Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ezekiel 40:38
And the chambers and the entries thereof [were] by the posts of the gates, where they washed the burnt offering.
38. Read: and a chamber, and the entry thereof (was) in the porch of the gate. The plur. gates can hardly be right. It is not probable that slaughtering took place at more than one gate. LXX. reads gate (sing.) and also porch for posts, cf. Eze 40:37. The chamber whose entry was from the porch must have been contiguous to the porch, but is not further described.
where they washed ] Not the usual word Lev 1:9. Both words Isa 4:4; 2Ch 4:6. LXX. thinks here of a drain or runnel for carrying off the sacrificial blood.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
38 43. Sacrificial appointments connected with the inner gate.
The verses are in some respects obscure. The text of LXX. differs in some points, but is hardly consistent with itself. The arrangements for slaughtering spoken of are of course connected with the inner gateway, but points not clear are: (1) which gateway, the N. or the E.? And (2) the position of the tables, Eze 40:40; were they situated in the inner court at the long sides of the gateway, or in the outer court in front of the gateway, on either side of the steps leading up to it?
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The chambers – Render it: and chambers, not yet described. They were north of the altar, by the posts or pillars in front and along the sides of the gate-building. There were several gates in the gate-building.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
The chambers; either the six, three on one side, and three on the other, as before in the gates of the outer court, or else chambers built on purpose for the uses here specified, as some conjecture.
The entries; the doors, as well as the chambers, were by the pillars probably adjoining to them. Though some have thought the north gate was that alone where they washed the burnt-offering, yet others conceive it was done at the east gate too, if not at the south also; and the plural number warrants us to look for another gate beside the north, when it is said these chambers were by the posts of the gates, plural. God commanded that the legs and entrails of this burnt-offering should be washed, Lev 1:13; now here they did that, and whether these chambers were built for this use only, or put to this to other holy uses, is not greatly material to inquire.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
38. chambers . . .entriesliterally, “a chamber and its door.”
by the poststhat is,at or close by the posts or columns.
where they washed the burntofferingThis does not apply to all the gates but only to thenorth gate. For Le 1:11 directsthe sacrifices to be killed north of the altar; and Eze8:5 calls the north gate, “the gate of the altar.” AndEze 40:40 particularlymentions the north gate.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And the chambers, and the entries thereof, were by the posts of the gates,…. Of the north gate; the plural for the singular; for not at the other gates, only at the north gate, were the sacrifices slain and washed; as under the law, only on the north side of the altar, Le 1:11, now, by the posts of this gate, or at the entrance of it on one side,
stood a cell or chamber, and a door into it o, as the words may be rendered; for they are singular in the text:
where they washed the burnt offering; its legs and inwards, Le 1:9, according to the law, there were lavers in Solomon’s temple, to wash the sacrifices in, 2Ch 4:6, but there was no such cell or chamber there for such a purpose as here: and as this refers to Gospel times, and to the church in the latter day, no legal sacrifice can be intended here, which are all abolished; but this must be mystically and spiritually understood, and designs no other than the sacrifice of Christ, a sweet smelling savour to God: that this kind of offering was typical of the sacrifice of Christ is clear from Heb 13:11, which whether of the herd, a bullock, represented Christ in his strength and laboriousness; or of the flock, and was either a sheep, an emblem of the innocence and patience of Christ; or a goat, which pointed him out as in the likeness of sinful flesh, traduced as a sinner, and made so by imputation; or of fowls, turtle doves, denoting his meekness and modesty; and all without spot or blemish signified the purity of his, nature and life; and these being burnt with fire were expressive of the pain and shame he endured when he bore our sins, and the wrath of God was poured on him as fire; the washing of the burnt offering denotes the purity of Christ’s sacrifice, being offered up without spot. Some, as Polanus, have thought the ordinance of baptism is here designed, as the Lord’s supper is by the tables next mentioned; and it is a note of Starchius upon the passage, that,
“he who is washed in the divine laver may be regaled with the heavenly feast.”
o “et cubiculum, et ostium ejus”, Pagninus, Montanus; “caeterum fuit cella, et ostium ejus”, Tigurine version.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The Cells and Arrangements for the Sacrificial Worship by and in the Inner Court
Eze 40:38. And a cell with its door was by the pillars at the gates; there they had to wash the burnt-offering. Eze 40:39. And in the porch of the gate were two tables on this side and two tables on that, to slay thereon the burnt-offering, the sin-offering, and the trespass-offering. Eze 40:40. And at the shoulder outside, to one going up to the opening of the gate toward the north, stood two tables; and at the other shoulder, by the porch of the gate, two tables. Eze 40:41. Four tables on this side and four tables on that side, at the shoulder of the gate; eight tables on which they were to slaughter. Eze 40:42. And four tables by the steps, hewn stone, a cubit and a half long, and a cubit and a half broad, and a cubit high; upon these they were to lay the instruments with which they slaughtered the burnt-offerings and other sacrifices. Eze 40:43. And the double pegs, a span long, were fastened round about the house; but the flesh of the sacrifice was placed upon the tables. Eze 40:44. And outside the inner gate were two cells in the inner court, one at the shoulder of the north gate, with its front side toward the south; one at the shoulder of the south gate, with the front toward the north. Eze 40:45. And he said to me, This cell, whose front is toward the south, is for the priests who attend to the keeping of the house; Eze 40:46. And the cell whose front is toward the north is for the priests who attend to the keeping of the altar. They are the sons of Zadok, who draw near to Jehovah of the sons of Levi, to serve Him. Eze 40:47. And he measured the court, the length a hundred cubits, and the breadth a hundred cubits in the square, and the altar stood before the house. – The opinions of modern commentators differ greatly as to the situation of the cells mentioned in Eze 40:38, since Bttcher and Hitzig had adjusted a text to suit their own liking, founded upon the Septuagint and upon decidedly erroneous suppositions. The dispute, whether is to be rendered in or by the , may be easily set at rest by the simple consideration that the in front of the porch of the gate were pillars of two cubits long and the same broad (Eze 40:9), in which it was impossible that a room could be constructed. Hence the could only be by (near) the pillars of the gate. To there is also added (by the gates)in loose coordination (vid., Ewald, 293 e), not for the purpose of describing the position of the pillars more minutely, which would be quite superfluous after Eze 40:9, but to explain the plural , and extend it to the pillars of all the three inner gates, so that we have to assume that there was a by the pillars of all these gates (Plate I O). This is also demanded by the purpose of these cells, viz., “for the cleansing or washing of the burnt-offering.” As the sacrifices were not taken through one gate alone, but through all the gates, the Sabbath-offering of the prince being carried, according to Eze 46:1-2, through the east gate, which was closed during the week, and only opened on the Sabbath, there must have been a cell, not by the north gate alone (Bttcher, Hvernick), or by the east gate only (Ewald, Hitzig), but by every gate, for the cleansing of the burnt-offering. Hvernick, Hitzig, and others are wrong in supposing that is a synecdochical designation applied to every kind of animal sacrifice. This is precluded not only by the express mention of the burnt-offerings, sin-offerings, and trespass-offerings (Eze 40:39), and by the use of the word in this sense in Eze 40:43, but chiefly by the circumstance that neither the Old Testament nor the Talmud makes any allusion to the washing of every kind of flesh offered in sacrifice, but that they merely speak of the washing of the entrails and legs of the animals sacrificed as burnt-offerings (Lev 1:9), for which purpose the basins upon the mechonoth in Solomon’s temple were used (2Ch 4:6, where the term used in Lev 1:9 is interpreted by the apposition ). A room at every gate (not by every pillar) was sufficient for this purpose. If there had been a of this kind on each side of the gate, as many have assumed on symmetrical grounds, this would have been mentioned, just as in the case of the slaughtering-tables (Eze 40:39-42). The text furnishes no information as to the side of the doorway on which it stood, whether by the right or the left pillars. On the ground plan we have placed the one at the east gate, on the right side, and those by the north and south gates on the western side (Plate I O O O).
Moreover, according to Eze 40:39-41, there were twice two tables on each side, eight therefore in all, which served for slaughtering. Two pairs stood “in the porch of the gate,” i.e., in the inner space of the porch, one pair on this side, the other pair on that, i.e., on the right and left sides to a person entering the porch, probably near the wall (see Plate II II f f). The expression , to slaughter at the tables (Eze 40:39 and Eze 40:40), stands for “to use when slaughtering” – that is, for the purpose of laying the slaughtered flesh upon. This is apparent from the fact itself in Eze 40:39. For the slaughtering was not performed within the front porch, but outside, and somewhere near it. The front porch of the gate-building was not a slaughter-house, but the place where those who entered the gate could assemble. The only purpose, therefore, for which the tables standing here could be used was to place the sacrificial flesh upon when it was prepared for the altar, that the priests might take it thence and lay it upon the altar. is to be understood as signifying the inner space of the porch; this is required by the antithesis in Eze 40:40, where two pair of tables outside the porch are mentioned. Two of these stood “by the shoulder outside to one going up to the gate opening, the northern” (Plate II II d d). The meaning of these not very intelligible words is apparent from the second half of the verse, which adds the correlative statement as to the two opposite tables. When it is said of these tables that they stood by the other shoulder ( ) which the porch of the gate had, not only is of the first hemistich more precisely defined hereby as the gate-porch, but is also rendered intelligible, namely, that as it corresponds to , it is an adjective belonging to , “at the northern shoulder outside to a person going up the steps to the opening of the gate” ( , the outer side, in contrast to the inside of the porch, , Eze 40:39). The shoulder of the gate, or rather of the porch of the gate, is the side of it, and that the outer side. Consequently these four tables stood by the outer sides of the porch, two by the right wall and two by the left. In Eze 40:41, what has already been stated concerning the position of the tables mentioned in Eze 40:39 and Eze 40:40 is summed up: Four tables stood on each side of the porch, two inside, and two against the outer wall, eight tables in all, which were used for slaughtering purposes. There is nothing strange in as an abbreviated expression for in Eze 40:40, as want of clearness was not to be feared after Eze 40:40. In addition to these there were four other tables ( , and four, Eze 40:42) of stone, from which it may be inferred that the four already mentioned were of wood. The four stone tables stood , i.e., at (near) the flight of steps (cf. , at the entrance to the city, Pro 8:3), and were of hewn square stones, as no doubt the steps also were (see Plate II II e e). It yields no sense whatever to render “for the burnt-offering” (lxx and others); and the expression in Eze 40:26 thoroughly warrants our translating , a flight of steps or staircase). These stone tables served as flesh-benches, on which the slaughtering tools were laid. belong together, the being inserted “as if at the commencement of a new sentence after a pause in the thought” (cf. Pro 23:24; Pro 30:28; Gen 50:9, Bttcher). It is not expressly stated, indeed, that these four tables were distributed on the two sides of the steps; but this may be inferred with certainty from the position of the other tables. Moreover, the twelve tables mentioned were not merely to be found at one of the gate-porches, but by all three of the inner fates, as was the case with the washing-cells (Eze 40:38), for sacrificial animals were taken to the altar and slaughtered at every gate; so that what is stated in Eze 40:39-42 with reference to one porch, namely, the porch of the east gate, to judge from in Eze 40:40, is applicable to the porches of the south and north gates also.
In Eze 40:43 another provision for the slaughtering of the sacrificial animals is mentioned, concerning which the opinions of the older translators and commentators are greatly divided. but the only explanation that can be sustained, so far as both the usage of the language and the facts are concerned, is that adopted by the Chaldee, viz., , et uncini egrediebantur (longitudine) unius palmi defixi in columnis domus macelli , to which not only Bttcher, but Roediger (Ges. Thes. p. 1470) and Dietrich ( Lex.) have given their adhesion. For , from , to set or stand (act.), signifies stakes or pegs (in Psa 68:14, the folds constructed of stakes), here pegs a span long on the wall, into which they were inserted, and from which they projected to the length of a span. In the dual it stands for double pegs, forked pegs, upon which the carcases of the beasts were hung of the purpose of flaying, as Dav. Kimchi has interpreted the words of the Chaldee. The article indicates the kind, viz., the pegs required for the process of slaughtering. This explanation is also in harmony with the verb , Hophal of , fastened, which by no means suits the rendering originated by the lxx, viz., ledges round the edge or the rim of the table. The only remaining difficulty is the word , which Bttcher interprets as signifying “in the interior of the gate-porch and pillars” (Roediger, in interiore parte, nempe in ea atrii parte, ubi hostiae mactandae essent ), on the just ground that the interior of the front porch could not be the place for slaughtering, but that this could only be done outside, either in front of or near the porch. But even in interiore parte atrii is not really suitable, and at all events is too indefinite for . It would therefore be probably more correct to render it “fastened against the house,” i.e., to the outer walls of the gate-porch buildings, so that would stand for buildings in the sense of , although I cannot cite any passage as a certain proof of the correctness of this rendering. But this does not render the explanation itself a doubtful one, as it would be still more difficult to interpret if were explained in any other way. refers to the three outer sides of the porch. The description of the slaughtering apparatus closes in Eze 40:43 with the words, “and upon the tables (mentioned in Eze 40:39-42) came the flesh of the offering.” , the general word for sacrificial offerings, as in Lev 1:2 ff.
In Eze 40:44-46 we have a description of cells for the officiating priests, and in Eze 40:45 and Eze 40:46 two such cells are plainly mentioned according to their situation and purpose (vid., Plate I F F). But it is impossible to bring the Masoretic text of Eze 40:44 into harmony with this, without explaining it in an arbitrary manner. For, in the first place, the reference there is to , cells of the singers; whereas these cells, according to Eze 40:45 and Eze 40:46, were intended for the priests who performed the service in the temple-house and at the altar of burnt-offering. The attempt of both the earlier and the more recent supporters of the Masoretic text to set aside this discrepancy, by arguing that the priests who had to attend to the service in the temple and at the altar, according to Eze 40:45 and Eze 40:46, were singers, is overturned by the fact that in the Old Testament worship a sharp distinction is made between the Levitical singers and the priests, i.e., the Aaronites who administered the priesthood; and Ezekiel does not abolish this distinction in the vision of the temple, but sharpens it still further by the command, that none but the sons of Zadok are to attend to the priestly service at the sanctuary, while the other descendants of Aaron, i.e., the Aaronites who sprang from Ithamar, are only to be employed in watching at the gate of the house, and other non-priestly occupations (Eze 44:10 ff.). Consequently Ezekiel could not identify the priests with the singers, or call the cells intended for the officiating priests singers’ cells. Moreover, only two cells, or cell-buildings, are mentioned in Eze 40:45 and Eze 40:46, and their position is described in the same words as that of the cells mentioned in Eze 40:44, so that there can be no doubt as to the identity of the former and the latter cells. In Eze 40:44 the supposed singers’ cells are placed at the north gate, with the front toward the south, which only applies, according to Eze 40:45, to the one cell intended for the priests who attended to the service in the holy place; and again, in Eze 40:44, another cell is mentioned at the east gate, with the front toward the north, which was set apart, according to Eze 40:46, for the priests who attended to the altar service. Consequently, according to our Masoretic text of the 44th verse, there would be first singers’ cells (in the plural), and then one cell, at least three cells therefore; whereas, according to Eze 40:45 and Eze 40:46, there were only two. And lastly, the in Eze 40:44 can only be understood by our taking it in the sense of “another,” in opposition to the usage of the language. For these reasons we are compelled to alter into , and into , after the lxx, and probably also into , and in consequence of this to adopt the pointing , and to read instead of . Further alterations are not requisite or indicated by the lxx, as the rest of the deviations in their text are to be explained from their free handling of the original.
According to the text with these alterations, even in Eze 40:44 there are only two cells mentioned. They were situated “outside the inner gate.” This definition is ambiguous, for you are outside the inner gate not only before entering the gate, i.e., while in the outer court, but also after having passed through it and entered the inner court. Hence there follows the more precise definition, “in the inner court.” If, then, we read for , there follows, in prefect accordance with the fact, a more precise statement as to the situation of both the one and the other of these cells, and corresponding to one another. The second , instead of , which is grammatically the more correct, is to be attributed to a constructio ad sensum , as the were not separate rooms, but buildings with several chambers. One cell stood by the shoulder (side) of the north gate, with the front ( ) toward the south; the other at the shoulder of the south gate, with the front toward the north. They stood opposite to one another, therefore, with their fronts facing each other. Instead of the south gate, however, the Masoretic text has , the east gate; and Eze 40:46 contains nothing that would be expressly at variance with this, so that could be defended in case of need. But only in case of need – that is to say, if we follow Kliefoth in assuming that it stood on the left of the gateway to persons entering through the east gate, and explaining the fact that its front turned toward the north, on the ground that the priests who resided in it were charged with the duty of inspecting the sacrifices brought through the east gate, or watching the bringing in of the sacrifices, so that this cell was simply a watchman’s cell after all. But this assumption is founded upon a misinterpretation of the formula , to keep the keeping of the altar. This formula does not mean to watch and see that nothing unlawful was taken to the altar, but refers to the altar service itself, the observance of everything devolving upon the servants of the altar in the performance of the sacrificial worship, or the offering of the sacrifices upon the altar according to the precepts of the law. If, then, this duty was binding upon the priests who resided in this cell, it would have been very unsuitable for the front of the cell to be turned toward the north, in which case it would have been absolutely impossible to see the altar from the front of the cell. This unsuitability can only be removed by the supposition that the cell was built at the south gate, with the front toward the north, i.e., looking directly toward the altar. For this reason we must also regard as a corruption of , and look for this second cell at the south gate, so that it stood opposite to the one built at the north gate. – All that remains doubtful is, whether these two cells were on the east or the west side of the south and north gates, a point concerning which we have no information given in the text. In our sketch we have placed them on the west side (vid., Plate I f), so that they stood in front of the altar and the porch-steps. The concluding words of Eze 40:46, in which refers to the priests mentioned in Eze 40:45 and Eze 40:46, state that in the new sanctuary only priests of the sons of Zadok were to take charge of the service at the altar and in the holy place; and this is still further expanded in Eze 44:10 ff. – Finally, in Eze 40:47 the description of the courts is concluded with the account of the measure of the inner court, a hundred cubits long and the same in breadth, according to which it formed a perfect square surrounded by a wall, according to Eze 42:10. The only other observation made is, that it was within this space that the altar of burnt-offering stood, the description of which is given afterwards in Eze 43:13 ff. (see Plate I H).
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(38) And the chambers and the entries thereof.These words in the original are in the singular, and have no article. The word for chamber is an entirely different one from that used in the former part of the chapter (Eze. 40:10; Eze. 40:12-13). The verse should be translated, And a cell with its door by the posts of the gates; there they washed the burnt offering. All the arrangements for sacrificing are here described in connection with the north gate, although in Eze. 46:2 it is said that at certain festivals the prince shall enter by the east gate, and there worship while the priests prepare his offerings. In the law it was required (Lev. 1:11; Lev. 6:25; Lev. 7:2) that all sacrifices should be slain in the court at the north side of the altar. Here the slaying is done at the north gate, but within the outer court. The reason appears to be that in the law each offerer was to slay his own victim, but here (Eze. 44:11) the sacrifice is to be slain by the Levites, and it was therefore desirable that it should be done in the presence of the offerer and the people, i.e., in the outer court. There was also a further reason in the convenience of disposing of the flesh of the victims. Only the whole burnt offerings and the fat and the kidneys of the others required to be taken to the altar in the inner court; while all the flesh of the sin offerings and the priests portion of the peace offerings was to be carried to the priests cooking place (F, Plan II.) to which a walk led from this point. The rest of the flesh of the peace offerings was taken to the peoples cooking places (E) in the corners of the outer court.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
38-43. The description of these chambers of sacrifice must always remain obscure. Was there a chamber and tables of offering at each of the three gates of the inner court, or only at the north gate, which seems to be described in the text, or only at the east or principal gateway, where certainly burnt offerings and peace offerings were prepared for the prince? (lxvi, 2.) The LXX. is probably correct in reading “gate” instead of gates (Eze 40:38), and the R.V. in reading “chamber” instead of chambers. The eastern gate would seem the most natural place for such sacrifices, yet because Eze 40:40 seems to refer, without a possibility of mistake, to the northern gate (compare also Lev 1:11; Lev 6:18; Lev 7:2), and because in one place Ezekiel distinctly refers to the north gate as the “altar gate” (viii, 5), we conclude that but one place of offering is here described and that it is situated at the northern gate. There were eight slaughtering tables four within the entry or porch of the gate, and four without and also, it seems, four additional tables of stone on which were laid the heavy instruments with which the burnt offerings, etc., were slain. Perhaps for this reason they were called tables “for the burnt offering” (Eze 40:42). They can hardly be the same tables referred to in Eze 40:39. One suspects the phrase “for the burnt offering” to be an interpolation. The “hooks” referred to were either fastened up “within” the entry to receive the slaughtered beasts (Targum) or the word must be translated “ledges” (R.V., margin), and be thought of as a projecting border around the tables. Toy renders, “and borders one handbreadth in width were fixed within on the tables round about for the flesh of the offering.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘There was a chamber with its door by the posts at the gates. There they washed the burnt offering. And in the porch of the gate were two tables on this side and on that side, on which to slay the burnt offering, and the sin offering and the guilt offering. And on the side outside as one ascends to the entry of the gate toward the north, were two tables, and on the other side which belonged to the porch of the gate, were two tables. Four tables were on this side and four tables were on that side, by the side of the gate. Eight tables on which they slew the offerings.’
The tables for the slaying of the sacrifices were seemingly partly in the vestibule and partly outside. There were eight in all, four inside and four outside (that is one reading. There may have been more tables depending on whether we see repetition here). They are described here as being at the northern gate but the idea is probably that they were similarly at all three gates. The shedding of blood before approach to God was ever necessary
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Equipment for Sacrifice ( Eze 40:38-43 ).
Full provision was made for sacrificial activity, including whole (burnt) offerings, sin offerings and guilt offerings. Approach to God still required the full sacrificial rites, the same as before the exile. So there were eight or more tables for the slaying of sacrifices (probably at each gate) and four to carry the sacrificial instruments.
The emphasis is therefore laid on the fact that none could approach God without the shedding of blood for sin and guilt, together with worship and thanksgiving offerings. The whole (burnt) offering was an offering of total surrender to God, and in its different uses included worship, praise, thanksgiving and atonement. The sin and guilt offerings were on the other hand basic. They represented a sacrifice for the taking away of the guilt of sin (Lev 4:1 to Lev 5:17). There is no way in which they can be seen as memorial offerings. Their meaning is clearly identified. A man sins. The sin or guilt offering is necessary in order to ‘bear’ the man’s sin (This once for all cancels the idea that they can just be dismissed as memorial offerings as is required by the millennium theory). Once the tabernacle was taken up into Heaven, however, these would be unnecessary, as the one offering for sin for ever would already have been made.
It is no argument against this to say that animal sacrifices did not really take away sins, but only did so as pointing forward to Christ. That is true, but at the time that they were instituted they were the only way known by which sin could be taken away, and the complexity of the sacrificial system was because of the complexity of the problem of sin. To reproduce this in a ‘memorial system’ replacing the simplicity of the Lord’s Supper (Holy Communion) would be ludicrous in the extreme. Solemn ceremonies carried out and animals killed in large numbers in a complicated system were necessary before full enlightenment came. Once, however, it came, and the full price was paid at the cross, they were no longer necessary. And in a land noted for the fact that killing between man and beast had ceased it would be shameful (Isa 11:6-9).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Eze 40:38 And the chambers and the entries thereof [were] by the posts of the gates, where they washed the burnt offering.
Ver. 38. Where they washed the burnt offering. ] All must be pure and clean in God’s service.
“ Pura Deus mens est, ”& c.
This washing of the burnt offering prefigured baptism, saith Polanus, as did the tables, Eze 40:39 the Lord’s Supper, wherein Christ the Lamb of God is slain in our sight.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Eze 40:38-43
38A chamber with its doorway was by the side pillars at the gates; there they rinse the burnt offering. 39In the porch of the gate were two tables on each side, on which to slaughter the burnt offering, the sin offering and the guilt offering. 40On the outer side, as one went up to the gateway toward the north, were two tables; and on the other side of the porch of the gate were two tables. 41Four tables were on each side next to the gate; or, eight tables on which they slaughter sacrifices. 42For the burnt offering there were four tables of hewn stone, a cubit and a half long, a cubit and a half wide and one cubit high, on which they lay the instruments with which they slaughter the burnt offering and the sacrifice. 43The double hooks, one handbreadth in length, were installed in the house all around; and on the tables was the flesh of the offering.
Eze 40:43
NASBdouble hooks
NKJVhooks
NRSVpegs
TEVledges
NJBrunnels
The Hebrew consonants in the words hooks (BDB 1052) and ledges are the same. Hooks fits Eze 40:42 (i.e., sacrifice) and the last phrase of Eze 40:43 (and on the tables was the flesh of the offering). However, ledges are mentioned in the Temple Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Eze 30:13, see IVP Bible Background Commentary, p. 725).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
washed. Or, took out, the entrails of.
burnt offering. Sec App-43. See note on “ordinances”, Eze 43:18.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
the chambers: Eze 40:12, Eze 41:10, Eze 41:11, 1Ki 6:8
where: This place, where the legs and entrails of the sacrifices, especially of the burnt offerings, were washed, was just within the portico of the north entrance to the inner court, or court of the priests. An allusion to this is most probably made by the inspired apostle when writing his Epistle to the Hebrews – Heb 10:22. “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.” Lev 1:9, Lev 8:21, Heb 10:22
Reciprocal: 2Ch 4:6 – such things as they offered for the burnt offering
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Eze 40:38. Washed the burnt offering. The law of Moses required that animals intended for sacrifice on the altar must be washed (Lev 1:9; Lev 1:13; Lev 9:14).
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Eze 40:38. And the chambers were by the gates where they washed the burnt-offerings The chambers, mentioned Eze 40:36, were near the entrance of the north gate, where they washed the legs and entrails of the burnt-offerings; and marble tables were placed there for that purpose. According to this exposition, the word gates in the plural stands for gate in the singular. But Dr. Lightfoot says, they washed the sacrifices on the south side, as well as on the north side of the court of the priests, when the sacrifices were more numerous than the north side could well contain: he therefore understands the word gates as comprehending here both the north and south gate, and confirms this interpretation from the placing of the lavers which were designed for that use, and were set five on the right side of the house, and five on the left, 1Ki 7:39.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Eze 40:38-47. By the (eastern?) gate (and possibly also the northern and southern) of this inner court was a chamber in which the burnt offering was washed. There were also tables on which the animals were slain and other tables on which the instruments of slaughter were placed. At the south there was a chamber for the Levitical priests who had the general charge of the Temple, and at the north another for the Zadokite priests who had more particularly charge of the altar which stood in the middle of the inner court and in front of the entrance to the Temple proper. (In Eze 40:44 for chambers for the singers read, with LXX, two chambers.)
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
The rooms and implements used for preparing sacrifices 40:38-43
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Ezekiel also saw a room outside each of the three inner gate complexes close to its doorway. There priests would rinse animals brought as burnt offerings. Discussion of these offerings will follow in the section dealing with worship (Eze 43:13 to Eze 46:24). Within each inner gate complex, in the vestibules, there were four tables where priests slaughtered animals brought as burnt, sin, and guilt offerings. Two tables stood on one side of each vestibule and two on the other side. There were also four tables on the outside of the northern inner gate complex, two on each side of the entrance. The north gate then had eight tables, four in the vestibule and four just outside the gate. Since Ezekiel was describing what he saw at the northern inner gate complex (Eze 40:35-37), it may be safe to assume that the east and south gates also had the same number of tables.
The presence of animal sacrifices in the millennial system of worship has troubled many readers. The Book of Hebrews teaches that Jesus Christ was the superior sacrifice who replaced the sacrifices of the Old Covenant (Hebrews 7-10). The best explanation seems to be that in the Millennium there will be animal sacrifices, but they will look back to Christ’s sacrifice even as the sacrifices of the Old Covenant looked forward to His sacrifice. They will be like the Lord’s Supper is for Christians, a memorial of Christ’s death. The Lord’s Supper, of course, will cease to be observed when the Lord comes for His church at the Rapture (1Co 11:24; 1Co 11:26). The millennial system of worship will follow the restoration of Israel to her land and the resumption of her prominence in God’s plan (Rom 11:25-27). These sacrifices will appropriately reflect Israelite worship (cf. Eze 45:18-25), though there will not be a reinstitution of the Old Covenant (cf. Rom 10:4).
Alexander believed that in the Millennium the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant will be operating side by side. [Note: Alexander, "Ezekiel," p. 986.] The Book of Hebrews, however, argues for the replacement of the Mosaic Covenant by the New Covenant. Apparently Alexander concluded that the replacement in view applies to the present dispensation only and that in the Millennium God will reinstitute the Mosaic Covenant for the Jews.
Sacrifices under the Old Covenant never took away sin permanently; they only covered sin temporarily and anticipated the ultimate sacrifice to come (Heb 10:1-4; Heb 10:10). The purpose of sacrifices under the Old Covenant was to restore the Israelites to fellowship with God, not to provide salvation. Salvation was always by faith. Even after the church began, Jewish believers did not hesitate to participate in the sacrifices of Israel (cf. Act 2:46; Act 3:1; Act 21:26). They viewed these sacrifices as memorials of Christ’s sacrifice. There could be other reasons for animal sacrifices in the Millennium besides serving as memorials, namely, cleansing from the defilement of sin and demonstrating obedience to Christ. [Note: Charles C. Ryrie, "Why Sacrifices in the Millennium?" The Emmaus Journal 11 (Winter 2002):309.] Another reason will probably be to bring people together for fellowship and feasting to the glory of God. [Note: Wiersbe, p. 241.] There are several other passages that refer to sacrifices in the Millennium (cf. Isa 56:7; Isa 66:20-23; Jer 33:18; Zec 14:16-21; Mal 3:3-4).