Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadEzekiel, Jonah, and Pastoral Epistles by Patrick Fairbairn - Ezekiel 40:5 - 40:16
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Eze_40:5. And behold a wall outside the house (viz. the house of God) round about, and in the man’s hand a measuring rod of six cubits, by the cubit and an handbreadth; (The exact proportions of the Hebrew measures of length cannot be ascertained with absolute correctness, as they were derived from parts of the human body, which necessarily vary. But the most careful inquiries have led to the conclusion that the ordinary Hebrew cubit was to a nearness 21 inches; and consequently the one employed here being an handbreadth or 3½ inches more, will make the cubit somewhere about 2 feet of our reckoning, and the rod about 12 feet. This must have been very near the length of each. (See Winer’s Real-Wört., art. Elle, and Kitto’s Bib. Cyclop., art. Cubit.)) and he measured the breadth of the building (the boundary-wall) one rod, and the height one rod.
Eze_40:6. And he came to the gate which looks toward the east, and went up on its (seven) steps, and measured the threshold (more exactly, sill) of the gate, one rod broad; even the one threshold, one rod broad. (It is impossible to make sense of our English version here, which renders, “and the other threshold of the gate, which was one reed broad.” What other threshold? There could be but one sill or threshold to each gate. Ewald arbitrarily substitutes àַçַø for àֶçָã , and renders, “the back threshold was one rod broad,” as if their could properly be two thresholds, or the dimensions behind were to be different from those in front. The true meaning is undoubtedly that adopted by Böttcher, and followed by Häv., that the prophet in this clause calls attention to the ample dimensions of the threshold of the gate, the breadth (one rod, or 12 feet, the height of the wall) being sufficient to let numbers pass and repass at once. There was no break or division; even the one gate had its threshold a rod-breadth.)
Eze_40:7. And the chamber, one rod long, and one rod broad; and between the chambers, five cubits; and the threshold of the gate beside the porch of the gate within, one rod.
Eze_40:8. And he measured the porch of the gate within, one rod.
Eze_40:9. And he measured the porch of the gate, eight cubits; and its pillars, two cubits; and the porch of the gate within.
Eze_40:10. And the chambers of the gate toward the east were three on the one side, and three on the other; all three of one measure; and the pillars had one measure on both sides.
Eze_40:11. And he measured the breadth of the gate entry, ten cubits; the length of the gate was thirteen cubits.
Eze_40:12. And a boundary-mark was before the chambers, one cubit; and on the other side a boundary-mark of one cubit; and the chambers, six cubits on this side, and six cubits on that.
Eze_40:13. And he measured the gate from the roof of one chamber to the roof of another, the breadth five-and-twenty cubits, door against door.
Eze_40:14. And he made pillars of sixty cubits, even unto the pillar of the court of the gate, round and round.
Eze_40:15. And from the front of the outer gate to the front of the inner gate porch were fifty cubits.
Eze_40:16. And there were closed (or fixed) windows to the chambers and their pillars within the gate round and round; and also to the porches; and windows were all round about inward; and upon each pillar palm-trees. (The whole of these verses (Eze_40:7-16) are taken up with a description of the east gate, and the buildings connected with it; but from certain obscurities in the terms, and the vagueness in some parts of the description itself, it is not possible to speak definitely and minutely of the plan—not at least without taking great liberties with the text. Some parts of the description are intelligible enough—as that there was a porch with pillars, or some sort of ornamental work, to the gate; that on each side there were three chambers (by which are plainly to be understood guard chambers, such as also belonged to the old temple buildings, 1Ch_9:26-27; 1Ch_26:12; 2Ki_22:4); that these chambers were each a rod or six cubits long by as much in breadth, separated from each other by a wall of five cubits, and having windows somehow fixed in them. These are the more prominent points. But when we ask, how the chambers stood precisely to the gate—whether longitudinally or transversely, projecting altogether outwards from the wall, or altogether inwards, or partly both; how the threshold could be found in Eze_40:7 one rod or six cubits broad, and in Eze_40:9 could be said to be eight cubits; what precisely were the àֵéìִí , translated pillars, though they are themselves said to have posts (Eze_40:49), or how they, as well as the guard-chambers, could have had windows, in Eze_40:16; what could be the use of windows, especially to the porches; how the measurement of the chambers from roof to roof could have been managed so as to make twenty-five cubits; and how the pillars of sixty cubits are to be understood, whether as rising aloft to this enormous height or placed horizontally: these, and several other points, are involved in hopeless obscurity, partly from the terms not being sufficiently understood, and partly from the relative positions of the objects not being distinctly enough marked. Ewald and Hitzig endeavour to make something of it by occasionally altering the text, supporting themselves to some extent by the LXX.; but I prefer saying, I don t find the text such as I can fully explain, to making a text which needs little or no explanation. I have no doubt that the original would have been more precise and definite if this had been necessary to our getting the instruction it was intended to convey. I deem it, therefore, quite unnecessary to enter into the minutiæ, of the different terms, which can lead to no satisfactory result.)
In this description, as stated in the note below, there are obscurities in regard to several of the particulars mentioned which we have not the means of satisfactorily clearing up. But we may not the less apprehend the general import of this part of the description. It marks a very decided superiority in the new pattern presented to the eye of Ezekiel over that which had previously existed; the imperfections of the one should have no place in the other. And this, first, in regard to the wall that enclosed the sacred edifice. It is probable that the temple of Solomon was surrounded by such a boundary wall, as something of this kind was customary in ancient temples; but there is no appearance of that having formed part of the Divine plan, or possessing strictly a sacred character. Hence various alterations were made from time to time in that respect, and new gates opened (2Ki_15:35; Jer_36:10), for the purpose, no doubt, of suiting more fully the convenience of the worshippers. Something of an irregular, adventitious, of a common or profane character was thus brought into close contact with the affairs of the temple; and on this account no scruple was made of turning apartments in the buildings raised on these sacred precincts to the commonest uses. It was in one of these that Jeremiah was detained as in a prison (Jer_20:2, Jer_29:26). But now, according to the new and better state of things seen in vision by the prophet, this imperfection and arbitrariness were to be done away. The whole summit of the temple mount was to be set off as an holy place to the Lord; and the wall enclosing it, and the gates and erections connected with it, were all, equally with the temple itself, to bear on them the stamp of Divine perfection.
The wall, as described by the prophet, does not seem to have been planned with any other view than to convey this impression of sacredness. As usual in Divine measurements (for example, the most holy place in the sanctuary, and the city in Rev_21:16), it bears the square form, as broad as it is high; but this being only twelve feet at the utmost, it was manifestly not designed to present by its altitude an imposing aspect, or by its strength to constitute a bulwark of safety. In these respects it could not for a moment be compared with many of the mural erections which existed in antiquity. But as the boundary line between the sacred and the profane, which, being drawn by the hand of God, must therefore remain free from all interference on the part of man, it is precisely such as might have been expected. Something more, however, needed to be expressed in the construction of the gates. These being the channels of intercourse with what was within the door-ways out and in to what might be called emphatically the city of the living God—they must be formed so as adequately to provide for the due preservation of the sacred character of the house. This is the point chiefly brought out in the plans and measurements connected with them. There are not wanting in the description signs of beauty and magnificence—porticoes, pillars, turrets, carved and ornamented, so as to convey the impression that the way through them conducted to the palace of the great King. But furnished as they were so amply with guard-chambers for those who should be charged with maintaining the sanctity of the house (Eze_44:11, Eze_44:14), they were formed more especially with a view to the holiness, which must be the all-pervading characteristic of the place. It was imprinting on the architecture of this portion of the buildings the solemn truth “that there shall in nowise enter into it anything that defileth, neither worketh abomination, or maketh a lie” (Rev_21:27)—a truth which in past times, partly from defective arrangements, partly from the wilful disregard of such as existed, had been most grievously suffered to fall into abeyance. But henceforth it must be made known to all that holiness becometh God’s house, and that they only who possess this shall be allowed to come and minister before him.
While this character attaches substantially to each of the four gates, it is brought out most especially and distinctly in connection with the eastern gate, because this was the one that looked straight to the door of the temple, and to it, therefore, belonged a place of pre-eminence. It was through that gate that the prophet in a former vision had seen the glory of the Lord departing (Eze_11:23), and through this also it was to return; whence the access through it was to be reserved for special occasions (Eze_44:2-3). The more intimate connection between this and the peculiar manifestations of Deity imparted to it a character of deeper sacredness.