Daniel 3

Daniel 3:18

But even if He does not, let if be known to you, O king, that we are not going to serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up."

You often hear people talk about where the line is, that point that cannot be crossed, the compromise that cannot be made without sin.  Where people draw that line is all over the map, and they tend to look with derision upon those who draw it elsewhere.

However, this is a point that most agree cannot be crossed, to worship false gods.  However, we probably do so a lot more than we like to admit, just by calling it something other than an idol or god.  However, our directive is clear:  even if it costs us our lives, we are not to cross that line and still call ourselves believers.

Daniel 2

Daniel 2:28

However, there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries, and He has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will take place in the latter days.  This was your dream and the visions in your mind while on your bed.

Two things in this always caught my attention.  First, "a God?"  I wonder if that article is in the original Hebrew?  Isn't that demeaning God, saying He's one among many?  I realize he's talking to a polytheistic culture, but wouldn't the impact be more significant if it was at least implied that He was the only God?

Second, it's interesting to note that it never actually says that Nebuchadnezzar forgot his dream.  It only says he required the counselors to tell it to him, and its interpretation.  Was it actually forgotten, as we're told as kids?  Or was he simply testing them, to make sure they were actually able to deliver what was promised?  Daniel fulfills that requirement, thanks to God.

Daniel 1

Daniel 1:8

But Daniel made up his mind that he would not defile himself with the king's choice food or with the wine which he drank; so he sought permission from the commander of the officials that he might not defile himself.

First, Daniel decided he would not be defiled.  I've always wondered how the story would go if God hadn't had the chief official give him favor.  Would Daniel have submitted and eaten the unclean food, deciding that it was proof God had totally abandoned them?  Or would he have simply not eaten and accepted the consequences, or even starved himself?

Also, it's important to see that he sought permission.  He didn't simply decide he was right and the boss was wrong and do things his way regardless.  He went with is concerns, and tried to work things out.

Ezekiel 48

Ezekiel 48:15

"The remainder, 5,000 cubits in width and 25,000 in length, shall be for common use for the city, for dwellings and for open spaces; and the city shall be in its midst.

Now this arrangement suddenly makes sense.  I'd been trying to figure out where this place was supposed to be, with the Sanctuary in the middle of it and the surrounding area specifically reserved for the priests.  I thought the Sanctuary was in the Temple, which had a fixed location.  But then, where was Jerusalem supposed to go? Was the Temple being moved?

Then I get to this verse, and realize that there is a place for Jerusalem in this special district.  It's suddenly clear, the remainder of the area is there to support the priests as they minister at the Temple, but the Temple itself will remain where it is.

Ezekiel 47

Ezekiel 47:22

You shall divide it by lot for an inheritance among yourselves and among the aliens who stay in your midst, who bring forth sons in your midst.  And they shall be to you as the native-born among the sons of Israel; they shall be allotted an inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel.

This seems to be quite a change from the last time the Jews were given this land.  First, He is telling them to re-divide it, ignoring the previous allocations.  Second, and more significant, this time He is not telling them to expel the foreigners from the land, but to accept them as part of the people.

This seems in contrast with the end of Ezra, when the people were told they had to cast out their foreign wives.  I'd have to look to be sure, but that may have just been the priests, in which case it doesn't conflict with this, since the priests don't get a land inheritance.  But still, is this the first step towards broader entrance into God's people through Jesus?  And what happened to turn the Samaritans into such pariahs a few centuries later, if they've been commanded to welcome outsiders?

Ezekiel 46

Ezekiel 46:20

He said to he, "This is the place where the priests shall boil the guilt offering and the sin offering and where they shall bake the grain offering, in order that they may not bring them out into the outer court to transmit holiness to the people."

I wonder how the phrasing on this works in the original Hebrew.  Here, it makes it sound like holiness is a disease, something the people should be afraid of.  Why should they fear holiness so; isn't it what everyone should want to have?

I think the problem is that holiness can't coexist with sin.  So, if someone who is sinful contacts something that is holy, one of the two has to change.  Either the holy thing is corrupted, or the sinful one is affected.  Since holiness isn't able to improve by mere contact, the only other option is for the sinful one to be destroyed, as light destroys darkness.  In this way, maybe the analogy to a disease wasn't so wrong after all.

Ezekiel 45

Ezekiel 45:7

"The prince shall have land on either side of the holy allotment and the property of the city, adjacent to the holy allotment and the property of the city, on the west side towards the west and on the east side toward the east, and in length comparable to one of the portions, from the west border to the east border.

Where does this prince come from?  Normally where there's a prince, there's a king, who should have this authority instead of his son.  So, who is this prince, that he seems to be the one in charge?

Is this title because, while the Israelites will apparently get their land back, they will lose their autonomy to another ruler, and therefore be subservient?  Or is it some kind of punishment by God, to help them remember their place?  Whichever it is, it seems that the then-future Israel would have a new leader, but that he would be subservient to some other.

Ezekiel 44

Ezekiel 44:22

And they shall not marry a widow or a divorced woman but shall take virgins from the offspring of the house if Israel, or a widow who is the widow of a priest.

Interesting that the priests should have this restriction.  They cannot marry someone who's been married before, unless it was to a fellow priest.  In the New Testament, there would be teachings that some feel forbid marrying a divorcee, but nothing I can recall speaks to a widow being off-limits.

Even among widows, there is an exception for the widow of a fellow priest.  Is there something about the priestly line needing to be maintained, that this exception exists?  Or is it more practical, that they know the family of fellow priests would have remained faithful where others are suspect?

Ezekiel 43

Ezekiel 43:11

If they are ashamed of all that they have done, make known to them the design of the house, its structure, its exits, its entrances, all its designs, all its statues, and all its laws.  And write it in their sight, so that they may observe its whole design and all its statues and do them.

Now we finally come to the purpose of the previous couple chapters.  This was all a prelude to...shaming the people?  Showing them what could be if they saw the possible future and were sorry they had sinned, and through that sin lost the original Temple?

Normally, God asks us to be sorry for our sin, and once we are He shows us what can be in the future.  This time, it almost seems like near-bribery:  if you're sorry, then you can get this.  I may be misreading this verse, but somehow it feels backwards to me, or at the least potentially insincere.

Ezekiel 42

Ezekiel 42:14

When the priests enter, then they shall not go out into the outer court from the sanctuary without laying there their garments in which they minister, for they are holy.  They shall put on other garments; then they shall approach that which is for the people."

The priestly clothes were holy, like everything else in the inner areas of the Temple.  I don't know whether the clothes were specifically made holy, or consecrated, but if not they were effectively made holy by their presence in those places.  Taking them into the common areas would have been risking them becoming tainted, and then desecrating the sacrifices they were to officiate over.

However, this worked both ways.  The people never got the chance to be around the holy in their daily lives.  Unlike today, the special things of God had to be separated from normal life, creating an artificial duality.  Thanks to Christ, we no longer have that concern, but we still sometimes separate those two worlds from each other artificially, and therefore invite sin into the everyday.

Ezekiel 41

Ezekiel 41:4

He measured its length, twenty cubits, and the width, twenty cubits, before the nave; and he said to me, "This is the most holy place."

I wonder what the significance of the size of the most holy place was?  Is there some special reason it needed to have those dimensions?  Was that the size needed to contain the object that would be stored in it, or something?

Also, I wonder why he felt the need to specify what the area was for?  I would think it would be obvious, given how the rest of the temple was laid out.  Was this somehow different from how the previous Temple operated, that Ezekiel wouldn't have naturally known the significance of the location?

Ezekiel 40

Ezekiel 40:2

In the visions of God He brought me into the land of Israel and set me on a very high mountain, and on it to the south there was a structure like a city.

This appears to be the new temple, perhaps the one that would be rebuilt Ezra?  It would be the central place for worship of God, and therefore important to the Jews.  Knowing that it would one day exist would give them hope.

However, I wonder why the rest of the chapter, and I think the next, are given to such precise detail of its dimensions?  Is this to be used as a blueprint for when it is built?  Or is it meant to be prophetic, and prove that when it is built it will "turn out" to match the vision?

Ezekiel 39

Ezekiel 39:12

For seven months the house of Israel will be burying them in order to cleanse the land.

What sort of slaughter would be necessary for it to take seven month to bury all the victims?  How large an army would have to be defeated?  How daunting a task would this be?

I did a quick search, and the Battle of Gettysburgh had about 7,000 casualties between the two sides.  It took the forces there almost two weeks after the battle to bury everyone, and most of them were either mass graves or buried very shallow.  So, stretch that out to seven months, and I'd guess the casualties would be no less than 100,000 dead, probably a lot more since the entire nation would have some part in the process.

Ezekiel 38

Ezekiel 38:23

I will magnify Myself, sanctify Myself, and make Myself known in the sight of many nations; and they will know that I am the LORD."'

As a general rule, when God makes Himself known to a large group, it's usually a bad thing for those He's making Himself known to.  He often reveals some part of Himself to individuals, and that often is good.  But when He is revealing Himself on a large scale, people tend not to survive the experience.

I am a bit confused about the first part of the verse, though.  How can got magnify or sanctify Himself?  He's already perfect, so there's nothing to further sanctify.  Similarly, He's infinite, so there's no way to be magnified further.  I guess maybe He's speaking of these nations' perception of Him?

Ezekiel 37

Ezekiel 37:3

He said to me, "Son of man, can these bones live?"  And I answered, "O Lord GOD, You know."

Some take this as a statement of faith in God's power.  Ezekiel knew He could do whatever He wants, and that included bringing the bones to life.  If God wants the otherwise-impossible to happen, it will; that's the definition of a miracle.

However, to me it always sounded like Ezekiel was dodging here.  If he said yes, he'd be denying nature.  But if he said no, he'd be denying God's power.  So instead, he gave a non-answer, so that God could do whatever He wanted, without being wrong.