Ezekiel
43
The consecration of the new temple by the entrance into it
of the glory of
the God of Israel (vs. 1-12), and a description of the
altar with its
dedication to the solemn ritual for which it was in future
to be employed
(vs. 13-27), form the contents of the present chapter, and
complete the
prophet’s picture of the future sanctuary of
Vs. 1-12 - the consecration of the temple by the entrance
into it of the
glory of the God of Israel.
1 “Afterward He brought me to the gate, even the gate that looketh
toward the east:”
Afterward - Having completed
the survey of the temple
precincts (ch.42:15-20), the prophet’s guide, “the
measuring man,” conducted
him back to the gate that looked towards the east, i.e. to the
gate leading into
the outer court from the east (see ch.40:6), perhaps
because this was the principal
entrance to the sanctuary, but chiefly because through it the impending theophany
was to pass.
2 “And, behold, the glory of the God of
and His voice was
like a noise of many waters: and the earth shined with His
glory.” Scarcely
had the prophet taken up his station at or near the gate
when “the glory of the God of
from the way of
the east” - as if intending to
enter the temple by the very
door through which
it had previously departed from the temple
(compare
ch.
1:28, 3:23, 8:4, 9:3, 10:4,18-19; 11:22-23).
The voice which proceeded from
the theophany and resembled the noise of many waters, is after
the Septuagint
(καὶ φωνὴ τῆς παρεμβολῆς– kai phonae taes
parembolaes )
understood
by some to have been the sound produced by the motion of
the wheels
and the rustling of the wings of the cherubim (see on ch. 1.; 10:5),
but is better
taken to signify the voice of the
Almighty Himself, i.e. of the personal Jehovah
(compare Revelation 1:15). The statement that the earth
shined with His glory
(compare Ibid. ch.18:1) has been supposed to indicate the
absence of
that “cloud” in which the glory of Jehovah appeared in both
the Mosaic
tabernacle (Exodus 40:34-35) and the Solomonic
temple (I Kings 8:10-11),
and thereby to point to the clearer and more resplendent
manifestations of
the Godhead, which were to be given in connection with the
new dispensation
for which Ezekiel’s “house” was being prepared. This,
however, cannot be
maintained in face of the facts that in both Exodus and I
Kings “the glory of the
Lord” is used synonymously with “the
cloud,” and that in Ezekiel’s vision
“the glory” and “the cloud” were
alike present (see ch. 10:3-4). Some take
“the earth” which
was illumined to have been “the whole
globe,” “the entire
region of humanity,” as in Isaiah 6:3; 60:1, etc.; but there does not appear
ground for departing from the ordinary sense of the words,
that “the path”
of the advancing God was irradiated by the brilliance of
His material glory.
The Glory of the God of
The visionary glory that dazzled the eyes of the rapt seer
is but an earthly
suggestion of that ineffable
glory in which the unseen God is ever clothed.
We may take the manifestation of glory as a type and
suggestion of that
higher wonder.
- IN WHAT THE GLORY OF THE GOD OF
Ø
The radiance of heavenly light. The glory is like
the effulgence of
sunlight, the raying forth of
beams of splendor from the central fountain
of light.
o
It is perfect
truth. All error and falsehood are
excluded. God dwells
in infinite knowledge
and wisdom and truthfulness. (“Who only
hath immortality, dwelling in the light, which no man can
approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor
can see: TO WHOM
BE HONOR AND POWER EVERLASTING. AMEN.”
I Timothy 6:16)
o
It is absolute
holiness. No stain or fleck of sin
ever touches the
supreme purity of God.
o
It is infinite
love. The glory of God is most seen in
His goodness.
By wonderful
deeds of grace HE MANIFESTS HIS GLORY!
o
It is
unutterable joy. The joy of truth,
holiness, and love must ever
dwell in the heart of God.
God smiles over His creatures: that is
His glory.
Ø
The wealth of heavenly voices. “His voice was like a noise of many
waters.” God has broken the silence of eternity. He has called to
His
lost and wayward children. With
variety of utterance and of truth
God has made His voice heard.
His gospel message is His glory.
- HOW THE
GLORY OF THE GOD OF
saw the glory dawn in the east
like the pure, bright light of a rising sun.
Ø
It was not always manifest. There had been a
night previous to this glad
dawn. There had been dark days
in the Captivity, when even the radiance
of God seemed to be dimmed.
o
In the world’s history
there have been awful, blank ages, out of which
all Divine glory seems to
have been excluded.
o
In individual
experience there are sad days when the soul exclaims,
“My God, my God,
why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34)
Ø
It is made manifest.
o
To the world, in
Christ, who manifested forth the glory
of His
Father. Thus John says, “And we beheld His glory, the glory
as of the Only
Begotten of the Father” (John 1:14).
o
To the
individual, by faith. When we truly seek for the
brightness of God’s countenance in Christ, and trust His grace,
there rises a
light in the darkness, and GOD’S
GLORY
APPEARS!
- THE RESULTS THAT FOLLOW THE
MANIFESTATION OF
THE GLORY OF THE GOD OF
glory.” This radiance was not confined to celestial regions. It
was no vain
pageantry displayed among the
clouds. It came into the world as a
brightness for earthly things.
This is ever the case with manifestations of
God’s glory. It is especially so
with Christ who” tabernacled
among us,”
and so brought
the celestial glory to dwell on earth.
The shining forth of
God’s truth and goodness makes a
new day for the world. It is already
reflected in purified,
gladdened-lives; it will be fully seen in a renewal of
the whole face of society. That
which seems to be most remote and
unpractical is thus most closely
associated with the needs and hopes of
mankind. The world pines and despairs for lack of more visions of
Divine
truth and
goodness. The perfect day will be when
this light shines into the
darkest places of the earth, i.e.
when all men have received “the glorious
gospel of the
blessed God.”
I will now attempt to draw attention to God leaving the
temple in
eastern gate as mentioned in v. 2 – (CY – 2009)
There was a
precedent set at the time of the Flood when God said
“my Spirit shall
not always strive with man” - Genesis
6:3
No one can be saved
without the leading
of the Holy Spirit drawing
a man to God – Jesus said “No man can
come to me, except the
Father which
hath sent me draw him” – John 6:44
When
of God, and
despised His words, and misused His prophets, until the
wrath of the Lord
arose against His people, till there was NO
REMEDY” –
II Chronicles
36:16
Therefore Jehovah withdrew from His people and this withdrawal has
lasted for around 2500 years. This withdrawal, in stages, is depicted by
Ezekiel in the
following passages:
- We find God in His temple – chps. 1:28, 3:23, 8:4
- We see God having removed to the
threshold or door of the temple –
chps.
9:3, 10:4
Comment on 9:3 – “Was gone up” - better, went up. The prophet saw the
process as well as the result. The “glory of the Lord” which he had seen
(ch. 8:4) by the northern gate
rose from its cherub throne (we note the
use of the singular to express the unity of the fourfold
form), as if to direct the
action of his ministers, to the threshold of the “house.” This may be
connected also with the thought that the normal abiding
place of the
presence of the Lord had been “between the cherubim”
(Psalm 80:1) of
the mercy seat.
Comment on 10:3-4 – “Now the cherubim stood” - The position of the
cherubim is defined, with a vivid distinctness of detail.
They had been standing
on the right, i.e. the southern side of the
sanctuary. What follows is probably a
reproduction of the change of positions described in ch. 9:3, and the verbs
should be taken, therefore, as pluperfects. The
cloud of glory, as in 1 Kings 8:10-11
and Isaiah 6:1-2, the Shechinah, that
was the token of the Divine presence,
filled the court, but
the glory itself had moved to the threshold at the first
stage of His
departure.
- Jehovah departs from the temple through the door of the east gate
–
ch.
10:18-19
Comment on 10:18-19 – “Then the glory of the Lord” - The chariot throne
was, as it were, ready for its Kingly Rider. The “glory”-cloud,
or Shechinah.
takes its place over them, and the departure begins. From that hour the temple
was, in Ezekiel’s thoughts, to be, till the time of
restoration contemplated in ch.
40-48., what
the voice which Josephus tells us was heard before the
final destruction of
the second temple, exclaiming, “Let us depart hence,” as the priests were
making ready for the Pentecostal feast (‘Bell. Jud.,’ 6:5.
3).
v. 19. — The departure has the east gate of
the Lord’s house for its
starting point. By that gate, in the later vision of the restored temple,
the
glory of the
Lord was to return (Ezekiel 43:4).
- Jehovah leaves the city of
the east side of the city – ch. 11:23
Comment on vs. 22-23 - Another stage of the departure of the Divine glory closes
the vision. He had rested over the middle of the city. He now halts
over the
mountain on the east side of the city, i.e. on the
Zechariah 14:4). Currey mentions,
but without a reference, a Jewish tradition that
the Shechinah, or glory cloud, remained there for three years,
calling the
people to
repentance. What is here recorded may have
suggested the thought of
Zechariah 14:4. We may
remember that it was from this spot that Christ
“beheld
the city, and
wept over it” (Luke 19:41); that from it He, the true Shechinah,
ascended into
heaven. Here, perhaps, the dominant thought was
that He
remained for a time
to direct the work of judgment. And so the
vision was
over, and the prophet was borne back
in vision to
exiles of Tel-Abib the wonderful and terrible things tidal he had seen.
The Eastern or Golden
Gate of
above, was sealed by
the Moslems centuries ago for reasons unclear.
In
doing so, they unwittingly
fulfilled the first part of the prophecy in
Ezekiel 44:1-6 (see
vs. 1-9 here). The rest of the prophecy
will be
fulfilled when the Prince, Messiah Jesus, enters the
through this gate, this time to rule! (Just last week, I heard over the
news that
will be at a risk in offending the Arabs – CY - Sept. 4, 2011)
During the Christian
Dispensation God’s Spirit has been dealing with
man – The Holy Spirit’s withdrawal after the Church Age in which we
are living seems to be the prerequisite for the appearance of the
“anti-christ” – II Thessalonians 2:7-8
For a parallel see
all of the “for this cause God gave them up” in
Romans 1:24, 26-28
All outward pomps and all human
distinctions are as nothing to the human soul
compared with the glorious presence of the Divine Spirit in
the heart of man.
But though God comes to us thus and dwells with us, He will
not abide with us
if we do not retain our purity, our moral and spiritual
integrity (see I Corinthians 3:16;
II Corinthians 6:16). Yet may there be, in individual
experience, a blessed
return of the glory of the Lord. If there be a sincere and
deep humility; if
there be an earnest seeking after God in prayer; if there be a cordial
reconsecration of the heart and life to the Divine Redeemer; — then will
there be a gracious and a glorious return of His presence
and of His blessing
to the soul.
WE CANNOT DO DESPITE UNTO THE SPIRIT OF GRACE AND
GET BY WITH IT – BLASPHEMY
AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT
IS THE ONLY UNPARDONABLE SIN – TODAY IS THE DAY
OF SALVATION
- WILL NOT YOU TRUST HIM TODAY!!!?
3 “And it was according to the appearance of the vision
which I saw,
even according to
the vision that I saw when I came to destroy the
city: and the
visions were like the vision that I saw by the river
Chebar; and I fell upon
my face.”
The prophet identifies the vision on which he now looks as
the
same he had formerly beheld on the banks of the Chebar, when he came to
destroy the city, i.e.
when, in obedience to Divine command, he stood
forth to announce the destruction of
the Vulgate. quando venit ut disperderet,
in substituting “he,” Jehovah, for
“I,” Ezekiel; but the change is unnecessary, as the
prophet’s language is
perfectly intelligible and quite correct, since “the
prophet destroyed the city
ideally by his prophecy” (Hitzig),
and it is not unusual for Scripture to
represent a prophet as himself doing what he is only sent
to predict (compare
Ezekiel 4:2; 32:18; Jeremiah 1:10). The prophet’s reason
for
introducing this clause was manifestly the same he had for
identifying the
visions — to show that, while it was the same Jehovah who
had departed
from the old temple that was now returning to the new,
there was nothing
incongruous in the idea that he who in the past had shown
himself a God of
justice and judgment by overturning and destroying the old,
should in the
future exhibit himself as a God of grace and mercy by
condescending to
establish his abode in the new. The impression produced
upon the
prophet’s soul by his vision was the same that had been
produced by the
former — he fell upon his face in awe and wonder.
God the Same in Judgment and in Mercy (v. 3)
The remarkable point of this verse lies in the fact that
Ezekiel could detect
no change in the manifestation of the Divine glory when he
compared the
new appearance which heralded the great redemption of
earlier appearance which preceded the denunciation of wrath
and doom.
God is the same
in both cases.
- THE FACT. This has two sides — one
relating to the time of judgment,
and the other concerned with the
period of redemption.
Ø
God’s mercy is not lost in judgment. He was glorious when He came to
judgment, and one essential
element of the glory of God is His ineffable
love. We may not see love in
wrath, but it is present, for “whom the Lord
loveth he chasteneth” (Hebrews 12:6). God does not change His nature
because men sin, nor indeed does
He cease to yearn over His poor fallen
children with infinite pity
because it became well that He should smite
them in His great anger.
Ø
God’s righteousness is not lost in redemption. He loses none of the
glory of His holiness by saving
sinners. Christ came to “magnify the Law
and make it
honorable” (Isaiah 42:21).
Righteousness is honored:
o
in the Person of
Christ, our great Representative, who offered
His pure and
spotless soul as a perfect sacrifice to God;
o
in the
deliverance of man from sin. Righteousness
itself desires
an end of sin more than the
mere punishment, which is but a means
towards that end. Thus the
glory of God’s holiness is most manifest
when He redeems man from
sin and leads him into a new, holy life.
- ITS CONSEQUENCES.
Ø
There is no escape from the law of righteousness. The subjects of a
changeable autocrat watch his
fickle moods, and endeavor to seize on
lucky moments when he appears to
be in a good burnout, in order to
extract some favor from him. No such maneuvers are needed, or can be of
any use, when men are looking for God’s grace. On the one hand, He is
always desirous to save and
bless; on the other hand, He is never weakly
negligent in regard to the great
principles of justice. We can never evade
His laws.
Ø There is no
reason to despair on account of the wrath of God against
sin. That wrath was always felt by God, though it has not always
been
perceived by man. “God
is angry with the wicked every day”
(Psalm
7:11). Yet God has shown
continuous love, and has put forth repeated
efforts of mercy to save His
fallen children. He has not changed towards us
because He has veiled His mercy
and displayed His wrath for a season. The
same ever-righteous and
ever-merciful Father who at one time smites in
anger and at another saves in
grace will act to us just as we do to Him.
With the froward thou wilt show thyself froward, etc. (Ibid. ch. 18:26).
Therefore our part is to be
plain and straight with God, simply trusting His
great love, and honestly
endeavoring to fulfill His holy will.
4 “And the glory of the LORD came into the house by the way
of the
gate whose
prospect is toward the east. 5 So the spirit took me up, and
brought me into
the inner court; and, behold, the glory of the LORD filled
the house.” The
prophet next narrates that he saw the glory of the Lord
entering into and taking possession of the “house,”
as formerly it had
entered into and taken possession of the tabernacle and the
temple
(Exodus 40:34-35; I Kings 8:10-11), and that of this he was
further assured by experiencing immediately thereafter an
impulse from
the Spirit (not
“a spirit,” which raised him from the ground upon which he
had fallen (v. 3), took him up (see on ch. 2:2; 3:12), and
brought him into the
inner court, exactly in front of the “house,”
where, having looked into the
interior, he saw that the glory of the Lord filled the
house, the language being
that used in connection with the tabernacle and the temple.
Filled with Glory (v. 5)
- THE GLORY
OF GOD IN THE
filled with the glory of God.
This was only a vision; but it was predicted
concerning the rebuilt temple
that the glory of the latter house should
exceed that of the former
(Haggai 2:9). Yet, while young men rejoiced
at the sight of the new
structure, old men wept as they remembered the
greater splendor of Solomon’s
temple, which Nebuchadnezzar had
destroyed (Ezra 3:12-13).
Nevertheless, it was promised that, though
in materials and architecture Zerubbabel’s temple might be inferior to
Solomon’s; there was this unique
privilege reserved for the new building
— the
Lord Himself should suddenly appear in it (Malachi 3:1). This
promise was fulfilled in the
advent of Christ (Luke 2:27).
- THE GLORY
OF GOD IN THE CHURCH. The spiritual brotherhood
of Christians, the
Jewish economy (I Corinthians
3:16; Ephesians 2:21). Now God
has manifested His glory in the
Church, for it is seen in the display of
Christian graces, so that she is
like a city set on a hill that cannot be hid.
But the brightness or the
dimness of this glory will be just proportionate to
the
Christ-likeness or the worldliness of the Church. The more of the Spirit
of Christ there is in this great
temple, the more of the glory of God will
there be there. Her glory has
been looked for in size, numbers, wealth,
power, influence, intellect; in
her sons of genius and her works of worldly
importance. But these things do not reveal God’s glory. Christ is the Glory
of the Church — “Christ
in you, the hope of glory” (Colossians
1:27).
- THE GLORY
OF GOD IN THE WORLD. Ezekiel saw the broad
earth ablaze with the radiance
of the heavenly glory (v. 2). But this glory
was concentrated in the temple.
God has a brightness for all men, but the
best light for those who seek
His near presence. The world now reveals the
glory of God in creation and in
providence. When the world is brought to
the feet of Jesus Christ it will
enjoy the richer, fuller glory of God in Christ.
Even now, in so far as a Christ-spirit is spread through society, a new light
dawns over the
old weary world. The day is coming when the earth shall be
full of His glory as the waters
cover the sea (Isaiah 11:9). That will be the
day
of the earth’s
perfect redemption and man’s perfect blessedness.
- THE GLORY
OF GOD IN THE SOUL. God’s glory comes into the
Church and the world by first
entering individual souls. To the darkest and
saddest this joy and light will
appear, when the barred door is opened to
the Guest who stands knocking
and graciously waiting for admission.
(Revelation 3:20). There is no
glory equal to that which His in-coming
will bring. We may think
much of riches, popularity, intellect, and power.
But the greatest glory of a human
life is the glory of goodness. The highest
ambition should be to live a
good and useful life. Christ’s aureole surrounds
such a life.
6 “And I heard Him (better, one) speaking unto me out of the
house; and the (literally,
a) man stood by me.” Two
questions arise —
Who was the speaker? and, Who the man? As to the speaker,
the natural
reply is that the One who addressed Ezekiel from the
interior of the
“house” was Jehovah himself, whose “glory” had just entered in to take
possession of the house, and this view is adopted by most
interpreters.
As to the man, it cannot be decided solely by the
absence of the article before
“man” that this
was a different person from the guide who had hitherto
conducted the prophet and measured the building. The
article may have
been omitted because the important point to be recorded was
not the
circumstance that the “one” who stood beside him was his
quondam guide,
but the fact that this “one” was a man. That he was also
Ezekiel’s old
conductor is at least a natural suggestion when one finds
him afterwards
appearing as a measurer with a line in his hand (ch. 47:3).
In the next six verses, debate exists as to who the speaker
in the seventh verse
was, whether Jehovah or the man — some holding that He was
Jehovah; others,
that he was “the man;” and still others, with
that it cannot be decided which
he was. One thing is clear, that if “the man” was the speaker, his words and
message were not his own, but Jehovah’s. Yet unless the man
had been the angel
of the Lord it will always seem incongruous that he should
have addressed Ezekiel
without a “Thus saith the Lord.” Hence the notion that the speaker was Jehovah is,
perhaps, the one freest from difficulty. The message
announced or communication
made to the prophet related first to Jehovah’s purpose in
entering the temple (vs. 7-9),
and secondly to his object in showing the house to the
prophet, viz. that he
might show it to the house of
7 “And He said unto me, Son of man, 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
whoredom, nor by
the carcasses of their kings in their high places.”
The Septuagint and the Vulgate divide the present verse
into two
parts, and take the first as equivalent to a solemn word of
consecration, the
former supplying ἑώρακας - heorakas - the latter vidisti, “thou
hast seen.”
The Chaldee Targum
inserts, hic est locus, “this is the place,” and in so doing is
followed by Luther and the Revised Version. Some word, it
is obvious,
either a “see!” or a “behold!” must be interpolated, in thought
at least,
unless one adopts the construction of the Authorized
Version makes
“the place of my
throne,” etc., to be governed by the verb “defile,”
or,
places it under the regimen of “show” in v. 10, throwing
the whole intervening
clause into a long parenthesis — a device which does not
contribute to its
clearness of thought.
Of the two expressions here employed to designate the
sanctuary — not the temple proper, but the whole house with
its surroundings —
the former, the
place of my throne, though
peculiar to Ezekiel, receives explanation
from the conception, familiar to earlier writers, of
Jehovah as dwelling between the
cherubim (Exodus 25:22; I Samuel 4:4; II Kings 19:15; Psalm
80:1; Isaiah 37:16);
the latter, the
place of the soles of my feet, was of frequent occurrence to
denote
the ark of the covenant (I Chronicles 28:2; Psalm 99:5;
132:7) and the temple
(Isaiah 60:13; Lamentations 2:1). The word of consecration
was expressed in the
promise, I will
dwell (in the temple) in the
midst of the children of
forever, etc., which went beyond anything that had been spoken
concerning either the tabernacle of Moses or the
(compare Exodus 25:8; 29:45; I Kings 6:13). The second part
of the
verse announces what would be the result of Jehovah’s
perpetual
inhabitation of the temple —
the house of
holy Name either by their whoredom or by the carcasses of
their kings
in their high
places, or, according to another
reading, in their death. That
the whoredom signified idolatry (compare ch.16.)
commentators are
agreed. What divides them is whether this also is alluded
to in the
alternative clause.
Some believe it is, contending that the “carcasses of their kings”
(compare Leviticus 26:30; and Jeremiah 16:18) was a
contemptuous and satirical
designation of the idols they had formerly served, that the
word “kings ‘ is
frequently employed in this sense in Scripture (see Isaiah
8:21; Amos 5:26;
Zephaniah 1:5), and that the special sin complained of,
that of building altars for
dead idols in the very temple court, had been practiced by
more kings than one in
urged first that it is favored by the use of the term bamotk, or “high places,”
in v. 7, and secondly by the exposition offered in v. 8 of
the nature of the sin.
Others regard the sin spoken of in the second clause as
different from that
indicated in the first, maintaining that while this was the
practice of defiling
Jehovah’s sanctuary by idolatry that was the desecration of
the same by the
interment in its courts of their dead kings. Against this,
however, stands the
fact that no authentic instance can be produced of a Judaean sovereign’s
corpse having been interred in the temple area. David,
Solomon, Jehoshaphat,
and others were buried in the city of
a place of sepulchers existed on the south-west corner of
Nehemiah (Nehemiah 3:16); but these prove nothing unless
the temple hill be
taken, as no doubt it sometimes was, in an extended sense
as inclusive of
Mount
the
of this view, unless it can be shown that the
on the temple hill. On the whole, therefore, the balance of
argument
inclines in favor of the first view, though it does involve
the introduction of
a figurative sense into the words.
The Divine Indwelling (v. 7)
There peculiar solemnity in this utterance. The prophet has
beheld the
return of the Lord’s glory to His house, and has
seen its courts filled with
the mystic luster. He stands in the inner court, the
attendant angel being
by his side. And the voice of the Lord, mighty as the sound
of many
waters, addresses him as the son of man, and assures him
that the Eternal.
Spirit has now takes up a perpetual abode within His
consecrated temple,
and that those courts shall henceforth be pure from every
defilement, and
shall be holy unto the Lord.
- THE FACT OF
THE DIVINE INDWELLING. It appears that this is set
forth under two metaphors, both
just and impressive, yet, even when taken
together, inadequate to set
forth the great reality.
Ø
The Church is God’s
dwelling, His home, where He reveals Himself in
His compassion and
kindness, and where He admits men to His sacred
fellowship, upon terms of
delightful, though reverent, worship and
familiarity.
Ø
The Church is God’s
throne, whence He rules by the publication of His
Divine and righteous laws, and
the exercise of His just, irresistible, and yet
benign authority. It is as
though He were at once the Father of the spiritual
family and the King of the spiritual
dominion. He is, indeed, all this, and
more than this, to the Church
He loves and has redeemed.
- THE ACCOMPANIMENTS OF THE DIVINE
INDWELLING.
These, as represented in this
passage, are:
Ø
Deliverance from
past idolatries, by which humanity has been defiled,
degraded, and disgraced.
Ø
By implication, reverence
for God’s holy Name, displaying itself in
holiness, in obedience, in praise. It was the expulsion of evil abominations
which made the return of the Lord a possibility; it is the prevalence of
holy worship and affectionate service which secures the lasting residence
and reign of the
great and glorious Inhabitant.
8 “In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and
their post
by my posts, and
the wall between me and them, they have even
defiled my holy
name by their abominations that they have
committed:
wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger.”
In their setting
of their threshold by my thresholds etc. The
first “their” can only refer to “the house of
second “their” may also allude to these,
but is best taken as pointing to the
“idols,” whose thresholds or temples, according to the view adopted
of the
preceding verse, were set up in the court of Jehovah’s
temple, and so close
to the latter that nothing stood between them except the
temple wall
9 “Now let them put
away their whoredom, and the carcasses of their
kings, far from
me, and I will dwell in the midst of them for ever.”
Now let them put
away their whoredom, etc. What has just
been declared to be the necessary consequence of Jehovah’s
abiding in the
midst of
of Jehovah’s taking up his
residence amongst them. Ezekiel’s
theology in
this respect harmonizes with that of Old and New Testament
writers
generally, who invariably postulate purity of heart and life as a necessary
condition of God’s abiding in the heart, while asserting that such
Divine
indwelling in the heart is THE ONLY CREATOR of such purity (compare
ch.18:31; 36:26; Isaiah 1:16, 25; 26:12; John 14:23; II
Corinthians 6:17; James 4:8).
God’s Unapproachable Sovereignty (vs. 7-9)
God now appears among His people as their Divine Sovereign;
the house to
which He comes in glorious manifestation is “the place of His throne” (v.7).
There He is resolved to rule. Other kings, human
potentates, had been
reigning there, but their rule should now be over. They had been usurpers
in that they had set up their will against His, “their threshold
by His
thresholds, their post by Hhis
posts” (v. 8); but all such
pretensions would
be henceforth peremptorily disallowed; they would be
unsparingly swept
away. “I
consumed them in mine anger.” THE
LORD ALONE was to
reign, without any rival, the
unchallenged, unapproachable Authority.
The
sanctuary of the Lord was the throne
of THE GREAT KING!
- THE
SOVEREIGNTY. As God
declared, through His prophet, that He would
reign in the temple, so Jesus
Christ claims to be the one and only Head and
Ruler of His Church. “One is your Master, even Christ” (Matthew 23:10).
We must not invade His “crown
rights” in any way or under any consideration
whatever.
Ø
To Him we must pay our
worship, not placing any created being by
His side upon His throne.
Ø
By His revealed will we
must determine the constitution of His
Church. Whether we gather that from His own words, or
from
the spirit of His life, or
from the words and action of His apostles,
we must make the
will of Christ absolutely supreme in all our
collective
action. And His will not only affects us in deciding
on
the forms and the rules of
our ecclesiastical association, but also
as to the spirit in which
we hold our post and do our work in His
kingdom; we are essentially
disloyal to Him when our attitude
or bearing toward any of our
brethren is other than that which
illustrates the spirit of
Christ.
- THE
SOVEREIGNTY. The
source in the sense of being instrumental in its
promotion. For it is to the Church that God has committed that truth which
alone will
establish it; and it is of the Church
He expects that life which will
contribute so largely to its
extension. The Church — every Christian
Church has:
Ø
to proclaim the
sovereign rights of Him who is the God of our life;
Ø
to present God to
men as the Divine Author of their being,
o
Fountain of their
joy,
o
Source of all their
comforts and their blessings,
o
Father of their
spirit,
o
Preserver and
Guardian of their life;
o
The Divine One in
whom they “live and
move and have their being,”
“with whom they
have to do” (Hebrews 4:13) in a deeper
sense and to a far higher
degree than they have with any human being.
Ø
to present the regal
claims of the Lord of our salvation;
Ø
to hold up before
the eyes of men that Son of man:
o
who came down from
heaven to be our Teacher, Leader, Friend,
and Savior;
o
who lived, taught,
wrought, sorrowed, and died for our redemption;
o
that Son of God who
rose in triumph from the grave and ascended
to the right hand of God;
o
who has a supreme
right
§
to the trust,
§
the love,
§
the obedience,
§
the full and entire
devotion
of all who have received
the story of His dying love and living
power.
Ø
to show the Way of a
true, thorough, happy subjection to the Divine
rule.
Thus will the
10 “Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of
may be ashamed of
their iniquities: and let them measure the
pattern.” Show
(or, make known, i.e.
publish the revelation concerning)
the house to the
house of
imparted to the prophet. That they may be ashamed of their iniquities.
This told the reason why the vision of the house should be
made known to
building. This
explained how, by beholding the house,
would be led to repent, and be ashamed of her iniquities.
There is no
ground for thinking the ultimate object Jehovah had in
view, in
recommending the house of
edifice that they might reproduce these in the post-exilic
building; if they
were to measure, i.e. scan and meditate upon the
fair dimensions of the
“house,” it was
that they might understand its religious or moral and
spiritual significance, both as a whole and in detail.
The Goodness that Leads to Repentance (v.
10)
The people of
ashamed of their iniquities. The goodness of God in
restoring the temple
will induce them to look with new horror on their old sins.
Thus God’s
goodness in life generally, and in the gospel of Christ, should
lead men to
see
the evil of their ways and to repent of it.
- GOD’S
GOODNESS PRECEDES MAN’S REPENTANCE. The full
enjoyment of that goodness is
not possible for those who are still living in
sin. The prodigal son cannot
enjoy the fatted calf before he comes to
himself, or arises and returns
to his father. But long before any movement
is made on the side of the
sinner to return, God is preparing the way for
him. The shepherd seeks the
wandering sheep. The woman sweeps for the
lost piece of silver. Even in
promised a gospel and victory
(Genesis 3:15). The pity of God for
made any effort to effect their
own escape. Christ came into a world that
was even unwilling to receive
Him, yet He came for the world’s salvation.
The gospel is now only too often
offered to unwilling hearers. God now
waits to be
gracious.
- THE REVELATION OF GOD’S GOODNESS SHOWS
THE
NECESSITY OF
REPENTANCE.
Ø
It should reveal our sin.
o
By contrast. God is good to us, while we behave ill to Him.
Surely we should see how sad
it is to live in rebellion against a
gracious God. Thus the
dreadful guilt of ingratitude is added to
other sins.
o
By the manner of
the revelation. It is a revelation in holiness.
God’s glory was seen in the
temple. It is a revelation in atonement
for sin: the temple was for
sacrifices; Christ died on the cross as a
sacrifice for the
world’s sin. Thus the very
proclamation of the
gospel involves a
declaration of man’s sinfulness.
Ø
It should incline us to return. If God had turned
against us we might feel
no inclination to go back to
Him. But His graciousness should serve as a
great attraction. Surely it is bad indeed to hold out against such forgiving
mercy as that of our Father and of our Savior Jesus Christ
- GOD’S GOODNESS ASSISTS US IN REPENTANCE.
Ø
It opens the door for our return. There is no longer
any excuse for
delay. Despair need not paralyze
our returning footsteps. The
preparation is an invitation;
the invitation should be an inspiration.
Ø
It moves our hearts to return. We may only be hardened
by
denunciations of wrath and doom.
But love should melt the heart of ice.
God’s love is shed abroad in the
hearts of His people. It comes as a glow
Of reviving energy to the soul
that is unable to save itself because it is
“dead in trespasses and sin.” All is now ready. The temple built, the
sacrifice offered, the welcome
waiting. “And the Spirit and the bride say,
Come. And let him
that heareth say, Come. And let him that is
athirst
come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely”
(Revelation 22:17)
Shame for Sin (v. 10)
Shame is an emotion which is often misdirected. Men are ashamed
sometimes of those things of which they ought rather to
boast, whilst
they
boast of those things of which they ought to be ashamed. There is one
habit of which men ought always to be ashamed — the
habit of sinning
against God. It was
this which Ezekiel was directed to bring home to the
hearts of his fellow-countrymen of the house of
- THE SIN OF WHICH A JUSTLY SENSITIVE
NATURE IS
ASHAMED. The
iniquities with which the prophet was directed to charge
the people of
were their idolatrous practices,
especially in connection with the temple
precincts. The palaces of the
idolatrous monarchs of
consecrated edifice, and in
those palaces heathen rites were celebrated. Not
only so, some of the kings of
introduced idolatry into the
very courts of the temple. Of such infamous
conduct both monarchs and
subjects may well have been ashamed. All who
put the creature in the place
of the Creator, who worship, whether with
their lips or in their hearts,
others than God, are virtually guilty of idolatry,
and have need to humble
themselves with shame and confusion
of face.
(Note the prayer of Daniel [Daniel 9:3-19] – CY – 2014)
- THE MANNER IN WHICH SHAME FOR SIN IS
AWAKENED.
Ø
The Word of God without propounds the sacredness and the exacting
character of the Divine Law
which has been violated, and summons the
offender to contrast his conduct with the commandment which is holy,
just, and good.
Ø
The voice of
conscience within responds to the
voice of the Word,
testifies to its Divinity and
its authority, rebukes the sinner for his
rebelliousness, and awakens
within the soul fear of the righteous
judgment of God. No wonder that
this conjunction should cause:
o
bitter humiliation,
o
poignant shame, and,
o
deep contrition.
- THE PROPER EFFECTS OF SHAME FOR SIN.
Ø
The offence is
loathed and forsaken; the idolater abandons his idols, the
unjust, impure, and
profane relinquish their sinful practices.
Ø
Reverence ensues
for the Law and ordinances of
God. Corresponding to
the aversion and humiliation
felt in the retrospect of evil courses now
abandoned, is the aspiration
which takes possession of the penitent, urging
him to conformity to the Divine
character, and subjection to the Divine
will. To be ashamed of sin is to
glory in righteousness, to boast one’s self
in God.
11 “ And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, shew them the
form of the
house, and the fashion thereof, and the goings out
thereof, and the
comings in thereof, and all the forms thereof, and
all the
ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the
laws thereof: and
write it in their sight, that they may keep the
whole form
thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.”
And if they be
ashamed of all that they have done. This
cannot signify that Ezekiel was not to show the house until
they had
evinced a sincere penitence for past wickedness, since the
converse has just
been stated, that their repentance should flow from a
disclosure to them of
the house: but that in the event of the presentation to
them of the “well-measured”
building awaking in them any disposition of regret and
sorrow,
then the prophet should proceed to unfold to them its
details. He should
show them first the form of the house, i.e. the external
shape of the
building, and the fashion
thereof, or its well-proportioned and harmonious
arrangements; the
goings out thereof, and the comings in thereof, i.e. its
exits and entrances (ch. 44:5), and all the forms thereof; which
can only mean the shapes of its several parts; and all the ordinances
thereof, or regulations concerning
its use in worship, and all the forms
thereof — the same words as above, and therefore omitted by the
Septuagint
as well as some Hebrew manuscripts, but others retain the
clause as genuine,
and regard it as an
illustration of Ezekiel’s habit of crowding words together
for the sake of emphasis — and all the laws
thereof, by which were
probably
signified the instructions
contained in these statutes for sanctification of life.
In addition to rehearsing the above in the hearing of the
people, the prophet
was directed to write
them in their sight, if it be
not open to understand
the “writing” as explanatory of the way
in which the “showing” was to be
made.
12 “This is the law of the house; Upon the top of the mountain
the
whole limit
thereof round about shall be most holy. Behold, this is
the law of the
house.” This is the law of the house. In this instance “the house”
must not be restricted to the
temple proper, consisting of the holy place
and the holy of holies, but extended to the whole free space encompassing
the outer court, the
quadrangular area of three thousand cubits square
(ch. 42:16-20); and concerning
this house as so defined, the fundamental torah,
law, or regulation, is declared to be that of its complete
sanctity. Upon the top
of the mountain
the whole limit thereof round about; and that the prophet’s
thought is that the
entire territory upon the mountain summit included
within the above specified border, and not merely the inner sanctuary, or
even that with its chambers and courts, was
to be regarded as most holy, or
as a holy of
holies, i.e. was to be
consecrated as the innermost adytum of
the tabernacle and temple had been BY THE INDWELLING OF
JEHOVAH! “This is the law” is the
customary underwriting and
superscription of the laws of the priest-code (see
Leviticus 6:9, 14; 7:1,
37; 11:46; 12:7; 13:59; 14:54; 15:32); but it need not
result from this that
the priest. code borrowed this expression from Ezekiel, who
employs it
only in this verse. The more rational hypothesis is that
Ezekiel, himself a
priest, made use of this formula, because acquainted with
it as already
existing in the so-called priest-code.
The
Law of the House (v. 12)
The connection to which is owing the introduction and
treatment in this
place of the law of the house, appears, though it is not
very plain, to be this
— Lawlessness has been described, lawlessness, taking the
form of sinful
rebellion against God, and defiance
of just authority, especially in the
sacred precincts of the temple, which have been diverted from spiritual
worship to idolatrous rites. Lawlessness,
by contrast, suggests law, and
especially law as applicable to the house of God. And to
the spiritual
apprehension, the orderly arrangement, the symmetrical
proportions of the
temple, and the provision made for all proper services, all
speak of the
the prophet in his vision.
- THE FACT OF DIVINE LAW IN THE CHURCH.
With the increase of
habits of observation and of
accuracy, with the diminution of superstition,
men have come to recognize
throughout the universe the presence and
operation of law. Many different
opinions prevail regarding natural law;
but it is recognized as a
reality. No wonder that a settled conviction should
have formed itself in men’s
minds that “order is Heaven’s first law.” It
would be strange, indeed, were
the Church, God’s noblest revelation of
Himself now on earth, exempt
from what seems a condition of all God’s
works. As there was a law of the
house in the Jewish temple, so also is
there in the
Church of the redeemed, THE
THE SPIRIT!
- THE
context, we observe that the
prophet notes the application of law to the
form, the furniture, the
ordinances, the holiness, of the temple. When we
come to consider the range
within which law is observable in Christ’s
Church, we find ourselves
constrained to believe that the principles are
universal and unmistakable, but
that in the details there is uncertainty.
Opinions differ as to the
measure in which law of an explicit character
governs the constitution, the
ministry, the observances, etc., of the Church
of Christ. Some students are
disposed to look to Scripture and to primitive
usage for more explicit
instructions regarding Church matters than are
others; and this holds good of
those taking different views of what are
known as ecclesiastical principles.
But all are agreed:
Ø
that mutual love is a
universal obligation,
Ø
that acceptable
worship must be spiritual, and,
Ø
that efforts are to be
made for the enlightenment and salvation of mankind.
And such laws as these are of
far more importance than many customs and
regulations upon which different
opinions prevail.
- THE AUTHORITY OF DIVINE LAW IN THE
CHURCH. It is the
authority of right, which,
however it may be misunderstood and practically
repudiated by any, is not
denied, but is admitted by all. It is also the
authority of love; the Divine
Lawgiver Himself declared, “Ye are my
friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.” (John 15:14)
- THE BLESSINGS OF DIVINE LAW IN THE
CHURCH. These are
apparent to those who consider
how wretched would be the state of a
Church without a law, and how
little less wretched the state of a Church
handed over to the control of
fallible and imperfect human legislators. The
past history of the Church
shows that it has truly prospered just so far as
the rules laid
down for it by Divine authority have been obeyed, just so far
as man has been
kept in abeyance, and human policy and human selfishness
have been
repudiated. Beside the direct
blessings which have accrued to
the Church itself through
subjection to “the law of the house,” it must
be
borne in mind that the
world has benefited by the example which has thus
been set to earthly institutions
and secular rulers, that owe more than they
are forward to acknowledge to
those principles of authority and subjection
which by the Church have been
introduced into and impressed upon the
world. (“the light of the world; a city set on a hill” – Matthew 5:14)
The Law of the House (vs. 10-12)
Through all the ceremonies and observances of the ancient
temple one
conspicuous lesson ran, viz. a
lesson of purity. Every rite and sacrifice
were vocal with this lesson. It was written on every
altar. It was visible in
the priestly dress. It was engraved on the high priest’s
miter. On every side
men saw and heard the cardinal truth that God is holy, and
that on earth He
has a residence in order to make men holy.
- GOD’S ABODE AMONG MEN IS THE HIGHEST
PROOF OF HIS
FAVOR. This is the
climax of His condescension. Material gifts He imparts
to all His creatures: “He makes His sun to shine on the evil and on the
good” (Matthew 5:45). It is an act of
kindness for God to speak to men
through a messenger; an act of
kindness to provide pardon for the penitent;
an act of kindness to open the
way to spiritual eminence and joy. But to
dwell among inferior, wayward,
rebellious creatures is the highest piece of
condescension we can conceive.
Such an idea overwhelmed Solomon’s
mind with surprise: “Will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth?”
(II Chronicles 6:18) And the incarnation of God in the Man Christ
Jesus
will ever remain the mystery of
mysteries. If God be with us we can have
no need. If God be with us we are sure to conquer, sure to rise in
excellence,
sure to reach perfection.
- GOD’S AMAZING KINDNESS IS THE SOURCE
OF PENITENCE.
The end of this gracious
revelation by Ezekiel is “that they may be
ashamed
of their
iniquities.” “What the Law could not do”
love has accomplished
(Romans 8:3). So constructed is the human heart that love
(if mighty enough)
shall move and conquer it. The
exile in
in the hearts of the Hebrews,
and now the dew and sunshine from heaven had
fallen on them to make the soil
fruitful. The purity of the human, soul is an
end so transcendently great that
no measures are too costly by which such
an end can be
gained. The magnificent provision which God was making,
in Ezekiel’s day, for dwelling
again in the midst of
calculated to awaken remorse and
shame in every breast. Jehovah’s good
will, in spite of provocation,
was enough to melt the stoutest heart.
- MAN’S PENITENCE IS THE GROUND OF
FURTHER
REVELATION FROM GOD, “If
they be ashamed… show them the form
of the house,” etc. Right moral dispositions are essential to an
understanding
of God. “To the froward
God will appear as froward” (Psalm 18:26). To
the Jews of His day Jesus said,
“How
can ye believe, who receive honor
one of another,
and seek not the honor that cometh from God only?”
(John 5:44) As natural light cannot find its way into our
dwelling if the
window be barred with shutters
so cannot God’s truth enter the mind if the
mind be choked with worldly things. “The secret of the Lord is with them
that fear Him;” (Psalm 25:14).
“To the upright there ariseth
light in the
darkness.” (Ibid. 112:4) For
God to reveal His will to sin-loving men would
be “to cast pearls before swine”
(Matthew 7:6). That heart must be right
towards God that desires to know
the truth; and whensoever a man eagerly
desires the truth, God will reveal
it unto Him. The man who has a docile
mind
shall see a light that others do
not see, shall hear a voice that others do not hear.
- GOD’S REVELATIONS TO MEN HAVE A
PRACTICAL
ASPECT. “Write
it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form
thereof.” God has seen fit never to indulge human curiosity.
Questions that
have no practical bearing on
conduct God will not answer. To indulge the
curiosity of men would divert
them from the great practical tasks required
of them — tasks which are the
largest channel of blessing. Further, God
has condescended
to put HIS WILL IN A WRITTEN FORM, that it may
be more clearly
known, and may have permanence amid the dissolutions
of mankind. These chapters in the
prophet’s book which seem to us void of
interest, were written by
special command of God. They have served a
useful purpose in the past; they
may fulfill a beneficent mission in time to
come. “All Scripture, written by inspiration of God, is
profitable” —
(II Timothy 3:16) – it promotes
some noble end. The fashion of the temple,
its court within court, its many
gates and porches, all conveyed important
lessons to the Jews, they convey
momentous lessons still.
- GOD’S
OF HIS HOLINESS. “The law of the house” is this, viz. holiness. The
sanctuary of God incorporates
men’s idea of God. Unless men adopt God’s
thoughts and cherish God’s
feelings, they will not build God’s temple after
God’s plan. (God was very plain with Moses
when He said “See, saith
He, that thou make all things according to the
pattern showed thee in
the mount.”
- Hebrews 8:5 – CY – 2014).
This
is the visible and eloquent
witness for God, age after age. If it be truly a
reside in it, it
will be a center of LIGHT and PURITY and BLESSING
to the
neighborhood. The purifying power will touch every
worshipper.
The gracious influence will be
felt:
Ø
in the home,
Ø
in the
city,
Ø
in every commercial
circle;
Ø
it will spread
through the nation; and
Ø
it will bless
the world.
“The whole limit
thereof round about shall be holy.” What
the sanctuary is, the
town or city will be. What the combined sanctuaries
of the land are,
THE NATION WILL BE! This
law of God’s house
is influential holiness —
holiness that uplifts and ennobles and beautifies
humanity; the holiness that
springs from love.
The Law of the House (v. 12)
“The Law of the House — universal holiness.” The law
of the house, what was
pre-eminently entitled to be called the law,
consisted in the whole region of the
temple mount being most holy. Not, as hitherto, was
this characteristic to be
confined to a single apartment of the temple; it was to
embrace the entire
circumference occupied by the symbolical institutions of
the kingdom —
the chambers allotted to the priests, and even the courts
trodden by the
people, as well as the
immediate dwelling-place of Jehovah. All were to
have one character of sacredness, because all connected
with them were to
occupy a like position of felt nearness to God and
equally to enjoy the
privilege of access to Him. For the glory of the Lord — His
manifested
presence — filled
the house; every one, therefore, in every part of the
sacred precincts, stood in very close and hallowed
relation to the living
God, and-character must
correspond with privilege. The
is now the “house” of the Lord, and respecting
its holiness we have:
- ITS TWO
SPIRITUAL CONSTITUENTS. These are:
Ø
Felt nearness to God. He only can be truly
said to be holy who
realizes continually:
o
how near he is
to THE LIVING GOD,
o
how intimate is
the relationship in which he stands to Him,
o
how free is his
access to Him; and
who, realizing this, does in
truth “walk with God” and “have
fellowship with the Father.” (I John 1:3)
Ø
Separateness from sin. The holy man is he who, like the righteous and
holy Father Himself, “hates
all manner of iniquity,” puts
far from him,
far from his sight and from his
sympathy as well as from his conversation
and his conduct, everything that
defiles and dishonors; he is the man who
repels from his soul, and
therefore banishes from his life, all falsehood and
falsity, all impurity, all
covetousness, all forms of dishonesty and
intemperance, all irreverence
and. profanity.
- ITS UNIVERSAL PREVALENCE. “The whole limit thereof round
about shall be
most holy.” Not one particular
compartment, but the whole
“mountain of the
Lord,”
(I consider selling wares in the vestibule as
being included in this! – CY – 2014) Thus with the
holiness is to characterize:
Ø
All its members, whatever their position or function may be, whether
they be ministers or whether
they hold no official position at all. There
is, indeed, a peculiar and
emphatic demand made upon those who speak
for Christ, that they should be
holy; but any one member of the Christian
household who does not realize
his nearness to God and does not
separate himself from sin, is
not qualified to take his place there, he is not
obeying “the law of the house,” he is a disloyal subject, an unworthy
inmate.
Ø
Its members in all their relationships. Not only, though
markedly and
unmistakably there, in all their
distinctively religious engagements, but
in every sphere in which they
move — domestic, social, literary, artistic,
municipal, political. At all times and in every place the people of God are
to have respect
to “the law of the house,” for wherever they are they are
members of the
household of God.
- THE SECRET
OF ITS MAINTENANCE. How are we to be holy,
and to maintain our sanctity in
all the rush and strife, under all the burdens
and provocations, in all the
unwholesome atmosphere, of daily life?
Ø
By being much,
in thought and prayer, with Jesus Christ, the holy
Savior. Much of his friendship will mean much of His spirit, for
we
constantly grow into the
likeness of Him we love.
Ø
By receiving into
our minds all we can welcome of Divine truth (see
John 15:3; 17:17).
Ø
By seeking and
obtaining the cleansing and renewing influences of
The Holy Spirit.
The temple-altar is now described in vs. 13-17, and the
ritual for its consecration
explained in vs. 18-27.
13 “And these are the measures of the altar after the cubits:
The cubit is
a cubit and an
hand breadth; even the bottom shall be a cubit, and the
breadth a cubit,
and the border thereof by the edge thereof round
about shall be a
span: and this shall be the higher place of the altar.”
The measures of
the altar. The altar is הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, that
formerly
mentioned as standing in the inner court, immediately in
front of the
“house” (ch. 40:47), the altar of burnt offering, and not the altar
of
incense in the holy place (ch.41:22). Its dimensions, then
omitted,
are now reported in connection with its consecration, which
also is
narrated as a pendant to that of the “house,” because of the intimate
connection between the two — the consecration of the
altar being
practically equivalent to the consecration of the house,
and the
consecration of the house finding approximate expression
in the
consecration of the altar. As in the other portions of the temple, so in this,
the measurements are given after the cubits, i.e.
by or in cubits, the length
of each cubit being noted at “a cubit and an hand-breadth,” as in
ch.40:5. They are likewise taken first from the foundation
upwards (vs. 13-15),
and then from the top downwards (vs. 16-17). The first
portion measured
is the bottom; literally, the bosom (Hebrew, , חֵיק, "that which embraces,"
from
הוּק
“to embrace;” Septuagint, κόλπωμα – kolpoma – bosom -
Vulgate, sinus); but what exactly that signified is
debated among
interpreters. Gesenius thinks of
“the hollowed part for the fire;” Hitzig, of
“a frame running round, a stand in which the altar stood;” Kliefoth, of “a
deepening on the wooden ring in which the whole altar
stands;” Keil, of” a
lower hollow or base of the altar, formed by a border of a
definite height;”
Smend, of “the channel or gutter of the altar base, which should
receive the
sacrificial blood;” Havernick, Currey, and Plumptre, of “a base
upon which
the altar stood.” If Smend’s
feasible notion be not adopted, then probably
that of Hitzig, Kliefoth, or Keil most nearly
expresses the conception of the
Hebrew term. The altar was surrounded by an enclosure in
which it seemed
to be set, or out of which to rise; the dimensions of this
“stand” or
“enclosure” being a cubit in height, and a cubit in
breadth, with a border
on its edge round about a span or half a cubit high. This,
the stand just
described, should be the
higher place; literally, the
back; hence the
support, base (Revised Version), or ὕψος
– hupsus – elevation –
(Septuagint) of the altar.
14 “And from the bottom upon the ground even to the lower
settle shall
be two cubits, and
the breadth one cubit; and from the lesser settle even to
the greater
settle shall be four cubits, and the breadth one cubit.”
The next measurements which are taken from the bottom upon
the ground,
i.e. from the הֵיק, “base,” or ground framework above described, to the
lower
settle, i.e. to the top of the undermost of the two “terraces,” or “enclosures,” or
“platforms,” of which the altar consisted, are two cubits of height with one
cubit of breadth; the measurements which follow, from the
lesser settle,
i.e. the undermost, to the greater settle, i.e. the uppermost, are four cubits
of height with one
cubit of breadth.
15 “So the altar shall
be four cubits; and from the altar and upward
shall be four
horns.” Noteworthy is the word altar, which in this verse renders
two distinct
Hebrew terms, הַרְאֵל
and אֲרִיאֵל, which many, after the
Septuagint (τὸ ἀριὴλ
- to ariael), identify as
synonymous, and translate by
“hearth.” But the first can only signify “the mount of God,” while the latter
may mean either “lion of God” or “hearth of God.” Kliefoth, deriving
the
latter from אָרָה, “to consume,” and אַיִכ, “a ram,” prefers as its
import
“ram-devourer;” Hengstenberg,
resolving into אַיִל “a ram,” and אְרַיִ, “a
lion,”
proposes as its equivalent “ram-lion.” i.e. “the lion that consumes the rams for
God” — a rendering closely allied to that of Kliefoth. In any case, the
terms
allude to parts of the altar: the second, Ariel (equivalent to the hearth on which
God’s fire burns), according to Keil, Kliefoth, and the best expositors, meaning
the flat surface of the altar; and
the first, Harel (conveying the ideas of elevation
and sanctity), the base on
which it rested. The height of this base was four cubits,
while from the hearth projected four
horns, as in the altars of the Mosaic tabernacle
(Exodus 27:2; 38:2; Leviticus 4:7,18; 8:15) and Solomonic temple (Psalm 118:27).
If the length of these be set down at three cubits, then
the whole height of the altar
will be in cubits — one for the ground bottom, two for the
lower settle, four for the
upper, four for the bases of the hearth, with three for the
horns, equal to fourteen
in all; or, omitting the horns, of which the length is not
given, and the altar
base, which is distinguished from the altar, ten cubits in
all for the altar
proper. As to the symbolic import of the “horns,” Kurtz,
after Hofmaun
and Kliefoth, finds this in the
idea of elevation, the “horns,” as the highest
point in the altar, bringing the blood put upon them nearer
to God than the
sides did the blood sprinkled on them (see ‘Sacrificial
Worship of the Old
Testament,’ § 13); Keil, after
Bahr, in the notions of strength, beauty, and
blessing, the horns of an animal being the points in which
its power, grace,
and fullness of life are concentrated, and therefore
fitting emblems of those
points in the altar in which appears “its significance as a
place of the
revelation of Divine might and strength, of Divine
salvation and blessing”
(‘Biblische Archaologie,’
§ 20).
16 “And the altar shall be twelve cubits long, twelve broad,
square in
the four squares
thereof. 17 And the settle shall be fourteen cubits long
and fourteen
broad in the four squares thereof; and the border about it shall
be half a cubit;
and the bottom thereof shall be a cubit about; and his stairs
shall look toward
the east.” The measurements that now begin
concern the breadth
of the
altar, and proceed
from above downwards. First the altar, or, hearth
of God (Hebrew, ariel) was twelve
cubits long and twelve broad,
i.e.
was square in the four squares (or, sides) thereof, or a
perfect square
(compare Exodus 27:1; Revelation 21:16). Next the settle, or, enclosure (Hebrew,
הָעֲזָרָה) of v. 14, was fourteen
cubits
long, and fourteen broad in
the four
squares (or, sides) thereof; the fourteen being made up of the twelve cubits of the
altar-hearth’s side with one cubit of ledge from the settle
all round. The only
question is to which “settle,”
the upper or the under, reference is made. Some
expositors, identifying the greater Azarah
with the Harel, i.e. the “upper settle,”
with “the mount of God” or the base of the hearth, make the
altar height only
seven cubits from the ground to the hearth. The general
belief, however, is that
they cannot be so identified. Among interpreters who
distinguish them, Kliefoth,
with whom Smend agrees, holds the
“settle” in this verse to be the harel,
or “mount of God,”
which extended (Smend says with a hek.
or “gutter”)
one cubit on each side beyond the ariel,
or “hearth of God,” so that the
“mount of God,” on which the “hearth
of God” rested, was fourteen cubits
square. Then, assuming a similar extension of one cubit at
each stage — in
the greater azarah, the lesser azarah, and the hek, or ground
bottom — he
finds the surface of the greater azarah
to be sixteen, of the lesser azarah
eighteen, and of the ground bottom twenty cubits square. Keil, with whom
Schroder and Currey agree, objects to
this as involving too much of
arbitrary assumption, and takes the “settle” of this verse to mean the lower
azarah; so that no additional measurements are required beyond
those
given in the text. If the square surface of the greater azarah be considered
as having been the same as that of the harel,
so that their sides were
continuous, then, as the “ground bottom” extended one cubit
on each side
beyond the lower azarsh, the
altar at its base was a square of sixteen cubits.
Comparing now these measurements with those of the altar of
burnt
offering in the tabernacle and the temple, one finds that
the former was
only five cubits square and three cubits high (Exodus
27:1), while the
latter was twenty cubits broad, but only ten cubits high
(II Chronicles
4:1), which awakes the suspicion that the different views
above noted have
been insensibly influenced by a desire on the part of their
authors to make
them harmonize with the measurements of the temple. But
there does not
appear sufficient reason why the measurements of Ezekiel’s
altar should
have agreed with those of Solomon’s rather than with those
of Moses’,
The border (or, parapet) of half a cubit which ran round the
ledge, or
bottom, of a cubit, at the foot of the lower azarah was clearly designed, not
for the protection of the priest officiating, but for
ornament. The stairs (or,
steps), mention of
which closes the description, mark a departure, not from
the pattern of the Solomonic
temple, in which the altar must have had steps
(see Keil’s ‘Biblische
Archaologie,’ p. 141), but from the pattern of the
tabernacle, in which altar-steps were disallowed (Exodus
20:26) and
did not exist (Ibid. ch. 38:1-7).
But if, as Jewish tradition asserts, the
post-exilic altar had no steps as Ezekiel’s had, having
been reached by an
inclined plane, because in the so-called book of the
covenant steps were
forbidden, how does this harmonize with the theory that
Ezekiel’s vision
temple was designed as a model for the post-exilic temple?
And why, if the
priest-code was the composition of a writer who worked in
the spirit and
on the lines of Ezekiel, should it have omitted to assign
steps to the
tabernacle altar?
18 “And he said unto
me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; These
are the
ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it,
to offer burnt offerings
thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.”
The ordinances of
the altar. These were not the regulations
for the sacrificial worship to be afterwards performed upon
this altar, but
the rites to be observed at its consecration when the day
should arrive for
its construction. As the altar in the tabernacle (Exodus
29:1-46;
Leviticus 8:11-33), and that in Solomon’s temple (I Kings
8:63-66;
II Chronicles 7:4-10), so was this in Ezekiel’s “house” dedicated by a
special ceremonial before being brought into ordinary use.
The particular
ritual observed by Solomon is not described in detail; but
a comparison
between that enjoined upon and practiced by Moses with that
revealed to
and published by Ezekiel shows that while in some respects
they agreed, in
other important particulars they differed. In both the
ceremony largely
consisted in offering sacrifice and smearing blood, and
lasted seven days;
but in the former the ceremony was performed exclusively by
Moses,
consisted, in addition to the above, of an anointing of the
altar, the holy
utensils, and the tabernacle itself with oil, and was
associated with the
consecration of the priests; whereas in the latter, in
addition to some
variations in the sacrificial victims, which will be noted
in the course of
exposition, the priests should bear an active part — there
should be no
anointing with oil, and no consecration of the priests, the
priesthood being
assumed as already existing. If in Ezekiel’s ritual there
was no mention of a
cleansing of the sanctuary (that of ch.45:18 referring to a
special
case), but only of the altar, that was sufficiently
explained by the
circumstance that Jehovah was already in the “house.” The final clause, to
offer burnt
offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon, indicates
the purpose for which the altar was to be used.
19 “And thou shalt give to the
priests the Levites that be of the seed of
Zadok, which approach
unto me, to minister unto me, saith the
Lord GOD, a young
bullock for a sin offering.” Thou
shalt give to the priests.
This injunction, which was addressed to Ezekiel, not as the representative of the
people or of the priests,
but as the prophet of Jehovah, made it clear that Ezekiel
was not to act in the future consecration of the altar
alone as Moses did in
the dedication of the tabernacle altar, but that the
priests were to bear their
part in the ceremonial. If some expressions, as the use of “thou” in this and
the following verses, appear to suggest that Ezekiel alone
should officiate,
the employment of “they”
in vs. 22, 24, 25, 26 as plainly indicates that
Ezekiel’s share in the ceremonial was to be performed
through the medium
of the priests. And, indeed, if the temple was a pattern
designed to be
converted into an actual building after the return from
captivity, as the
newer criticism contends, it is apparent that Ezekiel could
not have been
expected to have any hand in its erection. The Levites that be of the seed
of Zadok. The assistants of
Ezekiel and the officiating priests at the new
altar were not to be the whole body of the Levitical priesthood, but those
only who derived their descent from Zadok
(see on ch.44:15). A
young bullock for
a sin offering. With the offering of this the ritual
commenced, as in Exodus 29:1, 10 and Leviticus 8:14
(compare ch. 45:18).
It is observable that in the Levitical
code a young bullock, i.e. of a bullock in
the full vigor of youth, is appointed as the requisite sin
offering for the priest,
i.e. the high priest,
who was the head and representative of the people.
20 “And thou shalt take of the
blood thereof, and put it on the four
horns of it, and
on the four corners of the settle, and upon the
border round
about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.”
And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it. The
application of the victim’s blood to and upon the altar
formed an integral
part of every expiatory offering; but “whereas in all the other kinds of
sacrifice the blood was poured indifferently round about
the altar of the
fore court, in the sin offering it was not to be sprinkled, lest the intention
should be
overlooked, but smeared with
the finger upon the horns of the
altar (‘And the priest shall put of the blood upon the horns,’ Leviticus
4:7, 18, 25, 30, 34). In the present instance the blood was
to be carefully
put upon the four horns of the altar —
the only part to be smeared with blood in
the Mosaic consecration (Exodus 29:12) — the four corners of the settle,
or azarah, but whether the
greater or lesser is left undecided, though in all
probability it was the under, if not both, and the border round about, that
mentioned in v. 17; and the effect of this smearing with
blood should be
to cleanse and
purge, or, make
atonement for, the altar; not for the
people, without an
atoned-for altar, no atoned-for people
(ohne entsuhnten
Altar, kein entsuhntes Volk),
but for the altar, either, because, being made out
of a part of the sinful earth and world, it required to be
sanctified, or because, as
the sins of the people having been, as it were, transferred
to it, it stood in need
of cleansing.
21 “Thou shalt take the bullock
also of the sin offering, and he shall
burn it in the
appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.” As a
further stage in the ceremony, the Bullock of the sin
offering, i.e. the carcass
of the victim, was to be burned by Ezekiel or the priest
acting for him in
the appointed
place of the house, without the sanctuary, as in the Mosaic code
it was prescribed that the flesh of the bullock, with his
skin and dung, should
be burned without the camp (Exodus 29:14; Leviticus 4:12,
21; 9:11, 15; compare
Hebrews 13:13). The “place of the house, without the sanctuary” meant the gizrah,
or separate place (ch.41:12), which was a part of the “house” in the widest sense,
and yet belonged not to the “sanctuary” in the strictest sense. Smend
thinks of the
migrash, “suburbs” or “open spaces,” which surrounded the temple
precincts (ch.45:2);
and these were certainly without the sanctuary, while they
were also appointed for the
holy place, and might have been designated, as here, miphkadh, as being always under
the inspection of the temple watchmen. The fact that in
post-exilic times one of
the city gates was called Hammiphkadh
(Nehemiah 3:31) lends
countenance to this view. That in this “appointed place” the carcass of the
bullock should be consumed was a deviation from the Mosaic
ritual, which
prescribed that the fat portions should be burned upon the
altar, and the
rest eaten as a sacrificial meal (Leviticus 4:10, 26, 35;
7:15, 31;
Deuteronomy 12:7, 17-18). Keil
appears to think that the fat portions
may have been burned upon the altar, although it is not so
mentioned, and
that only those points were mentioned in which deviations
from the
ordinary ritual took place.
22 “And on the second day thou shalt
offer a kid of the goats without
blemish for a sin
offering; and they shall cleanse the altar, as they
did cleanse it
with the bullock.” The second day’s ceremonial should begin with
the offering of a
kid of the goats (rather,
a he-goat) without blemish for
a sin
offering, the ritual observed being probably the same as that of the
preceding
day. The substitution of a “he-goat,” the offering for a ruler who
sins
(Leviticus 4:23-24), instead of a “young bullock,” which formed the
first day’s offering, was a deviation from the ritual
prescribed for the
consecration of the Mosaic altar and priesthood (Exodus
29:36). The
object of the offering of the “he-goat” was the same as that of the offering
of the “bullock,”
viz. to cleanse the altar; not, however, as if the previous
day’s cleansing had been insufficient and required to be
supplemented, or
had already become inefficient so as to call for renewal, but in the sense of
recalling the meaning and impression of the previous
day’s ceremonial, and
so in a manner linking it on with the several rites of
the succeeding days.
23 “When thou hast made an end of cleansing it, thou shalt offer a
young bullock
without blemish, and a ram out of the flock without
blemish. 24 And thou shalt offer them before
the LORD, and the priests
shall cast salt
upon them, and they shall offer them up for a burnt
offering unto the
LORD.” The presentation of a
burnt offering unto the Lord
was the next
item in the ritual that should be observed. The material composing
it should consist of a
young bullock without blemish,
as in the ordinary
sacrificial code (Leviticus 1:3-5), and a ram out of the flock
without blemish, as in the consecration of the priests (Exodus 29:18)
and of the altar (Leviticus 8:18). The persons presenting
it should be
the prophet, thou,
and the priests, they, as his representatives. The mode
of offering should be by burning, the distinctive act in a
burnt offering, as
that of a sin offering was sprinkling, and that of a peace
offering the
sacrificial meal, and by casting salt upon the carcass, a feature in every
meat offering (Leviticus 2:13), and here added probably to intensify the
idea of purification. In the corrosive
and antiseptic property of salt there is
hidden something of the purifying and consuming nature of
fire; hence the
Redeemer, in Mark
9:49, combines the salting of the sacrifice with the
purifying fire of self- denial (Kurtz, ‘Sacrificial Worship
of the Old
Testament,’ § 145). The significance of it should be an expression of
complete self-surrender unto Jehovah, as the necessary
outcome of the
antecedent act of expiation. The time of its presentation should be
immediately after the cleansing of the altar on the second
day, and
presumably also on the succeeding days. Whether the burnt
offering was,
or was not offered also on the first day is difficult to
decide, though the
former opinion has, perhaps, most in its favor. The Mosaic
ritual always
enjoined a burnt offering to be offered as a sequel to the
sin offering
(compare Exodus 29:14, 18, with Leviticus 8:14, 18; and, in
accordance
with this, vs. 23-24 naturally follow on vs. 19-21, v. 22
being interposed
because of the variation in the sin offering for the second
day.
25 “Seven days shalt thou prepare
every day a goat for a sin offering:
they shall also
prepare a young bullock, and a ram out of the flock,
without blemish.”
Seven
days. Kliefoth begins
them with the second; Keil,
Schroder, Currey, and the majority of
expositors take them as inclusive of
the first and second. In favor of Kliefoth’s
view may be
urged that the first day appears to stand out from the
others, ‘and to be
distinguished by the peculiar character of its offering — a
young bullock
for a sin offering, without any accompanying burnt
offering; that the
offerings on the second and subsequent days are alike, a
he-goat and a ram;
that on each of the seven days a goat is mentioned for a
sin offering,
whereas on the first day it was a young bullock that was slain;
and that in
Zechariah 3:9 occurs an allusion to what seems a special
day such as
this first day of Ezekiel. In support of Keil’s interpretation it is contended
that the seven days were to be employed in purging or
making atonement
for, and purifying the altar, which was in part at least
(even admitting a
distinction in meaning between חָטָּא
and טָהַר) the business of the first
day; that the general statement in v. 20 as to a goat for a
sin offering on
the seven days admits of easy qualification by the previous
statement in
v. 19; and that seven days was the normal duration of
religious
solemnities under the Law (see Leviticus 8:33; I Kings
8:65; II Chronicles 7:8-9).
26 “Seven days shall they purge the altar and purify it; and
they shall
consecrate themselves.”
They
shall purge the altar and they shall consecrate
themselves; more correctly, they — i.e. the priests — shall
consecrate it; literally,
fill its hand.
The phrase, מִלֵּאיָד, “to fill one’s hand,” sc. with gifts, occurs with
reference to Jehovah (Exodus 32:29; I Chronicles 29:5; II
Chronicles 29:31). It is
also employed in the sense of filling the hand of another,
as e.g. of a priest, with
sacrificial gifts, when he is instituted into his sacred
office (Exodus 28:41; 29:9;
Leviticus 21:10; compare Ibid. ch.8:27). Here the hand to
be filled is that of
the altar, which is personified for the purpose (compare
the use of the terms
“bosom” and “lip” in
connection with the altar). The meaning is that the altar,
at its consecration, should have a plentiful supply of
gifts, to symbolize that the
offering of such gifts was the work for which it was set
apart, and that it
should never be without them.
27 “And when these days are expired, it shall be, that upon
the eighth
day, and so
forward, the priests shall make your burnt offerings
upon the altar,
and your peace offerings; and I will accept you,
saith the Lord GOD.” The
eighth day, and so forward. Omit
“so.” With this
day the regular
sacrificial service should commence. Thenceforward the priests
should offer upon the altar the burnt offerings and peace offerings of the
people. The omission of sin offerings is explained by Keil, on the principle
that “burnt offerings” and “peace offerings” were “the
principal and most
frequent sacrifices, whilst sin offerings and meat
offerings were implied
therein;” Kliefoth adding that ch. 44:27, 29; 45:17, 19, 22-23, 25;
and 46:20 show it cannot be inferred that sin offerings
were no more to be
offered on this altar. At the same time, the prominence
given to “burnt”
and “peace” as
distinguished from “sin offerings”
may have pointed to the
fact that the sacrificers who should use this altar would be “a people in a
state of grace,”
to whom Jehovah was prepared to say, I WILL ACCEPT YOU-
not your offerings
alone, but your persons as well; and not these because of
those, but contrariwise, these on
account of these.
Purification and Preparation (vs. 13-27)
Almost all the regulations pertaining to the sacrifices
under the old
economy bore upon the
supreme question of sanctity. God would impress
upon His people, by every means and in every way, that the
Holy One of
they would “ascend unto the hill of the Lord” they must come “with
clean
hands and a pure heart” (Psalm
24:3-4). Hence everything and every one
had to be carefully purified or consecrated in preparation
for the solemn service.
In these verses we have the same idea once more affirmed in
the prophet’s
vision. The priests who
officiated were to be duly consecrated (v.
26);
the animals slain were to be very carefully selected, only
those without
blemish being allowed (vs.
22-23, 25). And even the altar itself, which
might have been thought to be incapable of any impurity, had
to be
formally purged and cleansed (v. 20). Sin offerings and
burnt offering
were to be presented, not forgetting the salt (v. 25), that the altar
might
be perfectly prepared for use, and that the worshippers who
approached it
might find acceptance with the Lord (v. 27). Such preparation
by
sacrifice is unknown to the
become obsolete. But the
essential idea of it remains and WILL NEVER
DISAPPEAR! Before we draw near to God in public worship it becomes
us to make preparation answering to the purification of the
older time.
There is:
- THE
PREPARATION OF THE BODY. Our Lord said there was a
certain “kind” of evil which could only be expelled after prayer and fasting
(Matthew 17:21). We must
recognize the fact that one bodily condition
is much more favorable to pure
and sustained devotion than another; e.g. a
wakeful rather than a somnolent
one; a wisely and moderately nourished
state in preference to one
incapacitated by indulgence on the one hand or
by prolonged abstinence on the
other. Not in weariness and exhaustion, nor
yet in a disabling and unfitting
fullness, should we bring our offering of
prayer or praise, of exhortation
or docility, unto the house of the Lord.
- THE
PREPARATION OF THE MIND. They who have undertaken
the sacred task of speaking for
God should surely prepare for this high and
exalted work. If we carefully prepare to speak in our own name, how much
more should we
do so when we speak in His! Should we
not gather all the
knowledge we can anywise obtain,
think our subject through to the best of
our ability, search the
Scriptures to sustain the truth we are to utter by the
Word of God, lay all our mental
acquisitions and information under
contribution to give clearness
and cogency to our argument or appeal,
order and arrange our thoughts
that we may present them as freely and as
forcibly as we can? (And let us not forget our need
of prayer! Without
God we can do
nothing! – John 15:5 – CY – 2014)
- THE PREPARATION
OF THE HEART. This preparation, more than
that of the body or the mind,
answers to the purification described in the
text. Our hearts need to be “cleansed and purged” (v. 20). It has to be
cleansed from:
Ø
All self-seeking; so that we aim, not at our
own honor or advancement,
but at the glory
of Christ and the good of men.
Ø
All worldliness
and vanity; so that when we bow in
prayer or assume
the attitude of
attentiveness we are not lost in the remembrance or the
anticipation of bargains in
the market or of pleasures in society.
(Mr. Spurgeon said he used
to have some of the worst thoughts
during prayer – no doubt an
onslaught from Satan – CY – 2014)
Ø
The search for
enjoyment rather than the seeking after God; the
temptation to come to the house
of the Lord to partake of that which is
sweet unto our taste rather than
that which is strengthening to our
character and nourishing to our
soul. Such preparation or purification as
this must be
wrought in the secret chamber of devotion, WHEN WE
ARE ALONE WITH
GOD and:
o
in solemn
contemplation and
o
in earnest and
believing prayer.
Foundation of Acceptance with God (v. 27)
It is a question vital to the interests of men, “How
to find reconciliation
with God.” If the Bible contains no authentic information on this
head, it
contains no real gospel. Martin Luther tersely described
this doctrine of
justification as the hinge of a standing or a falling
Church. It is the pivot of
salvation or perdition for
every man. What the sun is in the
midst of the
solar system, what the heart is to the human body, what the
mainspring is
to a watch, the doctrine
of man’s justification before God is to all the other
doctrines of religion. On this momentous matter God has
clearly revealed
to us His will. It
is so plainly unfolded that he “may run who
reads”
(Habukkuk 2:2). The Old
Testament is in complete accord with the New.
Acceptance is based on VICARIOUS
SACRIFICE! On the part of man
active and implicit faith is required.
- ACCEPTANCE WITH GOD IS MAN’S
PRESSING WANT. All other
needs are
subordinate to this. God’s favor converts man’s hell into heaven.
To bring men into reconciliation
with God, all these visions were
vouchsafed to Ezekiel.
Ø
For this, all
the sacrifice of animal life had been made.
Ø
For this, the
temple had been erected, and was now to be reconstructed.
Ø
For this, the
office of priesthood had been instituted.
Ø
For this,
every written revelation has been given.
Ø
For this,
God’s mind has been deeply concerned.
·
FOR MAN’S ACCEPTANCE WITH GOD A MEDIATING PRIEST
IS REQUIRED. The work
of bringing men back to God is so full of
difficulty that it must be
accomplished by distinct stages. A priest serves
many useful purposes. He is an
instructor, by deed, if not by utterance. He
is a sympathizing helper. He has
near access to God, and interest with Him.
The priest must be, of all men,
the least erring. His mission must be marked
as specially sacred. Every
circumstance which can lend sanctity to his
office must be provided. He must
be mature in years, experienced in human
needs. His person must be free
from blemish. Frequent ablutions must be
practiced. Exact obedience to
the commands of God must be observed. He
must be a pattern man. God has
been pleased to do for us through a Priest
what he will not do without a
Priest. And all the complicated arrangements
of the priesthood were designed
to impress men’s minds with the gigantic
evil of rebellion, and with the
difficulty of regaining the lost place in God’s
regard.
- FOR MAN’S ACCEPTANCE VICARIOUS DEATH
IS NEEDED.
The necessity for substitution
for the endurance of penalty prior to
reconciliation with God may be a
necessity on God’s side as well as a
necessity on man’s side. The
maintenance of the Divine government
throughout the universe is an
object of supreme moment. To make pardon
cheap and easy would loosen the
bonds of loyalty, and depreciate the value
of righteousness, in men’s
esteem. As law had expressed the moral
relations between God and men, law must be maintained. The penalty of
sin must be met. Innocent lambs
and heifers must die that sentiments of
penitence may be deepened in the
human soul. So valuable is reconciliation
between man and God that it is
worthwhile to sacrifice hecatombs of
inferior animals in order to
gain the end. This was an
educational process,
that men might
perceive how devoid of efficacy any sacrifice
must be, short
of THE PERFECT SACRIFICE OF GOD’S SON! Whether
our minds
can comprehend the reason of the
atonement or not, it is clearly the
will of
God that
restoration of man can come only by the channel of VICARIOUS
SACRIFICE!
- FOR MAN’S ACCEPTANCE A COMPLETE CYCLE
OF TIME
FOR PREPARATION MUST ELAPSE. “When these days are expired, it
shall be.” Day after day, for seven days, a victim slain was demanded
in
order to purify the altar. The
Jewish altar had been grievously desecrated
and polluted; hence a complete
purgation was required. Not until the
completion of the week could the
priests proceed to present any offerings
for guilty men. A cycle of time
was to be spent in the work of preparation.
In like manner, the patriarchal
and Levitical periods were a time of
preparation for Messiah’s work. Until men have learnt the tremendous evil
there is in sin, until they
have learned that without Divine interposition moral
renovation is impossible, they will not value A
SAVIOUR FROM SIN;
they will not listen to Him.
Therefore “in the fullness time” — then, and not
till then —“the Son of God came forth.” (Galatians 4:4)
- FOR MAN’S ACCEPTANCE COMPLETE
CONSECRATION OF
SELF IS DEMANDED.
The offerings appointed to be laid upon the altar
were “burnt offerings.” The
burnt offerings must precede the peace
offerings. By a burnt offering
is meant that which must be wholly
consumed. The sacrifice must be
complete. (I recommend a study of the
offerings in Leviticus chapters
1-7 – this website - There is a lot more to grasp
than what is on the surface – CY
– 2014). A profound moral lesson is
here inculcated; IT
SHOULD BE WRITTEN IN CAPITALS - Salvation
means complete
surrender to God, complete devotion to His service. If we
keep back anything from God,
we still grieve His heart, we mar our characters,
we imperil our salvation. If one foe remains in the citadel, the
city is not safe.
One weed left in the garden may
spread and spoil the whole. One germ of
disease in the system may issue
in death. Loyalty, to be worth anything,
must be complete. In order to be
saved, the Son of God must reign
supremely
in us, King over every thought.
Acceptance (v. 27)
The purpose of the temple is the establishment and
maintenance of
harmonious relations between God and the sons of men. By
sin those
relations have been interrupted; by religion they are
restored. What was
symbolized by the material temple at
services and sacrifices — is realized in the spiritual
temple of the new
covenant, in which Christ
is the Sacrifice and the Priest, and in which the
Holy Spirit sheds the Shechinah-glory
through the holiest of all.
Acceptance thus takes the place of estrangement.
- ACCEPTANCE IS OF GOD’S GRACE, AND IS
UNDESERVED.
- ACCEPTANCE IS IN VIRTUE OF THE HIGH
PRIEST’S
MEDIATION AND INTERCESSION.
- ACCEPTANCE IS FOR THE OBEDIENT, THE
COMPLIANT,
THE SUBMISSIVE.
- ACCEPTANCE IS ALIKE OF THE PERSON AND
OF THE
SERVICE.
- ACCEPTANCE INVOLVES THE ENJOYMENT OF
ALL THE
MANIFESTATIONS AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE DIVINE
FAVOR.
- APPLICATION.
Ø
One aim of a
spiritual ministry to men is to convince them that
in their sinful state
they are without acceptance with God.
Ø
Another aim of such a
ministry is to exhibit the divinely
appointed
method of
obtaining and enjoying acceptance with God.
Ø
Yet another aim is to
expose false and delusive representations of the
way of acceptance. “There is one God, and one Mediator between God
and man, the Man
Christ Jesus; who gave Himself a ransom for all,
to be testified in due time.” (I Timothy 2:5-6)
"Excerpted text Copyright AGES Library, LLC. All rights reserved.
Materials are reproduced by
permission."
This material can be found at:
http://www.adultbibleclass.com
If this exposition is helpful, please share
with others.