extremely ancient. Thirdly, Athenæus and others state that the city was called Shushan, from the multitude of lilies growing in that region, a fact reconcilable with any date whatever. (2.) Another passage which has been objected to, is what De Wette calls the laughable description (in ch. vi.) of a lion's den like a cistern, with a stone to close the orifice. office of the writers. The prophetic gift must be discriminated | tradicted by all Greek and Oriental writers, who represent it as from the prophetic office. The one was common to all who were inspired; the latter to the regular, official prophets, who communicated the divine will to the Jewish nation. The books written by these prophets, as such, formed the second great division. The third, Dr. H. thinks, contains the inofficial prophecies. Why else should Jeremiah's Lamentations be disjoined from his prophecies? As to the relative position of the book among the Hagiographa, it evidently proves neither one thing nor another; as the book of Ezra is placed after it, and a slight inspection shows that no regard was had to date in the arrangement of the parts. OBJECTION 3.-The authors of the Talmud and the modern Jews regard the book of Daniel with contempt. ANSWER. The Talmudists have been misapprehended, and the prejudice of the modern Jews has naturally sprung from their hatred to the Gospel, and whatever tends to prove its authenticity. OBJECTION 4.-A fourth objection is founded on the words of the book itself. "In the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood by BOOKS the number of the years whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem." (Dan. ix. 2.) The Hebrew word translated books has the article prefixed. This Bleek considers as synonymous with biblia or the Scriptures, and a decisive proof that the Old Testament canon was already closed, and in the hands of the writer of this book. ANSWER. First, We have no proof of these books containing any other matter than the prophecies of Jeremiah. Secondly, The technical term in use among the later Jews to designate the canon was not "the books," but "the writings.". Thirdly, The supposititious forger of the book of Daniel never would have hinted at the canon's being closed, when his very object was to have his book included in it. Fourthly, Before the adjustment of the canon, there were private collections of the sacred books, as appears not only from the nature of the case, but from the fact, that Jeremiah quotes and imitates Moses, Isaiah, Obadiah, and Micah, a circumstance admitted both by Eichhorn and De Wette. These reasons are, we think, sufficient, without appealing, as Pareau does, to the Jewish tradition, that the sacred books were secured by Jeremiah before the burning of the temple, and entrusted to the care of Daniel. OBJECTION 5.-The lavish expenditure of signs and wonders, without any apparent object, is unworthy of the Deity. ANSWER. It is worthy of remark, that one of those who urge this difficulty has supplied an answer. This is Griesinger, who innocently observes, that no better reason seems assignable for all these miracles than a disposition to exalt Jehovah above other Gods! Can a better be desired? It is true, the adversaries still object, cui bono? We need only condense Dr. Hengstenberg's three replies into as many sentences. 1. That the faith and hope of the exiles might be maintained. 2. That a way might be opened for their restoration. 3. That the heathen might be awed into forbearance and respect towards God's peculiar people. OBJECTION 6.—The book of Daniel contains historical inaccuracies. (1.) The grossest of these is said to be the statement in the first two verses in the eighth chapter. Bertholdt's objections are -that Elam is mentioned as a province of the Babylonish empire, in which Daniel acted as a royal officer (v. 27.), whereas it was a province of the Median empire, as appears from Isaiah xxi. 2. and Jeremiah xxv. 5. 2. That a palace is spoken of at Shushan, whereas the palace there was built by Darius Hystaspes, as appears from Pliny. 3. That the name Shushan itself (which signifies a lily) was not given until long after Darius, and was intended to express the beauty of the edifices which that prince erected. ANSWER.-First, The subjection of Elam by the Chaldees is predicted by Jeremiah (xlix. 34.), and the fulfilment of the prophecy recorded by Ezekiel. (xxxii. 24.) The prediction quoted by Bertholdt (Jer. xxv. 5.) represents Elam, not as a province of Media, but as an independent monarchy, and intimates its overthrow. This prophecy was uttered in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, that of Daniel in the third of Belshazzar's. But even admitting the assertion of the adversary, there is no departure from the truth of history. Daniel was at Shushan only "in a vision," as appears from a strict translation of the passage. The scene of his vision, so to speak, was there, because Shushan was to be the capital of the empire whose fortunes he foresaw. Secondly, Pliny's statement as to the building of the palace, and indeed the whole city, by Darius Hystaspes, is con ANSWER. We know nothing about the lions' dens in that part of the world; but we know, that in Fez and Morocco they are subterraneous, and that criminals are often thrown into them. Who knows how large the stone was in the case before us? (3.) A third objection of the same kind is, that Belshazzar is represented (Dan. v. 11. 13. 18. 22.) as the son of Nebuchadnezzar, whereas, according to profane historians, he was his fourth successor. ANSWER. No fact is more familiar, than that father denotes an ancestor, son, a descendant. (4.) The other historical objections which Dr. Hengstenberg notices, are, that Cyaxares II. is by Daniel called Darius-and that in the first verse of the first chapter, Jerusalem is said to have been taken by Nebuchadnezzar, in the third year of Jehoiakim, while it appears from Jer. xlvi. 1. that the battle of Carchemish, which must have preceded that event, occurred in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, and from Jer. xxv. 1. that this same fourth year was the first of Nebuchadnezzar. Dr. Hengstenberg's solution of these difficulties carries him so far into minutiæ that we can neither follow copy nor abridge his argument. Suffice it to say, that it is wholly satisfactory, and exhibits in a strong light his critical sagacity, his learning, and his judgment. OBJECTION 7.-The book of Daniel contains various inconsistencies and contradictions. ANSWER. These alleged inconsistencies and contradictions are merely apparent, not real. The last verse of the first chapter, for instance, has been represented as at variance with the first verse of the tenth, as though the former intimated that he lived no longer! A similar objection has been founded on Belshazzar's not knowing Daniel (v. 14.), who had been exalted to such honour by Nebuchadnezzar (ii. 48, 49.); a circumstance explained by the very characters of the prophet and the king, which were too opposite to admit of intimacy. Daniel would naturally stand aloof from so debauched a court. Again, the indefatigable adversary asks, how could Nebuchadnezzar be ignorant (iii. 14.) whether the Hebrews served his God, when he had himself (ii. 47.) acknowledged theirs to be a God of gods and Lord of lords? This inconsistency, as Dr. Hengstenberg observes, is chargeable not upon the sacred writer, but upon the heathen king. His former acknowledgment resulted not from a change of heart, but from astonishment and terror-a distinction which the psychology of rationalists knows nothing of. The same may be said of the objection started to the diverse exhibitions of this same king's character in the first three chapters and the fourth. OBJECTION 8.-Opinions and usages are mentioned in this book, which are clearly modern, that is, of later date than that claimed for the book itself. (1.) Dan. vi. 11. "Now when Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went into his house; and, his windows being open in his chamber towards Jerusalem, he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks to his God as he did aforetime." Here it is objected that these are allusions to three modern customs, that of praying thrice towards Jerusalem-that of praying thrice a day-and that of having a chamber appropriated to prayer. ANSWER.-There are no such allusions to modern customs. That the custom of praying towards Jerusalem was an ancient practice, is susceptible of proof from Scripture. The law of Moses required all sacrifices to be offered at the place which the Lord should choose "to put his name there." (Deut. xii. 5, 6.) Prayer would of course accompany oblation. "Their burntofferings," says the Lord by the mouth of Isaiah, "and their sacrifices, shall be accepted upon my altar; for mine house shall be called a house of prayer for all people." (Isa. lvi. 7.) “In thy fear," says David, " will I worship toward thy holy temple.” (Psal. v. 7. cxxxviii. 2.) "I lift up my hands toward thy holy oracle." (xxviii. 2.) Now, if in the temple prayer was offered toward the oracle or sanctuary, and in the city toward the temple, surely those who were out of the city, whether far or near, would be likely to offer theirs toward Jerusalem itself. "If thy people," says Solomon in his dedicatory prayer, "go out to battle against their enemy, whithersoever thou shalt send them, and shall pray unto the Lord toward the city which thou hast chosen, and toward the house that I have built for thy name, then hear thou | Hellenistic Jew, without having any higher source whence in heaven," &c. (1 Kings viii. 44.) Nor would the practice cease, because the temple was destroyed. Its very site was regarded by the Jews as holy. "Remember this mount Sion, wherein thou hast dwelt. They have set thy sanctuary on fire," &c. (Psal. Ixxiv. 2. 7.) With regard to the custom of praying thrice a day, it is so natural, that we find it among those with whom the Jews could have had no intercourse, the Brahmins for example. And what says David? "Evening and morning and at noon will I pray and cry aloud." (Psal. lv. 17.) The third particular-that of having a chamber appropriated to prayer-rests upon mere assumption. There is nothing said about a chamber used exclusively for devotional purposes; and if there was, there can be no ground for the assertion, that this was an invention of the later Jewish formalists. Our Lord commands his disciples to go into their closets, and not to pray in public, like the Pharisees. (Matt. vi.) On the other hand, David "went up to the chamber over the gate," if not to pray, at least to vent his grief (2 Sam. xviii. 33.), and Elijah went into a loft," and "cried unto the Lord." (1 Kings xvii. 20.) Was this a modern pharisaical invention, as affirmed by Bertholdt ? (2.) The advice of Daniel to Nebuchadnezzar, (iv. 27.) is represented by Bertholdt as ascribing an efficacy to alms-giving, which was never dreamed of in the days of old. He translates the verse-66 Buy off (compensate or atone for) thy sins by gifts, and thy guilt by doing good to the poor." Dr. Hengstenberg shows clearly that the true sense is that which our own translation gives-" Break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by showing mercy to the poor." The adversary has the credit, therefore, not of the objection only, but of the fault objected to! (3.) A similar objection has been raised by Gramberg, in relation to the doctrine of meritorious fasting, as implied in ch. ix. That religious fasting was a most ancient usage of the Jews, any compendium of biblical antiquities will show. That the popish notion of merit should be found in a passage where such words as these occur-" We do not present our supplications before thee for our righteousness, but for thy great mercies" (Dan. ix. 18.)—argues something rather worse than inadvert ence in the caviller who finds it there.1 IV. In the Vulgate Latin edition of the Bible, as well as in Theodotion's Greek version, which was adopted by all the Greek churches in the East in lieu of the incorrect Septuagint translation above alluded to, there is added, in the third chapter of Daniel, between the twenty-third and twentyfourth verses, the song of the three children, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, who were cast into the fiery furnace. The version of Theodotion also introduces, at the beginning of this book, the history of Susanna, and, at the end, the stories of Bel and the Dragon; and this arrangement is followed by the modern version in use in the Greek church. But, in the Latin Vulgate, both these apocryphal pieces were separated by Jerome from the canonical book, and were dismissed to its close, with an express notice that they were NOT found by him in the Hebrew, but were translated from Theodotion. In a later age, however, they were improperly made a continuation of Daniel, being numbered chapters xiii. and xiv.; an arrangement which has been followed in all the modern versions from the Vulgate in use among the members of the Romish church, and sometimes (particularly in the Dublin edition of the Anglo-Romish version of the Bible printed in 1825) with the unjustifiable omission of the cautionary notice of Jerome. The narratives of Susanna and of Bel and the Dragon do not exist in the genuine Septuagint version of Daniel, recovered in the middle of the eighteenth century; nor were these apocryphal additions ever received into the canon of Holy Writ by the Jewish church. They are not extant in the Hebrew or Chaldee languages, nor is there any evidence that they ever were so extant. The occurrence of Hebraisms in them proves nothing more than that they were written by a Hebrew in the Greek tongue, into which he transferred the idioms of his own language; and that they were thus originally written in Greek by some The above are the principal objections of modern neologians, with the very satisfactory refutations of Dr. Hengstenberg; who has further inves tigated various anachronisins, improbabilities, and incongruities alleged to exist in the book of Daniel, at greater length than the limits of this work will admit of being stated even in the inost condensed forin. The reader is therefore necessarily referred to the English translation (forming part of the Edinburgh Biblical Cabinet), of his "Critical Inquiry into the Authenticity and Integrity of the Books of Daniel and Zechariah," which was announced for publication while this sheet was passing through the press. they could be derived, is evident from this circumstance, that, in the history of Susanna, Daniel, in his replies to the elders, alludes to the Greek names of the trees, under which, they said, the adultery charged upon Susanna was committed, which allusions cannot hold good in any other language.2 The church of Rome, however, allows these spurious additions to be of the same authority with the rest of the book of Daniel; and, by a decree of the fourth session of the council of Trent, has given them an equal place in the canonical Scriptures. But they were never recognised as part of the sacred volume by the ancient fathers of the Christian church. Julius Africanus, Eusebius, and Apollinarius rejected these pieces, not only as being uncanonical, but also as fabulous; and Jerome, who has been followed by Bel and the Dragon no better title than that of " Erasmus and other modern writers, has given the history of The Fable of Bel and the Dragon." And others, who have admitted them from the canonical Scriptures; in which conduct they them for instruction of manners, have nevertheless rejected have been followed by the Protestant churches, who exclude them from the canonical, and class them among the apocryphal writings.3 5. ON THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET OBADIAH. I. Author and date.-II. Synopsis of its contents. BEFORE CHRIST, 588-583. I. THE time when this prophet flourished is wholly uncertain. Jerome, with the Jews, is of opinion that he was the same person who was governor of Ahab's house, and who hid and fed one hundred prophets whom Jezebel would have destroyed. Some other critics think that he was the Obadiah whom Josiah constituted overseer of the works of the temple, mentioned in 2 Chron. xxxiv. 12. Dupin refers him to the with the Israelites, made war against the tribe of Judah; time of Ahaz, in whose reign the Edomites, in conjunction because his prophecy is almost wholly directed against the Edomites or Idumæans. Grotius, Huet, Dr. Lightfoot, and other commentators, however, make him to be contemporary with Hosea, Joel, and Amos, agreeably to the rule of the Jewish writers, viz. that, where the time of the prophet is not expressed, his predictions are to be placed in the same chronological order as the prophecy immediately preceding. Archbishop Newcome, with great probability, supposes that Obadiah prophesied between the taking of Jerusalem (which happened in the year 587 before Christ) and the destruction of Idumæa by Nebuchadnezzar, which took place a very few years after; consequently he was partly contemporary with Jeremiah. As the latter has many expressions similar to others in Obadiah, it is a question which of the two has borrowed from the other. Opinions vary on this subject, and there is not much preponderance of evidence on either side; except that, as Jeremiah has used the works of other prophets in his predictions against foreign nations, this fact renders it more probable that he had read Obadiah than the reverse. The following table of the parallel passages will enable the reader to form his own judgment: Obadiah, verse 1. compared with Jeremiah xlix. 14. The writings of Obadiah, which consist of only one chapter, are composed with much beauty, and unfold a very interesting scene of prophecy. 2 In the examination of the elders, when one of them said he saw the as answering, in allusion to exivov, "The angel of God hath received sen crime committed, zo zivor, under a mastich tree, Daniel is represented tence of God, EXIZAI o pov, to cut thee in two." And when the other elder said that it was a pivo, under a holm tree, Daniel is made to an swer, in allusion to the word pivov, "The angel of the Lord waiteth with the sword, IIPIZATσ proov, to cut thee in two." Jerome, ut supra. Dr. Prideaux's Connection part i. book iii. sub anno 534. vol. i. pp. 164, 165. edit. 1720. Calmet's Dictionary, voce Duniel, and his Préface sur Daniel, Comm. Litt. tom. vi. pp. 609-612. The fullest vindication of the genuineness and canonical authority of the prophecies of Daniel is to be found in Bishop Chandler's "Vindication of the Defence of Christianity, from the Prophecies of the Old Testament," in Dr. Samuel Chandler's "Vindication of the Antiquity and Authority of Daniel's Prophecies," both published at London in 1728, in 8vo. ; and in Dr. Hengstenberg's treatise already referred to in the course of this section. • Professor Turner's Translation of Jahn, p. 369. note. II. The prophecy of Obadiah consists of two parts; viz. This prediction, according to Archbishop Usher, was fulfilled, been impugned by some writers both on the Continent and in our own country. i. On the Continent it has been denied that the last nine chapters are to be attributed to Ezekiel; but the arguments adduced in behalf of this hypothesis are by no means sufficient to sustain it: for not at variance with the opinion that they were written by 1. The alleged obscurity of these chapters is "certainly Ezekiel, for many other parts of his work are less perspicuous, not to say, that descriptions of this kind, particularly of buildings, can scarcely be made very intelligible without the aid of drawings. 2. "These chapters are supposed to contain commands which were disregarded by the Hebrews after their return, and, therefore, it is inferred that they did not then exist, or at least were not ascribed to Ezekiel. But this supposition is unfounded; for those chapters do not contain commands, but an emblematic or figurative representation intended to confirm the certainty of the return, and the re-establishment of divine worship. 3. "It is further objected, that the prophet could not possibly retain in memory the numbers of so many measurements as were perceived by him in his vision. But this is of little weight; for as the impressions of the visions were the more vehement on account of the outward senses being at rest, there would be the less difficulty in retaining them in the memory. Besides, there are persons who commit numbers to memory with great facility, and if the objectors to these prophecies allow that visions constitute merely the dress and form in which the prophets announce their predictions, there would have been no need of memory in the case. 4. "Josephus attributes to Ezekiel two books concerning the Babylonish captivity; but as by the second book of Ezekiel he means the last nine chapters, how is it possible thence to infer that Ezekiel is not their author? There is no necessity, therefore, to apply the language to Jeremiah (as Eichhorn did), which cannot be done without violence to the series of the discourse.". I. EZEKIEL, whose name imports the strength of God, was the son of Buzi, of the sacerdotal race, and one of the captives carried by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon, with Jehoiachin king of Judah; it does not appear that he had prophesied before he came into Mesopotamia. The principal scene of his predictions was some place on the river Chebar, which flows into the Euphrates about two hundred miles to the north of Babylon, where the prophet resided; though he was, occasionally, conveyed in vision to Jerusalem. He commenced Altogether worthless is the conjecture "that some Hehis prophetic ministry in the thirtieth year of his age, accord-brew, who returned later than the great body of his brethren, ing to general accounts; or rather, as Calmet thinks, in the made up these chapters, in order to effect a new distribution thirtieth year after the covenant was renewed with God in of the country, by which he might acquire a portion for himthe reign of Josiah, which answers to the fifth year of Eze- self: for no such impostor would have written so largely kiel's and Jehoiachin's captivity (Ezek. i. 1. xl. 1.), the æra and in such a manner of the temple and of the division of the whence he dates his predictions; and it appears from xxix. country among the tribes, and at the same time forget en17. that he continued to prophesy about twenty-one years tirely the distribution among individuals. and three quarters. The events of his life, after his call to the prophetic office, are interwoven with the detail which he has himself given of his predictions; but the manner of its termination is nowhere ascertained. The pseudo-Epiphanius, in his lives of the prophets, says that he was put to death by the prince or commander of the Jews in the place of his exile, because this prince was addicted to idolatry, and could not bear the reproaches of the prophet. No reliance, however, can be placed on this account, which is intermixed with many fables. Jerome is of opinion, that, as Ezekiel was in part contemporary with Jeremiah, who prophesied in Judæa while Ezekiel delivered his predictions beyond the Euphrates, their prophecies were interchanged for the consolation and encouragement of the captive Jews. There is, indeed, a striking agreement between the subject-matter and their respective prophecies; but Ezekiel is more vehement than Jeremiah in reproving the sins of his countrymen, and abounds more in visions, which render some passages of his book exceedingly difficult to be understood. On this account no Jew was, anciently, permitted to read the writings of this prophet, until he had completed his thirtieth year.1 II. Until of late years the prophecies of Ezekiel have always been acknowledged to be canonical, nor was it ever disputed that he was their author. The Jews, indeed, say that the sanhedrin deliberated for a long time whether his book should form a part of the sacred canon. They objected to the great obscurity at the beginning and end of his prophecy; and to what he says in ch. xviii. 20. that the son should not bear the iniquity of his father, which they urged was contrary to Moses, who says (Exod. xx. 5.), that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation." But it is worthy of remark, that Moses himself (Deut. xxiv. 16.) says the very same thing as Ezekiel.2 The genuineness of certain chapters of this prophet has Hieronymi Procem. in lib. i. Comm. in Ezech. Calumet, Preface sur Ezekiel. Comment. Litt. tom. vi. pp. 353, 354. "Nothing, therefore, can be established in opposition to the genuineness of these prophecies; and it is confirmed by their contents. The visions, the manner of conveying reproof, the multitude of circumstantial particulars, the character of the language and style, in all which respects Ezekiel is remarkably distinguished from other writers, prove that he must have been the author of these chapters. No imitation could possibly have been so successful."+ ii. In England, an anonymous writers has denied that "the prophecies in chapters xxv.-xxxii. xxxv. xxxvi. xxxviii. and xxxix. are Ezekiel's. His reasons are so exceedingly trifling, that they are not worthy of refutation. Nor indeed is this necessary, for these very parts of the book contain evidence that they are the work of this prophet; very many particulars which Ezekiel is accustomed to introduce elsewhere are found in these prophecies; as, for instance, the designation of the year, the month and the day, on which a revelation was communicated; the remarkable phraseology son of man corresponding with the usage in the Aramaan dialect; the forms, set thy face towards or againstprophesy against-hear the word of Jehovah-thus saith the Lord Jehovah the word of Jehovah came to me-they shall know that I am Jehovah-take up a lamentation for. In these chapters, as in ch. i.-xxiv., the terms and are frequently applied to kings, the same devices for conducting sieges p, a circumvallation, and, a mound, are mentioned, compare ch. xxvi. 8. with iv. 2. xvii. 17. xxi. 27. (22.), and, in fine, the same particularity and multitude of circumstances occur. Indeed xxviii. 14. contains a reference to the vision mentioned in i. 13. x. 2. If the mention ing the regions of the departed more frequently than is usual (see xxvi. 20. xxxi. 14-17. xxxii. 18-32.) would seem to indicate a foreign origin, it must be considered that the subject required it, and it can never be alleged with any weight Antiq. Jud. lib. x. c. 5. § 1. Prof. Turner's Translation of Jahn, p. 403. as a proof that these portions of Ezekiel's prophecies differ in character from the remainder." Josephus ascribes to this prophet two books concerning the Babylonian captivity;2 and says, that, having foretold in Babylon the calamities which were coming upon the people, he sent accounts of them to Jerusalem. But these circumstances are not recorded in the predictions now extant; nor have we any means of ascertaining what foundation Josephus had for his assertion. Most commentators are of opinion that the Jewish historian divided the prophecy we now have into two books, and that he took that part of the prophecy, which contains a description of the temple (xli.— xlviii.) for a distinct book, because it treats on a subject wholly different from the topics discussed in the former part of his writings. III. The chief design of Ezekiel's prophecies is, to comfort his brethren in captivity, who deplored their having too lightly credited the promises of Jeremiah, who had exhorted them speedily to submit to the Chaldees, on account of the approaching ruin of Jerusalem. As these captives saw no appearance of the fulfilment of Jeremiah's predictions, God raised up Ezekiel to confirm them in the faith, and to support by new prophecies those which Jeremiah had long before published, and even then continued to announce in Judæa. In pursuance of this design, Ezekiel predicts the dreadful calamities which soon after were inflicted upon Judæa and Jerusalem, on account of the idolatry, impiety, and profligacy of their inhabitants; the divine judgments that would be executed on the false prophets and prophetesses, who deluded and hardened the Jews in their rebellion against God; the punishments that awaited the Ammonites, Edomites, and Philistines, for their hatred of the Jews, and insulting them in their distress; the destruction of Tyre; the conquest of Egypt; the future restoration of Israel and Judah from their several dispersions; and their ultimately happy state after the advent and under the government of the Messiah. IV. The prophecies of Ezekiel form, in our Bibles, fortyeight chapters; and, as he is extremely punctual in dating them, we have little or no difficulty in arranging them in chronological order. They may be divided into four parts; viz. PART I. Ezekiel's Call to the Prophetic Office (i. 1. to the first part of verse 28.), his Commission, Instructions, and Encouragements for executing it. (i. 28. latter clause, ii. iii. 1-21.) PART II. Denunciations against the Jewish People. (iii. 22— 27. iv.-xxiv.) SECT. 1. Under the emblem of a siege delineated upon a tile is represented the manner in which the Chaldæan army would surround Jerusalem during the reign of Zedekiah. (iii. 22-27. iv. 1-3.) The inhabitants there encouraged the captives in Chaldæa to hope for a return; and such a hope they actually cherished, so long as Jerusalem was safe : but this vision was designed to overthrow their confidence. From the specimens preserved in cabinets, it is well known that the tiles or bricks, anciently used in oriental buildings, were of considerable size, with one of the surfaces well polished, so as to be capable of receiving the representation described by the prophet. By Ezekiel's lying upon his right and left side a certain number of (prophetic) days, is exhibited the number of years, during which God had borne with the iniquities of the house of Israel. (4-8.) The scanty supply and intermixture of coarse food represented the scarcity and hard fare which the Jews should have during the continuance of the siege by Nebuchadnezzar. 1 Prof. Turner's Translation of Jahn, p. 401. Antiq. Jud. lib. x. c. 5. § 1. 3 Ibid. lib. x. c. 7. § 2. The arrangement proposed by Prof. De Wette coincides very nearly with that given in this work. He divides the predictions of Ezekiel into four parts, viz. I. From chap. i. to chap. xxiv. containing prophecies relat ing to the Jews and anterior to the destruction of Jerusalem, in chronolo gical order; II. From chap. xxv. to chap. xxxii. containing prophecies relating to various heathen nations, disposed according to the order of subjects; III. From chap. xxxiii. to xlviii. containing prophecies posterior to the destruction of Jerusalem, in chronological order. The prophetical types and figures are often adapted to the genius and education of the prophets. Amos, for instance, derives his figures from objects which were familiar to a shepherd or a husbandman. As Eze kiel seems to have had a peculiar talent for architecture, several of his representations are suitable to that profession. "And they that suppose the emblem here made use of to be below the dignity of the prophetic office, may as well accuse Archimedes of folly for inaking lines in the dust." W. Lowth on Ezek. i.; from whose summaries of chapters and the marginal abstracts of Mr. Reeves this analysis of Ezekiel is chiefly derived, in the present as well as in former editions of this work. SECT. 2. Under the type of shaving his head and beard, and weighing his hair, one-third part of which was to be burnt, another to be cut small with a knife, and the remainder to be burnt (v. 1—4.), are, in vision, denounced the divine judgments against Jerusalem, by famine, sword, and dispersion. (5-17.) The head here represents Jerusalem; the hair, the great number of its inhabitants; and the balances, the exactness of God's judgments. SECT. 3. denounces the divine judgments against the Jews for their idolatry (vi. 1-7.), but promises that a remnant shall be saved, and shall be brought to a sense of their sins by their afflictions. (8-14.) SECT. 4. announces the irreversible judgment of captivity, and final desolation of the Jews for their idolatry and other heinous sins (vii. 1—22.): the severity of their captivity, which is prefigured by a chain. (23—27.) SECT. 5. describes the carrying of the prophet, in a vision, to Jerusalem (viii. 1-4.), where he is shown the idolatries committed by the Jews within the precincts of the temple; particularly the image of Baal, by a bold figure called the image of Jealousy, from the provocation it gave to God, by setting up a rival against him in the place dedicated to his worship (5.): the Egyptian (6-12.), the Phenician (13, 14.), and the Persian superstitions. (15, 16.) The prophet then denounces vengeance against the wicked, and foretells the preservation of the pious Jews (17, 18. ix.) ; and under the command to scatter coals of fire over the city (x. 1-7.), and the vision of the Shechinah departing from the temple (8-22.), are prefigured the destruction of Jerusalem, and Jehovah's forsaking the temple. This section concludes with a severe denunciation against those wicked princes and people who remained in Jerusalem, and derided the types and predictions of the prophets (xi. 1— 13.); and the return of the Jews is then foretold (1421.); Jehovah's utterly forsaking the temple and city is represented by the departure of the Shechinah (22, 23.); and the prophet returns to communicate his instructions to his brethren of the captivity. (24, 25.) SECT. 6. Under the types of Ezekiel's removing himself and his household goods (xii. 1-7.), and eating and drinking "with quaking, and with carefulness" (17-20.), is prefigured the captivity of Zedekiah and of the Jews still remaining at Jerusalem (8-16.); and speedy judgment is denounced against the Jews for their abuse of the divine forbearance. (21-28.) SECT. 7. The false prophets (xiii. 1-16.), and false prophetesses (17-23.), are reproved and threatened with signal punishment. SECT. 8. A denunciation of the divine judgments against the idolatrous elders and their false prophets (xiv. 1-11.), and against the Jews for their obstinate impenitency (12—21.); a remnant of whom, it is promised, shall be saved. (22, 23.) SECT. 9. Under the parable of an unfruitful and unprofitable vine is set forth the utter rejection of Jerusalem. (xv.) SECT. 10. Under the emblem of an exposed and wretched infant is represented the natural state of the Jewish nation, and the great love of God to it in Egypt, as well as afterwards. (xvi. 1-14.) The heinous and unparalleled sins of the Jews are set forth; for which sore judgments are denounced against them. But, notwithstanding all these provocations, God promises in the end to show them mercy under his new and everlasting covenant. (60-63.) The figurative mode of describing adultery, which is of frequent occurrence in the prophets, is pursued with great force, and at considerable length, both in this and the 23d chapter. SECT. 11. Under the allegory of two eagles and a vine is represented God's judgment upon the Jews, for revolting from Babylon to Egypt. (xvii. 1-21.) The "great eagle with great wings" (3.) means Nebuchadnezzar, as the "feathers of divers colours" mean the various nations that Bishop Warburton has an excellent illustration of this prediction in his Divine Legation of Moses, book iv. sect. 6. (Works, vol. iv. pp. 295–300.); the most material parts of which are inserted in Bishop Mant's and Dr. D'Oyly's Commentary on the Bible. Josephus informs us that Zedekiah, thinking the prophecy of Ezekiel in the thirteenth verse of this chapter (that he should be brought to Baby. lon, which, however, he should not see, though he should die there), in consistent with the prediction of Jeremiah (xxxii. 4. and xxxiv. 3.) that the Jewish king should see the eyes of the king of Babylon,-determined to give no credit to either of them. Both prophecies, as we have already seen (Vol. 1 p. 124.) were literally fulfilled, and the event convinced him that they were not irreconcilable. Compare Josephus, Ant. Jud. lib x. c. 8. § 2. with 2 Kings xxv. 4-7. and Jer. lii, 8-11. were subject to his sway. means the king of Egypt. and the universal kingdom (22-24.) The other "great eagle" (7.) | SECT. 12. The Jews, in Ezekiel's time, having complained (xviii. 1, 2.) of the divine justice, as if the calamities which had befallen them were inflicted merely for the sins of their forefathers, this section contains a vindication of God's eternal rules of justice in punishing no one eternally for the sins of another, and in pardoning the wicked on their true repentance. (3—32.) SECT. 13. Under the parable of a lion's whelps are foretold the cruelty and captivity of Jehoahaz, who was deposed by the king of Egypt, and of Jehoiakim, who was deposed by the king of Babylon.2 (xix. 1-9.) And under the parable of a vine scorched by the east wind, torn up and transplanted in the wilderness, are set forth the desolation and captivity of the whole Jewish people. (10-14.) SECT. 14. A deputation of the elders having come to the prophet, in the seventh year of Jehoiakim's and his own captivity, to request him to ask counsel of God in the midst of their calamity, Ezekiel, by divine command, reminds them of God's mercies to them, and of their idolatry, and rebellions against him, from their departure out of Egypt to that very day. (xx. 1-39.) Yet, notwithstanding all their provocations, their return from captivity is foretold, and also that the twelve tribes shall serve God at Jerusalem. SECT. 15. Under the emblem of a forest, doomed to be consumed by fire, is foretold the destruction of Jerusalem, termed the "forest of the south," because that city lay to the south of Chaldæa, where the prophet then was. (xx. 45-49.) And under the emblem of a sharp sword is predicted the destruction of the Jews (xxi. 1-17.), of Jerusalem (18-27.), and of the Ammonites (28-32.), by Nebuchadnezzar. The prophecy against the Ammonites was accomplished about five years after Jerusalem was destroyed. SECT. 16. contains a recital of the sins committed in Jerusalem, and by all orders and classes of people in that city; for which the severest judgments are denounced. (xxii.) SECT. 17. represents the idolatries of Samaria and Jerusalem by the lewd practices of two common harlots (xxiii. 1—21.); for which crimes God denounces very severe judgments against them both. (22-49.) SECT. 18. Under the figure of a boiling pot is shown the PART III. comprises Ezekiel's Prophecies against various neigh- SECT. 2. announces, in language singularly elegant and ani- SECT. 3. The deposition and death of Pharaoh-Hophrah (or 1 See 2 Kings xxiii. 33. and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 4. 2 See 2 Kings xxiv. and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 6. Apries) king of Egypt (xxix. 1-8.), and the conquest of that country by Nebuchadnezzar (9-21. xxx.-xxxii.), are foretold. The imagery of the latter part of this prophecy is both sublime and terrible. These predictions were in the tenth, twenty-seventh, eleventh, and twelfth years of Jehoiachin's captivity. PART IV. contains a Series of Exhortations and consolatory Promises to the Jews, of future Deliverance under Cyrus, but principally of their final Restoration and Conversion under the Kingdom of Messiah. (xxxiii.-xlviii.) These Predic tions were probably delivered in the twelfth year of Jehoiachin's Captivity. SECT. 1. sets forth the duty of a prophet or minister of God, exemplified by that of a watchman, in warning a people of their sins. (xxxiii. 1-9.) Then follows an earnest exhortation to repentance, vindicating the equity of the divine government, and declaring the terms of acceptance (as in ch. xviii.) to be without respect of persons; so that the ruin of obstinate and impenitent sinners must be attributed to themselves. (xxxiii. 10-20.) While Ezekiel was thus under the prophetic impulse, tidings being brought to him of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians (21, 22.), he takes occasion to predict the utter desolation of Judæa, to check the vain confidence of those who still remain there, and he also reproves the hypocrisy of those Jews who were of the captivity. (23-33.) SECT. 2. In this section God reproves the conduct of the civil and ecclesiastical governors of the Jewish people (xxxiv. 1 -10.), and promises a general restoration of the people. Their happy condition under the reign of Messiah their king is described in the most beautiful terms. (11-31.) SECT. 3. contains a renewal of the prophet's former denuncia. tions against the Edomites (see xxv. 12.) as a just punishment for their insults to the Jews during their calamities. (xxxv.) 5 SECT. 4. announces the general restoration of the Jews, of which the return of the two tribes from Babylon may be considered an earnest, and their consequent felicity. (xxxvi.) The same subject is further illustrated under the vision of a resurrection of dry bones. (xxxvii. 1-14.) The address to the dry bones in ver. 4. is by some commentators considered as a prophetical representation of that voice of the Son of God, which all that are in their graves shall hear at the last day, and come forth. Under the emblem of the union of two sticks is foretold the incorporation of Israel and Judah into one state and church, which will enjoy the land of Canaan and the blessings of the Gospel under the Messiah. (15-28.) SECT. 5. contains a remarkable prophecy against Gog and all his allies, and the victory of Israel over them (xxxviii. xxxix. 1-22.), together with a promise of deliverance from captivity, and of the final restoration and conversion of the Jews to the Gospel, under the Messiah. (23—29.) This prophecy relates to the latter ages of the world, and will be best understood by its accomplishment. SECT. 6. contains a representation, partly literal and partly mystical, of Solomon's temple; also a mystical representation of the city of Jerusalem, and mystical directions concerning the division of the Holy Land ;-all which were designed to give the Jews a greater assurance of their returning into their own country from the Babylonish captivity; and, more remotely, of their return after their general conversion to Christianity, and of the lasting and firmly settled and prosperous state they shall then enjoy in their own country. It seems that no model of Solomon's temple had remained. To direct the Jews, therefore, in the dimensions, parts, order, and regulations of the new temple, on their return from the Babylonish captivity, is one reason why Ezekiel is so particular in his description of the old temple; to which the new was conformable in figure and parts, though inferior in magnificence on account of the poverty of the nation at that time. Whatever was august or illustrious in the prophetic figures, and not literally fulfilled in or near their own time, the ancient Jews justly considered as belonging to the times of the Messiah. Ac Urserii Annales, ad A. M. 3419. Josephus, Ant. Jud. lib. x. c. 11. § 1. Though these predictions chiefly relate to Old Tyre, yet Dr. Prideaux is of opinion that they also comprehend New Tyre, which was erected on an island about half a mile distant from the shore, and was conquered by Alexander the Great. Connection, part i. book ii. sub anno 573. (vol. i. pp. 91, 92.) See Vol. I. pp. 124, 125. for the proofs of the literal accomplish-book v. sub anno 129. (vol. ii. pp. 307, 308.) ment of Ezekiel's prophecy, that Tyre should be a place "to spread nets upon," and be "built no more.” (xxvi 14.) This prophecy was accomplished in the conquest of the Edomites, first by the Nabatheans, and secondly by John Hyrcanus, who compelled them to embrace the Jewish religion; in consequence of which they at length became incorporated with that nation. Dr. Prideaux's Connection, part i 6 See particularly 1 Cor. iii. 16. 2 Cor. vi. 16. Eph. ii. 20-22. 1 Tim. iii. 15. The same metaplior is also pursued in 2 Thess. ii. 4., and occurs repeat. |