adjunxerunt, pauci tamen illi erant, neque hi pares præstandis aut implendis iis, quæ Deus per Ezekielem omnibus præceperat." Dathius. "The temple described by Ezekiel should have been built by the new colonists; the customs and usages which he orders should have been observed by them; the division of the country should have been followed by them. That the temple did not arise out of its ruins according to his model, and that his orders were in no manner obeyed, was the fault of Israel. How far were they behind the orders of their first lawgiver Moses? what wonder therefore that they as little regard their second lawgiver Ezekiel? He supposes the return of all the tribes; which was agreeable to the prophecies of the other prophets, and to the will of Cyrus: but only Judah and Benjamin preferred the habitations of their ancestors to the country of Chaldea; and thus the great plan of Ezekiel was at once destroyed." Eichhorn.

A Dissertation on Ezekiel's Vision of the Temple, Ordinances of the Priest, Division of the Land, flowing of waters out of the Temple, &c. By Archbishop Secker.

Ezek. c. 40-48.

The Israelites mentioned in this vision are said to be the twelve tribes: Joseph is to have two shares of the land, and Levi none; but in the names of the gates Levi is mentioned, and but one named from Joseph. The country allotted them is described by geographical marks to be the land of Canaan. Indeed the shares of the several tribes are not the same, which they were in Joshua; nor is any of the country beyond Jordan divided amongst them. And 47. 22, 23, orders, that the proselytes sojourning in each tribe shall have an inheritance in land with those of the tribe in which they sojourn. This doth not seem to have been practised before the captivity. For though the Kenites, Judg. 1. 16, or rather part of them, 1 Sam. 15. 6, dwelt among the Jews, yet as they had neither house, nor vineyard, nor field, but dwelt in tents, Jer. 35. 7-9, as did Abraham, who had not a foot of the land in possession, Acts 7. 5, their case was not the same with that which is appointed here. But still in this alteration it appears, that the twelve tribes are meant literally, else there would be no distinction between them and the proselytes*.

* The meaning may possibly be, that the Gentile converts to Christianity shall have the same privileges with the Jewish. But supposing this, the twelve tribes must mean real Israelites and they are considered as the principal inhabitants in this vision : whereas the Gentile proselytes to Christianity have greatly exceeded the Jewisli. There is indeed a difficulty in the execution of this order, unless the several tribes in their captivity were kept distinct. For else how could it be determined amongst

And surely the vision must relate to those Israelites, who were to return in a short time from Babylon, not to those of a future age. It belonged to those who had been idolaters*, and practised their idolatrous worship in God's temple, so that only the wall was between him and idols: Comp. c. 8: and part of whose idolatries had been honouring the carcasses of their kings: 43. 7-9 and if they repented, the pattern of the house was to be shewn them, v. 11, which had been a small consolation, had it not been to be built for above 2000 years after. And as no other cause of God's anger against them is mentioned or hinted at but their idolatry, surely the vision must relate to their return from that captivity, before which they had been idolaters, not from one before which they had not †.

Besides, the temple to be built, or rather represented in this vision as built, is plainly the Jewish temple. Learned men, as Villalpandus and others, apprehend it to be of the same dimensions with Solomon's, and Vitringa is said to have proved it in a Dutch work to be of the same dimensions also with Zerobabel's and Herod's. And Lowth apprehends there might be probably need of so exact a description of it, as is given in this vision, in order to enable them to build one of the same dimensions. Moses had the dimensions of the tabernacle revealed to him, Exod. 25 &c. and David of the temple, 1 Chr. 28. 11, 19 ; and no one after the captivity could be supposed to remember these. But there is a description of Solomon's temple 1 Kings 6, which we must suppose them to have had then, and which would be a great direction to them, though not so particular as Ezekiel's‡. Zerobabel's temple was indeed much inferior to Solomon's, Hagg. 2. 3; but this might be in ornaments, not things essential. The old people wept when the foundations of it were laid Ezr. 3. 12. but this might be joy or tenderness, not sorrow at its being of less dimensions, and indeed Solomon's was not very large ||.

which of them the proselytes sojourned? But perhaps the meaning is, that where they sojourned after the return, and before the division of the land, there they should have a share. It is foretold, Zech. 2. 11, that Zion should have many proselytes at the return from Babylon; for that time appears by v. 6, 7, to be meant.

*They and their Kings. c. 43. 7.

+ It should also be observed that as a person, with a line of flax in his hands, measures here the city as well as temple, so Zech. 2. 1, 2, a person appears with a measuring line in his hand going to measure Jerusalem, the length and breadth of it; and this was when Zion, that dwelt with the daughter of Babylon, was commanded to flee from the land of the north. v. 6, 7.

And it is not easy to conceive, why directions so minute as his should be given, but in order to a real literal building. For surely no certain allegorical sense can be given of each. And to make them all only as ornaments of a parable is loading it with ornaments beyond measure.

Some make the measures of Ezekiel's temple and other things foretold so large, that the meaning cannot be literal. But I have not yet seen sufficient authority for this. Or if the measures were much larger than Solomon's temple, or than it was possible the temple, &c. should be, it might mean, not that no literal temple was intended,

The glory of the Lord had been seen by Ezekiel leaving the first house, 10. 19, and going to a mountain on the east (as it must naturally do, when it went out of the house, because the entrance of it was from the east) and standing there. 11. 23. And from the east it returned to this temple in the vision, and filled the house. 43. 1-5. 44. 4. Now the glory of the Lord* entered into Solomon's temple at the dedication of it, so that the priest could not enter into it to minister. 1 Kings 8. 10, 11. 2 Chron. 5. 13, 14. This was before Solomon's prayer. And again after this prayer fire came down from heaven, and consumed the sacrifice, and the glory filled the house so that the priests could not enter. 2 Chron. 7. 1, 2. One supposes therefore, it was not always in the same degree. But after this I know not that we have any mention of it in the historical books, though there is a vision of it Is. 6. Nor, I think, doth Josephus say any thing of it afterwards, though he doth say Antiq. 3. 8, 9, that the prophetic shining of the breast-plate and stone of the high priest's right shoulder left off 200 years before his time: Toû deoû dvoxepai νόντος ἐπὶ τῆ παραβάσει τῶν νόμων. We are not surely to think, that the glory of the Lord staid till the return from the captivity, much less stays till a future return, on any hill to the east of Jerusalem; nor indeed is it said, but only that it went to a hill in the east, and returned by the way of the east. But are we to suppose that it did, or will literally return at all to the temple there described? It is said here that it did, but it is said in a visiont. And neither Ezra, who gives the history of the building of the temple, nor Nehemiah, nor the prophets, who wrote afterwards, nor Josephus, mention it, which yet surely some of them would, though one should indeed have thought the departing of it at the Babylonish captivity should have been mentioned too. But if it did not return at the return from Babylon, it is not likely, if Christianity be true, to return at any future return of the Jews. For will God's glory now inhabit a temple built on the principles of Judaism, as this of Ezekiel's plainly is?

Strangers uncircumcised in heart, and in flesh, had been brought into the temple, and the prophet was directed to tell the people of this; and to charge that into this new temple no stranger uncircumcised in heart or flesh should enter. 44. 6-9. Surely this direction and charge must relate to a time near the commission of that offence, and to the next temple that was built after it, not a time distant, we know not how much

but that it should be a very large and spacious one, as certain numbers are put for uncertain, and hyperbolical ones for real ones, as in the burning the weapons of Gog's army, and burying their carcasses.

I think it is not mentioned from the entering into Canaan till now.

+ Which perhaps may mean only, that God will as certainly direct and protect his people as if he was visibly present by a symbol amongst them,

above 2000 years; especially as the last temple had no such crime allowed in it, and therefore there was no need to caution against it in a yet future one. And a literal circumcision must be meant here. For the crime under the former temple had been, admitting persons literally uncircumcised; and the repetitions of that being forbid, the same circumcision must be meant; besides that the sense is determined by adding in the flesh as well as in heart. Uncircumcised, when opposed to uncircumcised in heart, means literally, Jer. 9. 25, 26; much more then where in flesh is added.

Further, * sacrifices were to be offered in this temple, c. 43, 44, 45, 46, of blood and fat, 44. 7, the blood to be sprinkled on the altar, 43. 18, and God promises to accept them: 43. 27. Now though Christians are said in the New Testament to offer sacrifices, and their worship is understood to be meant in the Old Testament when incense and a pure offering is mentioned, Mal. 1. 11; yet the word there is , which denotes particularly a bread offering, and I believe the goats, bullocks, rams for sin, peace, burnt offerings, with their times, and quantities of flour and oil added to them, as described in these chapters, cannot be understood of other, than real Jewish sacrifices t.

Besides, they were to be offered by priests of the line of Aaron, and those of the sons of Zadoc, because the other priests had been guilty of idolatry, and those priests were to be employed only in lower offices in the temple: 44. 10—16. 48. 11. Now this seems to intimate a more speedy restoration of the temple, than the 70 years of Jer. Dan. Zech. will allow, and Ezekiel never mentions a number of years, but only that the time of return is near. After the 70 years scarce any could be sup posed capable of officiating, that had officiated in an idolatrous worship before. But the prohibition may be designed for their posterity. And for their posterity in Zerobabel's temple it might. But surely not in a time yet future, when nothing but a revelation can determine who are Zadoc's posterity, and when it would seem very strange, a punishment should commence for what their forefathers did so long ago. And not only the sons of Aaron as such would not be put to officiate in a Christian temple of the Jews, but Christian ministers would scarce be described in this manner. But supposing this temple to be that to be built after the return from Babylon, all would be easy.

Further still, ceremonial laws of sacrifice and purification and distinc

*There was to be an altar of such dimensions as are exactly specified, 43. 13, &c. Which, if the epistle to the Hebrews be true, to say nothing of the rest of the New Testament, God will not accept now, and therefore they must not be understood of future times.

tion between what the priests might do, and what the people might &c. were to be in force under this temple. c. 43. c. 44. Whether some of these may differ from the Mosaic, I have not particularly examined : if they do, Ezekiel must be considered as being in part a new legislator ; and I believe David and Solomon varied in some things from the rules of Moses. But still all these things cannot be designed, either to have allegorical meanings only, or to be ornaments of a parable only.

Particu

The prince mentioned in this vision, chap. 44-48, cannot be the Messias, but the ruler for the time being of the Jewish nation. It is directed, where he should sit in the temple to eat his share of the sacrifices, when and how he should go in and out, what he shall offer is specified very minutely for the sabbath day, for his voluntary offering &c. larly, it is directed, 45. 22, that at the passover he shall offer a bullock, a sin offering for himself and all the people. To guard him against the temptation of oppressing the people, he hath a provision of land allotted him, 45. 8; where it follows, and my princes shall not more oppress my people *. It is directed, 46. 16. &c. that if he give land out of his inheritance to one of his children, it shall be perpetual; but if to another, it shall be only to the Jubilee. And the prince shall not take of the people's inheritance by oppression, to thrust them out of their possession: he shall give his sons inheritance out of his own possession. These are plainly political rules for common princes, and for a succession of them. Nor is there any thing great said either of the character, or the dignity and dominion, of any particular prince in this vision: though there are considerable things said of the prosperity of the branch of the cedar, which God would plant in the mountain of Israel, but not more than would be proper concerning a flourishing king of Israel. 17. 22, &c. Nor doth he any where say† more of the people of the Jews, than that they should return, and live happily in their own land, one people under one king, God's servant David, and should not be wicked any more or longer, but have his tabernacle amongst them for ever. See particularly c. 37. 24, and 39. 25 &c. And accordingly in this vision it is said, 43. 7‡, that the temple here described was the place of God's throne, where he would dwell for ever in the midst of the children of Israel, and his holy name should neither they nor their kings defile any more by their idolatries. This must relate to their return from a captivity, into which they had been sent for idolatry. And in order to preserve the truth of the prophecy,

*The princes, it seems, had oppressed them, whence it follows v. 9, Let it suffice you O princes of Israel-take away your exactions from my people.

† Or prophesy any thing against that kingdom, in which he lived; though not only Isaiah, who lived before, but Jeremiah, who lived in a remote part of the empire, did. On the house being filled with the glory of the Lord.