xxxi. 12, xxxii. 5, G); and this periphrastic description of the land is more minutely defined by the additional clause, u waste ruins and forsaken cities." n? DX in ver. 5 is the particle used in oaths (cf. eh. v. 11, etc.); and the perfect *W}OT is not merely prophetic, but also a preterite. God has already uttered a threatening word concerning the nations round about in ch. xxv., xxvi., and xxxv.; and here He once more declares that they shall bear their disgrace. ns:p r« is the fiery jealousy of wrath. K|3 is an Aramean form for SJ3 (ch. xxxv. 15). For C;d: BKIBfe, see ch. xxv. 6. In the expression PW^»3 |yri> T3p, which has been rendered in various ways, we agree with Gesenius and others in regarding BHJO as an Aramean form of the infinitive of BH1, with the meaning to empty out, which is confirmed by the Syriac; for cn:p cannot be a substantive, on account of the IVE*5; and Hitzig's conjecture, that TX> should be pointed T37, and the clause rendered " to plunder its produce," is precluded by the fact that the separation of the preposition? lP9?j by the insertion of a word between, is unexampled, to say nothing of the fact that BHJO does not mean produce at all. The thought expressed in vers. 6 and 7 is the following: because Israel has hitherto borne the contempt of the heathen, the heathen shall now bear their own contempt. The lifting of the hand is a gesture employed in taking an oath, as in ch. xx. 6, etc. But the land of Israel is to receive a blessing. This blessing is described in ver. 8 in general terms, as the bearing of fruit by the mountains, i.e. by the land of Israel; and its speedy commencement is predicted. It is then depicted in detail in vers. 9 sqq. In the clause Kto? llip "3, the Israelites are not to be regarded as the subject, as Kliefoth supposes, in which case their speedy return from exile would be announced. The ^ shows that this cannot be the meaning; for it is immediately preceded by '&1 ^W^ which precludes the supposition that, when speaking of the mountains, Ezekiel had the inhabitants in his mind. The promised blessings are the subject, or the branches and fruits, which the mountains are to bear. Nearly all the commentators have agreed in adopting this explanation of the words, after the analogy of Isa. lvi. 1. With the s3 in ver. 9 the carrying out of the blessing promised is appended in the form of a reason assigned for the general promise. The mountains shall be cultivated, the men upon them, viz. all Israel, multiplied, the desolated cities rebuilt, so that Israel shall dwell in the land as in the former time, and be fruitful and blessed. This promise was no doubt fulfilled in certain weak beginnings after the return of a portion of the people under Zerubbabel and Ezra; but the multiplying and blessing, experienced by those who returned from Babylon, did not take place till long after the salvation promised here, and more especially in vers. 12—15. According to ver. 12, the land is to become the inheritance of the people Israel, and will no more make the Israelites childless, or (according to ver. 14) cause them to stumble; and the people are no more to bear the contempt of the heathen. But that portion of the nation which returned from exile not only continued under the rule of the heathen, but had also in various ways to bear the contempt of the heathen still; and eventually, because Israel not only stumbled, but fell very low through the rejection of its Saviour, it was scattered again out of the land among the heathen, and the land was utterly wasted... until this day. In ver. 12 the masculine suffix attached to ivjn^ refers to the land regarded as "in, which is also the subject to rw and tJDto. It is not till vers. 13, 14, where the idea of the land becomes so prominent, that the feminine is used. B?3^, to make them (the Israelites) childless, or bereaved, is explained in vers. 13, 14 by D*JK 1TOX, devouring men. That the land devours its inhabitants, is what the spies say of the land of Canaan in Num. xiii. 32; and in 2 Kings ii. 19 it is affirmed of the district of Jericho that it causes ^??^P, i.e. miscarriages, on account of its bad water. The latter passage does not come into consideration; but the former (Num. xiii. 32) probably does, and Ezekiel evidently refers to this. For there is no doubt whatever that he explains or expands 0?3E>by D*]N n??**» Although, for example, the charge that the land devours men is brought against it by the enemies or adversaries of Israel (pzb D^TOfct, they say to you), the truth of the charge is admitted, since it is said that the land shall henceforth no more devour men, though without a repetition of the?3B\ But the sense in which Ezekiel affirms of the land that it had been tns nfatf, and was henceforth to be so no more, is determined by N<> tf}X\ ■riy wan, thou wilt no more cause thy people to stumble, which is added in ver. lAb in the place of T\"T\!|ia T\72WD in ver. 14a. Hence the land became a devourer of men by the fact that it caused its people to stumble, i.e. entangled them in sins (the Keri v3K;n for Y^?n is a bad conjecture, the incorrectness of which is placed beyond all doubt by the "liy vBbfVW of ver. 15). Consequently we cannot understand the " devouring of men," after Num. xiii. 32, as signifying that, on account of its situation and fruitfulness, the land is an apple of discord, for the possession of which the nations strive with one another, so that the inhabitants are destroyed, or at all events we must not restrict the meaning to this; and still less can we agree with Ewald and Hitzig in thinking of the restless hurrying and driving by which individual men were of necessity rapidly swept away. If the sweeping away of the population is connected with the stumbling, the people are devoured by the consequences of their sins, i.e. by penal judgments, unfruitfulness, pestilence, and war, with which God threatened Israel for its apostasy from Him. These judgments had depopulated the land; and this fact was attributed by the heathen in their own way to the land, and thrown in the teeth of the Israelites as a disgrace. The Lord will henceforth remove this charge, and take away from the heathen all occasion to despise His people, namely, by bestowing upon His land and people the blessing which He promised in the law to those who kept His commandments. But this can only be done by His removing the occasion to stumble or sin, i.e., according to vers. 25 sqq. (compared with ch. xi. 18 sqq.), by His cleansing His people from all uncleannesses and idols, and giving them a new heart and a new spirit. The Keri SpiS in vers. 13, 14, and 15 is a needless alteration of the Chetib ^3. — In ver. 15 this promise is rounded off and concluded by another summing up of the principal thoughts.
Because Israel has defiled its land by its sins, God has scattered the people among the heathen; but because they also profaned His name among the heathen, He will exercise forbearance for the sake of His holy name (vers. 16-21), \vill gather Israel out of the lands, cleanse it from its sins, and sanctify it by the communication of His Spirit, so that it will walk in His ways (vers. 22-28), and will so bless and multiply it, that both the nations around and Israel itself will know that He is the Lord (vers. 29-38). — This promise is shown by the introductory formula in ver. 16 and by the contents to be an independent word of God; but it is substantially connected in the closest manner with the preceding word of God, showing, on the one hand, the motive which prompted God to restore and bless His people; and, on the other hand, the means by which He would permanently establish the salvation predicted in ch. xxxiv. and ch. xxxvi. 1-15. — The kernel of this promise is formed by vers. 25-28, for which the way is prepared in vers. 17-24, whilst the further extension is contained in vers. 29-38.
Vers. 16-21. The Lord will extend His forbearance, for the sake of His holy name, to the people who have been rejected on account of their sins. — Ver. 16. And the word of Jehovah came to mey saying, Ver. 17. Son of man, the house of Israd dicelt in its land, and defied it with its way and its doings; like the uncleanness of the unclean woman, was its way before me, Ver. 18. Then I poured out my fury upon them on account of the blood which they had shed in the land, and because they had defiled it through their idols, Ver. 19. And scattered them among the nations, and they were dispersed in the lands; according to their way and their doings I judge them, Ver. 20. And they came to the nations whither they came, and profaned my holy name, for men said of them, u These are Jehovah's people, and they have come out of His land.,y Ver. 21. And so 1 had pity upon my holy name, winch the house of Israel profaned among the nations whither they came. — The address commences with a description of the reasons why God had thrust out His people among the heathen, namely, on account of their sins and idolatrous abominations, by which the Israelites had defiled the land (cf. Lev. xviii. 28 and Num. xxxv. 34). Their conduct resembled the most offensive uncleanness, namely, the uncleanness of a woman in her menstruation (Lev. xv. 19), to which the moral depravity of the people had already been compared in Isa. lxiv. 5. — In ver. 18 the consequence of the defiling of the land by the people is introduced with the expression ^3^J. In ver. 17, ^^:! is the continuation of the participle D^B*; and the participle is expressive of the condition in the past, as we may see from the words 'U1 ^SBW. The simile in ver. 176 is an explanatory, circumstantial clause. For ver. 18, compare ch. vii. 8, and for 'til frjn hv, ch. xxii. 3, 6. The last clause, u and through their idols they have defiled it," is loosely appended; but it really contains a second reason for the pouring out of the wrath of God upon the people. For ver. 19, compare ch. xxii. 15. Niujl in ver. 20 refers to /infe*"M; but there is no necessity to read }Xa*} on that account. It is perfectly arbitrary to supply the subject proposed by Kliefoth, viz. "the report of what had happened to Israel" came to the heathen, which is quite foreign to the connection; for it was not the report concerning Israel, but Israel itself, which came to the heathen, and profaned the sacred name of God. This is not only plainly expressed in ver. 216, but has been already stated in ver. 20.
The fact that the words of the heathen, by which the name of God was profaned, are quoted here, does not prove that it is the heathen nations who are to be regarded as those who profaned the name of God, as Kliefoth imagines. The words, " these are Jehovah's people, and have come out of His (Jehovah's) land," could only contain a profanation of the holy name of God, if their coming out was regarded as involuntary, i.e. as an exile enforced by the power of the heathen; or, on the other hand, if the Israelites themselves had denied the holiness of the people of God through their behaviour among the heathen. Most of the commentators have decided in favour of the former view. Vatablus, for example, gives this explanation: " if their God whom they preach had been omnipotent, He would not have allowed them to be expelled from His land." And we must decide in favour of this exposition, not only because of the parallel passages, such as Num. xiv. 16 and Jer. xxxiii. 24, which support this view; but chiefly on account of the verses which follow, according to which the sanctification of the name of God amon^; the nations consists in the fact that God gathers Israel out of its dispersion among the nations, and leads them back into His own land (yid. vers. 23 and 24). Consequently the profanation of His name can only have consisted in the fact that Israel was carried away out of its own land, and scattered in the heathen lands. For, since the heathen acknowledged only national gods, and regarded Jehovah as nothing more than such a national god of Israel, they did not look upon the destruction of the kingdom of Judah and the carrying away of the people as a judgment of the almighty and holy God upon His people, but concluded that that catastrophe was a sign of the inability of Jehovah to defend His land and save His people. The only way in which God could destroy this delusion was by manifesting Himself to the heathen as the almighty God and Lord of the whole world through the redemption and glorification of His people, fen*JJ 'p uy~?y: so I had pity, compassion upon my holy name. The preterite is prophetic, inasmuch as the compassion consists in the gathering of Israel out of the nations, which is announced in vers. 22 sqq. as still in the future. The rendering, " I spared (them) for my holy name's sake" (LXX., Havernick), is false; for fen is construed with 7P, governing the person or the thing toward which the compassion is shown (vid. ch. xvi. 5 and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 15, 17).
Vers. 22-28. For His holy name's sake the Lord will bring Israel back from its dispersion into His own land, purify it from its sins, and sanctify it by His Spirit to be His own people. — Ver. 22. Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, I do it not for your sakes, 0 house of Israel9 but for my holy names sake, which ye have profaned among the nations whither ye have come, Ver. 23. / will sanctify my great name, which is profaned among the nations, which ye have profaned in the midst of them, so that the nations shall know that I am Jehovah, is the saying of the Lord Jehovah, when I prove myself holy upon you before their eyes, Ver. 24. I will take you out of the nations, and gather you out of all lands, and bring you into your land, Ver. 25. And will sprinkle clean water upon you, that ye may become clean; from all your uncleannesses and from all your idols will I cleanse you, Ver. 26. And I will give you a new heart, and give a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh, and give you a heart of flesh, Ver. 27, I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and keep my rights, and do them, Ver. 28. And ye shall dwell in the land which I have given to your fathers, and shall become my people, and I will be your God, — These verses show in what way the Lord will have compassion upon His holy name, and how He will put an end to the scoffing thereat, and vindicate His honour in the sight of the heathen. " Not for your sake," i.e, not because you have any claim to deliverance on account of your behaviour (cf. Isa. xlviii. 11 and Deut. ix. 6), but for my holy name's sake, i.e. to manifest as holy the name which has been profaned among the heathen, I do it, namely, what follows from ver. 23 onwards. The Lord will sanctify His name, i.e. show it to be holy by proving Himself to be holy upon Israel. £Hp is not equivalent to glorify, although the holiness of God involves the idea of glory. Sanctifying is the removing or expunging of the blots and blemishes which adhere to anything. The giving up of His people was regarded by the heathen as a sign of the weakness of Jehovah. This blot through which His omnipotence and glory were dishonoured, God would remove by gathering Israel out of the heathen, and glorifying it. Instead of DJ^^j the ancient versions have rendered Drvyjp. This reading is also found in many of the codices and the earliest editions, and is confirmed by the great Masora, and also commended by the parallel passages, ch. xx. 41 and xxviii. 25, so that it no doubt deserves the preference, although DS^y? can also be justified. For inasmuch as Israelites had despaired in the midst of their wretchedness through unbelief, it was necessary that Jehovah should sanctify His great name in their sight as well. The great name of Jehovah is His almighty exaltation above all gods (cf. Mai. i. 11, 12). The first thing that Jehovah does for the sanctification of His name is to bring back Israel from its dispersion into its own land (ver. 24, compare ch. xi. 17 and xx. 41, 42); and then follows the purifying of Israel from its sins. The figurative expression, <* to sprinkle with clean water," is taken from the lustrations prescribed by the law, more particularly the purifying from defilement from the dead by sprinkling with the water prepared from the ashes of a red heifer (Num. xix. 17-19; compare Ps. li. 9). Cleansing from sins, which corresponds to justification, and is not to be confounded with sanctification (Schmieder), is followed by renewal with the Holy Spirit, which takes away the old heart of stone and puts within a new heart of flesh, so that the man can fulfil the commandments of God, and walk in newness of life (vers. 2G-28; compare ch. xi. 18-20, where this promise has already occurred, and the necessary remarks concerning its fulfilment have been made). — With regard to the construction riK nwy 'W TIPKj to make or effect your walking, compare Evvald, $ 3375.
Vers. 29-38. The Lord will richly bless, multiply, and glorify His people, when thus renewed and sanctified. — Ver. 29. And I will save you from all your uncleannesses, and will call the corn, and multiply it, and no more bring famine upon you; Ver. 30. But I will multiply the fruit of the tree and the produce of the field, so that ye will no more bear the reproach of famine among the nations. Ver. 31. But ye will remember your evil ways, and your deeds which were not good, and will loathe yourselves on account of your iniquities and your abominations. Ver. 32. Not for your sake do I this, is the saying of the Lord Jehovah, be this Tcnown to you; be ye ashamed and blush for your ways,
0 house of Israel! Ver. 33. Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, In the day when I shall cleanse you from all your iniquities, I will make the cities inhabited, and the ruins shall be built, Ver. 34. And the devastated land shall be tilled instead of being a desert before the eyes of every one who passed by. Ver. 35. And men will say, This land, which was laid waste, has become like the garden of Eden, and the desolate and ruined cities are fortified and inhabited. Ver. 36. And the nations, which have been left round about you, shall know that 1 Jehovah build up that which is destroyed^ and plant that which is laid waste. I, Jehovah, have said it, and do it. Ver. 37. Thus sdith the Lord Jehovah,
1 vjill still let myself be sought by the house of Israel in this, to do it for them; I will multiply them, like a flock, in men; Ver. 38, Like a flock of holy sacnfices, like tlie flock of Jerusalem on its feast-days, so shall the desolate cities be full of flocks of men; and they shall know that I am Jehovah. — The words '\31 TO^in, I help or save you from all your uncleannesses, cannot be understood as relating to their purification from the former uncleannesses; for they have already been cleansed from these, according to ver. 25. The HiNDD can only be such defilements as are still possible even after the renewing of the people; and ysprij to help, means to guard them against any further recurrence of such defilements (cf. ch. xxxvii. 23), and not to deliver them from the consequences of their former pollutions. But if God preserves His people from these, there is no longer any occasion for a fresh suspension of judgments over them, and God can bestow His blessing upon the sanctified nation without reserve. It is in this way that the further promises are appended; and, first of all, in vers. 296 and 30, a promise that He will bless them with an abundant crop of fruits, both of the orchard and the field. lt I call to the corn," i.e. I cause it to come or grow, so that famine will occur no more (for the fact, compare ch. xxxiv. 29). In consequence of this blessing, Israel will blush with shame at the thought of its former sins, and will loathe itself for those abominations (ver. 31); compare ch. xx. 43, where the same thought has already occurred. To this, after repeating what has been said before in ver. 22, namely, that God is not doing all this for the sake of the Israelites themselves, the prophet appends the admonition to be ashamed of their conduct, i.e. to repent, which is so far inserted appropriately in the promise, that the promise itself is meant Jo entice Israel to repent and return to God. Then,, secondly, in two strophes introduced with '* IBK nb, the promise is still further expanded. In vers. 33-36, the prophet shows how the devastated land is to be restored and rebuilt, and to become a paradise; and in vers. 37 and 38, how the people are to be blessed through a large increase in their numbers. Both of these strophes are simply a further elaboration of the promise contained in vers. 9-12. 2>mnj causative of 3^J, to cause to be inhabited, to populate, as in Isa. liv. 3. *"^ijr?3 *?J£, as in ch. v. 14. The subject to ™$) in ver. 35 is, u those who pass by." For the comparison to the garden of Eden, see ch. xxxi. 9. nVWta is a circumstantial word belonging to toPJ: they shall be inhabited as fortified cities, that is to say, shall afford to their inhabitants the security of fortresses, from which there is no fear of their being expelled. In ver. 36 the expression, u the heathen nations which shall be left round about you," presupposes that at the time of Israel's redemption the judgment will have fallen upon the heathen (compare ch. xxx. 3 with ch. xxix. 21), so that only a remnant of them will be still in existence; and this remnant will recognise the work of Jehovah in the restoration of Israel. This recognition, however, does not involve the conversion of the heathen to Jehovah, but is simply preparatory to it. For the fact itself, compare ch. xvii. 24. B*Wl, to let oneself be asked or entreated, as in ch. xiv. 3. nw, with regard to this, is explained by Dr6 nwyb. What God will do follows in rU1 nrjs. God will multiply His people to such an extent, that they will resemble the flock of lambs, sheep, and goats brought to Jerusalem to sacrifice upon the feast days. Compare 2 Chron. xxxv. 7, where Josiah is said to have given to the people thirty thousand lambs and goats for the feast of the passover. CJK!*&? does not mean, like a flock of men. CHK cannot be a genitive dependent upon JN¥, on account of the article in J&&3, but belongs to nf1^, either as a supplementary apposition to E^N, or as a second object, so that nanx would be construed with a double accusative, after the analogy of verbs of plenty, to multiply them in men. Kliefoth's rendering, " I will multiply them, so that they shall be the flock of men " (of mankind), is grammatically untenable. a^iJ!*&, a flock of holy beasts, i.e. of sacrificial lambs. The flock of Jerusalem is the flock brought to Jerusalem at the yearly feasts, when the male population of the land came to the sanctuary (Deut. xvi. 16): So shall the desolate cities be filled again with flocks of men (compare Mic. ii. 12).
This chapter contains two revelations from God (vers. 1-14 and vers. 15-28). In the first, the prophet is shown in a vision the resurrection of Israel to a new life. In the second, he is commanded to exhibit, by means of a symbolical act, the reunion of the divided kingdoms into a single nation under one king. Both of these he is to announce to the children of Israel. The substantial connection between these two prophecies will be seen from the exposition.
Vers. 1—14. Resurrection of Israel to new Life,
Ver. 1. There came upon me the hand of Jehovah, and Jehovah led me out in the spirit, and set me down in the midst of the valley; this was full of bones. Ver. 2. And He led me past them round about; and,, behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and, behold, they were very dry. Ver. 3. And He said to me, Son of man, will these bones come to life? and I said, Lord, Jehovah, thou knowest. Ver. 4. Then He said to me, Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, Ye dry bones, hear ye the word of Jehovah. Ver. 5. Thus saith the Lord Jehovah to these bones, Behold, I bring breath into you, that ye may come to life. Ver. 6. I will create sinews upon you, and cause flesh to grow upon you, and cover you with skin, and bring breath into you, so that ye shall live and know that I am Jehovah. Ver. 7. And I prophesied as I was commanded; and there was a noise as I prophesied, and behold a rumbling, and the bones came together, bone to bone. Ver. 8. And I saw, and behold sinews came over them, and flesh grew, and skin drew over it above; but there was no breath in them. Ver. 9. Then He said to me, Prophesy to the breath, prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Come from the four winds, thou breath, and blow upon these slain, that they may come to life. Ver. 10. And I prophesied as I was commanded;
then the breath came into them, and they came to life, and stood upon their feet, a very, very great army. Ver. 11. And He said to me, Son of man, these bones are the ivhole house of Israel; behold, they say, our bones are dried, and our hope has perished; ice are destroyed! Ver. 12. Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I ivill open your graves, and cause you to come out of your graves, my people, and bring you into the land of Israel. Ver. 13. And ye shall know that I am Jehovah, when I open your graves, and cause you to come out of your graves, my people. Ver. 14. And I will put my Spirit into you, and will place you in your land, and ye shall know that I, Jehovah, hace spoken and do it, is the saying of Jehovah. — This revelation divides itself into two sections. Vers. 1—10 contain the vision, and vers. 11-14 give the interpretation. There are no particular difficulties in the description of the vision, so far as the meaning of the words is concerned. By a supernatural intervention on the part of God, Ezekiel is taken from his own home in a state of spiritual ecstasy into a valley which was full of dead men's bones. For the expression nirn '" T ^y, see the comm. on ch. i. 3. In the second clause of ver. 1 »^jns is the subject, and is not to be taken as a genitive in connection with nro, as it has been by the Vulgate and Hitzig in opposition to the accents, nna stands for B^K nvia (ch. xi. 24), and B^N is omitted simply because njn* follows immediately afterwards, PMH, to set down, here and ch. xl. 2; whereas in other cases the form n*3Pl Js usually employed in this sense. The article prefixed to ^VI??n appears to point back to ch. iii, 22, to the valley where Ezekiel received the first revelation concerning the fate of Jerusalem and its inhabitants. That D^ovy are dead men's bones is evident from what follows.
Q[?\?y *??3J5Jj not " He led me over them round about," but past them, in order that Ezekiel might have a clear view of them, and see whether it were possible for them to come to life again. They were lying upon the surface of the valley, i.e. not under, but upon the ground, and not piled up in a heap, but scattered over the valley, and they were very dry. The question asked by God, whether these bones could live, or come to life again, prepares the way for the miracle; and Ezekiel's answer, " Lord, Thou knowest" (cf. Rev. vii. 14), implies that, according to human judgment, it was inconceivable that they could come to life any more, and nothing but the omnipotence of God could effect this. — After this introduction there follows in vers. 4 sqq. the miracle of the raising to life of these very dry bones, accomplished through the medium of the word of God, which the prophet addresses to them, to show to the people that the power to realize itself is inherent in the word of Jehovah proclaimed by Ezekiel; in other words, that Jehovah possesses the power to accomplish whatever He promises to His people. The word in ver. 5, u Behold, I bring breath into you, that ye may come to life," announces in general terms the raising of them to life, whilst the process itself is more minutely described in ver. 6. God will put on them (clothe them with) sinews, flesh, and skin, and then put nvi in them, nvi is the animating spirit or breath = D^n mi (Gen. vi. 17, vii. 17). E1P, air. \ey. in Syriac incrustare, ohducere. When Ezekiel prophesied there arose or followed a sound (<>ip), and then a shaking (^H), and the bones approached one another, every bone to its own bone. Different explanations have been given of the words?ip and &y\ b)p signifies a sound or voice, and l^JH a trembling, an earthquake, and also a rumbling or a loud noise (compare ch. iii. 12 and Isa. ix. 4). The relation between the two words as they stand here is certainly not that the sound (zip) passes at once into a loud noise, or is continued in that form; whilst BW"i denotes the rattling or rustling of bones in motion. The fact that the moving of the bones toward one another is represented by ^Ip™ (with Vav consec), as the sequel to B^H, is decisive against this. Yet we cannot a^ree with Kliefoth, that by?)p we are to understand the trumpet-blast, or voice of God, that wakes the dead from their graves, according to those passages of the New Testament which treat of the resurrection, and by K;1H the earthquake which opens the graves. This explanation is precluded, not only by the philological difficulty that ^ip without any further definition does not signify either the blast of a trumpet or the voice of God, but also by the circumstance that the?)p is the result of the prophesying of Ezekiel; and we cannot suppose that God would make His almighty call dependent upon a prophet's prophesying. And even in the case of C'jn, the reference to ch. xxxviii. 19 does not prove that the word must mean earthquake in this passage also, since Ezekiel uses the word in a different sense in ch. xii. 18 and iii. 12. We therefore take b\p in the general sense of a loud noise, and nn in the sense of shaking (sc. of the bones), which was occasioned by the loud noise, and produced, or was followed by, the movement of the bones to approach one another. The coming together of the bones was followed by their being clothed with sinews, fleshy and skin; but there was not yet any breath in them (ver. 8). To give them this the prophet is to prophesy again, and that to the breath, that it come from the four winds or quarters of the world and breathe into these slain (ver. 9). Then, when he prophesied, the breath came into them, so that they received life, and stood upright upon their feet. In vers. 9 and 10 nvi is rendered by some u wind," by others "spirit;" but neither of these is in conformity with what precedes it. Wl does not mean anything else than the breath of life, which has indeed a substratum in the wind, perceptible to the senses, but is not identical with it. The wind itself brings no life into dead bodies. If, therefore, the dead bodies become living, receive life through the blowing of the rvn into them, what enters into them by the blowing cannot be a symbol of the breath of life, but must be the breath of life itself — namely, that divine breath of life which pervades all nature, giving and sustaining the life of all creatures (cf. Ps. civ. 29, 30). The expression BWl!? ^? points back to Gen. ii. 7. The representation of the bringing of the dead bones to life in two acts may also be explained from the fact that it is based upon the history of the creation of man in Gen. ii., as Theodoret1 has observed, and serves plainly to depict the creative revivification here, like the first creation there, as a work of the almighty God. For a correct understanding of the vision, it is also necessary to observe that in ver. 9 the dead bones, clothed with sinews, flesh, and skin, are called DWHj slain, killed, and not merely dead. It is apparent at once from this that our vision is not intended to symbolize the resurrection of all the dead, but simply the raising up of the nation of Israel, which has been slain. This is borne out by the explanation of the vision which God gives to the prophet in vers. 11—14, and directs him to repeat to the people.^ The dead bones are the u whole house of Israel " that has been given up to death; in other words, Judah and Ephraim. " These bones" in ver. 11 are the same as in vers. 3 and 5, and not the bodies brought to life in ver. 10; though Hitzig maintains that they are the latter, and then draws the erroneous conclusion that vers. 11-14 do not interpret the vision of the first ten verses, but that the bones in the valley are simply explained in these verses as signifying the dead of Israel. It is true that the further explanation in ver. 12 sqq. of what is described in vers. 5-10 as happening to the dead bones is not given in the form of an exposition of the separate details of that occurrence, but is summed up in the announcement that God will open their graves, bring them out of their graves, and transport them to their own land. But it does not follow from this that the announcement is merely an application of the vision to the restoration of Israel to new life, and therefore that something different is represented from what is announced in vers. 12-14. Such a view is at variance with the words, " these bones are the whole house of Israel." Even if these words are not to be taken so literally as that we are to under-
1 " For as the body of our forefather Adam was first moulded, and then the soul was thus breathed into it; so here also both combined in fitting harmony." — Theodoret.
stand that the prophet was shown in the vision the bones of the slain and deceased Israelites, but simply mean: these dead bones represent the house of Israel, depict the nation of Israel in its state of death, — they express so much in the clearest terms concerning the relation in which the explanation in vers. 12-14 stands to the visionary occurrence in vers. 4-10, namely, that God has shown to Ezekiel in the vision what He commands him to announce concerning Israel in vers. 12-14; in other words, that the bringing of the dead bones to life shown to him in the vision was intended to place visibly before him the raisins of the whole nation of Israel to new life out of the death into which it had fallen. This is obvious enough from the words: these bones are the whole house of Israel. rv:r;3 5wnfc^ points forward to the reunion of the tribes of Israel that are severed into two nations, as foretold in vers. 15sqq. It is they who speak in ver. lib. The subject to DHDK is neither the bones nor the dead of Israel (Hitzig), but the ^"ji^ n*5T?3 already named, which is also addressed in ver. 12. All Israel says: our bones are dried, i.e. our vital force is gone. The bones are the seat of the vital force, as in Ps. xxxii. 3; and 8??J, to dry up, applied to the marrow, or vital sap of the bones, is substantially the same as n^a in the psalm (I.e.). Our hope has perished (cf. ch. xix. 5). njjpn is here the hope of rising into a nation once more, w WiTja: literally, we are cut off for ourselves, sc. from the sphere of the living (cf. Lam. iii. 54; Isa. liii. 8), equivalent to tc it is all over with us."
To the people speaking thus, Ezekiel is to announce that the Lord will open their graves, bring them out of them, put His breath of life into them, and lead them into their own land. If we observe the relation in which vers. 12 and 13 stand to ver. 14, namely, that the two halves of the 14th verse are parallel to the two verses 12 and 13, the clause '" *JK *3 CWT1 in ver. 146 to the similar clause in ver. 13, there can be no doubt that the contents of ver. 14a also correspond to those of ver. 12 — that is to say, that the words, "I put my breath
(Spirit) into you, that ye may live, and place you in your own land" (bring you to rest therein), affirm essentially the same as the words, a I bring you out of your graves, and lead you into the land of Israel;" with this simple difference, that the bringing out of the graves is explained and rendered more emphatic by the more definite idea of causing them to live through the breath or Spirit of God put into them, and the tKO\j by fflin, the leading into the land by the transporting and bringing them to rest therein. Consequently we are not to understand by WW D22 TTfi either a divine act differing from the raising of the dead to life, or the communication of the Holy Spirit as distinguished from the imparting of the breath of life. W», the Spirit of Jehovah, is identical with the rm, which comes", according to vers. 9 and 10, into the bones of the dead when clothed with sinews, flesh, and skin, i.e. is breathed into them. This spirit or breath of life is the creative principle both of the physical and of the ethical or spiritual life. Consequently there are not three things announced in these verses, but onlv two: (1) The raising to life from a state of death, by bringing out of the graves, and communicating the divine Spirit of life; (2) the leading back to their own land to rest quietly therein. When, therefore, Kliefoth explains these verses as signifying that for the consolation of Israel, which is mourning hopelessly in its existing state of death, "God directs the prophet to say — (1) That at some future time it will experience a resurrection in the literal sense, that its graves will be opened, and that all its dead, those deceased with those still alive, will be raised up out of their graves; (2) that God will place them in their own land; and (3) that when He has so placed them in their land, He will put His Spirit within them that they may live: in the first point the idea of the future resurrection, both of those deceased and of those still living, is interpolated into the text; and in the third point, placing them in their land before they are brought to life by the Spirit of God, would be at variance with the text, according to which the giving of the Spirit precedes the removal to their own land. The repetition of ",tpj7 in vers. 12 and 13 is also worthy of notice: you who are my people, which bases the comforting promise upon the fact that Israel is the people of Jehovah.
If, therefore, our vision does not set forth the resurrection of the dead in general, but simply the raising to life of the nation of Israel which is given up to death, it is only right that, in order still further to establish this view, we should briefly examine the other explanations that have been given. — The Fathers and most of the orthodox commentators, both of ancient and modern times, have found in vers. 1-10 a locus classicus for the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, and that quite correctly. But their views differ widely as to the strict meaning and design of the vision itself; inasmuch as some regard the vision as a direct and immediate prophecy of the general resurrection of the dead at the last day, whilst others take the raising of the dead to life shown to the prophet in the vision to be merely a figure or type of the waking up to new life of the Israel which is now dead in its captivity. The first view is mentioned by Jerome; but in later times it has been more especially defended by Calov, and last of all most decidedly by Kliefoth. Yet the supporters of this view acknowledge that vers. 11-14 predict the raising to life of the nation of Israel. The question arises, therefore, how this prediction is to be brought into harmony with such an explanation of the vision. The persons noticed by Jerome, who supported the view that in vers. 4-10 it is the general resurrection that is spoken of, sought to remove the difficulties to which this explanation is exposed, by taking the words, " these bones are the whole house of Israel," as referring to the resurrection of the saints, and connecting them with the first resurrection in Rev. xx. 5, and by interpreting the leading of Israel back to their own land as equivalent to the inheriting of the earth mentioned in Matt. v. 5. Calov, on the other hand, gives the following explanation of the relation in which vers. 11—14 stand to vers. 1-10: " In this striking vision there was shown by the Lord to the prophet the resurrection of the dead; but the occasion, the cause, and the scope of this vision were the resurrection of the Israelitish people, not so much into its earlier political form, as for the restoration of the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the establishment of the worship of God, both of which were indeed restored in the time of Zerubbabel, but were first brought to perfection at the coming of Jesus Christ." He also assumes that the raising of the dead is represented in the vision, "because God would have this representation exhibited for a figure and confirmation of the restitution of the people." And lastly, according to Kliefoth, vers. 11-14 do not furnish a literal exposition of the vision, but simply make an application of it to the bringing of Israel to life. — We cannot regard either of these views as correct, because neither of them does justice to the words of the text. The idea of the Fathers, that vers. 11-14 treat of the resurrection of the saints (believers), cannot be reconciled either with the words or with the context of our prophecy, and has evidently originated in perplexity. And the assumption of Calov and Kliefoth, that vers. 11-14 contain simply an application of the general resurrection of the dead exhibited in vers. 1—10 to the resurrection of Israel, by no means exhausts the meaning of the words, u these bones are the whole house of Israel," as we have already observed in our remarks on ver. 11. Moreover, in the vision itself there are certain features to be found which do not apply to the general resurrection of the dead. In proof of this, we will not lay any stress upon the circumstance that Ezekiel sees the resurrection of the dead within certain limits; that it is only the dead men's bones lying about in one particular valley, and not the dead of the whole earth, though a very great army, that he sees come to life again; but, on the other hand, we must press the fact that in ver. 9 those who are to be raised to life are called E*:nn, a word which does not signify the dead of all kinds, but simply those who have been slain, or have perished by the sword, by famine, or by other violent deaths, and which indisputably proves that Ezekiel was not shown the resurrection of all the dead, but simply the raising to life of Israel, which had been swept away by a violent death. Kliefoth would account for this restriction from the purpose for which the vision was shown to the prophet. Because the design of the vision was to comfort Israel concerning the wretchedness of its existing condition, and that wretchedness consisted for the most part in the fact that the greater portion of Israel had perished by sword, famine, and pestilence, he was shown the resurrection of the dead generally and universally, as it would take place not in the case of the Israelites alone, but in that of all the dead, though here confined within the limits of one particular field of dead; and stress is laid upon the circumstance that the dead which Ezekiel saw raised to life instar omnium, were such as had met with a violent death. This explanation would be admissible, if only it had been indicated or expressed in any way whatever, that the bones of the dead which Ezekiel saw lying about in the nyp3 represented all the dead of the whole earth. But we find no such indication; and because in the whole vision there is not a single feature contained which would warrant any such generalization of the field of the dead which Ezekiel saw, we are constrained to affirm that the dead men's bones seen by Ezekiel in the valley represent the whole house of Israel alone, and not the deceased and slain of all mankind; and that the vision does not set forth the resurrection of all the dead, but only the raising to life of the nation of Israel which had been given up to death.
Consequently we can only regard the figurative view of the vision as the correct one, though this also has been adopted in very different ways. When Jerome says that Ezekiel " is prophesying of the restoration of Israel through the parable of the resurrection," and in order to defend himself from the charge of denying the dogma of the resurrection of the dead, adds that " the similitude of a resurrection would never have been employed to exhibit the restoration of the Israelitish people, if that resurrection had been a delusion, and it had not been believed that it would really take place; because no one confirms uncertain things by means of things which have no existence;" — Havernick very justly replies, that the resurrection of the dead is not to be so absolutely regarded as a dogma already completed and defined, or as one universally known and having its roots in the national belief; though Havernick is wrong in affirming in support of this that the despair of the people described in ver. 11 plainly shows that so general a belief cannot possibly be presupposed. For we find just the same despair at times when faith in the resurrection of the dead was a universally accepted dogma. The principal error connected with this vie'w is the assumption that the vision was merely a parable formed by Ezekiel in accordance with the do^ma of the resurrection of the dead. If, on the contrarv, the vision was a spiritual intuition produced by God in the soul of the prophet, it might set forth the resurrection of the dead, even if the belief in this dogma had no existence as yet in the consciousness of the people, or at all events was not yet a living faith; and God might have shown to the prophet the raising of Israel to life under this figure, for the purpose of awakening this belief in Israel.1 In that case, however, the vision was not merely a parable, but a symbolical representation of a real fact, which was to serve as a pledge to the nation of
1 No conclusive evidence can be adduced that the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead was not only known to Ezekiel, but was regarded by the people as indisputably sure, as both Hengstenberg (Christology,vo\. III. p. 51, transl.) and Pareau (Comment, de immortal, p. 109) assume. Such passages as Isa. xxv. 8 and xxvi. 19, even if Ezekiel referred to them, merely prove that the belief or hope of the resurrection of the dead could not be altogether unknown to the believers of Israel, because Isaiah had already declared it. But the obvious announcement of this dogma in Dan. xii. 2 belongs to a later period than our vision; and even Daniel does not speak of it as a belief that prevailed throughout the nation, but simply communicates it as a consolation offered by the angel of the Lord in anticipation of the times of severe calamity awaiting the people of God.
its restoration to life. Theodoret comes much nearer to the truth when he gives the following as his explanation of the vision: that " on account of the unbelief of the Jews in exile, who were despairing of their restoration, the almighty God makes known His might; and the resurrection of the dead bodies, which was much more difficult than their restoration, is shown to the prophet, in order that all the nation may be taught thereby that everything is easy to His will;" l and when, accordingly, he calls what occurs in the vision u a type not of the calling to life of the Jews only, but also of the resurrection of all men." The only defect in this is, that Theodoret regards the dead bones which are brought to life too much as a figurative representation of any dead whatever, and thereby does justice neither to the words, " these bones are the whole house of Israel," which he paraphrases by tu7to? tov 'IcrparjX ravra, nor to the designation applied to them as DWVJ, though it may fairly be pleaded as a valid excuse so far as D^nn is concerned, that the force of this word has been completely neutralized in the Septuagint, upon which he was commenting, by the rendering tov$ ve/cpov? tovtovs. — Havernick has interpreted the vision in a much more abstract manner, and evaporated it into the general idea of a symbolizing of the creative, life-giving power of God, which can raise even the bones of the dead to life again. His exposition is the following: " There is no express prediction of the resurrection in these words, whether of a general resurrection or of the particular resurrection of Israel; but this is only thought of here, inasmuch as it rests upon the creative activity of God, to which even such a conquest of death as this is possible." 2
KOtl hi' SKSIVQV TCKVTX ZlQXOXH TOV hotOV, &)£ 1CO.VXX OCVTU pCCOlCC fiouXoptSVU).
2 The view expressed by Hofmann (Schriftbeweis, II. 2, pp. 507 sqq.) is a kindred one, namely, that it is not the future resurrection of the dead, or
The calling to life of the thoroughly dried dead bones shown to the prophet in the vision, is a figure or visible representation of that which* the Lord announces to him in vers. 11—14, namely, that He will bring Israel out of its graves, give it life with His breath, and bring it into its own land; and consequently a figure of the raising of Israel to life from its existing state of death. The opening of the graves is also a figure; for those whom the Lord will bring out of their graves are they who say, " Our bones are dried," etc. (ver. 11), and therefore not those who are deceased, nor even the spiritually dead, but those who have lost all hope of life. We are not, however, to understand by this merely mors civilis and vita civilis, as Grotius has done. For Israel was destroyed, not only politically as a nation, but spiritually as a church of the Lord, through the destruction of its two kingdoms and its dispersion among the heathen; and in a very large number of its members it had also been given up to the power of physical death and sunk into the grave. Even then, if we keep out of sight those who were deceased, Israel, as the people of God, was slain (JVin), without any hope of coming to life again, or a resurrection to new life. But the Lord now shows the prophet this resurrection under the figure of the raising to life of the very dry bones that lie scattered all around. This is fulfilled through the restoration of Israel as the people of Jehovah, to which the leading of the people back into the land of Israel essentially belongs. The way was opened and prepared for this fulfilment by the return of a portion of the people from the Babylonian captivity under Zerubbabel and Ezra, which was the resurrection of the deceased Israelites, which is indicated in the vision, and that it does not even set forth to view the unconditioned power of God over death, or an idea which is intended as a pledge of the resurrection of the dead; but that by the revelation made manifest to the prophet in the state of ecstasy, the completeness of that state of death out of which Israel is to be restored is exhibited, and thus the truth is set before his eyes that the word of prophecy has the inherent power to ensure its own fulfilment, even when Israel is in a condition which bears precisely the same resemblance to a nation as the state of death to a human being.
brought to pass by tho Lord, by the rebuilding of the cities of Judah and the temple which had been destroyed, and by the restoration of political order. But all this was nothing more than a pledge of the future and complete restoration of Israel. For although the Lord still raised up prophets for those who had returned and furthered the building of His house, His glory did not enter the newly erected temple, and the people never attained to independence again, — that is to say, not to permanent independence, — but continued in subjection to the imperial power of the heathen. And even if, according to Ezra, very many more of the exiles may have returned to their native land, by whom, for example, Galilee was repopulated and brought into cultivation again, the greater portion of the nation remained dispersed among the heathen. The true restoration of Israel as the people of the Lord commenced with the founding of the new kingdom of God, the " kingdom of heaven," through the appearing of Christ upon the earth. But inasmuch as the Jewish nation as such, or in its entirety, did not acknowledge Jesus Christ as the Messiah foretold by the prophets and sent by God, but rejected its Saviour, there burst afresh upon Jerusalem and the Jewish nation the judgment of dispersion among the heathen; whereas the kingdom of God founded by Christ spread over the earth, through the entrance of believers from among the Gentiles. This judgment upon the Jewish people, which is hardened in unbelief, still continues, and will continue until the time when the full number of the Gentiles has entered into the kingdom of God, and Israel as a people shall also be converted to Christ, acknowledge the crucified One as its Saviour, and bow the knee before Him (Rom. xi. 25, 26). Then will a all Israel" be raised up out of its graves, the graves of its political and spiritual death, and brought back into its own land, which will extend as far as the Israel of God inhabits the earth. Then also will the hour come in which all the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and come forth out of their graves to the resurrection (Dan.
xii. 2; John v. 25-29); when the Lord shall appear in His glory, and descend from heaven with the trump of God (1 Thess. iv. 16), to call all the dead to life, and through the judgment upon all the nations to perfect His kingdom in glory, and bring the righteous into the Canaan of the new earth, into the heavenly Jerusalem, to the imperishable life of everlasting blessedness.
All these several factors in the restoration of Israel, which has been given up to the death of exile on account of its sins, though far removed from one another, so far as the time of their occurrence is concerned, are grouped together as one in the vision of the coming to life of the dead bones of the whole house of Israel. The two features which are kept distinct in the visionary description — namely, (1) the coming together of the dry bones, and their being clothed with sinews, flesh, and skin; and (2) the bringing to life of the bones, which have now the form of corpses, through the divine breath of life — are not to be distinguished in the manner proposed by Hengstenberg, namely, that the first may be taken as referring to the restoration of the civil condition — the external restitutio in integrum; the second, to the giving of new life through the outpouring of the Spirit of God. — Even according to our view, the vision contains a prophecy of the resurrection of the dead, only not in this sense, that the doctrine of the general resurrection of the dead is the premiss, or the design, or the direct meaning of the vision; but that the figurative meaning constitutes the foreground, and the full, literal meaning of the words the background of the prophetic vision, and that the fulfilment advances from the figurative to the literal meaning, — the raising up of the people of Israel out of the civil and spiritual death of exile being completed in the raising up of the dead out of their graves to everlasting life at the last day.
Vers. 15-28. Reunion of Israel as one Nation under the future King David,
This word of God directs the prophet to represent by a sign the reunion of the tribes of Israel, which have been divided into two kingdoms (vers. 15-17), and to explain this sign to the people (vers. 18-21), and predict its sanctification and blessedness under the reign of the future David (vers. 22-28). What is new in this word of God is the express prediction, embodied in a symbolical action, of the reunion of the divided tribes of Israel into one single people of God, which has been already hinted at in the promise of the raising to life of u the whole house of Israel" (ver. 11). This brief indication is here plainly expressed and more fully developed.
Ver. 15. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Ver. 16. And thou, son of man, take to thyself a piece of wood, and write upon it: Of Judah, and the sons of Israel, his associates; and take another piece of wood, and write upon it: Of Joseph, the wood of Ephraim, and the whole house of Israel, his associates; Ver. 17. And put them together, one to the other, into one piece of wood to thee, that they may be united in thy hand. Ver. 18. And when the sons of thy people say to thee, Wilt thou not show us what thou meanest by this? Ver. 19. Say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I will take the wood of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel, his associates, which I put thereon, with the wood oj Judah, and will make them into one stick, that they may be one in my hand. Ver. 20. And the pieces of wood upon which thou hast written shall be in thy hand before their eyes. Ver. 21. And say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I ivill take the sons of Israel out of the nations among whom they ivalk, and ivill gather them from round about, and lead them into their land. Ver. 22. I will make them into one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be king over them all; and it shall not become two nations any more, and they shall not henceforth be divided into two kingdoms any more; Ver. 23. And shall not defile themselves by their idols and their abominations, and by all their transgressions; but I will help them from all their dwelling-places, in which they have sinned, and will cleanse them; so that they shall be my people, and I will be their God. Ver. 24. And my servant David will be king over them, and be a sliepherd for them all; and they will walk in my rights, and keep my statutes and do them. Ver. 25. And they will dwell in the land which I gave to my servant Jacob, in which their fathers dwelt; there will they dwell, and- their children's children for ever; and my servant David vjill be a prince to them for ever. Ver. 26. And I make a covenant of peace with them for ever, an everlasting covenant shall be with them; and I will place them, and multiply them, and put my sanctuary in the midst of them, for ever. Ver. 27. And my dwelling will be over them; I will be their God, and they will be my people. Ver. 28. And the nation shall know that I am Jehovah, who sanctifieth Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for ever. The symbolical action commanded in vers. 16 and 17, which the prophet no doubt performed in all its external reality (cf. vers. 19 and 20), is easily understood, and expresses the thing to be represented in the clearest manner. The writing of the names of the tribes composing the two kingdoms recalls to mind the similar act on the part of Moses (Num. xvii. 17 sqq.). But the act itself is a different one here, and neither the passage referred to nor Ezek. xxi. 15 furnishes any proof that |*y signifies a staff or rod. Ezekiel would undoubtedly have used niSD for a staff. Nor have we even to think of flat boards, but simply of pieces of wood upon which a few words could be written, and which could be held in one hand. The / before the names to be written upon each piece of wood is the sign of the genitive, indicating to whom it belongs, as in the case of the heading to David's psalms (^TJ?). This is evident from the fact that in D11EN YV. the construct state is used instead. The name is to indicate that the piece of wood belongs to Judah or
Ephraim, and represents it. The command to Ezekiel to write upon one piece of wood, not only Judah, but " the sons of Israel, his associates," arose from the circumstance that the kingdom of Judah included, in addition to the tribe of Judah, the greater portion of Benjamin and Simeon, the tribe of Levi and those pious Israelites who emigrated at different times from the kingdom of the ten tribes into that of Judah, who either were or became associates of Judah (2 Chron. xi. 12 sqq., xv. 9, xxx. 11, 18, xxxi. 1). In the writing upon the second piece of wood, EH?^ TV. is an explanatory apposition to *|Di v, and an accusative governed by 3TO. But the command is not to be understood as signifying that Ezekiel was to write the words DHBK yv upon the piece of wood; all that he was to write was, "Joseph and the whole house of Israel, his associates." The name of Joseph is chosen, in all probability, not as the more honourable name, as Hiivernick supposes, but because the house of Joseph, consisting of the two powerful tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, formed the trunk of the kingdom of the ten tribes (Kliefoth). The " whole house of Israel, his associates," are the rest of the tribes belonging to that kingdom. The two pieces of wood, with these inscriptions upon them, Ezekiel is to put together, and hold in his hand bound together in one. *J? rfr&rnDj what these (two pieces of wood) are to thee, is equivalent to, what thou meanest to indicate by them. For the rest, compare ch. xxiv. 19. In the word of God explaining the action (ver. 19), the wood of Joseph is not the piece of wood with Joseph's name written upon it, but the kingdom represented by this piece of wood which was in Ephraim's hand, inasmuch as the hegemony was with the tribe of Ephraim. Instead of the wood, therefore, the tribes (not staffs) of Israel, i.e. the Israelites who constituted these tribes, are mentioned as his associates. God will put these upon the wood of Joseph (^V), i.e. will join them together, and then place them with the wood of Judah, i.e. the kingdom of Judah, and unite them into one wood (or nation).
TJ*"1) YV"n^y the construction of which has been misunderstood by Hitzig, is neither in apposition to Vjy, nor governed by WU: " and will put them thereupon, upon the wood of Judah" (Hitzig and Kliefoth), or, " I add them to it, (namely) with the wood of Judah" (De Wette); but it is dependent upon np?, u I take the wood of Joseph... and the tribes of Israel, his associates, which I put thereon, along with the wood of Judah, and make them into one wood." The construction is rendered obscure simply by the fact that the relative clause, " which I put thereon," is attached to the principal clause 'til n\p SJK by Vav consec. In *T3, " they shall be one in my hand" there is probably an antithesis to E^QK T3, those who have come into Ephraim's hand, the tribes severed by Ephraim from the kingdom of God, will God once more bring together with Judah, and hold in His hand as an undivided nation. — In ver. 20 the description of the sign is completed by the additional statement, that the pieces of wood on which the prophet has written are to be in his hand before their eyes, and consequently that the prophet is to perform the act in such a way that his countrymen may see it; from which it follows that he performed it in its outward reality. The fulfilment of the instructions is not specially mentioned, as being self-evident; but in vers. 21-28 the further explanation of the symbolical action is given at once; and the interpretation goes beyond the symbol, inasmuch as it not only describes the manner in which God will effect the union of the divided tribes, but also what He will do for the preservation of the unity of the reunited people, and for the promotion of their blessedness. This explanation is arranged in two strophes through the repetition of the concluding thought: u they will be my people," etc., in vers. 23 and 27. Each of these strophes contains a twofold promise. The first (vers. 21-23) promises (a) the gathering of the Israelites out of their dispersion, their restoration to their own land, and their union as one nation under the rule of David (vers. 21, 22); (b) their purification from all sins, and sanctification as the true people of the Lord (ver. 23). The second strophe (vers. 24-27) promises (a) their undisturbed eternal abode in the land, under David their prince (ver. 25); (6) the blessedness conferred upon them through the conclusion of an everlasting covenant of peace (vers. 26 and 27). This second promise, therefore, constitutes the completion of the first, securing to the nation of Israel its restoration and sanctification for all time. The whole promise, however, is merely a repetition of that contained in ch. xxxiv. 11-31 and xxxvi. 22-30. — The three factors — the gathering out of the nations, restoration to the land of Israel, and reunion as one people — form the first act of divine grace. The union of the Israelites, when brought back to their land, is accomplished by God giving them in David a king who will so rule the reunited people that they will not be divided any more into two peoples and two kingdoms. The Chetib HW is not to be altered into the plural W, as in the Keri; but '•in is to be supplied in thought, from the preceding clause, as the subject to the verb. The division of the nation into two kingdoms had its roots, no doubt, in the ancient jealousy existing between the two tribes Ephraim and Judah; but it was primarily brought to pass through the falling awray of Solomon from the Lord. Consequently it could only be completely and for ever terminated through the righteous government of the second David, and the purification of the people from their sins. This is the way in which ver. 23 is attached to ver. 22. For ver. 23a compare ch. xiv. 11 and xxxvi. 25. Different interpretations have been given of the words, "I help them from all their dwelling-places, in which they have sinned." They recall to mind ch. xxxvi. 29, " I help them from all their uncleannesses." As \0 J^'in signifies, in that case, u to preserve therefrom," so in the present instance the thought can only be, " God will preserve them from all the dwelling-places in which they have sinned." Hengstenberg is of opinion that the redemption from the dwelling-places does not take place locally, but spiritually, through the cleansing away of all traces of sin, first from the hearts, and then, in consequence, from all around. In this way is the land changed, through the power of the Lord, into another land, from a sinful to a holy one; just as before it had been changed from a holy to a sinful one through the guilt of the people. But if this were the only thought which the words contained, Ezekiel would certainly have placed the DniK miDI before 'U1 W^im. As the words read, the deliverance of the people from their sinful dwelling-places is to precede their purification, to prepare the way for it and bring it to pass, and not to follow after it. The dwelling-places, at or in which they have sinned, cannot be the settlements in foreign lands, as Hitzig supposes, but only the dwelling-places in Canaan, to which the Lord would bring them after gathering them from their dispersion. J?Pn does not signify, "leading out from these dwelling-places," which is the explanation given by Kliefoth, who consequently thinks that we must understand the words as denoting the leading over of Israel from the present Canaan, or the Canaan of this life, to which its sins adhere, to the glorified, new, and eternal Canaan. This view is utterly irreconcilable both with the words themselves and also with the context. Even if T^n meant to lead out, it would not be allowable to transform the " leading out" from the sinful Canaan into a " leading in" to the glorified and heavenly Canaan. Moreover, the further development of this promise in ver. 25 also shows that it is not in the glorified, eternal Canaan that Israel is to dwell, but in the earthly Canaan in which its fathers dwelt. It is obvious from this, that in all the promise here given there is no allusion to a transformation and glorification of Canaan itself. The helping or saving from all dwelling-places in which they have sinned would rather consist in the fact, therefore, that God would remove from their dwelling-places everything that could offer them an inducement to sin. For although sin has its seat, not in the things without us, but in the heart, the external circumstances of a man do offer various inducements to sin.
Before the captivity, Canaan offered such an inducement to the Israelites through the idolatry and moral corruption of the Canaan ites who were left in the land. And with reference to this the Lord promises that in future, when His people are brought back to Canaan, He will preserve them from the sinful influence of their dwelling-places. But this preservation will only be effected with complete success when God purifies Israel itself, and, by means of its renovation, eradicates all sinful desire from the heart (cf. ch. xxxvi. 26, 27). In this way WHO? is appended in the most fitting way to '131 "•riycnm. — Through the removal of all sinful influences from around them, and the purifying of the heart, Israel will then become in truth the people of God, and Jehovah the God of Israel (ver. 23). — Israel, when thus renewed, will walk in the rights of the Lord and fulfil His commandments, under the protection of its one shepherd David, i.e. of the Messiah (ver. 24, cf. ch. xxxvi. 27, and xxxiv. 23); and its children and children's children will dwell for ever in its own land, David being its prince for ever (ver. 25, cf. ch. xxxvi. 28 and xxxiv. 24). What is new in this promise, which is repeated from ch. xxxiv. and xxxvi., is contained in D^w, which is to be taken in the strict sense of the word. Neither the dwelling of Israel in Canaan, nor the government of the David -Messiah, will ever have an end. DPiyp is therefore repeated in ver. 26 in the promise of the covenant which the Lord will make with His people. The thought itself has already been expressed in ch. xxxiv. 25, and DW nn3 is to be understood, both here and there, as comprehending all the saving good which the Lord will bestow upon His sanctified people. There are only two factors of this salvation mentioned here in vers. 2Qb and 27, namely, the multiplication of the people, as the earthly side of the divine blessing, and the establishing of His eternal sanctuary in the midst of them as the spiritual side. These two points refer back to the former acts of God, and hold up to view the certain and full realization in the future of what has hitherto been neither per- fectly nor permanently accomplished on account of the sins of the people, ^nn^, in ver. 26, is not to be taken in connection with EniK NVinni So as to form one idea in the sense of dabo eos multiplicatos (Venema and Hengstenberg), for we have no analogies of such a mode of combination; but WW, I make, or place them, is to be taken by itself, and completed from the context, " I make them into a nation, and I multiply them (cf. ch. xxxvi. 10, 11, 37). Ezekiel has here Lev. xxvi. 9 and 11 in his mind, as we may see from the fact that the words, u I give my sanctuary in the midst of them for ever," are obviously formed after Lev. xxvi. 11, " I give my dwelling in the midst of them; " in such a manner, however, that by the substitution of ^i?*? for *?3BfD, and the addition of B^V?, the promise is both deepened and strengthened. In the change of ^IPB into WpD, he may indeed have had the words of Ex. xxv. 8 floating before his mind, " they shall make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them; " nevertheless he deliberately selected the expression u my sanctuary," to indicate that the Lord would dwell in the midst of Israel as the Holy One, and the Sanctifier of His people. Moreover, the words are not, u my dwelling will be in the midst of them, or among them" (Drrirm), but b\}yy, over them. This expression is transferred from the site of the temple, towering above the city (Ps. lxviii. 30), to the dwelling of God among His people, to give prominence to the protective power and saving grace of the God who rules in Israel (cf. Hengstenberg on Ps. lxviii. 30). The sanctuary which Jehovah will give in Israel for ever, i.e. will found and cause to endure, that He may dwell in the midst of it to shelter and bless, is the temple, but not the temple built by Zerubbabel. As an objection to this Jewish interpretation, Jerome has justly said: " but how could it be said to stand ' for ever,7 when that temple which was built in the time of Zerubbabel, and afterwards restored by many others, wTas consumed by Roman fire? All these things are to be taken as referring to the church in the time of the Saviour, when His tabernacle was placed in the church." There is no reference whatever here to the rebuilding of the temple by Zerubbabel; not because that temple did not stand for ever and was destroyed by the Romans, but chiefly because God did not make it His abode, or fill this temple with His gracious presence (Shechinah). The sanctuary which God will place for ever among His people is the sanctuary seen by Ezekiel in ch. xl. sqq.; and this is merely a figurative representation of the " dwelling of God in the midst of His people through His Son and Holy Spirit" (cf. Vitringa, Observv. I. p. 161), which began to be realized in the incarnation of the Logos, who is set forth in John i. 14 as the true 15^0, in the words icrfcrjvaxrev ev tjiuv, and is continued in the spiritual dwelling of God in the heart of believers (1 Cor. iii. 16, vi. 19), and will be completed at the second coining of our Lord in the " tabernacle (o-fcrjvrj) of God with men" of the new Jerusalem, of which the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple, since Israel will then first have become in truth the people of God, and Jehovah (God with them) their God (Rev. xxi: 3, 22). — The promise concludes in ver. 28 with an allusion to the impression which these acts of God in Israel will make upon the heathen (cf. ch. xxxvi. 36). From the fact that Jehovah erects His sanctuary in the midst of Israel for ever, they will learn that it is He who sanctifieth Israel. 8^5, to sanctify, means, u to remove from all connection either with sin or with its consequences. Here the reference is to the latter, because these alone strike the eyes of the heathen; but the former is presupposed as the necessary foundation" (Hengstenberg). The words rest upon the promises of the Pentateuch, where God describes Himself as He who will and does sanctify Israel (compare Ex. xxxi. 13; Lev. xxii. 31—33). This promise, which has hitherto been only imperfectly fulfilled on account of Israel's guilt, will be perfectly realized in the future, when Israel will walk in the ways of the Lord, renewed by the Spirit of God.
Thus does this prophecy of Ezekiel span the whole future of the people of God even to eternity. But the promise in which it culminates, namely, that the Lord will erect His sanctuary in the midst of His restored people, and there take up His abode above them for ever (ch. xxxvii. 26 sqq.), is of importance as helping to decide the question, how we are to understand the fulfilment of the restoration to Canaan into the land given to the fathers, which is promised to all Israel; whether, in a literal manner, by the restoration of the Israelites to Palestine; or spiritually, by the gathering together of the Israelites converted to the Lord their God and Saviour, and their introduction into the kingdom of God founded by Christ, in which case Canaan, as the site of the Old Testament kingdom of God, would be a symbolical or typical designation of the earthly soil of the heavenly kingdom, which has appeared in the Christian church. — These two different views have stood opposed to one another from time immemorial, inasmuch as the Jews expect from the Messiah, for whose advent they still hope, not only their restoration to Palestine, but the erection of the kingdom of David and the rebuilding of the temple upon Mount Zion, together with the sacrificial worship of the Levitical law; whereas in the Christian church, on the ground of the New Testament doctrine, that the old covenant has been abolished along with the Levitical temple-worship through the perfect fulfilment of the law by Christ and the perpetual efficacy of His atoning sacrifice, the view has prevailed that, with the abolition of the Old Testament form of the kingdom of God, even Palestine has ceased to be the chosen land of the revelation of the saving grace of God, and under the new covenant Canaan extends as far as the Israel of the new covenant, the church of Jesus Christ, is spread abroad over the earth, and that Zion or Jerusalem is to be sought wherever Christendom worships God in spirit and in truth, wherever Christ is with His people, and dwells in the hearts of believers through the Holy Spirit. It was by J. A. Bengel and C. F. Oetinger that the so-called " realistic " interpretation of the Messianic prophecies of the
Old Testament — according to which, after the future conversion to Christ of the Jewish people who are hardened still, the establishment of the kingdom of God in Palestine and its capital Jerusalem is to be expected — has been revived and made into one of the leading articles of Christian hope. By means of this " realistic " exposition of the prophetic word the chiliastic dogma of the establishment of a kingdom of glory before the last judgment and the end of the world is then deduced from the twentieth chapter of the Apocalypse; and many of the theologians of our day regard this as the certain resultant of a deeper study of the Scriptures. In the more precise definition of the dogma itself, the several supporters diverge very widely from one another; but they all agree in this, that they base the doctrine chiefly upon the prophetic announcement of the eventual conversion and glorification of all Israel. — As Ezekiel then stands out among all the prophets as the one who gives the most elaborate prediction of the restoration of Israel under the government of the Messiah, and he not only draws in ch. xl.-xlviii. a detailed picture of the new form of the kingdom of God, but also in ch. xxxviii. and xxxix., in the prophecy concerning Gog and Magog, foretells an attack on the part of the heathen world upon the restored kingdom of God, which appears, according to Rev. xx. 7-9, to constitute the close of the thousand years' reign; we must look somewhat more closely at this view, and by examining the arguments pro and con, endeavour to decide the question as to the fulfilment of the Old Testament prophecies concerning the future of Israel. In doing this, however, we shall fix our attention exclusively upon the exegetical arguments adduced in support of the chiliastic view by its latest supporters.1
The prophetic announcement, that the Lord will one day gather together again the people of Israel, which has been thrust out among the heathen for its unfaithfulness, will bring it back into the land given to the fathers, and there bless and greatly multiply it, has its roots in the promises of the law. If the stiff-necked transgressors of the commandments of God — these are the words of Lev. xxvi. 40-45 — bear the punishment of their iniquity in the land of their enemies, and confess their sins, and their uncircumcised heart is humbled, then will the Lord remember His covenant with the patriarchs, and not cast them off even in the land of their enemies, to destroy them, and to break His covenant with them; but will remember the covenant which He made with their ancestors, when He brought them out of Egypt before the eyes of the nations to be their God. He will, as this is more precisely defined in Deut. xxx. 3 sqq., gather them together again out of the heathen nations, lead them back into the land which their fathers possessed, and multiply Israel more than its fathers. On the ground of this promise, of which Moses gives a still further pledge to the people in his dying song (Deut. xxxii. 36—43), all the prophets announce the restoration and ultimate glorification of Israel. This song, which closes with the promise, " Rejoice, ye nations, over His people; for He will avenge the blood of His servants, and repay vengeance to His adversaries, and expiate His land, His people," continues to resound — to use the words of Hofmann (Schriftbeiveis, II. 2, pp. 89, 90) — " through all the Old
Testament prophecy. Not only when Obadiah (ver. 17) and Joel (ch. iii. 5) promise good to their nation do they call Mount Zion and the city of Jerusalem the place where there is protection from the judgment upon the nations of the world; but Micah also, who foretells the destruction of the temple and
Cyclopaedia, and here and there in his commentary on the Old Testament; C. E. Luthardt, The Doctrine of the Last Things in Treatises and Expositions of Scripture (1851); and Dr. Volck, in the Dorpater Zeitschrift fiir Theologie und Kirche, IX. pp. 142 sqq.; and others.
the carrying away of his people to Babylon, beholds Mount Zion exalted at last above all the seats of worldly power, and his people brought back to the land of their fathers (ch. iv. 1, vii. 14). The same Isaiah, who was sent to harden his people with the word of his prophecy, is nevertheless certain that at last a holy nation will dwell in Jerusalem, a remnant of Israel (Isa. iv. 3, x. 21); and the holy mountain of Jehovah, to which His scattered people return from all the ends of the world, is that abode of peace where even wild beasts do no more harm under the rule of the second David (Isa. xi. 9, 11). After all the calamities which it was the mournful lot of Jeremiah to foretell and also to witness, Jehovah showed this prophet the days when He would restore His people, and bring them back to the land which He gave to their fathers (Jer. xxx. 3).... And the same promise is adhered to even after the return. In every way is the assurance given by Zechariah, that Judah shall be God's holy possession in God's holy land."1 This re-
storation of Israel Ezekiel describes, in harmony with Jer. xxxi.,
1 Compare with this the words of Auberlen (der Prophet Daniel, p. 399, as the substance of these prophetic descriptions: " Israel having been
brought back to its own land, will be the people of God in a much higher and deeper sense than before; inasmuch as sin will be averted, the knowledge of God will fill the land, and the Lord will dwell again in the midst of His people at Jerusalem. A new period of revelation is thus commenced, the Spirit of God is richly poured out, and with this a plenitude of such gifts of grace as were possessed in a typical manner by the apostolic church. And this rich spiritual life has also its perfect external manifestation both in a priestly and a regal form. The priesthood of Israel was more especially seen by Ezekiel, the son of a priest, in his mysterious vision in ch. xl.-xlviii.; the monarchy by Daniel, the statesman; while
though in a much more detailed picture, in the following way:
— u The condition of things in the future will differ from that in the past, simply in the fact that Israel will then have a heart converted to fidelity and obedience by the Spirit of God (ch. xi. 19, xxxvi. 27), and will live in good peace and prosperity under the shelter of its God, who is known and acknowledged by all the world (ch. xxxvi. 23). The land to which it is restored, a land most decidedly represented by Ezekiel as the same as that in which its fathers lived (ch. xxxvii. 25), appears throughout merely as a happy earthly dwelling-place, and the promise of its possession as an assurance given to a nation continuing to propagate itself in peace" (Hofmann, p. 576).
This manner of depicting the condition of the Israel restored and glorified by the Messiah, as a peaceful settlement and a happy life in the land of the fathers, a life rich in earthly possessions, is not confined, however, to Jeremiah and Ezekiel, but stands out more or less conspicuously in the Messianic pictures of all the prophets. What follows, then, from this in
Jeremiah, for example, unites the two (ch. xxxiii. 17-22). What took place only in an outward way, i.e. in the letter, during the Old Testament times, and withdrew, on the other hand, into the inward and hidden spiritlife during the time of the Christian church, will then manifest itself outwardly also, and assume an external though pneumatic form. In the Old Testament the whole of the national life of Israel in its several forms of manifestation, domestic and political life, labour and art, literature and culture, was regulated by religion, though only at first in an outward and legal way. The church, on the other hand, has, above all, to urge a renewal of the heart, and must give freedom to the outward forms which life assumes, enjoining upon the conscience of individual men, in these also to glorify Christ. In the thousand years' reign all these departments of life will be truly Christianized, and that from within. Looked at in this light, there will be nothing left to give offence, if we bear in mind that the ceremonial law of Moses corresponds to the priesthood of Israel, and the civil law to the monarchy. The Gentile church has only been able to adopt the moral law, however certainly it has been directed merely to the inwardly working means of the word, or of the prophetic office. But when once the priesthood and the kingly office have been restored, then, without doing violence to the Epistle to the Hebrews, the ceremonial and civil law of Moses will unfold its spiritual depths in the worship and constitution of the thousand years1 reign.1'
relation to the mode in which these prophecies are to be fulfilled 1 Is it that the form assumed by the life of the people of Israel when restored will be only a heightened repetition of the conditions of its former life in Palestine, undisturbed by sin? By no means. On the contrary, it follows from this that the prophets have depicted the glorious restoration of Israel by the Messiah by means of figures borrowed from the past and present of the national life of Israel, and therefore that their picture is not to be taken literally, but symbolically or typically, and that we are not to expect it to be literally fulfilled.
We are forced to this conclusion by the fact that, through the coming of Christ, and the kingdom of heaven which began with Him, the idea of the people of God has been so expanded, that henceforth not the lineal descendants of Abraham, or the Jewish nation merely, but the church of confessors of Jesus Christ, gathered together out of Israel and the Gentiles, has become the people of God, and the economy of the Old Testament has ceased to constitute the divinely appointed form of the church of God. If, therefore, the Jewish people, who have rejected the Saviour, who appeared in Jesus Christ, and have hardened themselves against the grace and truth revealed in Him, are not cast off for ever, but, according to the promises of the Old Testament and the teaching of the Apostle Paul (Rom. xi.), will eventually repent, and as a people turn to the crucified One, and then also realize the fulfilment of the promises of God; there is still lacking, with the typical character of the prophetic announcement, any clear and unambiguous biblical evidence that all Israel, whose salvation is to be looked for in the future, will be brought back to Palestine, when eventually converted to Christ the crucified One, and continue there as a people separated from the rest of Christendom, and form the earthly centre of the church of the Lord gathered out of all nations and tongues. For, however well founded the remark of Hofmann (ut sup. p. 88) may be, that " holy people and holy land are demanded by one another;" this proves nothing more than that the holy people, gathered out of all the families of the earth through the believing reception of the gospel, will also have a holy land for its dwelling-place; in other words, that, with the spread of the church of the Lord over all the quarters of the globe, the earth will become holy land or Canaan, so far as it is inhabited by the followers of Christ. The Apostle Paul teaches this in the same Epistle in which he foretells to Israel, hardened in unbelief, its eventual restoration and blessedness; when he explains in Rom. iv. 9—13 that to Abraham or his seed the promise that he was to be the heir of the world was not fulfilled through the law, but through the righteousness of the faith, which Abraham had when still uncircumcised, that he might become a father of all those who believe, though they be not circumcised, and a father of the circumcision, not merely of those who are of the circumcision, but of those also who walk in the footsteps of his faith. As the apostle, when developing this thought, interprets the promise given to the patriarch in Gpn. xii. 7 and xv. 18: u to thy seed will I give this land " (i.e. the land of Canaan), by tcXypovo/jLuv k6g[jlov (inheriting the world), he regards Canaan as a type of the world or of the earth, which would be occupied by the children born of faith to the patriarch.
This typical interpretation of the promise, given in the Old Testament to the seed of Abraham, of the everlasting possession of the land of Canaan, which is thus taught by the Apostle Paul, and has been adopted by the church on his authority, corresponds also to the spirit and meaning of the Old Testament word of God. This is evident from Gen. xvii., where the Lord God, when instituting the covenant of circumcision, gives not to Abraham only, but expressly to Sarah also, the promise to make them into peoples (&!^P), that kings of nations (D'Tpy ^po) shall come from them through the son, whom they are to receive (vers* 6 and 16), and at the same time promises to give to the seed of Abraham, thus greatly to be multiplied, the land of his pilgrimage, the whole land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession (ver. 8). This promise the Lord, as the " almighty God," has not carried into effect by making Abraham and Sarah into nations through the lineal posterity of Isaac, but only through the spiritual seed of Abraham, believers out of all nations, who have become, and still will become, children of Abraham in Christ. It was only through these that Abraham became the father of a multitude of nations (fton 2tp Djfa, ver. 5). For although two peoples sprang from Isaac, the Israelites through Jacob, and the Edomites through Esau, and Abraham also became the ancestor of several tribes through Ishmael and the sons of Keturah, the divine promise in question refers to the people of Israel alone, because Esau was separated from the seed of the promise by God Himself, and the other sons of Abraham were excluded by the fact that they were not born of Sarah. The twelve tribes, however, formed but one people; and although Ezekiel calls them two peoples (ch. xxxv. 10 and xxxvii. 22), having in view their division into two kingdoms, they are never designated or described in the Old or New Testament as D^a fton. To this one people God did indeed give the land of Canaan for a possession, according to the boundaries described in Num. xxxiv., so that it dwelt therein until it was driven out and scattered among the heathen for its persistent unfaithfulness. But inasmuch as that portion of the promise which referred to the multiplication of the seed of Abraham into peoples was only to receive its complete fulfilment in Christ, according to the counsel and will of God, through the grafting of the believing Gentile nations into the family of Abraham, and has so received it, we are not at liberty to restrict the other portion of this promise, relating to the possession of the land of Canaan, to the lineal posterity of the patriarch, or the people of Israel by lineal descent, but must assume that in the promise of the land to be given to the seed of Abraham God even then spoke of Canaan as a type of the land which was to be possessed by the posterity of Abraham multiplied into nations.
This typical phraseology runs through all the prophetical writings of the Old Testament, and that both with regard to the promised seed, which Abraham received through Isaac (Gen. xxi. 12) in the people of Israel, and also with reference to the land promised to this seed for an inheritance, although, while the old covenant established at Sinai lasted, Israel according to the flesh was the people of God, and the earthly Canaan between the Euphrates and the river of Egypt was the dwelling-place of this people. For inasmuch as Abraham received the promise at the very time of his call, that in his seed all the families of the earth should be blessed, and the germs of the universal destination of the people and kingdom of God were deposited, according to Gen. xvii., in the subsequent patriarchal promises, the prophets continued to employ the names of Israel and Canaan more and more in their Messianic prophecies as symbolical terms for the two ideas of the people and kingdom of God. And from the time when the fortress of Jerusalem upon Mount Zion was exalted by David into the capital of his kingdom and the seat of his government over Israel, and was also made the site of the dwelling of Jehovah in the midst of His people, by the removal of the ark of the covenant to Zion, and the building of the temple which was planned by David, though only carried into execution by Solomon his son, they employed Zion and Jerusalem in the same typical manner as the seat and centre of the kingdom of God; so that, in the Messianic psalms and the writings of the prophets, Zion or Jerusalem is generally mentioned as the place from which the king (David-Messiah), anointed by Jehovah as prince over His people, extends His dominion over all the earth, and whither the nations pour to hear the law of the Lord, and to be instructed as to His ways and their walking in His paths.
Consequently neither the prominence expressly given to the land in the promises contained in Lev. xxvi. 42 and Deut. xxxii. 43, upon which such stress is laid by Auberlen (die mcssianische Weissagungen, pp. 827 and 833), nor the fact that Mount Zion or the city of Jerusalem is named as the place of judgment upon the world of nations and the completion of the kingdom of God, to which both Hofmann and Auberlen appeal in the passages already quoted, furnishes any valid evidence that the Jewish people, on its eventual conversion to Christ, will be brought back to Palestine, and that the Lord, at His second coming, will establish the millennial kingdom in the earthly Jerusalem, and take up His abode on the material Mount Zion, in a temple built by human hands.
Even the supporters of the literal interpretation of the Messianic prophecies cannot deny the symbolico-typical character of the Old Testament revelation. Thus Auberlen, for example, observes (die mess. Weiss* p. 821) that, u in their typical character, the sacrifices furnish us with an example of the true signification of all the institutions of the Old Testament kingdom of God, while the latter exhibit to us in external symbol and t}7pe the truly holy people and the Messianic kingdom in its perfection, just as the former set forth the sacrifice of the Messiah." But among these institutions the Israelitish sanctuary (tabernacle or temple) undoubtedly occupied a leading place as a symbolico-typical embodiment of the kingdom of God established in Israel, as is now acknowledged by nearly all the expositors of Scripture who have any belief in revelation. It is not merely the institutions of the old covenant, however, which have a symbolico-typical signification, but this is also the case with the history of the covenant nation of the Old Testament, and the soil in which this history developed itself. This is so obvious, that Auberlen himself (ut sup. p. 827) has said that " it is quite a common thing with the prophets to represent the approaching dispersion and enslaving of Israel among the heathen as a renewal of their condition in Egypt, and the eventual restoration of both the people and kingdom as a new exodus from Egypt and entrance into Canaan (Hos. ii. 1, 2 and 16, 17, ix. 3 and 6, xi. 5, 11; Mic. ii. 12, 13, vii. 15, 16; Isa. x. 24, 26, xi. 11; Jer. xvi. 14, 15, and other passages)." And even Hofmann, who sets aside this typical phraseology of the prophets in Isa. xi. 11—15, where the restoration of Israel from its dispersion throughout all the world is depicted as a repetition of its deliverance from Egypt through the miraculous division of the Red Sea, with the simple remark, u that the names of the peoples mentioned in the 14th as well as in the 11th verse, and the obstacles described in the 15th verse, merely serve to elaborate the thought" (Schriftbeweis, II. 2, p. 548), cannot help admitting (at p. 561) u that in Isa. xxxiv. 5 BilK is not to be understood as a special prophecy against the Edomitish people, but as a symbolical designation of the world of mankind in its enmity against God." But if Edom is a type of the human race in its hostility to God in this threatening of judgment, " the ransomed of Jehovah" mentioned in the corresponding announcement of salvation in Isa. xxxv., who are to " return to Zion with songs, and everlasting joy upon their heads," cannot be the rescued remnant of the Jewish people, or the Israel of the twelve tribes who will ultimately attain to blessedness, nor can the Zion to which they return be the capital of Palestine. If Edom in this eschatological prophecy denotes the world in its enmity against God, the ransomed of Jehovah who return to Zion are the people of God gathered from both Gentiles and Jews, who enter into the blessedness of the heavenly Jerusalem. By adopting this view of Edom, Hofmann has admitted the typical use of the ideas, both of the people of Jehovah (Israel) and of Zion, by the prophets, and has thereby withdrawn all firm foundation from his explanation of similar Messianic prophecies when the Jewish nation is concerned. The same rule which applies to Edom and Zion in Isa. xxxiv. and xxxv. must also be applicable in Isa. xl.-lxvi. The prophecy concerning Edom in Isa. xxxv. has its side-piece in Isa. lxiii. 1-6; and, as Delitzsch has said, the announcement of the return of the ransomed of Jehovah to Zion in ch. xxxvi., " as a whole and in every particular, both in thought and language, is a prelude of this book of consolation for the exiles (i.e. the one which follows in Isa. xl.-lxvi)." Ezekiel uses Edom in the same way, in the prediction of the everlasting devastation of Edom and the restoration of the devastated land of Israel, to be a lasting blessing for its inhabitants. As Edom in this case also represents the world in its hostility to God (see the comm. on ch. xxxv. 1-xxxvi. 15), the land of Israel also is not Palestine, but the kingdom of the Messiah, the boundaries of which extend from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the world (Ps. Ixxii. 8 and Zech. ix. 10). It is true that in the case of our prophet there is no express mention made of the spread of the kingdom of God over the lands> inasmuch as he is watchman over the house of Israel, and therefore, for the most part, principally speaks of the restoration of Israel; but it is also obvious that this prophetic truth was not unknown to him, from the fact that, according to ch. xlvii. 22, 23, in the fresh division of the land among the tribes by lot, the foreigners as well as the natives are to be reckoned among the children of Israel, and to receive their portion of the land as well, which plainly abolishes the difference in lineal descent existing under the old covenant. Still more clearly does he announce the reception of the heathen nations into the kin<Klom of God in ch. xvi. 53 sqq., where he predicts the eventual turning of the captivity, not of Jerusalem only, but also of Samaria and Sodom, as the goal of the ways of God with His people. If, therefore, in His pictures of the restoration and glorification of the kingdom of God, he speaks of the land of Israel alone, the reason for this mode of description is probably also to be sought in the fact that he goes back to the fundamental prophecies of the Pentateuch more than other prophets do; and as, on the one hand, he unfolds the fulfilment of the threats in Lev. xxvi. and Deut. xxviii.-xxxii. in his threatenings of judgments, so, on the other hand, does he display the fulfilment of the promises of the law in his predictions of salvation. If we bear this in mind, we must not take his prophecy of the very numerous multiplication of Israel and of the eternal possession of Canaan and its blessings in any other sense than in that of the divine promise in Gen. xvii.; that is to say, we must not restrict the numerous multiplication of Israel to the literal multiplication of the remnant of the twelve tribes, but must also understand thereby the multiplication of the seed of Abraham into peoples in the manner explained above, and interpret in the same way the restoration of Israel to the land promised to the fathers.