pays due regard to the law of Moses, to the part of it relating to worship, the subject here. Especially when the whole worship of Israel is concentrated in the temple, a symbolical view respecting a vision thereof will be quite in place. Thereby only its due right is given to this objective, to the divine idea, in the shape which it has above all assumed in

Israelitish worship. The symbolical character, moreover, is specially appropriate for the prophetic writings. As has already been often said and pointed out, the symbolical predominates in Ezekiel; and as to these concluding chapters, Hvernick adduces, as indicating their general character, the description of the circuit of the new temple (Eze 42:15 sq.), the representation of the entrance, etc. of the divine glory (Eze 43:1 sq.), the river (Eze 47:1 sq. etc.), and observes that it is just such passages that form the conclusion to the previous description, and hence cast a light on it. Comp. on Eze 43:10 sq. But everything architectonic is not a symbol, although everything of that nature will indeed primarily relate to the building to be erected, and will thereby at the same time in some way serve the idea of the whole. This character comes out clearly even in individual statements of number, yet all such measurements are not therefore to be interpreted symbolically. Nay, as the exposition shows, there are here bare numbers, resisting every attempt to trace them back to the idea. It is sufficient in respect to the numbers, that (comp. Umbreit, p. 259 sq.) 4, as signature not only of regularity but also of the revelation of God in space, e.g. in the quadrangle of the temple; 3, the signature of the divine, e.g. in the sets of three gates; 10, perfection complete in itself, occurring often; likewise the sacred number 7; and the number 12 in the tables for preparing the offerings (Ezekiel 40), represent symbolism. (On the symbolism of numbers, comp. Lange on Rev. Introd. p. 14.) Umbreit rightly maintains: It is a symbolical temple, notwithstanding the arid and dry description, in which only exact specifications of the number of cubits and the apparently most insignificant calculations and measurings occur; as he says, quite in keeping with the poverty of the immediately succeeding age and the dignity of the most significant inwardness. (3) The Messianic view (for which comp. Lange on Kings, p. 60 sq.) is only the taking full advantage of and applying the symbolic view in general. Symbol and type, emblem and pattern, must mutually interpenetrate one another in a law like that of Israel. What separates Israel from the heathen is its law; what qualifies Israel for the whole world is its promise. But now, because of sin, the law has come in between the promise and the fulfilment; that sin becoming the more powerful as transgression may make manifest for faith the grace which alone is still more powerful, and that consequently the necessity of the promise should be the more apparent; that is, the pedagogy of the law (and especially of its ethical part) to Christ. Thus the law of Israel is the theocratic expression of Israel, the servant of God, as he ought to be, and hence prefigures the servant of Jehovah who is the fulfilling of the law, as He is the personal fulfilling of Israel, inasmuch as in Him who was delivered for our transgressions, and raised again for our , Israel after the Spirit is represented; so that here out of the law relating to worship rise up, as on the one hand sacrifice and the priesthood, so on the other the concentration of the whole of worship in the temple, this parable of the future, with reference to which Christ, John 2, gives the : Destroy () this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (), saying this of the temple of His body; as also the disciples remembered when He had risen from the dead, and as the accusation against Him ran (Mat 26:61). Accordingly the law, and especially the temple and its service, is : the future is given in the ( , Hebrews 10). This reference to the future, says Ziegler (in his thoughtful little work on the historical development of divine revelation), is the most dynamical among all the references of the law; its significance for its own time is so weak and unimportant, that it seems to exist solely for the sake of the future, although its office is the opposite of the office of the New Testament, which is formed and abiding in the hearts of men ( , ); still it was a sensible type, a strongly marked and distinctly stamped shadow of the coming substances, and yet, moreover, a veil which concealed it. What has been said shows the typical signification of the vision of Ezekiel, in which the symbolical view of it is completed, and the pedagogic and providential necessity of that form borrowed from the legal worship in which it is enshrined. Here is more than what (as Hengstenberg can say) suffices to employ the fancy. For the anointed one is . But as the Messianic view of our chapters is thus justified by the symbolic view, when we have taken into account the law, particularly the law of worship in Israel, so likewise the already (Doct. Reflec. 1) noted connection of Ezekiel 40 sq. with the previous chapters, especially with Eze 37:26 sq. (p. 351), yields the same result, as also the position after Ezekiel 38, 39 and the relation to this prophecy will have to be taken into consideration. What holds good of Eze 37:26 sq. will also be a hint for our chapters. But even the Talmudists saw themselves compelled (principally because of the treatment of the law of Moses, to be spoken of presently) to acknowledge that the exposition of this portion would be first given in Messianic times, as the best (according to Philippson) Jewish expositors recognised here the type of a third temple. The saying of Jesus in John ii. possibly alluded to the exegetical tradition of the Jews. Hvernick accommodates as follows: The shattered old theocratic forms rather than new ones were above all cognate to the priestly mind of Ezekiel; so he sees nothing perish of that which Jehovah has founded for eternity; those forms beam before him revivified, animated with fresh breath, and lit up in the splendour of true glory; he recognises their full realization as coming in first in Messianic times. As errors are still committed, e.g. by Schmieder, in the symbolizing of particulars, so the Messianic typology of a Cocceius has deserved, although only in part, the anathema on mystical allegories, which above all modern criticism utters; for our defect in understanding in respect of many particulars will always have to be conceded. The Christian idea, however, the Old Testament typical symbolizing of which we have here to expound, is not only the idea of Christ, but also the idea of the Christian Church, the kingdom of God in Christ. If the resurrection of the Anointed One comes into consideration in the first respect, so in the latter does the consummation of the kingdom of grace, after its last affliction, into the kingdom of glory; comp. Rev 21:22. The one is as eschatological in the wider, that is, christological in the narrower sense, as the other is eschatological in the narrower, or christological in the wider sense. By the translating of our passage into the higher key of Johns Apocalypse, the relation of Ezekiel 40 sq. to Ezekiel 38, 39 must be so much the more evident. Comp. Doct. Reflec. on xxxviii. and xxxix. We refer, finally, to what has been said in the Introduction, 7, that Jehovahs building in Ezekiel here (still more in its already actual reality for the seer, so that what already existed had only to be measured to him) forms the architectonic antithesis to the buildings of Nebuchadnezzar. As the figure of Gog with his people may have presented itself to our prophet through means of Babylon (comp. Doct. Reflec. on Ezekiel 38 39, p. 375), so from that same quarter may have been derived the representation given of the kingdom of God in its victorious opposition to the world. Hitzig, too (as we now first see when treating of the closing chapters), supposes that there probably flitted before the eyes of the author living in Chaldea, when describing his quadrangle, the capital of the country and the temple of Belus,the former, like the latter, forming a square, with streets intersecting one another at right angles. Umbreit says of the vision of Ezekiel as a whole: It is a great thought, which presents itself unadorned to our view in the prophetico-symbolic temple: God henceforth dwells in perfect peace, revealing Himself in the unbounded fulness of His glory, which is returning to Jerusalem, in the purest and most blissful unison with His sanctified people, making Himself known in the living word of progressive, saving, and sanctifying redemption. Everything is placed upon the ample circuit of the temple, whose extended courts receive all people, and through whose high and open gates the King of Glory is to enter in (Psa 24:7; Psa 24:9), and then upon the order and harmony of the divine habitation, the well-proportioned building (Eze 42:10); and the revelations of the holiest are stored up in the pure, deep water of His word, which in life-giving streams issues from the temple. The stone tables of the law are consumed (?), and the fresh and free fountain of eternal truth streams forth from the temple of the Spirit, quickening and vivifying in land and sea, awakening by its creative and fructifying power a new and mighty race on earth. And thus hast thou, much misjudged yet lofty seer, in the unconscious depth of thy mysteriously flowing language, set up upon the great, undistinguishing (comp. Jer 31:34), well-proportioned, and beautifully compacted building, a type of the simple yet lofty temple of Christ, from which flows the spiritual fountain of life ! From this Messianic view of the section we have to reject (4) the chiliastic-literal view, according to which Ezekiel describes what may be called either the Jewish temple of the future, or the Jewish future of the Christian Church. It is interesting to observe what kind of spirits meet together here in the flesh; e.g. Baumgarten and Auberlen, Hofmann and Volck (who acts as champion for him, and that partly with striking power of demonstration against Kliefoth), are combined here only in general because they make the community of God at our Lords Parousia to be an Israelite one. Comp. moreover, p. 357 and 10 of the Introduction. Auberlen (Daniel and the Revelation of John, p. 348 sq., Clarks tr.) expresses the apocalyptic phantasm as follows: Israel brought back to his own land becomes the people of God in a far higher and more inward sense than before, etc.; a new period of revelation begins, the Spirit of God is richly poured forth, and a fulness of gracious gifts is conferred, such as the apostolic Church possessed typically (!). (One can hardly go farther in the delusion of deeper knowledge of Scripture than to make primitive and original Christianity a type of Judaism!) But this rich spirit-imparted life finds its completed representation in a priestly as well as in a kingly manner. That which in the ages of the Old Covenant obtained only outwardly in the letter, and that which conversely in the age of the Church withdrew itself into inward, hidden spirituality, will then in a pneumatic (!) manner assume also an outward appearance and form. In the Old Covenant the whole national life of Israel in its various manifestationshousehold and state, labour and art, literature and culturewas determined by religion, but only in an external legal manner; the Church, again, has to insist above all on a renewal of the heart, and must leave those outward forms of life free, enjoining it on the conscience of each individual to glorify Christ in these relations also; but in the millennial kingdom all these spheres of life will be truly Christianized from within outwardly. Thus looked at, it will no longer be offensive (?) to say that the Mosaic ceremonial law corresponds to the priesthood of Israel, and the civil law to its kingship. The Gentile Church could adopt only the moral law; so certainly the sole means of influence assigned to her is that which works inwardly,the preaching of the word, the exercise of the prophetic office.

(The Romish Church, however, has known how to serve itself heir satis superque to the Jewish ceremonial law!) But when once the priesthood and the kingship arise again, then alsowithout prejudice to the principles laid down in the Epistle to the Hebrews (?)the ceremonial and civil law of Moses will unfold its spiritual depths in the cultus and the constitution of the millennial kingdom (Mat 5:17-19). The present is still the time of preaching, but then the time of the liturgy shall have come, which presupposes a congregation consisting solely of converted people, etc. etc. When Hengstenberg calls such interpretation altogether unhappy, that is the least that one can say about it; but even that could not have been said if Ezekiels descriptions really had the Utopian character which Hengstenberg attributes to them. He, however, justly animadverts upon the incongruity of expecting the restoration of the temple, the Old Testament festivals, the bloody sacrifices (!!), and the priesthood of the sons of Zadok, within the bounds of the New Covenant. Comp. Keil, p. 500 sq., who, both from the prophetic parts of the Old Testament and from the New, refutes at length the notion of a transformation of Canaan before the last judgment, and a kingdom of glory at Jerusalem before the end of the world. (Auberlen, who looks on the first resurrection as a bodily coming forth of the whole community of believers from their hitherto invisibility with Christ in heaven, makes the now transformed Church again return thither with Christ, and the saints rule from heaven over the earth; and from this he concludes that the intercourse between the world above and the world below will then be more active and free, etc. Hofmanns transference of the glorified Church to earth, and his further connecting therewith the national regeneration of Israel, Auberlen declares to be incompatible with the whole of Old Testament prophecy, to say nothing of its internal improbability.)

ADDITIONAL NOTE ON Ezekiel 40-46

[Dr. Fairbairns classification of the views which have been held of Ezekiels closing vision generally, and in particular of the description contained in it respecting the temple, is as follows: 1. The historico-literal view, which takes all as a prosaic description of what had existed in the times immediately before the captivity, in connection with the temple which is usually called Solomons. 2. The historico-ideal view, that the pattern exhibited to Ezekiel differed materially from anything that previously existed, and presented for the first time what should have been after the return from the captivity, though, from the remissness and corruption of the people, it never was properly realized. 3. The Jewish-carnal view, held by certain Jewish writers, who maintain that Ezekiels description was actually followed, although in a necessarily imperfect manner, by the children of the captivity, and afterwards by Herod; but that it waits to be properly accomplished by the Messiah, who, when He appears, shall cause the temple to be reared precisely as here described, and carry out all the other subordinate arrangements,a view which, strangely enough, is in substance held also by certain parties in the Christian Church, who expect the vision to receive a complete and literal fulfilment at the period of Christs second coming. 4. The Christian-spiritual or typical view, according to which the whole representation was not intended to find either in Jewish or Christian times an express and formal realization, but was a grand, complicated symbol of the good God had in reserve for His Church, especially under the coming dispensation of the gospel. From the Fathers downwards this has been the prevailing view in the Christian Church. The greater part have held it, to the exclusion of every other; in particular, among the Reformers and their successors, Luther, Calvin, Capellus, Cocceius, Pfeiffer, followed by the majority of evangelical divines of our own country.

To this fourth and last view Dr. Fairbairn himself strenuously adheres, expounding, illustrating, and defending it at considerable length, and with marked ability and success. We give his remarks in a somewhat condensed form.

1. First of all, it is to be borne in mind that the description purports to be a vision,a scheme of things exhibited to the mental eye of the prophet in the visions of God. This alone marks it to be of an ideal character, as contradistinguished from anything that ever had been, or ever was to be found in actual existence after the precise form given to it in the description. Such we have uniformly seen to be the character of the earlier visions imparted to the prophet. The things described in chap, 13 and 811, which were seen by him in the visions of God, were all of this nature. They presented a vivid picture of what either then actually existed or was soon to take place, but in a form quite different from the external reality. Not the very image or the formal appearance of things was given, but rather a compressed delineation of their inward being and substance. And such, too, was found to be the case with other portions, which are of an entirely similar nature, though not expressly designated visions; such, for example, as Ezekiel 4, 12, 21, all containing delineations and precepts, as if speaking of what was to be done and transacted in real life, and yet it is necessary to understand them as ideal representations, exhibiting the character, but not the precise form and lineaments, of the coming transactions. Never at any period of His Church has God given laws and ordinances to it simply by vision; and when Moses was commissioned to give such in the wilderness, his authority to do so was formally based on the ground of his office being different from the ordinarily prophetical, and of his instructions being communicated otherwise than by vision (Num 12:6). So that to speak by way of vision, and at the same time in the form of precept, as if enjoining laws and ordinances materially differing from those of Moses, was itself a palpable and incontrovertible proof of the ideal character of the revelation. It was a distinct testimony that Ezekiel was no new lawgiver coming to modify or supplant what had been written by him with whom God spake face to face upon the mount.

2. What has been said respecting the form of the prophets communication, is confirmed by the substance of itas there is much in this that seems obviously designed to force on us the conviction of its ideal character. There are things in the description which, taken literally, are in the highest degree improbable, and even involve natural impossibilities. Thus, for example, according to the most exact modes of computation, the prophets measurements give for the outer wall of the temple a square of an English mile and about a seventh on each side, and for the whole city [i.e. including the oblation of holy ground for the prince, the priests, and the Levites] a space of between three and four thousand square miles. Now there is no reason to suppose that the boundaries of the ancient city exceeded two miles and a half in circumference (see Robinsons Researches, vol. i.), while here the circumference of the wall of the temple is nearly twice as much. And then, taking the land of Canaan at the largest, as including all that Israel ever possessed on both sides of the Jordan, it amounted only to somewhere between ten and eleven thousand square miles. Surely the allotment of a portion nearly equal to one-half of the whole for the prince, the priests, and Levites is a manifest proof of the ideal character of the representation; the more especially, when we consider that that sacred portion is laid off in a regular square, with the temple on Mount Zion in the centre. The measurements of the prophet were made to involve a literal incongruity, as did also the literal extravagances of the vision in chap. 38, 39, that men might be forced to look for something else than a literal accomplishment.

3. Some, perhaps, may be disposed to imagine that, as they expect certain physical changes to be effected upon the land before the prophecy can be carried into fulfilment, these may be adjusted in such a manner as to admit of the prophets measurements being literally applied. It is impossible, however, to admit such a supposition. For the boundaries of the land itself are given, not new boundaries of the prophets own, but those originally laid down by Moses. And as the measurements of the temple and city are out of all proportion to these, no alterations can be made on the physical condition of the country that could bring the one into proper agreement with the other. Then there are other things in the description, which, if they could not of themselves so conclusively prove the impossibility of a literal sense as the consideration arising from the measurements, lend great force to this consideration, and, on any other supposition than their being parts of an ideal representation, must wear an improbable and fanciful aspect. Of this kind is the distribution of the remainder of the land in equal portions among the twelve tribes, in parallel sections, running straight across from east to west, without any respect to the particular circumstances of each, or their relative numbers. More especially, the assignment of five of these parallel sections to the south of the city, which, after making allowance for the sacred portion, would leave at the farthest a breadth of only three or four miles a piece! Of the same kind also is the supposed separate existence of the twelve tribes, which now, at least, can scarcely be regarded otherwise than a natural impossibility, since it is an ascertained fact that such separate tribeships no longer exist; the course of Providence has been ordered so as to destroy them; and once destroyed, they cannot possibly be reproduced. Of the same kind, farther, is the very high mountain on which the vision of the temple was presented to the eye of the prophet; for as this unquestionably refers to the old site of the temple, the little eminence on which it stood could only be designated thus in a moral or ideal, and not in a literal sense. Finally, of the same kind is the account given of the stream issuing from the eastern threshold of the temple, and flowing into the Dead Sea, which, both for the rapidity of its increase and for the quality of its waters, is unlike anything that ever was known in Judea, or in any other region of the world. Putting all together, it seems as if the prophet had taken every possible precaution, by the general character of the delineation, to debar the expectation of a literal fulfilment; and I should despair of being able in any case to draw the line of demarcation between the ideal and the literal, if the circumstances now mentioned did not warrant us in looking for something else than a fulfilment according to the letter of the vision.

4. Yet there is the farther consideration to be mentioned, viz. that the vision of the prophet, as it must, if understood literally, imply the ultimate restoration of the ceremonials of Judaism, so it inevitably places the prophet in direct contradiction to the writers of the New Testament. The entire and total cessation of the peculiarities of Jewish worship is as plainly taught by our Lord and His apostles as language could do it, and on grounds which are not of temporary, but of permanent validity and force. The word of Christ to the woman of Samaria: Woman, believe me, the hour cometh when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father, is alone conclusive of the matter; for if it means anything worthy of so solemn an asseveration, it indicates that Jerusalem was presently to lose its distinctive character, and a mode of worship to be introduced capable of being celebrated in any other place as well as there. But when we find the apostles afterwards contending for the cessation of the Jewish ritual, because suited only to a church in bondage to the elements of the world, and consisting of what were comparatively but weak and beggarly elements; and when, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, we also find the disannulling of the Old Covenant, with its Aaronic priesthood and carnal ordinances, argued at length, and especially because of the weakness and unprofitableness thereof, that is, its own inherent imperfections, we must certainly hold, either that the shadowy services of Judaism are finally and for ever gone, or that these sacred writers very much misrepresented their Masters mind regarding them. No intelligent and sincere Christian can adopt the latter alternative; he ought, therefore, to rest in the former. And he will do so, in the rational persuasion, that as in the wise administration of God there must ever be a conformity in the condition of men to the laws and ordinances under which they are placed, so the carnal institutions, which were adapted to the Churchs pupilage, can never, in the nature of things, be in proper correspondence with her state of manhood, perfection, and millennial glory. To regard the prophet here as exhibiting a prospect founded on such an unnatural conjunction, is to ascribe to him the foolish part of seeking to have the new wine of the kingdom put back into the old bottles again, and while occupying himself with the highest hopes of the Church, treating her only to a showy spectacle of carnal superficialities. We have far too high ideas of the spiritual insight and calling of an Old Testament prophet, to believe that it was possible for him to act so unseemly a part, or contemplate a state of things so utterly anomalous. And we are perfectly justified by the explicit statement of Scripture in saying, that a temple with sacrifices now would be the most daring denial of the all-sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ, and of the efficacy of the blood of His atonement. He who sacrificed before, confessed the Messiah; he who should sacrifice now, would most solemnly and sacrilegiously deny Him.1

5. Holding the description, then, in this last vision to be conclusively of an ideal character, we advance a step farther, and affirm that the idealism here is precisely of the same kind as that which appeared in some of the earlier visions,visions that must necessarily have already passed into fulfilment, and which therefore may justly be regarded as furnishing a key to the right understanding of the one before us. The leading characteristic of those earlier visions, which coincide in nature with this, we have found to be the historical cast of their idealism. The representation of things to come is thrown into the mould of something similar in the past, and presented as simply a reproduction of the old, or a returning back again of what is past, only with such diversities as might be necessary to adapt it to the altered circumstances contemplated; while still the thing meant was, not that the outward form, but that the essential nature of the past should revive. In this connection, Dr. Fairbairn refers to the vision of the iniquity-bearing in Ezekiel 4; to the sojourn in the wilderness spoken of in Ezekiel 20; to the ideal representation given of the king of Tyre in Eze 28:11-19; and to the prediction of Egypts humiliation in Eze 29:1-16. Now in all these cases, he goes on to remark, of an apparent, we should entirely err if we looked for an actual repetition of the past. It is the nature of the transactions and events, not their precise form or external conditions, that is unfolded to our view. The representation is of an ideal kind, and the history of the past merely supplies the mould into which it is cast. The spiritual eye of the prophet discerned the old, as to its real character, becoming alive again in the new. He saw substantially the same procedure followed again, and the unchangeable Jehovah must display the uniformity of His character and dealings by visiting it with substantially the same treatment. If, now, we bring the light furnished by those earlier revelations of the prophet, in respect to which we can compare the prediction with the fulfilment, so as to read by its help, and according to its instruction, the vision before us, we shall only be giving the prophet the benefit of the common rule, of interpreting a writer by a special respect to his own peculiar method, and explaining the more obscure by the more intelligible parts of his writings. In all the other cases referred to, where his representation takes the form of a revival of the past, we see it is the spirit and not the letter of the representation that is mainly to be regarded; and why should we expect it to be otherwise here? In this remarkable vision we have the old produced again, in respect to what was most excellent and glorious in Israels past condition,its temple, with every necessary accompaniment of sacredness and attractionthe symbol of the divine presence withinthe ministrations and ordinances proceeding in due order withoutthe prince and the priesthoodeverything, in short, required to constitute the beau-ideal of a sacred commonwealth according to the ancient patterns of things. But, at the same time, there are such changes and alterations superinduced upon the old as sufficiently indicate that something far greater and better than the past was concealed under this antiquated form. Not the coming realities, in their exact nature and glorious fulnessnot even the very image of these things, could the prophet as yet distinctly unfold. While the old dispensation lasted, they must be thrown into the narrow and imperfect shell of its earthly relations. But those who lived under that dispensation might get the liveliest idea they were able to obtain of the brighter future, by simply letting their minds rest on the past, as here modified and shaped anew by the prophet; just as now, the highest notions we can form to ourselves of the state of glory is by conceiving the best of the Churchs present condition refined and elevated to heavenly perfection. Exhibited at the time the vision was, and constructed as it is, one should no more expect to see a visible temple realizing the conditions, and a reoccupied Canaan, after the regular squares and parallelograms of the prophet, than in the case of Tyre to find her monarch literally dwelling in Eden, and, as a cherub, occupying the immediate presence of God, or to behold Israel sent back again to make trial of Egyptian bondage and the troubles of the desert. Whatever might be granted in providence of an outward conformity to the plan of the vision, it should only be regarded as a pledge of the far greater good really contemplated, and a help to faith in waiting for its proper accomplishment.

6. But still, looking to the manifold and minute particulars given in the description, some may be disposed to think it highly improbable that anything short of an exact and literal fulfilment should have been intended. Had it been only a general sketch of a city and temple, as in the 60th chapter of Isaiah, and other portions of prophecy, they could more easily enter into the ideal character of the description, and understand how it might chiefly point to the better things of the gospel dispensation. But with so many exact measurements before them, and such an infinite variety of particulars of all sorts, they cannot conceive how there can be a proper fulfilment without corresponding objective realities. It is precisely here, however, that we are met by another very marked characteristic of our prophet. Above all the prophetical writers, he is distinguished, as we have seen, for his numberless particularisms. What Isaiah depicts in a few bold and graphic strokes, as in the case of Tyre, for example, Ezekiel spreads over a series of chapters, filling up the picture with all manner of details,not only telling us of her singular greatness, but also of every element, far and near, that contributed to produce it, and not only predicting her downfall, but coupling it with every conceivable circumstance that might add to its mortification and completeness. We have seen the same features strikingly exhibited in the prophecy on Egypt, in the description of Jerusalems condition and punishment under the images of the boiling caldron (Ezekiel 24) and the exposed infant (Ezekiel 16), in the vision of the iniquity-bearing (Ezekiel 4), in the typical representation of going into exile (Ezekiel 13), and indeed in all the more important delineations of the prophet, which, even when descriptive of ideal scenes, are characterized by such minute and varied details as to give them the appearance of a most definitely shaped and lifelike reality.

Considering his peculiar manner, it was no more than might have been expected, that when going to present a grand outline of the good in store for Gods Church and people, the picture should be drawn with the fullest detail. If he has done so on similar but less important occasions, he could not fail to do it here, when rising to the very top and climax of all his revelations. For it is pre-eminently by means of the minuteness and completeness of his descriptions that he seeks to impress our minds with a feeling of the divine certainty of the truth disclosed in them, and to give, as it were, weight and body to our apprehensions.
7. In farther support of the view we have given, it may also be asked, whether the feeling against a spiritual understanding of the vision, and a demand for outward scenes and objects literally corresponding to it, does not spring, to a large extent, from false notions regarding the ancient temple and its ministrations and ordinances of worship, as if these possessed an independent value apart from the spiritual truths they symbolically expressed? On the contrary, the temple, with all that belonged to it, was an embodied representation of divine realities. It presented to the eye of the worshippers a manifold and varied instruction respecting the things of Gods kingdom. And it was by what they saw embodied in those visible forms and external transactions that the people were to learn how they should think of God, and act toward Him in the different relations and scenes of lifewhen they were absent from the temple, as well as when they were near and around it. It was an image and emblem of the kingdom of God itself, whether viewed in respect to the temporary dispensation then present, or to the grander development everything was to receive at the advent of Christ. And it was one of the capital errors of the Jews, in all periods of their history, to pay too exclusive a regard to the mere externals of the temple and its worship, without discerning the spiritual truths and principles that lay concealed under them. But such being the case, the necessity for an outward an literal realization of Ezekiels plan obviously alls to the ground. For if all connected with it was ordered and arranged chiefly for its symbolical value at any rate, why might not the description itself be given forth for the edification and comfort of the Church, on account of what it contained of symbolical instruction? Even if the plan had been fitted and designed for being actually reduced to practice, it would still have been principally with a view to its being a mirror in which to see reflected the mind and purposes of God. But if so, why might not the delineation itself be made to serve for such a mirror? In other words, why might not God have spoken to His Church of good things to come by the wise adjustment of a symbolical plan? Let the same rules be applied to the interpretation of Ezekiels visionary temple which, on the express warrant of Scripture, we apply to Solomons literal one, and it will be impossible to show why, so far as the ends of instruction are concerned, the same great purposes might not be served by the simple delineation of the one, as by the actual construction of the other.2

It is also not to be overlooked, in support of this line of reflection, that in other and earlier communications Ezekiel makes much account of the symbolical character of the temple and the things belonging to it. It is as a priest he gives us to understand at the outset, and for the purpose of doing priest-like service for the covenant-people, that he received his prophetical calling, and had visions of God displayed to him (see on Eze 1:1-3). In the series of visions contained in Ezekiel 8-11, the guilt of the people was represented as concentrating itself there, and determining Gods procedure in regard to it. By the divine glory being seen to leave the temple was symbolized the withdrawing of Gods gracious presence from Jerusalem; and by His promising to become for a little a sanctuary to the pious remnant in Chaldea, it was virtually said that the temple, as to its spiritual reality, was going to be transferred thither. This closing vision comes now as the happy counterpart of those earlier ones, giving promise of a complete rectification of preceding evils and disorders. It assured the Church that all should yet be set right again; nay, that greater and better things, should be found in the future than had ever been known in the past,things too great and good to be presented merely under the old symbolical forms; these must be modelled and adjusted anew to adapt them to the higher objects in prospect. Nor is Ezekiel at all singular in this. The other prophets represent the coming future with a reference to the symbolical places and ordinances of the past, adjusting and modifying these to suit their immediate design. Thus Jeremiah says, in Ezekiel 31:3840: Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that the city shall be built to the Lord from the gate of Hananeel to the corner gate. And the measuring line shall go forth opposite to it still farther over the hill Gareb (the hill of the leprous), and shall compass about to Goath (the place of execution). And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields to the brook Kedron, unto the corner of the horse-gate toward the east, shall be holy to the Lord. That is, there shall be a rebuilt Jerusalem in token of the revival of Gods cause, in consequence of which even the places formerly unclean shall become holiness to the Lord: not only shall the loss be recovered, but also the evil inherent in the past purged out, and the cause of righteousness made completely triumphant. The sublime passage in Isaiah 60 is entirely parallel as to its general import. And in the two last chapters of Revelation we have a quite similar vision to the one before us, employed to set forth the ultimate condition of the redeemed Church. There are differences in the one as compared with the other, precisely as in the vision of Ezekiel there are differences as compared with anything that existed under the Old Covenant. In particular, while the temple forms the very heart and centre of Ezekiels plan, in Johns no temple whatever was to be seen. But in the two descriptions the same truth is symbolized, though in the last it appears in a state of more perfect development than in the other. The temple in Ezekiel, with Gods glory returned to it, bespoke Gods presence among His people to sanctify and bless them; the no-temple in John indicated that such a select spot was no longer needed, that the gracious presence of God was everywhere seen and felt. It is the same truth in both, only in the latter represented, in accordance with the genius of the new dispensation, as less connected with the circumstantials of place and form.

8. It only remains to be stated, that in the interpretation of the vision we must keep carefully in mind the circumstances in which it was given, and look at it, not as from a New, but as from an Old Testament point of view. We must throw ourselves back as far as possible into the position of the prophet himself. We must think of him as having just seen the divine fabric which had been reared in the sacred and civil constitution of Israel dashed in pieces, and apparently become a hopeless wreck. But in strong faith in Jehovahs word, and with divine insight into His future purposes, he sees that that never can perish which carries in its bosom the element of Gods unchangeableness; that the hand of the Spirit will assuredly be applied to raise up the old anew; and not only that, but also that it shall be inspired with fresh life and vigour, enabling it to burst the former limits, and rise into a greatness and perfection and majesty never known or conceived of in the past. He speaks, therefore, chiefly of gospel times, but as one still dwelling under the veil, and uttering the language of legal times. And of the substance of his communication, both as to its general correspondence with the past and its difference in particular parts, we submit the following summary, as given by Hvernick:1. In the gospel times there is to be on the part of Jehovah a solemn occupation anew of His sanctuary, in which the entire fulness of the divine glory shall dwell and manifest itself. At the last there is to rise a new temple, diverse from the old, to be made every way suitable to that grand and lofty intention, and worthy of it; in particular, of vast compass for the new community, and with a holiness stretching over the entire extent of the temple, so that in this respect there should no longer be any distinction between the different parts. Throughout, everything is subjected to the most exact and particular appointments; individual parts, and especially such as had formerly remained indeterminate, obtain now an immediate divine sanction; so that every idea of any kind of arbitrariness must be altogether excluded from this temple. Accordingly, this sanctuary is the thoroughly sufficient, perfect manifestation of God for the salvation of His people (Eze 40:1 to Eze 43:12). 2. From this sanctuary, as from the new centre of all religious life, there gushes forth an unbounded fulness of blessings upon the people, who in consequence attain to a new condition. There come also into being a new glorious worship, a truly acceptable priesthood and theocratical ruler, and equity and righteousness reign among the entire community, who, being purified from all stains, rise indeed to possess the life that is in God (Eze 43:13 to Eze 47:12). 3. To the people who have become renewed by such blessings, the Lord gives the land of promise; Canaan is a second time divided among them, where, in perfect harmony and blessed fellowship, they serve the living God, who abides and manifests Himself among them3 (Eze 47:13-23).Fairbairns Ezekiel, pp. 436450.W. F.]

5. In connection with the wall with which the description begins, mention is forthwith made (Eze 40:5) of the house. This makes clear in the outset what is the principal building, to which all else is subordinate, although the wall is called a building. However large, then, that which the wall comprehends may appear to be,and it is said in 40:2 to be a city-like building,the house is still the kernel. Comp. the measuring from it in 40:7 sq. Hence the symbolized idea is the dwelling of Jehovah as a permanent one, especially when we compare Eze 37:26 sq. As type, the realization of the idea is to be found in the Word become flesh (Joh 1:14), as also the (Joh 4:23) farther shows that the worship in spirit and in truth, and thereby the fulfilling of the worship at Jerusalem, has come with Christ. Salvation ( ) is of the Jews, as our vision also sets forth in an architectonic form; they worship what they know. But as the law was given by Moses, so grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. The original influence of the sanctuary on the first constituting of Israel as a people through the making of a divine covenant is still held by in Eze 37:26 sq. (Yes, Israel is Jehovahs family, His house, , Joh 1:11; Jehovahs covenant with Israel is a marriage-covenant, Ezekiel 16.) The visibility of Jehovahs dwelling, even in the vision here, although spiritual, must be looked on as a pledge of the entire relation of Jehovah to Israel, and especially of the promise of the Messiah. This is the sacramental character of Ezekiels vision of the temple specially insisted on by Hengstenberg. But the temple as the abode of Jehovah is a place of farther revelation, for Jehovah is the Self-revealing One. The very name Jehovah contains a pledge for the whole future of the kingdom of God, the Church of the future. Now this name, as is well known, coincides most essentially and intimately with the destination of this house; Ezekiel repeatedly emphasizes the fact that it is the name of His holiness, just as in connection therewith the sanctification of Israel is again and again expressed. Now, as this expresses also the ultimate aim of all Jehovahs revelation in Israel, we must have got before us in the sanctuary the perspective to the end of Gods way with Israel and mankind in general, the vision of Israel fulfilling its destiny of being Gods tabernacle with men, and the consummation of the world in glory, Revelation 21, 22. But the holiness of Jehovah, the sanctification of Israel, is signified forthwith by the wall round about the house.

6. The significance of the wall, however, comes first info consideration in respect to the court of the people, so that in special the sanctification of Israel as the end and object of Jehovahs dwelling in their midst is before all thus symbolically expressed. If the house is the central point of the whole, still the court completes the idea of the house; as we have the temple in its entirety, as it was meant to be, only when it has the two courts conjoined with it. The reference to the city, and farther to the whole land, which undoubtedly was always contained in the idea of the court, is moreover expressly given shape to in Ezekiel (comp. Ezekiel 48). The court here represents the Israel in the widest extent that appears before Jehovah, as it lives in the light of His countenance and of intercourse with Him; that is to say, it refers to the idea proper of a holy people. When, accordingly, the visionary-prophetic description in Ezekiel exhibits a striking difference from the brevity, incompleteness, and indefiniteness of the historical account in the books of Kings and Chronicles, this indicates, as respects the idea, another Israel than the people had hitherto been. Hvernick remarks on the wide compass, in order to contain the new community, and the sanctuary extending itself on all sides of the temple indiscriminately, that which was formerly undefined is now, as he says, to receive a higher, a divine sanction. Bhr, speaking of Solomons temple, says that the almost total indefiniteness of its court is owing to its human character in contrast to the idea and purpose of the house, and that even the court of the tabernacle, although measured and defined more exactly than that of the temple, shows numbers and measurements which indicate imperfection and incompleteness. This latter statement might possibly give a hint as to Ezekiels description of the courts of the temple, which is, on the contrary, so exact and detailed, and would at least be plainer than what Bhr says of the human as not divine, etc., while yet he must concede to the court a mediate divineness. Israel in the wilderness might, as Jehovahs host, as the people under His most special guidance, still in some measure stamp this relation on the court of the tabernacle. In Solomons temple, on the contrary, the self-development, left more to the freedom of the people, especially as they now had kings like other nations, and when their position under Solomon was so influential, would be expressed in the characteristic indefiniteness of the peoples part in the sanctuary. But the Israel of the future, Ezekiel in fine would say, will be exactly and distinctly Jehovahs possession. Hvernick (and Bhr too) cites for the conformation of the court, shaping itself according to the need of the people and the times, its well-known division by Solomon into two courts. After referring to 2Ch 20:5, and the various annexes, the cells, and the frequent defilement of this locality (2Ki 23:11-12), he concludes thus: The treading of the courts (Isa 1:12) has now come to an end; the repentant people are ashamed of their sins, and draw near to their God in a new spirit, Eze 43:10. The new condition of the courts is a figure, an expression of the new condition of the community. (Comp. Zec 3:7; Rev 11:2.) Thus in Ezekiels symbolism the new garnishing of the courts comes to view as the quickening anew, the glorious restoration of the community of Israel. [Comp. additional note on p. 388.W. F.]

7. But the description in our vision begins with the gates, dwelling specially on the east gate. For the copiousness with which the gates are described, comp. Eze 43:11; Eze 48:31 sq. Hvernick, against Bttcher, dwells on their significance (p. 641 sq.); makes them since Solomon have acquired under his successors the disturbing character of the incidental; remarks that the law says nothing definitely regarding them; points out the profane use to which they were put (Jer 20:2); and maintains that, on the contrary, the prophet assigns to them a definite relation to the whole of the building, so that they are thoroughly in conformity with the idea of the building. But the contrast to Ezekiel 8 and those that follow is to be very specially observed. Brought to the gates of the temple, the prophet had been witness of the idol-worship prevalent there. And he had seen the Shechinah departing out of the east gate. To this we have now a beautiful and complete contrast. Henceforth Jehovah will no longer see the holy passages in and out so contemptuously desecrated and defiled (Eze 43:7 sq.); on the contrary, the holy bands that keep the feast and offer sacrifice shall go in and out with the prince of the people in their midst (Eze 46:8 sq.; comp. Rev 21:25 sq.). But above all, the glory of Jehovah shall enter in by the east gate (Eze 43:1 sq.). Hence this gate is the pattern for all the others, etc.

8. From the relation on the whole to the temple of Solomon, Bunsen thinks that in general the old temple was the model; only, on the one hand, the disposition of the parts was simpler and less showy, and on the other, an effort was exhibited to attain to symmetry in the proportions and regularity in general. While Tholuck and others remark on the colossal size in different respects, as indicating the pre-eminence of the future community, Hengstenberg finds throughout always very moderate dimensions. Unmistakeably there is a reference throughout to the temple which Ezekiel had seen with his own eyes; this explains the brevity and incompleteness partially attaching to the description, although in respect to the sanctuary proper this peculiarity of Ezekiel, who is otherwise so pictorial, demands some farther explanation. That the knowledge of the temple, whenever it could be supposed, is supposed in our vision (comp. on Ezekiel 41), especially when what was seen presented itself, as it were, in short-hand to the prophet, is only what we should naturally expect. But it corresponded also to the typology of Solomon and the glorious age of Solomon, which had entered so deeply into the consciousness of Israel, and was so popular, when Solomons temple forms the foil for the still future revelation of glory and the form it assumes. Ezekiels vision presupposes, indeed, that which it passes over in silence, but certainly not always that which it suppresses, as having to be supplied from the days of Solomon. A supposition of this kind is least of all permissible for the metallic ornaments, of which nothing whatever is said in passages in which, on the contrary, e.g. Eze 41:22, what is made of wood is particularly mentioned, or when explanations are made, such, for example, as: This is the table which is before Jehovah. The old is presupposed, and also something new and different is inserted in the old when not put in its place. What Hvernick observes generally regarding the use made of the sacred symbols of the Old Testament and the allusions to the law by our prophet, may be applied to the way in which reference is made to Solomons temple and the knowledge of it supposed: He lives therein with his whole soul, but by the Spirit of God he is led beyond the merely legal consciousness, he rises superior to the legal symbolism, etc. In the prophetic description in the chapters before us, we can perceive a struggle as of a dawning day with the clouds of morning; and if something testifies to the derivation of our vision from a higher source than a fancy, however pious, would be, we may take that something to be the sudden advent of peculiar and quite unexpected lights, which have in them at least something strange and surprising in the case of Ezekiel, who was not only familiar with ancestral tenets and priestly tradition, but strongly attached to both. One might sometimes say a less than Solomon is here (Mat 12:42), and yet not be satisfied with Hengstenbergs reference to the troublous times in which temple and city were to be rebuilt, but (as Umbreit beautifully says) will feel constrained to take still more into consideration the worth of the most significant inwardness for the poverty of the immediately succeeding times, in view of the new temple for the new covenant, so that whatever of apparently meagre simplicity attaches to our temple-vision may have to be read according to the rule given in Mat 6:29. Umbreit aptly says: In the interior of the abode of the Holy One of Israel, quite a different appearance indeed is presented from that in Solomons temple, and the splendour of gold and brilliant hues is in vain sought for therein; no special mention is made of the sacred vessels, and only the altar of incense is changed into a table of the Lord, which, instead of all other symbols, simply suggests the purely spiritual impartation of the divine life. The ark of the covenant was destroyed by the fire of God, and our prophet no more than Jeremiah cared to know about a new one being made, as also, indeed, it was actually wanting in the so-called second temple. It is enough that the cherubim resume their place in the sanctuary, and, entering through the open doors, now fill the whole empty house, in which the distinctions of the old temple are very significantly left out; for we no longer see the veils, and the whole temple has become a holy of holies. In the same strain Hvernick says: If Jehovah wills to dwell among a new people, He must do so in a new manner, although in one analogous to the former. It is the same temple, but its precincts have become different, in order to contain a much more numerous people; and all the arrangements and adjustments here testify to the faithfulness and zeal with which the Lord is sought and served. The whole sacred temple area has become a holy of holies; in this temple there is no place for the ark of the covenant (Jer 3:16), instead of which comes the full revelation of the Shechinah. On the one hand, the legal form of worship is retained in every iota, or tacitly supposed; on the other, a new element, as with Eze 41:22, almost exactly what Christendom calls the Lords table, sheds its light over everything previously existing. On the one hand, the numbers and proportions express a magnitude and beauty, a majestic harmony, surpassing both the tent and the temple (Eze 41:1); on the other, there are unmistakeable indications, as respects the , in the simplicity and plainness of the whole and the parts, of an , a , and and here and there even a hint is perceptible of the outward poverty of the Church in the last times. Moreover, as the temple of Ezekiel consolingly presented to those who returned from the exile, approaching the more closely to them as respects its human character, its divinity and spirituality in their temple building, so again it contained a sacred criticism on the splendid edifice erected by Herod 500 years later (of the immensa opulentia of which the Roman Tacitus speaks),a criticism which He who walked in this last temple of Israel, and who was Himself the fulfilling of the temple, completed , and as , .

9. The treatment of the side-building (Eze 41:5 sq.), especially in its connection with the temple-house, and the detailed description, kept now first in due correspondence with the sanctuary, of the building on the gizrah (Eze 41:12 sq.), are worthy of observation, although not so important as Hvernick makes them. With a touch of human nature, Hengstenberg connects the side chambers with Ezekiels dearest youthful reminiscences, reminding us at the same time of Samuel, who, as well as Eli, had even his bedroom in such a side-chamber of the tabernacle. According to Hvernick, Ezekiels description is meant to keep the annexe in fairest proportion to the sanctuary itself, etc.; it is the perfect building, instead of the still defective and imperfect one described in 1 Kings 6. The side-building and the gizrah are evidently distinguished in relation to the temple as addition and contrast. The description, too, given of both, suggests a still farther realization of the temple-idea, as regards priestly service and other modes of showing reverence to God, and also of the in spirit and in truth for this future worship.

10. As to the temple of Ezekiels vision considered sthetically, Bhrs thoughtful analysis (Der sal. Tempel, pp. 7 sq., 269 sq.) is so much the more applicable, as this visionary temple is still more animated and dominated by the religious idea of Israel, which in its futurity is the Messianic idea. The temple before us is in the highest sense of the word music of the future, although only a variation of an old theme. The import of this old theme, Solomons temple and the original tabernacle, will first find full expression in Ezekiels temple, whether its measures and numbers are the old ones or different. We must not employ here the classical criterion of the beautiful; sensuous beauty of form is not to be found here. The adornment of the edifice is limited to cherubim and palms, either together or separate; and of the cherubim it must be granted that, sthetically considered, they are figures the reverse of beautiful. We meet, however, with nothing tasteless or repulsive, like the dog or bird-headed human forms, the green and blue faces of the Egyptian gods, or the many armed idols of the Indian cultus. But what a difference is there between the temple of Ezekiels vision and the fancy edifice, for example, the description of which is to be found in the younger Titurel (strophe 311415, edited by Hahn; comp. Sulp. Boisseree on the description of the temple of the Holy Grail, Munich 1834),the wondrous sanctuary on Mont Salvage, in which the ideal German architecture consecrates its poetic expression under the influence of reminiscences of Rev 21:11 sq.! (The chapel of the Holy Cross at Castle Karlstein, near Prague, presents to this day a partial imitation, and on a reduced scale, of the temple of the Grail.) A large fortress with walls and innumerable towers surrounds the temple of the Grail, like an extensive and dense forest of ebony trees, cypresses, and cedars. Instead of the guard-rooms (Ezekiel 40) and the express charge of the house (Ezekiel 44) of Ezekiel, are the guardians and protectors of the Grail,the templars, a band of spiritual knights of the noblest kind, humble, pure, faithful, chaste men. And whatever of precious stones, imagery, gold, and pearls the poetic fancy was able to imagine, is collected around the shrine of the Holy Grail. In the heathen temple, with its attempts to represent the divine, and especially in the Greek temple, conformably to the innate artistic taste of the Greeks, with such beautiful natural scenery cherishing and demanding this taste, where sky, earth, and sea on every side suggest the divine as also the beautiful, the execution, form, and shape, distribution and arrangement of the parts, as well as all its decorations, correspond to the demands of sthetics; but already in Solomons temple the ethical-religious principle of the covenant, and consequently of the theocratic presence of Jehovah among His people, penetrates and pervades everything else. Thus the tabernacle, and also the whole temple building, culminates in the holy of holies, which contains the ark of the covenant with the tables of the law, and in which the atonement par excellence is completed. A relation like this, then, is served by any form which rather fulfils its office than strives after artistic configuration, and the form has answered its purpose, provided it only is a religiously significant form. Solomons temple, says Bhr, cannot stand as a great work of art before the forum of the sthetic. Human art in general goes along with nature, hence its mainly heathenish, its cosmic (, decoration) character. Jehovah, on the contrary, is holiness, and no necessity of nature of any kind, no nationality as such, no deification of nature, no magic consecration binds Him to Israel, but the freest covenant grace, which has as its aim the sanctification of Israel as His people, with a view to all mankind. That Phnician artists executed the building of Solomons temple (comp. for this the exhaustive critique of Bhr in the work quoted above, p. 250 sq.)although (Krause, die drei ltesten Kunsturkunden der Freimaurer-brderschaft, Dresden 1819) freemasonry makes grand masters after Solomon, who is held to represent the Father (omnipotence), King Hiram as Son (wisdom), and Hiram Abif as Spirit (harmony, beauty)concerns chiefly the technical working in wood and metal. If the artistic execution, thus limited, of the temple decoration bore on it a Phnician character, and the employment of table work coated with silver showed signs of Hither Asia in general, yet the Phnician element, this mundane configuration, would not amount to much more than what the Greek language was, in which the gospel of the New Covenant, as well as that of the Old, came before the world. But a specifically Christian element, the really fundamental element in the first and oldest Christian church architecture, namely, that what is also called (it is true) Gods house is simply an enclosure of the congregation (; , , domus ecclesi), is an approximation to the extension of the outer court in Ezekiel, which extension is quite in unison with the Christological method of our prophet, with the peculiar regard he pays to the people of the Messiah (Introd. 9). Comp. 2Co 6:16; Eph 2:20 sq.; 1Pe 2:4. The Christian community forms in future the house of God, the temple; as also its development, externally and internally, is in the New Testament called edification, building. Voltaire has declared that he could remember in all antiquity no public building, no national temple, so small as Solomons; and J. D. Michaelis held that his house in Gttingen was larger; whereas Hengstenberg ascribes to Solomons temple, inclusive of the courts, an imposing size. The prominence given in Ezekiel to the east gate of the new temple, although the holy of holies still lies towards the west, may remind us of the projecting eastward of Christian church buildings from the earliest age, and especially of the Concha closing them on the east. As the glory of the God of Israel comes from the east (Ezekiel 43), so in the east is the Dayspring from on high (Luk 1:78; the Sun of Righteousness, Mal. 3:20 [4:2]), the Light of the world (Joh 8:12; Isaiah 4), which has brought a new day, the precursor and pledge of the future new morning and day of eternal glory (Rom 13:12; 2Ti 4:8). If the light-concealing stained windows of the Middle Ages are not to be traced back to the parts shut up and covered in Ezekiels temple, still the powerful tendency to elevation upwards, so appropriate to the Gothic style, has at least some support in the pillars (Eze 40:14), and even suggests an (Php 3:20; Col 3:1 sq.).

11. The designation of the temple in Ezekiel 43. as the place of Jehovahs throne, etc., might make us suppose the existence of the ark of the covenant, unless its significance as (to borrow Bhrs words) centre, heart, root, and soul of the whole edifice necessarily demanded an express mention, when, for example, we have in Ezekiel most exact accounts of the altars; comp on Eze 41:22. Solomons temple (1 Kings 8) first became what it was meant to be from the fact that the ark of the covenant came into it. But the post-exile temple had an empty holy of holies, as Tacitus (Hist. v. 9) relates of Pompey, that he by his right as conqueror entered the temple, from which time it became known that no divine image was in it, but only an empty abode, and that there was nothing in the mystery of the Jews. (Comp. Josephus, Bell. Jud. v. 5. 5) The most probable supposition is, that the ark of the covenant disappeared at the destruction of Solomons temple, that it was consumed by fire. For the traditions of what became of it are mere myths; e.g. in 2 Maccabees 2, that Jeremiah, among other things, by divine command hid the ark in a cave in Mount Nebo, but when they who had gone with him could not again find the place, he rebuked them, and pointed to the future, when the Lord would again be gracious to His people and reveal i to them, and the glory of the Lord and the cloud would appear as formerly. [The Mishna makes it be hid in a cave under the temple, a statement which the Rabbins endeavour to confirm from 2Ch 35:3. Carpzov supposes the ark included in 2Ch 36:10, and holds that it was restored by Cyrus, Ezr 1:7; a statement which Winer rightly cannot find in that passage, but rather the reverse; while at the same time he is unable to agree with Hitzig, who concludes from Jer 3:16 that the ark of the covenant was no longer in existence even in the days of this prophet. According to the Mishna (Joma v. 2), there had been put in its place an altar-stone rising three fingers above the ground, on which the high priest on the great day of atonement set the censer.] That the symbolical designation of the temple expressed in Ezekiel with reference to the ark of the covenant is simply a legal technical term may be the more readily believed, as in certain respects in contrast thereto, at least in distinction therefrom (although this is strangely denied by Hengst.), the whole precincts of the temple, in consequence of the re-entrance of the glory of Jehovah, became a holy of holies in accordance with the law of this house; comp. on Eze 43:12. W. Neumann expounds Jer 3:16 of the new birth of Israel, when Jehovah will be glorified in the midst of His saints, that these shall no longer celebrate the ark of the covenant. He rejects the opinion of Abendana, who, from 43:17 of the same chapter, inferred that the whole of Jerusalem is to be a holy dwelling-place, and holds to Rashis view, that the entire community will be holy, and that Jehovah will dwell in its midst as if it were the ark of the covenant. For the ark of the covenant as such is a symbolical vessel. As it contains within it the law, which testifies to the covenant (Deu 4:13; Deu 26:17 sq.), so the covenant-people are represented in it, the bearers of the law through worldly life, until the days when it shall be written on the hearts of the saints (Jer 31:31 sq.). The Capporeth represents the transformation of the creature transformed by Israels perfection in the Lord (?), the new heavens and the new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness, Isa 66:22-23. If this is the thought which lies at the root of the symbolism, then when the ark of the covenant is no longer kept in commemoration, the shadows of the Old Covenant have passed away, all has become new, and the redeemed are the holy seed (Isa 6:13), to whom Jehovahs law has become the law of their life. The eloquent silence in our prophet regarding the ark of the covenant will, moreover, be understood in respect to the man who speaks as Jehovah (comp. on Eze 43:7), that is, in a Messianic-christological sense, notwithstanding that Ezekiels Christology (Introd. 9) has the Messianic people principally in view.

12. Ezekiels vision rests throughout on the law of Moses. Were it otherwise in our chapters, Ezekiel could have been no prophet of Israel, nor the Mosaic law the law of God. This legal character was, moreover, well adapted to put an arrest on a mere fancy portraiture, if not to make it altogether impossible. As to the departure from the law of Moses, which, however, he must concede, Philippson maintains that it is not great, and is limited to the number of victims (? ?). Hengstenberg denies any difference, calling it merely alleged. On the other hand, Hvernick, with whom many agree, speaks of Ezekiels many differences and definitions going beyond the law of the Old Covenant, while at the same time he rejects the idea that the prophet forms the transition to the farther improved system of the Pentateuch (Vatke), and affirms against J. D. Michaelis the unchangeable character of the law of Moses. Hvernick says: These discrepancies rather show with so much the more stringent necessity, that a new condition of things is spoken of in the prophet, in which the old law will continue in glorious transformation, not abrogated, but fulfilled and to be fulfilled, coming into full truth and reality. Bunsen speaks to this effect: Ezekiels design was to make the ritual more spiritual, and to break the tyranny of the high-priesthood. For mention is nowhere made of a high priest, whereas a high-priestly obligation, although slightly relaxed, is laid upon the priests (Eze 44:22). The daily evening sacrifice falls away, and among the yearly feasts we miss Pentecost and the Great Day of Atonement, all which accords with the absence of the high priest and the ark of the covenant; instead of these comes an additional feast of atonement at the beginning of the year (Eze 45:18 sq.), and the amount of the morning sacrifice and the festal sacrifices is enhanced. There is, indeed, much reference to the original law throughout, and it is anew set forth with respect to transgressions and abuses that had crept in, special weight being laid on the precepts concerning clean and unclean (Eze 44:17 sq.; comp. Eze 22:26); but still more does Ezekiel go beyond the law, and gives additional force to its precepts. We must call to mind the position generally of prophecy to the law of Moses. As prophecy is provided for in the law in the proper place (comp. our Comment on Deut. p. 134), namely, when Moses departure demanded it, so its foundation is traced back in Deu 18:16 sq. to Sinai, and thus it is thenceforth comprehended historically in the legislation. But although it thus stands and falls with the law, having by its own account, like all the institutions of Israel, its norm in the law, yet it rejoices in its extraordinary fellowship with God, its divine endowment and inspiration. And this not in order, like the priesthood, to teach after the letter, and to serve in the ceremonial; but the provision made and charge given already on Mount Sinai, as they make the official duty of prophecy to be the representation of Gods holy will against every other will, so they give to it the character of a legitimate as well as legitimatized officiality, which, like Moses, has to serve as the chosen means of intermediation in relation to the will of the Most High Lawgiver revealing itself; the calling is ordained in Israel for the continuity of the divine legislation. This latter qualification of the prophets of Jehovah in Israel afforded a foundation for their deepening of the legal worship, as opposed to hypocrisy and torpid formality, for their spiritual interpretation of the ceremonial; as, in view of their position towards the future, a consideration of the ecclesiastical and civil law in their bearing on the future followed as a matter of course. The idea which for this end dominates Ezekiels closing vision is the holiness of Jehovah, and the corresponding sanctification of Israel, their separation to Jehovah as a possession. It is the root idea which the law expresses and symbolizes in all its forms, whether of morality, worship, or polity. And as it is said already in Exodus 19 : Ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, so it is also said in 1 Peter 2 of the Christian community, that they who are lively stones are built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ (comp. 1Pe 2:9). Peter thus makes a New Testament use of the same mode of expression regarding worship, which, carried out in Old Testament form, is Ezekiels representation of Jehovahs service of the future, when Jehovah shall dwell for ever in His people. Comp. Eze 20:40. Ezekiels position, therefore, to the law of Moses is not that of freedom from legal restraints,a position which might be subjective and arbitrary,but what he applies from the law for the illustration of the future, and the way in which he does so, passing by some things, more strongly emphasizing others, or putting them into new shapes, derives its legal justification from the idea of the law as it shall be realized in a true Israel, that is, the Messianic Israel. That the Messiah, who says in John 17 : And for them I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth, remains as a person in the background, is quite in correspondence with Ezekiels Christology (Introd. 9), which, as already said, characterizes the times and the salvation of the Messiah through the Messianic people.

13. The proper significance of the new temple lies in the full revelation of Jehovah in His sanctuary, in the new and living fellowship into which God enters with His people by this His dwelling among them (Hv.). As being a return, which it is in relation to Ezekiel 11, the entrance of the glory of the Eternal has, although with a New Testament application, corresponding to the: (Mat 28:20), also its Apocalyptic significance, as John says before the close of his Revelation (Ezekiel 22): , .

14. If the idea of the court is unquestionably that of the people, whose Messianic perfection as Israel Ezekiel is to behold, then, since everything on the mountain of the vision here is most holy (Eze 43:12), the immediately following detailed description of the altar of burnt-offering and its consecration can only point to the future manifestation of Jehovahs holiness and the sanctification of His peculiar people (1Pe 2:9). What holds good of the altar refers also to the whole court; the blessing of the altar includes in it that of the community. By means of the expiation of the altar, the purpose of the divine love, to see a holy people assembled, is effected. The first act, consequently, in which the significance of the new sanctuary is expressed, is the complete expiation of the people, and its efficacy in this respect far surpasses in extent and glory that of the old sanctuary (Hv.). Accordingly, if they who are sanctified are perfected by the (Heb 10:14), the full and complete offering on Golgotha, then the idea also of this altar of burnt-offering upon the very high mountain must be fulfilled. But as the offering which fulfils is the most personal priestly offering, so the sanctification of the people in Ezekiels typical temple takes place on the altar of burnt-offering in the priests court, which therefore still remains separated from the court of the people, as in Solomons temple, whereas in the tabernacle there was only one court. The symbolical representation of the dominant idea of the sanctification of the people was, from their being represented by the priests, rightly localized in a priests court, which gives it due prominence here, where everything hinges on locality and arrangement. Thus also, as Bhr observes, in the camp of Israel the priestly family in its four main branches encamped close around the sanctuary on its four sides. [Comp. with this section the Additional Note on Eze 43:13-27, p. 410.W. F.]

15. As the shutting of the east gate (Ezekiel 44) for the future puts the key of Ezekiels temple into the hand of Him who, according to the typology of the law and the prediction of the prophets, is the Coming One of Israel, so the princes sitting and eating in the east gate must be taken as throwing light on the Messianic future of the people of the promise. It is very evident that by the prince is not to be understood the high priest of Israel. This interpretation, which was a Maccabean prolepsis, has now been abandoned. Kliefoth, Keil, and Hitzig justly dispute the indefinite sense which Hvernick gives to the , yet they do not sufficiently attend to what may be said in defence of Hvernicks indefiniteness, and which certainly tells against those who make the future theocratic ruler to be one with the King David of Ezekiel 34, 37, because he too is called , as indeed he is also called . They must own, however, that there is a difference between: My servant David shall be king over them, between the one shepherd who is prince for ever, and the here, who comes into consideration qu . Now if this must be granted, then it is only with justice that Hvernick observes that the designation sets before us the original, or, as he calls it, the purely natural constitution of the Israelites (Exo 22:27 [28]), although not so much because the time of the exile had again limited the people to this original constitution, or left them only a poor remainder of it, as because, looking, as in our vision we always should do, at the Messiah and His times, the discrepancy between theocracy and kingly power, which showed itself at the rise of the latter under Samuel, is to be adjusted on the original ground of the peculiarity of Israel. The is the prince of the tribe, as the tribal constitution of Israel put the juridical power and the executive into the hands of the natural superiors, the heads, of families and tribes. And even when in time of need, as in the days of the judges, a dictatorship, the power of one over all others, is had recourse to, it is potestas delegata, and is on both sides considered as nothing else. With a tribal constitution such as the natural constitution of Israel was, the want of an outward centrum unitatis might in itself be painfully felt, and the instituting of one be looked on as a political necessity; but that for Israel the necessity of the time as such should have demanded a permanent institution of the kind, is strikingly refuted by the days of the judges, for the present aid of Jehovah answered to the momentary distress, and raised up the competent helper from out of the tribes of Israel,then when they entreated and wept, the faithfulness of God helped them, and sooner than they supposed all distress was over,just as the former examples of Moses and Joshua showed that in the Israelitish theocracy the right men were not wanting at the right time. Jehovah alone, as on another side the fundamental canon of the priesthood still held up before the people, claimed as His due to be Israels king in political respects also. Originally there could be beside Him no other political sovereign, but merely the institution, in subordination to Him, of the princes of the tribes, and a sort of hegemony of a single tribe. The unity of the religious sentiment, which made the twelve externally separate tribes internally one community, had in earlier times made up for the want of an external centrum unitatis, and the free authority of certain individual representatives of this sentiment was quite in harmony therewith. Hence Jehovah says in 1 Samuel 8 : They have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them. Thus the demand of the people requesting a king must, having regard to Samuel, who occupied in Israel a position similar to that of Moses, be looked on as a symptom of disease, although the disease was one of development. We may concede to the elders of Israel who come before Samuel, Samuels age, which they urge; and still more, as the occasion of their demand, the evil walk of his sons. We can point to the picture exhibited in the later period of the judges, when everything, even the temporary alliance of individual tribes, appears to be in a state of dissolution; we can along therewith take into account the pride of Ephraim, in whose midst the sanctuary stood, and to whose claims of superiority, even over Judah, all the tribes were more or less compelled to bow. Nay, even in the law (Deu 17:14 sq.), where it refers to the future taking possession of Canaan, the future development of an Israelitish kingdom is taken into view by Jehovah Himself, and the very form foreseen in which the demand came to Samuel: I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are about me. But although this possible desire of the people, because tolerated, is not expressly blamed, yet neither the self-derived resolution there: when thou sayest: I will, etc., nor the pattern: like all the nations that are about me, is spoken of approvingly; nor can there be behind the emphatic command: thou shalt in any wise set him to be king over thee whom Jehovah thy God shall choose, anything but a presupposed conflict with the kingly authority of Jehovah, against which provision must be made in the very outset. Accordingly, when Jehovah Himself takes into view the earthly kingship for Israel, He does so in a way not very different from what Christ says in Matthew 19 regarding the Mosaic permission of divorce because of Israels hard-heartedness: . But Jehovah is the Physician of Israel, who (Numbers 21) made Moses set the brazen serpent on a pole, as a remedy against the bite of the fiery serpents. That which expresses to the full the sentiment of the people under Samuel is also the undisguised: like all the nations; with this their request before Samuel closes emphatically as its culminating point. Although to Samuel the thing that personally concerned him: that he may judge us, which they gave as their object in the case of the king to be appointed, was displeasing, was in his eyes the bad element in the request, Jehovah first set the matter before him in the light that in His eyes the request for the king () was rather a rejection of His reigning over them, and explained to him the: like all the nations, in the mouth of the elders of the people, by their hereditary disposition: they forsook Me, and served other gods. Kingly power, such as the heathen nations have from early times, is a necessary self-defence of polytheism against its own divisive and centrifugal elements in the realm of politics; it is a socialistic attempt to arrange a life in community, and that is to unite, both to make the internal unity and order strong and powerful externally, and to keep them so. For , from , is derived from: judging, as still attested by the Syrian signification: to advise, and also by the fact that the kingly power in Israel arose from that of the judges: the ruler is he who stands over the opposing parties, over the strife, he who unites; very different from whom is , the tyrant, , the coming to power by the right of the strongest. Thus kingly power is from the first peculiar to heathenism;

and because the boundary between the human and the divine is to the heathen consciousness a fluctuating one, kingship, especially in connection with the idolatrous worship thereof which grew up among the heathen nations, comes to be regarded as the contrast to the theocratic relations of the monotheistic people of Israel. Accordingly, when the people of Jehovah ask a king such as all the nations have (comp. 1Sa 8:20), this indicates that the theocratic consciousness is darkened and weakened in them; and thus a visible king appears necessary to them, because the invisible Ruler has, as it were, disappeared from their view. In times of religious and moral insensibility, inquiries are always directed to the political constitution; not to the state of society, but to the civil arrangements. And when Israel, forgetting the divine national prerogative they had enjoyed since leaving Egypt, placed themselves on a level with the heathen, then they must have looked on themselves with eyes like those of the heathen; it could not but occur to them, that in comparison with heathen monarchy they were, as Ziegler says, a people poorly and weakly organized, visibly only republican, and therefore easy to be overcome by the heathen, whose power was concentrated in monarchy. Thus Israels disease in desiring a monarchy like the nations was, that they had become infected by the political miasma of the polytheistic spirit of the age. For while the first king of Israel, Saul, very soon entered on the path of the heathen, the monarchy which is in accordance with the law of Israel first assumes shape with David, and then chiefly internally, and with Solomon, and then almost entirely externally. This, too, explains the significance of these two types of kings for the Messianic idea. Ziegler calls David: the king among kings. He comprehended thoroughly the office of a king in a theocracy; he was the best mediator between the people and Jehovah. Because he was the servant of Jehovah, he was also the lawful king. Through him the kingdom became the very best means for attaining to the divine purposes. Comp. Doct. Reflec. 14, etc. on Ezekiel 34, and Doct. Reflec. 21 on Ezekiel 37 But already with Davidso that Solomons sinking down from the greatest external kingly glory into the surrounding polytheism, and the after-division of the royal power through its being broken into two kingdoms, only furnish the foil to itthe wider and higher future of Israel was founded in spirit, namely, as this future should be realized in the Messiah. According to the flesh, the Coming One of Israel is the son of David; according to the spirit of Messianic prophecy, David is the historico-personal basis, its personal foundation, a thoroughly prophetic personality; as Ziegler says: Partly inasmuch as he is manifestly a in many phases of his character and life, even in the minute particulars,that, like Christ, he began his official career in his thirtieth year, and that he went weeping over the Kedron, and ascended the Mount of Olives with covered head; but also partly because in his psalms he manifests himself a prophet in the narrower sense of the word, a prophet who by his psalms really adds new elements of revelation to the old, his prophecies entering into the most minute details, his Son is the Spirit of his poetry. If the people were comprehended in Moses as the as to the law, we may say of David that they are gathered together in him as to the theocratic kingdom. Hence these are far-seeing divine thoughts, and bearing special reference to the Messianic salvation which in 1 Samuel 8. Jehovah repeatedly urged upon Samuel, viz. to listen to the voice of the people, although the people will not at all listen to Samuels voice. Not that Israel had, as Ziegler supposes, to be set by the monarchy on a level with he world in order to be preserved in the world,for it was just the monarchy that destroyed its national existence, by drawing it into the politics of the great world,but (and this is the sole object in view in the law regarding the king in Deuteronomy 17) the possible conflict with Jehovahs royal dominion over Israel was guarded against by this, that in the Israelitish monarchy, especially as represented by David personally and by Solomon regally, Jehovah made His Anointed for eternity assume a preparatory shape, that is, filled the heathen-political form of government, which might be and still more might become such a contrast to the true, the theocratic Israel, with that which is the final purpose of Gods dominion over Israel (just as already to the patriarchs kings were promised as their descendants). Accordingly in Deuteronomy also, as the Israelitish kingship rises up as on the foundation of the judgeship, so, parallel therewith, and in connection with the priestly office, the prophetic office rises up as a continuation of the revelation by Moses ( or , Deuteronomy 18), in whom, according to Peter, was the . And not less significantly does the prince in Ezekiel sit and eat in the gate, through which the glory of Jehovah had entered, and which it has Messianically sanctified. With him Israel appears again as what it was, just as the elders of Israel asked from Samuel a king like the nations, to be chief representative of Israel according to its tribal constitution; he who can be styled directly ,4 will be so in Messianic consecration and sanctification, so that Christian kingship might be symbolized. Umbreit observes: Whereas at first every particular tribe had its Nasi, they now are all reunited under a single one. Thus an old name, and yet again new in its signification. From this Umbreit infers a prince clothed with great splendour (?), like another Melchizedek, who may combine well the rights of the state and of the Church in one spirit, etc. etc. Yet surely Hvernick is right in finding indicated here the true and complete harmony of civil and ecclesiastical order in the days of the Messiah. Christ has no vicar; to no one but Himself shall the kingdoms of the world belong; but to pious princes (to princes as they ought to be), to lawful magistrates and lords, pertains a prerogative over the faithful, which again is a duty and a service (Cocc.). Comp. what is said on this point in the exposition of Eze 46:2. [See also Additional Note on p. 417.]

16. In regard to the priests of Ezekiels temple, Hengstenberg thinks the prophet wishes to draw away the view from the dreary present,the priests without prospect of office, the ruins of the priesthood,and, on the contrary, presents to the eye priests in office and honour, in whom the Mosaic ordinances are again in full exercise and authority; and next he wishes to labour for the regeneration of the priesthood. It is only surprising, when in accordance with Hengstenbergs general view of our chapters the fancy is worked on here too by ideas of Mosaic priests, that the idea of the high priest is wanting, that this most powerful impression is disregarded. But as regards the removal of the degradation of the pre-exile priesthood, the mention of Zadok sets forth too prominently for this end just the age of David and Solomon. Ezekiels priests certainly are Mosaic priests, but the Mosaic priests had a people to represent of whom it is said in Exo 19:6 : Ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation (at the passover the whole people acted as priests); so that it is certainly Mosaic, although according to the inmost idea of the Mosaic law, when the people of the future are in Ezekiel specially represented by the priests. But it is quite peculiar to Ezekiel, that, in order duly to set forth the sanctification of the people by the lofty holiness of their priests, the high priest appears in certain respects absorbed into the priests, and these are represented in a high-priestly aspect. As the people are dealt with in Eze 44:6 sq. for the bad priests set to keep the charge of Jehovahs holy things (44:8), so the exemplification of priestly instruction of the people given in 44:23 is that of the true priests teaching to discern the difference between the holy and the profane, the unclean and the clean: the high-priestly sanctity of the priests is to serve for a high-priestly sanctification of the people; the high-priestly idea is to become a national reality, just as the aggregate of these Old Testament letters (for which comp. Zechariah 6) is the fulfilling word of the body of Christ as the Church. For the figure of Zadok, the typical high priest, taken from the very specially Messianically-typical age of David and Solomon, corresponds to only such a Messianic prospect. Zadoks sons are called the true priests of the people, just as the true Shepherd of the people (Ezekiel 34, 37) is a descendant of David. And here we have a parallel exactly similar to that of Jeremiah 33, where the continuance of the Levitical priesthood is guaranteed in like manner as the continuance of the race of David, and similarly as to the increase of both,in which respect there shall, according to Isaiah 66, be taken of the Gentiles for priests and for Levites; and so in this way the position of priests among the Gentiles, promised to Israel in Isaiah 61, fulfils itself as a universal priestly position. Hvernick makes a special blessing for the priesthood be connected with the general blessing of the theocracy, inasmuch as not its hitherto meagre (?) form, but the priestly office, as a faithful expression of the idea inherent in it, will be established in perpetuity; and he compares Mal 3:3 : A new priesthood, made anew by the power of the Lord, arises on the soil of the Old Testament priesthood in the new theocracy; just as Ezekiels main concern is the priestly office in general, so also the idea of a really spiritual priesthood comes to light in his writings, etc. When Hengstenberg compares Psalms 24 for the reformation of the priesthood, we observe that the demands on His people, spoken of there from the coming of the Lord of glory, are no specially priestly demands, but are addressed to the whole house of Israel; and the same is really the case with Isaiah 40, which he also cites. The Messianic references of the priesthood of the sons of Zadok, whereby (neither by Zadok personally, nor by Samuel) the prophetic word spoken to Eli (1Sa 2:27 sq.) is fulfilled, is not only maintained by the Fathers, but also by Keil;5 comp. on 1Sa 2:35 sq. The Berleburg Bible observes: As in the person of Solomon the Spirit of prophecy pointed to the true and anointed Solomon, so also in this priest it points to the great High Priest, Jesus Christ. Hengst. remains quite on the ordinary priestly ground; the prospect into the New Testament relations remains completely closed. According to him, the prophet has to do only with what is to be accomplished after brief delay, etc. On the other hand, Umbreit says: The priesthood is quite in accordance with the transformation of the house of God. The old class of mediators between Jehovah and His people, consecrated by descent, has disappeared, and we no more find the high priest than we find the ark of the covenant. Instead of the Levites, who, together with the people, have to bear the guilt of the profanation of the covenant, there have come now only the inwardly worthy, the sons of Zadok, who should fulfil their significant name by maintaining fidelity in this ideal sense; and the supreme enhanced law of the new priesthood is the maintaining of inward purity from every outward stain, etc. Their outward support is the holy gift of Jehovah, so that they can say with the godly man in Psalms 16 : Jehovah is my portion and my cup; my lot has fallen to me in pleasant places (Psa 16:5 sq.). [Comp. Additional Note at pp. 419, 420.]

17. The temple building, with its sacred architecture on the basis of the first tabernacle, as Solomons temple most richly displays it, symbolizes essentially the same as that which in the priesthood of the temple of Ezekiels vision is illustrated liturgically by the ministrations in this temple. For the accomplished dwelling of the Holy One in Israel proclaims His people to be a sanctified, and therefore a holy people. These are the worshippers that the Father desires (John 4), a kingdom of priests, or a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2); just as the prince, representing the people civilly and politically, fulfils his idea in King-Messiah; while the priests, the sons of Zadok, represent them ecclesiastically and spiritually. This is the purpose and constitution of Israel, the people of God. What the temple is in spirit, the representation by the priesthood of the new temple gives in truth, that is, in faithfulness and trueness of life. In the former, everything is most holy; in the latter, all are high-priestly. But in Christ the idea to be represented is realized in so much the more priestly a manner, because we have here the community of the Lord, the , where, in the case of Israel, was the congregation of the people, the , the . We might, moreover, find some difficulty in reconciling the omissions, and also the occasional so pregnant additions and stricter definitions taken from the idea of the law, in the ordinances regarding the priesthood, with what Hengst. maintains, namely, that the aim is, by a few well-chosen strokes, to bring out the thought of the restoration of the Mosaic priesthood in its customs and its rights, while it has been so easy for the exposition (which comp.) to show the prominence given throughout to the priestliness and sanctity of the priests office and the priestly order with reference to the people to be represented. As, moreover, the prince is, in Ezekiel 44, advanced to a privileged relation to the sanctuary (comp. Eze 45:13 sq.), so along with teaching, instruction, especially in holiness ( ) and sanctification ( , Eze 44:23), the settlement of disputes by the judgment of God, the establishing of righteousness (as is perhaps indicated in the name Zadok), is specified in 44:24 among the official duties of the priests. The prince eats in the east gate in the enjoyment of peace; the priests have always to restore peace.

18. As, on the one hand, the burnt-offering is the predominant note in this temple-system of the future, so, on the other, in Ezekiel 45 oblation is said in reference to the whole land. It is the same idea of devotion to Jehovah which is expressed by both,the national life consecrated to the Lord in fellowship with Him (comp. the sacrificial feasts, in the east gate, of the prince of this people), Israels state of grace. The disquisition on the oblation of holiness, etc., preliminary to Ezekiel 47, 48, and for which Eze 44:28 sq. furnishes the occasion, is significant from the very fact of being thus occasioned. For where priests and Levites are taken account of expressly according to their ministry in relation to Jehovah (Ezekiel 45), there the whole house of Israel (45:6), and the prince in particular, with their portions of land, appear in the light of sacred property belonging to Jehovah, and also as His servants, who, while His more peculiar servants, the priests, are to see to holiness and sanctification, have to endeavour after judgment and righteousness. In this way the new nationality dedicated to the Lord (chiefly by the burnt-offering, and symbolized by the oblation) has to exhibit itself in civil, social, and secular life. It is actually a new nationality in relation to land and people; but, considered by itself, and apart from Eze 44:28 sq., it appears to mean the division of the land, and especially the oblation. Spring has come, yea, the fields are now already white for the harvest (John 4). The oblation of holiness announces itself as the commencement of the future harvest. Ewald: The holy portion, which is previously taken from the rest of the land (like the tithes from the fruits of the field), and set apart for its own special purpose, is here very expressively mentioned in the outset, and with manifest reference to the now completed description of the temple (44:2; comp. Eze 42:20); while the prophet evidently hastens more quickly over the portions connected therewith of the common Levites and the city of Jerusalem, in order to come to the portion and duties of the prince, etc.

19. Hvernick says on Ezekiel 45 : After the description of a so newly reviving order of things in church matters, it appears as a matter of course that the land itself must be treated as a new land, and stand in need of a new special division. This division stands in a converse relation to that under Joshua. While at that time the people before all, each particular tribe, receive their portion, and not until afterwards was a fixed seat in the land assigned to Jehovah, here Jehovah first of all receives a holy gift, which is presented to Him. A portion of land is separated for the sanctuary and the priests, and one of equal size for the Levites. The new temple is moreover kept separate by a kind of suburb, in order to point out its special holiness.

20. The design of the Mosaic regulation, according to which priests and Levites, especially the latter, were to dwell dispersed among all the tribes, whereby the curse formerly uttered with respect to Levi by Jacob in his blessing of the patriarchs (Genesis 49) became fulfilled as a blessing for Levi and for all Israel, was to settle the tribe among Israel in accordance with its calling. Bhr says: If the Levites were to preserve the law and word of God, and thereby spread religious knowledge, promote religious life, pronounce judicial decisions in accordance therewith, etc., then it was not only suitable, but necessary, that they should not all dwell in one place, in one district. Their dwelling dispersed reminded them to spread the light of the fear of God and piety among the whole people, to give preference to no tribe, and to neglect none. On this we observe, that it is certainly not to be looked on as an abolition of the Mosaic ordinance that in Ezekiel priests and Levites are all concentrated in one place,the negation of the former would necessarily have to be formally announced,but the fulfilment simply comes in place of the former arrangement, inasmuch as the end proposed by that arrangement and regulation is present with and in the future Church. Hengst. thinks the relation of the priests and Levites to the sanctuary is meant to be made clear by their concentration in its neighbourhood. But already before this the cities of the priests at least were to be found in those tribal districts which lay nearest to the place of worship. The idea from which the grouping of the priests and Levites around the sanctuary has to be understood is rather what Jeremiah predicts: that they shall no more teach every man his brother, etc., that from the least to the greatest they all shall know Jehovah (Jer 31:34). The aim of dividing Levi among all the tribes, viz. to care for, preserve, and spread abroad everywhere the law and the testimony, is thus attained. The people of the future will be such that their liturgical representation and the dwelling of their priests and Levites in the neighbourhood of the temple suffice; and besides, this significantly brings out the thought that Levi, this election from the elect people, is a people of God in the people of God (Bhr). For, what was designed by the appointed cities, in which we already see them collected while they were dispersed among all the tribes, is fully accomplished in the land of the priests and the Levites (Ezekiel 45); and if Bhrs interpretation of the number of the 48 cities of the priests and Levites as referring to the sanctuary (Symb. d. mos. Kult. ii. p. 51) needed confirmation, it might have it here, where what this interpretation makes of Levis dwelling in the midst of Israel is expressly stated of the dwelling-place of the priestly Levites: a holy place for the sanctuary (45:4). Accordingly it is with this diversity as respects the Mosaic law, which Philippson calls the real diversity, exactly as Christ says in Matthew 5.: I am come not to destroy (), but to fulfil, and that: not one jot or one tittle shall pass from the law till all be fulfilled.

21. The sanctuary, the land of the priests and Levites, and the princes portion, form almost the centre of the land. The city does not include the sanctuary, but is situated beside it, also in the midst of the land. No jealousy about the possession of them can any longer separate the tribes (Hv.). This whole district, says Bunsen, is not to lie in the territory of a single tribe, which might thereby appear privileged, but, as accords with its sanctity, is separated from the tribal territories. In other words, the union-authority of the confederacy is to have a special seat for manifesting its activity. No wiser political idea could be devised. Hence Jerusalem still remains Jerusalem, but it no longer belongs to Benjamin. The central sanctuary is that which unifies also the tribes of Israel, just as the priesthood, royalty, and public property grouped around it give local expression to the unity and oneness of the whole. Instead of the violence-inflicting and heaven-assailing tower of Babel (Neteler), the tabernacle of Shem has become a divine sanctuary, which then no longer symbolizes solely Jehovahs dwelling in Israel, but is at the same time a type for mankind in general of His tabernacle with men (Rev 21:3), and of their being united to and under Him. Comp. the Doct. Reflec. on Ezekiel 47, 48.

22. Chiliasmand this is conceivable of the Jewish Chiliasm, whereas such a final Judaism cannot but prove injurious to modern Christian Chiliasm (Gal 3:3)forgets, while studying these closing chapters of our prophet, the beginning of his prophecy, the cosmic character of Ezekiel 1, which relates to creation generally, and on which the whole book is based. But indeed if in Romans 11 is the people, i.e. Israel after the flesh, then it is only logically consistent to interpret the requickening in Ezekiel 37 as a bodily resurrection of all dead Jews. Those who are raised become by this fact, or as at one stroke, converted to Christ; those who are alive are Christians already, or will become so in consequence of this; and this whole Israel returns to Palestine, and forms in a transformed state, as it is already marked out for being by this awakening, the focus of the millennial kingdom for fresh salvation to all nations. It is illogical to wish to pick out one piece here, and to understand another merely spiritually; but he who here says A must also say B. Whether the converted Jews are to live in their own land, under kings of the house of David, as a people who are to be preserved and finally also converted, as Kliefoth allows to be the doctrine of Scripture, or whether King David will then return and rule over Israel in glory, is rather an antiquarian than a theological question. Scripture teaches none of these fancies; nor does it speak of a kingdom of glory in the earthly Jerusalem, in which the Gentile Church is to be joined to Israel under the dominion of the then reappeared Christ-Messiah (as Baumgarten). According to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, it has been the destination of Israel, as the people separated from all nations from the time of their first fathers, to be a blessing to mankind. And the more its national theocracy expanded itself to universal Christocracy, which comprehended also the Gentiles under the blessing of the Messiah, the more evidently there becomes exhibited in Israel, with its ecclesiastical and political forms, the preformation of an Israel which wholly is what Israel exhibits only in type,a people of God that comprehends the redeemed, the saints of all mankind; in which accordingly, as to its worship, and as to its nationality in general, traced back to its original idea, and also viewed with respect to its future realization, the whole and (what is specially emphasized) every part always exhibits holiness and sanctification, the service of the holy God in spirit and in truth (Psa 22:28 [Psa 22:27] sq., Psa 47:10 [Psa 47:9], Psa 102:16 [Psa 102:15] sq.; Isa 26:2; Isaiah 51, 60; Luk 1:17; Rom 9:24 sq.; 2Co 6:16; Tit 2:14; 1Pe 2:5 sq., 1Pe 2:9-10, etc.). Nation and nationality are historical and hence perishable colourings of the idea of mankind, which have entirely faded since the eternal idea of Israel has been fulfilled in Christ, in whom there is neither Jew nor Greek (Galatians 3), but man, the new man (Ephesians 2) . What could be fulfilled according to the letterwhich, however, is the expression borne by the spirit of fulfilmenthas been fulfilled in the people of Israel by their rising and revival from the graves of the exile, by their return thenceforth to Canaan under Judah as Jews, by the period of the Maccabees, certainly in historical prelude only to the ideal, the entire, true fulfilment of the spirit-letter in the kingdom of God through Christ; according to which fulfilment the elect people are the people of the elect from all mankind, and the Jewish people now neither exist as a people, nor have a future such as Kliefoth would assign to them, namely, to be holy in the same way that every Christianized nation (!) now is, for (1Th 2:16). For the Church of God in Christ, so far as it belongs to this world, the representation of its spiritual life in a service of atoning sacrifices and cleansings, as here in Ezekiel, can be no antithesis; for still, according to Hebrews 12, the has to be laid aside, and (Jam 3:2) (comp. Eze 45:20). But to Ezekiel no other representation of the future could be given than in types of the sacred past of Israelas of its law, so of the Davidic royalty and of Canaan as the land of promise. But however prominent, observes Keil, is the Old Testament clothing of the Messianic prophecy in Ezekiel, yet even in this guise lineaments are found by which we recognise that the Israelitish-theocratic guise is only the drapery in which is concealed the New Testament form of the kingdom of God; and he very justly refers to 1Pe 1:10 sq., while he farther says: Even although the prophets, in their uninspired meditations on what they had prophesied as moved by the Holy Ghost, may not have known the typical signification of their own utterances, yet we who live in the times of fulfilment, and know not only the beginning in the appearing of our Lord, etc., but a considerable course of the fulfilment too in the eighteen hundred years spread of the kingdom of heaven on earth, have not so much to inquire after what the Old Testament prophets thought in their searching into the prophecies with which they were inspired by the Holy Ghost,if these thoughts of theirs could be in any way ascertained,but we have to inquire, in the light of the present measure of fulfilment (comp. 2Pe 1:19), what the Spirit of Christ, which enabled the prophets to behold and prophesy the future of His kingdom in figures of the Old Testament kingdom of God, has announced and revealed to us by these figures. Apart from the occasional references of Ezekiels representation to paradise, to the first creation (comp. on Eze 36:35; Eze 16:53), to which there is a return in Christ through Gods new creation, the whole handling of the Mosaic law in Ezekiel, of its forms of worship as hieroglyphs of the future to be prophesied of the true Israel, can be understood only from the point of view of a transmutation of the law into its fulfilment.

Footnotes:

[1]Douglas Structure of Prophecy, p. 71.

[2]See the Typology of Scripture, vol. i. Ezekiel 1, 2, for the establishment of the principles referred to regarding the tabernacle: and vol. ii. part iii., for the application of them to particular parts.

[3]Hvernick, Comm. p. 623.

[4]It will each time be a more definite person, but that does not determine who it will be: only this perhaps is implied, that each nation may retain what is natural to it, what accords with its special character and historic development. The Bible dictates neither a church constitution nor a state constitution; but in Ezekiel there is symbolized what in every constitution, in itself human, ought to be the abiding, the higher: the humanly highest one () sits and eats in the east gate of the Highest, of Jehovah.

[5]The final fulfilment comes with Christ and His kingdom; accordingly, the Lords Anointed, before whom the approved priest shall alway walk, is not Solomon, but David and Davids Son, whose kingdom shall endure for ever (Keil).

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The subject is still continued. Various appointments are here set forth, for the due government of the Prince’s Kingdom, and the blessedness of his people.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Mysterious as the subject is in many points, respecting these offerings, looking as this scripture evidently doth, to a period of the Church, when the daily offering was forever to cease; yet one point is abundantly clear and satisfactory; namely, that the Prince was to be in the midst of his people, both at their going in, and going out. Such we know Christ to be, in all his Churches; and indeed without his presence, their assembly would be in vain. It is a precious consideration to the faithful, this promise of their God and Saviour: and which He hath very graciously given to them, for their comfort in all ages. Mat_18:20; Mat_28:20 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

XIX

THE FINAL CONDITION OF THE REDEEMED

Ezekiel 40-48

The date of this prophecy as given in Eze 40:1 is about 572 B.C., thirteen years after his last prophecy before this one and fourteen years after the fall of the city of Jerusalem. Thus, there is an interval of thirteen years between the last writing of Ezekiel before this and this one.

As to what Ezekiel was doing during the thirteen years between his last prophecy and this one, we have no record whatever. Perhaps after he had prophesied the restoration of Israel and the glorious messianic age as found in Ezekiel 36-37, Ezekiel was thinking and pondering in his mind over the messianic kingdom. He was thinking of what it would be like, what would be its constitution, what would be its temple, what would be its temple service, what would be the relation between the king and the priesthood and what would be the condition of the people.

After those long years of thinking and pondering in his own mind, at last the vision broke upon him. A great many visions have come to God’s prophets and God’s servants along the line that they had been thinking and meditating. Thus the vision broke upon Ezekiel, and he saw in this vision the final condition of the restored and redeemed people of Israel. He does not picture any method of salvation in these chapters because he conceives of the people as enjoying salvation; they are in a condition of salvation, saved forever. It is the kingdom of God that he has in mind, the kingdom of God set up on earth with its center in Jerusalem and existing in all its glory, blessedness, and beauty. We call it the millennium, for to Ezekiel it was the millennial period of the world’s history.

This picture is cast in the Jewish mold. The best place to the Jew on this earth was in Palestine, his own land. There was death and burial and all the various incidents of life in this blessed age. There were families, there was a city of a certain size, a tabernacle of a certain size, and buildings, and chambers; there was a priesthood, there were sacrifices, there was to be a Prince of the line of David, the messianic Prince. All these things were to comprise the glorious messianic age, was all cast in the Jewish mold, and not to be taken as literal.

Now, in these chapters Ezekiel gives the religious side of the kingdom of Israel. He deals very little with anything but the religious phase. He touches on the geographical side of the country, a little on the civil side of affairs, but puts the emphasis almost entirely upon the religious and ecclesiastical. To Ezekiel religion was the foundation of a nation, for the foundations of national existence and the great informing principles in all national life from the beginning of history to the present time, have been the religious conceptions of the people.

Ezekiel, in vision, was brought by the hand of God into the land of Israel, and set down upon a very high mountain, whereon was, as it were, the frame of a city. Placed upon this high mountain Ezekiel opens his eyes in vision and sees a man, who appears to him as a man of brass. This is an angelic and supernatural being. He has a line of flax in his hand, also a measuring reed, and stands at the gate of this great structure.

Eze 40:1-4 gives the introductory remarks of Ezekiel showing how this vision occurred. He was standing facing the west and also facing the east gate of the great sanctuary. Before him lay an enclosure, a tabernacle, 500 cubits square, measuring probably 800 feet or about 250 yards square. This enclosure was surrounded by a wall six cubits high and six cubits broad, or thick. Right before him was a gate, the east gate, approached by seven steps. The gate itself was really a large building, twenty-five cubits broad altogether and fifty cubits long, reaching into the court of the temple. Inside that gate was the outer court. That outer court was 150 cubits from the outer wall to the inner wall, and one hundred cubits from the inside entrance of the gate to the next gate on the inner wall. This outer court ran around three sides of the enclosure and on these three sides were the pavements and chambers round about on the walls.

He then approached the inner court and that had a gate facing east just the same size as the gate on the outer court, approached by eight steps showing the gradations up into the holy place. Right in front of the gate which was the same size as the other gate, was a square place of 100 cubits and in the center of that was the altar for the burnt offerings. Right behind the gate approached by ten steps was the temple building itself. There was the porch, there the holy place behind it, and the most holy place behind that, and chambers around on three sides. There was a space of five cubits on either side of this temple building and chambers twenty cubits wide on the outside of that space. The raised pavement on which the temple stood was exactly 100 cubits square and reached back to the wall that surrounded the inner court. To the north of the outer court was a gate exactly the same as that of the east gate; to the south, a gate exactly the same as the one Ezekiel entered; on the west there was no gate at all. To the inner court there was a gate to the north and a gate to the south, exactly like the one to the east which Ezekiel entered.

A more detailed description of the temple with its parts is found in Eze 40:5-16 . There he describes the outer gate by which he approaches, ascending seven steps. The outer gate has a threshold, and the entrance into the outer court has on either side three lodges or guard chambers, intended for sentinels who abode there and watched the multitudes that thronged the gates into the temple courts. This entire gate was twenty-five cubits wide by fifty cubits long, reaching fifty cubits into the outer court minus the breadth of the wall.

In Eze 40:17-19 he describes the outer court just inside that gate. That outer court is altogether 150 cubits wide minus the wall and reaches around three sides. It is covered with a pavement and around on these three sides next the wall are chambers, large rooms. What these were for he does not tell us; doubtless they were intended for service in connection with the temple worship.

In Eze 40:20-23 we have described the north gate which is exactly the same as the one on the east which he entered. In Eze 40:24-27 he describes the south gate which is exactly the same as the east and the north gate.

In Eze 40:28-37 he describes the inner court. He enters the gate of the inner court by an approach of eight steps, passes through that fifty cubits deep into the inner court. There is & south gate and a north gate exactly the same, all facing the great altar in the center of the court 100 cubits square in the temple area itself.

In Eze 40:38-43 he describes the tables that are on either side of the north gate that enters into the inner court. Outside in the outer court are four tables for killing the sacrifices and washing them; inside are four tables for the sacrifices, and there are other large stone tables upon which they would lay the instruments for slaying their sacrifices. It was the law of Leviticus that the sacrifices were to be slain north of the altar, so all these tables and instruments are at the north gate which approaches the inner court north of the great altar.

Now in the inner court we have on either side of that court which is about 250 cubits square counting the thickness of the walls on the north side and on the south side, large chambers. These chambers were for the use of the priests in their ministrations. Those on the north were for the use of those who helped the priests in their services; the south for the sons of Zadok who were the leaders among the priests. In Eze 40:38-49 , he approaches the temple itself and the porch facing the temple building; ten steps brings him up on to the raised platform which is exactly 100 cubits square and which contains all the great temple buildings.

In Eze 41:1-14 , he describes the porch, gives the measurements, then the dimensions of the tabernacle which is forty cubits long and twenty cubits wide; then the holy of holies which is exactly twenty cubits square. Ezekiel does not go into the holy of holies; only the messenger goes in and brings out the measurements and tells them to Ezekiel. The walls are six cubits thick; then there are little chambers on either side, and there are walls five cubits thick beyond them. The lower chambers are four Cubits wide, the next, five; the next, six, just the same as those of Solomon’s Temple. All around on either side of that Temple with its chambers, which was nearly forty cubits wide altogether, was an open space of five cubits, and outside of that, again on this pavement of ten cubits, along the two sides were buildings used as chambers for the priests.

In Eze 41:15-26 he describes the inside of the temple proper. It is made of wood, beautifully carved wood, cherubim carved as was Solomon’s Temple; palm trees carved and engraved upon the wood also, and only one altar, no table of shewbread, no golden candlestick, no ark of the covenant, no laws written on tables of stone; they were written on the tables of the heart now and there is no need for an ark of the covenant or for these other things, only an altar representing the prayers and worship of the people. There are doors into the holy place and folding doors into the most holy place. We do not read that Solomon made any doors between those apartments.

Now in Eze 42:1-14 , the other buildings that are inside this inner court are described. This inner court, as we have said, is about 250 cubits square; 100 cubits are taken up by the altar, 100 for the temple buildings and chambers, then there are fifty cubits on either side along the north and south sides. Now these are described in the section we have just mentioned. They are chambers, and one row is three stories high, extending along 100 cubits on the north side of the temple buildings, and south side also a row 100 cubits long. These are for the priests, in which they store their garments, and in which they dress that they may appear before the people in the outer court and perform the services in the inner court.

In Eze 42:15-20 , we have the measurements of the outer wall and the whole area of the buildings. Here he gives the general measurements. Now note that he says 500 reeds. A reed is six cubits. Thus he gives the general measurements such as I have described. Thus far he has been describing the temple and we readily see it is impossible to give all the details.

In Eze 43:1-12 we enter upon a new theme: the vision of the entrance of Jehovah into this house, this temple, to abide forever. Notice that Ezekiel says in the latter part of verse Eze 43:3 : “The visions were like the vision that I saw by the river Chebar.” The same magnificent picture of the four cherubim appears here now right at the gate of the temple and Jehovah thus enters into the temple by the east gate, there to abide forever. Note what he says to Ezekiel as he enters, verses Eze 43:6-7 : “And I heard one speaking unto me out of the house; and a man stood by me. And he said unto me, Son of man, this is the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel forever. And my holy name shall the house of Israel no more defile.” Thus he goes on to describe the new and blessed condition of Israel and how they are purified from all their sins. Then in Eze 43:10-12 Ezekiel shows to the people this vision of the great temple that they are to have, and he says that they shall be ashamed of their iniquities when they see and learn the pattern. It is a perfect temple, perfect equipment, divinely measured and symbolizes the relation of Jehovah to his people.

Now in Eze 43:13-17 he describes the altar of burnt offerings in the center of that 100 cubits square in the court. Bight in front of the east, north, and south gates: that altar has a base eighteen cubits square and one cubit thick, resting upon the solid earth; then another place above that sixteen cubits square, and another one fourteen cubits square, and the uppermost one twelve cubits square with four projections, or horns, one at each corner. So the altar stands high and is twelve cubits, or about twenty feet, square.

In Eze 43:18-27 he describes the sacrifices and the ceremonies relating to the altar. The sacrifices and ceremonies are to be performed by the sons of Zadok and they are to cleanse the altar and purify it and make it ready for the sacrifices of God.

In Eze 44:1-3 , he says that the east gate was to be kept forever shut, because through that gate Jehovah had entered and he had entered to remain forever, and therefore the gate by which he had entered must be closed forever, and no being in heaven nor on earth should pass through it.

In Eze 44:4-14 , we have the subordinate position of the Levites. The Levites previous to the exile had become idolatrous, almost to a man; they had gone after the worship of idols (but many of the priestly families had remained faithful to Jehovah) and because of that Ezekiel says that the Levites should not serve in the temple, but should be degraded to a secondary position and only the sons of Zadok could minister in the inner court.

In Eze 44:15-30 , Ezekiel gives the precepts and the rules regarding the priests. These priests were of the sons of Zadok. Doubtless, Ezekiel himself belonged to that line. They alone were to go into the inner court; the people were allowed in the outer courts, but only the priests in the inner court. They were to have linen garments and everything was to be so pure and so clean that they were not allowed to wear any garments that would hold perspiration; not one drop of perspiration was allowed to remain in their clothing; they were to be scrupulously clean. Their beards were not to be shaved; they were not to drink any wine while performing the services; they were to marry only a certain class of women, the widow of a priest or a virgin of the house of Israel; they were to teach the people, and they were to be the judges in all cases of the law. The priests were to judge between the litigants. They were to have no possessions, verse Eze 44:28 : “I am their inheritance; and ye shall give them no possessions in Israel; I am their possession.” They were to have all the first-fruits of the land and certain other material resources.

In Eze 45:1-8 , we have the portion of land assigned to the priests. In almost the center of this land of Israel, a space 25,000 cubits wide extending from the Mediterranean Sea to the river Jordan was set apart for the prince and the priests and the city and the temple. In the center of that was a section 25,000 cubits long and 25,000 cubits wide divided thus: 10,000 cubits of the northern part was for the Levites, 10,000 cubits in the center, for the priests and in the center of that was this section we have just described; south of that, 5,000 cubits wide and 25,000 cubits long was the city area and in the center of that was the city itself, about two miles square; lands on either side also about two miles square; the whole section was about eight miles square. The Levites had a section about two by eight miles; the priests had a section about two by eight miles, and the city, a little more than two by eight. At each end of this section reaching to the Mediterranean Sea on the west side, and to the Jordan on the east, was the portion of the prince, or royal family, the messianic king.

In Eze 45:9-17 we have the ordinances for the prince. He was strictly commanded to be just and square in his dealings, and strange to say, the prince received the tithes from all the people of Israel, and he supplied the priests with all their sacrifices, and sustained them out of what the people brought to him. The prince was a very important personage. He was really the Messiah, the messianic King.

In Eze 45:18-25 we have the ordinances for cleansing the temple, for the atonement, for the Passover, and the various offerings, for which see the text.

In Eze 46:1-15 , we have the ordinances for the feasts. They are going to have sacrifices, feasts, pilgrimages, in this blessed messianic age, according to Ezekiel, and he lays down rules for the feasts of the new moon, the sabbath, the Passover, and all other appointed feasts. It is to be the Levitical system carried out to perfection all through the ages. But remember that this is only the Jewish mold into which these blessed events are cast.

In Eze 46:16-18 , Ezekiel says that a prince cannot forfeit permanently his inheritance. If he does deed it to any member of another noble family, it reverts back to the royal family in time. Thus these two portions of land are reserved to the line of David forever.

In Eze 46:19-24 we have described the kitchens for the priests. They are to have kitchens in the temple, and in the far northwest corner of the inner court, and the far southwest corner of this inner court are great buildings that serve as kitchens where the priests are to boil their meat for these services in the temple; then in the same corners of the outer court are large buildings where they are going to boil the meat and sacrifices for the people. The Levites are to do this, as they are not allowed in the inner court.

In Eze 47:1-12 Ezekiel describes a stream which issues from the temple and flows down to the inner court and outer court and out by the east gate through which Ezekiel had entered and through which Jehovah had entered, and which is forever closed, down across the land toward the valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea. Many have preached from that chapter on “The River of Life.” It ran through that desert land, and coursed down to the awful wilderness surrounding the Dead Sea, making everything green and the trees bore their fruit every month, the analogue of John’s vision of the River of Life flowing through the great city of God. Then it flows through those deserts and into the Dead Sea healing the water which became alive with fishes and everything the river touches lives. It flows down into the barren deserts, the dead seas of life, the worthless places, and heals them. There are certain portions by that Dead Sea that Ezekiel says were given to salt, the marshes. These were not healed but were given to salt as they needed the salt in the east for their sacrifices and their food, that was a hot climate. Thus closes the vision of Ezekiel of the land of Israel. The land is rich and verdant, teeming with life and fruitage; it is the blessed messianic age. (See the author’s sermon on “The River of Life.”)

Eze 47:13-23 describe the boundaries of the Holy Land and the privilege of strangers attaching themselves to the tribes. The boundaries of the Holy Land we cannot exactly fix but they extend west to the Mediterranean Sea; to about the entering in of Hamath for the northern boundary; the eastern boundary is the valley of Jordan down through the Sea of Galilee to the Dead Sea; the southern boundary is by way of Kadeshbarnea and to the brook of Egypt. That is Ezekiel’s Holy Land.

In Eze 48:1-7 , he tells what tribes are going to live north of the oblation. This tract of land, 25,000 cubits wide and reaching from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, is the oblation; the tribes that are to live north of the oblation we find in verses 1-7. To the far north is Dan; south of him is Asher, reaching from the Mediterranean to the Jordan Valley; the same for Napthali, and a similar section for Manasseh, Ephraim, Reuben, and Judah, bordering on the oblation which was the center and contained the portion for the Levites, temple, city, and prince. Why he has them in that order we cannot tell.

In Eze 48:8-22 we have the oblation itself and its divisions again described: 25,000 cubits wide, reaching from the Mediterranean to the Jordan and in the center of that square, 10,000 to the north for the Levites, 10,000 for the priests and in the center of that, the temple; then a section, 5,000 wide to the south for the city. We see by this that Ezekiel does not think that the temple should be in the city, and he separated them by a distance of about three miles. The city is about two miles square. It has land on either side of it which is to support the people. Ezekiel makes no provision for the growth of the city, nor for the increase of the Levites, nor for the priests; there they are and they are going to abide forever.

In Eze 48:23-29 , he gives the tribes south of the city, and the first one is Benjamin. Ezekiel puts Judah north and Benjamin south, while before, they had always been the reverse. Below that is Simeon, then Issachar, then Zebulun, and Gad; previously they had been closer together.

Then Eze 48:30-35 tell of the gates of the city. There are three on each of the four sides. This is the analogue of John’s magnificent vision of the holy city “on the east three gates, on the north three gates, and on the south three gates, and on the west three gates.” He goes on to show which tribes shall enter in by these several gates: three tribes on one side, etc., grouping Ephraim and Manasseh under the name of Joseph. He closes by saying, Eze 48:35 , “And the name of the city from that day shall be Jehovah-shammah,” Jehovah is there, that is, all this land is to be sanctified by the presence of Jehovah, from Dan in the far north to Gad in the far south. As one approaches the oblation, it is to be more holy; the domain of the priests and the sanctuary, still more holy. The outer court, the inner court, the temple platform, the holy place, then the most holy of all.

That is Ezekiel’s picture of the great messianic age. He believed that all the people that inhabited this land were people who had a new heart and a right spirit, who had the old stony heart taken out of them and a heart of flesh given them; that God’s laws were written in their hearts and on their minds; that they walked in his statutes and in his law; converted people, regenerated people, living in bliss upon the earth.

Will this ever be literally fulfilled? Can it be possible that when Jesus Christ comes this will be fulfilled as Ezekiel pictures it? Our pre-millennialist brethren believe that this will be literally fulfilled. They believe that Christianity must revert back to Judaism with Jerusalem as its center. To me it is unthinkable that our gospel with its worldwide vision and mission can become so cabbined, cribbed, coffined, and confined that it will be shut up to Palestine and to Judaism. That would be an unthinkable anticlimax.

QUESTIONS

1. What was the date of the writing of this prophecy?

2. What was Ezekiel doing during the thirteen years between his last prophecy before this and this one and what the bearing on this last prophecy?

3. Give a bird’s eye view of the temple as Been by Ezekiel.

4. Give a more detailed description of the temple with its parts.

5. Describe Jehovah’s entrance into this temple and give its significance.

6. Describe the altar of burnt offerings and the sacrifices to be offered thereon.

7. What is the ordinance regarding the east gate and why?

8. What the ordinance respecting the position of the Levites and why?

9. What ordinances regarding the priests?

10. What provisions were made for the priests?

11. What are the ordinances regarding the prince and what special provision for the people by the prince?

12. What are the ordinances for cleansing the temple, etc.?

13. What are the ordinances for the feasts?

14. What are the ordinances for the inheritance of the prince?

15. What is the special provision for the work of the priests and Levites?

16. Describe Ezekiel’s “River of Life” and give its significance.

17. Give the boundaries of Ezekiel’s holy land.

18. What are tribes are to be north of the oblation?

19. Describe the oblation itself.

20. What are the tribes south of the oblation?

21. Describe the gates of the city and give the position of the tribes.

22. What do you say of the fulfilment of this magnificent prophetic picture by Ezekiel?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Eze 46:1 Thus saith the Lord GOD; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened.

Ver. 1. Thus saith the Lord God. ] In this chapter are set forth rationes et ritus, the laws and rites that were to be observed by prince and people in offering their sacrifices. It is the manner of performance that maketh or marreth any duty. There may be malum opus in bona materia, ill work in a good matter.

The gate of the inner court. ] Of the priests’ court.

That looketh toward the east. ] That pointeth to Christ, the day spring from on high, the Sun of righteousness, who shineth sweetly upon such as rightly sanctify the Sabbath, and shall much more when they come to rest with him in heaven.

Shall be shut the six working days. ] Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work. Neither doth this hinder holiness, as the abbey lubbers pretend, but further it: (1.) By preventing temptation; (2.) By nourishing experience of God’s bounty and providence; (3.) By filling the heart with objects of heavenly thoughts; (4.) By stirring up to prayer and praise for each day’s mercies.

But on the Sabbath it shall be opened. ] That the people may see Christ in the glass of the ceremonies, and call upon his name. We under the gospel have a clearer light and free access, on Lord’s days especially, and other times of holy meetings.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Ezekiel Chapter 46

We have now further particulars as to the public worship of the millennial day in the sanctuary; and this as affecting the prince, the people, and the priests, and with especial prominence given to the sabbaths and the new moons.

“Thus saith the Lord Jehovah; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened.” (Ver. 1) The reason why these two occasions gain so marked a place now is obvious. Those who are of God are no longer entering into rest; they have gone in. The day is come. Sabbath-keeping no longer remains for the people of God. Glory dwells in the land, and Israel are there gathered out of the lands, from the east, and from the west, from the north, and from the south. They had wandered in the wilderness in a solitary way; they found no city to dwell in. This is all past – past for ever. They have been led forth by the right way, they are come to a city of habitation, yea to His city, for this is its true and deep and worthy boast: as we shall hear, Jehovah is there. “In that day it shall be said to Jerusalem, Fear thou not; to Zion, Let not thine hands be slack. Jehovah thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy; he will be silent in his love, he will exult over thee with singing.” The sabbath therefore naturally is now made much of. But so is the new moon. Israel who had long waned and disappeared now renews her light, never more to withdraw herself. The new moon therefore fitly marks Israel restored now and for evermore.

“And the prince shall enter by the way of the porch of [that] gate without, and shall stand by the post of the gate, and the priests shall prepare his burnt-offering and his peace-offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate: then he shall go forth; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening. Likewise the people of the land shall worship at the door of this gate before Jehovah in the sabbaths and in the new moons.” (Vers. 2, 3) It was meet that prince and people should thus worship before Jehovah, and with this distinction between them. But even the prince does not go within, he stands by the post of the gate, he worships at the threshold. There is no drawing near as we now do in the Holy Spirit through the rent veil. It is a people blessed on earth, not in the heavenly places.

“And the burnt-offering that the prince shall offer unto Jehovah in the sabbath day [shall be] six lambs without blemish, and a ram without blemish. And the meat-offering [shall be] an ephah for a ram, and the meat-offering for the lambs as he shall be able to give, and a hin of oil to an ephah. And in the day of the new moon [it shall be] a young bullock without blemish, and six lambs, and a ram: they shall be without blemish. And he shall prepare a meat-offering, an ephah for a bullock, and an ephah for a ram, and for the lambs according as his hand shall attain unto, and a hin of oil to an ephah. And when the prince shall enter, he shall go in by the way of the porch of [that] gate, and he shall go forth by the way thereof.” (Vers. 4-8) Such was the order on ordinary occasions. There was this difference however, that in the solemn feasts the prince went in and went out in their midst: “But when the people of the land shall come before Jehovah in the solemn feasts, he that entereth in by the way of the north gate to worship shall go out by the way of the south gate; and he that entereth by the way of the south gate shall go forth by the way of the north gate; he shall not return by the way of the gate whereby he came in, but shall go forth over against it. And the prince in the midst of them, when they go in, shall go in; and, when they go forth, shall go forth. And in the feasts and in the solemnities the meat-offering shall be an ephah to a bullock, and an ephah to a ram, and to the lambs as he is able to give, and an hin of oil to an ephah.” (Vers. 9-11) Another distinction appears when he offered a voluntary offering alone: “Now when the prince shall prepare a voluntary burnt-offering or peace-offerings voluntarily unto Jehovah, [one] shall then open him the gate that looketh toward the east, and he shall prepare his burnt-offering and his peace-offerings, as he did on the sabbath day: then he shall go forth; and after his going forth [one] shall shut the gate.” (Ver. 12)

It is remarkable again that, while the daily offering consisted of the burnt-offering of a lamb, as of old it was to be prepared morning by morning, but there was no longer an evening lamb. “Thou shalt daily prepare a burnt offering unto Jehovah [of] a lamb of the first year without blemish: thou shalt prepare it every morning. And thou shalt prepare a meat-offering for it every morning, the sixth part of an ephah, and the third part of an hin of oil, to temper with the fine flour; a meat-offering continually by a perpetual ordinance unto Jehovah. Thus shall they prepare the lamb, and the meat-offering, and the oil, every morning [for] a continual burnt-offering.” (Vers. l 3-15) The propriety of this again seems most apparent. It was the day when the sun of Israel should go no more down. Of old an evening lamb was in every way seasonable, and full of comfort for the people to know when awakened to the truth that God had provided for that long long night during which they had slept alas! in their forgetfulness of Him who had died for that nation. But now that they are in the light of His day the evening lamb disappears, while every morning it abides as a continual burnt-offering.

Next we have care taken that the prince should not overstep his due limits, in case of a gift to his servants, so as to preserve the rights of his sons intact, as well as of every Israelite. “Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: If the prince give a gift unto any of his sons, the inheritance thereof shall be his sons’; it [shall be] their possession by inheritance. But if he give a gift of his inheritance to one of his servants, then it shall be his to the year of liberty, when it shall return to the prince: but his inheritance shall only be for his sons. Moreover the prince shall not take of the people’s inheritance by oppression, to thrust them out of their possession; he shall give to his sons inheritance out of his own possession: that not one of my people be deprived of his possession.” (Vers. 16-18) Truly judgment shall return to righteousness in that day. The jubilee is then observed in all its force.

The last regulations show special provision not for meat-offerings only but for those for sin and trespass: the state of Israel on earth still demands them. “And he brought me through the entry, which [was] at the side of the gate, into the holy chambers of the priests, which looked toward the north: and, behold, there [was] a place on the two sides westward. And said he unto me, This [is] the place where the priests shall boil the trespass-offering and the sin-offering, where they shall bake the meat offering; that they bear [them] not out into the utter court, to sanctify the people. And he brought me forth into the utter court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court; and, behold, in every corner of the court [there was] a court. In the four corners of the court [there were] courts joined of forty [cubits] long and thirty broad: these four corners [were] of one measure. And [there was] a row [of building] round about in them, round about them four, and [it was] made with boiling places under the rows round about. And said he unto me, These [are] the places of them that boil, where the ministers of the house shall boil the sacrifice of the people.” (Ver. 19-24) The millennial age differs as decidedly from the present ways of God with the church as from the eternal state. We have here Israel blessed on earth during the kingdom, Satan bound, but sin not yet extirpated though suppressed, and in certain cases grace meeting it where it did not demand a curse or excision.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Eze 46:1-10

1’Thus says the Lord God, The gate of the inner court facing east shall be shut the six working days; but it shall be opened on the sabbath day and opened on the day of the new moon. 2The prince shall enter by way of the porch of the gate from outside and stand by the post of the gate. Then the priests shall provide his burnt offering and his peace offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate and then go out; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening. 3The people of the land shall also worship at the doorway of that gate before the Lord on the sabbaths and on the new moons. 4The burnt offering which the prince shall offer to the Lord on the sabbath day shall be six lambs without blemish and a ram without blemish; 5and the grain offering shall be an ephah with the ram, and the grain offering with the lambs as much as he is able to give, and a hin of oil with an ephah. 6On the day of the new moon he shall offer a young bull without blemish, also six lambs and a ram, which shall be without blemish. 7And he shall provide a grain offering, an ephah with the bull and an ephah with the ram, and with the lambs as much as he is able, and a hin of oil with an ephah. 8When the prince enters, he shall go in by way of the porch of the gate and go out by the same way. 9But when the people of the land come before the Lord at the appointed feasts, he who enters by way of the north gate to worship shall go out by way of the south gate. And he who enters by way of the south gate shall go out by way of the north gate. No one shall return by way of the gate by which he entered but shall go straight out. 10When they go in, the prince shall go in among them; and when they go out, he shall go out.

Eze 46:1 the gate of the inner court facing east Remember the outer eastern gate was permanently sealed (cf. Eze 44:2) because this is the gate by which YHWH left the temple (cf. Ezekiel 10) and returned (cf. Ezekiel 43).

the new moon This monthly feast is first mentioned in Num 10:10 and explained in Num 28:11-15. It is referred to in Psa 81:3-5 and Eze 45:18; Eze 46:3; Eze 46:6. Since the tabernacle was set up on the first day of the month (cf. Exo 40:2; Exo 40:17), it is possible that it is connected to this event.

The Jews used a lunar calendar. See Special Topic: Ancient Near Eastern Calendars .

Eze 46:2 his burnt offerings and his peace offerings Also note, Eze 46:12 lists several other offerings. See Special Topic: Sacrificial Systems of the Ancient Near East .

he shall worship This is an unusual form of a common religious concept of worship or bow down. The unusual form is called a Hishtaphel, which comes from this word. The first three consonants () are common in other Semitic languages, but this is the only example in biblical Hebrew (Kittel, Hoffer and Wright, Biblical Hebrew, p. 182).

The basic stem seems to be (KB 295 II), which in Ugaritic means to prostrate oneself in worship or , to bow down (BDB 1005). It occurs three times in this paragraph (cf. Eze 46:2-3; Eze 46:9).

The prince has a special place at the gateway of the inner court where he can see the sacrificing being made, but cannot enter the sacred precincts of the priests. See Special Topic: Worship .

the gate shall not be shut This is a metaphor of access and availability. YHWH would receive the prince and the people in regular worship.

the prince This future Davidic leader (prince, BDB 672) is mentioned several times in Ezekiel.

1. YHWH will establish him as shepherd over a united covenant people, Eze 34:20-24

2. YHWH will restore the covenant people to their land and restore their Davidic prince. He will make an everlasting covenant of peace with an obedient Israel, Eze 37:24-28

3. he will eat/worship before YHWH in the new temple, Eze 44:2-3; Eze 46:1-12

4. he shall receive a large special land allotment (i.e., great wealth) on both sides of the temple area to keep him from oppressing the people, Eze 45:7-8; Eze 48:21-22

5. the people will give offerings to the prince so that he can provide sacrifices on special days, Eze 45:13-25

6. regulations about inheritance gifts given by the prince, Eze 46:16-18

Eze 46:4-7 The prince shall offer

1. the sabbath

a. six lambs

b. one ram

c. one ephah of grain (with ram)

d. as much as able of grain (with the lambs)

e. a hin of oil

2. new moon

a. a young bull

b. six lambs

c. a ram

d. one ephah of grain (with bull)

e. one ephah of grain (with ram)

f. as much as able of grain (with lambs)

g. a hin of oil

Eze 46:4 without blemish This term (BDB 1071) denotes an animal that is healthy and without obvious defect. In other words, it is a prime example (typical) of its breed in color, shape, and size (i.e., Exo 12:5; Lev 3:1).

Eze 46:5 ephah. . .hin See Special Topic: ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (METROLOGY) .

Eze 46:7

NASBas much as he is able

NKJV, TEVas much as he wants to give

NRSVas much as he wishes

NJBwhat he pleases

LXXaccording as his hand can furnish

Peshitta,

JPSOA, REBas much as he can afford

The literal phrase is as much as his hand can reach. The amount of sacrifices depended on two things.

1. the free-will offerings of the people

2. the wealth and/or ability and/or desire of the monarch

Eze 46:10 The prince has a special place to observe the sacrifices on the special days (i.e., appointed feasts), but on other days he was not allowed even this special place, but must enter and exit with other covenant people.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Thus saith, &c. See note on Eze 44:9.

the Lord God. Hebrew. Adonai Jehovah. See note on Eze 2:4.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 46

Now it describes in chapter 46 how the prince worships in this new sanctuary.

Thus saith the Lord GOD; The gate of the inner court that looks toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it will be open, in the day of the new moon it will be open ( Eze 46:1 ).

So this gate on the inner court that you see here in your diagram, six days of the week it will be closed. It will be open only on the sabbath day.

And the prince shall enter by the way of the porch of that gate without, and shall stand by the post of the gate, and the priests shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate: and he shall go forth; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening. Likewise the people of the land shall worship at the door of this gate before the LORD in the sabbaths and in the new moons. And the burnt offerings that the prince shall offer unto the LORD ( Eze 46:2-4 )

So the fact that he is offering burnt offerings unto the Lord, which are consecration offerings and all sort of precludes him being Jesus Christ.

The meal offerings ( Eze 46:5 )

And it describes the various offerings that he will offer.

And when the prince shall enter, he shall go in by the way of the porch of that gate, and he shall go forth by the way thereof. But when the people of the land come before the LORD in the solemn feasts, and enter, they enter by the north gate and they leave by the south; or if they enter by the south gate they leave by the noRuth ( Eze 46:8-9 ):

And it goes ahead and tells of the offerings and how the offerings are to be boiled and so forth in offering them unto the Lord. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Eze 46:1-8

Eze 46:1

This chapter gives instructions for worship on the day of the new moon, and on the sabbath, and the gate by which the prince (or king) would be required to enter the temple. If one entered by the north gate he was required to exit by the south gate; and if he entered by the south gate, he was required to exit by the north gate. Also the king would be required to enter with the people and also to leave when they left. There are also directions for the king’s offering of a voluntary burnt-offering or peace-offering.

Eze 46:1-8

Thus saith the Lord GOD; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened. 2 And the prince shall enter by the way of the porch of that gate without, and shall stand by the post of the gate, and the priests shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate: then he shall go forth; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening. 3 Likewise the people of the land shall worship at the door of this gate before the LORD in the sabbaths and in the new moons. 4 And the burnt offering that the prince shall offer unto the LORD in the sabbath day shall be six lambs without blemish, and a ram without blemish. 5 And the meat offering shall be an ephah for a ram, and the meat offering for the lambs as he shall be able to give, and an hin of oil to an ephah. 6 And in the day of the new moon it shall be a young bullock without blemish, and six lambs, and a ram: they shall be without blemish. 7 And he shall prepare a meat offering, an ephah for a bullock, and an ephah for a ram, and for the lambs according as his hand shall attain unto, and an hin of oil to an ephah. 8 And when the prince shall enter, he shall go in by the way of the porch of that gate, and he shall go forth by the way thereof.

Regulations for the Sabbath. Eze 46:1-8.

The inner east gate of the sanctuary was closed for six days and opened on the Sabbath and New Moon, a special Sabbath celebrating the beginning of a new month (Eze 46:1). The inner east gate is the place from which the prince will carry out his ministry on Sabbath and feast days (Eze 46:2). He will not enter the inner court or take part in the sacrifices because he was not a priest. He remained inside the east gate of the inner court to perform his duties while the people were just outside the gate in the outer court (Eze 46:3). For each Sabbath observance the prince will bring six male lambs, one ram, plus a grain offering and a hin of oil for each ephah of grain (Eze 46:4-5). On the New Moon he will bring an offering consisting of a young bull, six lambs, a ram, a grain offering, and a hin of oil for each ephah of grain (Eze 46:6-7). The prince will perform his duties entering the east gate by way of the porch (Eze 46:8).

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Chapter Forty-six

Regulations For Special Offerings

As we come to this chapter that deals with the sanctuary itself and the offerings which the prophet saw in vision as re-established, we note the special place given to the day of the new moon and the Sabbath.

Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath day it shall be opened, and on the day of the new moon it shall be opened. And the prince shall enter by the way of the porch of the gate without, and shall stand by the post of the gate; and the priests shall prepare his burnt-offering, and his peace-offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate: then he shall go forth; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening. And the people of the land shall worship at the door of that gate before Jehovah on the sabbaths and on the new moons. And the burnt-offering that the prince shall offer unto Jehovah shall be on the sabbath day six lambs without blemish and a ram without blemish; and the meal-offering shall be an ephah for the ram, and the meal-offering for the lambs as he is able to give, and a bin of oil to an ephah. And on the day of the new moon it shall be a young bullock without blemish, and six lambs, and a ram; they shall be without blemish: and he shall prepare a meal-offering, an ephah for the bullock, and an ephah for the ram, and for the lambs according as he is able, and a hin of oil to an ephah. And when the prince shall enter, he shall go in by the way of the porch of the gate, and he shall go forth by the way thereof-vers. 1-8.

The fact that so much stress is laid upon the special observance of the Sabbath day shows the very distinctive Jewish character of the entire vision. It is not a picture of Christianity, except in the sense that the temple of old and also the temple seen in vision typify, in measure at least, Gods present temple composed of all those who have been builded by the Spirit into the house of God. For us the Sabbath is found in our blessed Lord Himself who is the fulfilment of that typical day as well as of all else in the Old Testament economy. But it is very evident from this and other scriptures that when the church period has come to an end and God will take up Israel again, the Sabbath of the law will once more be observed, and so we have it set before us here as an appointed day when special offerings are to be presented before God. We need have no difficulty here in regard to the possible literalness of these offerings, but as we have seen already they all speak of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the presentation of them before God on the Sabbath day would indicate the deep appreciation which the people of God in the coming kingdom age will have of the Person and work of Him who is our Saviour now, and will be recognized as their Saviour then. It is noticeable that there was to be no undue compulsion in regard to the offerings; they are to be presented voluntarily before the Lord, each one as he is able to give.

The day of the new moon is specially emphasized because it indicates from month to month a new beginning, even as the Sabbath sets forth a weekly ending; and each return of the moon speaks anew of the goodness of God to His people in watching over them through another month and pledging His grace for the month to come.

But when the people of the land shall come before Jehovah in the appointed feasts, he that entereth by the way of the north gate to worship shall go forth by the way of the south gate; and he that entereth by the way of the south gate shall go forth by the way of the north gate: he shall not return by the way of the gate whereby he came in, but shall go forth straight before him. And the prince, when they go in, shall go in in the midst of them; and when they go forth, they shall go forth together. And in the feasts and in the solemnities the meal-offering shall be an ephah for a bullock, and an ephah for a ram, and for the lambs as he is able to give, and a bin of oil to an ephah. And when the prince shall prepare a freewill-offering, a burnt-offering or peace-offerings as a freewill-offering unto Jehovah, one shall open for him the gate that looketh toward the east; and he shall prepare his burnt-offering and his peace-offerings, as he doth on the sabbath day: then he shall go forth; and after his going forth one shall shut the gate-vers. 9-12.

We are impressed as we read these words of the happy relationship that will exist between the prince and the people. While special recognition is given to the prince because of his office, yet all stand on one common ground before God and in His sanctuary; there is no room for worldly honors or human pride. All stand together upon redemption ground, the only basis of acceptance with God; and of this the sacrifices and offerings all speak.

There may be something suggestive here too in the instruction given as to entering in at one gate and passing on through the court and leaving by another portal. May not this speak to everyone of us, reminding us that we shall never pass over the same route again? We cannot retrace our steps as we go through this scene. It should be our happy privilege to go on with God from glory to glory as led by His Spirit.

There may be very much here that a more spiritual mind would enter into, but I hesitate to try to apply types beyond their clear, evident meaning.

And thou shalt prepare a lamb a year old without blemish for a burnt-offering unto Jehovah daily: morning by morning shalt thou prepare it. And thou shalt prepare a meal-offering with it morning by morning, the sixth part of an ephah, and the third part of a hin of oil, to moisten the fine flour; a meal-offering unto Jehovah continually by a perpetual ordinance. Thus shall they prepare the lamb, and the meal-offering, and the oil, morning by morning, for a continual burnt-offering-vers. 13-15.

Of old in the tabernacle service and also in that connected with the temple of Solomon, the burnt offering was present before God both morning and evening. Here we are told, Thou shalt prepare a lamb a year old without blemish for a burnt-offering unto Jehovah daily: morning by morning shalt thou prepare it. There is no mention of the evening offering besides, because everything here is connected with the glorious day when the Lord Himself will be the light of His people and the morning of gladness will not be succeeded by an evening of sorrow or distress. How precious it is even now for those of us who know the Lord, to wait upon Him morning by morning, presenting a continual burnt offering before God as we meditate upon the preciousness and the effective work of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is of this indeed that the burnt offering really speaks. With it the meal offering was connected, and that, as we know, speaks of the perfection of Christs Person rather than emphasizing the work which He accomplished on the cross. It is the incarnate Christ-God and Man in one Person- that is represented by the meal offering of fine flour mingled with oil, never to be separated again.

Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: If the prince give a gift unto any of his sons, it is his inheritance, it shall belong to his sons; it is their possession by inheritance. But if he give of his inheritance a gift to one of his servants, it shall be his to the year of liberty; then it shall return to the prince; but as for his inheritance, it shall be for his sons. Moreover the prince shall not take of the peoples inheritance, to thrust them out of their possession; he shall give inheritance to his sons out of his own possession, that My people be not scattered every man from his possession-vers. 16-18.

In the coming great day of Israels restoration they will enter fully into the meaning of the year of Jubilee, the year of liberty. All down through the centuries, had these Jubilees been properly observed, they would have been a constant reminder that God has in view both for Israel and the world something far better than they have ever known. A time is coming when liberty will be proclaimed to the captives, and the house of Israel shall return to their own possessions and enter fully into the enjoyment of them, never to be separated from them any more. The ancient law of the Jubilee, it seems, will prevail in millennial days: thus the family of Israel will not forfeit their lands, and the strangers will be permitted to enjoy, at least for a season, a portion with them; but God said of the land of Palestine, The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is Mine (Lev 25:23). He has given it by covenant to Abrahams literal seed so that no future arrangement will be permitted that will alienate it from them, however much others may be permitted to enjoy it with Israel.

Then he brought me through the entry, which was at the side of the gate, into the holy chambers for the priests, which looked toward the north: and, behold, there was a place on the hinder part westward. And he said unto me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the trespass-offering and the sin-offering, and where they shall bake the meal-offering; that they bring them not forth into the outer court, to sanctify the people. Then he brought me forth into the outer court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court; and, behold, in every corner of the court there was a court. In the four corners of the court there were courts inclosed, forty cubits long and thirty broad: these four in the corners were of one measure. And there was a wall round about in them, round about the four, and boiling-places were made under the walls round about. Then said he unto me, These are the boiling-houses, where the ministers of the house shall boil the sacrifice of the people-vers. 19-24.

Ezekiel saw in the vision adequate provision made for the nourishment of the priests. In the book of Exodus (29:33) we read, They shall eat those things wherewith the atonement was made. The priests dwelling in the courts of the Lords house, feasting upon the burnt offerings and the meal offerings, speak to us of Gods family today who are privileged to feed their souls on what God has revealed concerning His Son and the work of the cross. And so in that coming day the priests of Jehovah will enter in a way they have never done in the past into the meaning of all these sacrifices; and in the quiet precincts of the chambers of the priests, shut away from the observance of the multitude, they will prepare their food and enjoy it in the presence of the Lord. How good it would be if we only knew more of this today-dwelling quietly in the secret place where the eye of God alone is upon us as we meditate upon what Scripture reveals concerning the Deity and Humanity of our Lord Jesus, His eternal fellowship, and His perfection as Man here on earth, His obedience unto death, and the effect of His work both as to the glorifying of the Father and the salvation of those who put their trust in Him! Here is rich food indeed on which we do well to nourish our souls that we may become strong in the Lord and in the power of His might.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

Eze 46:9

Ezekiel’s temple is designed to set forth the order, grandeur, and beauty of the Church in its vigour, and the life that shall go out from it in floods all over the world. What can be meant, then, by declaring regarding the temple that those who go in by the south door shall go out by the north, and that those who go in by the north shall go out by the south. A man may enter either by the north door or the south. There is perfect liberty here. But there is no liberty as to what he shall do after that. The rest is fixed. Absolute restriction begins at once. He shall go right through. He shall make for the “over against.” Has not this a very plain meaning for us? We should not sit still at that side of religion which first attracted us, not keep going back over the old ground, but strive to go through the whole breadth of religion. Every man who enters on a religious experience must go from that first experience to the opposite experience.

Let us turn this thought in three directions,-Truth, Worship, Life.

I. Truth. The truth of God has many sides, and there are truths which stand as opposites; whole classes of truths stand as opposites. A healthy religious life seeks to lay hold of both of these. (1) Religion embraces truths that are mysterious and truths that are clear and plain. The plain truths need the vast and unsearchable to give them force. Your soul wants a most important part of education, if it has no experience of lying defeated and prostrate before the great ultimate mysteries. From the side of the mysterious, then, reach over to all the plainest and simplest things. One may have studied the mysteries long and not know. A man may know the stars better than his own fields. From the side of the plain reach over to the great mysteries; come out of your house and your workshop, and stand beneath the vast concave and wonder. (2) There are truths of theory and truths of practice. Let the one class be added to the other.

II. Worship. Worship has many sides. It also abounds in opposites. Such are sorrow and joy, hope and fear, prayer and praise, supplication and promise or resolve. How frequent it is for men to cling to one side of worship. (1) How many enter at the north door of entreaty, and never really approach the south door of joy and praise. (2) There are those who find it easy to be glad and grateful. They imagine that the sacrifice of sorrow is one they are not called to bring. He that does not know the secret of grief must be very much on the surface of things. If he wants to get down into reality, he must set himself to those thoughts that produce penitence.

III. Moral and spiritual life. (1) How common it is to deny feeling, and exalt conduct and action. But feeling, which many depreciate, is the proper basis of action and conduct. (2) Devotion and righteousness in like manner stand over against each other. If any one feels himself more inclined to the one side than the other, he should earnestly and resolutely resist this and press over to the other side. Let the praying man become practical, the practical become devout. To oblige oneself to strive for the opposite would initiate the most wholesome line of effort, and bring on great and wholly unexpected results. It would expel many a doubt, brace up many a slack life, and clear many a horizon.

J. Leckie, Sermons Preached at Ibrox, p. 210.

References: Eze 46:10.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. ix., p. 136. Eze 47:1-8.-S. Baring-Gould, One Hundred Sermon Sketches, p. 32. Eze 47:1-12.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. iii., p. 102. Eze 47:5.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xviii., No. 1054. Eze 47:8.-Ibid., vol. xxxi., No. 1852.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 46

1. The worship of the prince (Eze 46:1-8)

2. Further instruction as to worship (Eze 46:9-15)

3. Concerning the prince, his sons and his servants (Eze 46:16-18)

4. A final description of places in the temple (Eze 46:19-24)

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

seventh month

i.e. October.

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

Thus saith: Whether the rules for public worship here laid down were designed to be observed in those things wherein they differed from the law of Moses, in the ministrations of the second temple, is not certain. In the latter history of the Jewish church, the law of Moses only was followed, except in the corruption of following the traditions of the fathers.

The gate: The prophet had before observed that the east gate of the outer court was shut, and was told that it must only be opened for the prince; and now he is informed that the gate of the inner court on the east was also shut, and is to be opened only on the sabbath and new moons, till the evening.

shall be shut: Eze 44:1, Eze 44:2

six working: Gen 3:19, Exo 20:9, Luk 13:14

on the sabbath: Eze 45:17, Isa 66:23, Heb 4:9, Heb 4:10

Reciprocal: Gen 1:14 – and let Exo 16:26 – General Exo 31:15 – Six days Num 28:11 – in the beginnings 1Ch 9:18 – the king’s Eze 40:6 – unto Eze 40:19 – unto the Eze 43:1 – the gate that Eze 46:12 – open him Col 2:16 – the new

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Eze 46:1. A gate could be shut and not be fastened, and there is nothing said about that subject. However, the fact of its being opened on the sabbath indicates that the Lord’s business was going on.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Eze 46:21. In every corner of the court there was a court. The LXX read aule micra, a little court, which relieves the idea, by defining the nature of the courts. These courts were open to the heavens, having no roof.

REFLECTIONS.

The gate of the inner court being opened on the sabbath, shows the peculiar sanctity of that day as high and holy; and that it is of everlasting obligation till the heavenly sabbath shall commence. It is therefore lamentable that any modern christians who pretend to have the highest veneration for the bible, should in so gross a manner despise the glory of the day. They may by their profanations provoke the Lord to exclude them from his heavenly rest.

The sabbath is not only holy, but all ranks of men are bound to attend religious worship on that day. The prince is here named in particular, as required to set a high example of decency and devotion before his people. The poor cannot be less obliged to the duty; for religion is their peculiar support and comfort. When the French infidels abolished the sabbath, Mons. Neckar remarked, that the poor were peculiarly called upon to support the sanctity of the day, as the pressure of circumstances would soon compel them to labour seven days in the week as hard as they now do the six. This thought is strikingly just, yet the salvation of the soul ought to be a weightier argument with conscientious men.

We learn from this and the preseding chapters, that men are not only obliged to attend religious worship, but also to support it in an adequate way. A grand scale of obligations is here prescribed, as becoming the courts and worship of the Lord. Here the poor as well as the rich must contribute; and though the levitical law often allowed of doves instead of beasts for the poor, the spirit in which the poor man offered his gift, rendered it as pleasing to God as a hundred bulls of a prince.

In the house of God, strict attention is paid to the work and duty of servants; for the temporal food of the church was in their hands. The Lord therefore expects diligence and fidelity in the humblest ministers of his house: and who can tell but they may he among the first of servants in the life to come. In the outward court were four ranges of boilers, placed in the four corners. Thus in one part of the house was food for the body, and in another food for the soul. In this point of view, heaven shall greatly exceed earth, for there we shall not need the bread that perisheth. He that eateth of the tree of life shall live for ever. In thy presence is fullness of joy, and at thy right hand are pleasures for evermore.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Eze 46:1-15. The Sabbath, New Moon, and Other Festivals.On the Sabbath day, seven animals, besides meal and oil, were to be offered; on the new moon the offering was the same, with the addition of a bullock. The prince, who might not enter into the sacred inner court, watched the sacrifice being offered from his place at the threshold of its eastern gate (Eze 46:1-7). To prevent confusion the worshippers were obliged to leave the outer court by the opposite gate from that by which they had entered (Eze 46:8 f.). It was the princes duty to provide for the daily burnt offering. When, in addition to this, he made a free-will offering, the eastern gate of the inner court was opened for him, as on the Sabbath and new moon (Eze 46:11-15).

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Worship on the Sabbath and new moon days 46:1-8

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

The Lord specified that the gate in the inner east gate complex should be open only on Sabbath days and on the new moon days (i.e., the first of each month). All other days it was to remain closed. An exception to this rule follows in Eze 46:12. Observance of the Sabbath day in the future, as was true in Israel’s past, will remind the Israelites of God’s creation of the cosmos, His creation of their nation, and His provision of rest (in the Messiah). The new moon (new month) celebrations may be periodic reminders of God’s providential control of nature and His faithful provision of His people’s needs, as they were in the past.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

PRINCE AND PEOPLE

Eze 44:1-31; Eze 45:1-25; Eze 46:1-24, PASSIM

IT was remarked in a previous chapter that the “prince” of the closing vision appears to occupy a less exalted position than the Messianic king of chapter 34 or chapter 37. The grounds on which this impression rests require, however, to be carefully considered, if we are not to carry away a thoroughly false conception of the theocratic state foreshadowed by Ezekiel. It must not be supposed that the prince is a personage of less than royal rank, or that his authority is overshadowed by that of a priestly caste. He is undoubtedly the civil head of the nation, owing no allegiance within his own province to any earthly superior. Nor is there any reason to doubt that he is the heir of the Davidic house and holds his office in virtue of the divine promise which secured the throne to Davids descendants. It would therefore be a mistake to imagine that we have here an anticipation of the Romish theory of the subordination of the secular to the spiritual power. It may be true that in the state of things presupposed by the vision very little is left for the king to do, whilst a variety of important duties falls to the priesthood; but at all events the king is there and is supreme in his own sphere. Ezekiel does not show the road to Canossa. If the king is overshadowed, it is by the personal presence of Jehovah in the midst of His people; and that which limits his prerogative is not the sacerdotal power, but the divine constitution of the theocracy as revealed in the vision itself, under which both king and priests have their functions defined and regulated with a view to the religious ends for which the community as a whole exists.

Our purpose in the present chapter is to put together the scattered references to the duties of the prince which occur in chapters 44-46 so as to gain as clear a picture as possible of the position of the monarchy in the theocratic state. It must be remembered, however, that the picture will necessarily be incomplete. National life in its secular aspects, with which the king is chiefly concerned, is hardly touched on in the vision. Everything being looked upon from the point of view of the Temple and its worship, there are but few allusions in which we can detect anything of the nature of a civil constitution. And these few are introduced incidentally, not for their own sake, but to explain some arrangement for securing the sanctity of the land or the community. This fact must never be lost sight of in judging of Ezekiels conception of the monarchy. From all that appears in these pages we might conclude that the prince is a mere ornamental figurehead of the constitution, and that the few real duties assigned to him could have been equally well performed by a committee of priests or laymen elected for the purpose. But this is to forget that outside the range of subjects here touched upon there is a whole world of secular interests, of political and social action, where the king has his part to play in accordance with the precedents furnished by the best days of the ancient monarchy.

Let us glance first of all at Ezekiels institutes of the kingdom in its more political relations. The notices here are all in the form of constitutional checks and safeguards against an arbitrary and oppressive exercise of the royal authority. They are instructive, not only as showing the interest which the prophet had in good government and his care for the rights of the subject, but also for the light they cast on certain administrative methods in force previous to the Exile.

The first point that calls for attention is the provision made for the maintenance of the prince and his court. It would seem that the revenue of the prince was to be derived mainly, if not wholly, from a portion of territory reserved as his exclusive property in the division of the country among the tribes. {Eze 45:7-8; Eze 48:21-22} These crown lands are situated on either side of the sacred “oblation” around the sanctuary, set apart for the use of the priests and Levites; and they extend to the sea on the west and to the Jordan Valley on the east. Out of these he is at liberty to assign a possession to his sons in perpetuity, but any estate bestowed on his courtiers reverts to the prince in the “year of liberty.” The object of this last regulation apparently is to prevent the formation of a new hereditary aristocracy between the royal family and the peasantry. A life peerage, so to speak, or something less, is deemed a sufficient reward for the most devoted service to the king or the state. And no doubt the certainty of a revision of all royal grants every seventh year would tend to keep some persons mindful of their duty. The whole system of royal demesnes, which the king might dispose of as appanages for his younger children or his faithful retainers presents a curious resemblance to a well-known feature of feudalism in the Middle Ages; but it was never practically enforced in Israel. Before the Exile it was evidently unknown, and after the Exile there was no king to provide for. But why does the prophet bestow so much care on a mere detail of a political system in which, as a whole, he takes so little interest? It is because of his concern for the rights of the common people against the high-handed tyranny of the king and his nobles.

He recalls the bad times of the old monarchy when any man was liable to be ejected from his land for the benefit of some court favourite, or to provide a portion for a younger son of the king. The cruel evictions of the poorer peasant proprietors, which all the early prophets denounce as an outrage against humanity, and of which the story of Naboth furnished a typical example, must be rendered impossible in the new Israel; and as the king had no doubt been the principal offender in the past, the rule is firmly laid down in his case that on no pretext must he take the peoples inheritance. And this, be it observed, is an application of the religious principle which underlies the constitution of the theocracy. The land is Jehovahs, and all interference with the ancient landmarks which guard the rights of private ownership is an offence against the holiness of the true divine King who has His abode amongst the tribes of Israel. This suggests developments of the idea of holiness which reach to the very foundations of social well-being. A conception of holiness which secures each man in the possession of his own vine and fig tree is at all events not open to the charge of ignoring the practical interests of common life for the sake of an unprofitable ceremonialism.

In the next place we come across a much more startling revelation of the injustice habitually practised by the Hebrew monarchs. Just as later sovereigns were wont to meet their deficits by debasing the currency, so the kings of Judah had learned to augment their revenue by a systematic falsification of weights and measures. We know from the prophet Amos {Amo 8:5} that this was a common trick of the wealthy landowners who sold grain at exorbitant prices to the poor whom they had driven from their possessions. They “made the ephah small and the shekel great, and dealt falsely with balances of deceit.” But it was left for Ezekiel to tell us that the same fraud was a regular part of the fiscal system of the Judaean kingdom. There is no mistaking the meaning of his accusation: “Have done, O princes of Israel, with your violent and oppressive rule; execute judgment and justice, and take away your exactions from My people, saith Jehovah God. Ye shall have just balances, and a just ephah, and a just bath.” That is to say, the taxes were surreptitiously increased by the use of a large shekel (for weighing out money payments) and a large bath and ephah (for measuring tribute paid in kind). And if it was impossible for the poor to protect themselves against the rapacity of private dealers, poor and rich alike were helpless when the fraud was openly practised in the kings name. This Ezekiel had seen with his own eyes, and the shameful injustice of it was so branded on his spirit that even in a vision of the late days it comes back to him as an evil to be sedulously guarded against. It was eminently a case for legislation. If there was to be such a thing as fair dealing and commercial probity in the community, the system of weights and measurement must be fixed beyond the power of the royal caprice to alter it. It was as sacred as any principle of the constitution. Accordingly he finds a place in his legislation for a corrected scale of weights and measures, restored no doubt to their original values. The ephah for dry measure and the bath or liquid measure are each fixed at the tenth part of a homer. “The shekel shall be twenty geras: five shekels shall be five, and ten shekels shall be ten, and fifty shekels shall be your maneh.” {Eze 14:12}

These regulations extend far beyond the immediate object for which they are introduced, and have both a moral and a religious bearing. They express a truth often insisted on in the Old Testament, that commercial morality is a matter in which the holiness of Jehovah is involved: “A false balance is an abomination to Jehovah, but a just weight is His delight.” {Pro 11:1} In the Law of Holiness an ordinance very similar to Ezekiels occurs amongst the conditions by which the precept is to be fulfilled: “Be ye holy, for I am holy.” {Lev 19:35-36} It is evident that the Israelites had learned to regard with a religious abhorrence all tampering with the fixed standards of value on which the purity of commercial life depended. To overreach by lying words was a sin: but to cheat by the use of a false balance was a species of profanity comparable to a false oath in the name of Jehovah.

These rules about weights and measures required, however, to be supplemented by a fixed tariff, regulating the taxes which the prince might impose on the people. {Eze 14:13-17} It is not quite clear whether any part of the princes own income was to be derived from taxation. The tribute is called an “oblation,” and there is no doubt that it was intended principally for the support of the Temple ritual, which in any case must have been the heaviest charge on the royal exchequer. But the oblation was rendered to the prince in the first instance; and the prophets anxiety to prevent unjust exactions springs from a fear that the king might make the Temple tax a pretext for increasing his own revenue. At all events the peoples duty to contribute to the support of public ordinances according to their ability is here explicitly recognised. Compared with the provision of the Levitical law the scale of charges here proposed must be pronounced extremely moderate. The contribution of each householder varies from one-sixtieth to one-two-hundredth of his income, and is wholly paid in kind. The proper equivalent under the second Temple of Ezekiels “oblation” was a poll-tax of one-third of a shekel, voluntarily undertaken at the time of Nehemiahs covenant “for the service of the house of our God; for the shew-bread and for the continual meal-offering, and for the continual burnt-offering, of the Sabbaths, of the new moons, for the set feasts, and for the holy things, and for the sin-offerings to make atonement for Israel, and for all the work of the house of our God.” {Neh 10:32-33 : cf. Eze 14:15} In the Priestly Code this tax is fixed at half a shekel for each man. But in addition to this money payment the law required a tenth of all produce of the soil and the flock to be given to the priests and Levites. In Ezekiels legislation the tithes and firstfruits are still left for the use of the owner. who is expected to consume them in sacrificial feasts at the sanctuary. The only charge, therefore, of the nature of a fixed tribute for religious purposes is the oblation here required for the regular sacrifices which represent the stated worship rendered on behalf of the community as a whole.

This brings us now to the more important aspect of the kingly office-its religious privileges and duties. Here there are three points which require to be noticed.

1. In the first place it is the duty of the prince to supply the material of the public sacrifices of-feted in the name of the people. {Eze 14:17} Out of the tribute levied on the people for this purpose he has to furnish the altar with the stated number of victims for the daily service, the Sabbaths, and new moons, and the great yearly festivals. It is clear that some one must be charged with the responsibility of this important part of the worship, and it is significant of Ezekiels relations to the past that the duty does not yet devolve directly on the priests. They seem to exercise no authority outside of the Temple, the king standing between them and the community as a sort of patron of the sanctuary. But the position of the prince is not simply that of an official receiver, collecting the tribute and then handing it over to the Temple as it was required. He is the representative of the religious unity of the nation, and in this capacity he presents in person the regular sacrifices offered on behalf of the community. Thus on the day of the Passover he presents a sin-offering for himself and the people. as the high priest does in the ceremonial of the Great Day of Atonement. And so all the sacrifices of the stated ritual are his sacrifices, officiating as the head of the nation in its acts of common worship. In this respect the prince succeeds to the rights exercised by the kings of Judah in the ritual of the first Temple, although on a different footing. Before the Exile the king had a proprietary interest in the central sanctuary, and the expense of the stated service was defrayed as a matter of course out of the royal revenues. Part of this revenue, as we see in the case of Joash, was raised by a system of Temple dues paid by the worshippers and expended on the repairs of the house; but at a much later date than this we find Ahaz assuming absolute control over the daily sacrifices, which were doubtless maintained at his expense.

Now the tendency of Ezekiels legislation is to bring the whole community into a closer and more personal connection with the worship of the sanctuary, and to leave no part of it subject to the arbitrary will of the prince. But still the idea is preserved that the prince is the religious as well as the civil representative of the nation; and although he is deprived of all control over the performance of the ritual, he is still required to provide the public sacrifices and to offer them in the name of his people.

2. In virtue of his representative character the prince possesses certain privileges in his approaches to God in the sanctuary not accorded to ordinary worshippers. In this connection it is necessary to explain some details regulating the use of the sanctuary by the people. The outer court might be entered by prince or people either through the north or south gate, but not from the east. The eastern gate was that by which Jehovah had entered His dwelling-place, and the doors of it are forever closed. No foot might cross its threshold. But the prince-and this is one of his peculiar rights-might enter the gateway from the court to eat his sacrificial meals. It seems therefore to have served the same purpose for the prince as the thirty ceils along the wall did for common worshippers. The east gate of the inner court was also shut, as a rule, and was probably never used as a passage even by the priests. But on the Sabbaths and new moons it was thrown open to receive the sacrifices which the prince had to bring on these days, and it remained open till the evening. On days when the gate was open the worshipping congregation assembled at its door, while the prince entered as far as the threshold and looked on while the priests presented his offering; then he went out by the way he had entered. If on any other occasion he presented a voluntary sacrifice in his private capacity, the east gate was opened for him as before, but was shut as soon as the ceremony was over. On those occasions when the eastern gate was not opened, as at the great annual festivals, the people probably gathered round the north and south gates, from which they could see the altar; and at these seasons the prince enters and departs in the common throng of worshippers. A very peculiar regulation, for which no obvious reason appears, is that each man must leave the Temple by the gate opposite to that at which he entered; if he entered by the north, he must leave by the south, and vice versa.

Many of these arrangements were no doubt suggested by Ezekiels acquaintance with the practice in the first Temple, and their precise object is lost to us. But one or two facts stand out clearly enough, and are very instructive as to the whole conception of Temple worship. The chief thing to be noticed is that the principal sacrifices are representative. The people are merely spectators of a transaction with God on their behalf, the efficacy of which in no way depends on their co-operation. Standing at the gates of the inner court, they see the priests performing the sacred ministrations; they bow themselves in humble reverence before the presence of the Most High; and these acts of devotion may have been of the utmost importance for the religious life of the individual Israelite. But the congregation takes no real part in the worship; it is done for them, but not by. them; it is on opus operatum performed by the prince and the priests for the good of the community, and is equally necessary and equally valid whether there is a congregation present to witness it or not. Those who attend are themselves but representatives of the nation of Israel, in whose interest the ritual is kept up. But the supreme representative of the people is the king, and we note how everything is done to emphasise his peculiar dignity within the sanctuary. It was necessary perhaps to do something to compensate for the loss of distinction caused by the exclusion of the royal body-guard from the Temple. The prince is still the one conspicuous figure in the outer court. Even his private sacrificial meals are eaten in solitary state, in the eastern gateway, which is used for no other purpose. And in the great functions where the prince appears in his representative character, he approaches nearer to the altar than is permitted to any other layman. He ascends the steps of the eastern gateway in the sight of the people, and passing through he presents his offerings on the verge of the inner court which none but the priests may enter. His whole position is thus one of great importance in the celebration of public ordinances. In detail his functions are no doubt determined by ancient prescriptive usages not known to us, but modified in accordance with the stricter ideal of holiness which Ezekiels vision was intended to enforce.

3. Finally, we have to observe that the prince is rigorously excluded from properly priestly offices. It is true that in some respects his position is analogous to that of the high priest under the law. But the analogy extends only to that aspect of the high priests functions in which he appears as the head and representative of the religious community, and ceases the moment he enters upon priestly duties. So far as the special degree of sanctity which characterises the priesthood is concerned, the prince is a layman, and as such he is jealously debarred from approaching the altar, and even from intruding into the sacred inner court where the priests minister. Now this fact has perhaps a deeper historical importance than we are apt to imagine. There is good reason to believe that in the old Temple the kings of Judah frequently officiated in person at the altar. At the time when the monarchy was established it was the rule that any man might sacrifice for himself and his household, and that the king as the representative of the nation should sacrifice on its behalf was an extension of the principle too obvious to require express sanction. Accordingly we find that both Saul and David on public occasions built altars and offered sacrifice to Jehovah. The older theory indeed seems to have been that priestly rights were inherent in the kingly office, and that the acting priests were the ministers to whom the king delegated the greater part of his priestly functions. Although the king might not appoint any one to this duty without respect to the Levitical qualification, he exercised within certain limits the right of deposing one family and installing another in the priesthood of the royal sanctuary. The house of Zadok itself owed its position to such an act of ecclesiastical authority on the part of David and Solomon.

The last occasion on which we read of a king of Judah officiating in person in the Temple is at the dedication of the new altar of Ahaz, when the king not only himself sacrificed, but gave directions to the priests as to the future observance of the ritual. The occasion was no doubt unusual, but there is not a word in the narrative to indicate that the king was committing an irregular action or exceeding the recognised prerogatives of his position. It would be unsafe, however, to conclude that this state of things continued unchanged till the close of the monarchy. After the time of Isaiah the Temple rose greatly in the religious estimation of the people, and a very probable result of this would be an increasing sense of the importance of the ministration of the official priesthood. The silence of the historical books and of Deuteronomy may not count for much in an argument on this question; but Ezekiels own decisions lack the emphasis and solemnity with which he introduces an absolute innovation like the separation between priests and Levites in chapter 44. It is at least possible that the later kings had gradually ceased to exercise the right of sacrifice, so that the privilege had lapsed through desuetude. Nevertheless it was a great step to have the principle affirmed as a fundamental law of the theocracy; and this Ezekiel undoubtedly does. If no other practical object were gained, it served at least to illustrate in the most emphatic way the idea of holiness, which demanded the exclusion of every layman from unhallowed contact with the most sacred emblems of Jehovahs presence.

It will be seen from all that has been said that the real interest of Ezekiels treatment of the monarchy lies far apart from modern problems which might seem to have a superficial affinity with it. No lessons can fairly be deduced from it on the relations between Church and State, or the propriety of endowing and establishing the Christian religion, or the duty of rulers to maintain ordinances for the benefit of their subjects. Its importance lies in another direction. It shows the transition in Israel from a state of things in which the king is both de jure and de facto the source of power and the representative of the nation and where his religious status is the natural consequence of his civic dignity, to a very different state of things, where the forms of the ancient constitution are retained although the power has largely vanished from them. The prince now requires to have his religious duties imposed on him by an abstract political system whose sole sanction is the authority of the Deity. It is a transition which has no precise parallel anywhere else, although resemblances more or less instructive might doubtless be instanced from the history of Catholicism. Nowhere does Ezekiels idealism appear more wonderfully blended with his equally characteristic conservatism than here. There is no real trace of the tendency attributed to the prophet to exalt the priesthood at the expense of the monarchy. The prince is after all a much more imposing personage even in the ceremonial worship than any priest. Although he lacks the priestly quality of holiness, his duties are quite as important as those of the priests, while his dignity is far greater than theirs. The considerations that enter in to limit his power and importance come from another quarter. They are such as these: first, the loss of military leadership, which is at least to be presumed in the circumstances of the Messianic kingdom; second, the welfare of the people at large; and third, the principle of holiness, whose supremacy has to be vindicated in the person of the king no less than in that of his meanest subject.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing is that the transition referred to was not actually accomplished even in the history of Israel itself. It was only in a vision that the monarchy was ever to be represented in the form which it bears here. From the time of Ezekiel no native king was ever to rule over Israel again save the priest-princes of the Asmonean dynasty, whose constitutional position was defined by their high-priestly dignity. Ezekiels vision is therefore a preparation for the kingless state of post-exilic Judaism. The foreign potentates to whom the Jews were subject did in some instances provide materials for the Temple worship, but their local representatives were of course unqualified to fill the position assigned to the prince by the great prophet of the Exile. The community had to get along as best it could without a king, and the task was not difficult. The Temple dues were paid directly to the priests and Levites, and the function of representing the community before the altar was assigned to the High Priest. It was then indeed that the High Priesthood came to the front and blossomed out into all the magnificence of its legal position. It was not only the religious part of the princes duties that fell to it, but a considerable share of his political importance as well. As the only hereditary institution that had survived the Exile, it naturally became the chief centre of social order in the community. By degrees the Persian and Greek kings found it expedient to deal with the Jews through the High Priest, whose authority they were bound to respect, and thus to leave him a free hand in the internal affairs of the commonwealth. The High Priesthood, in fact, was a civil as well as a priestly dignity. We can see that this great revolution would have broken the continuity of Hebrew history far more violently than it did but for the stepping-stone furnished by the ideal “prince” of Ezekiels vision.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary