Related pages
Introduction
It is often referred to as the vision of the restored temple. This section of the book is the climax of Ezekiel's message, a vision of the temple to which the glory of the Lord returns (43:5). It complements the vision when Ezekiel watched the glory of the Lord departing from Solomon’s temple, before the city and temple were destroyed (ch 8-11).
Ezekiel dates the vision in the 25th year of exile (40:1), which is 573 BC, thirteen years after his previous vision, he is now fifty years old. This is this final vision.
The vision falls into two sections. The first is the design of the temple (ch 40-42), and the second contains the regulations of the temple (ch 43-48). Ezekiel was brought in visions back to Israel and set down on a high mountain, where he is shown a structure like a city (40:2-3). He is then guided through the temple by an angelic being, before returning to the city later (48:30).
There are many difficulties in interpretation
The temple does not seem to have the same design as the temple as rebuilt after the exile, either as built by Zerubbabel or as later enlarged and embellished by Herod the Great. Zerubbabel's temple was only a small shabby shadow of the temple in Ezekiel's vision (Hag 2:3). This temple was the only temple built after the exile. Herod’s temple was the site of much of Jesus' ministry and was destroyed by the Romans in AD 70. There is no record of the glory of the Lord filling Zerubbabel's temple, until Jesus came into it. No temple like Ezekiel's vision has ever been built.
There is a mingling of natural and supernatural elements in the description. For example, no river on earth flows like the one in ch 47. The land allocations are most unfair, the southern tribes would have only desert, they must be idealised and symbolic.
There is no clear command to build this temple in this vision.
There are many differences between the regulations and the Mosaic law. The temple is separate and next to the city, rather than the temple being in the centre of the city. No ark of covenant described, or the lampstand, or altar of incense. There is no mention of the day of atonement, although other feasts are mentioned.
There was never a king or prince in Israel after the return from exile, only a governor under the Persian empire.
How should Ezekiel 40-48 be interpreted?
There seem to be six different interpretations:
1) Liberal view
2) Apocalyptic view
3) A vision of Solomon's temple, which should be rebuilt, but was not
4) A future temple to be built in Jerusalem
5) The church in heaven
6) A spiritual temple
The Jews first reading about Ezekiel's vision, would probably understand it as the temple that they expected will be built after the return from Babylon, in the same design as Solomon's temple. However, Zerubbabel's temple was not as elaborate as Ezekiel's vision, partly due to lack of money and because of continuing opposition.
1) Liberal view
Ezekiel was wrong because the temple was never built.
2) Apocalyptic view
This does not need a literal fulfilment, as it is all symbolic. The description is full of numerical symmetry. The temple an exact square, so in this view it is not a true prediction. In this view, Ezekiel’s temple is a pattern for the Messianic age to come, using symbolism to describe all that God going to do in bringing his plans to perfection. If so, the following interpretation is suggested. The symmetry of the design of the temple represents the perfection of God's plan for his restored people. The temple represents the centrality of worship in Kingdom, the altar is at centre of the complex, and it includes a detailed observance of rituals. Most importantly it shows the presence of God in the midst of his people and the blessings that flow from God's presence, bringing life to the barren places. The Kingdom will be a place of service and responsibility with attendant privileges (cf Rev.7:4-8).
3) Solomon's temple rebuilt (literal prophetic view)
The dimensions of the courts in the vision are the same as in Solomon's temple, which was destroyed by the Babylonians in 587 BC, fourteen years before this vision. Both Moses and David were given the plan of the tabernacle or temple in a vision, which they had to copy. Ezekiel was given a vision of the old temple, which he would have seen in Jerusalem as a young man, in order that it may be rebuilt after the return from exile. This vision was a blueprint or plan of the intended temple, a building specification.
Ezekiel was told to describe the appearance of the temple to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities, “As for you, mortal, describe the temple to the house of Israel, and let them measure the pattern; and let them be ashamed of their iniquities. When they are ashamed of all they have done, make known to them the plan of the temple, its arrangement, its exits and entrances, and its whole form - all its ordinances and its entire plan and all its ordinances” (43:10-11). So he was to show them the temple so they may repent of their sin which caused the previous one to be destroyed. Then if they truly repented the temple would be built. The rebuilding was conditional. So the vision was not of a future temple, but of a temple that was never built, (and never will be built) because the people did not truly repent. Ezekiel is still seen as a true prophet having seen a real vision, but was not responsible for the people's response.
Cyrus had given money to rebuild the temple. Only 50,000 Jews returned with Zerubabbel, and later more returned with Ezra and with Nehemiah. Most Jews were not interested and did not respond or return to the land. Jews remaining in Babylon were not repentant, and content to stay in Babylon.
This temple would have been the climax of the OT with the law of Moses brought to perfection. People would see that they could not keep it and so would need something else, the coming of the Messiah.
The advantages of this interpretation, are that all the measurements can be taken literally, and that Ezekiel was expecting a literal return of the exiles to Jerusalem, so a new temple would be expected.
The disadvantages of this interpretation are that Ezekiel is a prophet, not an architect. The plan is not complete, and much extra detail is needed to build the temple. No height measurements are given, only a bird's eye view from a mountain. It is not possible to take the whole vision literally as there are too many symbolic elements, including the siting of the temple on a high mountain (40:2) and the straight boundaries of the tribes in the hilly country of Israel. There is also a conflict with Haggai and Zechariah, who encouraged people to build Zerubbabel's temple.
4) A future temple (dispensational interpretation)
This very popular view claims that a literal Jewish temple will be rebuilt in Jerusalem sometime in the future. This is either a temple that will be rebuilt soon, before the second coming, in which the antichrist will set up his image, or otherwise the millennial temple, built after the second coming. All the sacrifices will be re-established, but are understood to be a memorial of Jesus' sacrifice. This is what is stated in the footnote in the Scofield Reference Bible, ‘Doubtless these offerings will be memorials, looking back to the cross, as the offerings under the old covenant were anticipatory, looking forward to the cross.’ The Scofield Reference Bible gives the section of Ezekiel chapters 40-48 the title, ‘Israel in the Land during the Kingdom age’. However, Ezekiel repeatedly indicates that the sacrifices are for atonement (Ezek 43:20, 45:15,17,20), which have been clearly made redundant by Jesus' death on the cross (Heb 8-10). There are some real problems with this interpretation, particularly some serious contradictions with clear teaching in the NT, and the undermining of the work of the cross.
Ezekiel states that priests cannot marry a widow or a divorced person, but only a virgin or the widow of a former priest (44:22), but after the second coming, after the resurrection of the dead, Jesus stated that there will be no marriage or death (Lk 20:34ff). It mentions children being born (47:22), but there will be no marriage after the second coming. Circumcision is still required (44:9) which completely counters teaching in the NT in Acts 15 and the Book of Galatians. The temple still holds sacrifices of animals (40:38, 43:18), even though after the second coming there will be no more death. Sacrifices have no relevance after the cross (Heb 8), as the Book of Hebrews repeatedly states that Jesus was the once and for all sacrifice never to be repeated (Heb 10:9-13).
The temple will have the ministry of the Levites and sons of Zadok (44:10). The priesthood of the OT has been superseded by a superior great high priest (Heb 5-7). To establish the old priesthood is to deny the effectiveness and power of the cross.
The Jews might rebuild a temple like this, but it will not have God's blessing on it. It could only be seen as an act of rebellion against God and rejection of the Gospel. Jesus did away for the need of the temple and its sacrifices, so re-establishing them is nothing short of blasphemy, denying the work of the cross. Herod’s temple was destroyed as a judgement against the Jews rejecting Jesus as the Messiah in AD 70.
In the NT, worship is not limited to Jerusalem, but in Spirit and truth (John 4:21), geographically localised worship has gone forever.
5) Futurist Christian view
This describes the church in heaven after the second coming. It is not a picture of the church now, but all is still to come.
6) A spiritual temple (symbolic Christian view)
The spiritual temple in the NT is the church. The Zadokites are the children of God. The church and its worship partly or completely fulfils this vision.
Conclusion
Ultimately all interpretations of prophetic literature need to be seen through the perspective of the NT. Any interpretation that contradicts clear teaching in the NT, needs to be seriously questioned.
There are many passages in the NT where the church is described as a temple. These are some of them, “We are living stones built into a spiritual house” (1 Pet 2:5), the church is the household of God, growing into a holy temple (Eph 2:21), and the church is described as a heavenly city (Heb 12, Gal 4). An important underlying concept in the NT is the ‘now but not yet’. We have the blessings in Christ today, and look forward to the full consummation in the future, in the life to come or following the second coming of Christ.
Related pages