vision of the dry bones (eh. xxxvii.), it can be inferred that the prophet believed in and taught the doctrine of a future resurrection, or, on the strength of certain statements as to Israel dwelling again upon her own )and, it ought to be concluded that the prophet anticipated a final ingather- ing of the Jews to Palestine, with Christ reigning as their Prince in Jerusalem, it would hardly be safe to affirm; it is much more credible to hold that much of the prophet's language in his last vision points to a condition of things which will be realized on earth first in a millennial period, when the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ (Rev. xi. 15), and finally in heaven, when the tabernacle of tho Lord shall be with men, and he shall dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God (Rev. xxi. 3).
LITERATURE.
1. Among the older commentaries on this book mar be mentioned the following : CEcolampadius, 'Comm. in Ezech.,' 1543; Strigel, • Ezech. Proph. ad Heb. verit. recogn. et argum. et schol., illustr.,' 1564, 1575, 1579; Casp. 'Sanctius Co=. in Ezech. et Dan.,' 1619; Hieron. Pradus et Jo. Bapt. Villapandus, 'In Ezech. explanatt. et apparatus urbis ac templi Hierosol. Comm., illustr.,' Romre, 1596-1604; Calvin, ' Prailectiones in Ezechielis Prophetai viginti capita priora,' 1617; Venema, • Leet. acad. ad Ezech.,' 1790. 2. Among the newer, the following may be reckoned the more important: Rosen- mtiller, 'Scbolia,' 2nd edit., 1826; Maurer, 'Commentaries,' vol. ii., 1835; Ha.vernick, 'Comm. tiber den Propheten Ezechiel,' 1843 ; • Um breit, ' Prakt. Comm. tiber den Heeekiel,' 1843; Hitzig, 'Der Prophet Ezechiel erkla.rt,' 1847; Patrick Fairbairn, 'Ezekiel and the Book of his Prophecy,' 1st edit., 1851, 2nd edit., 1855, 3rd edit., 1863; Henderson, 'Ezekiel with Comm. Critical,' etc., 1856; Kliefoth, 'Das Buch Ezekiel's tibereetzt und erkla.rt,' 1864; Hengstenberg, 'Die Weissa.gungen des Prophet Ezechiel,' 1867, 1868 ; Ewa.Id, 'Die Propheten des Al ten Bundes,' vol. ii., 2nd edit., 1868; Keil, 'Commentary on Ezekiel,' Engl. tra.us., 1868; Schroder, in Lange's Series, 1873; R. Smend, 'Der Prophet Ezechiel,' in 'Kurzg. Ex. Ha.ndb.,' 1880; I. Knabenbauer (Roman Catholic), 'Comm. in Ezech.,' Paris, 1690; Dr. Currey, in 'Speaker's Com- mentary,' 1882; Von Orelli, in Strack und Zockler's ' Comm.,' 1888. 3. Among works which, though not formal expositions, are yet valuable contributions ~o the literature on Ezekiel, may be placed, W. Neumann,' Die Wasser des Lebens' (Ezck. xl vii. 1-12), 1840; Hoffmann, 'Das gelobte Land, etc.,' 1871; Ernst Kuhn, • Ezechiel's Gcsicht von Tempel,' 1882; C. H. Cornill, 'Der Proph. Ezechiel,' 1882; 'Das Buch des Propb. Ezechiel,' 1886; Plumptre, 'Ezekiel: an Idea.I Biography,' in Expositor, vols. vii. and viii., 2nd series, 1884,
EZEJ{TEL. THE
BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. EXPOSITION. evidence that that era was in use in CHAPTER I. Ezekiel's time, and (b) that he nowhere else For the life of the prophet prior to the uses a double historical chronology. (2) That vision whi<lh this chapter relates, and which the years are reckoned from the discovery of the book of the Law in the reign of Josiah constituted his call to that office, see Intro- (2 Kings JU.ii. 8; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 14), as a. duction. tnrning-point or era in the history of Juda.h Ver. 1.-Now; literally, and. The use of (Targum, Theodoret, Jerome, Ha,ernick), the conjunction indicates here, aa in Jonah which would again bring us to B.c. 595. i. 1, that the narrative that follows links This view is, however, open to the -same itself on to something that has gone before. objections as (1). We have no proof that the In Exod. i. 1 and 1 Sam. i. I it may point to Jews ever reckoned from that event, and a connection with the book that precedes it. Ezekiel did not want, here or elsewhere, Here the sequence is subjective. We may another point to reckon from, as far as his think of Ezekiel as retracing the years of bis people's history was concerned, than the life till he comes to the thirtieth. Then, as captivity of J ehoiachin. In the fourth it were, he pulls himself up. That must be month. Both here and in ver. 2 the months the starting-point of what he bas to say. a.re probably reckoned from Abib, or Nisan, Our English use of" now" is nearly equiva- the month of the Passover, with which the lent to this. In the thirtieth year. I incline, Jewish year began (Exod. xii. 2 ; N eh. ii. I ; following Origen, Hengstenberg, Smend, and Esth. iii. 7), so that the fourth month, known others, to rerer the date to the prophet's own by later JeWB as Tammuz, would bring us lire. That year in Jewish reckoning was to June or July. Among the captives the nge of full maturity, At that age the (literally, the captivity) by the river of Che bar. earlier Levites (Numb. iv. 23, 30, 39, 43, 47) By most earlier commentators the Chebar had entered on their duties. It is probnble, has been identified with the Chnboras of the though no written rule is found, that it was Greeks (now the Khabour), which rises iu the normal nge for the functions of the Upper Mesopotamia, at Ras-el-Ai11, and falls priesthood. In the case of our Lord (Luke into the Euphrates at Carcesium, a city iii. 23) and of the Baptist it appears to have which modern geographers distinguish from been recognized as the stnrting-point of a the Carchemish of the Old Testament. prophet's work. Jeremiah's coll as a "child" Recent critics, however (Rawlinson, Smend, (Jer. i. 6; the word may, however, include and others), have urged that this was too adult manhood, as in 1 Sam. xxx. 17; I Kings far north to be in the "land of the Chai- iii. 7) was obviously exceptional. Other deans" (var. 3), or Babylon (2 Kings xxiv. theories are: (1) That the years are reckoned 16), and have suggested that the Cbebar of from the era of N abopolassar, the father of Ezekiel is the Nahr-Malcha, or Roye.I Canal Nebuchadnezzar (B.O. 625), dating from his of Nebuchadnezzar, thegreatestof thatking'!i tl!l'?Wing off the sovereignty Of Assyria, and irrigation works, to which, therefore, the giving hero the date B.C. 595 (Michaelis, no.me Chebar (i.e. uniting) would be appro- R~se~mtiller, Ewald,and others); but against priate. The identification of Chebar with this 1t may be urged (a) that there is no the Habc>r of 2 Kings xvii. 6, to whioh the ltZEKJ&L. B 2 THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. [on. I, 1-28,