# commentaries

text:
<p>Therefore, son of man, prophesy and tell Gog, Thus says the Lord Yahweh: In that day when My people Israel dwells securely, shall you not know it?- The idea seems to be as in GNB and LXX: "Wilt thou not arise in that day, when my people Israel are dwelling securely:::?". Perhaps the sense is that Gog realizes that the people are "dwelling securely" as the reestablished kingdom of God, and consciously wishes to attack an entity clearly under God’s protection and blessing.</p>


text:
<h4>You shall come from your place out of the uttermost parts of the north, you, and many peoples with you, all of them riding on horses- See on :4. The "horses" suggest the Scythian hordes of Ezekiel’s day which surrounded Israel, who could potentially have fulfilled this prophecy. "Uttermost parts of the north" is not the best translation; if read literally it would refer not to Moscow, as wrongly claimed, but to the very northernmost parts of the Arctic. But such a literal reading is unwarranted; the original clearly means ’from the very northern border / side’, and the side or boundary in view is that of eretz Israel. And already the jihadist factions are massing on the northern borders of eretz Israel.</h4><h4>A great company and a mighty army- Human armies are often described in Angelic language because there are Angels controlling them. This is also the case here with he Gog invasion, which is fitting seeing that Angels were behind the initial Assyrian invasion which is the prototype of that of Gog. They are described as "a great company, a mighty army"- reflecting the mighty Heavenly host. The language here is a parody of <a href='B:300 31:8'>Jer 31:8</a>, which speaks of the "great company" (s:w:) of Israel coming from the north and returning to Zion. And it is a revived Israel who in Ezekiel 37 stand up as a "mighty army". The invaders are therefore presented as a fake, imitation Israel. This image is exactly that of their jihadist enemies, claiming to be the true seed of Abraham, who are massed on the northern borders of the eretz.</h4>


text:
<p>And you shall come up against My people Israel, as a cloud to cover the land. It shall happen in the latter days that I will bring you against My land, that the nations may know Me, when I shall be sanctified in you, Gog, before their eyes- "I will bring you::." means that Gog’s desire to ascend and go [s:w. "bring"] against the land in :11 is confirmed by God; see on :11. The ’coming up’ or ascending is because God makes them come up (<a href='B:330 39:2'>Eze 39:2</a> s:w:). At every step, Gog’s freewill is allowed but is confirmed. God works through human sin; the whole intention of Gog’s latter day destruction is to bring the remaining nations to "know Yahweh", to enter relationship with Him.</p>


text:
<p>Thus says the Lord Yahweh: Are you he of whom I spoke in old time by My servants the prophets of Israel, who prophesied in those days for many years that I would bring you against them?- This invader was repeatedly spoken of by the prophets- it can’t refer therefore to Russia but to Assyria / Babylon, of whom the prophets repeatedly speak. And yet the invasion is clearly in the last days. Assyria, therefore, must be revived in some way. The nations listed in Ezekiel 38 are never spoken of in the prophets as invading Israel; it is usually Babylon and Assyria who are in view. And so we can detect here another case of prophetic transference. The prophecies about Babylon and Assyria are to be transferred to this coalition of the last days; which is why, as pointed out on :2, this invasion is full of allusion to the Assyrians.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen in that day, when Gog shall come against the land of Israel, says the Lord Yahweh, that My wrath shall come up into My nostrils- This Divine wrath would lead to a literal shaking in Israel (:19). The metaphor is used repeatedly of God’s anger with Israel resulting in Him taking them out of their land (e:g. <a href='B:50 29:28'>Deu 29:28</a>). That wrath is now transferred to their abusers. Even in this we see God’s love for His people. A more human God would have felt that all His faithless people had suffered was justified; but His wrath with those who so abused them is of itself a testament to the depth of His love for His sinful people.</p>


text:
<p>For in My anger and in the fire of My wrath have I spoken, Surely in that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel- This could be the same earthquake as spoken of in Ezekiel 37 which causes the resurrection and revival of Israel. The chronological conflicts (for at this stage Israel are apparently already revived and living safely in their land) need not concern us once we realize that we are reading apocalyptic here. We are not being necessarily given a chronological sequence of events, but rather snapshots from various points in the overall saga. This especially needs to be appreciated in understanding the book of Revelation.</p>


text:
<p>So that the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the animals of the field and all creeping things which creep on the earth, and all the men who are on the surface of the earth, shall shake at My presence. The mountains shall be thrown down, the steep places shall fall and every wall shall fall to the ground- The impression given is that this is more than a theophany, with God symbolically and metaphorically ’coming down’; but the literal coming down of God to earth, or the land promised to Abraham, resulting in the fulfilment of the final parts of Revelation, where God Himself dwells with men. Absolutely every strata of creation will be aware of this presence. It is the language of <a href='B:410 1:5'>Nah 1:5</a> about the destruction of Assyria, and also of the theophany at Sinai (<a href='B:230 68:8'>Psa 68:8</a>). For the destruction of Israel’s enemies is to be associated with God claiming Israel finally and fully for Himself in eternal covenant. Walls falling to the ground is the language ofthe fall of all Israel’s historical enemies: Babylon (<a href='B:300 51:44'>Jer 51:44</a>), Syria (<a href='B:110 20:30'>1Ki 20:30</a>) and the Canaanites in Jericho (<a href='B:60 6:5'>Jos 6:5</a>).</p>


text:
<h4>I will call to all My mountains for a sword against him, says the Lord Yahweh- This is quoting from <a href='B:300 25:29'>Jer 25:29</a>, where the context is of a group of neighbouring nations invading the land and a sword being called upon them. There are several other links with the nations of Ezekiel 38 when we look closer at <a href='B:300 25:19-26'>Jer 25:19-26</a>. Dedan and the merchants of Tarshish (<a href='B:300 25:22-23'>Jer 25:22-23</a>) are also part of the invading force in Ezekiel 38, not against it. "All the kings of the north, far and near" (<a href='B:300 25:26'>Jer 25:26</a>) of course includes Gog from the north. These nations all had their part in the Babylonian invasion, which is why they were to be punished in the end after Israel’s restoration from captivity (<a href='B:300 25:12'>Jer 25:12</a>). Ezekiel was prophesying about the time of the restoration- after Ezekiel 38, 39 he goes on to give&nbsp; commands about how to rebuild the temple on their return from captivity. This is the context in which Ezekiel alludes back to Jeremiah 25.</h4><h4>Every man’s sword shall be against his brother- The manner of Gog’s destruction also hints at the origin of Gog and those with him. They will be destroyed by every man’s sword turning against his brother. But this is the very language of the curse upon Ishmael, the forefather of so many of the Moslem people who now live in the territory of the land promised to Abraham (<a href='B:10 16:12'>Gen 16:12</a>).</h4>


text:
<p>With pestilence and with blood will I enter into judgment with him; and I will rain on him and on his hordes and on the many peoples who are with him, an overflowing shower, and great hailstones, fire, and sulphur- Entering into judgment could imply that God is pleading with them even in their last moments for their repentance. The destruction of the Gog invasion by fire (<a href='B:730 20:9'>Rev 20:9</a>) is exactly as here in <a href='B:330 38:22'>Eze 38:22</a>; <a href='B:330 39:6'>Eze 39:6</a>. It is the same invasion in view. It didn’t happen as was potentially possible in Ezekiel’s time, and so it is transferred to the last days for fulfilment. I would go with Harry Whittaker’s suggestion that this invasion by Gog of <a href='B:730 20:8'>Rev 20:8</a> is when the 1000 year reign is established [not "expired" as in AV]; this would fit with the beast / Gog coming against Christ once He has returned and Israel are dwelling confidently and safely. The beast is destroyed at Christ’s return, and yet has a revival. This is very much the theme of the various prophecies about the beast receiving a deadly wound but reviving. Yet the chronological issues should not overly concern us. I have elsewhere explained that Bible prophecy is conditional, and therefore there are various possible outcomes and sequences of events. And further, it seems likely that the nature of time will be compressed or changed around the time of the Lord’s return.</p>


text:
<p>I will magnify Myself, and sanctify Myself, and I will make Myself known in the eyes of many nations; and they shall know that I am Yahweh- It could have been that at the restoration, Yahweh would have been magnified from the border of Israel (<a href='B:460 1:5'>Mal 1:5</a> s:w:). But this prophetic scenario was precluded at the time by Israel’s lack of repentance. But it shall come ultimately true in the last days. This is the purpose of all this blood and judgment; to bring about the Kingdom on God on earth, where the remaining nations "know Yahweh", i:e. enter relationship with Him. "Magnify" is the word used in <a href='B:360 2:20-21'>Joe 2:20-21</a> and <a href='B:400 5:4'>Mic 5:4</a> of how God will "do great things" in destroying the northern invader; and those great things are in the end for God in the sense that they are for His beloved people.</p>


text:
<p>You, son of man, prophesy against Gog and say, Thus says the Lord Yahweh: Behold, I am against you, Gog, chief prince of Meshech, and Tubal- It is unclear whether Ezekiel 39 is a repeat of the situation in Ezekiel 38, or whether Gog attempts to come up a second time. The language is so similar to Ezekiel 38 that I would come down on the side of thinking that this is typical apocalyptic genre, describing the same events from a slightly different angle; in Ezekiel 39, the focus is more upon the judgment of God.</p>


text:
<h4>And I will turn you around, and will lead you on, and will cause you to come up from the uttermost parts of the north; and I will bring you on the mountains of Israel- The repeated emphasis is that God causes Gog to come up, He brings or makes Gog to "go" against Israel. But it was of Gog’s own freewill that he himself decided to do these things; see on <a href='B:330 38:11'>Eze 38:11</a>; <a href='B:330 38:16'>Eze 38:16</a>. <a href='B:730 20:8'>Rev 20:8</a> parallels all the nations in the earth / land with Gog: “To deceive the nations which are in the four quarters / borders of the land / earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle”. The language of deceit is also picking up that of Ezekiel 38 about Gog. "I will drive you forward" (<a href='B:330 39:2'>Eze 39:2</a>, AV "leave the sixth part of thee") appears to be a Hebraism meaning ’I will deceive you’ ; see Jacob Milgrom and Daniel Israel Block, Ezekiel’s Hope: A Commentary on Ezekiel 38-48 (Wipf & Stock, 2012) p. 20. Gog is led into the conflict by God, and the entire showdown is not so much between Gog and Israel as between God and Gog. The events in the Middle East are not, therefore, running out of control. All is carefully planned and executed by God, just as the historical Assyrian was a rod in Yahweh’s hand, manipulated by Him.</h4><h4>"The mountains" may be an intensive plural referring to the great mountain, Zion, which is the goal of jihadist domination at this time. For "uttermost parts of the north" see on <a href='B:330 38:15'>Eze 38:15</a>.</h4>


text:
<p>And I will strike your bow out of your left hand, and will cause your arrows to fall out of your right hand- Assyrian bas-reliefs frequently show them posing with their bows:&nbsp;This is another Assyrian allusion; see on <a href='B:330 38:2'>Eze 38:2</a>; <a href='B:330 38:17'>Eze 38:17</a>. The idea may be that the military technology in which they trusted is to be removed. The Scythian tribes were famed for their horses and archery; these were the peoples who could potentially have fulfilled the prophecy at Ezekiel’s time, but that scenario was precluded by Israel’s impenitence.</p>


text:
<h4>You shall fall on the mountains of Israel, you, and all your hordes, and the peoples who are with you. I will give you to the birds of prey of every sort, and to the animals of the field to be devoured- The "mountains" may be an intensive plural for the great mountain, Zion, the focus of radical jihadist attention at this time. And it is the city of God which Gog focuses upon according to the interpretation of this passage in Revelation 20. <a href='B:340 11:45'>Dan 11:45</a> likewise says that the final destruction of the northern invader will be upon "the glorious holy mountain". The wild animals would then refer to the surrounding nations who are converted to God’s perspective upon the invaders, who come up to Zion to destroy the remnants of Gog’s coalition, and turn to Yahweh themselves. The birds which Abraham successfully drove away in Genesis 15 referred to the surrounding tribes of the eretz which Abraham feared would persecute him at that time. And they likely refer to the same peoples in this latter day application.</h4><h4>"Hordes" is a word only used by Ezekiel. It refers to bands of marauders, and is more appropriate to the Scythians than to the organized regiments of Babylon or Assyria. The Scythians could have fulfilled the prophecy in Ezekiel’s time, but Israel’s impenitence precluded the entire scenario envisaged in Ezekiel 33-48.</h4>


text:
<p>You shall fall on the open field; for I have spoken it, says the Lord Yahweh- The fall will be upon the great mountain of Israel, Zion (:4), so the idea of "the open field" is that they will not be buried, but fall in the open and be devoured there (:4); the classic shame for people of Ezekiel’s time.</p>


text:
<h4>I will send a fire on Magog, and on those who dwell confidently along the sea coasts; and they shall know that I am Yahweh- The destruction of Gog by fire is also spoken of in Revelation 20, confirming our suggestion there that Revelation 20 describes this same event. The sea coasts would refer to the maritime powers in the confederacy, Sheba, Dedan and Tarshish. But "the coastal lands" of the land could also refer to the Gaza Strip. The latter day Assyrian will therefore have connection with the Palestinians in Gaza- which is exactly what we are seeing today. We can note that they are described as living peaceably, "confidently", like Israel in Ezekiel 38; this might support the suggestion that the peace and safety in the land is brought about by an Israeli-Arab peace accord that appears to last.</h4><h4>This sending of fire uses the same Hebrew phrase used of the final sending of Divine fire of judgment upon Gaza and Tyre (<a href='B:370 1:7'>Amo 1:7</a>; <a href='B:370 1:10'>Amo 1:10</a>). These are the sea coasts who support "Magog". And the wonder of it all is that some of them will finally come to have relationship with Yahweh, to "know Yahweh".</h4>


text:
<p>My holy name will I make known in the midst of My people Israel; neither will I allow My holy name to be profaned any more: and the nations shall know that I am Yahweh, the Holy One in Israel- This surely alludes to the similar language used in <a href='B:30 22:31-32'>Lev 22:31-32</a> about the sanctification of God’s Name in Israel as a result of their obedience to Him. We can therefore see in this a hint that the invasion leads to Israel’s repentance. The language here suggests that both Israel and the nations will be in permanent, eternal relationship with God, and Israel will never again profane His Name. The only way for these things to be really true is by a change of nature, to eternal, sinless nature. And therefore the main fulfillment will be at the Lord’s return.</p>


text:
<p>Behold, it has come, and it is done, says the Lord Yahweh; this is the day about which I have spoken- As noted on :7, the implication of the language is that this is all to be fulfilled in the last days. And this final coming of the Kingdom was so certain that it was as if it had already come and was done in Ezekiel’s day. If this was the final reality, then they in his day should have lived the kingdom life there and then.</p>


text:
<p>Those who dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth, and shall make fires of the weapons and burn them, both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, and the war clubs, and the spears, and they shall make fires of them seven years- Understandable concern has been raised concerning the seven months of burning Gog’s corpses, and the rather unreal feel of the punishments of Gog and the cleansing of the land in Ezekiel 39. Notice the usage of the number seven. There are seven enemies of Israel listed in the opening part of Ezekiel 38, joined in later by another three. The enemies have seven weapons (<a href='B:330 39:9'>Eze 39:9</a>), seven years’ worth of fuel is provided by burning them (<a href='B:330 39:9'>Eze 39:9</a>), and it takes seven months to burn the corpses (<a href='B:330 39:12'>Eze 39:12</a>). One wonders whether we are intended to read the ’sevens’ literally, or whether this is a device to indicate completeness. If indeed the language here is figurative, then we are the more encouraged to read ‘Gog’ as a codename rather than seek for a literal historico-geographical reference for him. The simple point is that the invaders will have an array of military technology which will be brought to nothing and permanently destroyed.</p>


text:
<h4>They shall take no wood out of the field, neither cut down any out of the forests; for they shall make fires of the weapons- These wooden weapons are understandable if indeed Ezekiel 38, 39 had a potential primary fulfillment in Ezekiel’s time or soon after. This is the invasion and victory that could have happened at the restoration. There seems an intentional contrast with how when Israel first entered the land, they retained the wooden images of the Canaanite tribes (<a href='B:70 1:27-28'>Jdg 1:27-28</a>). The Maccabees tried to obey this command by burning anything that belonged to the Seleucids and Antiochus who had desecrated the temple. But clearly the prophesy was not then fulfilled, at best that was a foretaste of the future cleansing.</h4><h4>And they shall plunder those who plundered them, and rob those who robbed them, says the Lord Yahweh- There is no indication that the invasion of Gog to "take a prey" was successful; and so his followers are judged for what they intended doing, i:e. robbing and plundering, even though they didn’t actually do it. This serves as a reminder for all time that we are judged according to our dreams and intentions, whether or not we actually fulfill them; as the sermon on the mount makes clear enough.</h4>


text:
<p>It shall happen in that day, that I will give to Gog a place for burial in Israel, the valley of those who pass through on the east of the sea; and it shall stop those who pass through. There shall they bury Gog and all his multitude; and they shall call it The valley of Hamon Gog- See on :17. This would be close to the location of Sodom and Gomorrah, which likewise suffered "eternal fire" in that their destruction was to be an eternal lesson for others (<a href='B:720 1:7'>Jud 1:7</a>). The allusion is to the highway which then passed through that valley, connecting Syria with Petra and Egypt. This likely has more relevance to the potential fulfillment at Ezekiel’s time than to anything in the latter days.</p>


text:
<p>Seven months shall the house of Israel be burying them, that they may cleanse the land- For the significance of "seven", see on :9. The lament had been that the land had not been cleansed of Israel’s sins (<a href='B:330 22:24'>Eze 22:24</a> s:w:). Now the land was to be permanently cleansed of all sin, Jewish and pagan, by the repentant Jews themselves.</p>


text:
<p>Yes, all the people of the land shall bury them; and it shall be to them for a renown in the day that I shall be glorified, says the Lord Yahweh- "A renown" is literally "a name". The name we shall be given eternally will be a reflection of who we are and what we have done in this life, just as Yahweh’s Name is the same- a reflection of His character and history. Those who are involved in burying Gog’s followers will it seems have this as part of their eternal Name, which will itself be a part in the final glorification of Yahweh’s Name in His people. See on :16.</p>


text:
<p>After the seven months are over, men will be chosen to travel through the land in order to find and bury those bodies remaining on the ground, so that they can cleanse the land- The AV suggests that the travellers themselves will help these appointed men: "passing through the land to bury with the passengers those that remain upon the face of the earth, to cleanse it". There is also the implication that some of the bodies might have been missed, and after seven months there has to be a check made. This all sounds very human, and relevant to the primary fulfillment potentially possible in Ezekiel’s time rather than to the last days.</p>


text:
<p>They shall go up and down the land; and when anyone sees a man’s bone, then shall he set up a sign by it, until the undertakers have buried it in the valley of Hamon Gog- There is still the fear of defilement by touching dead bones; hence only "the undertakers" deal with them, and those who notice the bones simply set up a sign by them. This fear of defilement suggests that this aspect of the prophecy was particularly relevant to its potential fulfillment in Ezekiel’s time rather than to the last days.</p>


text:
<p>Hamonah shall also be the name of a city. Thus shall they cleanse the land- Possibly it is Jerusalem which is in view, and this will be one of her names, "multitude". As explained on :13, the names given in the eternal kingdom will be a reflection of history, just as the Yahweh Name is. See on :12.</p>


text:
<p>You, son of man, thus says the Lord Yahweh: Speak thus to the birds of prey, and to every animal of the field: Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to My sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice on the mountains of Israel, that you may eat flesh and drink blood- As explained on :19, this invitation to partake of a religious meal with God is an invitation to fellowship with Him through participating in the destruction of His enemies. The destruction of the Ezekiel 38 invasion is described in <a href='B:330 39:17-20'>Eze 39:17-20</a> in terms of a great supper, and the language is the basis for the description of the final destruction of "the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies" at the ’bird supper’ in <a href='B:730 19:17-18'>Rev 19:17-18</a>. The nations listed in Ezekiel 38 are therefore the kings of the earth / land. They cannot, therefore, refer to nations outside of the land promised to Abraham (e:g. England and Russia). The emphasis upon horses in <a href='B:330 38:4-7'>Eze 38:4-7</a>; <a href='B:330 38:9'>Eze 38:9</a>; <a href='B:330 38:15'>Eze 38:15</a>; <a href='B:330 38:22'>Eze 38:22</a>; <a href='B:330 39:4'>Eze 39:4</a>; <a href='B:330 39:11'>Eze 39:11</a> and the destruction / ’eating’ of their flesh is matched by the horse mounted nations of <a href='B:730 19:15-21'>Rev 19:15-21</a> being destroyed and their flesh likewise ’eaten’. The calling for a sword against Gog is matched by the sword proceeding out of Christ’s mouth in Revelation 19. It isn’t therefore incidental that <a href='B:730 20:8'>Rev 20:8</a> goes on to use the terms Gog and Magog in describing the final enemies of God. The nations with Gog and Magog come from "the four corners of the earth / land" (<a href='B:730 20:8'>Rev 20:8</a>), and this is alluding to how the nations with Gog in Ezekiel 38 are from the four compass points around Israel. This is incidental proof that the ten nations of Ezekiel 38 are all with Gog; "Are you come to take a spoil?" of <a href='B:330 38:13'>Eze 38:13</a> is therefore not a protest but rather a joining in with the group spoiling of Israel.</p>


text:
<p>You shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, of lambs, and of goats, of bulls, all of them fatlings of Bashan- The nations with Gog are defined here as “the princes / kings of the earth”- the leaders of the peoples within the earth / eretz promised to Abraham. These are the same “kings of the earth / land” which are so often mentioned in Revelation as coming against God’s people as part of the beast entity (<a href='B:730 6:15'>Rev 6:15</a>; <a href='B:730 16:14'>Rev 16:14</a>; <a href='B:730 17:2'>Rev 17:2</a>; <a href='B:730 17:18'>Rev 17:18</a>; Rev 183; <a href='B:730 18:9'>Rev 18:9</a>). This alludes to the kings of the earth who are raised up from the borders of the earth / land and come with Babylon to invade Israel (<a href='B:300 50:41'>Jer 50:41</a>). The very idea of ‘the borders of the earth’ suggests that ‘the earth’ doesn’t refer to a sphere like the globe, but rather to a specifically defined territory. That territory is the land promised to Abraham. When we read that all “the kings of the earth” came from the very ends of the earth to hear Solomon’s wisdom, we likewise are to understand “the earth” as the land promised to Abraham. The Queen of Sheba was at the end of that earth / land; but the kings of New Zealand or Hawaii didn’t come. "Bashan" implies the area east of the Jordan, from where the jihadists will come in the last days, and from where the Scythians would have come in the potential fulfillment.</p>


text:
<p>You shall eat fat until you be full, and drink blood until you are drunk, of My sacrifice which I have sacrificed for you- The surrounding nations are invited to eat at the Lord’s table or altar, upon which are sacrificed Gog and his followers. This invitation to eat "at My table" (:20) is an invitation to fellowship and relationship. It implies that the remaining people in the eretz of the last days will come to relationship with God through destroying the remnants of Gog.</p>


text:
<p>You shall be filled at My table with horses and chariots, with mighty men, and with all men of war, says the Lord Yahweh- AV "There you shall be filled at My table" implies that there on the great mountain of Israel, Zion, would be the altar or table of Yahweh. "Chariots" is put for the charioteers. Participating in the destruction of Gog would be a sign of fellowship with Yahweh.</p>


text:
<p>I will set My glory among the nations; and all the nations shall see My judgment that I have executed, and My hand that I have laid on them- "Set" is s:w. "give". God is to be given glory by the remaining nations when they recognize God’s hand / judgment upon them was correct. It will achieve the intended result, of eliciting their repentance and glorification of God. The returned exiles could have ’given / set glory’ to Yahweh (s:w. <a href='B:460 2:2'>Mal 2:2</a>) at the restoration, but they didn’t. And so the whole scenario was transferred to the last days for fulfillment.</p>


text:
<p>So the house of Israel shall know that I am Yahweh their God, from that day and forward- See on <a href='B:330 38:12'>Eze 38:12</a>. This could imply that it is not until the destruction of Gog that Israel are permanently and forever in relationship with God, even though it seems that they are already "dwelling safely" with the Lord Jesus amongst them when the Ezekiel 38 invasion comes.</p>


text:
<p>The nations shall know that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity; because they trespassed against Me, and I hid My face from them: so I gave them into the hand of their adversaries, and they fell all of them by the sword- This hiding of the face was intended to make Israel repent and seek God’s face, and finally this will happen (<a href='B:50 31:17'>Deu 31:17</a>; <a href='B:290 59:2'>Isa 59:2</a>). The nations will realize that their earlier triumphs over Israel were not due to their righteousness or human strength, but because they were used by God to take Israel captive for their sins. Israel did not "all" fall by the sword, although this was the punishment threatened. God’s grace and pity meant that the deserved judgment wasn’t fully carried out. See on :24.</p>


text:
<p>According to their uncleanness and according to their transgressions did I to them; and I hid My face from them- As explained on :23, God did not actually execute all His wrath upon His people. He did not in fact judge them "according to" their sins, but less than what those sins deserved (<a href='B:150 9:13'>Ezr 9:13</a>). But by grace He counts the judgment to have happened. This may have been simply due to His pity and grace; or maybe there was the repentance and intercession of a minority. They were like Cain, driven out of the land / sanctuary and hidden from God’s face (<a href='B:10 4:14'>Gen 4:14</a> s:w:); and yet by grace, a way back was found for them. And it was by the hiding of God’s face from them that their seeking for His face would be elicited (<a href='B:50 31:17-18'>Deu 31:17-18</a>; <a href='B:50 32:20'>Deu 32:20</a>).</p>


text:
<p>Therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh: Now will I bring back the captivity of Jacob, and have mercy on the whole house of Israel; and I will be jealous for My holy name- "The whole house of Israel" looks ahead to the final reuniting of Judah with the ten tribes which was possible at Ezekiel’s time if they had all alike repented. But <a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a> gives this a wider application; "so all Israel shall be saved" is understood as meaning both Jew and Gentile alike shall comprise the "all Israel", both natural and spiritual Jews.</p>


text:
<h4>They shall bear their shame, and all their trespasses by which they have trespassed against Me, when they shall dwell securely in their land, and none shall make them afraid- Shame for sin is a major theme with Ezekiel. The days of shame would come to an end (<a href='B:330 16:54'>Eze 16:54</a>; <a href='B:330 34:29'>Eze 34:29</a>; <a href='B:330 36:15'>Eze 36:15</a>; <a href='B:330 39:26'>Eze 39:26</a>)- if Jerusalem accepted shame for her sins. But <a href='B:330 44:13'>Eze 44:13</a> says that the sins of the Jerusalem priesthood were such that in the restored temple, they would bear their shame in that they would never again minister in it. Likewise the Jewish priesthood who persecuted Jeremiah at this time were to bear a shame that would last for ever (<a href='B:300 20:11'>Jer 20:11</a>). And yet the hope of Israel was that they would eternally be unashamed, world without end (<a href='B:290 45:17'>Isa 45:17</a>). The resolution of this may be in God’s willingness to count them totally righteous by grace, upon their repentance. And Ezra "blushed" [s:w. "ashamed"] because of Israel’s sins (<a href='B:150 9:6'>Ezr 9:6</a>), and Jeremiah at this time cast himself down in shame because of them (<a href='B:300 3:25'>Jer 3:25</a>). This representative intercession for Judah had some effect. Just as the Lord Jesus bore the shame of Israel and all sinners on the cross (<a href='B:290 50:6'>Isa 50:6</a>), and yet because of that He would not be ashamed eternally (<a href='B:290 50:7'>Isa 50:7</a>). He was to become representative of the repentant Israel of God; for the same words are used of how they too would have unashamed faces eternally (<a href='B:290 54:4'>Isa 54:4</a>). But the Jerusalem priesthood refused to take shame, they were unashamed of their whoredoms (<a href='B:300 3:3'>Jer 3:3</a>; <a href='B:300 8:12'>Jer 8:12</a>). Ezekiel’s appeal in Ezekiel 16 was so that they would recognize their sins, and be ashamed (<a href='B:330 16:2'>Eze 16:2</a>). There was time for them to do so right up until they were led captive, in the final attempt to make them realize their shame. For when they went into captivity, then God intended that they would be "ashamed" (<a href='B:300 22:22'>Jer 22:22</a>). The final vision of Ezekiel, of the potential that was possible in a restored Zion, was in order to make the exiles ashamed of their sins when they realized the possibilities they had wasted and yet which were still possible by grace(<a href='B:330 43:10-11'>Eze 43:10-11</a>). But they didn’t respond to that vision, they refused to build and operate such a temple system; because they refused to be ashamed in exile, although it was God’s intention that they should be. And so it is for us as a new Israel to be ashamed for our sins, and identify with the Messiah figure who would bear Israel’s shame and thereby emerge eternally unashamed.</h4><h4>The AV offers "When they dwelt safely in their land". This would mean that they will reflect that they had dwelt safely earlier in their history without repentance. They would be ashamed that they had been treated as righteous when they had not been, and this realization of God’s utter grace would elicit even deeper repentance.</h4>


text:
<p>When I have brought them back from the peoples, and gathered them out of their enemies’ lands, and am sanctified in them in the sight of many nations- The word for "brought::. back" is to be found in the references to Judah’s return at the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:1'>Ezr 2:1</a>; <a href='B:150 6:21'>Ezr 6:21</a>; <a href='B:160 7:6'>Neh 7:6</a>; <a href='B:160 8:17'>Neh 8:17</a>). The same word is to be found in <a href='B:330 38:8'>Eze 38:8</a>, where again, the invasion is to happen once Judah had been ‘brought again’ from captivity. Judah returned, and yet they didn’t rebuild the temple as they were commanded. Therefore the invasion didn’t come, and therefore the Kingdom wasn’t then established. As if knowing this, <a href='B:350 6:11'>Hos 6:11</a> had prophesied [otherwise strangely] that Judah would reap their punishment, when they returned from captivity. They returned [s:w. ‘bring again’], but not to the Most High (<a href='B:350 7:16'>Hos 7:16</a>).</p>


text:
<p>They shall know that I am Yahweh their God, in that I caused them to go into captivity among the nations, and have gathered them to their own land; and I will leave none of them any more there- Such total restoration would be a parade example of God’s grace. And in this they would "know" or experience Yahweh. His grace was the causative factor in both their exile and restoration.</p>


text:
<p>Neither will I hide My face any more from them; for I have poured out My Spirit on the house of Israel, says the Lord Yahweh- The pouring out of the Spirit is parallel to God’s face being revealed and not hidden. The activity of the Spirit is therefore in order to reveal God, to bring people into relationship with Him. Thus the Spirit is poured out as part of the new covenant with Israel in order to make them repentant, all of God’s initiative, rather than as a response to their righteousness (<a href='B:450 12:10'>Zec 12:10</a> "the spirit of grace and supplication", as if this Spirit provokes their supplication / prayer to God; <a href='B:360 2:28'>Joe 2:28</a>). This will be the parade example of "prevenient grace".</p>


text:
<h4>In the twenty-fifth year of our captivity- The captivity of the Jews began in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, when Daniel and his companions were carried away, thirty-two years previously. Daniel would have been seven years in captivity when Ezekiel arrived. Daniel and his three friends are presented as the only faithful ones amongst the captives, but clearly Ezekiel was there. There’s no reference to their having any contact, perhaps because Ezekiel was at the exile encampment by the Chebar river.</h4><p>In the beginning of the year- This phrase is used about the jubilee year, and it has been calculated that BC575 would have been a jubilee year. Perhaps the idea was that now was the time for the exiles to accept the proclamation of release, at least in their hearts.</p><p>In the tenth day of the month- The month isn’t defined, which is understandable if the reference is to the proclamation of a jubilee year on the day of atonement in the tenth day of the seventh month (<a href='B:30 25:9'>Lev 25:9</a>). The idea was that Judah had been forgiven, although they hadn’t yet claimed it by repentance, and they were to now consider the glorious potential future which was thereby possible for them. Hence the emphasis upon "on that very day" in the next clause.</p><h4>In the fourteenth year after that the city was struck, on that very day, the hand of Yahweh was on me and He brought me there- The city was struck towards the end of the twelfth year of Ezekiel’s captivity (<a href='B:330 33:21'>Eze 33:21</a>). The submission of this study is that the return could have led to the establishment of the Kingdom on earth, replete with a Messiah figure and a temple according to the pattern showed to Ezekiel in Ezekiel 40-48. Parts of many of the prophets looked forward to this time, as did the restoration prophecies of Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Isaiah 40-66. All of these could have had their fulfilment in the return under Ezra, but this was disabled by the poor response to the call to return. Under Nehemiah and then even in Malachi’s time, these Kingdom prophecies could have had their fulfilment, but time and again Judah failed to live up to the necessary preconditions. In all this lies abundant exhortation for us; so much could happen but doesn’t, because of our failure to live out and fulfil prophecy::. instead, like Judah, we tend to assume that the time for its’ fulfilment will inexorably arrive some day, regardless of our effort.</h4>


text:
<h4>In the visions of God brought He me into the land of Israel and set me down on a very high mountain, whereon was as it were the frame of a city- Ezekiel saw the temple as if it were already there, located at Jerusalem; he wasn’t transported to Heaven to view it. And it was there, potentially, that whole glorious temple. But the captives had to return and build it. turning the prophetic word into flesh, the logos into reality. But they didn’t. Mount Zion is called "very high" although it isn’t, relatively speaking. But it was "very high" in God’s purpose and Ezekiel visually got this impression.</h4><h4>On the south- This refers to how Ezekiel was brought to the scene from the north, from Babylon, by the cherubim.</h4>


text:
<p>He brought me there; and, behold, there was a man whose appearance was like the appearance of brass, with a line of flax in his hand, and a measuring reed; and he stood in the gate- This man with the measuring line is the same Angel of <a href='B:450 2:1'>Zec 2:1</a>, who was enabling the restoration of Zion at the time of the returned exiles; but they refused to make use of the potential. The "appearance of brass" recalls the vision of <a href='B:330 1:5'>Eze 1:5</a>, confirming that the opening vision of the cherubim is connected with Angelic activity. The line of flax would have been to measure the land areas, and the reed to measure the masonry of the buildings.</p>


text:
<p>The man said to me, Son of man, see with your eyes and hear with your ears, and set your heart on all that I shall show you; for you are brought here with the intent that I may show these things to you: declare all that you see to the people of Israel- Ezekiel was not merely to act as a transmitter of information, but to be personally involved in the message. This is the challenge to us all in any teaching or sharing of God’s word. The command to declare the vision to "the people of Israel" could mean thatwhilst in Jerusalem, Ezekiel was to share the message with the impoverished remnant who remained there, as well as with the captives back in Babylon. There is a clear similarity with the command to Moses in <a href='B:20 25:9'>Exo 25:9</a>; the tabernacle was to be built by Israel according to what "I show thee", you singular, Moses. The fulfilment of the potential was therefore dependent upon the faithfulness of Ezekiel in accurately sharing the vision. And that is true for all who bring God’s word to others.</p>


text:
<p>See, a wall on the outside of the house all around, and in the man’s hand a measuring reed six cubits long, of a cubit and a handbreadth each: so he measured the thickness of the building, one reed; and the height, one reed- The wall wasn’t very high; it was not for defence, but to mark the difference between the sacred and profane. The measuring reed or rod is here defined as being 6 cubits plus 6 handbreadths. We recall the presence of a man’s hand, Ezekiel’s, within the cherubim visions (see on <a href='B:330 10:8'>Eze 10:8</a>). That represented the human part of the whole wondrous vision; God requires human response, but would work powerfully with it. That may explain this otherwise strange measuring unit which mixed a human hand with the cubit measure.</p>


text:
<p>Then he came to the gate which looks toward the east, and went up its steps: and he measured the threshold of the gate, one reed broad; and the other threshold, one reed broad- We firstly read of the east gate because the intention was that the cherubim of glory would return through the east gate. Contra Henry Sulley, there is no evidence that the temple is circular. The temple can hardly face East, as we are told it will in <a href='B:330 47:1'>Eze 47:1</a>, if it is circular. We note the use of steps (seven of them, :22), forbidden in the Mosaic system; human uncleanness would have been dealt with to some extent in the restored community.</p>


text:
<p>Every lodge was one reed long, and one reed broad; and the space between the lodges was five cubits; and the threshold of the gate by the porch of the gate toward the house was one reed- These lodges recalled the guard rooms which were commonly placed next to gates of a city. The priests were to keep the charge of these gates and not allow anything unclean to enter (<a href='B:330 44:11'>Eze 44:11</a>). This sounds appropriate to the restored community, but not to a scenario in the Kingdom of God under the rulership of the returned Lord Jesus. See on :21. Then, this truth will be spiritually understood in the vision in which John sees no temple in the new city; "there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defiles, neither works abomination, or makes a lie" (<a href='B:730 21:27'>Rev 21:27</a>).</p>


text:
<p>He measured also the porch of the gate toward the house, one reed- The measurement given in :9 would be that of the porch in the wider sense, including the projecting side-walls upon it (2 cubits).</p>


text:
<p>Then measured he the porch of the gate, eight cubits; and its posts, two cubits; and the porch of the gate was toward the house- LXX "inward". It seems :9 is measuring the length of the porch from north to south, whereas :8 measures the depth of it from east to west.</p>


text:
<p>The lodges of the gate eastward were three on this side and three on that side; these three were of the same measure: and the posts had the same measure on this side and on that side- Nehemiah did his very best to bring the potential Kingdom of God about by urging the people to repentance and conformity to God’s will, such was his perception of what was going on; that the coming of God’s Kingdom was being limited by the apathy of his own people. No fewer than 24 times in Ezekiel 40-48 are we told that the temple was to be built by ‘measure’ (e:g. <a href='B:330 40:3'>Eze 40:3</a>; <a href='B:330 40:5'>Eze 40:5</a>; <a href='B:330 40:10'>Eze 40:10</a>; <a href='B:330 40:21-22'>Eze 40:21-22</a>; <a href='B:330 40:24'>Eze 40:24</a>; <a href='B:330 40:28-29'>Eze 40:28-29</a>); and the same word occurs frequently in describing how Nehemiah gave various groups of Jews their own ‘measure’ in the work of rebuilding Jerusalem (<a href='B:160 3:11'>Neh 3:11</a>; <a href='B:160 3:19-20'>Neh 3:19-20</a>; <a href='B:160 3:22'>Neh 3:22</a>; <a href='B:160 3:24'>Neh 3:24</a>; <a href='B:160 3:27'>Neh 3:27</a>).</p>


text:
<p>He measured the breadth of the opening of the gate, ten cubits; and the length of the gate, thirteen cubits- The opening of the gate is its entire width. "The length" appears to mean effectively "the height"; the Hebrew is not specific.</p>


text:
<p>And a border before the lodges of one cubit on this side, and a border of one cubit on that side; and the lodges, six cubits on this side, and six cubits on that side- "The border" is really a barrier. The ten cubits of :11 is therefore reduced by one cubit on each side, to limit the passage to eight cubits. The implication is that there may have been crowd control problems and the guards / gate keepers needed to be able to manage any possible crush. Again, this is a scenario appropriate to a temple rebuilt by the exiles, but not to the future Kingdom of the Lord Jesus. See on <a href='B:330 46:8'>Eze 46:8</a>.</p>


text:
<p>He measured the gate from the roof of the one lodge to the roof of the other, a breadth of twenty-five cubits; door against door- This is the entire breadth of the gate-buildings.</p>


text:
<p>He made also posts, sixty cubits; and the court reached to the posts, around the gate- It was an Angel who described to Ezekiel the nature of the temple which the exiles were intended to build; and we even read here that “He made…” [e:g. the posts of the temple]. The Angels had potentially built that temple; it was for Israel to build according to the pattern of it. The measuring now becomes making; what was potentially measured up was thereby as good as made. It all depended upon God’s people to actually do it. And for each of us, there are wonderful things prepared for us to achieve for the Lord, made potentially possible, with all the host of Heaven eagerly awaiting our fulfillment of them on earth. But so very often they remain only poorly replicated by us. And the temple prophecies of Ezekiel are a classic example. See on :38; <a href='B:330 1:1'>Eze 1:1</a>; <a href='B:330 1:20'>Eze 1:20</a>; <a href='B:330 10:8'>Eze 10:8</a>; <a href='B:330 11:24'>Eze 11:24</a>.</p>


text:
<p>From the forefront of the gate at the entrance to the forefront of the inner porch of the gate were fifty cubits- The man on the seventh step would see it clearly: first threshold, 6 cubits; three guardrooms with two intervening spaces, 28 cubits; second threshold, 6 cubits; porch, 6 cubits; projection of the side and gate-pillars, 4 cubits = 50 cubits. This length is double the breadth.</p>


text:
<h4>There were closed windows to the lodges, and to their posts within the gate all around, and likewise to the arches; and windows were around inward; and on each post were palm trees- There are many links between Solomon’s temple and that described by Ezekiel. The repeated stress on the cherubim / palm tree decor in both the records of Solomon’s temple and also Ezekiel’s encourages the idea that the prophesied temple was to be seen as a re-establishment of Solomon’s (<a href='B:110 6:29'>1Ki 6:29</a>; <a href='B:110 6:32'>1Ki 6:32</a>; <a href='B:110 6:35'>1Ki 6:35</a>; <a href='B:110 7:36'>1Ki 7:36</a> cp. <a href='B:330 40:16'>Eze 40:16</a>; <a href='B:330 40:22'>Eze 40:22</a>; <a href='B:330 40:26'>Eze 40:26</a>; <a href='B:330 40:31'>Eze 40:31</a>; <a href='B:330 40:34'>Eze 40:34</a>; <a href='B:330 40:37'>Eze 40:37</a>; <a href='B:330 41:18-20'>Eze 41:18-20</a>; <a href='B:330 41:25-26'>Eze 41:25-26</a>).</h4><h4>It’s easy to assume that the temple was totally destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC. The fact a new foundation stone was laid doesn’t actually mean that the entire structure was razed to the ground. <a href='B:300 41:5'>Jer 41:5</a> refers to 80 people coming to offer offerings and perform some kind of worship there even after the Babylonian destruction. There’s ample historical reference to the essential ground plan and some structure still standing even after the Babylonians had effectively destroyed it and rendered it useless (See R:S. Foster, The Restoration Of Israel (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1970) p. 28; John Bright, A History of Israel (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981) p. 325; Martin Noth, The History of Israel (London: SCM, 1983) p. 291). This makes it more appealing to consider Ezekiel’s vision as a blueprint for the exiles’ reconstructing the existing temple, rather than a totally new structure. It’s even been suggested that Ezekiel 40-42 was intended as an architectural record of the ’old’ temple upon which a new one was to be reconstructed. Zerubbabel is pictured as bringing forth "the premier stone" for the temple (<a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>). This is a technical term, used in Mesopotamia about "a unit of building material removed from the former temple ruins and then incorporated into the new building" (C:L. & E:M. Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 2004) p. 270:). This demonstrates how the projected new temple was a rebuilding of Solomon’s temple. The "shouts" with which it was laid (<a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>) were the "shouts" of the foundation ceremony described in <a href='B:150 3:10-12'>Ezr 3:10-12</a>.</h4>


text:
<p>Then brought he me into the outer court; and behold, there were rooms and a pavement, made for the court all around: thirty rooms were on the pavement- Earlier Ezekiel had seen the wings of the cherubim over the "outer court" (<a href='B:330 10:8'>Eze 10:8</a>). That outer court was now to be rebuilt. The cherubim, simply representing the operation of God for His people, would likewise be involved just as they had been in its destruction; if Judah wished to work with them.</p>


text:
<p>The pavement was by the side of the gates, answerable to the length of the gates, even the lower pavement- The length of the gates fixed the breadth of the stone pavement. Ezekiel 40-48 stress the “gates” dozens of times; and Nehemiah’s account likewise stresses many times the attention he paid to setting up the “gates” [s:w:] as if he saw his work as fulfilling Ezekiel’s words.</p>


text:
<h4>Then he measured the breadth from the forefront of the lower gate to the forefront of the inner court outside, one hundred cubits- He measures the breadth of the outer court, starting from the east gate, the gate already referred to, measuring from the front of its porch.</h4><h4>Both on the east and on the north- "Thus with respect to the east side, and the same with respect to the north side".</h4>


text:
<p>The gate of the outer court whose prospect is toward the north, he measured its length and its breadth- This becomes the standard measure of the other gates (:21).</p>


text:
<p>The lodges of it were three on this side and three on that side; and its posts and its arches were after the measure of the first gate: its length was fifty cubits, and the breadth twenty-five cubits- We have to note the emphasis upon the guard rooms in the dimensions and measuring; see on :7.</p>


text:
<p>The windows of it, and its arches, and the palm trees of it, were after the measure of the gate whose prospect is toward the east; and they went up to it by seven steps; and its arches were before them- If indeed Ezekiel 40-48 are conditional prophecies, this opens up the possibility that so too are many other prophecies- especially those which involve allusion to them. For example, <a href='B:730 11:1'>Rev 11:1</a> speaks of a command to measure the temple- and immediately our minds are sent back to the temple being measured in such detail in <a href='B:330 40:10'>Eze 40:10</a>; <a href='B:330 40:21-22'>Eze 40:21-22</a> etc. Is this to be read as a sign that we are about to receive another conditional prophecy? Assuming that Revelation was given just prior to the fall of Jerusalem in AD70, we could read the ensuing prophecy in Revelation 11 as saying that although Jerusalem and the outer court would fall to the Romans, the zealots in the inner sanctuary would be preserved, and a command to repentance would be issued by two prophets. Now of course, this didn’t happen; but perhaps it could’ve done, potentially? Consider the possibility- both here and in so many other Bible passages.</p>


text:
<p>There was a gate to the inner court over against the other gate, both on the north and on the east; and he measured from gate to gate one hundred cubits- Now we are introduced to the relation of the gate (of the inner court) to the gate (of the outer court); and we see it as it were by reference to the two gates described northward and eastward.</p>


text:
<p>He led me toward the south; and behold, a gate toward the south: and he measured its posts and its arches according to these measures- Ezekiel was now close to the measuring Angel, so close he could be led by Him.</p>


text:
<p>There were windows in it and in its arches all around, like those windows: the length was fifty cubits, and the breadth twenty-five cubits- Like the windows in the gates of :22.</p>


text:
<p>There were seven steps to go up to it, and its arches were before them; and it had palm trees, one on this side, and another on that side, on its posts- Perhaps by every pillar stood two artificial palms. But literal palm trees may be in view.</p>


text:
<p>There was a gate to the inner court toward the south: and he measured from gate to gate toward the south a hundred cubits- "Gate" is literally ’an opening’. Whether there were doors upon the gates is left for us to imagine; perhaps if not, we have the impression of a welcoming openness towards the most holy space.</p>


text:
<p>Then he brought me to the inner court by the south gate: and he measured the south gate according to these measures- Ezekiel was "led" in :24, but now "brought". The Hebrew terms are different but too wide in meaning to be certain of the difference, but the idea could be of some reluctance on Ezekiel’s part.</p>


text:
<p>And its lodges, and its posts, and its arches, according to these measures: and there were windows in it and in its arches all around; it was fifty cubits long, and twenty-five cubits broad- The "lodges" or "chambers" of the temple (s:w. <a href='B:110 14:28'>1Ki 14:28</a>) are the basis of the Lord’s statement that in the Father’s house are many abiding places (<a href='B:500 14:1-3'>Joh 14:1-3</a>); the rebuilding of this temple didn’t work out as envisaged, but the essence of the prophecy still comes true in a spiritual sense.</p>


text:
<p>There were arches all around, twenty-five cubits long, and five cubits broad- The Hebrew for "arches" can also mean a colonnade or portico.</p>


text:
<p>The arches of it were toward the outer court; and palm trees were on its posts: and the ascent to it had eight steps- This compares with the seven steps of :22, possibly implying that this was of greater holiness, requiring more effort in human ascent.</p>


text:
<p>He brought me into the inner court toward the east: and he measured the gate according to these measures- This now describes the inner part of the east gate.</p>


text:
<p>And its lodges, and its posts, and its arches, according to these measures: and there were windows therein and in its arches all around; it was fifty cubits long, and twenty-five cubits broad- Repeating the style of :29.</p>


text:
<p>The arches of it were toward the outer court; and palm trees were on its posts, on this side, and on that side: and the ascent to it had eight steps- The motif of palm trees is perhaps to create the idea of direct, upward growth, characteristic of the flourishing of the righteous (<a href='B:230 92:12'>Psa 92:12</a>). Likewise the feet of the cherubim were "straight". The idea is that we respond directly and immediately to spiritual things and possibilities, without all the meandering and distraction so typical of the flesh.</p>


text:
<p>He brought me to the north gate: and he measured it according to these measures- "Measure" is literally ’to stretch oneself’. It could perhaps be that the measure was the height of the Angel; which would then make sense of <a href='B:730 21:17'>Rev 21:17</a> where the wall of the new Jerusalem is measured "according to the measure of a man, that is an Angel".</p>


text:
<p>Its lodges, its posts, and its arches: and there were windows therein all around; the length was fifty cubits, and the breadth twenty-five cubits- The prevalence of "windows::. all around" recalls the cherubim being full of eyes all around (<a href='B:330 10:18'>Eze 10:18</a>). There is clearly an impression given that the cherubim were to be involved in the rebuilding and functioning of this new temple system; every human effort to engage with it would be blessed and multiplied by the huge Angelic help available.</p>


text:
<p>The posts of it were toward the outer court; and palm trees were on its posts, on this side, and on that side: and the ascent to it had eight steps- "The outer court" is LXX "the porch", corresponding with :31,34.</p>


text:
<p>A room with its door was by the posts at the gates; there they washed the burnt offering- Ezekiel saw a functioning temple- he speaks of “where they washed the burnt offering”, he saw animals being killed, things being laid on tables (:38-43). It was all- potentially- ‘happening’. It just had to be realized on earth. See on :14.</p>


text:
<p>In the porch of the gate were two tables on this side, and two tables on that side, to kill thereon the burnt offering and the sin offering and the trespass offering- The order of the offerings usually features the burnt offering last; after recognizing sin and obtaining forgiveness, there was [and is] to be the dedication to God represented by the burnt offering. But God was so eager to accept the returning exiles that He had forgiven them although they had not generally repented. He wanted them to respond in dedication, and then for His grace to elicit from them the recognition of their sins.</p>


text:
<p>On the one side outside, as one goes up to the entry of the gate toward the north, were two tables; and on the other side, which belonged to the porch of the gate, were two tables- There were twelve tables, eight were used for slaughtering and laying the carcasses, and the remaining four for the instruments employed in killing the animals. Of the eight, four stood within the porch of the gate, two on each side, and four outside—two on the side "as one goes up to the entry of the north gate". This seems to mean "at the shoulder to one going up to the gate opening towards the north", i:e. on the outside of the porch’s north wall; and two on the other side or shoulder, i:e. on the outside of the porch’s south wall. The gate in view is therefore not the north gate, as the AV conjectures, but the east gate, whose side walls looked towards the north and south. The third group of four tables appears to have been planted at the steps, presumably two on each side, "at the ascent", i:e. at the staircase (cp. :26).</p>


text:
<p>Four tables were on this side, and four tables on that side, by the side of the gate; eight tables, whereupon they killed the sacrifices- See on :40.</p>


text:
<p>There were four tables for the burnt offering, of cut stone, a cubit and a half long, and a cubit and a half broad, and one cubit high; whereupon they laid the instruments with which they killed the burnt offering and the sacrifice- This speaks of the vessels to be used in the temple [NEV “instruments”] with the same word used for the temple vessels which were brought up out of Babylon back to Judah, in fulfilment of several of Isaiah’s ‘Kingdom’ passages (<a href='B:150 1:6-11'>Ezr 1:6-11</a>; <a href='B:150 8:25-33'>Ezr 8:25-33</a> cp. <a href='B:290 52:11'>Isa 52:11</a>; <a href='B:290 66:20'>Isa 66:20</a>). The tables on which the carcasses were placed were of stone, maybe implying the tables for the instruments were of wood.</p>


text:
<p>The hooks, a handbreadth long, were fastened within all around: and on the tables was the flesh of the offering-&nbsp; "Hooks" is LXX "ledges," or "border guards", to keep the instruments or flesh from falling off; or they could refer to&nbsp; "pegs" fastened in the wall for hanging the carcasses before they were flayed.</p>


text:
<p>Outside of the inner gate were rooms for the singers in the inner court, which was at the side of the north gate; and their prospect was toward the south; one at the side of the east gate having the prospect toward the north- The chambers for the singers appear to have been the priestly chambers (:45,46). In Solomon’s temple, the Levites managed the singing (<a href='B:130 6:33-47'>1Ch 6:33-47</a>; <a href='B:130 15:17'>1Ch 15:17</a>; <a href='B:140 20:19'>2Ch 20:19</a>). Now the priests were apparently to do so. LXX: "And he led me unto the inner court, and behold two chambers in the inner court, one at the back of the gate which looks towards the north, and bearing towards the south, and one at the back of the gate which looks towards the south, and bearing towards the north". The emphasis upon the singers is appropriate seeing that so manyrestoration prophecies envisaged the returned exiles singing praises.</p>


text:
<p>He said to me, This room, whose prospect is toward the south, is for the priests, the keepers of the duty of the house- The phrase ’to keep the duty / charge / ordinance’ is used multiple times as a commandment. The priests were to keep the duty, whereas previously they had not. But the same phrase is used in <a href='B:460 3:14'>Mal 3:14</a> of how the restored exiles complained that they had ’kept the duty’ of the temple for no profit. The greatest tragedy is when potentials are thrown away, and this was and is the tragedy of God’s people.</p>


text:
<h4>And the room whose prospect is toward the north is for the priests, the keepers of the charge of the altar: these are the sons of Zadok, who from among the sons of Levi come near to Yahweh to minister to Him- It was in this kind of chamber in the restored temple that the enemies of the Jews were allowed a living place and the apostate Tobiah stored his "stuff" (<a href='B:160 13:8'>Neh 13:8</a>). This explains Nehemiah’s anger about the situation- they were precluding the fulfilment of the potential envisaged here in <a href='B:330 40:46'>Eze 40:46</a>.</h4><h4>Ezekiel emphasized that the sons of Zadok were to organize priestly work in the temple (<a href='B:330 40:46'>Eze 40:46</a>; <a href='B:330 43:19'>Eze 43:19</a>; <a href='B:330 44:15'>Eze 44:15</a>; <a href='B:330 48:11'>Eze 48:11</a>); and it was surely not incidental that Ezra, the leader of the initial restoration, was one of the sons of Zadok (<a href='B:150 7:2'>Ezr 7:2</a>). He was in a position to fulfil those prophecies, although the bulk of his brethren seem to have precluded this. Ezra was enabled to “beautify” the temple (<a href='B:150 7:27'>Ezr 7:27</a>), the very same word used in <a href='B:290 60:7'>Isa 60:7</a>; <a href='B:290 60:9'>Isa 60:9</a>; <a href='B:290 60:13'>Isa 60:13</a> about how God would “glorify” [s:w:] His temple with merchandise from throughout the Babylonian empire- all of which was willingly offered by Cyrus and Darius. But the people didn’t respond to Ezra, and so this scenario didn’t come about.</h4>


text:
<p>He measured the court, one hundred cubits long, and a hundred cubits broad, foursquare; and the altar was before the house- Henry Sulley and other popular reconstructions place it, without justification, in the Most Holy Place. Ezekiel commanded that the priests were not to wear their holy garments in the outer courts; and yet if as the popular view suggests they wear them in a central area, at the altar, and then go into their chambers on the edge of the temple, they would have to wear them in the outer courts.</p>


text:
<p>Then he brought me to the porch of the house, and measured each post of the porch, five cubits on this side, and five cubits on that side: and the breadth of the gate was three cubits on this side, and three cubits on that side- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:3'>1Ki 6:3</a>). The "porch" appears to have been entered by a folding door of two leaves, each three cubits broad, which were attached to two side pillars five cubits broad, and met in the middle, so that the whole breadth of the porch front was six cubits, or, including the posts, sixteen cubits. The measurements in :49 of the length of the porch (from east to west) twenty cubits, and the breadth (from north to south) eleven cubits, assumes that the pillars, which were five cubits bread in front, were only half that breadth in the inside, the side wall dividing it in two, so that, although to one entering the opening was only six cubits, the moment one stood in the interior it was 6 cubits + 2 x 2:5 cubits = 11 cubits</p>


text:
<p>The length of the porch was twenty cubits, and the breadth eleven cubits; even by the steps by which they went up to it: and there were pillars by the posts, one on this side, and another on that side- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 7:21'>1Ki 7:21</a>). See on :48.</p>


text:
<p>He brought me to the temple and measured the doorposts, six cubits broad on the one side, and six cubits broad on the other side, which was the breadth of the structure- "The temple" here refers to the holy place, the nave. "Structure" is ’tabernacle’, to ever remind the people that the temple was but a masonry expression of the simple tent in the wilderness where God met with His wandering people. All organized religious structures must ever remember this.</p>


text:
<h4>The breadth of the entrance was ten cubits- The door into the porch was eleven cubits (<a href='B:330 40:49'>Eze 40:49</a>). This would have the effect of rendering the door into the holy place more conspicuous.</h4><h4>And the sides of the entrance were five cubits on the one side, and five cubits on the other side: and he measured its length, forty cubits, and the breadth, twenty cubits- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:16-17'>1Ki 6:16-17</a>).</h4>


text:
<p>Then he went inside and measured each post of the entrance, two cubits; and the entrance, six cubits; and the breadth of the entrance, seven cubits- The Angel entered the Most Holy, and presumably called out the measurements to Ezekiel.</p>


text:
<h4>He measured its length, twenty cubits, and the breadth, twenty cubits, before the temple. He said to me, This is the most holy place- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:19-20'>1Ki 6:19-20</a>). No details are given of what was within the most holy place, perhaps because it was simply to be indwelt by the glory of God. In Ezekiel’s system there is a lack of many things required under the Mosaic system (see too <a href='B:330 45:23'>Eze 45:23</a>), because at the restoration they could have been spiritually fulfilled. That didn’t work out, and so the fulfilment has been reapplied and rescheduled to the work of the Lord Jesus. There was:</h4><p>?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; No Laver (see <a href='B:330 36:24-27'>Eze 36:24-27</a>, <a href='B:500 15:3'>Joh 15:3</a>) ;</p><p>?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; No Table of Shewbread (see <a href='B:400 5:4'>Mic 5:4</a>, <a href='B:500 6:35'>Joh 6:35</a>);</p><p>?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; No Lampstand or Menorah (see <a href='B:290 49:6'>Isa 49:6</a>, <a href='B:500 8:12'>Joh 8:12</a>);</p><p>?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; No Golden Altar of Incense (<a href='B:450 8:20-23'>Zec 8:20-23</a>, <a href='B:500 14:6'>Joh 14:6</a>)</p><p>?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; No Veil (<a href='B:290 25:6-8'>Isa 25:6-8</a>, <a href='B:470 27:51'>Mat 27:51</a>) ;</p><h4>?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; No Ark of the Covenant (<a href='B:300 3:16'>Jer 3:16</a>, <a href='B:500 10:30-33'>Joh 10:30-33</a>).</h4>


text:
<p>Then he measured the wall of the house, six cubits; and the breadth of every side room, four cubits, all around the house on every side- Solomon’s system of “chambers” or "ribs" was replicated (<a href='B:110 6:5'>1Ki 6:5</a>; <a href='B:110 6:8'>1Ki 6:8</a>; <a href='B:110 6:16'>1Ki 6:16</a> cp. <a href='B:330 41:5-11'>Eze 41:5-11</a> s:w:). The measuring began with the outer wall, which, beginning at the pillars (<a href='B:330 41:1'>Eze 41:1</a>), enclosed the temple on its south, west, and north sides.</p>


text:
<p>The side rooms were in three floors, one over another, and thirty on each floor. The outer wall on each floor was thinner than on the floor below, so that the rooms could rest on the wall without being anchored into it- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:6'>1Ki 6:6</a>; <a href='B:110 6:10'>1Ki 6:10</a>):The chambers were ranged in three stories of thirty each; Josephus (Antiquities 8:3:2) claims this was exactly how it was in Solomon’s temple. Perhaps there were twelve threes on each of the longer sides, the north and the south, and six threes on the shorter or western side.</p>


text:
<p>The walls of the house, when seen from the outside, seemed to have the same thickness all the way to the top. Against the house’s outer wall, on the outside of the rooms, two wide stairways were built, so that it was possible to go from the lower story to the middle and the upper stories- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:6'>1Ki 6:6</a>; <a href='B:110 6:8'>1Ki 6:8</a>). The AV speaks of an "enlarging", as if the floor area of each floor increased from the first to the third story. The AV "and a winding about still upward to the side chambers" could suggest that Ezekiel’s temple had a spiral staircase like that in Solomon’s temple (see <a href='B:110 6:8'>1Ki 6:8</a>).</p>


text:
<p>I saw also that the house had a raised base all around: the foundations of the side rooms were a full reed of six great cubits- RV "A raised basement". The six cubits are the height of the ceiling above the floor in each story, which would give a height of eighteen cubits for the three stories; but probably they mark only the height of the temple and side chamber measured from above ground level.</p>


text:
<p>The thickness of the wall, which was for the side rooms, on the outside, was five cubits: and that which was left was the place of the side rooms that belonged to the house- The five cubits were between the temple wall and the side chambers.</p>


text:
<p>Between the rooms was a breadth of twenty cubits around the house on every side- The LXX combines :9 and :10: "And that which was left between the side chambers of the house and the cells [along the inner court wall] was twenty cubits round about the house on every side".</p>


text:
<p>The doors of the side rooms were toward the place that was left, one door toward the north, and another door toward the south: and the breadth of the free space that was left was five cubits all around- The breadth of the court was comprised of: 1. Breadth of the house 20 cubits; 2. Breadth of wall, 6 x 2 cubits = 12 cubits; 3. Breadth of chambers, 4 x 2 cubits = 8 cubits; 4. Breadth of chamber wall, 5 x 2 cubits = 10 cubits; 5. Breadth of corridor, 5 x 2 cubits = 10 cubits; 6. Breadth of free space, 20 x 2 cubits = 40 cubits. Total = 100 cubits. The length of the court was comprised of: 1. The length of the house—60 cubits; 2. The temple wall—6 cubits; 3. The chambers—4 cubits; 4. The chamber wall—5 cubits; 5. The corridor ["free space"]—5 cubits; 6. The space towards the west—20 cubits. Total = 100 cubits. The "house" was thus one hundred cubits square.</p>


text:
<p>The building that was before the separate place at the side toward the west was seventy cubits broad; and the wall of the building was five cubits thick all around, and its length ninety cubits- "The separate [’cut off’] place" refers to a space behind the temple on the west, which was marked off from the rest of the ground on which the temple with its courts and chambers stood. There was a similar space behind Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:120 23:11'>2Ki 23:11</a>; <a href='B:130 26:18'>1Ch 26:18</a>), apparently for rubbish.</p>


text:
<p>So he measured the house, one hundred cubits long; and the separate place, and the building, with its walls, one hundred cubits long- See on :14.</p>


text:
<h4>Also the breadth of the face of the house, and of the separate place toward the east, one hundred cubits- We can summarize: The breadth of the area from west to east:</h4><p>1. The separate place (including walls)—100 cubits</p><p>2. The "house" (with free space behind)—100 cubits</p><p>3. The inner court—100 cubits</p><p>4. The outer court (the two gates with space between them)—200 cubits</p><p>Total = 500 cubits</p><p>The length of the area from north to south—</p><p>1. The outer court (the two northern gates with spaces between them)—200 cubits</p><p>2. The "house" (with free space on both sides)—100 cubits</p><p>3. The outer court (the two southern gates with distance between them)—200 cubits</p><h4>Total = 500 cubits.</h4>


text:
<p>He measured the length of the building before the separate place which was at its back, and its galleries on the one side and on the other side, one hundred cubits; and the inner temple, and the porches of the court- The "galleries" could be "ledges", or some kind of terrace buildings.</p>


text:
<p>The thresholds, and the closed windows, and the galleries around on their three stories, over against the threshold, with wood ceilings all around, and from the ground up to the windows, (now the windows were covered)- If parts of the structure were to be made of wood, we wonder whether this was really intended to last for 1000 years, as required by the view that this temple is that of a future illennial reign of Christ. The ’covering’ of the windows could refer to a lattice, or it could imply that from below, they were not seen.</p>


text:
<p>To the space above the door, even to the inner house, and outside, and by all the wall all around inside and outside, by measure- The ’complete covering’ (GNB) with cherubim (:18) reflected the complete and total presence of God and His activity for His people, which is what the cherubim represented.</p>


text:
<p>It was made with cherubim and palm trees; and a palm tree was between cherub and cherub, and each cherub had two faces- The temple was to have cherubim motifs throughout it- as if to show that the Cherubim of Ezekiel 1 had now ‘landed’ on the temple at the end of the prophecy. The vision of God’s glory entering the temple “was according to the vision… that I saw by the river Chebar” back in Babylon (<a href='B:330 43:2-3'>Eze 43:2-3</a>). This is the meaning of the fact that cherubim visions both begin and end the prophecy of Ezekiel. The cherubim would move from Judah to Babylon and then back to Judah, to enter into and dwell in the temple. Yet God’s glory did not enter the temple which Nehemiah built. This was because the people had not followed Ezekiel’s example, they had not identified themselves with the Angelic movements above them, but rather remained dominated by their petty self interests. They never really repented- for <a href='B:330 43:11'>Eze 43:11</a> records Ezekiel being told to only give Judah “the form of the house” and “write it in their sight” only “if&nbsp; they be ashamed of all that they have done”. There is no record of Ezekiel giving them the promised further plans for the temple- so the wonderful prophecy could not be fulfilled, because they did not repent.</p>


text:
<p>So that there was the face of a man toward the palm tree on the one side, and the face of a young lion toward the palm tree on the other side. Thus was it made through all the house all around- Each cherub had only two of its faces revealed on the wall. Perhaps the allusion was to the man who was to be the lion of Judah, the Messiah figure who could have arisen at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>From the ground to above the door were cherubim and palm trees made: thus was the wall of the temple- The entire wall was covered with this motif.</p>


text:
<p>As for the temple, the door posts were squared; and as for the face of the sanctuary, the appearance of it was as the appearance of the temple- The emphasis upon the !squared"pattern again connects with the four fold nature of the cherubim vision of Ezekiel 1. The cherubim of glory had as it were landed permanently in the temple. And all of God’s people who identified with His work would likewise come there.</p>


text:
<p>The altar was of wood, three cubits high, and its length two cubits; and its corners, and its length, and its walls, were of wood: and he said to me, This is the table that is before Yahweh- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:20'>1Ki 6:20</a>; <a href='B:110 6:22'>1Ki 6:22</a>). A wooden altar may seem unsuitable for the task. But the idea of the altar was that it was God’s table, at which He as it were ate in fellowship with men. We too sit at such a humanly inadequate table in fellowship with the same God. However a wooden altar may imply this was the altar of incense (<a href='B:20 30:1'>Exo 30:1</a>; <a href='B:110 7:48'>1Ki 7:48</a>). But again we note a difference with the old system; the dimensions of this altar in the tabernacle were two cubits high and one cubit long and broad.</p>


text:
<p>The temple and the sanctuary had two doors- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:31-35'>1Ki 6:31-35</a>; <a href='B:110 6:32'>1Ki 6:32</a> AVmg:).</p>


text:
<p>The doors had two leaves apiece, two turning leaves: two leaves for the one door, and two leaves for the other- Considering all the detail given of even the doors, the absence of any mention of an ark of the covenant within them is significant. The glory of God was to dwell there. Or perhaps the details of the most holy place would have been given later, had Judah been responsive to this outline description (<a href='B:330 43:11'>Eze 43:11</a>).</p>


text:
<h4>There were made on them, on the doors of the temple, cherubim and palm trees, like as were made on the walls- Matching Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:32'>1Ki 6:32</a>).</h4><h4>And there was a threshold of wood on the face of the porch outside-"Wood"is"thick planks". There are many links between Solomon’s temple and that described by Ezekiel:&nbsp; There were “thick planks” upon the porch of Solomon’s temple; and the same word is only used elsewhere in describing how this would feature in Ezekiel’s temple too (<a href='B:110 7:6'>1Ki 7:6</a> cp. <a href='B:330 41:25-26'>Eze 41:25-26</a>).</h4>


text:
<p>There were closed windows and palm trees on the one side and on the other side, on the sides of the porch: thus were the side rooms of the house, and the thresholds- :&nbsp; Even the “windows of narrow lights” of Solomon’s temple (<a href='B:110 6:4'>1Ki 6:4</a>) were to be replicated (<a href='B:330 40:16'>Eze 40:16</a>; <a href='B:330 41:16'>Eze 41:16</a>; <a href='B:330 41:26'>Eze 41:26</a>). The idea is that the Davidic throne and kingdom was to be reestablished, and we know from Zechariah that this was envisaged as happening at the restoration from Babylon.</p>


text:
<p>Then he brought me forth into the outer court, the way toward the north: and he brought me into the room that was opposite the separate place, and which was opposite the building toward the north- Earlier we heard of chambers for the officiating priests on the north and south gates of the inner court (<a href='B:330 40:44-46'>Eze 40:44-46</a>). He now as it were returns to take a closer look at them.</p>


text:
<p>The length of the building whose door faced north was a hundred cubits, and the breadth was fifty cubits- It was the front length of the cell building to which Ezekiel sees himself brought. The hundred cubits length agree with <a href='B:330 41:13'>Eze 41:13</a>.</p>


text:
<p>Over against the twenty cubits which belonged to the inner court, and over against the pavement which belonged to the outer court, was gallery against gallery in the third story- No staircase seems mentioned; the focus of the vision is upon the existence of so many rooms; see on :5.</p>


text:
<h4>Before the rooms was a walk of ten cubits’ breadth inward, a way of one cubit- The walkways are emphasized. <a href='B:450 3:7-10'>Zec 3:7-10</a> encouraged Joshua to be the king-priest of the restored kingdom: “If you will walk in my ways, and if you will keep my charge [as so frequently commanded in <a href='B:330 40:46'>Eze 40:46</a>; <a href='B:330 44:8'>Eze 44:8</a>; <a href='B:330 44:14-16'>Eze 44:14-16</a> s:w:], then you shall also judge my house (as prophesied in Ezekiel 40-48), and shalt also keep my courts (so often mentioned in Ezekiel 40-48), and I will give you places to walk (s:w. <a href='B:330 42:4'>Eze 42:4</a> about the walkways in the prophesied temple)::. hear now, O Joshua”. But he didn’t. He didn’t keep the courts, but allowed Tobiah the Ammonite to set up his office for subversion in the temple chambers.</h4><h4>And their doors were toward the north- Time and again, the new system is described in terms which allude to the bad practices in the old system- e:g. the stress of <a href='B:330 42:4'>Eze 42:4</a> etc. that the doors of the new chambers were"toward the north"connects with how Ezekiel had earlier seen women weeping for Tammuz"towards the north"in the temple (<a href='B:330 8:14'>Eze 8:14</a>; <a href='B:330 9:2'>Eze 9:2</a>). See on :20.</h4>


text:
<p>Now the upper rooms were shorter; for the galleries took away from these, more than from the lower and the middle, in the building- The huge attention given to the chambers is surely because they would come to represent the places in the Father’s house prepared for His people (<a href='B:500 14:1-3'>Joh 14:1-3</a>), who would all be as it were about the work of His house. And there was a huge number of them, far more perhaps than was required in the restored temple situation. The sheer number of them and attention given to them in the plans was to highlight a symbolic meaning to them, even at the time. For the literal"sons of Zadok"were likely not enough to have lived in or used them all.</p>


text:
<p>For they were in three stories, and they had no pillars like the pillars of the courts. Thus the upper chambers were set back from the ground more than the lower and the middle ones- The chambers rose in terrace form, each of the upper stories receding from that below it, as was customary in Babylonian architecture. Likewise the form of the cherubim and palm tree motif was similar to what they had seen in Babylon. God in His grace and sensitive understanding was giving the exiles a plan to follow which would have been acceptable to them in accordance with the culture they had picked up in Babylon. And this thought confirms the impression that the temple was intended for the returned exiles to build, and not far any far later generation.</p>


text:
<p>The wall that was outside by the side of the rooms, toward the outer court before the rooms, its length was fifty cubits- This"wall"is the word used in <a href='B:330 13:5'>Eze 13:5</a>. Judah had not previously built nor maintained such a wall or fence; and now on return from exile they were to do what they had earlier failed to. The fence was perhaps intended to screen the side windows of the lower chambers from public gaze, since these were to be occupied as robing and disrobing rooms for the priests (<a href='B:330 44:19'>Eze 44:19</a>). This all sounds very much of a human situation, rather than that after the return of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>For the length of the rooms that were in the outer court was fifty cubits: and see, before the temple were one hundred cubits- The chambers whose windows looked into the outer court, projected fifty cubits into the outer court; i:e. this was their breadth or depth from north to south. Those before the temple were an hundred cubits; i:e. the chambers whose windows fronted the temple, were a hundred cubits from east to west.</p>


text:
<p>From under these rooms was the entry on the east side, as one goes into them from the outer court- This entry ran along the east side of the building, and led from the outer to the temple court. Because the outer court was higher than the temple and could only be reached by steps,"the entry"is represented as lying under the rooms</p>


text:
<p>In the thickness of the wall of the court toward the east, before the separate place, and before the building, there were rooms- As noted on :5, there is a huge emphasis upon the rooms, seeing they would come to represent places of personal salvation in Christ. But we reflect that these rooms are places of work and connected to work. Salvation will be about active work for the Lord and not an eternal rest.</p>


text:
<p>The way before them was like the appearance of the way of the rooms which were toward the north; according to their length so was their breadth: and all their exits were both according to their fashions, and according to their doors- The existence of walkways is stressed in these plans. As explained on <a href='B:450 3:7'>Zec 3:7</a>, these are the"places to walk"which would have become real and actual had the returned exiles responded to this great plan.</p>


text:
<p>According to the doors of the rooms that were toward the south was a door at the head of the way, even the way directly before the wall toward the east, as one enters into them- See on :11.</p>


text:
<p>Then he said to me, The north rooms and the south rooms, which are before the separate place, they are the holy rooms, where the priests who are near to Yahweh shall eat the most holy things: there shall they lay the most holy things, and the meal offering, and the sin offering, and the trespass offering; for the place is holy- The same words are found in <a href='B:150 2:63'>Ezr 2:63</a> and <a href='B:160 7:65'>Neh 7:65</a> - it wasn’t possible for the priests to eat of the holy things [signifying God’s acceptance of His people], because there was no record of their genealogy. Their names were not written in the “register” in fulfilment of <a href='B:330 13:9'>Eze 13:9</a>: “neither shall they be written in the writing [s:w. ‘register’, <a href='B:150 2:62'>Ezr 2:62</a>] of the house of Israel”. Only if a priest stood up with urim and thummim could they eat of the holy things. These were two engraven stones carried in a pouch in the breastplate which flashed out Divine decisions (see H:A. Whittaker, Samuel, Saul And David for an excellent study of this). <a href='B:450 3:9'>Zec 3:9</a> prophesies that Joshua the High Priest would have the engraven stone with seven eyes- the urim and thummim. It would thereby have been possible for a priesthood who had lost their genealogy record during the sacking of the first temple to eat the holy things, and thus fulfil <a href='B:330 42:13'>Eze 42:13</a>. In a restoration context, <a href='B:290 66:21'>Isa 66:21</a> had prophesied that Yahweh would regather Judah, “And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the LORD”. This implies, surely, that He would accept some as Levites who could not otherwise prove they were. <a href='B:450 6:11'>Zec 6:11</a>; <a href='B:450 6:13'>Zec 6:13</a> speaks of Joshua being crowned with the High Priestly mitre and ‘bearing the glory’, i:e. carrying the urim and thummim in the breastplate. But all this was conditional on Joshua’s obedience: “This shall come to pass, if ye will diligently obey” (<a href='B:450 6:15'>Zec 6:15</a>). Because Joshua failed, he didn’t have urim and thummim, therefore no decision could be given about who was an acceptable priest, and therefore the‘Kingdom’ prophecy of <a href='B:330 42:13'>Eze 42:13</a> was left unfulfilled. So much depended upon that man. And likewise, the eternal destiny of many others depends on us. Isaiah’s prophecies of the restoration feature “the servant”- who was a symbol of both the people and a Messianic individual. His success was bound up with theirs. Thus <a href='B:290 65:9'>Isa 65:9</a>: “And I will bring forth a seed [singular] out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor [singular] of my mountains: and mine elect [plural] shall inherit it, and my servants [plural] shall dwell there”. His obedience would enable the peoples’ establishment as the Kingdom.</p>


text:
<p>When the priests enter in, then shall they not go out of the holy place into the outer court, but there they shall lay their garments in which they minister; for they are holy: and they shall put on other garments, and shall approach to those things which are for the people- The LXX gives the sense:"None shall go in thither except the priests, and they shall not go forth of the holy place into the outer court, that they that draw nigh to me may be continually holy, and may not touch their garments in which they minister, with defilement, for they are holy; and they shall put on other garments whenever they come in contact with the people". The language of defilement reads contrasts with the New Testament teaching that defilement has now been ended in Christ; and the veil to the Most Holy was torn at the Lord’s death to demonstrate that now, access to the Holiest was possible for"the people". And Hebrews builds on this, showing that all in Christ are now able to enter. It is not therefore good enough to argue that this temple will be built after the Lord’s return, and these things will point back to Him as the Mosaic sacrifices pointed forward to Him. The reality is that"the people"can get direct access to the Holiest, and that is now a reality for all time that will not be changed.</p>


text:
<p>Now when he had made an end of measuring the inner house, he brought me forth by the way of the gate whose prospect is toward the east, and measured it all around- He now measures the wall which was around the house and its courts. And Ezekiel was apparently led out by the east gate to observe this.</p>


text:
<p>He measured on the east side with the measuring reed five hundred reeds, with the measuring reed all around- For discussion of the size of the temple, see on <a href='B:330 45:1'>Eze 45:1</a>. The LXX sees this wall as that of the outer court, and changes the"reeds"into"cubits".</p>


text:
<p>He measured on the north side five hundred reeds with the measuring reed all around- The temple of Ezekiel was of broadly similar dimensions to that of Solomon, 500 cubits square (see RSV). The Hebrew translated"reeds"is hard to interpret; but many expositors have concluded that"cubits"is meant, amongst them Mark Allfree, Worship In The Age To Come and Philip Hinde & Ivan Sturman, Ezekiel’s Last Vision.</p>


text:
<p>He measured on the south side five hundred reeds with the measuring reed- The LXX reads"cubits"instead of"reeds".</p>


text:
<p>He turned about to the west side, and measured five hundred reeds with the measuring reed- Reading with LXX"cubits"makes more sense. Otherwise there is a huge area of space enclosed for no apparent reason.</p>


text:
<h4>He measured it on the four sides: it had a wall around it, the length five hundred, and the breadth five hundred, to make a separation between that which was holy and that which was common- This is alluding back to Ezekiel’s earlier lament that Judah had not made that very separation (<a href='B:330 22:26'>Eze 22:26</a>). See on <a href='B:330 44:6'>Eze 44:6</a>. Thisreflected the difference between God’s people, His “sanctuary” (<a href='B:230 114:2'>Psa 114:2</a>), and the surrounding world. But Judah did not ‘separate’ themselves from the surrounding tribes but instead married them and worshipped their idols (s:w. <a href='B:150 9:1'>Ezr 9:1</a> “The people of Israel::. have not separated themselves from the people of the land, doing according to their abominations::. for they have taken of their daughters for themselves”). The same word for “abominations” occurs in the same context in <a href='B:460 2:11'>Mal 2:11</a>: “Judah has dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah hath profaned the holiness of the LORD which he loved, and hath married the daughter of a strange god”. Yet it had been emphasized that the temple system Ezekiel described was to be free of all the “abominations” [s:w:] previously committed by Israel (<a href='B:330 43:8'>Eze 43:8</a>; <a href='B:330 44:6-7'>Eze 44:6-7</a>; <a href='B:330 44:13'>Eze 44:13</a>).</h4><h4>In fact, the account of Judah’s separation from the surrounding peoples reads similar to that of the purges from idolatry during the reign of the kings. They separated / purged, and then, within a few years, we read of them doing so again. Initially, the exiles separated from the peoples of the land (<a href='B:150 6:21'>Ezr 6:21</a>); by <a href='B:150 9:1'>Ezr 9:1</a> they are in need of separating again; and by <a href='B:150 10:11'>Ezr 10:11</a> likewise; then they separate (<a href='B:150 10:16'>Ezr 10:16</a>), only to need another call to separation by the time of <a href='B:160 9:2'>Neh 9:2</a>; <a href='B:160 13:3'>Neh 13:3</a>. They obviously found it extremely difficult to be separated from the surrounding world unto God’s law (<a href='B:160 10:28'>Neh 10:28</a>). There was a powerful logic- either separate from the world around, or be separated from the people of God (<a href='B:150 10:8'>Ezr 10:8</a>). It’s a separation- one way or the other. Judah chose not to make that separation, and so the spirit of the new temple was precluded from coming about in that form at that time.</h4>


text:
<p>Afterward he brought me to the gate that looks toward the east- The same words are translated"prepare the way"in <a href='B:460 3:1'>Mal 3:1</a> and <a href='B:290 40:3'>Isa 40:3</a> (see too <a href='B:330 43:1'>Eze 43:1</a>; <a href='B:330 44:1'>Eze 44:1</a>; <a href='B:330 47:2'>Eze 47:2</a>). The way&nbsp; is ’prepared’ or ’looks’ eastward. This was the way or road over which the glory was to re-enter the restored temple. But Judah didn’t rebuild that temple as specified and as Malachi often demonstrates, the priests failed to act as commanded in Ezekiel 40-48. And so the messenger of the covenant who was to prepare that way likewise failed; but finally the essence of the prophecies will come true through the work of the Elijah prophet and John the Baptist [also a priest] preparing the way of the Lord Jesus, so that His glory and Spirit could enter a spiritual temple of restored people.</p>


text:
<p>Behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the east: and His voice was like the sound of many waters; and the earth shined with His glory- This refers to the cherubim, who made the same sound according to Ezekiel’s earlier visions of them.</p>


text:
<p>It was according to the appearance of the vision which I saw when I came to destroy the city; and the visions were like the vision that I saw by the river Chebar; and I fell on my face- The vision of God’s glory entering the temple “was according to the vision… that I saw by the river Chebar” back in Babylon. This is the meaning of the fact that cherubim visions both begin and end the prophecy of Ezekiel. The cherubim would move from Judah to Babylon and then back to Judah, to enter into and dwell in the temple. Yet God’s glory did not enter the temple which Nehemiah built. This was because the people had not followed Ezekiel’s example, they had not identified themselves with the Angelic movements above them, but rather remained dominated by their petty self interests. They never really repented- for <a href='B:330 43:11'>Eze 43:11</a> records Ezekiel being told to only give Judah “the form of the house” and “write it in their sight” only “if&nbsp; they be ashamed of all that they have done”. There is no record of Ezekiel giving them the promised further plans for the temple- so the wonderful prophecy could not be fulfilled, because they did not repent.</p>


text:
<p>The glory of Yahweh came into the house by the way of the gate whose prospect is toward the east- Ezekiel prophesied that ultimately the glory would fill the temple as it had done then (<a href='B:330 43:4-5'>Eze 43:4-5</a>). But God’s prophesy of this in <a href='B:290 60:7'>Isa 60:7</a>, that He would glorify His house, meant that He was prepared to work through men to glorify it. The fulfilment of Ezekiel’s vision of the cloud of glory entering the temple again could have been fulfilled if the exiles had done what Artaxerxes empowered them to do- to glorify the house of glory. And so the fulfilment was delayed. The glory of the temple the exiles built was tragically less than the glory of the first temple; and so it would only be in the last day of Messiah’s second coming that the house shall truly be filled with glory (<a href='B:440 2:3'>Hag 2:3</a>; <a href='B:440 2:7'>Hag 2:7</a>; <a href='B:440 2:9'>Hag 2:9</a>). And the lesson ought to be clear for us, in the various projects and callings of our lives: it becomes crucial for us to discern God’s specific purposes for us, and insofar as we follow His leading, we will feel a blessing and power which is clearly Divine.</p>


text:
<p>The Spirit took me up, and brought me into the inner court; and behold, the glory of Yahweh filled the house- The glory of Yahweh was to fill Ezekiel’s temple as it had done Solomon’s (<a href='B:330 43:5'>Eze 43:5</a> cp. <a href='B:110 8:10'>1Ki 8:10</a>).</p>


text:
<p>I heard one speaking to me out of the house; and a man stood by me- The references to Yahweh’s ’return’ to Zion were to be fulfilled in the Angel of His presence again dwelling there. And this is the Angelic person who is now located within the house and speaks to Ezekiel.</p>


text:
<h4>He said to me, Son of man, this is the place of My throne, and theplace of the soles of My feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel forever- God’s throne was that of David; the restored throne of David is in view.</h4><h4>The house of Israel shall no more defile My holy name, neither they, nor their kings, by their prostitution, and by the dead bodies of their kings in their high places- . Judah in the new temple would not “defile” Yahweh’s Name any more (:8); but they were lazy to keep the uncleanness laws, they did defile Yahweh by touching dead bodied and then offering the sacrifices (<a href='B:440 2:13-14'>Hag 2:13-14</a> s:w:), just as Israel previously had been defiled by touching the dead bodies of their kings and then offering sacrifices; but after the restoration, Judah thought they were above God’s law, and therefore did exactly the same things which had caused the temple to be destroyed in the first place.</h4>


text:
<p>In their setting of their threshold by My threshold, and their doorpost beside My doorpost, and there was but the wall between Me and them; and they have defiled My holy name by their abominations which they have committed: therefore I have consumed them in My anger- We gasp at the closeness of God to men, even before the even greater proximity achieved in the work of Jesus.</p>


text:
<h4>Now let them put away their prostitution- Whilst Ezekiel was prophesying before the return from exile, he speaks as if the temple has been built but Judah are still unfaithful to the covenant. He was inspired to see that the restoration would happen, but the returned exiles would need exhortation to return spiritually to God and not just physically to Zion.</h4><h4>And the dead bodies of their kings, far from Me; and I will dwell in their midst forever- Instead of focusing upon the dead bodies of apostate kings, they should instead look to the restoration of the Davidic line in a Messianic prince. The promise that Yahweh would dwell in the new temple was conditional on them not touching dead bodies; but <a href='B:440 2:13'>Hag 2:13</a> makes it apparent that they did this very thing at the time of the restoration. The kingdom prophecy of <a href='B:360 3:21'>Joe 3:21</a> could then had had some fulfilment: “I will cleanse their blood that I have not cleansed; for the LORD dwells [s:w:] in Zion”. See on <a href='B:330 47:1'>Eze 47:1</a>.</h4>


text:
<h4>You, son of man, show the house to the people of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities; and let them measure the pattern- Ezekiel was showing the captives that they would return but would likely fall back into the very"prostitution"to the covenant (:9) which led to their exile; and Ezekiel is as it were asking them to repent ahead of time. Ezekiel shewed Judah the general picture of the temple; if they were obedient, then God promised to give them more details so they could build it in reality (perhaps these would have included details of the contents of the most holy place, of which nothing is said). In the same way as the Angel-cherubim were to be followed back on earth by Judah from Babylon to Jerusalem, so in the same way as the Angel is described as measuring the new temple, so Judah were to"measure the pattern"and build accordingly. But they didn’t.</h4><h4>Israel would only be able to build the temple properly if they were “ashamed of their iniquities”. This was the tragedy felt by Ezra, when he realized the exiles were not living as they should be: “O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my God; for our iniquities are increased” (<a href='B:150 9:6'>Ezr 9:6</a>). And Ezra knew they weren’t"ashamed of their iniquities". And thus he sought to take upon himself that shame, believing that God would accept his shame on behalf of the people. Note in passing how he speaks of blushing before God. You only blush in someone’s presence. And this was how close and real Ezra felt his God to be.</h4>


text:
<h4>If they be ashamed of all that they have done, make known to them the form of the house, and its fashion, and its exits, and its entrances, and all its forms, and all its ordinances, and all its forms, and all its laws; and write it in their sight; that they may keep the whole form of it, and all its ordinances, and do them- The fact Ezekiel does make known the form of the house would suggest that a minority amongst the exiles did repent. Or perhaps they didn’t, and by grace God all the same revealed to them the wonderful"form"of all the possibilities for them, in the hope that would elicit their repentance. Perhaps this repentance of a remnant explains why in fact the record ofEzekiel’s temple was written down at all- for it would be written down if Judah were ashamed of their sins. Ezekiel’s opening chapters record him being forewarned by God that they would not generally be responsive to his ministry; and yet some like Ezra were (see on :10), and maybe this was eagerly seized upon by God as the basis for allowing the writing down and preservation of the specifications we have in Ezekiel 40-48.</h4><h4>The temple vision should have made them ashamed of their sins (<a href='B:330 43:10-11'>Eze 43:10-11</a>). It should have motivated them to live the Kingdom life in their lives: “describe the Temple to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them match their lives to its pattern”. But they didn’t. It may have been partly due to lack of familiarity with the text of the prophecy- Ezekiel would have preached it to them, but many of them were too busy with the Babylon life to reflect upon it. Those who returned to the land may well have done so not so much in order to get on with conformity to Ezekiel’s vision of the Kingdom, but for other reasons- their family and friends were going back, they felt some vague conscience that they ought to, perhaps their own experience of Babylon life hadn’t been positive and they vaguely hoped for something better::. and so when they got there, they simply weren’t interested in serious conformity to the prophecies about restoration. And in principle, our own lives and apparent commitment before God can be just the same. It is evident that they didn’t reflect upon the real implications of the prophecies which they must all have vaguely known. And these&nbsp; weaknesses must serve as the basis for our own self-examination: are we familiar with the text of Scripture, and more so, are we really meditating upon the personal implications for us?</h4>


text:
<p>This is the law of the house: on the top of the mountain the whole limit around it shall be most holy. Behold, this is the law of the house- This is one of the clearest statements that what we have in Ezekiel 40-48 is command rather than prediction. They were a law, a commandment to be fulfilled. This explains the commandment style of the instructions, e:g. <a href='B:330 44:2'>Eze 44:2</a>: “This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened”. The"law of the house"should not be confused with the law of Moses; there are significant differences.</p>


text:
<p>These are the measures of the altar by cubits (the cubit is a cubit and a handbreadth): the bottom shall be a cubit, and the breadth a cubit, and its border around its edge a span; and this shall be the base of the altar-</p>


text:
<p>From the bottom on the ground to the lower ledge shall be two cubits, and the breadth one cubit; and from the lesser ledge to the greater ledge shall be four cubits, and the breadth a cubit- The impression given by the language is that the altar rises up out of the earth. This is a purposeful juxtaposition with the unusual word used for it in :15, harel,"the mount of God". The impression is that arising from the dust on man’s side, God meets with man there at His table and fellowships with us in eating together.</p>


text:
<p>The upper altar shall be four cubits; and from the altar hearth and upward there shall be four horns-"Upper altar"is harel, literally"the mount of God". The altar is therefore presented as the pinnacle of mount Zion. The teaching is not so much that sacrifice is the pinnacle of devotion to God, but rather His desire to share a table with man, to eat with man, is the pinnacle. The four horns perhaps connect with the four cherubim, who have as it were landed permanently in the new temple.</p>


text:
<p>The altar hearth shall be twelve cubits long by twelve broad, square in the four sides of it- This was large, but the twelve square arrangement looked forward to the united twelve tribes of Israel having one altar. The restoration prophecies indicate that there was envisaged a unity between the restored tribes of Israel, centred around a joint experience of forgiveness and desire to worship at the same altar (cp. <a href='B:140 32:12'>2Ch 32:12</a>). Ezekiel had earlier seen the altar as the place of Divine judgment for the abuses committed there (<a href='B:330 9:2'>Eze 9:2</a>). Now, the restored exiles were to do better.</p>


text:
<p>The ledge shall be fourteen cubits long by fourteen broad in the four sides of it; and the border about it shall be half a cubit; and its bottom shall be a cubit around; and its steps shall look toward the east- The altar would have steps leading up to it, whereas this was forbidden in <a href='B:20 20:26'>Exo 20:26</a>. The intended new system would not need to be so concerned about human uncleanness because this had been dealt with under the new covenant offered them.</p>


text:
<p>He said to me, Son of man, thus says the Lord Yahweh: These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon-"In the day::."implies they were not to use it until they had immediately offered a sin offering upon it (:19). That the altar needed cleansing again indicates an abiding imperfection in the whole system which would not be appropriate if this temple is to be built and operated by the Lord Jesus and the redeemed in the future.</p>


text:
<p>You shall give to the priests the Levites who are of the seed of Zadok, who are near to Me, to minister to Me, says the Lord Yahweh, a young bull for a sin offering- Before we can offer anything to God on His altar (:18), there must be the recognition that we are sinners; what we are offering, therefore, is not in order to obtain forgiveness, but in gratitude for that forgiveness already received. The"you"was addressed to Ezekiel and suggests it could have been built within Ezekiel’s lifetime, for he was to give the animals to the sons of Zadok to offer in the temple; Ezekiel was to prepare the daily sacrifice (<a href='B:330 46:13'>Eze 46:13</a>). The Zadok of <a href='B:330 43:19'>Eze 43:19</a> may well be the Zadok of <a href='B:160 13:13'>Neh 13:13</a>; meaning that although the potential for fulfilment in Ezekiel’s lifetime had been missed, the next generation were still capable of fulfilling it.</p>


text:
<p>You shall take of its blood, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the ledge, and on the border all around: thus you shall cleanse it and make atonement for it- Ezekiel himself, as a priest, was to inaugurate the altar by sprinkling blood upon it and making an offering (<a href='B:330 43:20-25'>Eze 43:20-25</a>). Ezekiel personally was to give the priests a bullock to offer on the new altar and to cleanse it (<a href='B:330 43:19-20'>Eze 43:19-20</a>)- as if the temple was intended to be built during Ezekiel’s lifetime:&nbsp; See on :19.</p>


text:
<p>You shall also take the bull of the sin offering, and it shall be burnt in the appointed place of the house, outside of the sanctuary- Nehemiah did his very best to bring the potential Kingdom of God about by urging the people to repentance and conformity to God’s will, such was his perception of what was going on; that the coming of God’s Kingdom was being limited by the apathy of his own people. See on <a href='B:330 40:10'>Eze 40:10</a>. He arranged for 12 gates to be built in the wall, as <a href='B:330 48:31-34'>Eze 48:31-34</a> had commanded there to be. He built ‘miphkad’, “the Muster Gate” (<a href='B:160 3:31'>Neh 3:31</a> RSV), the “appointed place” [s:w:] of <a href='B:330 43:21'>Eze 43:21</a>.</p>


text:
<p>On the second day you shall offer a male goat without blemish for a sin offering; and they shall cleanse the altar, as they cleansed it with the bull- Malachi and Haggai so bitterly complain at the way the priests didn’t serve God properly in the restored temple. They offered blemished sacrifices, when it had been prophesied / commanded in Ezekiel that Israel were not to do this (<a href='B:460 1:8'>Mal 1:8</a>).</p>


text:
<p>When you have finished cleansing it, you shall offer a young bull without blemish, and a ram out of the flock without blemish- But they offered blemished animals (<a href='B:460 1:8'>Mal 1:8</a>), because they wanted the nicer meat and more money for themselves- petty materialism stopped the Kingdom experience being realized.</p>


text:
<p>You shall bring them near to Yahweh, and the priests shall cast salt on them, and they shall offer them up for a burnt offering to Yahweh- The salt was a sign of covenant relationship (<a href='B:30 2:13'>Lev 2:13</a>). The inauguration of the altar would be a sign of acceptance of the new covenant with the returned exiles which is envisaged in Ezekiel 20 and Jeremiah 31. The reality is that they didn’t really accept it.</p>


text:
<p>Seven days you shall prepare every day a goat for a sin offering: they shall also prepare a young bull, and a ram out of the flock, without blemish- The contrast between"you"and"they"suggest that Ezekiel himself is envisaged as acting as a priest. The prophecy could have come true in his life time; the 70 year period of captivity could have been reduced. Instead, it was extended.</p>


text:
<p>Seven days shall they make atonement for the altar and purify it; so shall they consecrate it- There was to be a seven day dedication of the altar (<a href='B:330 43:26'>Eze 43:26</a>) just as had happened in Solomon’s time (<a href='B:140 7:9'>2Ch 7:9</a>).</p>


text:
<h4>When they have accomplished the days, it shall be that on the eighth day, and onwards, the priests shall make your burnt offerings on the altar and your peace offerings- Both Solomon and Ezekiel’s temples were to be ready for operation on “the eighth day” after their consecration (cp. <a href='B:110 8:66'>1Ki 8:66</a>). I suggest that contrary to how it is often presented, Ezekiel’s temple was to be of a similar size to that of Solomon’s. Even the statement that finally, the Lord would be there in the temple, is alluding back to how Yahweh came and dwelt in Solomon’s temple.</h4><h4>And I will accept you, says the Lord Yahweh- Ezekiel 20 gives the clearest outline of the envisaged sequence of events at the restoration. Verses 3-33 describe Israel’s sins up to the captivity; then there is the pleading with Israel in captivity (:35 = <a href='B:330 17:20'>Eze 17:20</a>), with the intention that there in Babylon Israel would repent (:43). Then they would return to their land, build a temple and offer acceptable sacrifices, and be “accepted” (<a href='B:330 20:41'>Eze 20:41</a>). The idea of God ‘accepting’ Israel is found here in <a href='B:330 43:27'>Eze 43:27</a>; when the temple was built and the sacrifices offered, “I will accept you”. If Judah resumed building the temple according to Ezekiel’s plan, “I will take pleasure” in it, God offered (<a href='B:440 1:8'>Hag 1:8</a>). The same word is used in <a href='B:330 43:27'>Eze 43:27</a> - then, when the temple of Ezekiel was built, Yahweh would “accept / take pleasure in” His people and temple. But because they built and served Him with such a mean spirit, He did not “accept” them at that time (<a href='B:460 1:10'>Mal 1:10</a>; <a href='B:460 1:13'>Mal 1:13</a> s:w:). Note how <a href='B:440 1:8'>Hag 1:8</a> describes the need to go up onto the mountain and build the temple- as if to recall attention to Ezekiel’s opening vision of the temple as built on a mountain. But Judah would not, and therefore the Kingdom blessings of corn, new wine and oil, as well as fruitfulness on the mountains, were all withheld (<a href='B:440 1:11'>Hag 1:11</a>).</h4>


text:
<p>Then he brought me back by the way of the outer gate of the sanctuary, which looks toward the east; and it was shut- The intention was that when the temple was built and functioning as required, operated and used by a repentant Judah, Yahweh’s glory would return through the east gate. But in the vision, it was still"shut". The same words are translated"prepare the way"in <a href='B:460 3:1'>Mal 3:1</a> and <a href='B:290 40:3'>Isa 40:3</a> (see too <a href='B:330 43:1'>Eze 43:1</a>; <a href='B:330 47:2'>Eze 47:2</a>). The way&nbsp; is ’prepared’ or ’looks’ eastward. This was the way or road over which the glory was to re-enter the restored temple. But Judah didn’t rebuild that temple as specified and as Malachi often demonstrates, the priests failed to act as commanded in Ezekiel 40-48. And so the messenger of the covenant who was to prepare that way likewise failed; but finally the essence of the prophecies will come true through the work of the Elijah prophet and John the Baptist [also a priest] preparing the way of the Lord Jesus, so that His glory and Spirit could enter a spiritual temple of restored people.</p>


text:
<p>Yahweh said to me, This gate shall be shut; it shall not be opened, neither shall any man enter in by it; for Yahweh, the God of Israel, has entered in by it; therefore it shall be shut- Zechariah labours the paradox of grace- that if Judah returned to Yahweh both physically and spiritually, then He would return to them. But He by grace had already returned, so eager was He for this possible scenario to come about. And He has the same Spirit in dealing with us today. See on <a href='B:330 46:12'>Eze 46:12</a>.</p>


text:
<p>As for the prince, he shall sit therein as prince to eat bread before Yahweh; he shall enter by the way of the porch of the gate, and shall go out by the way of the same- Had Judah repented at the time of the restoration, a Davidic ruler would have been raised up, Zerubbabel is the most obvious candidate (see on Zechariah 6). He would have reigned"for ever", for an age. But he dropped the baton, or at least Judah were unwilling for this scenario. And so the prophecies were reinterpreted and rescheduled for total and eternal fulfilment in the Lord Jesus."The prince"of the envisaged restored temple in Ezekiel 40-48 refers to this same individual. See on <a href='B:330 37:25'>Eze 37:25</a>; <a href='B:330 46:3'>Eze 46:3</a>.</p>


text:
<p>Then he brought me by the way of the north gate before the house; and I looked, and behold, the glory of Yahweh filled the house of Yahweh: and I fell on my face-</p>


text:
<p>Yahweh said to me, Son of man, mark well, and see with your eyes, and hear with your ears all that I tell you concerning all the ordinances of the house of Yahweh, and all its laws; and mark well the entrance of the house, with every exit of the sanctuary- The details of the temple were so detailed- Ezekiel was to “mark well…every going forth”- in order to inspire in Judah repentance for how they had abused the previous temple. Ezekiel’s prophecies should have been an inspiration to Israel, that they might be obedient and live out these things as a reality before them, and thereby see other prophecies come true in their own experience. They could have entered upon an upward spiral of spirituality. The form of the house, the very description of it by Ezekiel, should have inspired them to feel that they had had enough of sin.</p>


text:
<h4>You shall tell the rebellious house of Israel- This the same rubric used earlier (<a href='B:330 2:5'>Eze 2:5</a>; <a href='B:330 3:26'>Eze 3:26</a>; <a href='B:330 12:2'>Eze 12:2</a>; <a href='B:330 12:25'>Eze 12:25</a>; <a href='B:330 17:12'>Eze 17:12</a>; <a href='B:330 24:3'>Eze 24:3</a>). There is a congruence between the style of address found in Ezekiel 40-48 and the earlier part of the prophecy. See on <a href='B:330 42:20'>Eze 42:20</a>. This is because Ezekiel is addressing the same audience- those who had heard his criticisms and appeals for repentance were the same group who were now being commanded to build a temple according to the dimensions given.</h4><h4>Thus says the Lord Yahweh: you house of Israel, let it suffice you of all your abominations- These plans for the temple were given in order to elicit Judah’s repentance. These words are picked up from the LXX by Peter, and applied to all of us in <a href='B:670 4:3'>1Pe 4:3</a>: “For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles”. The same word for “abominations” occurs in the same context in <a href='B:460 2:11'>Mal 2:11</a>: “Judah has dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah has profaned the holiness of the LORD which he loved, and has married the daughter of a strange god”. Yet it had been emphasized that the temple system Ezekiel described was to be free of all the “abominations” [s:w:] previously committed by Israel (<a href='B:330 43:8'>Eze 43:8</a>; <a href='B:330 44:6-7'>Eze 44:6-7</a>; <a href='B:330 44:13'>Eze 44:13</a>).</h4>


text:
<h4>In that you have brought in foreigners, uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, to be in My sanctuary, to profane it, even My house, when you offer My bread, the fat and the blood- This could be read as referring to what Judah had done before the exile; they were under the impression, according to Ezekiel 18, that they were suffering unfairly. But in the attempt at rebuilding the temple, Judah profaned the Sabbath (<a href='B:160 13:17-18'>Neh 13:17-18</a>), and profaned the temple by their marriage with Gentiles and their “weariness” with the temple ordinances (<a href='B:460 1:12'>Mal 1:12</a>; <a href='B:460 2:10-11'>Mal 2:10-11</a>). They got bored with the things of the Kingdom, and so they had no part in it.</h4><h4>And they have broken My covenant, to add to all your abominations- Judah broke covenant [s:w:] with Yahweh at the time of the restoration by marrying Gentiles and worshipping their gods (<a href='B:150 9:1'>Ezr 9:1</a>; <a href='B:150 9:14'>Ezr 9:14</a>).</h4>


text:
<h4>You have not performed the duty of My holy things; but you have set performers of My duty in My sanctuary for yourselves- They had the mentality of many religious people. They thought their religious structures and leaders could do the work of spirituality for them. We recall how Israel didn’t want to hear Yahweh speaking directly to them, but preferred Moses to engage with God for them; and how the spiritually weak asked others to pray to God for them instead of them doing so (<a href='B:300 14:11'>Jer 14:11</a>; <a href='B:510 8:24'>Act 8:24</a>). This is the problem with all organized religion; it tends to take away from personal spirituality and engagement with God.</h4><h4><a href='B:450 3:7-10'>Zec 3:7-10</a> encouraged Joshua to be the king-priest of the restored kingdom: “If you will walk in my ways, and if you will keep my charge [as so frequently commanded in <a href='B:330 40:46'>Eze 40:46</a>; <a href='B:330 44:8'>Eze 44:8</a>; <a href='B:330 44:14-16'>Eze 44:14-16</a> s:w:], then you shall also judge my house (as prophesied in Ezekiel 40-48), and shalt also keep my courts (so often mentioned in Ezekiel 40-48), and I will give you places to walk (s:w. <a href='B:330 42:4'>Eze 42:4</a> about the walkways in the prophesied temple)::. hear now, O Joshua”. But he didn’t. He didn’t keep the courts, but allowed Tobiah the Ammonite to set up his office for subversion in the temple chambers.</h4>


text:
<p>Thus says the Lord Yahweh, No foreigner, uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter into My sanctuary, of any foreigners who are among the people of Israel- Joel 3 describes how then there would be a great invasion, to be met by Yahweh’s intervention and the establishment of the Kingdom. Then&nbsp; “So shall you know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no stranger pass through her any more” (<a href='B:360 3:17'>Joe 3:17</a>). This is language undoubtedly to be linked with that of Ezekiel 40-48. There we have Yahweh dwelling in Zion, the city named Yahweh Shammah, ‘Yahweh is there’ (<a href='B:330 48:35'>Eze 48:35</a>). No stranger would pass through Zion, according to <a href='B:330 44:7-9'>Eze 44:7-9</a>.</p>


text:
<p>But the Levites who went far from Me, when Israel went astray, who went astray from Me after their idols, they shall bear their iniquity- We notice how the religious leaders and the masses are equally blamed. A population get in the end the leadership they really want and deserve, whether or not they practice a democratic system. The priesthood knew what the people wanted and encouraged them in it, for their own ends.</p>


text:
<h4>Yet now- Having carried the guilt of their iniquity in the exile (:10), they were now to be rehabilitated as ministers again.</h4><h4>They are to be ministers in My sanctuary, having oversight at the gates of the house, and ministering in the house: they shall kill the burnt offering and the sacrifice for the people, and they shall stand before them to minister to them- The Levites were to"stand before"the people as their inferiors, to serve them, and not as previously, as their controllers and masters.</h4>


text:
<p>Because they ministered to them before their idols, and became a stumbling block of iniquity to the house of Israel; therefore have I lifted up My hand against them, says the Lord Yahweh, and they shall bear their iniquity- As noted on :11, they were in Ezekiel’s time ’bearing their iniquity’ in exile, unable to minister to Yahweh in His temple.</p>


text:
<h4>They shall not come near to Me, to execute the office of priest to Me, nor to come near to any of My holy things, to the things that are most holy; but they shall bear their shame, and their abominations which they have committed- They would be able to"minister"for the people, but not to come near before Yahweh (:15). That would be done by the sons of Zadok.</h4><h4>The people were warned that the temple had been destroyed because of their previous “abominations”, and that the rebuilt temple was not to feature any such abominations (<a href='B:330 43:8'>Eze 43:8</a>; <a href='B:330 44:6-7'>Eze 44:6-7</a>; <a href='B:330 44:13'>Eze 44:13</a>). “let it suffice you of your abominations” they were told- and then told not to allow the uncircumcised into the temple, as they had been doing <a href='B:330 44:6'>Eze 44:6</a>; <a href='B:330 44:9'>Eze 44:9</a>). This sounds as if the prophecy of Ezekiel wasmore command than prediction- to those of his own day. But they returned, and committed the abominations [s:w:] of the Gentiles (<a href='B:150 9:1'>Ezr 9:1</a>; <a href='B:150 9:11'>Ezr 9:11</a>; <a href='B:150 9:14'>Ezr 9:14</a>) and married their daughters; to the extent that Malachi commented upon this: “Judah hath dealt treacherously, and an abomination [s:w:] is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah hath profaned the holiness of the LORD which he loved, and hath married the daughter of a strange god” (<a href='B:460 2:11'>Mal 2:11</a>).</h4>


text:
<p>Yet will I make them performers of the duty of the house, for all its service, and for all that shall be done therein- Judah were to keep the charges of God relating to His house (<a href='B:330 40:46'>Eze 40:46</a>; <a href='B:330 44:8'>Eze 44:8</a>; <a href='B:330 44:14-16'>Eze 44:14-16</a>). Nehemiah, seeking for Israel’s obedience to Ezekiel’s vision, tried to get them to “keep the charges” (s:w. <a href='B:160 7:3'>Neh 7:3</a>; <a href='B:160 12:9'>Neh 12:9</a>; <a href='B:160 12:45'>Neh 12:45</a>; <a href='B:160 13:20'>Neh 13:20</a>). But soon, Judah complained that there was no benefit to them from having kept the charges (<a href='B:460 3:14'>Mal 3:14</a> s:w:). Partial obedience discouraged them from any further effort, because the fullness of blessing can only come from a way of life conformed to God’s Kingdom vision and life. This is why people get disillusioned with religion and lose even the true faith- because they seek for immediate benefit as a result of keeping a few highly specific aspects of God’s law, rather than willingly devoting their way of life to the realization of His vision</p>


text:
<p>But the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok, who performed the duty of My sanctuary when the children of Israel went astray from Me, they shall come near to Me to minister to Me; and they shall stand before Me to offer to Me the fat and the blood, says the Lord Yahweh- We wonder if there was a literal"Zadok"at the time of the restoration whose sons could have literally done this.</p>


text:
<p>They shall enter into My sanctuary, and they shall come near to My table, to minister to Me, and they shall keep My instructions- Malachi later laments how this table or altar of Yahweh was despised by the returned exiles, offering small quantities of sick animals upon it, and thereby entertaining Yahweh in a paltry manner. They despised it (<a href='B:460 1:7'>Mal 1:7</a>; <a href='B:460 1:12'>Mal 1:12</a>), they found it such a weariness. And we too have an attitude to the Lord’s table. Paul speaks of us each one partaking of “the table of the Lord” (<a href='B:530 10:21'>1Co 10:21</a>), a phrase used in the LXX for the altar (<a href='B:330 44:16'>Eze 44:16</a>; <a href='B:460 1:7'>Mal 1:7</a>; <a href='B:460 1:12'>Mal 1:12</a>)- the sacrifices whereof only the priests could eat. This would have been radical thinking to a community used to priests and men delegated to take charge of others’ religious affairs. Hebrew 3:13 gets at this idea when we read that we are to exhort one another not to turn away, situated as we are on the brink of the promised land, just as Moses exhorted Israel.</p>


text:
<p>It shall be that when they enter in at the gates of the inner court, they shall be clothed with linen garments; and no wool shall come on them, while they minister in the gates of the inner court, and within- The temptation to wear woolen clothesmay have been simply in order to keep warm.</p>


text:
<p>They shall have linen headware on their heads, and shall have linen breeches on their waists; they shall not clothe themselves with anything that causes sweat- These people are clearly mortal, as sweat is part of the curse.</p>


text:
<p>When they go forth into the outer court, even into the outer court to the people, they shall put off their garments in which they minister, and lay them in the holy rooms; and they shall put on other garments, that they not sanctify the people with unclean garments- We recall how Joshua the high priest was clothed in filthy garments in Zechariah 3. The statements in :18-23) may all be hinting that these things were done by Israel before the captivity; but they were not to be done in the new temple. There was to be repentance.</p>


text:
<p>Neither shall they shave their heads, nor allow their locks to grow long; they shall only cut off the hair of their head- They were to be under something like the Nazirite vow.</p>


text:
<p>Neither shall any of the priests drink wine when they enter into the inner court- These priests are clearly mortal because they are liable to the influence of alcohol.</p>


text:
<h4>Neither shall they take for their wives a widow, nor her who is divorced; but they shall take virgins of the seed of the house of Israel, or a widow who is the widow of a priest- These priests are clearly mortal as the immortalized will not marry (<a href='B:490 20:35-36'>Luk 20:35-36</a>), and we have here a surrounding situation envisaged where there is the possibility of divorce and remarriage. If indeed this speaks of a situation in the supposed Millennium, then we have to accept there will be divorce and remarriage then. But after the Lord’s return, surely all that will be part of the tears that are wiped away from our eyes and experience.</h4><h4>Malachi and Haggai so bitterly complain at the way the priests didn’t serve God properly in the restored temple. The priests married divorced women (<a href='B:460 2:14-16'>Mal 2:14-16</a>), even though Ezekiel 44 commanded they should not do this.</h4>


text:
<h4>They shall teach My people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean- It would no longer be the duty of the Levites to teach the people as under the Mosaic law; it is envisaged here as specifically the duty of the sons of Zadok. This again confirms the conclusion that we are not reading here of the Law of Moses being reinstituted; but rather a new deal, a new covenant, offered to the returning exiles which had some similarities with the Mosaic law, but which differed from it.</h4><h4>The Levites were to teach Judah and to make others discern between good and evil. They should have done this, but instead “ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi” (<a href='B:460 2:7-8'>Mal 2:7-8</a>). The sons of Zadok were descendants of Eleazer and Phinehas (<a href='B:130 6:3-8'>1Ch 6:3-8</a>), and <a href='B:460 2:5'>Mal 2:5</a> alludes to this: “My covenant was with him of life and peace: and I gave them to him for the fear wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name” (cp. <a href='B:20 32:28'>Exo 32:28</a>). But <a href='B:460 2:6-8'>Mal 2:6-8</a> go on to show that the sons of Zadok, as the descendants of Phinehas, had not lived up to their pedigree; they were making men “stumble at the law”. This shows the connection between the Ezekiel prophecies and Malachi’s commentary on their failed fulfilment in the hands of men like the sons of Zadok.</h4>


text:
<p>In a controversy they shall stand to judge; according to My ordinances shall they judge it: and they shall keep My laws and My statutes in all My appointed feasts; and they shall make My Sabbaths holy- The existence of controversies is surely inappropriate to any Millenial reign of Christ; and the Sabbath was fulfilledin the Lord Jesus. The situation here speaks of a scenario after the restoration from Babylon. The Levites were to judge justly. But <a href='B:450 7:9'>Zec 7:9</a>; <a href='B:450 8:16'>Zec 8:16</a> [s:w:] had to exhort them to stop judging unjustly.</p>


text:
<p>They shall not go near a dead person to defile themselves; but for father, or for mother, or for son, or for daughter, for brother, or for sister who has had no husband, they may defile themselves- The priests of this new system would have relatives who died, and the possibility of defilement. Clearly they are mortal and not immortal.</p>


text:
<p>After he is cleansed, they shall reckon to him seven days- As noted on :25, the possibility of defilement and the need for cleansing speaks of a very human situation at the time of the restoration, and not of the reign of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>In the day that he goes into the sanctuary, into the inner court, to minister in the sanctuary, he shall offer his sin offering, says the Lord Yahweh- The priests will still be capable of sin and require sin offerings. They are mortal, and not immortal. And the Lord’s sin offering on the cross was and is effective for all time, and thereby ended the need for animal sacrifices to atone for sin and defilement.</p>


text:
<p>They shall have an inheritance: I am their inheritance; and you shall give them no possession in Israel; I am their possession- The GNB grasps the sense:"The priests have the priesthood as their share of what I have given Israel to be handed down from one generation to another". The honour of serving God today should likewise make our material possessions of little moment to us.</p>


text:
<p>They shall eat the meal offering, and the sin offering, and the trespass offering; and every devoted thing in Israel shall be theirs- The existence of such offerings clearly speaks of a time prior to the Lord’s death, which was the ultimate offering for sin and all trespass and thereby ended the need for any further such offerings.</p>


text:
<p>The first of all the first fruits of every thing, and every offering of everything, of all your offerings, shall be for the priest: you shall also give to the priests the first of your dough, to cause a blessing to rest on your house- <a href='B:460 3:8'>Mal 3:8</a> and Nehemiah’s record show how these tithes were not given, and what was given was substandard and abused by the priests. This potential scenario didn’t come about because we are reading here commands rather than prediction.</p>


text:
<p>The priests shall not eat of anything that dies of itself, or is torn, whether it be bird or animal- The priests ’ate’ the offerings to symbolize God eating with the offerer at His table, the altar. But the returned exiles did offer such animals, according to Malachi; see on :30. The existence of animals who will have been “torn” by other animals seems hard to square with the Kingdom prophecies of Isaiah 9, 11 about the animals living at peace with each other. It is the restoration from exile which is in view, not the Kingdom to be established by the Lord Jesus at His return.</p>


text:
<p>Moreover, when you shall divide by lot the land for inheritance, you shall offer an offering to Yahweh, a holy portion of the land; the length shall be the length of twenty-five thousand reeds, and the breadth shall be ten thousand: it shall be holy in all its border all around- The confusion has been in deciding whether to take some of the measurements in reeds or cubits (which are much smaller), seeing that the Hebrew text strangely omits the measurement unit. The “oblation”&nbsp;would be about 60 miles square if we measure it in reeds. This area would encroach either upon the Mediterranean or the Dead Sea, and it seems contextually more likely that a smaller area measured in cubits is intended. If measured in reeds, this large area somewhat disrupts the distribution of land amongst the tribes as detailed later in Ezekiel. If the missing measurement unit here is cubits and not reeds, it is likely that it is in the dimensions of the temple itself. The holy oblation described in <a href='B:330 45:1'>Eze 45:1</a> is to be “the length of five and twenty thousand”. “Reeds” in the AV is in italics. The following verse speaks of cubits as the measurement unit. Only the context can decide whether cubits or reeds is meant in many of the Ezekiel passages- although the LXX, RSV etc. give cubits rather than reeds in 42:16 and other passages. If it is going to be thousands of reeds, then it would be over 1 mile square. However, <a href='B:300 30:18'>Jer 30:18</a> RSV prophesies: “the city shall be builded upon her own heap, and the palace shall be where it used to be”. And passages as varied as Zechariah 1, Psalms 68 and Micah 4 all insist that the temple of the restored Kingdom was to built within the city of Jerusalem. If the temple is 500 reeds square, there will be no room for a city, assuming the city will be of the same size as the previous old city of Jerusalem.</p>


text:
<p>Of this there shall be for the holy place five hundred in length by five hundred in breadth, square all around; and fifty cubits for its suburbs all around- As noted on :1, the"five hundred"isn’t defined.</p>


text:
<p>Of this measure you shall measure a length of twenty-five thousand, and a breadth of ten thousand: and in it shall be the sanctuary, which is most holy- The sanctuary was in the midst of the tribal allotments (<a href='B:330 48:8'>Eze 48:8</a>). The entire area is described as"the most holy", literally"the holy of holies". The conception of sacred space is challenged in the Ezekiel temple. The most holy in Solomon’s temple was 20 x 20 cubits, about 9 x 9 meters. Now, the entire temple area is the most holy.</p>


text:
<p>It is a holy portion of the land; it shall be for the priests, the ministers of the sanctuary, who come near to minister to Yahweh; and it shall be a place for their houses, and a holy place for the sanctuary- The priests were to live in one specific area near the temple, whereas under the Mosaic Law, the priests were given land to live on in each of the various tribes of Israel. And yet the record of the restoration stresses that the priests lived not around the temple, but in various cities throughout Judah (<a href='B:150 2:70'>Ezr 2:70</a>; <a href='B:160 7:73'>Neh 7:73</a>; <a href='B:160 11:3'>Neh 11:3</a>; <a href='B:160 11:20'>Neh 11:20</a>; <a href='B:160 12:44'>Neh 12:44</a>). They disobeyed about everything in the regulations of Ezekiel 40-48.</p>


text:
<p>Twenty-five thousand in length, and ten thousand in breadth, shall be to the Levites, the ministers of the house, for a possession to themselves, as places to live in- AV"for a possession for twenty chambers". This suggests the number of ministers is relatively small, contradicting the theory of a huge temple for the entire planet. The small size and relatively small number of ministers is far more appropriate to a temple intended to be rebuilt by the returned exiles.</p>


text:
<p>You shall appoint the possession of the city five thousand broad, and twenty-five thousand long, side by side with the offering of the holy portion: it shall be for the whole house of Israel- Adding the 10,000 reeds of breadth for the Levites’ domain, the 10,000 for the priests’ land, and the 5000 for the city quarter, makes a total breadth of 25,000 reeds; so that the tract in which all these were included was a square.</p>


text:
<p>Whatever is for the prince shall be on the one side and on the other side of the holy offering and of the possession of the city, in front of the holy offering and in front of the possession of the city, on the west side westward, and on the east side eastward; and in length answerable to one of the portions, from the west border to the east border- Had Judah repented at the time of the restoration, a Davidic ruler would have been raised up, Zerubbabel is the most obvious candidate (see on Zechariah 6). He would have reigned"for ever", for an age. But he dropped the baton, or at least Judah were unwilling for this scenario. And so the prophecies werereinterpreted and rescheduled for total and eternal fulfilment in the Lord Jesus."The prince"of the envisaged restored temple in Ezekiel 40-48 refers to this same individual. See on <a href='B:330 37:25'>Eze 37:25</a>.</p>


text:
<p>In the land it shall be to him for a possession in Israel: and My princes shall no more oppress My people; but they shall give the land to the house of Israel according to their tribes- The idea that some prophecies are more command than prediction helps make sense of the prophecy of Ezekiel 40-48. When we read “my princes shall no more oppress my people… the shekel shall be twenty gerahs… you shall offer an oblation” (<a href='B:330 45:8'>Eze 45:8</a>; <a href='B:330 45:12-13'>Eze 45:12-13</a>), the emphasis needs to be placed upon the word “shall”. This was a command to the elders of the people- made explicit in passages like <a href='B:330 45:9'>Eze 45:9</a>: “Let it suffice you, O princes of Israel: remove violence and spoil… you shall have just balances”. By failing to be obedient, God’s people effectively disallowed the fulfilment of the ‘prophecy’ that could have come true if they had been obedient to it. “My princes [in this new temple system] shall no more oppress my people” as they did in the recent past (cp. <a href='B:300 22:3'>Jer 22:3</a>; <a href='B:330 18:7'>Eze 18:7</a>; <a href='B:330 18:12'>Eze 18:12</a>; <a href='B:330 18:16'>Eze 18:16</a>; <a href='B:330 22:7'>Eze 22:7</a>; <a href='B:330 22:29'>Eze 22:29</a>; <a href='B:430 3:1'>Zep 3:1</a>, where the same Hebrew word for “oppress” is found). Thus there was to be repentance for the ‘oppression’ which Ezekiel had earlier had to criticize Israel for. They went into captivity because the princes and priests oppressed the people (<a href='B:300 21:12'>Jer 21:12</a>; <a href='B:300 22:3'>Jer 22:3</a>; <a href='B:300 22:17'>Jer 22:17</a>); in the new temple, this was not to be so. The princes were to give the rest of the land to the people of Israel. And yet, in Nehemiah’s time the princes of the people did again oppress them, e:g. through making them mortgage their lands to them so that effectively they took it for themselves (<a href='B:160 5:3'>Neh 5:3</a>). This is the tragedy of Israel’s refusal to learn… The intention was that those hearing Ezekiel’s words in captivity would “bear the punishment of their iniquity… that the house of Israel go no more astray” (<a href='B:330 14:11'>Eze 14:11</a>).</p>


text:
<p>Thus says the Lord Yahweh: Let it suffice you, princes of Israel: remove violence and spoil, and execute justice and righteousness instead of dispossessing My people, says the Lord Yahweh- Nehemiah 5 records that Judah did the very opposite on returning from exile, and Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi all record social injustice as being the order of the day at the time of the restoration</p>


text:
<p>You shall have just balances, a just ephah and a just bath- They were to have “just” balances, as opposed to the “unjust” [s:w:] balances which they had in the lead up to the captivity (<a href='B:300 22:13'>Jer 22:13</a>, AV “unrighteous”).</p>


text:
<p>The ephah and the bath shall be of one measure, that the bath may contain the tenth part of a homer, and the ephah the tenth part of a homer: its measure shall be after the homer- Malachi and Haggai so bitterly complain at the way the priests didn’t serve God properly in the restored temple:&nbsp; They were to use just measures (:9-14), unlike what they had previously done. But they robbed God in their sacrifices in the restored temple (<a href='B:460 3:8'>Mal 3:8</a>).</p>


text:
<p>The shekel shall be twenty gerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekels shall be your mina- The standard, defining weights were destroyed during the Babylonian attack, according to Josephus.</p>


text:
<p>This is the offering that you shall offer: the sixth part of an ephah from a homer of wheat; and you shall give the sixth part of an ephah from a homer of barley- There are intentional differences with the Mosaic requirements. There is probably no great symbolic meaning in the differences, rather is the point being made that acceptance of the new covenant meant effectively that the Mosaic law had been ended. This is evidence enough that the law of Moses was not literally"eternal"but was for that age or olahm.</p>


text:
<p>And the set portion of oil, of the bath of oil, the tenth part of a bath out of the cor, which is ten baths, even a homer (for ten baths are a homer)- This is significantly more than the Mosaic law required, although there was to be only one daily offering in the morning, and not also in the evenings.</p>


text:
<p>And one lamb of the flock, out of two hundred, from the well-watered pastures of Israel for a meal offering, and for a burnt offering, and for peace offerings, to make atonement for them, says the Lord Yahweh- The Ezekiel temple prophecies may be a purely conditional prophecy, which will not now come true in that Israel were disobedient. This would then allow us to be more comfortable with the passages in Hebrews which speak as if the system of sacrifices has finished for all time. It would also enable us to sit more comfortably with the Ezekiel passages which speak of the sacrifices offered in that temple as actually achieving atonement, i:e. forgiveness of sins (<a href='B:330 45:15'>Eze 45:15</a>; <a href='B:330 45:22'>Eze 45:22</a>; <a href='B:330 45:25'>Eze 45:25</a>; <a href='B:330 45:17'>Eze 45:17</a>). They are not just ‘pointing back’ as teaching aids to the Lord’s work; they are framed as actually enabling, by their blood, forgiveness. It may be, however, that the Ezekiel prophecies had an intended and possible fulfilment at the time of the restoration under Ezra, but this was nullified by Israel’s lack of response; and therefore, at least in principle, the prophecies had their fulfilment delayed until the second coming. The lesson that comes out of all this is the extent to which God is willing to work with us, to tailor His purpose according to how far we are prepared to work with Him, and in that sense to allow Himself to be limited by us. There could be no greater inspiration to a maximal commitment to His purpose and His work.</p>


text:
<p>All the people of the land shall give to this offering for the prince in Israel- &nbsp;“The people of the land” were to have a part in the new system of things (<a href='B:330 45:16'>Eze 45:16</a>; <a href='B:330 45:22'>Eze 45:22</a>; <a href='B:330 46:3'>Eze 46:3</a>; <a href='B:330 46:9'>Eze 46:9</a>), and yet this very phrase is repeatedly used concerning the Samaritan people who lived in the land at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 4:4'>Ezr 4:4</a>; <a href='B:150 10:2'>Ezr 10:2</a>; <a href='B:150 10:11'>Ezr 10:11</a>; <a href='B:160 9:24'>Neh 9:24</a>; <a href='B:160 10:30-31'>Neh 10:30-31</a>). God’s intention was that they should eventually be converted unto Him; it was His intention that Ezekiel’s temple be built at the time of the restoration under Ezra. And yet Judah intermarried with them, learnt their language, and were dragged away from true Yahweh worship by them at the time. The later separation from the ’Samaritans’ was only after a few generations from the restoration. But <a href='B:450 7:10'>Zec 7:10</a>; <a href='B:460 3:5'>Mal 3:5</a>&nbsp; criticize the Jews who returned and built the temple for continuing to oppress the stranger / Gentile. Israel would not. <a href='B:290 56:6'>Isa 56:6</a> defines what is meant by “a house of prayer for all nations”- it is for those of all nations who “join themselves to the Lord, to serve him and to love the name of the Lord::. every one that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant”.</p>


text:
<p>It shall be the prince’s part to give the burnt offerings, and the meal offerings, and the drink offerings, in the feasts, and on the new moons, and on the Sabbaths, in all the appointed feasts of the house of Israel: he shall prepare the sin offering and the meal offering and the burnt offering and the peace offerings, to make atonement for the house of Israel- It was this which in principle inspired Nehemiah to generously provide food to God’s people and the local people of the land (<a href='B:160 5:17'>Neh 5:17</a>)."The prince"here is presented as also a priest; and Zechariah 6 presents the possibility of a king-priest arising as leader of the returned exiles. But it never came about, and so these things have their spirit fulfilled in the Lord Jesus, although not the exact letter of them.</p>


text:
<p>Thus says the Lord Yahweh: In the first month, in the first day of the month, you shall take a young bull without blemish; and you shall cleanse the sanctuary- We wonder why the Lord Jesus and His assistant priests would need regular cleansing in the age to come. The entire situation presented here clearly applies to mortal, sinful people and priesthood, which could have arisen at the time of the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>The priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering, and put it on the door posts of the house and on the four corners of the ledge of the altar, and on the posts of the gate of the inner court- This alludes to the Passover, which under Moses’ law was to begin on the tenth day of the first month. But this was to be done on the first day of the first month (:18). The differences seem intended to underline the fact that the Mosaic law was over. But Judah refused to accept this revision of the Passover law, and to this day keep the Mosaic law rather than that laid down here.</p>


text:
<p>So you shall do on the seventh day of the month for everyone who errs, and for him who is ignorant: so you shall make atonement for the house- This appears to be a revised form of the day of atonement. We note that sins of ignorance still require atonement. This ought to humble us, realizing that ignorance is no excuse. We are saved by grace rather than specific repentance and obtaining of forgiveness for every sin.</p>


text:
<p>In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, you shall have the Passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten- There is no Day of Atonement mentioned in Ezekiel’s new system, because the exiles were to have repented and been forgiven on a more permanent basis than under the Mosaic system.</p>


text:
<h4>On that day shall the prince prepare for himself- That the"prince"needed to prepare for himself a sin offering is surely evidence that the Lord Jesus is not in view; not only does He need no sin offering, but He was Himself the sin offering."The prince"must refer to a prince of the restored line of David at the time of the restoration, although as I have explained on Zechariah, the various possible candidates all dropped the baton.</h4><h4>And for all the people of the land a bull for a sin offering- See on :16;"the people of the land"refer to Gentiles who were envisaged as accepting Yahweh in this new system. This is a revised form of the Passover legislation; but Judah didn’t accept it and continued to attempt to keep the Mosaic legislation. And so the envisaged system didn’t come about.</h4>


text:
<h4>The seven days of the feast he shall prepare a burnt offering to Yahweh, seven bulls and seven rams without blemish daily the seven days; and a male goat daily for a sin offering- This differs from Mosaic legislation; see on <a href='B:330 46:4'>Eze 46:4</a>. Moses’ law required 1 lamb, (daily for 7 days, 2 bulls burnt, 1 ram burnt). There were to be more bulls and rams offered in this new system; perhaps to suggest a greater level of dedication.</h4><p>Much thinking about the temple seems to have gotten confused because of an assumption that Ezekiel’s temple will be in order to observe parts of the Mosaic law. But consider the following studied differences between the two. Clearly the system described by Ezekiel implied&nbsp; a change of the Law at the re-institution of the temple; the temple he speaks of was not in order to obey the Mosaic Law:</p><p><strong>Sin offering:</strong></p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eze. : blood daubed, parts burned outside, day 1-1bull, days 2-7-1 kid, 2 bulls, 1 ram</p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Law: blood poured, parts burned inside, day 1-1bull + 2 rams, days 2-7-1bull</p><p><strong>Sabbath offering:</strong></p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eze. : 6 lambs, 1 ram (gate open)</p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Law: 2 lambs</p><p><strong>New Moon offering:</strong></p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eze:: 1 bull, 1 ram, 6 lambs</p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Law: 2 bulls, 1 ram, 7 lambs</p><p><strong>Daily sacrifice:</strong></p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eze:: 1 lamb (in a:m:)</p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Law: 2 lambs (1 a:m:, 1 p:m:)</p><p><strong>Passover:</strong></p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eze:: 1bull, (daily thru 7 days: 7 bulls burnt, 7 rams&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; burnt), 1 kid? (sin offering)</p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Law: 1 lamb, (daily thru 7 days: 2 bulls burnt, 1 ram burnt), 1 kid? (sin offering)</p><p><strong>Feast of Booths:</strong></p><p>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eze:: 7 bulls + 7 rams (burnt daily,&nbsp;7 days), 1 kid</p><h4>·&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Law: day 1: 13 bulls, 2 rams, 14 lambs, 1 kid; day 2: 12 bulls, 2 rams, 14 lambs, 1 kid; The number of bulls is reduced by 1 each day:::day 7: 7 bulls, 2 rams, 14 lambs, 1 kid</h4>


text:
<p>He shall prepare a meal offering, an ephah for a bull, and an ephah for a ram, and a hin of oil to an ephah- This clearly differs from the Mosaic law (<a href='B:40 28:19-22'>Num 28:19-22</a>).</p>


text:
<p>In the seventh month, in the fifteenth day of the month, in the feast, shall he do the like the seven days; according to the sin offering, according to the burnt offering, and according to the meal offering, and according to the oil- <a href='B:450 7:5'>Zec 7:5</a> criticized the Jews for keeping this feast only externally, but not “unto me”. <a href='B:440 2:1'>Hag 2:1</a> records how on the 21st day of the 7th month- i:e. once the seven day feast that began on the 15th had finished- Haggai was sent to rebuke “the prince”, Zerubbabel, for being so slack in fulfilling Ezekiel’s vision. Even by the time of <a href='B:160 8:14-17'>Neh 8:14-17</a>, it was so that the feast of the 7th month had not been kept by Judah since the time of Joshua. They subconsciously switched off to Ezekiel’s words; just as we can all do. They reasoned that “the time” of which he spoke hadn’t come- even though the temple had miraculously been enabled to be rebuilt, for no human benefit at all to Cyrus (<a href='B:290 45:13'>Isa 45:13</a> “not for price nor reward”). They felt that all the prophecies were “marvellous” in the sense of something incapable of concrete fulfilment in their experience (<a href='B:450 8:6'>Zec 8:6</a>). This is why <a href='B:440 1:2'>Hag 1:2</a> rebuked them for saying “the time is not come…that the Lord’s house should be built”. They didn’t want the prophecy to be fulfilled, because it would mean ‘going up’ from their ceiled houses- both in Babylon and in the farmsteads they had built in Judah- to build the temple.</p>


text:
<p>Thus says the Lord Yahweh: The gate of the inner court that looks toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the Sabbath day it shall be opened, and on the day of the new moon it shall be opened- Whatever the Messianic implications of this, Malachi lamented that the returned exiles wouldn’t even open the gates unless they were paid; or some translations suggest that nobody at all would open or shut the gates (<a href='B:460 1:10'>Mal 1:10</a>). By not opening or closing the gates, the entrance of the Messianic prince was precluded.</p>


text:
<p>The prince shall enter by the way of the porch of the gate outside, and shall stand by the post of the gate; and the priests shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate: then he shall go forth; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening- Had Judah repented at the time of the restoration, a Davidic ruler would have been raised up, Zerubbabel is the most obvious candidate (see on Zechariah 6). He would have reigned"for ever", for an age. But he dropped the baton, or at least Judah were unwilling for this scenario. And so the prophecies were reinterpreted and rescheduled for total and eternal fulfilment in the Lord Jesus."The prince"of the envisaged restored temple in Ezekiel 40-48 refers to this same individual. See on <a href='B:330 37:25'>Eze 37:25</a>. His standing by the post of the gate records David’s royal descendants doing so (<a href='B:120 11:14'>2Ki 11:14</a>; <a href='B:120 23:3'>2Ki 23:3</a>). The impression is given that the prince is a restoredDavidic ruler at the time of the restoration of the temple. But we note that he must remain at the gate whilst the priest prepares the offerings. This again reads strangely if we are to interpret the prince as the Lord Jesus, for He is both a prince and priest, after the order of Melchizedek.</p>


text:
<p>The people of the land shall worship at the door of that gate before Yahweh on the Sabbaths and on the new moons- Instead, “the people of the land” hung around the gates of the city on the Sabbath in order to do some trading of goods (<a href='B:160 13:19-20'>Neh 13:19-20</a>). Judah intermarried with them rather than leading them to worship Yahweh at the temple on the Sabbaths. Those who insist that these prophecies speak of the future Kingdom of God on earth would have to therefore admit that the Sabbath will be reinstituted. But the New Testament is clear that the Sabbath has been fulfilled in the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<h4>The burnt offering that the prince shall offer to Yahweh- According to Zechariah 3 and Zechariah 6, we can understand “the prince” as primarily referring to Zerubbabel or Joshua the High Priest (see on <a href='B:330 37:25'>Eze 37:25</a>; <a href='B:330 44:3'>Eze 44:3</a>). Under Joshua, the iniquity of the land could have been removed, and “ye shall call every man his neighbour under the vine and under the fig tree” (<a href='B:450 3:8-10'>Zec 3:8-10</a>). The Messianic Kingdom could have been brought in, the new covenant accepted by Israel. It could have been Eliashib- but despite his apparent enthusiasm, he didn’t even build the wall outside his own house (<a href='B:160 3:20-22'>Neh 3:20-22</a>), and arranged for his grandson to marry Sanballat’s daughter (<a href='B:160 12:10-11'>Neh 12:10-11</a>). It is evident from <a href='B:330 46:3'>Eze 46:3</a> and <a href='B:330 44:3'>Eze 44:3</a> that the promised Messiah figure was to be both a king and a priest- which would fit Joshua. He is described as a crowned High Priest, called “the branch”, who would build the temple and reign as “a priest upon his throne”. But this didn’t happen. Because Zechariah concluded this prophecy with the comment: “And this shall come to pass, if ye will diligently obey the voice of the Lord” (<a href='B:450 6:10-15'>Zec 6:10-15</a>). Joshua-Jesus didn’t live up to it. And Zerubbabel never ruled in Jerusalem- he returned to the soft life in Babylon after the temple was rebuilt. But the prophecies suffered a deferral. They will be fulfilled in Jesus Christ, the branch.</h4><h4>Shall be on the Sabbath day six lambs without blemish and a ram without blemish- Two lambs were required under Mosaic law. This temple whilst based upon Solomon’s was not an exact replica, just as the regulations for sacrifice are similar but differ from those of the Mosaic law. See on <a href='B:330 41:4'>Eze 41:4</a>; <a href='B:330 45:23'>Eze 45:23</a>. Perhaps the greater number of lambs was to teach the exiles the weight of their sins. Seven lambs weren’t required, but six- perhaps hinting that the complete and perfect lamb [seven] was yet to come. But see on :6.</h4>


text:
<p>And the meal offering shall be an ephah for the ram, and the meal offering for the lambs as he is able to give, and a hin of oil to an ephah- The Mosaic law required less; whereas it required more than Ezekiel’s system for the new moons in :6.</p>


text:
<p>On the day of the new moon it shall be a young bull without blemish, and six lambs, and a ram; they shall be without blemish- This contrasts with the Mosaic law which required 2 bulls, 1 ram and 7 lambs. See on :4. It almost seems that the regulations are purposefully intended to signal a difference with the Mosaic law.</p>


text:
<p>And he shall prepare a meal offering, an ephah for the bull, and an ephah for the ram, and for the lambs according as he is able, and a hin of oil to an ephah-"Ashe is able"suggests serving God within the limitations of what is available to us. This cuts across all legalism, reflecting God’s earnest desire for fellowship with man in all his limitations. It is also a rather strange thing to read if indeed these words speak of fulfilment of in God’s future Kingdom on earth.</p>


text:
<p>When the prince shall enter, he shall go in by the way of the porch of the gate, and he shall go out by its way- It seems the east gate is in view (:1,2). This is in contrast to how the people were to enter by one gate and leave by another (:9). See on :10.</p>


text:
<h4>But when the people of the land shall come before Yahweh in the appointed feasts- “The people of the land” were to have a part in the new system of things (<a href='B:330 45:16'>Eze 45:16</a>; <a href='B:330 45:22'>Eze 45:22</a>; <a href='B:330 46:3'>Eze 46:3</a>; <a href='B:330 46:9'>Eze 46:9</a>), and yet this very phrase is repeatedly used concerning the Samaritan people who lived in the land at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 4:4'>Ezr 4:4</a>; <a href='B:150 10:2'>Ezr 10:2</a>; <a href='B:150 10:11'>Ezr 10:11</a>; <a href='B:160 9:24'>Neh 9:24</a>; <a href='B:160 10:30-31'>Neh 10:30-31</a>). God’s intention was that they should eventually be converted unto Him; it was His intention that Ezekiel’s temple be built at the time of the restoration under Ezra. The scenario of Zechariah 14, with Gentiles coming to Zion to keep Tabernacles, was also potentially possible at the restoration.</h4><h4>He who enters by the way of the north gate to worship shall go out by the way of the south gate; and he who enters by the way of the south gate shall go out by the way of the north gate: he shall not return by the way of the gate by which he came in, but shall go out straight before him- We noted earlier the design of the gatehouses and barriers to facilitate crowd control (<a href='B:330 40:12'>Eze 40:12</a>), and this one way system appears to be reflective of a perceived need to control the crowds. This all seems rather human if we think that this scenario is intended for fulfilment in the Kingdom of God. The language of going"straight before him"is another example of how there are continual allusions back to the cherubim visions. The straight feet and path of the cherubim was to be replicated in the path of God’s people on earth (see on <a href='B:330 1:7'>Eze 1:7</a>).</h4>


text:
<p>The prince, when they go in, shall go in with them; and when they go out, he shall go out- He enters and leaves by the east gate (:1,2,8). The idea may be that when the people enter by the north or south gates (:9), he enters; and he leaves as they leave. The idea is that the worship of the prince is not separate from that of the ordinary people. There was to be a unity between prince and people, despite his evident superiority to them; and this looks forward to the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>In the feasts and in the solemnities the meal offering shall be an ephah for a bull and an ephah for a ram, and for the lambs as he is able to give, and a hin of oil to an ephah- The lack of specific definition of the amount of meal offering required with the lambs is typical of God’s open ended relationship with us. We are to respond as we can. And perhaps it is the lack of legalistic legislation which inspires us to greater generosity and devotion than within a more circumscribed system.</p>


text:
<p>When the prince shall prepare a freewill offering, a burnt offering or peace offerings as a freewill offering to Yahweh, one shall open for him the gate that looks toward the east; and he shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace offerings, as he does on the Sabbath day: then he shall go out; and after his going forth one shall shut the gate- Malachi and Haggai so bitterly complain at the way the priests didn’t serve God properly in the restored temple. The priests were to shut the gates (<a href='B:330 44:2'>Eze 44:2</a>; <a href='B:330 46:2'>Eze 46:2</a>; <a href='B:330 46:12'>Eze 46:12</a>); but they refused to do this unless they were paid for it (<a href='B:460 1:10'>Mal 1:10</a>). Again we note here how the prince was also able to act as a priest in some feasts. Zechariah 6 taught that just such a figure could have arisen at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>You shall prepare a lamb a year old without blemish for a burnt offering to Yahweh daily: morning by morning you shall prepare it- The"you"was addressed to Ezekiel and suggests this system could have been built within Ezekiel’s lifetime, for he was to give the animals to the sons of Zadok to offer in the temple (<a href='B:330 43:19'>Eze 43:19</a>); Ezekiel was to prepare the daily sacrifice.</p>


text:
<p>You shall prepare a meal offering with it morning by morning, the sixth part of an ephah, and the third part of a hin of oil, to moisten the fine flour; a meal offering to Yahweh continually by a perpetual ordinance- The continual burnt offering under Moses’ law was to be made morning and evening (<a href='B:40 28:3'>Num 28:3</a>); now the evening sacrifice is abolished. We note the change of pronouns."The prince"has been in view in :13; now"you", perhaps Ezekiel personally; and then"they"in :15. It is as if Ezekiel is being addressed as representative of the priests; another indication that the prophecy was intended for fulfilment in Ezekiel’s time by people then known to Ezekiel.</p>


text:
<p>Thus shall they prepare the lamb, and the meal offering, and the oil, morning by morning, for a continual burnt offering-"Morning by morning"appears to stress that the evening offering was now no more.</p>


text:
<p>Thus says the Lord Yahweh: If the prince give a gift to any of his sons, it is his inheritance, it shall belong to his sons; it is their possession by inheritance- The idea is that it could never again revert to the prince. This seems to safeguard against the prince making gifts to his sons and then demanding them returned to him; any attempt to interpret the prince as the returned Lord Jesus runs into major difficulty here, as the legislation is designed to keep the prince from being fickle and manipulative with his wealth.</p>


text:
<p>But if he gives of his inheritance as a gift to one of his servants, it shall be his to the year of liberty; then it shall return to the prince; but as for his inheritance, it shall be for his sons- He is subject to death (<a href='B:330 46:17-18'>Eze 46:17-18</a>); and&nbsp; has a wife and sons (<a href='B:330 46:16'>Eze 46:16</a>) who will succeed him (<a href='B:330 45:8'>Eze 45:8</a>). Clearly the prince is mortal, and not the immortal Lord Jesus."The year of liberty"could refer to the year of Jubilee, or possibly the seventh year release of slaves from their bondage to a particular master. Although here it is the return of property which is in view, so the reference is more likely to the year of Jubilee.</p>


text:
<p>Moreover the prince shall not take of the people’s inheritance by thrusting them out of their possession; he shall give an inheritance to his sons out of his own possession, that My people not be scattered every man from his possession- This and the surrounding verses are admittedly hard to understand if they really are to be literally fulfilled in relation to Jesus at His second coming. For this legislation seems to guard against the prince abusing the people, as if he is prone to such sin. But it is so understandable within the framework of interpretation here advocated. They had gone into captivity for these kind of abuses, they had indeed been scattered from their possessions; now they were to return and rebuild the temple after the pattern of Solomon’s, repent of their sins, and live righteously, and they would have the possibility of bringing in the Messianic Kingdom. But they chose to be satisfied with a semi-revival, a quasi repentance- just as we can be so easily. And Nehemiah records how the princes did oppress the people, taking their land / possessions away from them:&nbsp;They had ’thrust out’ their brethren before the captivity (<a href='B:300 22:3'>Jer 22:3</a>; <a href='B:330 18:7'>Eze 18:7</a>; <a href='B:330 18:12'>Eze 18:12</a>; <a href='B:330 22:7'>Eze 22:7</a>; <a href='B:330 22:29'>Eze 22:29</a> s:w:), and so had been themselves ’thrust out’ (<a href='B:300 25:38'>Jer 25:38</a> s:w:).</p>


text:
<p>Then he brought me through the entry, which was at the side of the gate, into the holy rooms for the priests, which looked toward the north: and behold, there was a place on the hinder part westward- There were to be “holy chambers” in the temple for the Levites (here and very often in Ezekiel 40-48). The uncircumcised Gentiles were not to be brought into the sanctuary (<a href='B:330 44:7'>Eze 44:7</a>). It was God’s intention that when Judah returned from Babylon, the uncircumcised would not come into Zion (the temple), and the Kingdom would be established (<a href='B:290 52:1'>Isa 52:1</a>; <a href='B:290 52:11'>Isa 52:11</a>). There was to be no Canaanite in the house of Yahweh (<a href='B:450 14:21'>Zec 14:21</a>). But Tobiah the Ammonite was given a chamber in the temple for him to use as an office for undermining God’s people (<a href='B:160 13:7-9'>Neh 13:7-9</a>).</p>


text:
<p>He said to me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the trespass offering and the sin offering, and where they shall bake the meal offering; so that they do not bring them into the outer court, to sanctify the people- The clear distinction between the inner and outer court (<a href='B:330 44:19'>Eze 44:19</a>) seems inappropriate now, when the veil of the holiest has been torn down and as Hebrews emphasizes, all can freely enter the presence of God Himself.</p>


text:
<p>Then he brought me into the outer court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court; and behold, in every corner of the court there was another court- The"Behold"suggests surprise on Ezekiel’s part; because this temple whilst based upon Solomon’s was not an exact replica, just as the regulations for sacrifice are similar but differ from those of the Mosaic law.</p>


text:
<p>In the four corners of the court there were enclosed courts, forty cubits long and thirty broad: these four in the corners were of one measure- Great detail is given about these kitchens, whereas there is nothing at all about what was within the most holy place. The difference in detail is striking and highlights the emphasis of the vision upon the work which God’s restored people were intended to do.</p>


text:
<p>There was a wall around in them, around the four, and boiling places were made under the walls all around- This"wall"could be no more than a low wall with shelves on appropriate for the kitchen utensils or storage.</p>


text:
<p>Then he said to me, These are the boiling houses, where the ministers of the house shall boil the sacrifices of the people- The portions of the people’s offerings which were to be eaten by the priests were to be boiled in these kitchens.</p>


text:
<h4>He brought me back to the door of the house; and see, waters issued out from under the threshold of the house eastward (for the front of the house was toward the east); and the waters came down from under the right side of the house, on the south of the altar- The holy waters start from the altar- not from the threshold of the house, as Henry Sulley’s view&nbsp; requires. His claim that the city will be built 30 miles away from the temple is another example of pure imagination which just doesn’t fit the text. This is the situation of <a href='B:360 3:18'>Joe 3:18</a> “a fountain shall come forth of the house of the LORD”. Joel’s kingdom prophecies likewise could have had some fulfilment in the restoration from Babylon. See on <a href='B:330 43:7'>Eze 43:7</a>; <a href='B:330 43:9'>Eze 43:9</a>. So far in the temple prophecies, we have been given the impression of a very human situation. Much detail has just been given about the kitchens, regulations limiting the prince from abusing the people and about his children, of priests who sweat and must therefore wear appropriate clothing, of guardhouses with crash barriers to enable the smooth flow of people through the temple etc. Now in Ezekiel 47, 48 we have prophecies which are clearly more miraculous in nature. They are alluded to in Revelation and John’s Gospel and given a clearly figurative application, and yet the material is clearly based upon a literal depiction of a situation replete with fishermen fishing, a healed Dead Sea etc. I suggest that had Judah been obedient to the vision and repented as required, then these more miraculous things such as a river of living water would also have come about. The description of the course of the new river requires that the temple structure be built to accommodate it, but there is no evidence that Judah even attempted this at the rebuilding under Ezra and Nehemiah. And so again, the great possibilities in the Divine program for the restored exiles didn’t come about. But the prophecies were not thereby falsified; in spiritual essence, they will come true at the Lord’s return and even in this life, although maybe not in every literal, physical detail.</h4><h4>The enigmatic <a href='B:500 7:38'>Joh 7:38</a> alludes here:"He that believes on me, as the scripture has said, out of his belly ("innermost being", NIV) shall flow rivers of living (Gk. spring) water". What"scripture"did the Lord have in mind? Surely <a href='B:330 47:1'>Eze 47:1</a>; <a href='B:330 47:9'>Eze 47:9</a>, the prophecy of how in the restored Kingdom, rivers of spring water would come out from Zion and bring life to the world; and perhaps too the references to spring water being used to cleanse men from leprosy and death (<a href='B:30 14:5'>Lev 14:5</a>; <a href='B:30 15:13'>Lev 15:13</a>; <a href='B:40 19:16'>Num 19:16</a>). The water originated from the sanctuary; and that most holy place is now the"innermost being"of the believer. The literal possibilities in Ezekiel 40-48 didn’t come about, but the essence of it all, although not the physical detail, will be fulfilled in spiritual terms. Out of the innermost being of the true believer, the spring(ing) water of the Gospel will &nbsp;naturally spring up and go out to heal men, both now and more fully in the Kingdom, aided then by the Spirit gifts. The believer, every&nbsp; believer, whoever&nbsp; believes, will preach the word to others from his innermost being, both now and in the Kingdom - without the need for preaching committees or special efforts (not that in themselves I’m decrying them). The tendency is to delegate our responsibilities to these committees. There is no essential difference between faith and works. If we believe, we will do the works of witness, quite spontaneously. And note how the water that sprung out of the Lord’s smitten side is to be compared with the bride that came out of the smitten side of Adam. We, the bride, are the water; thanks to the inspiration of the cross, we go forth in witness, the water of life to this hard land in which we walk.</h4>


text:
<p>Then he brought me out by the way of the north gate, and led me round by the way outside to the outer gate, to the gate that looks toward the east; and, there ran out waters on the right side- The same words are translated"prepare the way"in <a href='B:460 3:1'>Mal 3:1</a> and <a href='B:290 40:3'>Isa 40:3</a> (see too <a href='B:330 43:1'>Eze 43:1</a>; <a href='B:330 44:1'>Eze 44:1</a>). The way&nbsp; is ’prepared’ or ’looks’ eastward. This was the way or road over which the glory was to re-enter the restored temple. But Judah didn’t rebuild that temple as specifiedand as Malachi often demonstrates, the priests failed to act as commanded in Ezekiel 40-48. And so the messenger of the covenant who was to prepare that way likewise failed; but finally the essence of the prophecies will come true through the work of the Elijah prophet and John the Baptist [also a priest] preparing the way of the Lord Jesus, so that His glory and Spirit could enter a spiritual temple of restored people.</p>


text:
<p>When the man went forth eastward with the line in his hand, he measured one thousand cubits, and he caused me to pass through the waters, waters that were to the ankles- This man with the measuring line is the same Angel of <a href='B:450 2:1'>Zec 2:1</a>, who was enabling the restoration of Zion at the time of the returned exiles; but they refused to make use of the potential.</p>


text:
<p>Again he measured one thousand, and caused me to pass through the waters, waters that were to the knees. Again he measured one thousand, and caused me to pass through the waters, waters that were to the waist- As explained on :1, there is a miraculous element in this. A water course does not increase in depth so consistently unless other rivers or sources of water enter into it. But these waters increase in depth in a miraculous way. For this was to be no ordinary water, which always naturally finds a consistent level. The idea is that the water is not water as we know it, but has unique properties.</p>


text:
<p>Afterward he measured one thousand; and it was a river that I could not pass through; for the waters were risen, waters to swim in, a river that could not be passed through-"Passed through"is the term used in <a href='B:290 33:21'>Isa 33:21</a> of how no ship or boat would pass through or along the new"broad rivers and streams"in the restored Kingdom. But the returning exiles could miraculously pass through this river with God’s miraculous help (s:w. <a href='B:290 43:2'>Isa 43:2</a>).</p>


text:
<p>He said to me, Son of man, have you seen this? Then he brought me and caused me to return to the bank of the river- The question seems to imply that Ezekiel had failed to notice something, and so he had to return to the riverbank.</p>


text:
<p>Now when I had returned, see, on the bank of the river were very many trees on the one side and on the other- <a href='B:730 22:2'>Rev 22:2</a> quotes this but in a very symbolic context. This will come true at the Lord’s return, but in a figurative sense; for Revelation 22 is not at all literal but symbolic. These things could have literally come about at the restoration from Babylon, as God’s miraculous response to their obedience. But they didn’t, because Judah were not switched on to the huge Divine potential which there was.</p>


text:
<p>Then he said to me, These waters issue forth toward the eastern region, and shall go down into the Salt Sea Arabah; and the waters of the sea shall be healed- The healing of saltiness, a symbol of bareness, will not be complete in the area (:11). This seems somehow inappropriate to the Kingdom to be established by the Lord Jesus in the future; but it rings true for a scenario at the restoration whereby Judah’s repentant obedience to the plans of Ezekiel 40-46 would have been rewarded by God making miraculous things happen. The same words are used in <a href='B:120 2:21-22'>2Ki 2:21-22</a> of the healing of salty waters by Elisha. Such things had been done by God’s power earlier in human history, and could have been repeated at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen, that every living creature which swarms, in every place where the rivers come, shall live; and there shall be a very great multitude of fish; for these waters have come there, and the waters of the sea shall be healed, and everything shall live wherever the river comes- The plural"rivers"may just be an intensive plural referring to ’the great river’. Malachi had likewise foreseen a situation at the restoration where"in every place"Gentiles would have been spiritually healed and turned to Yahweh (<a href='B:460 1:11'>Mal 1:11</a>)."Every living creature which swarms"is the language of creation, as if a new creation was going to come about in that local area. The river of living water, as explained on :1, refers now to the Spirit which is given to us and flows from us. Wherever we go, there should be healing- not just dissension, theological controversy and factionism, but real healing for those who hitherto had not had spiritual life. The great multitude of fish is again alluded to in John’s Gospel, where the miracles of catching fish are used as symbolic of how the Lord’s people would"catch men"in the Gospel’s net. The physical realities didn’t come about at the restoration, but the essence of them now comes true in the lives of Spirit filled believers.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen, that fishermen shall stand by it: from En Gedi even to En Eglaim shall be a place for the spreading of nets; their fish shall be after their species, as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many- The two locations mentioned are at the north and south of the Dead Sea. The"fish::. after their species"could mean ’every kind of species of fish’. And again we have a connection to the miraculous haul of 153 fishes. As explained on <a href='B:500 21:11'>Joh 21:11</a>, this was the number of species of fish which were then thought to exist. Every species of fish was caught in the net, with the incident clearly speaking of the universal appeal of the Gospel, saving some from all nations. The stress upon"exceeding many", also in :9, connects with the huge number of the seed of Abraham, the converts to the Gospel.</p>


text:
<p>But its muddy places and its marshes shall not be healed; they shall be given over to salt- This rings somewhat strangely if we insist this prophecy must have a fulfilment in the Kingdom of God on earth. See on :8. The idea is that not all would respond, even if the water of life came to them. For the marshes and muddy places were clearly reached by the water flowing from the temple.</p>


text:
<p>By the river on its banks, on this side and on that side, shall grow every tree for food whose leaf shall not wither, neither shall its fruit fail: it shall bear new fruit every month, because its waters issue out of the sanctuary; and its fruit shall be for food, and its leaf for healing- <a href='B:730 22:2'>Rev 22:2</a> interprets this in a clearly symbolic way with reference to the situation which will come about at the return of the Lord Jesus to Zion. Perhaps the trees with leaves that don’t wither are to be seen as representative of the righteous (<a href='B:240 11:30'>Pro 11:30</a>; <a href='B:230 1:3'>Psa 1:3</a>). Those who respond to the water of life will grow thereby to provide the fruit of the tree of life to others. And that is true in this life too, as <a href='B:240 11:30'>Pro 11:30</a>; <a href='B:230 1:3'>Psa 1:3</a> make clear.</p>


text:
<p>Thus says the Lord Yahweh: This shall be the border, by which you shall divide the land for inheritance according to the twelve tribes of Israel: Joseph shall have two portions- The latter chapters of Ezekiel stress how Israel were to “inherit” the land; yet the same word is used in other restoration prophecies, about Messiah causing Israel to “inherit” the land again after their return from “the north country” (<a href='B:450 2:12'>Zec 2:12</a>; <a href='B:450 8:12'>Zec 8:12</a>; <a href='B:290 49:8'>Isa 49:8</a>; <a href='B:300 3:18'>Jer 3:18</a>). When Judah returned from the “north country”, then Jerusalem would be the universally recognized “throne of the Lord” (<a href='B:300 3:17-18'>Jer 3:17-18</a>). The Kingdom could have come when Judah returned from Babylon. It was therefore potentially possible for the returning exiles to inherit all the land outlined in <a href='B:330 47:13-21'>Eze 47:13-21</a> and share it out between the 12 tribes. But they grabbed every man for himself, his own farmstead, his own mini-Kingdom. They had no interest in the wider vision, nor in subduing extra land; and the majority of the Jews didn’t even want to inherit it; they preferred the soft life of Babylon, the Kingdom of men rather than the Kingdom of God. And thus the Kingdom made possible was neveractually fulfilled at that time.</p>


text:
<p>You shall inherit it, one as well as another; for I swore to give it to your fathers: and this land shall fall to you for inheritance- This is the language of the tribal lots distributed under Joshua when the people first entered the land from the wilderness journey. It all has deep appropriacy to the giving of the land to the exiles now returning from Babylon, also involving a desert journey. All Judah were&nbsp; to inherit the land,"one as well as another"; whereas in reality at the restoration, Nehemiah 5 records how some grabbed the land of others. If the land was for an inheritance there could be the implication that those who were given it would die and then pass it on as an inheritance- again, appropriate to a restored kingdom at the time of the restoration, but not to the day of the eternal Kingdom of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>This shall be the border of the land: On the north side, from the great sea, by the road to Hethlon, to the entrance of Zedad- Numbers 34 and Joshua 15 had defined the land in the order south, west, north, and east. But there the order is north, east, south, west. Perhaps this was because in Joshua’s time Israel came from the south into the land; whereas now they were to return from the land of the north. We marvel at God’s sensitivity to our contexts and situations on earth. See on :17.</p>


text:
<p>Hamath, Berothah, Sibraim, which is between the border of Damascus and the border of Hamath; Hazer Hatticon, which is by the border of Hauran- The whole style of Ezekiel 40-48 would appear to be relevant to Ezekiel’s own time- note how the borders of the land are described as “Sibraim, which is between the border of Damascus… on the north northward is the border of Hamath” (:17). These geographical notes only made sense in Ezekiel’s time.</p>


text:
<p>The border from the sea, shall be from the sea to Hazar Enon at the border of Damascus; and on the north northward is the border of Hamath. This is the north side- There appears to be a double reference to the northern border; as explained on :15, perhaps this was because in Joshua’s time Israel came from the south into the land; whereas now they were to return from the land of the north. We marvel at God’s sensitivity to our contexts and situations on earth.</p>


text:
<p>The east side, between Hauran and Damascus and Gilead, and the land of Israel, shall be the Jordan; from the north border to the east sea you shall measure. This is the east side- The Jordan river was to be the eastern border. Yet the territory promised to Abraham extended to the Euphrates. God was making concessions to their weakness by giving them at this stage a more limited area. But the territory in Gilead east of the Jordan river was also envisaged as being possible for their possession (<a href='B:400 7:14'>Mic 7:14</a>; <a href='B:450 10:10'>Zec 10:10</a>). These varying definitions of the promised land are of themselves evidence that God’s purpose with His people is elastic. We can be sure that at the return of the Lord Jesus, the full territory promised to Abraham will be given to Israel, right up to the Euphrates; for God’s promise to Abraham shall surely be fulfilled. So this scenario here in Ezekiel 47 is not that of the future Kingdom after Christ’s return.</p>


text:
<p>The south side southward shall be from Tamar as far as the waters of Meriboth Kadesh, to the brook of Egypt, to the great sea. This is the south side southward- Tamar was apparently at the southern end of the Dead Sea. There would therefore be a diagonal line drawn from there to the"brook of Egypt". As noted on :18, this was a new definition of the promised land. It was intended for the time of the restoration, as in the full Messianic Kingdom, the entire territory promised to Abraham will be inherited.</p>


text:
<p>The west side shall be the great sea, from the south border as far as over against the entrance of Hamath. This is the west side- This is the Hamath of :17. This coastal area included the territory possessed by the Philistines which had always been problematic for Israel. It would’ve all seemed too incredible for the exiles to believe; that powerful localpeoples and the empire of Babylon and Persia would not get in the way of these promises being fulfilled. We too can look at present realities and baulk at the possibility of them all being swept away in order to fulfil the promises within the Gospel of the Kingdom. The Israel who returned instead focused on establishing their own farmsteads, getting a reasonable harvest, getting along with the local tribes, and a religion of external obedience, rather than seeing the huge possibilities open to them. We too face this same temptation.</p>


text:
<p>So you shall divide this land to you according to the tribes of Israel- Which were twelve tribes according to Ezekiel 48. The prophecies of the restoration envisaged both the ten tribes and Judah returning together. But most of them preferred to remain in the lands of their captivity.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen, that you shall divide it by lot for an inheritance to you and to the aliens who live among you, who shall father children among you; and they shall be to you as the native-born among the children of Israel; they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel- This would have been very hard for the exiles to accept. Ezra and Nehemiah document all the conflicts with the local people who"live among you". To give them a place in the new system would run counter to the core of Judah’s self perception. The idea of course was that these"aliens"would convert to the God of Israel and become joined to natural Israel as His covenant people. But instead the Jews despised them, later terming them ’Samaritans’, refusing to accept them; and initially intermarrying with them and accepting their gods.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen, that in what tribe the foreigner lives, there you shall give him his inheritance, says the Lord Yahweh- The commandments about giving the Gentiles inheritance amongst the tribal cantons are understandable in the light of the fact that the Samaritans were living in the land at the time of the restoration. Even within Ezekiel, as well as in Malachi, Israel are criticized for oppressing the stranger / Gentile who lived with them (<a href='B:330 22:7'>Eze 22:7</a>; <a href='B:330 22:29'>Eze 22:29</a>); and now they are told that in the new temple system, the stranger must be generously given an inheritance in the land, he must be counted as actually belonging to one of the tribes. But the subsequent history of the returned exiles reveals their development of a xenophobic attitude to Gentiles.</p>


text:
<p>Now these are the names of the tribes: From the north end, beside the way of Hethlon to the entrance of Hamath, Hazar Enan at the border of Damascus, northward beside Hamath, (and they shall have their sides east and west)- The initial audience would have balked at the mention of Damascus. It would’ve seemed impossible to establish a new kingdom bordering on such a powerful city. These descriptions of the borders of the land and the inheritances were therefore a huge challenge to faith, just as the message of a future Kingdom is to us today, surrounded by the seemingly permanent and powerful structures of this world.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Dan, from the east side to the west side, Asher, one portion- By the time of Revelation, the tribe of Dan isn’t mentioned in <a href='B:730 7:5-8'>Rev 7:5-8</a>. But this was not the case at the time of the restoration. This is another reason to understand the entire potential scenario here as relevant to the restoration but not to the return of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Asher, from the east side even to the west side, Naphtali, one portion- The tribal allotments are all equal in size, and the borders as it were imagined as straight lines. But this would have been unworkable in practice due to issues of topography; greater definition was needed to enable this to be practically done. The implication is that had Israel repentantly returned and responded to the plans of Ezekiel 40-46, then more detail would have been given. This is exactly as stated in <a href='B:330 43:11'>Eze 43:11</a>.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Naphtali, from the east side to the west side, Manasseh, one portion- The inheritance of Manasseh east of the Jordan is now ignored, and in order to be given parallel swathes of territory, this would meant Naphtali giving some of its former territory to Manasseh.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Manasseh, from the east side to the west side, Ephraim, one portion- Ephraim as the largest tribe of the ten tribes is still given the same inheritance size. It could be that with the loss of the genealogical records at the destruction of the temple, the captives were not strongly aware of what tribe they came from. And so effectively a new Israel was being declared.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Ephraim, from the east side even to the west side, Reuben, one portion- The inheritance of Reuben east of the Jordan is now ignored; perhaps because effectively their separation there from the rest of Israel had not been to their spiritual good.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Reuben, from the east side to the west side, Judah, one portion- The exiles of Judah returning from Babylon would have expected a larger portion, but this was not to be. A new Israel was envisaged here. This division of the land between the tribes was designed to take away any sense of parochialism and superiority based upon previous history.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Judah, from the east side to the west side, shall be the district which you shall set apart, twenty-five thousand cubits in breadth, and in length as one of the portions, from the east side to the west side: and the sanctuary shall be in its midst- If the sanctuary was to be strictly in the midst of a swathe of land running from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, then this position would not coincide with mount Zion. Perhaps this was intentional- to as it were relocate Zion, perhaps due to topographical changes God would have brought about. But"in its midst"need not be so literally interpretted. The Hebrew can as well be translated"within it".</p>


text:
<p>The district that you shall offer to Yahweh shall be twenty-five thousand in length, and ten thousand in breadth- The holy district had to be consciously ’offered’ to God by the tribes. This suggests that the scenario in this chapter is more command than prescription of what God would force to come about. <a href='B:330 45:1'>Eze 45:1</a> seems to envisage a ceremony at which the returned exiles formally divided up the land according to these borders and also offered the district to the Lord. But they never did this.</p>


text:
<h4>This holy district shall be for the priests: toward the north twenty-five thousand in length, and toward the west ten thousand in breadth, and toward the east ten thousand in breadth, and toward the south twenty-five thousand in length- This area was to be consciously given to the priests; see on :9. Hence LXX"Out of this shall be the first-fruits of the holy things to the priests".</h4><h4>And the sanctuary of Yahweh shall be in its midst- See on :8.</h4>


text:
<p>It shall be for the priests who are sanctified of the sons of Zadok, who have kept My instruction, who didn’t go astray when the children of Israel went astray, as the Levites went astray- But there is no record of the sons of Zadok keeping separate from the apostasy of the Levites in the time before the exile. We can conclude that they did have some faith, and this was counted to them for righteousness; hence"Zadok"means ’righteousness’. The sons of Zadok would sanctify others to work as priests, presumably because at the time of the restoration they were so few. Ezra struggled hard to get any Levites to return with him. And there is no evidence that the sons of Zadok ever did this at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>It shall be to them an offering from the offering of the land, a thing most holy, by the border of the Levites- GNB"So they are to have a special area next to the area belonging to the Levites, and it will be the holiest of all". Again we see the intentional usage of the language of"the holiest of all"used about areas other than the most holy place. The impression given is that holiness will abound, and not be confined to a tiny area of 9 square meters; <a href='B:450 14:20'>Zec 14:20</a> likewise speaks of holiness abounding in the restored temple system. As noted on :9, this area was to be consciously given to the sons of Zadok; hence LXX"And the first-fruits shall be given to them out of the first-fruits of the land, even a most holy portion from the borders of the Levites". But this simply wasn’t done at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>Opposite the border of the priests, the Levites shall have an area twenty-five thousand cubits in length, and ten thousand in breadth: the entire length shall be twenty-five thousand, and the breadth ten thousand- The division between sons of Zadok, priests sanctified by the sons of Zadok and Levites all seems to contradict the idea that the faithful are and will eternally be ’king-priests’ (see on <a href='B:730 5:10'>Rev 5:10</a>). We conclude therefore that this situation describes what could have happened at the restoration, and not in the future Kingdom of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>They shall sell none of it, nor exchange it, nor shall the first fruits of the land be separated; for it is holy to Yahweh- The situation envisaged is where sale and exchange of land is possible, although the Levites must not do so; which hardly sounds appropriate to the Lord’s future Kingdom on earth. The original text is unclear regarding the"first fruits". The GNB offers:"none of it may be sold or exchanged or transferred to anyone else". The Levites were to be provided for, but did not own anything of themselves. And we in this age are to live in the spirit of priesthood (<a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a>).</p>


text:
<h4>The five thousand that are left in the breadth, in front of the twenty-five thousand, shall be for common use, for the city, for dwellings and for suburbs- Ezekiel had earlier explained that Judah went into captivity because the priests made no difference between the holy and the"common"(<a href='B:330 22:26'>Eze 22:26</a> s:w:). The restored system was to correct that and maintain the separation. But Malachi makes clear that they did not do so.</h4><h4>And the city shall be in its midst- See on :8. There could be here the implication that the exiles had a choice as to where to build the city. Perhaps a new Zion was in view.</h4>


text:
<p>These shall be its measures: the north side four thousand five hundred, and the south side four thousand five hundred, and on the east side four thousand five hundred, and the west side four thousand five hundred- The style here is alluded to in the description of the four square city of God in which there is no temple in <a href='B:730 21:13'>Rev 21:13</a>. The idea seems to be that the essence of these prophecies will come true in a spiritual and eternal sense, but without the literal temple system (<a href='B:730 21:22'>Rev 21:22</a>).</p>


text:
<p>The city shall have suburbs: toward the north two hundred and fifty, and toward the south two hundred and fifty, and toward the east two hundred and fifty, and toward the west two hundred and fifty- Whilst the Levites and sons of Zadok lived in the area around the sanctuary, it seems there were to be no other tribes living there. Judah, in whose territory Jerusalem previously stood, had a separate swathe of territory as an inheritance. To as it were lose Jerusalem would have been unattractive to the people of Judah who were in captivity hearing these words for the first time. See on :18.</p>


text:
<p>The remainder in the length, alongside the holy district, shall be ten thousand eastward, and ten thousand westward; and it shall be adjacent to the holy district; and its increase shall be for food to those who labour in the city- Revelation alludes to these prophecies, and effectively speaks of"the city"as being"the temple"(<a href='B:730 3:12'>Rev 3:12</a>; Revelation 21 cp. <a href='B:290 66:6'>Isa 66:6</a>)."Them that serve the city"could refer to the Levites, who were"to serve the tabernacle"(<a href='B:40 4:24'>Num 4:24</a>; <a href='B:40 4:26'>Num 4:26</a>; <a href='B:40 18:6'>Num 18:6</a>), which was now the temple / city. But the restored exiles considered that it was vain to serve God (<a href='B:460 3:14'>Mal 3:14</a>; <a href='B:460 3:18'>Mal 3:18</a>), and so this just didn’t come about at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>Those who labour in the city, out of all the tribes of Israel, shall cultivate it- I suggested on :17,18 that nobody actually lives in the city; all the tribes have their inheritances elsewhere. The servants of the city may be the Levites. In this case we are to imagine them as under the Mosaic system, scattered throughout the tribes of Israel teaching there, and coming up by groups to work at the temple. One of their jobs will be to grow food for those working in the temple.</p>


text:
<p>The entire district shall be twenty-five thousand by twenty-five thousand: you shall offer the holy district foursquare, with the possession of the city- Again we note that the returned exiles were to consciously offer this area to God (<a href='B:330 45:1'>Eze 45:1</a>); see on :9.</p>


text:
<p>The residue shall be for the prince, on the one side and on the other of the holy offering and of the possession of the city; in front of the twenty-five thousand of the offering toward the east border, and westward in front of the twenty-five thousand toward the west border, answerable to the portions, it shall be for the prince: and the holy offering and the sanctuary of the house shall be in its midst- Had Judah repented at the time of the restoration, a Davidic ruler would have been raised up, Zerubbabel is the most obvious candidate (see on Zechariah 6). He would have reigned"for ever", for an age. But he dropped the baton, or at least Judah were unwilling for this scenario. And so the prophecies were reinterpreted and rescheduled for total and eternal fulfilment in the Lord Jesus."The prince"of the envisaged restored temple in Ezekiel 40-48 refers to this same individual. See on <a href='B:330 37:25'>Eze 37:25</a>.</p>


text:
<p>Moreover from the possession of the Levites, and from the possession of the city, being in the midst of that which is the prince’s, between the border of Judah and the border of Benjamin, it shall be for the prince- This is the territory which <a href='B:330 46:18'>Eze 46:18</a> says could be passed on by the prince to his sons for a lasting inheritance. But there is no legislation about how his sons could pass it on; over time, the area would have become endlessly subdivided between the prince’s descendants. This is one of the many practical issues which arise in studying these records, just as the division of the land into horizontal swathes along straight lines requires more definition in order to be practically done. As noted on <a href='B:330 43:11'>Eze 43:11</a>, had the returned exiles been obedient, then more details would have been given.</p>


text:
<p>As for the rest of the tribes: from the east side to the west side, Benjamin, one portion- <a href='B:50 33:12'>Deu 33:12</a> had stated that Benjamin would dwell close to Yahweh, and his portion is directly next to the sanctuary area. Jerusalem was originally situated on the border between Benjamin and Judah, although Judah took over Benjamin’s territory at that point and effectively Jerusalem was considered as within Judah. But now, the tribal allotments were such that Jerusalem clearly belonged to neither of them. Such petty squabbles were to be forgotten in the restored kingdom.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Benjamin, from the east side to the west side, Simeon, one portion- Simeon’s original territory was surrounded by Judah; now they were to be as it were given territory which was once Judah’s, and Judah was given&nbsp; an inheritance to the north of where they had previously inherited. This would have been hard to accept for the men of Judah to whom Ezekiel was preaching. But all sense of pride and clinging on to the once significant things of this life is to be subsumed in the realities of the restored Kingdom. And we can learn a lesson from that.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Simeon, from the east side to the west side, Issachar, one portion- Issachar had previously inherited to the far north of the land. Now they were in the far south. All we once held so dear is to be completely inverted in the inheritance prepared for us in God’s Kingdom.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Issachar, from the east side to the west side, Zebulun, one portion- Likewise Zebulun had previously inherited to the far north of the land. Now they were in the far south. Those who simply wanted to return to what they had once known were to be disappointed. See on :27.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Zebulun, from the east side to the west side, Gad, one portion- This area would have been desert, as was the area promised to Issachar. To achieve an equality and fairness in the distribution of territory, there must be the implication that the climate and even topography would be changed. The restoration prophesies are full of promises of abundant harvests and blessing upon the physical land. But unless they were believed, Zebulun would have considered that this was not a good deal, and that the good news of this new kingdom held nothing much for them. And so it is with us. The promise of the Kingdom is only meaningful and good news for us if we have the faith to believe that things shall radically change on this earth, and the promised Kingdom will not simply be a return to how we have known secular life in this world; the old and familiar, like the previous inheritance and homesteads of Gad before the exile, will not be returned to us. Something far better is in store.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Gad, at the south side southward, the border shall be even from Tamar to the waters of Meribath Kadesh, to the brook of Egypt, to the great sea- Tamar was apparently at the southern end of the Dead Sea. There would therefore be a diagonal line drawn from there to the"brook of Egypt". As noted on <a href='B:330 47:18'>Eze 47:18</a>, this was a new definition of the promised land. It was intended for the time of the restoration, as in the full Messianic Kingdom, the entire territory promised to Abraham will be inherited.</p>


text:
<p>This is the land which you shall divide by lot to the tribes of Israel for inheritance, and these are their individual portions, says the Lord Yahweh- It was Ezekiel, as he sat with the exiles in Babylon, who was to divide the land by lot unto the various tribes. The tragedy of all the details recorded in Ezekiel 40-48, and the very reason for their being preserved to this day, is to show us to what great extent God has prepared potential things for His people, and yet they can be totally wasted if we don’t respond. In fact according to <a href='B:400 4:10'>Mic 4:10</a>, it was God’s purpose to exile His people to Babylon, “and there shalt thou be delivered; there the Lord shall redeem thee from the hand of thine enemies”. And yet they preferred to side with their enemies and to prefer non-deliverance from Babylon. The tragedy of it all is almost unthinkable, and yet this is what we do if day by day we chose the things of this world against the deliverance from this world which there is in Christ.</p>


text:
<p>These are the exits of the city: On the north side four thousand five hundred reeds by measure-"Exits"is literally ’goings out’, the word used of Israel’s going out from captivity in Egypt and Babylon. The association is in the fact that if they had truly gone out from Babylon, spiritually as well as literally, then this wonderful city would have been built.</p>


text:
<p>And the gates of the city shall be after the names of the tribes of Israel, three gates northward: the gate of Reuben, one; the gate of Judah, one; the gate of Levi, one- Nehemiah did his very best to bring the potential Kingdom of God about by urging the people to repentance and conformity to God’s will, such was his perception of what was going on; that the coming of God’s Kingdom was being limited by the apathy of his own people. See on <a href='B:330 40:10'>Eze 40:10</a>. He arranged for 12 gates to be built in the wall, as <a href='B:330 48:31-34'>Eze 48:31-34</a> had commanded there to be. The twelve gates with the names of the tribes of Israel are spoken of in <a href='B:730 21:12'>Rev 21:12</a>; but the language there is completely figurative. Seeing Judah had not built the city commanded in Ezekiel, it would as it were descend ready made from Heaven. But this is all figurative language. Seeing the literal fulfilment had been precluded by Judah’s disobedience, God would fulfil the essence of it in spiritual terms.</p>


text:
<p>At the east side four thousand five hundred reeds, and three gates: even the gate of Joseph, one; the gate of Benjamin, one; the gate of Dan, one- <a href='B:330 48:31-34'>Eze 48:31-34</a> envisaged the 12 gates of Jerusalem being named after the 12 tribes of Israel. But it seems no accident that twelve separate gates of the city are mentioned in the restoration record- but they weren’t renamed after the tribes of Israel. But the names of the city gates in Nehemiah were: valley (<a href='B:160 3:13'>Neh 3:13</a>); horse (<a href='B:160 3:28'>Neh 3:28</a>); east (<a href='B:160 3:29'>Neh 3:29</a>); Miphkad (<a href='B:160 3:31'>Neh 3:31</a>); water (<a href='B:160 8:16'>Neh 8:16</a>); dung (<a href='B:160 12:31'>Neh 12:31</a>); fountain (<a href='B:160 12:37'>Neh 12:37</a>); Ephraim, old, fish, sheep and prison gates (<a href='B:160 12:39'>Neh 12:39</a>). No wonder some wept when the rebuilt temple was finally dedicated- the pattern ofEzekiel’s vision hadn’t been followed, even on such basic matters as the names of the twelve gates of Jerusalem.</p>


text:
<p>At the south side four thousand five hundred reeds by measure, and three gates: the gate of Simeon, one; the gate of Issachar, one; the gate of Zebulun, one- The division of the tribes into four groups of three in a square formation recalls the cherubim visions of Ezekiel 1. The cherubim speak of the action of God on behalf of His people, and those who wished to could identify themselves with that work. The cherubim could have returned to Jerusalem and been manifested in the twelve tribes of a restored Israel. But this was precluded at the time by their disobedience and simple disinterest.</p>


text:
<p>At the west side four thousand five hundred reeds, with their three gates: the gate of Gad, one; the gate of Asher, one; the gate of Naphtali, one-&nbsp; There is no reason to think [contra Henry Sulley in The Temple of Ezekiel’s Prophecy] that there will be eleven gates on the West side. This is merely the fantasy of an architect.</p>


text:
<h4>It shall be eighteen thousand reeds around: and the name of the city from that day shall be, Yahweh is there- Jerusalem was to be renamed"Yahweh is our righteousness"(<a href='B:300 33:16'>Jer 33:16</a> RV)- <a href='B:330 48:35'>Eze 48:35</a> likewise is a command rather than a prediction, that the city should be called"Yahweh is there". The cherubim of glory would have returned; but as Zechariah makes clear, Judah had to return to God, not just physically returning to Judah and making the motions of worship, but in repentance. The idea that Jerusalem will become the city where “the Lord is there” must be connected with Ezekiel’s early use of the phrase to describe how the Lord “was there” in the land of Israel before the Babylonian invasion (<a href='B:330 35:10'>Eze 35:10</a>); all these details could have come true in Ezekiel’s time; but they did not. When they do so in the last days, the glory will visibly enter by the east gate in the person of the Lord Jesus. Using the prophetic perfect, God had prophesied that at the time of the restoration, He would come and dwell in rebuilt Zion (<a href='B:450 8:3'>Zec 8:3</a>)- just as Ezekiel’s prophecy had concluded: “The name of the city from that day shall be, The LORD is there” (<a href='B:330 48:35'>Eze 48:35</a>). Clearly, Ezekiel’s prophecies could have been fulfilled at the restoration; God was willing that they should be. But human apathy and self-interest stopped it from happening as it could have done:&nbsp;&nbsp;</h4><h4>They should have been more committed to building the temple “that I may appear in my glory” (<a href='B:440 1:8'>Hag 1:8</a> RSV). The glory of Yahweh as described at the end of Ezekiel could have appeared in Haggai’s time- but this wonderful possibility was held back by Israel’s petty minded, self-satisficing laziness.</h4>


text:
<p>In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon to Jerusalem, and besieged it- This means that Daniel would have been within the very first wave of captives taken into Babylon; he would have experienced the arrival of others over the next few years, all telling an increasingly bad story of the situation in Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar was not at this point"king", he was regent, although melech could apply to any such leader as he was at the time. This explains the possible chronological problem in Daniel 2.</p>


text:
<h4>The Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God- This is to be a theme in Daniel; that all such apparent disasters have God in control of them. The remainder of the vessels were taken in later waves of the invasion (<a href='B:120 24:13'>2Ki 24:13</a>; <a href='B:140 36:18'>2Ch 36:18</a>), confirming that Daniel was taken amongst the very first wave of captives (:1). Babylon’s original plan seemed to have been to make Judah a tributary state, taking away the leadership and seeking to make the youngsters like Daniel completely Babylonian, with a view to them returning and governing Judah. Hence only part of the vessels were initially taken. But this changed to a policy of complete destruction.</h4><h4>And he carried them into the land of Shinar to the house of his god: and he brought the vessels intothe treasure house of his god- The captives were paralleled with the temple treasures; they were taken into the temple as evidence that Yahweh and His people had now been apparently dominated. But Isaiah had prophesied that Bel would be rendered helpless and judged (<a href='B:290 46:1-2'>Isa 46:1-2</a>). The faithful captives would have remembered that, even when it seemed their chips were down.</h4>


text:
<p>The king spoke to Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring in some of the Israelites, those of the seed royal and of the nobles- This fulfilled the prophecy to Hezekiah:"Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store unto this day, shall be carried into Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith the Lord. And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon"(<a href='B:120 20:17-18'>2Ki 20:17-18</a>). This would mean that Daniel and his friends may well have been castrated. There is no mention of Daniel ever getting married or having children. So we are to imagine these young men looking forward to a rather bleak life; and they instead put their energy into devotion to their God and separation from the evil empire who has seeking to psychologically dominate them. So whilst Daniel’s devotion to Yahweh is to his credit, it is also psychologically understandable given this background. If Daniel and his friends were"of the seed royal", they would not have been ’well brought up’ in spiritual things. They would have seen the tragedy which occurred because attention had not been paid by their families to God’s word; and they were determined to do better. Josephus claims Daniel was in fact a son of Zedekiah.</p>


text:
<h4>Youths in whom was no blemish- The language of the sacrifices (<a href='B:30 22:19-21'>Lev 22:19-21</a>) and priests (<a href='B:30 21:16-24'>Lev 21:16-24</a>). These young men were to be trained up in the culture and religion of Babylon. There is a specifically spiritual aspect to the intention to educate them, so that the princes of Judah become princes of Babylon, with loyalty wholly to Babylon and her gods, and not Judah and Yahweh. There was therefore heavy pressure on these young men, with the intention of effectively brainwashing them into a totally different worldview, so that Judah would have no princes loyal to her any more.</h4><p>But handsome, well educated, knowledgeable- They were to be"wise", that is, made wise, in the wisdom of Babylon."The wise"in Daniel however are those who reject this and are wise in Yahweh’s ways (<a href='B:340 11:33'>Dan 11:33</a>; <a href='B:340 11:35'>Dan 11:35</a>; <a href='B:340 12:3'>Dan 12:3</a>; <a href='B:340 12:10'>Dan 12:10</a>).</p><h4>Understanding science, and such as had the ability to stand in the king’s palace; that he should teach them the learning and the language of the Chaldeans- There is an intended echo here of Moses’ experience in Egypt; situations repeat within and between the lives of God’s people, that we might learn from Biblical history and from the experiences of our brethren contemporary with us. Daniel and his friends surely saw and were inspired by the similarities with Moses. They would later see the similarities with Joseph.</h4>


text:
<p>The king appointed for them a daily portion of the king’s dainties, and of the wine which he drank, and that they should be trained for three years; that at its end they should stand before the king- The Persians and Babylonians typically trained such candidates intensely for three years from the age of 14. We can assume that this was the age of Daniel and his friends when they first made their stand for principle. Food and wine had religious significance. They were being made to participate in the king’s idolatry. For his table was seen as the table of the gods he worshipped. Right at the start of the book, we are introduced to the idea of a daily sacrifice- this pagan one mimicked the true daily sacrifice of the temple.</p>


text:
<p>Now among these were, of the Judeans, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah- All these names had the name of God in them, either as el or Yah. They were perhaps from amongst the minority influenced by Jeremiah’s attempted reformation on the eve of the Babylonian victory against Jerusalem. Or perhaps these were names they gave themselves, for Semitic peoples often are given or give themselves names appropriate to their belief system or life experience."Daniel"is ’God is judge’, the idea being that although Babylon had judged Jerusalem, God was the ultimate judge who had merely used Babylon and Babylon would be judged too."Hananiah"is"Whom Yah has favoured", and this word is used of how God would"favour"Judah with restoration (<a href='B:230 123:2-3'>Psa 123:2-3</a>; <a href='B:290 30:19'>Isa 30:19</a>; <a href='B:290 33:2'>Isa 33:2</a>; <a href='B:460 1:9'>Mal 1:9</a>)."Mishael"is from the two words misha [’who is like’] and el, ’God’:These same two words are used in the classic restoration prophecy of <a href='B:290 40:18'>Isa 40:18</a> and <a href='B:400 7:18'>Mic 7:18</a>, the idea being ’Who is like the God who restores Judah’. ’Who is like God!’ was the commentary upon God’s deliverance of Israel out of Egypt (<a href='B:20 15:11'>Exo 15:11</a>)."Azariah", ’help of Yah’, is likewise a term associated with God’s promise to"help"Judah in restoring them (s:w. <a href='B:290 41:13-14'>Isa 41:13-14</a>; <a href='B:290 44:2'>Isa 44:2</a>; <a href='B:290 49:8'>Isa 49:8</a>; <a href='B:290 50:7'>Isa 50:7</a>; <a href='B:290 50:9'>Isa 50:9</a>). So I suggest these young men chose their names in hope, in faith and in defiance of where they were being taken.</p>


text:
<h4>The prince of the eunuchs gave names to them: to Daniel he gave the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego- As noted on :6, the names of these young men all spoke of their faith and hope in the restoration of the Kingdom, and they may have chosen them in defiance of where they were being taken and the unashamed program of brainwashing they were now subject to. The names they were given were an intentional subversion of Yahweh worship."Belteshazar"is"Keeper of the hid treasures of Bel". The treasures of Yahweh’s temple had been transported to the temple of Bel in Babylon, and Daniel was likewise transported.</h4><p>"Shadrach"is"Filled with the spirit of the sun god". Hananiah was amongst those to be trained as Babylonian astrologers, and according to the Babylonian understanding, to do his job he would have to live up to his name, and be"Filled with the spirit of the sun god".</p><p>Mishael was tweaked to Meshach. The first syllable was retained, but el was replaced with Shak, the goddess of Babylon, also called Sheshach (<a href='B:300 25:26'>Jer 25:26</a>; <a href='B:300 51:41'>Jer 51:41</a>), which also means Venus, the goddess of love and mirth. But that goddess and the attempt to make Mishael into Meshach was subverted by the fact that it was during her feast that Cyrus took Babylon.</p><h4>Azariah became"Abednego","servant of Nebo", the god of wisdom, or"servant of the fire god". This was subverted wonderfully when Azariah was put in the fiery furnace, sacrificed to Nego, and yet survived thanks to Israel’s God. The psychological pressure consciously exerted upon these young believers was huge, and matches that which we all live under in this latter day Babylon</h4>


text:
<h4>But Daniel determined-"Determined"is the same word translated"gave the name to::."in :7. Babylon was determined to rename him, but he was determined not to give in to this brainwashing. He sets an example to all youngsters.</h4><p>Not to defile himself- Daniel is the more commendable in this because the other captives didn’t have the same sensitivity of conscience; and he is mentioned alone as the initiator in this refusal, with the three friends only coming in afterwards. The same word is used of how the later restored exiles did pollute themselves (<a href='B:460 1:7'>Mal 1:7</a>; <a href='B:460 1:12'>Mal 1:12</a>; <a href='B:150 2:62'>Ezr 2:62</a>; <a href='B:160 7:64'>Neh 7:64</a>). It is so much harder to take a stand for things when others amongst God’s people don’t do so.</p><h4>With the king’s dainties, nor with the wine which he drank: therefore he requested of the prince of the eunuchs that he might not defile himself- The objection was not so much because of unclean food or the nature of its preparation, but because Daniel perceived that eating meat offered to idols was purposefully intended by the Babylonians to make these young Jews effectively part of idol worship in every meal they ate. Paul’s reasoning in 1 Corinthians is based upon this; to partake in food knowingly offered to idols, when your eating was perceived as idol worship, was wrong."The king’s dainties"is better"the king’s portion of food", the food that had been placed upon the idolatrous table of the king; and it is used in <a href='B:340 11:26'>Dan 11:26</a> to describe those on the king’s side, his fellow worshippers.</h4>


text:
<p>Now God made Daniel to find kindness and compassion with the prince of the eunuchs- Finding chesed kindness and compassion was the language used of finding such mercy from God. But God had shown it to Daniel through the prince of the eunuchs:&nbsp; <a href='B:50 13:17'>Deu 13:17</a> had used the term in explaining that if none of the unclean things of the gentiles defiled God’s people, then Yahweh would show His people mercy and compassion. Daniel was not willing in his heart to be thus defiled, and so God showed him this promised"kindness and compassion". But how, mechanically, did it work out? We wonder if this man who was himself a eunuch may have been homosexually attracted to Daniel, who was a handsome young man and also a eunuch."Compassion"is AV"tender love". I am not suggesting that they had a homosexual affair, but possibly the prince of the eunuchs had a homosexual attraction to Daniel and did him a favour because of it. God works in all manner of ways to bring about His purpose and work in the lives of those faithful to Him. The Hebrew however has the idea of"pity", and is the word used in <a href='B:230 106:46'>Psa 106:46</a>:"He made them to be pitied of all those that carried them captives".</p>


text:
<p>The prince of the eunuchs said to Daniel, I fear my lord the king who has appointed your food and your drink: for why should he see your faces worse looking than the youths who are of your own age? Do you really want to endanger my head with the king?- We sense this man had indeed"tender love"(:9 AV) towards Daniel but naturally feared the consequences. We also have here a window into the despotic manner of Nebuchadnezzar, who beheaded his servants for the slightest perceived lack of obedience and servitude towards him. Daniel and his friends grew up as teenagers within the threat of instant death hanging over them. It seems the king personally had come up with this idea of making the young Jews eat and drink what had been offered to idols upon his personal table; he had a personal interest in breaking the culture of Yahweh worship which these youngsters had.</p>


text:
<p>Then Daniel said to the steward whom the prince of the eunuchs had appointed over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah- It seems Daniel didn’t respond directly to the prince of the eunuchs but to the steward, AV"Melzar". It seems those four had one"steward"responsible for them; with only four charges under his control, he would have observed them carefully and known them well.</p>


text:
<p>Test your servants, I beg you, for ten days; let them give us vegetables to eat, and water to drink-"Ten days"is elsewhere a period of testing (<a href='B:730 2:10'>Rev 2:10</a> etc:).</p>


text:
<p>Then let our faces be looked on before you, and the faces of the youths who eat of the king’s dainties; and as you see, deal with your servants-"Faces"or ’appearance’ is the word specifically used in Daniel of the"visions"about the ending of gentile power over Israel. The idea could be that this was a hint that&nbsp; those looking after them were invited to look upon the later visions and judge for themselves.</p>


text:
<p>So he listened to them in this matter, and proved them ten days- The Hebrew is literally ’He heard / obeyed them in this word’, the phrase so often used in appealing to people to hear God’s word. Those in charge of Daniel are presented as spiritually perceptive.</p>


text:
<p>At the end of ten days their faces appeared fairer, and they were fatter in flesh, than all the youths who ate of the king’s dainties- Or,"the king’s portion". There was a fair chance of word getting out about Daniel and his friends, but the men in charge of their feeding took that chance."Fair and fat"is the very Hebrew phrase used about the seven fat ears of corn in Pharaoh’s dream (<a href='B:10 41:5'>Gen 41:5</a>). There are so many echoes of the Joseph story in Daniel. We are to understand that it served as a Divine template for the situation Daniel found himself in; and our familiarity with God’s word coupled with sensitivity and self-examination enables us to discern such templates working out in our own lives."Zaphnath Paaneah", the name given to Joseph, can mean ’interpreter of dreams’; and Daniel’s interpreting the king’s dreams, at one stage being summoned out of obscurity to do so, is so clearly based upon Joseph’s experience. Man is not alone- in that no experience is without Biblical precedent, in essence. For other connections with Joseph, see on <a href='B:340 1:19'>Dan 1:19</a>.</p>


text:
<p>So the steward took away their dainties, and the wine that they should drink, and gave them vegetables- This was all the same a great risk, to disobey the king, and not give"the king’s portion"("dainties") when he had specifically stipulated it should be given them. The steward had sympathy for them.</p>


text:
<p>Now as for these four youths, God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom: and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams- The intention was that they should obtain such learning and wisdom from their education in the school of Babylonian mythology; interpretation of dreams was specifically connected with idolatry. Hence the emphasis that Israel’s God gave them wisdom. Daniel’s wisdom was proverbial throughout the empire (<a href='B:330 28:3'>Eze 28:3</a>). The language recalls how Bezaleel was"filled with the Spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge"(<a href='B:20 31:2-3'>Exo 31:2-3</a>) in order to build the tabernacle; these young men were given wisdom to effectively lead to the rebuilding of the temple. God is shown here to be able to operate directly on the human heart by His Spirit; and He can do so to this day (<a href='B:660 1:17'>Jas 1:17</a>; <a href='B:560 3:15-21'>Eph 3:15-21</a>). We don’t read here that Daniel and the four youths got wisdom from their own unaided Bible reading; rather, God gave them knowledge.</p>


text:
<p>At the end of the days which the king had appointed for bringing them in, the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar- The King wanted to see how far they had progressed out of the Yahweh cult, as he would have seen it, into the Babylonian mindset. The fact he was impressed with them was a result of the wisdom given to them and probably various providential situations which enabled them to answer his questions in an impressive way. <a href='B:340 2:1'>Dan 2:1</a> says that Daniel interpretted Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in his second year, so it’s possible that this examination ceremony was actually after that; chapter 2 is explaining, in the case, how the huge reputation of Daniel had been built up. However, the commentaries all give various suggestions about the chronological issues in Daniel and there are other apparently valid ways of understanding it.</p>


text:
<p>The king talked with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore they served the king- The other young Jewish men had comprised their faith in order to gain acceptance with the king; but their efforts somehow failed."They served the king"is literally ’they stood before [the face of] the king", and the same term is used of Pharaoh being brought before Pharaoh and his ’standing before [the face of]’ that king (<a href='B:10 41:46'>Gen 41:46</a>). As noted on <a href='B:340 1:15'>Dan 1:15</a>, this is another background allusion to Pharaoh which sets up the similarities with Joseph.</p>


text:
<p>In every matter of wisdom and understanding about which the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and enchanters who were in all his kingdom- They were not only better than the other Jewish youths, but ten times better than the existing Babylonian magicians. "Ten times" may connect with the ten days testing which they initially gave their steward (:14). Already the seeds of jealousy were sown; these young foreigners were found to be so far ahead of their teachers. It was thereby obvious that they had access to a wisdom far beyond that of their teachers.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel continued up to the first year of king Cyrus- This may refer to the length of Daniel’s uninterrupted court service. The first year of Cyrus was when the command was given to allow the Jewish exiles to return and rebuild the land. This isn’t necessarily when Daniel died, but the point is being made that he lived to see that significant moment. Some Jewish traditions claim Daniel returned to Judah at that time, but then went back to Babylon to die there.</p>


text:
<h4>PART I: Tales (chapters 1:1–6:29)</h4><p>1: Introduction (1:1–21 – set in the Babylonian era, written in Hebrew)</p><p>2: Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of four kingdoms (2:1–49 – Babylonian era; Aramaic)</p><p>3: The fiery furnace (3:1–30 – Babylonian era; Aramaic)</p><p>4: Nebuchadnezzar’s madness (3:31–4:34 – Babylonian era; Aramaic)</p><p>5: Belshazzar’s feast (5:1–6:1 – Babylonian era; Aramaic)</p><p>6: Daniel in the lions’ den (6:2–29 – Median era with mention of Persia; Aramaic)</p><p>PART II: Visions (chapters 7:1–12:13)</p><p>7: The beasts from the sea and the Son of Man (7:1–28 – Babylonian era: Aramaic)</p><p>8: The ram and the he-goat (8:1–27 – Babylonian era; Hebrew)</p><p>9: Interpretation of Jeremiah’s prophecy of the seventy weeks (9:1–27 – Median era; Hebrew)</p><p>10: The angel’s revelation: kings of the north and south (10:1–12:13 – Persian era, mention of Greek era; Hebrew)</p><p>Daniel chapter 2 contains an outline of the powers who were to dominate the people of Israel within the land of Israel; that is the eretz / earth / land which is in view, not the whole planet. It begins with a head of gold (Babylon), then breast and arms of silver (Persia), thighs of brass (Greece), two legs of iron (the two halves of the Roman empire) and then feet part of iron, part of clay. Each part of the image corresponds in proportion to how long each empire dominated the land of Israel and the Jewish people- thus the legs were longest because the Romans dominated the land for longest. After AD70, the Jewish state ceased to be a nation. But now, it is once again, for the first time in nearly 2000 years. The final part of the image therefore represents a group of nations (perhaps divided into two groups, symbolized by the two feet) who will dominate Israel in the last days. A stone cut out of a mountain without hands (representing the Lord Jesus Christ) then hits the image on its feet, growing into a mountain which fills the earth. The interpretation is given, and it clearly refers to the second coming of Christ to destroy the kingdoms of men who have dominated His land and His people, and to establish God’s Kingdom on earth: “In the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people; it shall crush to powder and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever” (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>). The vision requires that the image stands complete in order to all be destroyed together. The latter day entity represented by the feet will also be headed up by a latter day Nebuchadnezzar, and will comprise elements of all the previous entities which have dominated God’s people.</p><p>And yet there is another view possible. Bible prophecy is often conditional. At Daniel’s time, there was the possibility that in some sense, a Messiah figure could have appeared and re-established Israel as God’s Kingdom on earth. Many of the prophecies we understand as referring to the establishment of the Kingdom on earth at the Lord’s return could have then been fulfilled. Ezekiel 40-48 is the clearest example; the returning exiles were intended to build a temple of the dimensions given, replete with a Messiah figure. But most remained in the soft life of Babylon, and those who did return were disobedient to the Kingdom potential, as prophets like Malachi, Haggai and Zechariah make clear. Daniel’s prophecies likewise outlinea possible scenario which could have led to the re-establishment of the Kingdom; but it didn’t happen, because of men dropping the baton, missing the opportunities, refusing to use the potential of the Spirit.</p><p>Understanding Daniel 2 is programmatic to making sense of Bible prophecy about the last days. The beasts of Daniel 7 are clearly an extension and development of the four metals of the Daniel 2 image, and those beasts morph into the beasts of Revelation, where we find them presented with various aspects and with additional details. As to why the beasts morph over time, I would suggest that this is because Bible prophecy is conditional (see the Appendix ‘Conditional Prophecy in Daniel’). What could have come true e:g. in Daniel’s time, did not- because of the indolence of God’s people and the lack of repentance amongst the Gentiles. And so the prophecies morphed into another form, and then another, meaning that the essence of God’s prophetic word will still come true, even if the form of fulfilment is not that which was initially or ideally intended. Daniel 2-7 are written in Aramaic [Chaldee], not Hebrew. The section has a concentric structure, in which the visions of chapters 2 and 7 form the opening and concluding parts. They are clearly to be related to each other:</p><p>Daniel 2 - Vision of empires</p><p>Daniel 3 - Deliverance of three Jews from death</p><p>Daniel 4 - God’s discipline of the king</p><p>Daniel 5 - God’s discipline of the king</p><p>Daniel 6 - Deliverance of Daniel from death</p><p>Daniel 7 - Vision of empires</p><p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, was given a dream which Daniel interpreted. He saw an image comprised of various materials, in the form of a man. Nebuchadnezzar was the head of gold, followed by the breast and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, two legs of iron, and finally two feet [10 toes] made from a brittle mixture of iron and clay. A stone cut out from a mountain without hands then struck the image on its brittle feet, and destroyed the gold, silver, brass, iron and clay. A whirlwind carried them all away, and the stone grew into a mountain which filled the earth and will never pass away as the previous kings and kingdoms passed away. This is interpreted as the establishment of God’s eternal Kingdom on earth (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>). The stone is a fairly common symbol of the Lord Jesus Christ (<a href='B:230 118:22'>Psa 118:22</a> cp. <a href='B:470 21:42-44'>Mat 21:42-44</a>; <a href='B:510 4:11'>Act 4:11</a>; <a href='B:290 8:14'>Isa 8:14</a>; <a href='B:290 28:16'>Isa 28:16</a>; <a href='B:520 9:32-33'>Rom 9:32-33</a>; <a href='B:560 2:20'>Eph 2:20</a>; <a href='B:670 2:4'>1Pe 2:4</a>; <a href='B:670 2:6-8'>1Pe 2:6-8</a>), the Messiah of Israel (<a href='B:10 49:24'>Gen 49:24</a>; <a href='B:450 3:9'>Zec 3:9</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>; <a href='B:450 4:10'>Zec 4:10</a>), the begotten Son of God, cut out without human hands.</p><h4>Bible prophecy can be understood on a number of levels. It would be legitimate to see these four empires as referring to the succession of kingdoms which had dominion over “all the earth”. We must remember that the Bible was written in Hebrew, Greek and Chaldee. We read through the mask of translation. The Hebrew word and concept of eretz, translated “the earth”, can refer either to the whole planet, or specifically to the land promised to Abraham, between the Nile and the Euphrates. The word is used in modern Hebrew to refer to eretz Israel, the state of Israel. Clearly enough, the domination of “all the earth” (<a href='B:340 2:39'>Dan 2:39</a>) doesn’t mean the entire planet. It surely refers to domination of the land promised to Abraham, and the people of that land, i:e. Israel. Likewise Babylon is described as being ruler over “wherever the children of men dwell” because they had been “given into your hand” (<a href='B:340 2:38'>Dan 2:38</a>). This isn’t speaking of a literal dominion over every human being on the planet. The reference was to the way that Babylon had scattered the Jews amongst the various areas of the eretz [land promised to Abraham] under its control. The very same words for ‘give into the hand’ are used of how God would give the land and people of Judah / Israel “into the hand of” the king of Babylon (<a href='B:150 5:12'>Ezr 5:12</a>; <a href='B:230 106:41'>Psa 106:41</a>; <a href='B:300 20:4-5'>Jer 20:4-5</a>; <a href='B:300 22:25'>Jer 22:25</a>; <a href='B:300 32:3'>Jer 32:3</a>; <a href='B:300 32:28'>Jer 32:28</a>; <a href='B:300 34:2'>Jer 34:2</a>; <a href='B:300 34:20-21'>Jer 34:20-21</a>; <a href='B:300 44:30'>Jer 44:30</a>; <a href='B:330 16:39'>Eze 16:39</a>; <a href='B:330 39:23'>Eze 39:23</a>). Indeed, within the book of Daniel the point has been made; for the book opens with the statement that the king of Judah has been ‘given into the hand of’ the king of Babylon (<a href='B:340 1:2'>Dan 1:2</a>). This is all quite some emphasis- the people ‘given into the hand’ of Nebuchadnezzar do not refer to all people on the planet, rather are they specifically the Jewish people. Likewise, the earth / land which is in view isn’t the whole planet, but rather the land promised to Abraham. Note too that ‘the earth’ [eretz] is often understood as the people of Israel within their land. Thus: “Concerning Samaria and Jerusalem… hear, all you people; hear, O earth [eretz] and all that therein is” (<a href='B:400 1:2'>Mic 1:2</a>). Frequently, the physical land of Israel is addressed by the prophets, when clearly it is the people of the land which is in view. Ezekiel 6 is full of this: “Set your face toward the mountains of Israel, and prophesy against them, and say, You mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord GOD! Thus says the Lord GOD to the mountains and the hills, to the ravines and the valleys: Behold, I, even I, will bring a sword upon you, and I will destroy your high places:::&nbsp; I will cast down your slain before your idols… I will scatter your bones around your altars… your works wiped out… and you shall know that I am the LORD” (<a href='B:330 6:2-7'>Eze 6:2-7</a>). Therefore the domination of the land / eretz can be understood specifically as the domination of the people of Israel within that land. This would explain why there is an apparent gap in fulfilment of the Daniel 2, 7 visions- the historical fulfilment appears to stop once Rome was no longer dominating Israel, and then restarts in the very last days, in the period of the ten toes / horns. This would be because there was no land / state / people of Israel in their land to dominate.</h4><p>After Babylon’s domination of the land, there followed the Medo-Persian empire (breast and arms of silver), then the Greeks (belly and thighs of brass), followed by the Roman empire, divided as it was into Western and Eastern parts, symbolized by the two iron legs. Out of this arose the two feet with their ten toes. But after the Roman empire, the people of Israel were exiled from their land, only becoming a nation again in 1948. The two feet with their ten toes would then represent a brief period of mixed domination of the land, under a confederacy of ten groups broadly divided into two camps. I say ‘brief’ because in proportion to the size of the image, the feet are not very large. The proportions of the different parts of the body match the length of time over which the various empires dominated Israel. Thus Babylon dominated Judah for 70 years, and they are represented by the head, which is not a large part of the human body.</p><p>The prophecy of Daniel goes further to provide more details of this series of empires. Daniel 7 describes the same succession in terms of four beasts, which also represent the same empires as the metals in the image of Daniel chapter 2. The fourth beast has ten horns, corresponding to the ten toes of Daniel’s image; and out of them, one particular horn is prominent. This beast becomes the prototype for the beasts we encounter in the book of Revelation, who likewise dominate God’s people and will be destroyed by Christ’s return.</p><p>Radical Islam and the Land Promised to Abraham</p><p>Radical Islam has a lot to say about the land promised to Abraham- what the Bible prophecies refer to as the eretz or land / earth. Radical Islamist groups such as The Islamic State and al-Nusra Front have spoken much about it; their definition of the Levant or Sham is pretty much that of the land promised to Abraham. ‘Nusra’ is an acronym standing for the Front for the Defense of the Levant. They claim to be fighting to prepare the way for the coming of the Mahdi to establish God’s Kingdom worldwide; they call the land promised to Abraham “Land of Malahim,” or “epic battles”, and they expect there to be the al-Malhamah al-Kubra, the “Great Battle of the last hour”, at Jerusalem. This is what the Bible calls Armageddon. When the true Jesus appears in Jerusalem, all nations in the earth / land will be gathered together to battle at Jerusalem. And the jihadist theology is preparing them for this. They consciously speak of their caliphate as being extended over the land promised to Abraham, and they are urging people to leave their native lands as Abraham left his, and journey to live in the caliphate, comprised as they wish it to be, of the territory promised to Abraham. They call their caliph or leader ‘Caliph Ibrahim / Abraham’, and urge migration or hijrah to the land promised to him. The pieces are all falling into place to fulfil the Biblical pictures of the last days. Jihadist theology makes much of ‘signs of the times’, leading upto the coming of the Mahdi and the final battle against the antiChrist. These ‘signs of the times’ they look for are often the same signs which are to be found in the Bible, e:g. the re-establishment of Israel as a nation before Armageddon. So as they apparently come true, Islamists are the more convinced that antiChrist [who they call Dajjal and understand to be a Jew] is about to appear in Jerusalem, and they must fight him in the last great battle, in order to enable the Mahdi to return. Who they consider to be the antichrist will in fact be the true Christ. They will rush to fight Him, believing Him to be the antichrist they are expecting. Their destruction by Him will presage the establishment of God’s true Kingdom on earth, the revived and restored kingdom of Israel. This would explain why many Biblical terms used about the very last days are also found in Jihadist theology. They speak of the events of the very last days before the Mahdi returns as being “the hour”; and yet Revelation speaks of how the kings of the earth / land will have power for “one hour” and be destroyed likewise in “one hour” (<a href='B:730 17:12'>Rev 17:12</a>; <a href='B:730 18:10'>Rev 18:10</a>; <a href='B:730 18:17'>Rev 18:17</a>; <a href='B:730 18:19'>Rev 18:19</a>). These similarities are unsurprising because Mohammed clearly plagiarized the Bible and Judaism for his teachings.</p><p>The changing of times and laws by the antichrist figure of <a href='B:340 7:25'>Dan 7:25</a> sounds like the radical Islamist desire to impose the Islamic calendar and sharia law in the land promised to Abraham, which they see as their caliphate; and for sure, if Israel becomes part of an Islamic state, then the keeping of the Jewish calendar will be outlawed. The implementation of sharia law and changing legal structures to reflect it, is a major theme in their program. It’s clear that the three and a half year domination of Jerusalem and changing of the Jewish law and calendar had an initial fulfilment in the abuses of Antiochus Epiphanes, who desecrated the temple. There was a three and a half year period from the edict of Antiochus in June 168 BC to the rededication of the temple in December 165 BC:&nbsp; The little horn of Daniel 8 comes out of the Greek kingdom, but the horn of Daniel 7 out of the fourth kingdom. I suggest that this is because the prophecy could have been fulfilled totally at the time of Antiochus- Messiah could have come and destroyed him. But the various required preconditions weren’t met, and so there was another possibility of it coming true out of the Roman kingdom [another possibility is that the four beasts and metals refer to Babylon-Media-Persia-Greece rather than Babylon-Medo Persia-Greece-Rome]. Revelation uses the same imagery to describe the antiChrist of the last days, who will incorporate some elements of the previous historical fulfilments of the little horn in men like Antiochus Epiphanes.</p><p>Issue number 3 of the Islamic State magazine Dabiq frequently talks of the call to follow Ibrahim [Abraham] in making hijrah [migration] to the land promised to him: “Islam in the end of times will be more manifest in Shâm::. So the best of the people on the earth in the end of times will be those who keep to the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah, which is Shâm” [Majmû’ul-Fatâwâ]. Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullâh) also said, “So he informed that the best of the people on the earth are those who keep to the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah, in contrast to those who pass through it or leave it. The land that Ibrâhîm made hijrah to is Shâm::. the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah::. And the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah, has been made for us equal to the land of our Prophet’s hijrah. The best people on earth will be those who keep to the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah”. Note how the theology of these jihadists effectively replaces the land of Saudi Arabia and the city of Mecca with that of the Levant, the territory promised to Abraham; and Mecca is replaced in their focus by Jerusalem. With Saudi Arabia now supporting the Western coalition against radical Islam, such a shift in emphasis isn’t surprising. But it means that all is being prepared for the last days- for the Bible prophecies focus upon the domination of the land of Israel and Jerusalem in particular. It’s significant that the Caliph of the Islamic State Caliphate is referred to by his followers as Caliph Ibrahim / Abraham; the idea is that the faithful will follow him in migrating from their homelands to the land promised to him- which is the very same eretz which is the focus of the Bible’s latter day prophecies, and which is to be dominated by an antiChrist figure and his beast.</p><h4>&nbsp;The Image Stands Complete in the Last Days</h4><p>The image of Daniel 2 must stand complete in the last days- the whole image, not just the toes, are to be broken in pieces “together”. This feature of the prophecy is crucial to correct interpretation. Babylon, the head of gold, must therefore rule over the system which the image represents. The image is a man- let’s not forget that. The head is Nebuchadnezzar. The entity which will be destroyed by the Lord’s coming is therefore headed up in an individual; and there are other Bible themes and specific predictions which flesh out the picture of this anti-Christ of the last days.</p><p>According to the interpretation given inDan 2:38-40, the first kingdom (Babylon) was destroyed by the second (Medo-Persia), and the second was destroyed by the third (Greece); but we read that the iron (Roman) kingdom would break in pieces all the previous empires, not just the Greek empire: “iron breaks in pieces and subdues all [these]; and as iron that crushes all these, shall it break in pieces and crush them” (<a href='B:340 2:40'>Dan 2:40</a>). This was achieved in the sense that there were elements of the Babylonian and Medo-Persian empires in the Greek empire which Rome crushed; as Keil puts it in his commentary, “the materials of the first two kingdoms were comprehended in the third”. And likewise there are elements of the iron in the last part of the image- for the feet are made of iron mixed with clay. On this basis we can conclude that the final part of the image, the feet of iron and clay, will incorporate elements of all the previous empires which dominated Israel.</p><p>Apart from the head of gold, all the metals / beasts have a strange feature in common- they subdue three previous powers. The second beast has three ribs in its mouth` (<a href='B:340 7:5'>Dan 7:5</a>)- speaking of three powers subdued by the Persians. The third entity, Greece, subdued “three… even four” kings of Persia (<a href='B:340 11:2'>Dan 11:2</a>). I suggest this is a Semitism which effectively means ‘three very great ones’- cp. “for three transgressions and for four” in Amos 1, “three things… even four” (<a href='B:240 30:15'>Pro 30:15</a>; <a href='B:240 30:18'>Pro 30:18</a>; <a href='B:240 30:21'>Pro 30:21</a>; <a href='B:240 30:29'>Pro 30:29</a>). The fourth entity, the legs of iron (Daniel 2) and the terrible fourth beast (Daniel 7) devoured, broke in pieces and stamped upon the remnants of the preceding three beasts / powers (<a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a>). The little horn roots up three of the ten horns [cp. the ten toes], meaning that “he shall subdue three kings” (<a href='B:340 7:24'>Dan 7:24</a>). Clearly the final phase of the kingdoms of men will include this feature which was in all the preceding ones. We should look, therefore, for a system which subdues three other kings or kingdoms.</p><p>If you tried to build a replica of the image seen by Nebuchadnezzar, with human dimensions and the same metals, it would not stand up. The relative gravity of the materials is such that it would be pulled over by the weight of its head. Gold has a specific gravity of 19:6, and the other materials have progressively lower gravities- clay has only 1:8 [silver 11, brass 8:5, and iron7:8]. Specific gravity refers in layman’s terms to the tendency of the material to fall to the ground. The whole image is pulled down to the earth by the weight of the head of gold. The specific individual heading it up therefore has an overpowering effect upon the whole entity. This of itself indicates not only how fragile are the Kingdoms of men, but how a specific individual, the latter day head of gold, will bring the image down. The whole colossus of humanity is actually kept standing by God- because the image as it is described could not stand. God is in history, He was and ever shall be and will bring it all down at the appointed time. This of itself is great comfort, as we feel dwarfed by the seeming inexorability of historical event and the apparent colossus of human corporation and empire.</p><p>Some of the words used about the behaviours of the elements of the image are elsewhere used specifically about the persecution of Israel. Nebuchadnezzar, and indeed the other empires, are described as ’ruling’ over the earth / land (<a href='B:340 2:38'>Dan 2:38</a> etc:), but the equivalent Hebrew word is used specifically about how the enemies of the Jews sought to rule over the Jewish people. The word is used of how Haman the Agagite [the man of Gog] sought to "have power over" [s:w:] the Jews (<a href='B:190 9:1'>Est 9:1</a>). Likewise, the word used for how the iron would ’subdue’ (<a href='B:340 2:40'>Dan 2:40</a>) is only used elsewhere of how the Israelites were subdued or ’made feeble’ by their Egyptian persecutors (<a href='B:50 25:18'>Deu 25:18</a>). The iron would "break" all beneath it, and this word is used of Esau [forefather of the Arab Moslem peoples] ’hurting’ Jacob (<a href='B:10 31:7'>Gen 31:7</a>), the Egyptians breaking Israel in Egypt (<a href='B:20 5:22-23'>Exo 5:22-23</a>; <a href='B:40 20:15'>Num 20:15</a>; <a href='B:50 26:6'>Deu 26:6</a>), the Assyrians ’breaking down’ the land of Judah (<a href='B:290 24:19'>Isa 24:19</a>) and the Babylonians breaking down Jerusalem (<a href='B:300 25:29'>Jer 25:29</a>; <a href='B:300 31:28'>Jer 31:28</a>). God’s Kingdom will "consume all those kingdoms" (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>), using the same word as used about the ’consuming’ of all things upon the land of Israel, both Gentile dominators and the apostate within Israel (<a href='B:430 1:2-3'>Zep 1:2-3</a>).</p><p>So much of God’s prophetic word had some initial fulfilment and relevance to its first audience. But always we are left with the sense that the fulfilment was only partial. The prophecies of Israel’s restoration from Babylon did indeed have a fulfilment in the return of the exiles, as did those of Babylon’s judgments, but clearly the major and complete fulfilment is yet to come. And thus it will be in the last days and in the return of Christ to earth that the entire prophetic word has its complete fulfilment. The word will take on the full flesh of reality in a way it has never done previously. The fulfilments and applications of Revelation’s prophecies about the beast over history are but a prelude to that which is yet to come. We are seriously mistaken if we think that because we can discern a historical application of these prophetic words, therefore there is no future fulfilment. The schema of the image in Daniel 2 visually demonstrates this; the sequence of empires which can be discerned is not the main fulfilment of the prophecy. Rather is the ultimate and main fulfilment in the way that the image stands complete in the last days and is destroyed by Christ’s return to earth. Likewise all the beasts exist at the coming of Christ (<a href='B:340 7:12'>Dan 7:12</a>). The arising of four beasts from the sea doesn’t mean they had to arise at different times; they are a parody of the four beasts representing God’s Angelic organization. John describes these in <a href='B:730 4:7'>Rev 4:7</a>; clearly he saw them all at the same time: “The first creature was like a lion, the second creature like a calf, the third creature had the face of a man and the fourth creature was like a flying eagle”. Because the continuous historical application is true as far as it goes doesn’t preclude the main fulfilment of the prophecy in a rather different way in the very last days. And thus the book of Revelation too can have discernible historical applications over history, but throughout the book there is the strong impression that the prophecies speak of situations immediately before Christ’s return, appeals and judgments which are urgently poured out immediately prior to ’the end’- and in that sense He is spoken of as coming "soon" (<a href='B:730 2:16'>Rev 2:16</a>; <a href='B:730 3:11'>Rev 3:11</a>; <a href='B:730 22:7'>Rev 22:7</a>; <a href='B:730 22:12'>Rev 22:12</a>; <a href='B:730 22:20'>Rev 22:20</a>), in that the ultimate message of the book is for the generation who will be alive at the Lord’s coming.</p><p>The complete image will have elements within it of the previous entities who dominated God’s people in their land. But it’s also possible that for the image to stand erect there will be four entities dominating the eretz, represented by the four beasts and four metals, with one of them sprouting ten toes / horns and an antichrist figure. This scenario would explain how after the fourth beast is destroyed the other three beasts have their dominion taken away (<a href='B:340 7:11-12'>Dan 7:11-12</a>).</p><p>The Head of Gold</p><p>Nebuchadnezzar was given a kingdom of power, strength and glory (<a href='B:340 2:37'>Dan 2:37</a> LXX). Biblically, this is God’s Kingdom, which at that time was Israel. The animals and birds given into his hand (<a href='B:340 2:38'>Dan 2:38</a>) surely refer to those of the land promised to Abraham, rather than literally the whole planet. For in what sense were the birds of the Amazon or Australian kangaroos given into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar? The phrase ‘beasts of the field and birds of Heaven’ is repeatedly used to represent the ‘wild’ nations living in eretz Israel, from the Euphrates to Egypt. It is they who were at one time protected by the great empires and then turned against them (<a href='B:330 29:5'>Eze 29:5</a>; <a href='B:330 31:6'>Eze 31:6</a>; <a href='B:330 31:13'>Eze 31:13</a>; <a href='B:330 32:4'>Eze 32:4</a>); they are used as symbolic of the nations in the invasion of <a href='B:330 38:20'>Eze 38:20</a>, and of Israel’s neighbouring enemies (<a href='B:230 79:2'>Psa 79:2</a>; <a href='B:350 2:18'>Hos 2:18</a>). It was these which were given into Nebuchadnezzar’s hand; and later in Daniel we read that the birds and beasts represent the nations dominated by Babylon (<a href='B:340 4:2'>Dan 4:2</a>; <a href='B:340 4:21'>Dan 4:21</a>). Clearly Nebuchadnezzar’s dominion was not global, and I submit that the only other clearly definable domain for ‘the entire earth’ is the earth / land promised to Abraham. God is said to have ‘given’ the beasts and birds ‘into the hand’ of Nebuchadnezzar. This exact phrase is used of how God gave the people of Israel into his hand (<a href='B:150 5:12'>Ezr 5:12</a>). It is so often stated that God would give His people into Babylon’s hand (<a href='B:300 20:4-5'>Jer 20:4-5</a>; <a href='B:300 22:25'>Jer 22:25</a>; <a href='B:300 32:3'>Jer 32:3</a>; <a href='B:300 32:28'>Jer 32:28</a>; <a href='B:300 34:2'>Jer 34:2</a>; <a href='B:300 34:21'>Jer 34:21</a>). Clearly it is the Jewish people in their land who are in view. As Babylon reigned over them as the head of gold, so the succeeding empires likewise would reign over them, and the entire image would stand therefore upon the land and people of Israel in the last days. Nebuchadnezzar was “made ruler over all”; but the “all” requires definition. I suggest it means all the eretz promised to Abraham, and all God’s people within it. The same word is used of how the Persians wished to ruler over / have power over God’s people (<a href='B:190 9:1'>Est 9:1</a>). The ‘all the earth’ over which these kings / kingdoms had power (<a href='B:340 2:39'>Dan 2:39</a>) is not referring to the entire planet, but specifically to the land promised to Abraham and God’s people within it.</p><h4>The whole intention of the vision was to "make known to the king what shall be in the latter days" (<a href='B:340 2:28'>Dan 2:28</a>). Now that of course can simply mean ’in the future’ ("hereafter", <a href='B:340 2:29'>Dan 2:29</a>). But "the latter days" is a term often used in the Bible regarding ’the last days’- the period directly prior to the return of Christ to earth. So we are invited to see the entire prophecy of the image standing complete and&nbsp;being broken as speaking of events to happen directly prior to the Lord’s return. This requires the image to stand complete, and for the entire prophecy to have a primarily latter day fulfilment. The form of the entire image was "terrible" (<a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>), and this is the language of the last beast which would exist at the time of Christ’s return (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a> s:w:). That beast, which is the basis of the beasts we meet in Revelation, is a summary of all the components of the image:&nbsp; The stone cut out without hands (<a href='B:340 2:34'>Dan 2:34</a>) must be connected with the way in which the antiChrist figure of the very last days will stand up against the Prince of Princes [Christ] and be broken "without hand" (<a href='B:340 8:25'>Dan 8:25</a>), just as the stone quarried without hands would ’break’ the entire image. The individual of <a href='B:340 8:25'>Dan 8:25</a> is therefore the embodiment of the entire image of Daniel 2; the entity represented by the image will be incarnated in its individual leader, who will exist at the very time of theLord’s coming. And the language of <a href='B:340 8:25'>Dan 8:25</a> is clearly picked up in the prophecy of the "man of sin" in 2 Thessalonians 2, who will challenge the Lord Jesus and be destroyed by the brightness of His second coming.</h4><p>The Feet of Iron and Clay</p><p>The ten toes are split into two groups, represented by the two legs. This could refer to the deep division between Sunni & Shia Islam, or to the latter day entity having two foundations within the land of Israel- in the West Bank, and in the Gaza Strip. Imagine the image standing with its two legs standing on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with Jerusalem in the middle; if the image is facing East, it would be looking precisely towards Mecca, as if it is an observant Moslem. Or it could be that there will be ten leaders, or ten groups, within the land promised to Abraham. Another consideration is that the "emirate" of a future Islamic entity is headed by a caliph and his "cabinet" of ten "ministers.</p><p>The cementing together of the iron and clay recalls the words of the Koran in Surah 61:4:"Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure". And yet the prophecy requires that they will be mixed together, but will not cleave with each other. And this will be the basis of their destruction, just as the disunity between Israel’s historical enemies was the basis of their destruction. <a href='B:230 60:8'>Psa 60:8</a>; <a href='B:230 108:9'>Psa 108:9</a> predict that God will triumph over Philistia- literally, He will split, divide them. But their own internal divisions are effectively their own judgment. And this is how God so often works.</p><p>The military arm of Hamas is the Qassam Brigades; kassam in Arabic means ‘divider’, another allusion to the feet part of iron and part of clay, when the Kingdom of Israel’s oppressors shall be “divided” (<a href='B:340 2:41'>Dan 2:41</a>). Hamas means ‘strong’, and the Gaza strip / Hamas controlled area will be part of the final strong / weak, iron / clay entity that briefly dominates the land according to Daniel 2. The uniting of the disparate elements in the ten toes is matched by the great emphasis in the Moslem world upon unity. We read of “King Hussein’s plan for the establishment of a so-called United Arab Kingdom” (Y. Harkabi, The Palestinian Covenant And Its Meaning (Totowa, N:J: Valentine, Mitchell & Co:, 1979) p:135). This sounds exactly like the ‘uniting’ of the iron and clay in the entity of the last days which will dominate Israel. “The Palestinian National Authority will strive to achieve a union of the confrontation countries [i:e. “all nations around about” Israel- D:H:]… or a step along the road to comprehensive Arab unity” – Political Programs of the P:L:O:, Article 8. “The Arab ‘nation’ is made up of ‘peoples’ and the (one) Arab homeland comprises the national homeland of these peoples… the relationship of the people and the individual to the overall Arab homeland and nation is called in modern Arabic Qamwiyya (nationalism)… like the trunk of a tree that branches off into offshoots of local patriotism…the splitting up of the Arab region into separate states carved out by the colonial powers:&nbsp; However, once Arab unity is achieved and the frontiers wiped out…” (Y. Harkabi, The Palestinian Covenant And Its Meaning (Totowa, N:J: Valentine, Mitchell & Co:, 1979) p. 31).</p><p>There is a gap in historical fulfilment between the end of the iron legs, the Roman empire, and the brief time of the iron and clay [the feet are a small proportion of the image of a man]. This need not concern us unduly. It could be that this is because there was no nation dominating Israel in the land promised to Abraham, because the Jews were in dispersion from Roman times until the 20th century revival of the state of Israel. This period may be what Jesus had in mind when He spoke about “the times of the Gentiles” (<a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a>). Or it may be that indeed the prophecy had a possible fulfilment in the first century, or even earlier, that didn’t happen- and so the fulfilment was delayed, resulting in this apparent gap in fulfilment. We encounter a similar gap at the end of Daniel 11, when the fulfilment jumps from the time of the Greek empire to the last days; likewise Daniel 8 makes the very same jump. And the 70 weeks prophecy in Daniel 9 seems to require a similar jump from the time of Jesus to the last days. Another possibility is that the entire thrust of the Daniel 2 prophecy is indeed, as Daniel said, to show what shall be in the last days. The fulfilment over history is not exact and is only a dim primary fulfilment of the vision.</p><p>Muslim Unity and Disunity</p><p>The entire image with all its component metals is"broken to pieces together"by the little stone (<a href='B:340 2:35'>Dan 2:35</a>). The Chaldee word translated"together"is the equivalent of the Hebrew echad, one. The various metals, along with the feet or iron and clay, may not naturally cleave to each other and yet in another sense they are one. And this is exactly the scenario we see developing- bitter intra-Islamic rivalry, whilst united passionately. The only commonality they all have is their joint hatred of Israel and desire to destroy the Jewish people and dominate their land. The same word is found, almost untranslated, in <a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>, where we read that the king saw a great image. The"a"translates the same original word which is translated"together"in :35. The image was not just ’an’ image, but a together, united image,"one"image. The different metals were united together in one form and person, as a consciousimitation of Nebuchadnezzar and ultimately, Mohammad, whom the IS and the jihadists claim to embody. Remember article 8 of the Hamas Covenant:"Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model”. Recall too that the IS developed out of the Tawhid wa al-Jihadi group, meaning ’Unity & Jihad’. Unity is such a major and recurrent theme in the founding documents of so many jihadist groups, not least the IS [ISIS] and Hamas.</p><p>The ‘Palestinians’ were historically destroyed not by Israel but by the king of the north: “Howl, gate! Cry, city! You are melted away, Philistia, all of you; for smoke comes out of the north, and there is no straggler in his ranks” (<a href='B:290 14:31'>Isa 14:31</a>). Historically, God seems to prefer to provoke division and confusion amongst Israel’s enemies so that they turn on themselves and self-destruct. The horns hate the whore riding the beast, and there are many other hints at such a scenario in the last days. The King of the North, a re-formed Babylon, or Assyria redivivus, will likely end up conflicting with Hamas, or the final rulers of Gaza, and likewise destroying them.</p><p>Intermarriage of the Clay and Iron?</p><p>But Biblically, the potters clay is Israel. They and the Arabs do not mix with each other. The strong iron, fragments and elements of the iron legs, the fourth beast system, will be mixed with them but they will not cleave to each other. Hamas / Gaza, the strong ones [‘Hamas’ and ‘Gaza’ both mean ‘strong’], will be mixed with a weak remnant of Israel within the land- and the whole entity will be destroyed by the Lord’s coming. Iron and clay don’t cleave or marry to each other (<a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>). The same word for "cleave" is used about marriage in <a href='B:10 2:24'>Gen 2:24</a>. They are mixed with each other- and the Hebrew and Chaldee words arab are used here. Clay is a symbol for Israel (<a href='B:290 64:8'>Isa 64:8</a>; <a href='B:300 18:6'>Jer 18:6</a>). The Jeremiah 18 reference is significant in that God says that Israel are as clay and He will break them in pieces because they didn’t respond to His appeals. The very same image is used of the destruction of the feet of clay in Daniel 2. The clay is specifically "potter’s clay" (<a href='B:340 2:41'>Dan 2:41</a>). And that is really the key to the interpretation, because Jeremiah 18 speaks of Israel as the clay in the hands of the Divine potter. The iron in the toes is clearly to be connected with the iron of the legs, which corresponds to the terrible fourth beast with iron teeth (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a>). The dominators of Israel in the last days will seek to cleave [in marriage] to the clay, Israel. The clay is called "the seed of men" (<a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>), recalling the descriptions of Israel as "the seed of the Jews" (<a href='B:190 6:13'>Est 6:13</a>). Mingling with the men of the seed would certainly suggest marriage. Is this a reference to a future Islamic domination of Israel unsuccessfully forcing the remaining Jews to marry Moslems? The iron and clay are "mixed" with each other; and the same word is used in <a href='B:150 9:2'>Ezr 9:2</a> of how the people of Judah "mingled themselves" in marriage to the peoples of the land. The suggestion is that the iron and clay ’marry’ but do not cleave to each other in that relationship. This is a feature of radical Islamist domination of territories. In Tunisia and other areas brought under Moslem domination, the Jews there were either killed or, if they were women, forced to marry (polygamously) Moslem men. It would not be out of character with the IS if those they conquer [Israel in particular] were given the same choice.</p><h4>Religious Hypocrisy</h4><p>The image is clearly presented as an idol- this is how the word translated "image" is usually used in the Old Testament. The chief deity of Babylon was Marduk who was considered to be the “god of gold”. Herodotus described the image of Marduk as a golden statue seated upon a golden throne before a golden table and a golden altar. Pliny also notes that the robes of Marduk’s priests were interlaced with gold. The word used for the breaking in pieces of the image (<a href='B:340 2:34'>Dan 2:34</a>) is that used frequently about the breaking in pieces of idols (<a href='B:20 32:20'>Exo 32:20</a>; <a href='B:50 9:21'>Deu 9:21</a>; <a href='B:120 23:6'>2Ki 23:6</a>; <a href='B:120 23:15'>2Ki 23:15</a>; 2Ch 344):&nbsp; The sequence of metals (gold, silver, brass and iron) is found again in <a href='B:340 5:4'>Dan 5:4</a>; <a href='B:340 5:23'>Dan 5:23</a> in describing the materials used by the Babylonian kings for their idols. It’s as if they wanted to show that actually all the metals of the image were comprehended within their empire- and they would last for ever. The latter day entity will be distinctly religious, too. The IS, as Sunni Moslems, are passionately against any idols or memorials, hence their destruction of any Shia shrines they take control of. But in a turn of irony which can only be Divine, their religious system is of itself an idol, which is to be destroyed by the Lord’s second coming. The entity represented by the image of Daniel 2, which I suggest refers to an Islamic state established in the land promised to Abraham, is destroyed by the return of Christ as of a stone cut out without hands. But the Kaaba stone, the black stone of Mecca which is the central point of the grand mosque in Mecca towards which Moslems pray, is believed by Moslems to have been cut out without human hands and to have come to earth from Heaven, and will reappear at judgment day (Hava Lazarus-Yafeh Some Religious Aspects of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1981) pp:&nbsp;120–124). And yet this stone, which serves as the focal point of Islam, will be shown to be but a parody of the ultimately true stone cut without hands, the Lord Jesus, who will return from Heaven as the stone to smash the image.</p><p>We can likewise observe that the description of the beast in Revelation 17 is very un-Islamic- in fact, the very opposite. The beast is ridden by a prostitute who is drunk- both abominations to radical Islam. The woman has a golden cup- drinking from golden cups is specifically forbidden to Moslems by the Quran. The cup is full of idolatry- and Sunni Islam particularly is passionately against any idolatry or worship of anything apart from God. An image is set up to the beast and worshipped- also abomination for Moslems. The false prophet does miracles- whereas Moslems claim that Mohammed did no miracles and the Quran itself is the one supreme miracle of Islam. The gawdy decoration of the beast and whore of Revelation 17 is far from the sobriety of jihadist Islam. Why the apparent contradictions? The similarities with what Islam is not are so pronounced that a point is surely being made. The beast of Revelation is how God views the Islamic State and radical Islam. From His perspective, they are the very and exact opposite of all they are claiming. And as has often been observed, the supposed ’religion of peace’ is responsible for huge destruction and mass murder. Another possibility is that the more opulent descriptions of the beast actually match well with the Islamic conception of Paradise- as defined, e:g:, in the Encyclopedia of Islam (Article ’Jannah’): "One day in paradise is considered equal to a thousand years on earth. Palaces are made from bricks of gold, silver, pearls, among other things. Traditions also note the presence of horses and camels of"dazzling whiteness", along with other creatures. Large trees are described, mountains made of musk, between which rivers flow in valleys of pearl and ruby". It may be that the radical Islam will seek to portray their caliphate as paradise come on earth.</p><p>The Destruction of the Image</p><p>The ’breaking in pieces’ of the colossus is described using the same word as is used about how Israel will break in pieces their latter day enemies (<a href='B:290 41:15'>Isa 41:15</a>; <a href='B:400 4:13'>Mic 4:13</a>). Whilst God ultimately will do this, it may be that He uses the tiny, ragged, repentant remnant of natural Israel to do so in the last days, achieving the most humanly unlikely, David versus Goliath victory of all human history. For it is God’s style to always work through some human mechanism in achieving His judgments. The destruction of the nations will be as the wind blowing away the chaff from the threshing floors at harvest time (<a href='B:340 2:35'>Dan 2:35</a>). But God usually works through a mechanism. It is a repentant Israel who will be Yahweh’s threshing instrument and who will trample their enemies to pieces and destroy them as chaff (<a href='B:290 41:15'>Isa 41:15</a>; <a href='B:400 4:13'>Mic 4:13</a> - very much the language of the destruction of the image in Daniel 2). Thus again we have the picture of the tiny, now faithful remnant of Israel being mightily used by the Lord to destroy their oppressors. And yet unbelieving Israel are described as chaff (<a href='B:290 5:24'>Isa 5:24</a>; <a href='B:290 33:11'>Isa 33:11</a>; <a href='B:300 23:28'>Jer 23:28</a>; <a href='B:350 13:3'>Hos 13:3</a>; <a href='B:430 2:2'>Zep 2:2</a>). Those Jews who come into covenant with the oppressors will be treated as them and share their judgment, just as those who do not come out of Babylon will share in her plagues, and the unfaithful Christian believers will be "condemned with the world" (<a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a>). The work of the Elijah ministry will culminate in the Lord Jesus appearing on earth in order to destroy the chaff (<a href='B:470 3:12'>Mat 3:12</a>). So we can infer that the work of the Elijah prophet in appealing for Israel’s repentance occurs at the same time as Israel’s domination by the oppressors. For both activities culminate in the Lord Jesus destroying the chaff.</p><p>The image of threshing definitely connects with other prophecies describing the judgment process at the Lord’s second coming as being a threshing. <a href='B:400 4:11-12'>Mic 4:11-12</a> predict that the nations will be gathered against Jerusalem in order that they may be threshed there. Jerusalem has been the attraction for these peoples- nd Islam so strongly desires it. Those are threshed are the ten toes of the image of Daniel 2, the 10 horns of the beast of Daniel 7. These therefore represent nations who desire to take Jerusalem. It is Babylon who will be threshed in the last day (<a href='B:300 51:33'>Jer 51:33</a>), so we can understand these collected together nations as all under the control of Babylon. Which is what the image requires, because it was what Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon effectively saw as it were in the mirror, it was him, with his face. <a href='B:360 3:2'>Joe 3:2</a>; <a href='B:360 3:12'>Joe 3:12</a> envisages these nations being gathered into the valley of Jehoshaphat as a result of a holy / sanctified war which they have declared, a jihad (<a href='B:360 3:9'>Joe 3:9</a>), where God will first plead with them to repent (<a href='B:360 3:2'>Joe 3:2</a>) and then judge them at the harvest (<a href='B:360 3:12-13'>Joe 3:12-13</a>). The Joel 3 passage is developed in more detail in Revelation 16, where we read that once the Angels restraining the forces of evil at the Euphrates release them, the kings of the East will come charging towards God’s people. And the hordes of Islamic fundamentalists are currently gathered at the Euphrates river. But this will in reality be a gathering of them together unto Armageddon, meaning a heap of sheaves in a valley. Still within this same metaphor, Daniel 2 describes the threshing process, resulting in the wind blowing away the ground up peoples like chaff.</p><p>The image of a nation being threshed into dust is used in <a href='B:120 13:7'>2Ki 13:7</a> of how the Syrians did this to an apostate Israel- inviting us to see the feet of iron and clay as having at least some reference to Israel. "The precious sons of Zion" are likened to potters’ clay being smashed by the Babylonian invasion (<a href='B:310 4:2'>Lam 4:2</a>); and the toes are of potters’ clay (<a href='B:340 2:41'>Dan 2:41</a>). The imagery suggests the destruction of an apostate Israel by a latter day Syrian / Babylonian. The stone which does the destruction is the Lord Jesus, but it is He working through the enemies of Israel to do this, just as God did so many times in judging His people historically.</p><p>Conditional Prophecy in Daniel</p><p>The Olivet prophecy quotes and alludes to various parts of Daniel’s prophecy, and yet the Olivet prophecy’s intended fulfilment in AD70 didn’t happen as was potentially possible, and was rescheduled. This therefore implies that Daniel’s prophecies, which are alluded to, are thereby capable of a similar more elastic fulfilment. And looking in more detail at Daniel, this does indeed seem to be the case. Daniel prophesied whilst Judah were in captivity, and the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel are full of potential prophecies of how the Messianic Kingdom could have been established at Judah’s return after 70 years in Babylon. Ezekiel’s conditional prophecy of the temple system is a parade example, although this was more commandment than prediction. I have discussed this in great detail in The Exiles. I suggest that like the Olivet prophecy, the prophecies of Daniel were an outline of a potential schema of events that could have taken place, leading up to the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom. But due to Judah’s overall preference to remain in Babylon, and the lethargy of those who did return, that schema was rescheduled and was given a longer term application over history, culminating in the events of [our?] last days and the final, inexorable establishment of the Messianic Kingdom on earth.</p><p>As is well established, Daniel’s prophecies are interrelated. The metals of the opening vision in Daniel 2 develop into the beasts of Daniel 7, and the other prophecies give more details of potential fulfilments and developments of the beast systems, culminating in the war between the Kings of the North and South and the final revelation of Israel’s triumphant Messiah and the resurrection in Daniel 12. The sequence of metals in the image of Daniel 2 speak primarily of four kings, each having a king-dom, a dominion over which they reigned. And they all form part of the image of an individual man. Nebuchadnezzar personally, rather than the Babylonian empire, was represented by the head of gold (<a href='B:340 2:38'>Dan 2:38</a>). The ten toes of the image represent “kings” (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a> “in the days of these kings”). The prophecy started to be fulfilled- for in Daniel’s lifetime, the head of gold, Nebuchadnezzar’s dynasty, gave way to Darius the Mede (<a href='B:340 5:31'>Dan 5:31</a>), and still in Daniel’s lifetime, to Cyrus the Persian (<a href='B:340 6:28'>Dan 6:28</a> <a href='B:340 5:31'>Dan 5:31</a>). Daniel immediately perceived that it was about a succession of kings, not kingdoms (<a href='B:340 2:21'>Dan 2:21</a>). But even that sequence need not have happened the way it did if Nebuchadnezzar had repented more quickly; if he had, there would have been a “lengthening of your tranquility” (<a href='B:340 4:27'>Dan 4:27</a>). If he had, perhaps the next metal of the image would have followed him directly, rather than following his son. The time period intended for him could have been changed. The same word translated “lengthening” occurs only again in <a href='B:340 7:12'>Dan 7:12</a>, where we read that the beasts had their “lives prolonged for a season and time”. Their intended time periods were added to. The setting up of God’s Kingdom on the earth / land of Israel was exactly what had been prophesied in Jeremiah and Ezekiel as happening once the captivity in Babylon had ended; at that time, the stone could have hit the earth and destroyed the situation envisaged in the image of Daniel 2. But this intended sequence of four kings followed by ten kings didn’t come about as intended. Ezra lamented the intermarriage of the Jews with the surrounding peoples, but even that could have been the fulfilment of the iron and clay mingling themselves with the seed of men (<a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>); but still the Kingdom was not established. The attempted reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah and the prophets Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi didn’t bear enough fruit; and the potential Messiah figures such as Joshua and Zerubbabel all failed.</p><h4>The captivity was intended to last for 70 years, but in reality it lasted longer- hence Daniel’s confusion and pleading with God in Daniel 10 to do what He had promised. And yet his prayer of Daniel 9 suggests that he realized Judah’s sins were such, and their lack of real repentance in Babylon was such, that the restoration program had been delayed. His response to understanding the 70 year period is to pray to God admitting Israel have sinned and are still impenitent- as if he realized this was why the period had been extended (<a href='B:340 9:2-3'>Dan 9:2-3</a>). In <a href='B:340 9:19'>Dan 9:19</a> he asks for God to forgive, to accept his repentance on Judah’s behalf, and therefore not to “defer” or delay any longer. Clearly he saw that the intended 70 year period had been extended, because Israel had not repented as required. It seems to me that this was the same reason for the ‘delay’ in Christ’s second coming; the bridegroom does indeed “delay”, the same word translated “tarried” (<a href='B:470 24:48'>Mat 24:48</a>; <a href='B:470 25:5'>Mat 25:5</a>). It didn’t happen in the first century as planned but was delayed, just as the coming of the Messianic Kingdom was delayed in Old Testament times.</h4><p>The beasts of Daniel 7 are based upon the four metals of the image in Daniel 2, with the feet and ten toes of iron and clay matched by the horns upon the fourth beast. The first beast was given a man’s heart and stood up looking like a man, showing it represented a personal king (<a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>). <a href='B:340 7:9'>Dan 7:9</a> speaks of how “the thrones were cast down” and then the last judgment sat. The beasts are therefore kings or “thrones”; their casting down is the same as the smashing of the metals of the image. My point is that the beasts were initially intended to be seen as kings, individuals rather than empires. <a href='B:340 7:17'>Dan 7:17</a> is clear: “These great beasts, which are four, are four kings which shall arise out of the earth / land”. Likewise “the ten horns… are ten kings” (<a href='B:340 7:24'>Dan 7:24</a>). We are so familiar with the rescheduled, long term application of the prophecies, rolling through the empires of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome, that we can overlook the simple fact that the intended fulfilment was in a swift succession of kings after Nebuchadnezzar which would conclude with the return from exile and the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom upon the ruins of the Babylonian kings. When it became clear that there would be some delay, Daniel was given the vision of Daniel 8, in which another version of the horns on the fourth beast was given. In this vision, a ram with a great horn spawned four leaders, out of whom came another horn, which persecuted Israel and defiled the sanctuary for 2,300 days, placing the desolating abomination (<a href='B:340 8:13'>Dan 8:13</a>). This time period has now obvious fulfilment. But this very verse is quoted by the Lord Jesus in the Olivet prophecy; and clearly it has the capacity for various potential fulfilments which can be rescheduled if human repentance and response is inadequate. <a href='B:340 8:20-22'>Dan 8:20-22</a> says that the two horns on the goat represented the kings of Media and Persia- both of whom Daniel served under (<a href='B:340 5:31'>Dan 5:31</a>; <a href='B:340 6:28'>Dan 6:28</a>). After them, four kings could have arisen, followed by a charismatic leader who would conflict with “the prince of princes” [Messiah] and be “broken without hand” (<a href='B:340 8:25'>Dan 8:25</a>) just as the little stone cut out without hands would destroy the image of Daniel 2. Such a situation could have happened in Daniel’s time, or at least in the time of Alexander the Great. But it didn’t. Firstly, in Daniel 2, he saw a succession of four kings. But then, after the second king, he has a vision of another four kings needing to arise; in other words, another element has been added to the sequence, delaying the fulfilment somewhat. Daniel’s response was feeling depressed (<a href='B:340 8:27'>Dan 8:27</a>)- because obviously he wanted the fulfilment assoon as possible.</p><p>In Daniel 9, Daniel pleads for the prophecy of restoration to be fulfilled, recognizing that the 70 year period had been extended; he is recorded as repenting on behalf of Judah, and asking that God will not further delay the fulfilment (<a href='B:340 9:19'>Dan 9:19</a>). The answer is the prophecy of the 70 weeks. This could mean that 70 weeks were going to be added to the 70 years. This could have meant a literal 70 weeks from the time of Daniel’s prayer, or the seventy sevens could be a total of 490 day / years. Despite many ingenious attempts, there is no persuasive interpretation of the 70 weeks prophecy. It could be that it is a series of potential possibilities; seven literal weeks from the commandment to restore Jerusalem unto Messiah, and then 62 weeks from Messiah’s coming to His ‘cutting off’. But then the prophecy speaks of how the city and sanctuary would again be destroyed and the destroyer then himself destroyed. This would’ve been most discouraging for Daniel, who was expecting and hoping for the immediate restitution of the temple.</p><p>Then in Daniel 10, Daniel was told that the appointed time had been made longer (<a href='B:340 10:1'>Dan 10:1</a> Heb:). This was in the third year of Cyrus, when according to the earlier prophecies, Daniel was looking for a new king to arise (Daniel 2), or four kings (according to the sequence of Daniel 8). Seeing Daniel had lived through the reigns of at least three kings, he likely expected the reign of these kings to be very brief, so that he might see the coming of the restored Kingdom. But now he is told that the time period has been extended. No wonder Daniel mourned this vision for three weeks (<a href='B:340 10:2'>Dan 10:2</a>). Daniel then symbolically dies and resurrects; the comfort being that he would ultimately be resurrected to the life eternal, but the sadness being that he must die because “the vision [i:e. its fulfilment] is still for many days” (<a href='B:340 10:14'>Dan 10:14</a>). His praying and weeping for those three weeks had not brought about a reverting of the time period back to that originally planned- it was yet or still for many days. In the spirit of Moses, Daniel had tried to change God’s will. All we learn at least from this is that prophetic time periods are open to change. The Olivet prophecy speaks of how “the days”, and the context suggests the ‘days’ of Daniel’s prophecies were in view, will have to be shortened otherwise even the elect will fall away (<a href='B:470 24:22'>Mat 24:22</a>). <a href='B:340 11:2'>Dan 11:2</a> went on to explain to Daniel that now another series of four kings was envisaged, this time all Persian kings, in contrast to the idea of four Greek kings arising in Daniel 8; and this would culminate in two leading kings, of the North and South, who would have a series of conflicts climaxing in the temple being captured again, and conflict with Messiah leading to the resurrection (<a href='B:340 11:40'>Dan 11:40</a> to <a href='B:340 12:2'>Dan 12:2</a>). This scenario also didn’t happen- and it would explain why no very credible interpretation has been found for Daniel 11. When we read allusions to these prophecies in the Olivet prophecy, and perceive that the Lord had in mind fulfilling them in the first century but later rescheduled that, we must remember that those prophecies had already had various potential fulfilments which had not worked out because of the lack of repentance within Israel. This is the all important sign of fruit on the fig tree, and an encouragement to give highest priority to preaching to Israel.</p><h4>Daniel’s response is to ask “How long to the end of these things?” (<a href='B:340 12:8'>Dan 12:8</a> Heb:). He’s given various time periods of days, but told that these do not concern him, for he is to fall asleep in death, and then stand again “at the end of the days” (<a href='B:340 12:13'>Dan 12:13</a>), however many they were, whether shortened or extended, “the end” would come all the same, and he would be resurrected then. And this is the great comfort to all of us as we reflect whether we will live to see the Lord’s coming or not.</h4><h4><a href='B:340 2:1'>Dan 2:1</a></h4><p>In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar-&nbsp; The miserable critics point out that Daniel and his friends were tried for three years by Nebuchadnezzar when he was apparently already king (<a href='B:340 1:18-19'>Dan 1:18-19</a>). In a book as subtle and carefully internally coherent as the Bible, it beggars belief that such an obvious mistake would be made by some conman author. I suggest the opposite is true; someone who was writing the truth and who had lived close to the situation would write things which may appear contradictory to those reading from a distance. The four Gospel records are another example. And so here, at the time of Daniel 1 Nebuchadnezzar ruled as regent or subordinate to his father, Nabopolassar; whereas "the second year" refers to Nebuchadnezzar’s sole sovereignty. <a href='B:300 25:1'>Jer 25:1</a> likewise uses the idea of "the first year" of Nebuchadnezzar to refer to the first year of his sole reign. Or we can go with the alternative textual readings, which offer "the twelfth" for "the second year". Another option is to understand Daniel 1 as summarizing how Daniel and his friends came to be so highly acceptable to Nebuchadnezzar after three years; and the events ofchapter 2 explain how that came about. This kind of literary device is common in the Bible.</p><h4>Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams; and his spirit was troubled, and his sleep went from him- There are so many similarities with the young, handsome, captive, faithful Joseph interpreting Pharaoh’s dreams and getting rewarded; here the connection is with <a href='B:10 41:8'>Gen 41:8</a>.</h4>


text:
<h4>Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the enchanters, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, to tell the king his dreams- Babylon was deeply religious; the real leaders were the religious leaders, and the sorcery for which Babylon was infamous was a large part of their religion. Hence "the Chaldeans" refers to Babylonians generally, as well as to this class of religious leaders. They were the quintessence of all Babylon was. For them to be exposed as fraudulent failures was therefore a blow to Babylon’s entire religious structure, just as the dreams of Pharaoh and later the plagues struck at the very core of Egypt’s religious beliefs.</h4><h4>So they came in and stood before the king- Perhaps in the middle of the night; see on :3.</h4>


text:
<p>The king said to them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit is troubled to know the dream- The implication of :1 could be that the king couldn’t get back to sleep, and so he called the magicians immediately, at night. It could even be that the king commanded them to be killed immediately (see on :5), and the executioner then went to the house of Daniel to kill him too. But that same night Daniel went to the king (:16) and assured him that he would find the interpretation; he returns to pray, goes to sleep [despite all the pressure and drama], and in a night vision, perhaps later that very same night, receives the answer (:19). If something like this scenario is correct, then time was of the essence. Daniel would have wanted an immediate answer from God; but he had to exercise faith in going to the king and asking for time for the answer to come. And he went to see the king that night knowing that he had a death penalty upon his head. The heads of his department [as it were] had just been condemned to death; and he the very junior underling now goes to the king to ask for more time. Then he comes home, chats with his friends and prayers with them about the matter and goes to sleep in peace; and that night, he gets a vision which is the answer. This is all typical of the deep faith and peace which we sense in Daniel.</p>


text:
<p>Then the Chaldeans spoke to the king in the Syrian language, O king, live forever: tell your servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation- The group are summarized as "the Chaldeans". As noted on :2, "the Chaldeans" refers to Babylonians generally, as well as to this class of religious leaders. They were the quintessence of all Babylon was. For them to be exposed as fraudulent failures was therefore a blow to Babylon’s entire religious structure, just as the dreams of Pharaoh and later the plagues struck at the very core of Egypt’s religious beliefs. That they spoke in Syrian may seem unsurprising, but perhaps the idea is that as this part of Daniel is written in Aramaic ["Syrian"], we are reading the very words they actually spoke.</p>


text:
<h4>The king answered the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me- It’s unclear whether "the thing" refers to the dream, which had gone from him in the sense of forgetting it, "the thing" is the same word translated "matter" in :8,23; or whether the reference is to the decree which he intended sending out to kill the Chaldeans unless they recalled his dream for him and interpretted it. The same word for "thing" is translated "commandment" in <a href='B:340 3:22'>Dan 3:22</a>; <a href='B:340 3:28'>Dan 3:28</a> when the king again commands the death of his wise men. I suggest that if the reconstruction of events offered on :3 is correct, then "the thing" refers to the command to kill the wise men unless the dream was retold an interpreted. The reasoning in :8 confirms this.</h4><h4>If you don’t make known to me the dream and its interpretation, you shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a compost heap- The cutting in pieces is to be connected with how the stone was to break the image in pieces, including the head of gold which represented Nebuchadnezzar. He was to be taught that it was not for him to arrogate to himself such power of condemnation. For contrary to what he liked to imagine, he was not eternal, nor was he God. Rather, he was under Divine judgment.</h4>


text:
<p>But if you show the dream and its interpretation, you shall receive from me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore show me the dream and its interpretation- This is the language of a man who considers that he has the power to give any reward in his kingdom, which he considered to be the kingdom of a divine being, of God. The gifts and rewards given to Daniel were of political power within the kingdom. "Receive" is elsewhere used in Daniel of receiving the kingdom; and yet ultimately it is the people of God who would receive or "take" the Kingdom (<a href='B:340 7:18'>Dan 7:18</a> s:w:). "Great honour" is the word elsewhere translated "glory"; it was this glory which was so prideful and which led to Nebuchadnezzar’s downfall (<a href='B:340 4:30'>Dan 4:30</a>; <a href='B:340 4:36'>Dan 4:36</a>). The glory of the Kingdom was to be finally given for ever to God’s people (<a href='B:340 7:14'>Dan 7:14</a> s:w:). So it was precisely the attitude Nebuchadnezzar had at this point, considering that all reward and glory in the Kingdom of God was his to distribute at will, which had to be taken away from him. He was playing God, and this is so unacceptable to Him.</p>


text:
<p>They answered the second time and said, Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation- Their humanity is being taught to both them and the king. The idea was that they had special dialogue with the gods which others didn’t have, and therefore could give interpretations. But their limitations are apparent; it was God’s attempt to teach all of them, and the king, that their religion was woefully weak and they should accept the one true God. The whole scene here parallels Joseph before Pharaoh, and that was also the intention then. We marvel that God would make such effort to convert the likes of Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar, the very types we would have passed over and ignored as unsuitable candidates for any evangelism attempt.</p>


text:
<p>The king answered, I know of a certainty that you would gain time, because you see the thing is gone from me- The king is suspicious that they were not who they claimed to be, because they could not tell him what he had dreamt. The thing that went from him sounds like the command to kill them (see on :3,5). The king’s sensitivity to any appeal for extra time therefore made Daniel’s approach to request just that all the harder and more dangerous; although :16 could suggest Daniel as it were booked an appointment with the king, whilst as yet he had no answer. He was so sure that prayer would be answered and he would have an answer to give.</p>


text:
<h4>But if you don’t tell me the dream, there is but one law for you; for you have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, until the time be changed- The magicians had presumably come out with some airy words and were begging for more time, in the hope that the death penalty would be lifted. "Words" is the same word as "matter" in :10; perhaps they had come up with some dream which was not the word or matter which the king had dreamed. But Nebuchadnezzar had to be taught that God alone can ’change the times’; Daniel uses the same phrase in :21. The lives of the magicians were held in his hand as if playthings; but he was to learn that his life was in God’s hand in just the same way. It was God through His people who could change the king’s word of command (<a href='B:340 3:28'>Dan 3:28</a>), which was supposedly unchangeable.</h4><h4>Therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that you can show me its interpretation- He perceives that the dream and its interpretation cannot be separated; the magicians were making a difference between the two, but the king was not going to be fooled. If they truly had Divine powers, then they would know what he had dreamed.</h4>


text:
<p>The Chaldeans answered before the king and said, There is not a man on the earth who can show the king’s matter, because no king, lord or ruler has asked such a thing of any magician, enchanter or Chaldean- By saying this they were admitting that they were merely men upon earth. They reasoned that there was no historical precedent for such a request. And yet they were setting themselves up to have to make an exception to all their received wisdom; the one true God could inspire one man upon the earth, and show the matter.</p>


text:
<p>It is an unusual thing that the king requires, and there is no other who can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh- They were admitting that they were not in fact in contact with the gods, although this was what their profession was supposedly all about. And they were setting up an acceptance that therefore Daniel was God manifest in flesh.</p>


text:
<p>Therefore the king was angry and very furious, and he commanded that all the wise men of Babylon be destroyed- As noted on :11, they had effectively admitted that they had no connection with the gods; they were fakes, and may as well be fired from their jobs and "destroyed". The same word is used of how the power of destruction is ultimately with God alone (<a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>; <a href='B:340 7:26'>Dan 7:26</a>). Again, the king is portrayed as playing God, and being educated as to his error.</p>


text:
<p>So the decree went forth that all the wise men were to be slain; and they sought Daniel and his companions to be slain- I suggested on :3 that this all happened the same night. Perhaps the more prominent wise men were indeed slain, leaving their posts open for Daniel and his friends to replace them.</p>


text:
<p>Then Daniel returned answer with counsel and prudence to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, who was gone forth to kill the wise men of Babylon- We imagine Arioch coming to Daniel, sword in hand. "Arioch" may well be a title for the court executioner.</p>


text:
<p>He answered Arioch the king’s captain, Why is the decree so urgent from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel- As suggested on :3, this may have been very late at night.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would appoint him a time, and he would show the king the interpretation- The king had made it clear that there was to be no playing for time. If they were indeed in contact with the gods, he expected an immediate answer. But Daniel asks for time because he has to contact the one true God and wait for an answer. But it could be that although Daniel had not received any revelation at this point, he was certain he would; and he made the appointment to see the king in absolute faith that it would be given to him. Again we sense the calmness and faith of Daniel, reasoning as if what he did not then have, he effectively did have. See on :25.</p>


text:
<p>Then Daniel went to his house, and told Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions- As suggested on :3, this was in the middle of the night. "Companions" suggests those he was joined to, through sharing covenant relationship with Yahweh. Perhaps there were no others amongst the young exiles whom he felt were abiding in the covenant. As noted on :30, this is why Daniel later says that the dream was revealed to him simply so that he and his three friends might be saved from death at that time.</p>


text:
<p>That they would desire mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret; so that Daniel and his companions should not die with the rest of the wise men of Babylon- Daniel realized that his own prayers might not be enough, and so he awoke his friends late at night (see on :3) with the request that they join in prayer about the matter "Mercies" is better "pity". Their motivation was admittedly to save their own skins.</p>


text:
<p>Then was the secret revealed to Daniel in a vision of the night. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven- Effectively, Daniel dreamed the same as Nebuchadnezzar did, making him effectively equal to the king who thought he had no equal. And because he remembered the dream and the interpretation, he was thereby declared greater than him. The night vision reflects the fact that Daniel could sleep under the threat of execution the next day, rather like Peter in prison, all reflects the depth of his faith. See on :3. Daniel’s first response was to thank God for the answer, rather than to race off to the king.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel responded, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever; for wisdom and might are His- Daniel had been shown that the Kingdom of God was to be on earth "for ever and ever", and he envisages praise to God for eternity. The required wisdom was of God, and not of Daniel; this is a major theme in Daniel’s speech to the king, but it reflected how he felt within himself; for his spontaneous prayer of thanks recognizes it.</p>


text:
<p>He changes the times and the seasons; He removes kings, and sets up kings; He gives wisdom to the wise, and knowledge to those who have understanding- The whole prophecy of the image was to result in God’s praise and glory (:20). The challenges of working out the symbolism and its correspondence to geopolitics should not lead us to forget that. Daniel was faced with a "time" and commandment for his own death, made by a despot who considered his own word unchangeable. But for God to change that was a small matter (:9 s:w. "changed"), for He changes the times and seasons of the world powers. "He gives wisdom to the wise" is not Daniel being self congratulatory. Rather he accepts that he and his friends had retained their spiritual wisdom and understanding of God’s ways, and it was in response to that, that he had been given the required insight. The four beasts were "changed" from each other, AV "diverse one from another" (<a href='B:340 7:3'>Dan 7:3</a> s:w:). This is saying that the changes between the metals of the image and then the beasts of Daniel 7 were all orchestrated by God. Daniel understood the image as referring to a succession of kings, not kingdoms; as suggested on :1, this was the primary potential of the prophecy. There would have been a series of kings after Nebuchadnezzar, which would have ended with the mountain of Judah’s kingdom being re-established on earth upon their ruins.</p>


text:
<p>He reveals the deep and secret things; He knows what is in the darkness, and the light dwells with Him- If as suggested on :3 all this happened in one night, then these allusions to light and darkness make the more sense. The future is "darkness" to us, but God reveals the essence- that the process of human history will climax in the establishment of His Kingdom.</p>


text:
<p>I thank You, and praise You, You God of my fathers, who has given me wisdom and might, and has now made known to me what we desired of You; for You have made known to us the king’s matter- Daniel’s praise is not that God has hereby saved his life by revealing the vision; but rather praise of God’s wisdom and the glory of His workings amongst men.</p>


text:
<p>Therefore Daniel went in to Arioch, whom the king had appointed to destroy the wise men of Babylon and said this: Don’t destroy the wise men of Babylon; bring me in before the king, and I will show to the king the interpretation- The command to kill them had been issued in the middle of the night (see on :3), and so we envisage Daniel walking or running through darkened streets to find Arioch. We note too that the wise men owed their lives to Daniel. And yet in Daniel 6 they sought to kill him. This is the power of jealousy; it so often develops from an arrogant refusal to be grateful to a person for the grace of God to us which was manifested through them.</p>


text:
<p>Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste, and said: I have found a man among the captives of Judah who will make known to the king the interpretation- this appears to conflict with the impression given on :16 that Daniel had gone in to the king; but it seems that :16 means that he made an appointment to see the king and tell him the dream, seeing it was now the dead of night. Arioch’s reference to "the captives of Judah" heightens the sense that Babylonian religion and wisdom was being overturned. And Arioch himself seems confident that Daniel has really been given the answer.</p>


text:
<p>The king answered Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Are you able to make known to me the dream which I have seen, and its interpretation?- The king addressed Daniel as Belteshazzar, a reference to the god Bel. Daniel responds by saying immediately that it is the one God of heaven, not Bel of Babylon, who had provided the answers.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel answered before the king, and said, The secret which the king has demanded can neither wise men, enchanters, magicians, nor soothsayers, show to the king- We would likely have answered the king’s question by saying "Yes, sir!". But Daniel is so awed by Yahweh’s majesty that he loses no chances to emphasize that this revelation from Yahweh was an effective trashing of all Babylon’s religious leaders; for the "wise men" were the religious leaders.</p>


text:
<p>But there is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, and He has made known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Your dream, and the visions of your head on your bed, are these- The Babylonians thought that their god Bel lived in Babylon. Daniel stresses therefore that His God is in Heaven. Cyrus later defines Yahweh as "Yahweh, the God of Heaven" (<a href='B:150 1:2'>Ezr 1:2</a>). The God of or in Heaven was therefore a known title for Israel’s God. "The latter days" is a term which refers both to the final end time, when Messiah shall destroy the image as it stands complete in the last day; and also to the general ’future’ immediate to Nebuchadnezzar.</p>


text:
<p>As for you, O king, your thoughts came into your mind on your bed, what should happen in the future; and He who reveals secrets has made known to you what shall happen- ’Those who reveal secrets’ were the magicians and wise men; but Daniel says that it is God alone who reveals secrets, through his agency. I would have been tempted to just blurt out the dream and its message, knowing that the king wary of the slightest attempt to delay, and had ordered my execution by Arioch, who was presumably standing next to Daniel at the time. Just one irritation of the despotic king could lead to Daniel’s head being severed from his shoulders. But still he stresses the glory of Israel’s God before he reveals the dream.</p>


text:
<p>But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but to the intent that the interpretation may be made known to the king, and that you may know the thoughts of your heart- "But to the intent that the interpretation may be made known to the king" is AV "But for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king". Daniel wishes to connect his friends to himself in this matter. He is saying that he has been chosen to reveal the secret just so that Daniel and his friends would not be executed. And yet there were many other young exiles from Judah with them at the time; Daniel seems to count them as not really within the covenant (see on :17).</p>


text:
<h4>You, O king, saw, and behold, a great image. This image, which was mighty- Matthew Henry notes: “Nebuchadnezzar was an admirer of statues, and had his palace and gardens adorned with them; however, he was a worshipper of images, and now behold a great image is set before him in a dream”. He was being shown that all his worship of images was effectively a worship of himself. And so it can be with all religion; we can think we are doing God service when in reality we are merely using it as a channel for worshipping ourselves. The only other time we encounter the sequence of gold, silver, brass and iron in Daniel is when we read that the idols of the Babylonians were made of these very metals (<a href='B:340 5:4'>Dan 5:4</a>; <a href='B:340 5:23'>Dan 5:23</a>), as are the idols of the latter day Babylon (<a href='B:730 18:12'>Rev 18:12</a>). The image reflected back to Nebuchadnezzar how he saw himself.</h4><p>And whose brightness was excellent, stood before you; and its aspect was awesome- “Brightness” was associated with the cherubim, symbols of God’s glory, which were to return from Babylon to Judah (<a href='B:330 1:4'>Eze 1:4</a>; <a href='B:330 1:27-28'>Eze 1:27-28</a>); “brightness” was to be a feature of God’s restored Kingdom in Judah (<a href='B:290 59:9'>Isa 59:9</a>; <a href='B:290 60:3'>Isa 60:3</a>; <a href='B:290 60:19'>Isa 60:19</a>; <a href='B:290 62:1'>Isa 62:1</a>). It is very much the language of theophany (<a href='B:230 18:12'>Psa 18:12</a>; <a href='B:420 3:4'>Hab 3:4</a>) and the return of Christ (<a href='B:600 2:8'>2Th 2:8</a>), and therefore the impression is given that this is a fake Kingdom of God, an anti-Christ, a system which appeared as the true when it was the false. As noted often so far in this chapter, Nebuchadnezzar was playing God. Daniel concludes with a picture of how the brightness of God’s people shall be eternal, as opposed to the fading brightness of the image (<a href='B:340 12:3'>Dan 12:3</a>).</p><p>"Stood before you" implies ‘rose up before you’. It is the same word used of how God raises up kings (2:21), “another kingdom shall arise after you” (2:39), “the God of Heaven will set up a Kingdom” (2:44). The king was being enabled to see himself from outside himself. It is used eight times in Daniel 3 to describe how Nebuchadnezzar defied this revelation by&nbsp; ‘setting up’ another image, purely of gold, as if to say that his kingdom would in fact be eternal; he refused to accept that others would ‘arise’ after him.</p><p>The face of the image is emphasized in <a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>. The AV reads "His brightness was excellent", but the Chaldee word translated "brightness" is the same word translated "face" in describing how the face of the ruler of Babylon was ’changed’ as the sequence of empires had its fulfilment (<a href='B:340 4:36'>Dan 4:36</a>; <a href='B:340 5:6'>Dan 5:6</a>; <a href='B:340 5:9-10'>Dan 5:9-10</a>). The entity represented by the entire image is focused upon the face of the man heading it up. That face was notable and awesome, just as the fourth beast entity was "strong exceedingly" (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a> s:w. "excellent"). The entire image stood "before you", i:e. Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>). The Hebrew idea of q’bel suggests that the image stood there opposite Nebuchadnezzar ’on his behalf’, as a reflection of himself. The image is of course a person; the entity represented by it in its complete form is a reflection of a person, modelled after the king of Babylon. This all suggests that the entity which the image represents will be a personification of someone. That individual would be the caliph or prince which governs it, to whom the entity swears loyalty. And the Islamists insist that loyalty be sworn to their caliph, who in turn is seen as the incarnation of the [false] prophet Mohammed. It is this individual who is the antiChrist of the last days. The appearance of the image of the man was "terrible" (<a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>), it struck fear into the heart of the viewers. And this is the effect of the Islamic extremists on those beholding them. But we can expect more emphasis to be given to their leader, with greater prominence accorded to loyalty to him and an aura of fearfulness emanating from him. The same word translated "terrible" is used of how all nations "trembled and feared" before Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:340 5:19'>Dan 5:19</a>), and of how uniquely and unsurpassedly "terrible" was the fourth beast (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a>) whose leader is an embodiment of it. The Chaldee word resh used for the "head" of the image is also translated ’the sum’. The head, the man whose face was on the image, was the sum of the image, he was the embodiment of it in a person.</p><h4>The head was of "fine gold", and the equivalent Hebrew words are found in <a href='B:10 2:12'>Gen 2:12</a>, where we read that "the gold of that land was good [’fine’]". Which land? "Havilah", according to <a href='B:10 2:11'>Gen 2:11</a>. Perhaps the leader of the entity will therefore be from Havilah. But there are various options in seeking to identify this area. Keil and Delitzsch in their commentary on Genesis opt for a location in the Caucasus mountains- and many of the Islamic fighters are from there, especially from Chechnaya. Other arguments would place it in Yemen or Saudi Arabia, which is where much of the financial and logistical support for the Islamic extremism is currently coming from, seeing they too are Sunni Moslems. Another line of enquiry is suggested by the way that "fine gold" is used to describe what was used in Yahweh’s temple (<a href='B:140 3:5'>2Ch 3:5</a>; <a href='B:140 3:8'>2Ch 3:8</a>; <a href='B:310 4:1'>Lam 4:1</a>). And where did Solomon get that from? Solomon constructed the finer details of the temple from materials prepared by his father David (<a href='B:130 22:14'>1Ch 22:14</a>). And David received that fine gold as a present from Tou, king of Hamath (<a href='B:130 18:9-10'>1Ch 18:9-10</a>). Hamath is in Syria. Perhaps Syria is another possible source of origin for the head of the Islamic image. The true Christ will be "more precious than fine gold" (<a href='B:290 13:12'>Isa 13:12</a>); He will thus stand in opposition at the last day to the head of "fine gold" which heads up the latter day Islamic state. The manifestation of God in Christ is presented in visual form in <a href='B:340 10:6'>Dan 10:6</a> "His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a multitude". This vision has outline similarities with the image of a man explained in Daniel 2. The two ’men’ will face off against each other in the last days; and Jesus wins. That, in the end, is the simple message of all prophecy, especially the book of Revelation:&nbsp; The "head" of the image uses the same equivalent Hebrew word rosh as we find in the Ezekiel 38 description of ten nations being lead against Israel by a rosh, a leader, a prince, what the Arabs would call a caliph. Again and again, we find a specific figure being identified as the leader of the latter day invaders. The interpretation that Nebuchadnezzar was a "king of kings" (<a href='B:340 2:37'>Dan 2:37</a>) was surely understood by him to mean that he was in some sense king over the other kings which featured in the image. Perhaps God graciously inserted this element in order to preserve Daniel’s life before the king. But it will come true in the final erection of the image upon earth, in that the component nations of the image will be headed up by an individual who is effectively a Nebuchadnezzar-like figure for them all, Babylon personified in a single man.</h4>


text:
<h4>As for this image, its head- Literally, the rosh, the great leader, of the image, the same rosh spoken of in Ezekiel 38 as leading a latter day invasion of Israel. The image is of a man; a latter day Nebuchadnezzar. For he was the head of gold.</h4><p>We note that the value of the metals decreases with distance from the head of gold. Dreams reveal our subconscious thoughts and value systems; Nebuchadnezzar saw himself as most important, and as he speculated about the future, those furthest from him in time seemed less important and valuable. But that illusion was shattered by the idea of the Jewish Messiah, the little stone, destroying the image and becoming an eternal mountain on earth. We need to learn the lesson, valuing the Kingdom perspective far above our immediate prospects. It’s worthy of note that the other empires, especially Medo-Persia and Rome, had far greater dominion and extent than Babylon ever had- both geographically and culturally. And yet from Nebuchadnezzar’s perspective, they were inferior and insignificant simply because they were far away from him in time. The dream was in a sense his dream, which is why the empires are described as “inferior” to him; this is how it was from his perspective. But the interpretation was from God, and the twist in the tail is that all these kingdoms of men are to become as nothing before the Kingdom of the God of Israel to be established on earth.</p><p>The increasing inferiority of the metals refers to how the power of the king / emperor decreased. Nebuchadnezzar was absolute, whereas as Daniel’s history itself shows, the Medo-Persian kings couldn’t even change their own laws and were bound by their courtiers. The Greek rulers over the land / eretz were weaker still, because the power of Alexander the great was shared between his four generals, who often controlled him. And the Romans delegated power to local governors, rather than the Caesar himself dominating the land of Palestine from Rome. This serves to demonstrate that the primary intention of the vision was to present a series of kings, rather than kingdoms, which would arise after Nebuchadnezzar, climaxing in the re-establishment of Israel’s Kingdom. But that potential was not realized, and so it was delayed and the fulfilment extended.</p><h4>Was of fine gold, its breast and its arms of silver, its belly and its thighs of brass- The metals decrease in value. And there is progressive disunity; from one head, to two arms, two thighs, two legs, and then very divided feet. The Persian empire was more extensive than Babylon; the degeneration was perhaps in Nebuchadnezzar’s own mind. And the image represented kings or kingdoms who dominated the eretz promised to Abraham. How extensive their dominion was elsewhere isn’t therefore germane to the vision. It could be argued therefore that Babylon had the tightest control over the land; and the powers which followed had less control and allowed more autonomy.</h4>


text:
<h4>Its legs of iron, its feet part of iron and part of clay- The legs of iron more comfortably represent the latter part of the Grecian monarchy, the two empires of Syria and Egypt, the former governed by the family of the Seleucidae, from Seleucus, the latter by that of the Lagidae, from Ptolemaeus Lagus . The idea that the two legs represent Eastern and Western Rome [centered in Constantinople and Rome] is problematic, in that these areas were not part of the land promised to Abraham. The image prophecy speaks specifically of kingdoms reigning over “the earth”, the land of Israel. Turkey [Constantinople] and Italy [Rome] were not part of that land. And they will have their revival in the last days in the form of the feet and ten toes- split between two groups, two entities which between them dominate the land promised to Abraham. As explained on :43 and :1, the prophecy had a number of potential fulfilments; one of which was that the Messiah figure could have re-established Israel’s Kingdom during the time of the Greeks, or in the immediate aftermath of the conflict between the kings of the north and south described in Daniel 11. These two kings, the two sections of the Greek empire which affected Israel, were matched by the two legs of the image.</h4>


text:
<h4>You saw until- The Hebrew here is quite complex; the GNB does well with "While you were looking at it::.", and this forges the connection with Nebuchadnezzar’s sudden fall as he looked at great Babylon which he had built, in pride and surety that it would stand for ever (Dan 4:29-31). This was a primary fulfilment of the image being toppled; it was evidence even during the period contemporary with Daniel that the image prophecy would come true.</h4><p>A stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet that were of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces- The Lord Jesus surely alluded to this in saying that His resurrection would be a rebuilding of the temple “without hands” (<a href='B:480 14:58'>Mar 14:58</a>). It could be that He perceived the possibility of the smiting of the image as being fulfilled in His resurrection. Thus the vision had several potential fulfilments which were not realized. This would explain the gap in fulfilment between the end of the iron leg domination of Israel and their land, and the latter day existence of the ten toes / horns. This apparent awkwardness in the symbology can be explained by Israel not being in their land from then until our last days; but it can also be understood in terms of a reworked fulfilment, after the earlier possible fulfilments were disallowed by Israel’s lack of response. The breaking in pieces of the feet appears to be separate to the breaking in pieces of the rest of the metals ["then::.", :35]. This could speak of two stages of judgment at the Lord’s return.</p><p>But as explained on :1, the initial, potential fulfilment was in the remnant of Judah who "broke lose" (GNB) from the mountain of Israel in Babylon, and who could have broken up the hotchpotch of nations then dominating the land, and re-established the Kingdom.</p>


text:
<h4>Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken in pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors- "To pieces… like the chaff" suggests a breaking up into fine parts. Combining the visual images of Daniel 2 with those of the beasts in Daniel 7, we see a progressive sense of breakup. Babylon was headed by one king, Medo-Persia is presented as a divided kingdom, split between the two arms of the Medes and Persians; then the third Kingdom is likened to a leopard with four heads, referring to the four states that came after Alexander the Great. The fourth empire was divided into two legs (in Daniel 2), and in Daniel 7, it has ten horns, who have conflicts with each other. These are the equivalent of the ten toes, which don’t mix with each other. Then, the entire image is ground to pieces and becomes like tiny pieces of chaff. And the ultimate unity of God’s Kingdom on earth is then established. We see in society generally, and especially in the territory of the land promised to Abraham, a progressive breaking up. And this will continue, until it is confirmed by the Lord’s return breaking into even smaller pieces.</h4><h4>And the wind carried them away, so that no place was found for them- This phrase is quoted in <a href='B:730 20:11'>Rev 20:11</a>, where the "heavens and earth" at the time of the Lord’s coming are likewise carried away and no place found for them. This means that the "heavens and earth" in view at the end of Revelation is the colossus of Daniel 2, the image represents the system which shall dominate the land promised to Abraham in the last days. Here conclusively we see that the main thrust of the prophecy is not some continuous historical account of world history, but rather a depiction of the latter day entity which will dominate the eretz / land promised to Abraham at the time of the Lord’s return. The prophecy insists that the image stands complete when it is struck.</h4><p>And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth- The "great mountain" of God’s Kingdom fills the whole earth, but the mountain initially begins at one point on the planet. Elsewhere in Daniel, the mountain is defined specifically as Jerusalem: "Your city Jerusalem, even Your holy mountain" (<a href='B:340 9:16'>Dan 9:16</a>). The toes are therefore specifically dominating Jerusalem at the initial point of impact of the stone upon the land. And this is what we would expect from an Islamist confederacy dominating the land of Israel- Jerusalem is the key issue for them. And we know from Zechariah 14 that "the city shall be taken".</p><p>I suggest that the primary interpretation refers to the remnant of Judah, the mountain of God’s Kingdom, which returned to the temple in Jerusalem at the time when it was dominated by a brief coalition of peoples sent there by the Babylonians, some strong and some weak. Being cut out without [human] hands means that it was of God; and Ezra and Nehemiah continually speak of how it was the hand of God which enabled the restoration. "The mountain" so often refers to the Kingdom of God in Israel ruled by a Davidic king, and particularly to the temple mount (<a href='B:50 33:19'>Deu 33:19</a>; <a href='B:230 30:7'>Psa 30:7</a>; <a href='B:230 48:1'>Psa 48:1</a>; <a href='B:230 78:54'>Psa 78:54</a>; <a href='B:290 2:2-3'>Isa 2:2-3</a>; <a href='B:290 11:9'>Isa 11:9</a>; <a href='B:290 25:6-10'>Isa 25:6-10</a>; <a href='B:290 40:9'>Isa 40:9</a>; <a href='B:290 56:7'>Isa 56:7</a>; <a href='B:290 57:7'>Isa 57:7</a>; <a href='B:290 57:13'>Isa 57:13</a>; <a href='B:290 65:11'>Isa 65:11</a>; <a href='B:290 65:25'>Isa 65:25</a>; <a href='B:290 66:20'>Isa 66:20</a>; <a href='B:300 31:23'>Jer 31:23</a>; <a href='B:330 20:40'>Eze 20:40</a>; <a href='B:450 8:3'>Zec 8:3</a> etc:). The restoration prophecies are full of pictures of the restored Zion at the time of the restoration as a huge mountain dominating the eretz. The mountain of Babylon was to be burnt and replaced with the mountain of Yahweh’s restored Kingdom (<a href='B:300 51:25'>Jer 51:25</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>). It was the returned remnant who were to destroy this mountain (<a href='B:290 41:15'>Isa 41:15</a>); they were to be the little stone. <a href='B:290 41:15-16'>Isa 41:15-16</a> is full of reference to Daniel 2 : “Behold, I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff. Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them: and thou shalt rejoice in the LORD, and shalt glory in the Holy One of Israel”. Having spoken of Babylon as a mountain to be destroyed, we then read that it was a little stone which was to bring Babylon down (<a href='B:300 51:25'>Jer 51:25</a>; <a href='B:300 51:63'>Jer 51:63</a>). Restored Jerusalem was to become the stone (<a href='B:450 12:3'>Zec 12:3</a>). That stone was to as it were grow, stone by stone, as the walls and temple were rebuilt (<a href='B:440 2:15'>Hag 2:15</a>). This is the significance of the enigmatic little stone which was to bring about the restoration of the Kingdom at the time of <a href='B:450 3:9'>Zec 3:9</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>; <a href='B:450 4:10'>Zec 4:10</a>. I have suggested that the command to rebuild the temple according to the specifications of Ezekiel 40-48 was a conditional prophecy of what the exiles could and ought to have achieved. The scenario there is all about a mountain (<a href='B:330 40:2'>Eze 40:2</a>; <a href='B:330 43:12'>Eze 43:12</a>). This is why Daniel prayed for the restoration of the mountain of Yahweh (<a href='B:340 9:20'>Dan 9:20</a>)- i:e. for the vision of the mountain in Daniel 2 to come true in his time. But this was disallowed by the refusal of the exiles to follow the path of the Spirit, and all these prophecies of the mountain being established have been rescheduled and reapplied to the Lord’s return (<a href='B:730 21:10'>Rev 21:10</a>). Judah were not the little stone; the prophecy is to come true in the stone of the Lord Jesus, cut out without hands by God through the virgin birth. We are so familiar with this application that we can overlook the initially intended potential application to the Judah of Daniel’s day.</p><h4>Note that the stone was cut out of a mountain, but after hitting the image, it becomes a mountain, filling the whole earth. This second mountain is interpreted as the Kingdom of God coming on earth. Biblically, mountains represent people. The equivalent in Daniel 7 is that the kingdoms of the world are given to "the people of the saints of the Most High" (<a href='B:340 7:27'>Dan 7:27</a>). The first mountain likewise, therefore, refers to people. Out of the mountain of humanity, or perhaps the mountain of the Hebrew people (<a href='B:20 15:17'>Exo 15:17</a>; <a href='B:230 48:1'>Psa 48:1</a>; <a href='B:290 2:2'>Isa 2:2</a> "the mountain of Yahweh’s house / family / people will be exalted"), the Lord Jesus as the stone was cut out without human hands, born through the virgin birth. But the people of God will finally all become like Him. He as the stone becomes them, the mountain. We will finally manifest the Lord Jesus in totality, eternally. And if I am correct in understanding "the mountain" as specifically referring to God’s people Israel, then the second mountain, the Kingdom of God on earth, is in fact the eternal and glorious re-establishment of the Kingdom of God as it was in the form of Israel. And this is indeed Bible teaching elsewhere (<a href='B:330 21:25-27'>Eze 21:25-27</a>; <a href='B:510 1:7'>Act 1:7</a> and see more evidence in my Bible Basics chapter 5).</h4>


text:
<h4>This is the dream; and we will tell its interpretation before the king- The "we" reflects how Daniel was eager to save his three friends. He had asked them for their prayers, and therefore although the answer was given specifically to him, he felt that it was effectively given to them all. Daniel has expressed in :23 that God "has now made known to me what we desired of You; for You have made known to us the king’s matter". This is the unity which prayer develops. It could be that the friends came with Daniel, and that this incident is what brought about the situation in <a href='B:340 1:20-21'>Dan 1:20-21</a>, where Daniel and his friends are found far superior than others in the matter of interpreting dreams.</h4><h4>And yet there is another possibility. Daniel has emphasized how the words he is speaking are not from himself, but from God, who has given the interpretation through Daniel. The "we" could therefore refer to God and Daniel, reflecting the closeness Daniel felt to God.</h4>


text:
<p>You, O king, are a king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the strength, and the glory- The dream of Daniel 2 ascribes to Nebuchadnezzar "the Kingdom, power, strength and glory" (<a href='B:340 2:37'>Dan 2:37</a>), but this is exactly the language of God’s kingdom. The emphasis of passages like <a href='B:130 29:11'>1Ch 29:11</a> is that Yours is the Kingdom, power, strength and glory (as in <a href='B:230 145:11'>Psa 145:11</a>; <a href='B:470 6:13'>Mat 6:13</a>). Nebuchadnezzar is thus presented as an anti-Christ and the Kingdoms of men as a fake imitation of God’s Kingdom.</p>


text:
<h4>Wherever the children of men dwell, the animals of the field and the birds of the sky has He given into your hand, and has made you to rule over them all: you are the head of gold- The animals and birds were even under Babylon’s control, according to this; although as Babylon was the great first beast of Daniel 7, these lesser animals likely refer to the peoples of the land / eretz promised to Abraham. If Babylon reigned over "wherever the children of men dwell" it is clear that the "earth" and "children of men" have a limited, local definition; for Babylon didn’t reign over all the earth. But it is the beasts and birds of the sky who later are prophesied as feasting upon Babylon (<a href='B:730 19:17'>Rev 19:17</a>). This is the equivalent of the horns on the beast hating the whore of Babylon who rides it (<a href='B:730 17:16'>Rev 17:16</a>); the destruction of the Babylon system will ultimately be more by Moslem infighting than direct bolts of destruction from God. Indeed, this was historically God’s preferred method of destroying Israel’s invaders in Old Testament times. The head or rosh of gold strictly referred to Nebuchadnezzar personally rather than the kingdom of Babylon; as explained earlier, the prophecy had a potential fulfilment in a series of kings who would arise, culminating in the restoration of Israel’s kingdom under Messiah. But this fulfilment was deferred until the last days, when the image shall stand complete, headed up by an individual, a rosh, "the king of the north" of Daniel 11, the same rosh who leads the confederacy of ten nations against the Lord Jesus in Ezekiel 38.</h4><h4>The language here recalls what happened to Nebuchadnezzar in <a href='B:340 5:21'>Dan 5:21</a>; he was driven from "the children of men" instead of reigning over them, and became like the animals and birds he was intended to reign over. The idea would be that he had been "given" by God such dominion, but it was taken away from him even during his lifetime. This was an attempt to get him to realize that indeed his kingdom would pass from him to another, he was not immortal; but he was given a wonderful preview of this whilst he was still alive, so that he would repent and accept the import of this vision. We marvel at how God tries to save even people like him and Pharaoh, whom we would likely consider not worth even approaching with the Gospel of God’s Kingdom.</h4>


text:
<p>After you shall arise another kingdom inferior to you; and then a third kingdom of brass, which shall rule over all the land- We should not assume that there are no other possibilities apart from the sequence Babylon- Medo-Persia- Greece- Rome. Each kingdom is to reign over the earth / land of Israel. The second and third kingdoms could refer to Media and Persia; and the fourth kingdom to the Greeks, split into the two parts of the empire which affected Israel- the kings of the north and south of Daniel 11, i:e. the Syrian [Seleucid] part of the Greek empire and the Egyptian [Ptolemaid] part of it. These potential possibilities are because God’s purpose is relatively open ended; the Messiah and the restoration of Israel’s Kingdom could have come at any point in the sequence, and the ideal initial scenario was that there would be a sequence of kings [not kingdoms] after Nebuchadnezzar which would climax in the Kingdom of God and Messiah’s coming. All these potential fulfilments were disallowed by Israel’s lack of repentance. The next kingdom was to be "inferior"; but Persia was greater than Babylon in territory and other ways. The inferiority may have been in that their rulership over the Jews was not as powerful as that of the Babylonians, even allowing the Jews to return and rebuild Jerusalem. However, the Chaldee for "inferior" is identical to the word used for "land" in this same verse. The idea is better that this second kingdom is a kingdom [a king having dominion over] the land [promised to Abraham]. The third kingdom rules over "all the land", perhaps paralleling the idea of the second kingdom being king over the land / eretz. Perhaps the idea was that the third kingdom would rule over all the territory promised to Abraham; from the Euphrates to the Nile. This would have been true of the Persian and Greek empires but not strictly of Babylon nor of Media. The Babylonians didn’t rule the area of Arabia eastward from the Euphrates, but only the fertile crescent; whereas the Persians did. This would make the second kingdom Media, and the Persians the third with the Greeks as the legs of iron, the two legs representing the kings of north and south as explained in Daniel 11. But this is only in the continuous historical fulfilment, which is not that significant compared to the intended latter day fulfilment, when the entire image stands complete, to be destroyed by the Lord’s return.</p>


text:
<h4>The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, because iron breaks in pieces and subdues all things; and as iron that crushes all these, shall it break in pieces and crush- This was not the general attitude of the Romans to the earth / land of Israel, although it has some relevance to the Greeks under Antiochus (see on :39). Such a cruel destruction of the land looks ahead to some future, last day fulfilment, when the image stands complete upon the land promised to Abraham. "Crush" is the equivalent of the Hebrew raah, "evil"; this system was to be the embodiment of the evil determined against God’s people, which is how "evil" is usually used in the prophets. The fourth kingdom, like the fourth beast of Daniel 7, is to break in pieces those on the earth / eretz promised to Abraham. But in turn, the little stone will "break in pieces and destroy" the fourth kingdom along with the entire image, represented by how the bones of Daniel’s persecutors were broken to pieces[s:w:] by the lions. The connection demonstrates that the judgments paid out by the latter day abusers of God’s people will in turn be given to them at the Lord’s return. They will be judged by the Lord as they judged. This is a major theme of Revelation, which describes how the judgments upon the land poured out by the latter day beast are in turn meted out to the beast system in the same territory. This is all foreseen here in Daniel; those who break in pieces the land are to be broken in pieces.</h4><p>John Drake has some interesting comments here: "If you take the time to look at the history of the middle east you will find that the empires that succeeded Greece and the division into the Seleucid and Ptolemaic Empires was not Rome but the Parthians, then the Sassanids and then Islam. It was Islam that overthrew the Eastern Roman Empire in Byzantium. Rome never fulfilled the requirements of <a href='B:340 7:23'>Dan 7:23</a> and <a href='B:340 2:40'>Dan 2:40</a> in crushing breaking and trampling all the others. Rome was able to conquer less than 1/3 of the Seleucid Empire (have a look at history). The Roman Empire does not qualify as the Empire of Iron in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream because it did not successfully conquer and crush Babylon, Persia and Greece. It left Babylon untouched, could not conquer Persia, and its own culture was subservient to Greek culture and language. Rome did not crush any of other three empires. On the other hand Islam was “different from all the other kingdoms” <a href='B:340 7:23'>Dan 7:23</a>. It has one culture (Islam), a different language (Arabic and Farsi in Iran) and one religion. The other empires had multiple gods, cultures and language, as did Rome.</p><p>The divided nature of Islam is very evident in the Sunni and Shia factions of Islam and fits well with the iron legs and the divided nature of the feet. They are one in purpose – the expansion of Islam to rule the world together with the destruction of Israel. The fourth beast of Daniel is the same beast that John sees in Revelation. It is made up of components of the first three beasts. It like a lion (Babylon), looked like a bear (Medes and Persians) and looked like a leopard (Greece). This surely indicates that the beast must be identified with the same geographical areas as those in Daniel and that was Mesopotamia. Bear in mind also that the vision of Daniel 2 was given to Nebuchadnezzar, not Daniel and not Israel. It was about Babylon and kingdoms that would arise in Mesopotamia.</p><h4>The mountains upon which the harlot of Revelation sits represent seven kings. Five are fallen. One is and one is yet to come. Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia and Greece fell before the time of John. The one that existed at the time of John was Rome and one was to come. The one that came was Islam and later the Ottoman Empire. Muslims worldwide and particularly Turkey now seek to revive the caliphate and this I believe is the eighth head of the beast represents the 7 previous empires and it will have dominion over the kingdoms of Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece as represented by the leopard, bear and the lion".</h4>


text:
<h4>Then you saw the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, that shall be a divided kingdom; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, because you saw the iron mixed with miry clay- The coming of Christ is described in Isa 4125 as: “I have raised up one from the north, and he shall come; from the rising of the sun, one who calls on My name; and he shall come on princes as on mortar, and as the potter treads clay”. This connects with the "potters’ clay" here. And Isaiah 41 was potentially about the restoration from Babylon. The “princes” are surely some of the ten kings represented by the ten toes (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>). Note that Israel’s latter day invader is described as one “from the north”; this person will be an imitation of Christ, the ultimate One from the north. His coming will be as “the rising of the sun” (<a href='B:460 4:2'>Mal 4:2</a>), just as that of the antichrist will be. The coming of Christ upon princes who are as clay therefore connects directly with the language of Daniel 2. <a href='B:420 2:6'>Hab 2:6</a> speaks of the latter day Babylonian antichrist figure as one who “lades himself with thick clay”, to be destroyed by the Lord’s coming and the Kingdom of God, when “the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord” (<a href='B:420 2:14'>Hab 2:14</a>). The “clay” would then refer to the same more lowly components of the feet part of iron and clay.</h4><h4>However it is perhaps wrong to imagine bits of iron mixed with clay. It has been commented: "Ancient iron production was by subjecting the ore to intense heat and afterwards driving out the clay by beating. When the latter was done imperfectly the result was"slag"in which iron and clay was mixed". The idea is that the situation was brittle and not strong, even if it appeared strong as iron visually. This will be of great comfort to those persecuted by the ten toe / ten horn system; powerful as it will seem, it is actually very brittle and prone to sudden destruction.</h4>


text:
<p>As the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken- If the two legs correspond to the two parts of the Greek empire which were relevant to Israel, this divided kingdom would refer to the dismemberment of Alexander’s empire. The ten toes of the image correspond to the ten horns on the beast, one of which was far stronger than the others, and uprooted some of the weaker ones. "Broken" is the same idea in the feet and the whole image being "broken to pieces"&nbsp; by the Lord’s return. The idea may be that some elements of the final stage of the colossus are already broken in judgment, by each other. The breaking in pieces of the former kingdoms by some of the later kingdoms, as explained in Daniel 8 and Daniel 11, was really a foretaste of the final judgment upon them all. The same word is used of how Cyrus of Persia would break in pieces Babylon (<a href='B:290 45:2'>Isa 45:2</a>). Isaiah 45 seems to be saying that it was God’s intention that Cyrus would break Babylon in pieces, convert to Him and be Israel’s salvation. Just as it was His intention to convert Nebuchadnezzar and Pharaoh. But this didn’t happen, and so the prophecy was delayed in fulfilment until our last days. Revelation likewise presents the scenario of the warring factions of the last days destroying or judging each other, before the final destruction of them all by the Lord’s coming.</p>


text:
<p><h4>Whereas you saw the iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men- "Mingle themselves" is used of intermarriage at the time when the Kingdom could have been re-established (<a href='B:150 9:2'>Ezr 9:2</a>). If the two legs represent the Syrian and Egyptian sides of the Greek empire, then we see here a picture of the breakup of that situation; and <a href='B:340 11:6'>Dan 11:6</a>; <a href='B:340 11:17'>Dan 11:17</a> predicts the intermarriage between the Seleucids and Ptolemies which would not succeed and which would lead to its destruction. Daniel 11 at various points describes the ending of the Greek kingdom in language appropriate to the Lord’s return and the destruction of the image in Daniel 2 (<a href='B:340 11:22'>Dan 11:22</a>; <a href='B:340 11:36-37'>Dan 11:36-37</a>). As noted on :1, the image prophecy had various potential fulfilments, and one of them was in the coming of a Messianic figure at the end of the Greek kings to re-establish God’s Kingdom. But that too didn’t happen, and the fulfilment was delayed.</h4><p>The prophecy may also have had a potential fulfilment in the situation around AD70. The metals represent kings; the Caesars were partly strong and partly weak in the lead up to AD70, with three emperors in the year AD69 alone (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius). The Lord could have come in AD70 and established the Kingdom; but His coming to do so was delayed because of Israel’s lack of repentance.</p><p>But they shall not cling to one another, even as iron does not mingle with clay- Who, then, are these nations who were represented by the feet partly of iron and partly of clay? Some will be strong, others weak. “Then you saw the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, that shall be a divided kingdom; but thereshall be in it of the strength of the iron, because you saw the iron mixed with miry clay. As the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. Whereas you saw the iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men; but they shall not cling to one another, even as iron does not mingle with clay” (<a href='B:340 2:41-43'>Dan 2:41-43</a>). One only has to look at the various groups currently fighting in the Middle East to see how deeply divided is the Islamist group.</p><p>The situation could actually lead to a fragmentation of the established territories in the Middle East into groups of smaller states, all united under the Al-Sham concept and a desire to drive Jews out of Israel. The same is true for Iraq and other Muslim states bordering Israel. Writing on the Al Jazeera website in May 2013, Murtaza Hussain wrote a penetrating article "Iraq, Syria and the death of the modern Middle East". The following sounds exactly like the ten toes of Daniel’s image, formed out of larger powers but now weak and yet united against Israel:</p><h4>"The countries of Syria and Iraq, formerly unified Arab states formed after the defeat of their former Ottoman rulers, exist today only in name. In their place what appears most likely to come into existence - after the bloodshed subsides - are small, ethnically and religiously homogenous statelets: weak and easily manipulated, where their progenitors at their peaks were robustly independent powers".</h4><p>We of course are reading the Bible through translation. But take a closer look at the original Hebrew and Chaldee translated “they shall mingle themselves” (<a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>). They were to be a mingled people- and that’s exactly who the nations of ‘Al Sham’ are. The original word translated ‘mingle’ is arab. One easy way to check that is to use an online concordance to poke under the surface of <a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>. And you will see it- Strong’s number <a class='strong' href='#sH6151'>H6151</a>. Arab. Surely there is a reference here to the Arab peoples!</p><h4>The ‘feet and toes’ section of the image is proportionally not a very long part of the body. The domination of Israel by this group will not be for long- perhaps the three and a half year period which occurs in several latter day prophecies.</h4></p>


text:
<h4>In the days of those kings- The kings may refer to the ten toes; but it could equally refer to the situation when the image stands complete in the last days. And we would again see that the primary intention of the prophecy was to describe a sequence of individual kings, rather than kingdoms, which would follow Nebuchadnezzar and be brought to an end by the re-establishment of Judah’s mountain or kingdom.</h4><p>Shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people; it shall crush to powder and consume all these kingdoms- The location of God’s Kingdom is therefore going to be in the same arena as earthly political kingdoms, here on this earth. There is no reference therefore to any kingdom of God in heaven, nor any spiritual kingdom in human hearts. We note that the feet of the image are already divided into small parts, as iron and clay; the Lord’s judgment only confirms their own situation by breaking them into pieces. Parts of the feet are already ’broken [to pieces]’ [s:w. "crush to powder"] when the Lord’s return hits them (:42); they have already experienced judgment.</p><h4>And it shall stand forever- This is the same word used of how the entire image "stood" (:31), and of how Nebuchadnezzar blasphemously set or stood up another image all of gold, representing himself (<a href='B:340 3:1-3'>Dan 3:1-3</a>; <a href='B:340 3:5'>Dan 3:5</a>; <a href='B:340 3:7'>Dan 3:7</a>; <a href='B:340 3:12'>Dan 3:12</a>; <a href='B:340 3:14'>Dan 3:14</a>; <a href='B:340 3:18'>Dan 3:18</a>), as if the image he saw would not have its fulfilment, but he would last for ever. The entire image therefore represents the kingdoms of men which are to become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ (<a href='B:730 11:15'>Rev 11:15</a>). The same word is used throughout Daniel 7 concerning how the various beasts all ’stand’, as if on their legs as men, but are brought down to nothing.</h4>


text:
<h4>As you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God has made known to the king what shall happen hereafter: and the dream is certain, and its interpretation sure- <a href='B:520 3:16'>Rom 3:16</a> speaks in the Greek of ‘a dashing to pieces’ of the wicked, perhaps an allusion to how the stone of Messiah’s second coming would dash the kingdoms of men to pieces at His return (<a href='B:340 2:45'>Dan 2:45</a>; <a href='B:730 2:27'>Rev 2:27</a>). But sinners are going now in way of such destruction. Damnation begins now- in the way of life people chose to live.</h4><p>The stone was cut out of a mountain and in turn becomes a mountain which fills the whole eretz, the territory promised to Abraham, where all the elements of the image had once dominated. This of itself suggests that the most natural interpretation of the metals refers to nations located within that territory- including Babylon, Media and Persia. We are so familiar with the interpretation which includes Greece and Rome that we can overlook this. Those four kings, not kingdoms, could have arisen and then been broken by the fragment of the mountain which comes into the territory and then becomes a mountain. I suggest that the primary interpretation refers to the remnant of Judah, the mountain of God’s Kingdom, which returned to the temple in Jerusalem at the time when it was dominated by a brief coalition of peoples sent there by the Babylonians, some strong and some weak. Being cut out without [human] hands means that it was of God; and Ezra and Nehemiah continually speak of how it was the hand of God which enabled the restoration. "The mountain" so often refers to the Kingdom of God in Israel ruled by a Davidic king, and particularly to the temple mount (<a href='B:50 33:19'>Deu 33:19</a>; Psa. 30:17; <a href='B:230 48:1'>Psa 48:1</a>; <a href='B:230 78:54'>Psa 78:54</a>; <a href='B:290 2:2-3'>Isa 2:2-3</a>; <a href='B:290 11:9'>Isa 11:9</a>; <a href='B:290 25:6-10'>Isa 25:6-10</a>; <a href='B:290 40:9'>Isa 40:9</a>; <a href='B:290 56:7'>Isa 56:7</a>; <a href='B:290 57:7'>Isa 57:7</a>; <a href='B:290 57:13'>Isa 57:13</a>; <a href='B:290 65:11'>Isa 65:11</a>; <a href='B:290 65:25'>Isa 65:25</a>; <a href='B:290 66:20'>Isa 66:20</a>; <a href='B:300 31:23'>Jer 31:23</a>; <a href='B:330 20:40'>Eze 20:40</a>; <a href='B:450 8:3'>Zec 8:3</a> etc:). The restoration prophecies are full of pictures of the restored Zion at the time of the restoration as a huge mountain dominating the eretz. The mountain of Babylon was to be burnt and replaced with the mountain of Yahweh’s restored Kingdom (<a href='B:300 51:25'>Jer 51:25</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>). It was the returned remnant who were to destroy this mountain (<a href='B:290 41:15'>Isa 41:15</a>); they were to be the little stone. Having spoken of Babylon as a mountain to be destroyed, we then read that it was a little stone which was to bring Babylon down (<a href='B:300 51:25'>Jer 51:25</a>; <a href='B:300 51:63'>Jer 51:63</a>). Restored Jerusalem was to become the stone (<a href='B:450 12:3'>Zec 12:3</a>). That stone was to as it were grow, stone by stone, as the walls and temple were rebuilt (<a href='B:440 2:15'>Hag 2:15</a>). This is the significance of the enigmatic little stone which was to bring about the restoration of the Kingdom at the time of <a href='B:450 3:9'>Zec 3:9</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>; <a href='B:450 4:10'>Zec 4:10</a>. I have suggested that the command to rebuild the temple according to the specifications of Ezekiel 40-48 was a conditional prophecy of what the exiles could and ought to have achieved. The scenario there is all about a mountain (<a href='B:330 40:2'>Eze 40:2</a>; <a href='B:330 43:12'>Eze 43:12</a>). This is why Daniel prayed for the restoration of the mountain of Yahweh (<a href='B:340 9:20'>Dan 9:20</a>)- i:e. for the vision of the mountain in Daniel 2 to come true in his time. But this was disallowed by the refusal of the exiles to follow the path of the Spirit, and all these prophecies of the mountain being established have been rescheduled and reapplied to the Lord’s return (<a href='B:730 21:10'>Rev 21:10</a>). Judah were not the little stone; the prophecy is to come true in the stone of the Lord Jesus, cut out without hands by God through the virgin birth. We are so familiar with this application that we can overlook the initially intended potential application to the Judah of Daniel’s day.</p><h4>Note that the stone was cut out of a mountain, but after hitting the image, it becomes a mountain, filling the whole earth. This second mountain is interpreted as the Kingdom of God coming on earth. Biblically, mountains represent people. The equivalent in Daniel 7 is that the kingdoms of the world are given to "the people of the saints of the Most High" (<a href='B:340 7:27'>Dan 7:27</a>). The first mountain likewise, therefore, refers to people. Out of the mountain of humanity, or perhaps the mountain of the Hebrew people (<a href='B:20 15:17'>Exo 15:17</a>; <a href='B:230 48:1'>Psa 48:1</a>; <a href='B:290 2:2'>Isa 2:2</a> "the mountain of Yahweh’s house / family / people will be exalted"), the Lord Jesus as the stone was cut out without human hands, born through the virgin birth. But the people of God will finally all become like Him. He as the stone becomes them, the mountain. We will finally manifest the Lord Jesus in totality, eternally. And if I am correct in understanding "the mountain" as specifically referring to God’s people Israel, then the second mountain, the Kingdom of God on earth, is in fact the eternal and glorious re-establishment of the Kingdom of God as it was in the form of Israel. And this is indeed Bible teaching elsewhere (<a href='B:330 21:25-27'>Eze 21:25-27</a>; <a href='B:510 1:7'>Act 1:7</a> and see more evidence in my Bible Basics chapter 5).</h4>


text:
<p>Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell on his face, and worshipped Daniel, and commanded that they should offer an offering and sweet incense to him- As noted on <a href='B:340 3:1'>Dan 3:1</a>, this was the humility and repentance of a moment. Nebuchadnezzar tried to demonstrate through his golden image that this dream would not come true. He was then humbled again in Daniel 4. We too have moments of humility, before God’s word or circumstances brought into our lives, and then our pride so often returns. The offering and incense were typically offered to a god or idol and not to a man (<a href='B:150 6:10'>Ezr 6:10</a>), but the king recognized the intense degree to which God was manifest in Daniel through Daniel’s revelation of God’s word. We too in our witness are the manifestation of God and His Son to men in a very intense identification. All people see of the Father and Son are what they see of us.</p>


text:
<p>The king responded to Daniel and said, Of a truth your God is the God of gods, and the Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, since you have been able to reveal this secret- As noted on :46, there was a very intense association and identification between God and His servant Daniel who manifested Him through the preaching of His word. Daniel was likely expecting to die for having come out with this interpretation, which went so directly against the king’s pride and obvious desire to endure for ever. Nebuchadnezzar’s recognition that Yahweh was "Lord of kings" was effectively a recognition of Yahweh as his lord; although as we will see on <a href='B:340 3:1'>Dan 3:1</a>, he failed to maintain this intensity of devotion. The "kings" he had in view were the kings of the vision; another indication that the primary potential fulfilment of it was in a series of kings rather than kingdoms which would terminate in the re-establishment of Israel’s Kingdom as the eternal Kingdom of God. Inscriptions have been found using these very words about Marduk (Merodach), the idol of Nebuchadnezzar. For him to now apply these words to Yahweh was effectively a renunciation of Marduk. It’s so sad that Nebuchadnezzar failed to maintain his commitment; and this is a disappointing feature of our lives, moments of devotion and realization, followed by a slump back into pride and the old and familiar patterns of thinking. Only the Spirit will empower us not to be like this.</p>


text:
<p>Then the king made Daniel great, and gave him many great gifts, and made him to rule over the whole province of Babylon, and to be chief governor over all the wise men of Babylon- Comparing with :49, we sense that Daniel was exalted even higher than rulership over the province; he was in the king’s gate, one of his close personal advisers. The word of ’making a great man’ is used of how Nebuchadnezzar had been made a great man (<a href='B:340 4:11'>Dan 4:11</a>; <a href='B:340 4:20'>Dan 4:20</a>; <a href='B:340 4:22'>Dan 4:22</a>), made by God a ruler. It is a classic piece of human psychology that now Nebuchadnezzar wants to do to another what he perceived had been done to him by God’s grace. The Biblical record throughout has the ring of psychological and internal credibility in a way in which the uninspired histories of the time simply do not. We note that the "wise men" were effectively the political governors too. Religion and politics were totally connected in Babylon; for Daniel and his friends to be made governors, to be given political power when they had a different religion, was a radical thing for the king to do. And it set them up for the later conflicts we read of in Daniel. Like all of us, they were in an impossible situation. Daniel later rejected all such reward for telling dreams, but I will suggest on :49 that at this point, Daniel’s motivation for accepting it and getting his Jewish friends into power was because he entertained the possibility that all Babylon might be brought to the true God. We too should set our sights high in our preaching work, not content with mere ’witnessing’ for the sake of relieving our conscience, with no great hopes for conversions. The enduring legacy of Daniel is reflected in the fact that centuries later, it was magi, "wise men"&nbsp; from the east, who came to worship the infant Jesus, realizing that his birth was the fulfilment of some of Daniel’s prophecies.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel requested of the king, and he appointed Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, over the affairs of the province of Babylon: but Daniel was in the gate of the king- Daniel clearly did this for the sake of ensuring a good deal for the Jews there, and perhaps also in line with the Divine intention that Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon repent and come to the true God. Just as Isaiah 45 seems to envisage the possibility of Cyrus king of Persia becoming Israel’s saviour after coming personally to Israel’s God. There was likewise an attempt to convert even Pharaoh. These ancient monarchs would have seemed to us not worth wasting effort with; but God did try. And we likewise should consider nobody as just not worth the effort when it comes to our work of witness.</p>


text:
<h4>Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold, whose height was sixty cubits, and its breadth six cubits- The dimensions reflect how Babylon used a sexagesimal system [counting based around sixes] rather than a decimal one [based around tens]. The figure 666 in Revelation 13 therefore points us to a figure who epitomizes Babylon. The breadth is out of proportion to its height- like the kingdoms and glory of men it symbolized, it was fragile and unstable, and easily toppled. He was attempting to deconstruct the image made of various metals, insisting that he as the head of gold would in fact be eternal and not followed by other kingdoms. What he did therefore reveals his humility before Daniel in Daniel 2 as just the passing humility of a desperate moment. We too have seen this in our own lives; humility before God and His people is soon replaced by a return to visions of our own strength. This image becomes the prototype for "the image of the beast" to be established in the last days by a latter day Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:730 13:14-15'>Rev 13:14-15</a>; <a href='B:730 14:9'>Rev 14:9</a>; <a href='B:730 14:11'>Rev 14:11</a>). Those of the last days who are victorious over the beast and his image are therefore represented by the three friends (<a href='B:730 15:2'>Rev 15:2</a>). They are to be no mere Sunday School story for us, but real and actual prototypes of us all in the last days.</h4><h4>He set it up in the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon- This is the same word used of how the entire image "stood" (:31), and of how Nebuchadnezzar blasphemously set or stood up another image all of gold, representing himself (<a href='B:340 3:1-3'>Dan 3:1-3</a>; <a href='B:340 3:5'>Dan 3:5</a>; <a href='B:340 3:7'>Dan 3:7</a>; <a href='B:340 3:12'>Dan 3:12</a>; <a href='B:340 3:14'>Dan 3:14</a>; <a href='B:340 3:18'>Dan 3:18</a>), as if the image he saw would not have its fulfilment, but he would last for ever. The entire image therefore represents the kingdoms of men which are to become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ (<a href='B:730 11:15'>Rev 11:15</a>). The same word is used throughout Daniel 7 concerning how the various beasts all ’stand’, as if on their legs as men, but are brought down to nothing.</h4>


text:
<p>Then Nebuchadnezzar the king sent to gather together the satraps, the deputies, and the governors, the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, to come to the dedication of the image which Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up- "Rulers of the provinces", implying a gathering of the leaders of the entire empire. This was how insistent Nebuchadnezzar was to demonstrate on a huge scale that he as the head of gold would in fact be immortal; his idea was that he would not be destroyed nor cede power to another empire, as the vision of Daniel 2 required. He would be the entire image; and he wished to make that point to all levels of society.</p>


text:
<p>Then the satraps, the deputies, and the governors, the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, were gathered together to the dedication of the image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up; and they stood before the image that Nebuchadnezzar had set up- This gathering together of people from throughout the empire would have taken time; and so the three friends had plenty of opportunity to plan their course of action. Their devotion was therefore not the zeal of a moment, but a consciously planned willingness to lay down their lives for the one true God. The fact they alone of all the Jews did so makes their bravery the more significant; for it is hard to live on a high level of dedication when our brethren consider it unnecessary and foolhardy. The same had happened over the matter of refusing the king’s meat.</p>


text:
<p>Then the herald called aloud, To you it is commanded, peoples, nations, and languages- The assembled crowd were told to bow down to it whatever nation or language they were from. The idea was that the local rulers of the provinces from throughout the empire may have been local men; and that perhaps there was to be a moment of bowing down observed throughout the empire. This was not merely a local event in the province of Babylon. The idea of a herald calling out a call to worship to all "peoples, nations and languages" is similar to the heralding of the Gospel of the true Kingdom of God to all peoples. Nebuchadnezzar was a fake God, an imitation Christ, a prototype of the latter day antiChrist.</p>


text:
<h4>That whenever you hear- "Whenever" suggests the call to worship was not just a one time event; to build a huge image for just one usage would not be justifiable. There was to be a period of regular worship of this image, perhaps throughout the empire.</h4><h4>The sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music, you fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king has set up- This combination of instruments suggest that the music was associated with religious ritual. The latter day demand to worship the image of the beast will likewise be a specifically religious matter, and it will be consciously designed to deconstruct the claims of the God of Israel. Nebuchadnezzar had fallen down and worshipped Daniel (s:w:) in <a href='B:340 2:46'>Dan 2:46</a>; now he commands everyone to fall down and worship himself. He was perhaps now angry with Daniel because of the interpretation given.</h4>


text:
<p>And whoever doesn’t fall down and worship shall immediately be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace- Remains of such a furnace have been found in the plain of Dura; it was a kind of ’Gehenna’, a burning place for rubbish, and again Nebuchadnezzar is set up as an anti-God, an anti-Christ, playing God, assuming the power of condemnation for not worshipping him.</p>


text:
<h4>Therefore at that time, when all the peoples- LXX "all the nations". The impression is given of Nebuchadnezzar seeking to preside over an imitation Kingdom of God, comprised of peoples from all nations; his proclamation to worship his statue, presenting himself as the eternal Kingdom, then would become a parody of the proclamation of the good news of the true Kingdom to "all the nations". We note here how "all the nations" means ’representative people from all nations’, and this is how we are to understand the language of preaching to "all nations", and "all nations" coming before the judgment seat.</h4><h4>Heard the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music, all the peoples, the nations, and the languages, fell down and worshipped the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up- The record of their obedience to the commandment exactly matches the record of the commandment. This kind of total obedience to "the image of the beast" is to be seen in the last days too.</h4>


text:
<p>Therefore at that time certain Chaldeans came near, and brought accusation against the Jews- The Chaldeans were the supposed interpreters of dreams, bitter and jealous that they had been unable to interpret the dream of Daniel 2. Instead of being grateful to their Jewish saviours, as often happens when we do good to others, they wanted to spite them. They wanted to support the king’ position that in fact the interpretation of the image had in fact been faulty, because the head of gold was going to last for ever.</p>


text:
<p>They answered Nebuchadnezzar the king, O king, live for ever- This was no formal greeting; the message of the all gold image was that the head of gold (Nebuchadnezzar) would last for ever. And they supported this.</p>


text:
<p>You, O king, have made a decree, that every man that shall hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music, shall fall down and worship the golden image- The recorded Biblical history of the restoration often records how the rulers made decrees. Those decrees were considered to be effectively the word of a divine being, unable to be altered, and absolutely certain. But the record shows the tension between the word of the true God, and that of men. The changing of those decrees, or issuing decrees which superseded them, all indicates that their claim to being the Divine word was simply untrue.</p>


text:
<p>And whoever doesn’t fall down and worship shall be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace- This is a similar idea to how the beast of the last days is to be destroyed and his "body destroyed and given to the burning flame" (<a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>). Clearly, what the beast seeks to do to God’s people shall be done to it. This is why the series of judgments recorded in Revelation are so similar, e:g. the seals and vials. The idea is that what the latter day abusers do to God’s people is done to them; they are&nbsp; punished with their own judgments.</p>


text:
<p>There are certain Jews whom you have appointed over the affairs of the province of Babylon: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego; these men, O king, have not respected you. They don’t serve your gods, nor worship the golden image which you have set up- The bitterness of the Chaldeans or magicians / dream interpreters is again apparent. The three Jews had been placed over Babylon as reward for interpreting the dreams which the Chaldeans had been unable to interpret, and so these failed men were jealous and bitter. "Have not respected you" is a three word phrase used again in the accusation against Daniel in <a href='B:340 6:13'>Dan 6:13</a>. It seems that he went through the very same experience in essence. Perhaps he sought to discreetly and tactfully get himself out of the situation; but maybe he later regretted it, and so the hand of providence enabled him to pass through the same situation in essence in the events of Daniel 6.</p>


text:
<p>Then Nebuchadnezzar in his rage and fury commanded to bring Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. Then they brought these men before the king- "Rage" is only once used elsewhere, again in a restoration context, regarding the rage of God at Judah’s disobedience and unfaithfulness to Him (<a href='B:150 5:12'>Ezr 5:12</a>). Nebuchadnezzar was again playing God, as if obedience to him was critical, and he had the right to judge as God. The original word for "fury" is likewise used of God’s fury against Judah at the hands of the Babylonians (<a href='B:290 51:17'>Isa 51:17</a>; <a href='B:340 9:16'>Dan 9:16</a>).</p>


text:
<p>Nebuchadnezzar said to them, Is it on purpose, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, that you don’t serve my gods, nor worship the golden image which I have set up?- "Is it on purpose?" supports the suggestion on :28 that the friends purposefully made some sign of worship of their God instead of bowing to the image. Presumably the other Jews, and perhaps Daniel, had been tacitly allowed by the king to be absent; but these three were "on purpose" making a point, and that was what so irritated the king. We can debate the extent to which we too should ’make a point’ regarding our separation from the world, or act like the other Jews and possibly Daniel did at this time. The case of John the Baptist rebuking Herod for his marriage would be another analogous situation to consider. And we should entertain the possibility that Daniel at this point was weaker in faith than his friends, and symbolically went along with it all. And yet when the decree was given forbidding prayer, Daniel like the friends, and doubtless inspired by their example, chose to ’make a point’ by opening his windows and praying towards Jerusalem in full view of his critics. We see here how faithful examples do inspire others to act likewise, at later points intheir lives.</p>


text:
<p>Now if you are ready whenever you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music to fall down and worship the image which I have made, well: but if you don’t worship, you shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that god that shall deliver you out of my hands?- The Babylonians worshipped fire, and Nebuchadnezzar is arguing that the God of Israel was no match for the gods of fire. The king’s anger was doubtless because he had promoted these Jews, despite this being an affront to Babylonian culture and religion; and now they had apparently betrayed his trust. He therefore gave them a second chance, because he maybe didn’t want to destroy them immediately, despite his anger.</p>


text:
<p>Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered the king, Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter- The idea is that they weren’t interested in the offer of a second chance; it had taken time to gather together the leaders of the empire, and they had in that period made their minds up and would not flinch from the possible consequences.</p>


text:
<p>If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace; and He will deliver us out of your hand, O king- The essence of their faith was that "God is able", whether or not He chose to exercise His power in the matter at that time in that way. And they would still serve a God who doesn’t always do what He is able to do, and what we would wish Him to do in the immediacy of the moments of trial. Their words are cited back to them by the king in :29 when he recognizes that indeed, their God "is able to deliver" in a way no other deity could.</p>


text:
<p>But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods, nor worship the golden image which you have set up- Even if God doesn’t ’come through’ as we expect and believe, all the same, we are to live by His principles and serve Him alone. Even if He slays us, we are to trust in Him (<a href='B:220 13:15'>Job 13:15</a>). The worship of the image was more than a merely symbolic gesture; it was somehow connected with serving the king’s gods. He obviously thought that the version of history suggested by Israel’s God in chapter 2 was going to be overthrown by the power of his gods, who would make him, the golden head, have an eternal kingdom. So to worship the image was to accept servitude to the king’s gods.</p>


text:
<h4>Then was Nebuchadnezzar full of fury, and his face changed against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego- This could mean that his face was filled with rage. But to change face toward someone means to change attitudes. This king had promoted these men on the basis of their part in obtaining the interpretation of the dream in Daniel 2. And the king appears to have liked them; but all that changes now. His respect for them turns to burning anger. The friends didn’t fear his fury, and the restored Judah collectively are urged not to fear the fury [s:w:] of their oppressor but rejoice that God will enable the restoration of Israel’s Kingdom (<a href='B:290 51:13'>Isa 51:13</a>). The friends are set up as the pattern for all God’s people.</h4><h4>Therefore he commanded that they should heat the furnace seven times more than it was usually heated- LXX "until it should burn to the uttermost". Fire burning to the uttermost is the picture of Divine wrath in judgment. Again, Nebuchadnezzar is portrayed as setting himself up as God, feeling that he alone was responsible for human condemnation, instead of continuing to be humbled by the vision of Daniel 2. There was no way of measuring how much a furnace had been heated before, nor of accurately multiplying that by seven. So we can assume this is an example of numbers being used in a non-literal sense; although the allusion may be to the Babylonian belief in seven gods and seven planets. Again, the king would be saying that the faithful three were to experience the full wrath of the Babylonian gods. The incident therefore reveals the triumph of Yahweh over all their false gods, which would explain the king’s proclamation concerning the supremacy of Israel’s God.</h4>


text:
<p>He commanded mighty men who were in his army to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and to throw them into the burning fiery furnace- The dragon, symbol of the latter day entity persecuting God’s people, is to be bound and thrown to condemnation (<a href='B:730 20:2'>Rev 20:2</a>). What was done to God’s people is to be done to them, which explains the similarities between the seals [what was done to God’s people] and vials [poured out upon their persecutors] in Revelation. See on :22.</p>


text:
<p>Then these men were bound in their trousers, their tunics, and their mantles, and their other garments, and were thrown into the midst of the burning fiery furnace- Perhaps the function of thetext’s stress upon their clothing was because it was untouched by the fire, and this was in reality the most convincing proof of their deliverance (:27).</p>


text:
<h4>Therefore because the king’s commandment was urgent- LXX "Forasmuch as the king’s word prevailed". The prevailing of the king’s word could suggest that there was some opposition generally to the idea. This is the background for the comment in :28 that the friends "changed the king’s word" (AV). The king’s word was pitted against God’s word, and God’s word prevailed.</h4><h4>And the furnace exceeding hot, the flame of the fire killed those men who took up Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego- We noted on :20 that what was done, or intended to be done, to God’s people is what happens to their abusers. This is a major theme in the prophets, and will be the basis for the nature of the Divine judgments upon the latter day beast.</h4>


text:
<p>These three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace- Like us at times, they were in the fire but not consumed by it, not even their clothes; recalling the burning bush unconsumed. We have here a primary fulfilment of <a href='B:290 43:2'>Isa 43:2</a>: "If thou go through fire, thou shalt not be burned; the flame shall not burn thee". This is in the context of a prophecy of how the Jews could have been restored from Babylon, and the Kingdom of God re-established as Israel’s kingdom, replete with a Messiah figure. But the Jews generally preferred to remain in Babylon; what happened to the friends could have developed into a total restoration of Israel. But the potential prophecy didn’t come true because of Israel’s indolence, and so the ultimate fulfilment has been delayed until our last days.</p>


text:
<h4>Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonished, and rose up in haste- LXX "And Nabuchodonosor heard them singing praises". The LXX includes the prayer of praise of Azarias. We recall how the prison keeper heard the praises sung by Paul and Silas. To praise God in the face of suffering and death is surely the ultimate reflection of faith in Him and loving trust in Him. perhaps their example inspired Paul and Silas, just as faithful examples may inspire later believers to act likewise.</h4><h4>He spoke and said to his counsellors, Didn’t we throw three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered the king, True, O king- "We throw" shows the king’s total identity with the men who had actually throw the friends into the furnace. But those men had been slain by the flames.</h4>


text:
<p>He answered, Look, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are unharmed; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods- This was an Angel, and not the Lord Jesus personally; see on :28. The LXX gives aggelos, "Angel". I have noted several times on this chapter that the Babylonian belief in the god of fire was being deconstructed; and "Son of the gods" could in fact be a reference to Iz-bar ["bar" = "son"], the god of fire. In this case, the allusion would reflect how in fact the god of fire was under Divine control and rendered powerless to destroy the Jews.</p>


text:
<p>Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace: he spoke and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, you servants of the Most High God, come out, and come here. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego came out of the midst of the fire- This coming out of fire is the historical pattern for the statement that "Your people shall be delivered" (<a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a>); again, the friends are set up as the pattern for God’s people of the latter day tribulation. "The most high God" is quite an admission from Nebuchadnezzar. He is recognizing that whether or not his gods really existed, without doubt the God of Israel was the highest. It was God’s intention that this man should indeed come to recognize that He is the most high (<a href='B:340 4:17'>Dan 4:17</a>). But again, Nebuchadnezzar’s appreciation of this was only momentary, for he needs to be taught this reality again by his illness and humiliation. When we are brought to such deep spiritual realizations, we must pray earnestly that we continue in them and not experience them as merely passing moments.</p>


text:
<p>The satraps, the deputies, and the governors, and the king’s counsellors, being gathered together, saw these men, that the fire had no power on their bodies, nor was the hair of their head singed, neither were their clothes changed, nor had the smell of fire passed on them- As they had been "gathered together" to the image, now they were "gathered together" to see these men. Perhaps the function of the text’s stress upon their clothing in :21 was because it was untouched by the fire, and this was in reality the most convincing proof of their deliverance. The Babylonians worshipped the gods of fire, and so the stress that the fire had no power was effectively revealing the bankruptcy of their entire belief system. That no "smell of fire" was upon them would then speak of their total disassociation with the Babylonian religious system. Again, the friends are held up as our pattern for faith n <a href='B:650 11:34'>Heb 11:34</a> - by faith they quenched the violence of fire.</p>


text:
<h4>Nebuchadnezzar spoke and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent His angel- This shows Nebuchadnezzar recognizing that an Angel had been physically sent to Daniel and his friends in the fiery furnace. It seems that great stress is placed in Scripture on the Angels physically moving through space, both on the earth and between Heaven and earth, in order to fulfil their tasks, rather than being static in Heaven or earth and bringing things about by just willing them to happen. See on <a href='B:10 18:10'>Gen 18:10</a>. The Lord Jesus was not an Angel, as Hebrews 1 demonstrates at length; the one like a son of the gods was therefore an Angel and not the Lord Jesus personally, who wasn’t then in existence.</h4><h4>And delivered His servants who trusted in Him, these who have set aside the king’s command, and have yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God- LXX "Changed the king’s word", just as Daniel did to him (<a href='B:340 2:21'>Dan 2:21</a>). This repetition of situation was surely in order to get Nebuchadnezzar to repent; we marvel that God made such efforts to convert this man, as He did with Pharaoh, when we would likely have considered such a person just not worth the effort in trying with. It would seem that the friends went beyond simply not bowing down to the image, but instead yielded their bodies to Yahweh and made some act of homage towards Him, perhaps like Daniel later, praying toward Jerusalem rather than falling before the image. They did this on purpose (:14), to make a point. "Set aside" can also mean "to despise", as the Peshitta renders it. The king is therefore accepting that his word had been despised, and Yahweh’s word had prevailed. He reaches an impressive point of humility, although as we learn in Daniel 4, he didn’t remain at that level but returned to pride. Just as we too so often experience humility as only a passing condition, in time of crisis, when it ought to remain a permanent characteristic.</h4>


text:
<p>Therefore I make a decree, that every people, nation, and language, which speak anything evil against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a compost heap; because there is no other god who is able to deliver after this sort- The Babylonian gods were not saviours; Nebuchadnezzar here recognizes that the God of Israel is essentially a saviour, and we see that supremely articulated in His work through His Son Jesus, Yah’s salvation. The same word for "able" is later used to Nebuchadnezzar in warning him that God is "able" to abase him if he continues in pride (<a href='B:340 4:37'>Dan 4:37</a>). We marvel at God’s continued and constant efforts to convert the king; He taught Nebuchadnezzar that He was indeed "able" to do all things; and then goes on to warn him that He therefore is "able" to abase him, if he continues in pride.</p>


text:
<p>Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the province of Babylon- LXX adds: "And gave them authority to rule over all the Jews who were in his kingdom". The ministers for Jewish affairs were themselves Jews.</p>


text:
<h4>Nebuchadnezzar the king, to all the peoples, nations, and languages, who dwell in all the earth: Peace be multiplied to you- Here we have "all the earth" defined as the area governed by Babylon, and not the entire planet. This assists in our interpretation of the dominions of Daniel 2. Clearly Europe and any area beyond the Middle East is not in view. This proclamation is that made after his humiliation. His response to that humbling was to spread the good news of God’s Kingdom, rather than his own, to every aspect of humanity which he could reach. We too have been given the great commission to do likewise, and we obey it in the humility which comes from having been convicted of our sin and pride.</h4><h4>Nebuchadnezzar’s multi-lingual preaching of the greatness of God’s Kingdom “to all nations” can easily be read unappreciated. But it must have been quite something, involving translating the Gospel of the Kingdom of God into many languages; and it incorporated a very humble expression of his own failures, a recognition of his foolish pride and lack of repentance. And maybe this is exactly why he was the one used by God to make the widest and greatest Old Testament witness to the Gospel of the Kingdom.</h4>


text:
<p>It has seemed good to me to show the signs and wonders that the Most High God has worked toward me- The content of Gospel preaching is the message of God’s Kingdom and His Son. But it is also a reflection of our personal experience of how "God has worked toward me". This is what gives our message credibility.</p>


text:
<h4>How great are His signs! How mighty are His wonders!- These miraculous signs and wonders surely refer to how "God has worked toward me" (:2), for they have no other referent. The way God tirelessly works to humble us and lead us to accept His Kingdom and renounce our own is nothing short of major, dramatic psychological miracle.</h4><h4>His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and His dominion is from generation to generation- Nebuchadnezzar had rejected the teaching of the previous revelation to him in <a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>, that God’s kingdom alone is everlasting, and will not pass to another. He had built an image of gold, as if to say that he the head of gold would in fact last eternally. And now he realizes how wrong he had been.</h4>


text:
<p>I, Nebuchadnezzar, was at rest in my house, and flourishing in my palace- "Flourishing" is the language of a tree, which he will be likened to in the vision he now saw. Again he shows humility by recognizing the truth of the Divine vision concerning him.</p>


text:
<p>I saw a dream which made me afraid; and the thoughts on my bed and the visions of my head troubled me- This is the language of his earlier experience in <a href='B:340 2:1'>Dan 2:1</a>; <a href='B:340 2:29'>Dan 2:29</a>. Circumstances repeat in our lives. If he had humbly accepted the Divine word to him in that first dream, he wouldn’t have needed this further dream and humiliation. The way situations and feelings repeat in our lives is therefore a great encouragement that man is not alone, abandoned in this world; instead we are sure that God is working with us, to humble us that we might be exalted in due time.</p>


text:
<p>Therefore made I a decree to bring in all the wise men of Babylon before me, that they might explain to me the interpretation of the dream- As noted on :5, this was just what he had done in Daniel 2. He ought to have guessed that the outcome would be similarly bad for his pride, and the message of God’s Kingdom would again prevail over him.</p>


text:
<p>Then came in the magicians, the enchanters, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers; and I told the dream before them; but they did not explain to me its interpretation- Again, as noted on :5 and :6, the situation in Daniel 2 was repeating. He ought to have learnt the lesson then, but he didn’t; and he failed his second chance too, with the dream of the tree, but it seems he learnt his lesson finally and became one of the most remarkable converts to the things of the Kingdom.</p>


text:
<h4>But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name was Belteshazzar- Nebuchadnezzar ought to have perceived the inability of his magicians to interpret dreams; he ought to have gone to Daniel first rather than "at the last". But he learnt his lesson right at the end, although requiring a terrible humiliation. Daniel being called "at the last" may well have been because he had moved himself away from all the great promotions he had been given, and eagerly slipped into the twilight, out of the deep conflicts between his conscience for Yahweh and the requirements of the Babylonian court life. We too at times need to reverse the effects of promotion in secular life, that we might be separate for our God.</h4><h4>According to the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods: and I told the dream before him, saying- Nebuchadnezzar proclaims Yahweh as the supreme God. So he may here be admitting his own foolishness in having Bel as his god, and perhaps we are to read in an ellipsis: "In whom [as I mistakenly thought was] the spirit of the holy gods". For he goes on to make it clear that Daniel’s God is the greatest.</h4>


