Ezekiel’s vision of the future: literal or symbolic interpretation?

1.   Introduction

The largest part of Ezekiel’s prophecy consists of a condemnation of the sins of the people of Judah and an announcement of the exile. These prophecies were spoken before Jerusalem had fallen. After the people were taken into exile and Jerusalem was destroyed, Ezekiel received a vision that presents a picture of the future. The interpretation of this vision raises many questions. Is this vision a literal or symbolic description of the future? And has this vision already been fulfilled—fully or partially—in history? Or is it yet to be fulfilled in the future? In particular, the section describing the temple raises many questions.

2.   Overview of the vision

The future vision covers chapters 37 through 48 of Ezekiel.
This section begins with the vision of the dry bones. In a vision Ezekiel sees a valley filled with human bones that have been there for a long time. Ezekiel must prophesy to these bones. The bones then come together, and tendons, flesh, and skin form on them. In this way the bodies are restored, but there is no life in them. Then Ezekiel must prophesy to the breath, causing the people to come to life and a great multitude to arise. God Himself explains this vision. The bones represent the whole house of Israel, meaning all twelve tribes. The vision depicts the return from exile. Two things stand out. The first is that this vision represents both the return of the two tribes from the Babylonian exile and the return of the ten tribes from the Assyrian exile. The Lord Himself tells Ezekiel that this is about the return of the entire house of Israel. The second notable point is that the restoration is depicted in two phases: a physical restoration and a spiritual restoration.
After this, Ezekiel is given the task of performing a symbolic prophetic act that represents the reunification of the two-tribe kingdom and the ten-tribe kingdom. He must take one piece of wood (or writing tablet) that represents Judah, and one that represents Ephraim, and hold them together as if they were one. Thus the situation from the time of David and Solomon, before the division of the kingdom, will return. God then declares that the people will be ruled by a (messianic) king from the line of David. He will place His sanctuary (the temple) in their midst forever.
In two parallel visions Ezekiel then sees how the prince Gog, together with other nations, launches an attack on Israel. The vision clearly concerns a distant future. Gog, the prince of Magog, marches with Persia, Cush (Nubia), Put (Libya), and Gomer and Togarmah with a great army from the north toward Israel. These are the nations located at the borders of the then-known world. When they attack Israel, God Himself intervenes, causing them to fight one another and to be struck by great natural disasters. Gog and his allies are destroyed. A second vision gives a more detailed description of the destruction of Gog and his allies. It is also stated that all nations will see the power of God and that Israel will acknowledge God as their Lord.
Next comes the extensive temple vision. The new temple is described in detail. We then see the glory of God returning to the temple, followed by the ordinances and regulations concerning the temple. After this we see a stream of water flowing from the temple toward the Dead Sea. This water causes the Dead Sea to become healthy again and to contain many fish. Along the river grow trees that bear fruit every month, and whose leaves have healing properties.
Finally, the division of the land of Israel is described, with each tribe receiving an allotted strip of land.

3.   Already fulfilled in the return from exile? Or fulfilled in the Messiah?

My starting point is that this kind of Old Testament prophecy should be read as the first hearers and readers would have understood it. After that, we must examine whether the New Testament provides additional insights that help us understand the meaning.
Some interpreters claim that these prophecies of Ezekiel were already fulfilled in the period of the return from exile. This position can only be maintained by downplaying the prophecies of Ezekiel. If one reads the prophecies as the original audience would have understood them, it is not possible to assert that they have already been fulfilled. The return of the ten tribes never took place, and therefore neither did the reunification of the two-tribe kingdom and the ten-tribe kingdom. The complete destruction of Israel’s enemies has never occurred. Nor has the land of Israel, after the exile, ever again had the extent described in this prophecy.
Another method of interpretation is to see the coming of the promised Messiah as the fulfillment of these prophecies. It will be clear that this contradicts the principle that exegesis should align with how the prophecies would initially have been understood. When one looks at all the details of these prophecies, it requires a great deal of imagination to maintain this interpretation.
The conclusion, therefore, is that these prophecies of Ezekiel primarily refer to a future that is still to come.

4.   The vision as a mirror image of the exile

Ezekiel’s vision of the future is intended first and foremost to give hope to the exiles in Babylon. We see this in the contrasts between the situation of the exiles and the situation described in the vision. The leaders were responsible for the downfall of the people, but another shepherd is coming—a Messiah from the line of David. Jerusalem has been destroyed and the people are living in a foreign land in exile. But in the vision, judgment is pronounced over the nations, God’s people are back in their own land, and a spiritual restoration takes place. The temple, now destroyed, will be rebuilt. And God, who left the temple because of the sins of the spiritual leaders and of the people, returns again.
This does not mean that the promise given is an empty promise; it is a genuine commitment. The question, however, is when and in what manner these prophecies will be fulfilled.

5.   Literal or not?

The question is how Ezekiel’s prophecies are meant to be understood. It is clear that the vision of the dry bones has a symbolic meaning, and the meaning of the joining of the two pieces of wood is also clear. But how should we understand the extensive temple vision? And the image of the river from the temple that brings the Dead Sea back to life? And the highly schematic division of the land among the twelve tribes?
The most common argument for claiming that the temple vision should be seen as an instruction to actually build this temple is that many detailed measurements are given. What is the point of giving such precise measurements if the temple is not meant to be built? But this turns out to be relative. The description contains almost no vertical measurements, nor is it indicated which materials should be used. There is no mention of gold, silver, precious stones, or cedar wood. Supporters of a literal interpretation say that in the future the missing information will somehow be revealed. But that is, of course, a forced explanation, since this is suggested nowhere. We must realize that long narratives with many seemingly unnecessary details are part of Ezekiel’s literary style. As an example, one can point to Ezekiel 16, where we also see a very extensive description with many details that seem unnecessary to us in light of the message the prophet wants to convey. Many other prophecies in the book of Ezekiel are likewise elaborately detailed from our perspective. The fact that the temple vision is so detailed is therefore no indication that the temple must actually be built according to this model.
A striking element is that the temple is seen in a different location from the temple in Jerusalem. In Ezekiel’s description, the temple lies several kilometers above ‘the city.’ Interpreters disagree on whether ‘the city’ refers to Jerusalem or not, but in any case, it is clear that Ezekiel’s temple is not located in Jerusalem. It is also explicitly stated that the king’s palace is no longer next to the temple, as it was in Jerusalem. Most interpreters who argue that the temple will indeed be built according to this description assume Jerusalem as the location. But if one takes this prophecy literally, this cannot be the case. It is also noteworthy that Jerusalem is not mentioned by name anywhere in this vision.
When we look at the details of the temple’s description, several things stand out. There is no lampstand or altar of incense, nor a veil, nor an ark. The high priest is also missing. And if we look at the festivals, we find no Feast of Weeks, no Feast of Trumpets, no Feast of Tabernacles, and no Day of Atonement. This means that the original temple service is not being fully restored in Ezekiel’s vision.
If one assumes that the temple vision will still be fulfilled literally, then the question is what the meaning of the sacrifices would be, since they have lost their significance now that Jesus Christ has come. There are clear differences between the sacrifices Ezekiel describes and those in the Torah, without it being entirely clear what the reason is. The usual claim among supporters of a literal interpretation—namely that the sacrifices will merely function as memorial sacrifices—is not supported by Ezekiel’s description. It is a forced explanation for which no arguments can be found in the text itself.
It is striking that nowhere in Ezekiel’s prophecy is there a command to build the temple according to the design he saw in the vision. Even at the rebuilding of the temple after the return from exile, Ezekiel’s prophecy played no role. Apparently, even then, at the end of the 6th century BC, this vision was not seen as a model that had to be reconstructed.
There are also indications that the vision is meant to convey a symbolic message. The emphasis in the temple description lies on its holiness. This stands in contrast to the idolatry that caused the exile. For this reason, strong emphasis is placed on the fact that there will no longer be idolatry in the new temple. And the palace is no longer next to the temple, because kings were always buried near the palace, and the temple may not be defiled by corpses. This may also explain why the temple is not built on the ruins of the old one, but in an entirely new place. God’s holiness is also underscored by the sacrifices mentioned. When one observes the differences between the instructions of Moses and the instructions Ezekiel gives, one notices that the emphasis lies heavily on the holiness of the temple. Another striking aspect is that foreigners are not allowed to enter the temple complex at all, and that only the offerers, the Levites, and the prince may enter the area between the temple and the outer court. Only the priests may enter the inner courtyard around the temple. Again, this seems to underscore the great emphasis on the temple’s holiness. And most remarkable of all: God Himself is present in the temple. No veil, no Ark, and no high priest who mediates between God and the people—God Himself is present.
The vision of the temple is strongly connected to the vision of the river flowing from the temple. It is clear that this vision has a symbolic meaning. If the temple is intended as a blueprint for construction, then it is difficult to explain its connection to such an obviously metaphorical vision.
Much can be said about the description of the land’s boundaries. It is striking that the boundaries strongly resemble those of the nine and a half tribes—excluding the two and a half tribes that had settled across the Jordan—in the description of the original division of the land. All tribes are given a place in this territory, and the layout appears highly schematic. The entire land is divided into thirteen horizontal strips: one strip containing, among other things, the temple and ‘the city,’ and twelve strips for the twelve tribes. The land envisioned here is therefore smaller than the land ruled by Solomon, because in his day the two and a half tribes still lived across the Jordan.

6.   The Revelation to John

Before we attempt to determine how Ezekiel’s prophecy of the future will be fulfilled, it is useful to examine how the author of the Revelation to John deals with it.
The expectation of the return from exile appears in the description of the sixth plague (Rev. 16:12). There we also read about the gathering of the nations for war (Rev. 16:16, with a reference to Ezek. 38:8, 21 and 39:2, 4). Later, at the end of the Millennium (Rev. 20:7-15), there is a reference to Gog and Magog. The description of the new heaven and the new earth has several similarities with Ezekiel’s description of the temple, and in both texts there is a river flowing from the throne of God. But, John says about the new Jerusalem, there was no temple (Rev. 21:22). As with Ezekiel, strong emphasis is placed on holiness. Nothing unclean will ever enter the new Jerusalem.

7.   The fulfillment of Ezekiel’s vision of the future

Both a fully symbolic interpretation and a fully literal interpretation fall short of capturing the meaning of Ezekiel’s vision of the future.
The first meaning was for the exiles—a message of hope. A time will come when God will no longer hold the sins of the Israelites against them and will turn His attention back to His people. But it is clear that the return from exile can only be a partial fulfillment of the prophecy. We look forward to a complete fulfillment when all the tribes return to the Promised Land.
It is notable that in the vision of the dry bones the restoration occurs in two stages: first a restoration as human beings, and only then a new spirit. Several interpreters see in this an announcement of Israel’s restoration in two steps: first the return to the land, and then the recognition of Jesus as Messiah. This interpretation is very plausible. The reign under the Messianic king will be fulfilled in the thousand-year kingdom when the Messiah will rule.
The temple vision is primarily a depiction of God’s presence among His people. In my view, we should at least see a preliminary fulfillment in the coming of the Messiah. The river flowing from the temple symbolizes the work of the Holy Spirit, who brings healing to people and unprecedented fruitfulness. The temple vision is not a depiction of a literal rebuilding of the temple in the end times.
The vision of the division of the land raises more questions. The extent of the land corresponds closely to the land promised to Moses and Aaron. It is the land of the seven nations that God had promised to drive out, from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates. It is entirely possible that this means that the land of Israel will indeed reach this extent in the future.
From the Revelation to John, it appears that the complete fulfillment of the temple vision and the temple river will take place in the new Jerusalem. Then God will dwell among His people, and there will be no more sickness.
Finally, this article argues that based on Ezekiel alone, one cannot claim that the temple will be rebuilt in the end times. This does not make any statement about the possible rebuilding of the temple in general. After all, there are other arguments—other biblical texts besides Ezekiel—that are used for this, which are not discussed in this article.

Bas Krins