theory, begun by Graf and Reuss, but per- originally taught Moses; but inasmuoh 611 fcct-0d by Kuenen and Wellhaueen, it ie well it has not been and cannot be made out known, is tllat, while the book of the cove- beyond reasonable doubt-rather, inasmuoh nan t (Exod. xxi.-xxiii.) originated in the 1\8 strong grounds exist for holding that early years of the monarchy, and Deutero• Ezekiel had no suoh intention, but designed nomy not later than the reigu of Josiah, the to provid!l a complex symbol of tho perfeot priest-code, e.s it is styled (Exod. xxiv.-xl. relations which should subsist between God with some exceptions, the whole of Leviticus, and his (spiritual) Isre.el, it is clee.rly not and the most of Numbers), is a work of post- permissible to o.rgue tbe.t Ezekiel was sug• exilic origin, and that Ezekiel (xl.-xlviii.) gesting for the first time the course which constituted, as it were, the bridge by which temple-legislation should pursue in the the law-making spirit of the Hebrew religion new era which should commence when the passed over from the popular legislation of exile we.a ended and the restoration begun. the Fifth Book of Moses to the highly If all the.t Ezekiel had in contemplation developed and minutely articulated system was to furnish e. symbol of the sort e.lree.dy of Leviticus. Into the general question it indicated, it is me.nifestly e.n inference not would be out of place in this work to we.rranted by the premisses that he desired enter; the most that can be done is to to initiate o. distiuction which should after- indicate how far the theory is entitled to wards be put in force between the priests claim support from the temple-vision which who should serve the altar and the Levites has just been expounded and interpreted. who should serve the te.bernacle, e.nd to Nor is it needful, in doing so, to dwell upon assign the former honour to the sons of the alleged evidence of Ezekiel's priority to Ze.dok, while inflicting the le.tter degradation Leviticus, derived from Ezekiel's language on the Levites who had ministered e.t pre- end the contents of bis sacrificie.l Torah- exilic high places. If Ezekiel's fetching in this has been more or less done in the of the sons of Zadok was merely e. device course of exposition-since the validity or to obtaiu a symbol of faithful and pure invalidity of such (so-ea.lied) evidence service, then the whole theory which ho.a depends entirely on the correctness or incor- been so ingeniously erected on the so-called rectness of the presupposition which is com- degradation of the Levites-a pe.seage which monly made, viz. !bat Ezekiel designed to has been styled "the key to the Old Testa- draft a new constitution for the post-exilio meat "-runs the risk of falling to pieces, Church. Could this have been me.de out, and, to use the words of Delitzsch ( Luthardt' a it would by no means have followed that Zeitschrift filr kirkliche Witiaenschaft, 1880- Ezekiel's Torah, by its divergences from 1881, p. 288), "the degradation of the tl,at of Leviticus, proved the later origin of Levites, which certainly appears in Ezekiel the latter, since Ezekiel, having himself been as e.n innovation," becomes "another thing o. prophet, no less than Moses, was e.t liberty than a riddle to be solved by the new Pen- to abrogate or modify any pre-existing law te.teuche.l theory." if impelled to do so by the Spirit that
HOMILETICS.' Ver. I (first clause "Now these are the names of the tribes ").-Names. The tribes are here severally na~ed. Elsewhere whole pages of the Bible are taken up with lists of names. Let us consider the significance of this method of assortment. L NAMES INDICATE INDIVIDUALS. Each tribe has its name; each person also has his own private no.me. Thus the community is broken up into its several constituent elements. God does not treat men in the mass. He takes "one of a city, o.nd two of a family" (Jer. ill. 14). Each tribe of Israel had its separate district, each family its own allotted inheritance. II. NAMES DESCRIBE oBABA<Yl'ERB. This was the case with names in 0\,1 Testament times. It does not apply among us, excepting in the case of soubriq-uets. But the old suggestiveness contains a lesson for all time. Different men have different characters. All these varieties are known to God, even though some of them may be concealed from our fellow-men. It might often have happened that by some accident, misunder- stanclino-, or act of malice, a false name would be given to a person-a good name to a bad ma~, or a bad name to a good man. No such error can be found in God's books, the books in which he reads the names of his people, There he notes the true character of all. III. NAMES DIREOT APPEALS. We call a person by name to arrest his attention mr. XLVW. 1-35.] THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. 17:i