A. FIRST PART.—Ezekiel 1:24THE OF _________ I. THE DIVINE MISSION OF EZEKIEL.—Ezekiel 1:1 to Ezekiel 3:11 1. The Vision of Glory (Ch. 1)It has been customary, as at Isaiah 6 and Jeremiah 1, so also here, to read Ezekiel’s call to be a prophet as if it were his ordination or consecration to office. But even in the case of Isaiah 6., where the official activity of the prophet does not certainly first begin, but where we find ourselves already in the midst of his labours, one has been compelled for this reason to individualize and to define more exactly; and instead of making it a call to the prophetic office in general, has made it a call to a special mission. This necessity, which is occasioned there by the position of the 6th chapter, would not indeed be present here; for the history of Ezekiel’s call would be found exactly in the right, or at least in an unexceptionable place, namely, at the commencement of his official activity. It would be just as in the case of Jeremiah (Ezekiel 1:4 sqq.), only not in equally simple circumstances, so far as the vision is concerned. But as regards Jeremiah’s case, the historical call at a definite period of his life is from the first the element that falls into the background; what above all is prominent, is the divine consecration and appointment of Jeremiah as a prophet even before his appearance and birth in time. It is a thoroughly ideal history the history of the call of the prophet Jeremiah, and not to be compared with what Ezekiel relates to us in these chapters (1–3.). If then we keep by that which lies before us, is it anywhere a call to the prophetic office that is spoken of? If we bring closely together the detailed vision of Ezekiel 1., and the more compressed, briefer one of Isa 6:1-4, then also Ezekiel 2:3 sqq. contains merely the mission of Ezekiel, which is represented as a divine one, just as Isaiah 6:8 sqq. contains that of Isaiah. It is this, and by no means to tell us how Ezekiel was called to be a prophet, that is the essential element in the opening chapters of our book. So much does the idea of the prophetic mission from God dominate the whole, that neither does the real incongruity of how a sinner among sinners is permitted to be the seer of the holy God (comp. Isaiah 6:5 sqq.), nor the seeming incongruity of how a man who is not eloquent, and too young, is sent as a prophet (comp. Jeremiah 1:6 sqq.), come to a solution, but Ezekiel has simply to open his mouth and to eat what is given him by God (Ezekiel 2:8 sqq.). The question, therefore, is not, how he becomes qualified for the office of a prophet,—thus Isaiah, if such a view is held in his case, in the relation alleged, but more correctly perhaps for his special commission, is qualified by the removal of sin (Isaiah 6:6 sqq.); or Jeremiah, by means of the touch of Jehovah’s hand (Jeremiah 1:9);—the question rather turns on this point simply, in what capacity Ezekiel will have to discharge his prophetic office, to execute his mission. The distinction between the call in general and a mission in particular might admit of being expressed as that between something more subjective and what is more objective, in some such way as this: that, in the call, the prophet as subject stands in the foreground; in the mission, the objective matter of fact preponderates, in which and through which the prophet has to develope his activity, which is Ezekiel’s case. For the more general call, of course in its individual character in the case of each, one might have to confine himself in the case of Ezekiel as well as of Isaiah to their names (§ 1), while Jeremiah’s name seems rather to express his mission. The divine legitimation of the mission of Ezekiel is the primary meaning of Ezekiel 1-3. On the whole, it approximates too much the peculiar nature of the prophetic office to the priestly and the kingly, when we speak in this way of the consecration of a prophet. The mission of a prophet is at all events in actual fact equivalent to his consecration to the prophetic office. CHAPTER 1 1And it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month, as I was in the midst of the captivity, by the river Chebar, that 2the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. On the fifth of the month—it was the fifth year [from the time] of the carrying away captive of king Jehoiachin—3The word of Jehovah came in reality unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; and the hand of 4Jehovah came upon him there. And I saw, and, behold, a stormy wind came out of the north, a great cloud, and fire flashing into itself, and brightness round about it [the cloud], and out of the midst of it [the fire] as the look of the brightness 5of gold, out of the midst of the fire. And out of the midst thereof [of the fire] appeared the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance: they had the likeness of a man. 6And every one had four faces, and every one of them four wings. 7And their feet were straight feet; and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot; and sparkling like the look of bright brass. 8And they had the hands of a man under their wings on their four sides; and 9they four had their faces and their wings. Joined one to another were their wings; they turned not when they went; they went every one straight forward. 10As for the likeness of their faces, they four had the face of a man, and the face of a lion on the right side: and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; 11and they four had the face of an eagle. And their faces and their wings were separated above; in every one two were joined, and two covering their bodies. 12And they went every one straight forward: whither the spirit was to go, they went; they turned not when they went. 13As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like kindled, burning coals of fire, like the appearance of torches: this [the fire] was going round between the living creatures; and the fire had brightness, and out of the fire went forth lightning. 14And the living creatures ran and returned as the appearance of a flash of lightning. 15And I saw the living creatures, and, behold, one wheel was upon the earth beside the living creatures, for its four faces. 16The appearance of the wheels and their make was like unto the look of the precious stone of Tartessus: and they four had one likeness; and their appearance and their make was as it were a wheel in the midst of a wheel. 17When they went, they went upon their four sides: they turned not when they went. 18As for their felloes, there was a highness about them, and fearfulness was about them; and their felloes were full of eyes round about them four. 19And when the living creatures went, the wheels went beside them; and when the living creatures were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up. 20Whithersoever the spirit was to go, they [the living creatures] went, thither Was also the Spirit to go [in the wheels]; and the wheels were lifted up beside them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels. 21When those went, they also went; and when those stood, these also stood; and when those were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted 22up beside them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels. And a likeness was over the heads of the living creature [Ezekiel 1:20]—an expanse, like unto the look of the terrible crystal, stretched out over their heads above. 23And under the expanse were their wings straight, the one toward the other: to every 24one two which covered, to every one two which covered their bodies. And I heard the noise of their wings, like the noise of many waters, as the voice of the Almighty, to wit, in their going, the noise of tumult, as the noise of an host: 25when they stood, they let down their wings. And there came a voice from above the expanse which was over their head: when they stood, they let down their wings. 26And above the expanse that was over their head was there as the appearance of a sapphire stone, the likeness of a throne: and upon the likeness of the throne the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it. 27And I saw as the look of the brightness of gold, as the appearance of fire, a house round about it; from the appearance of his loins and upwards, and from the appearance of his loins and downwards, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and brightness round about Him. 28As the appearance of the bow that will be in the cloud on the day of heavy rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of Jehovah. And I saw, and fell upon my face, and heard the voice of one that spake. Ezekiel 1:2. Sept.: ... τηςαἰχμαλωσιαςΙωαχειμ— Ezekiel 1:3. ... ἐπ̓ἐμεχειρχυριου. (Syr., Arab., and some MSS.: ςμι.) Ezekiel 1:4. ... πυρεξεστραπτον … ὡςὁρασιςἠλεχτρου … χ. φεγγοςἐυαὐτω. Vulg.: ignis involvens… Ezekiel 1:5. ... ώςὁμοιωμα … ζωων—animalium. Ezekiel 1:6. Other readings: μδπδ ,μδο ,μδξδ ;ξδο ,ξδν. Ezekiel 1:7. ... χ. πτερωτοιοἱποδεςαν̓των, κ. σκινθηρεςὡςὁἐζεστραπτωνχαλκος, κ. ἐλαφραιαἱπτερυγεςαὐτων.—et Scintillae quasi aspectus aeris candentis. Ezekiel 1:9. ἐχομεναιἑτερατηςἑτερας. Κ. ταπροσωπααὐτωνοὐκἐπεστρεφοντοἐντωβαδιζειναὐτα (anoth. read.: αμλϊν). Ezekiel 1:10. Anoth. read.: μΰψαςϊο. Ezekiel 1:11. Κ. αἱπτερυγεςαὐτωνἐκτεταμεναιἀνωθεν– Ezekiel 1:12. Anoth. read.: αμλϊν. Ezekiel 1:13. Κ. ἐνμεσωτωνζωωνὁρασιςὡςἀνθρακων ... λαμπαδωνσυστρεφομενωνἀναμεσοντωνζωων … (anoth. read.: ξγΰιδο). Ezekiel 1:14. ... ὡςεἰδοςτουβεζεχ. Ezekiel 1:16. Other readings: εξςωιδο ;εξψΰδ, wanting in Sept.; εξγΰιδο. Ezekiel 1:17. Anoth. read.: γαςιδν. Ezekiel 1:18. ... οὐδεοἱνωτοιαν̓των ... κ. ἰδοναὐτα, κ. οἱνωτοι— Ezekiel 1:20. Οὑἀνἠνἡνεφεληἐκειτοπνενματουπορευεσθαι (ιμαεωξδΧμμλϊ are wanting in some MSS. The Greek and Syriac translators and the Targ. (?) omit δψεημμλϊ). Ezekiel 1:22. Sept., Vulg., Syr., Chald., Arab, read δηιεϊ. Ezekiel 1:23. ... αἱπτερυγεςαὐτωνἐκτεταμεναι, πτερυσσομεναιἑτερατηἑτερα, ἑκαστωδυοσυνεζευγμεναι,—(ξαΧμδπδεμΰιωωϊΧ are wanting in some MSS., Vulg., Sept., and Arab.) Ezekiel 1:24. ... ὑδατοςπολλου, ώςφωνηνἱκανου ... φωνητουλογονὡςφωνηπαρεμβολης. Ezekiel 1:25. αςξγνϊψΧλπτιδο are wanting in some MSS., in Sept.?, Syr., and Arab. Ezekiel 1:27. ... ὡςὁρασινπυροςἐσωθεναὐτουκυκλω— REMARKS Ezekiel 1:1-3 a preface, which contains introductory matter in general—specially to the vision which immediately follows, what is most necessary respecting the time, person, place, and subject-matter on hand. This latter, the subject-matter, is “visions of God” in the plural, which are separated by means of the expression: “and I saw, and, behold” (Ezekiel 1:4; Ezekiel 1:15), properly into two visions only, Ezekiel 1:4-28; but it will commend itself to treat Ezekiel 1:22-28 as a separate conclusion completing both visions. Ezekiel 1:1-3.—Preface, IntroductoryEze_1:1. “And it came to pass.”—The imperf. with ε consecut., as usual without Dagesh forte, indicating a continuation, an advance, connection with something going before, begins, as often elsewhere, so also here the book of Ezekiel. Since there is no real connection, as in the case of Exodus, Ezra, a connection in thought is to be assumed, as in the case of Ruth, Esther. The chronology, still more the inner relationship (comp. the Introduction, §§ 2, 3, 4), suggests a connection with Jeremiah. Hengstenberg, while he lays stress upon the similar commencements, by which Joshua is connected with the Pentateuch, the book of Judges with Joshua, the books of Samuel and also Ruth with the book of Judges, understands, besides a special connection of Ezekiel with Jeremiah (whose letter (Jeremiah 29.), directed shortly before to the exiles, formed as it were the programme for the labours of our prophet), in general (as in the case of the book of Esther) the incorporation (represented by such a commencement) in a chain of sacred books, a connection with a preceding sacred literature. In a more definite way Athanasius brought into connection with this the passage in Josephus (Antiq. 10.)—comp. Introd. § 5—and made out that the one book of Ezekiel, with which the present one is here connected by means of ε, had gone amissing through the negligence of the Jews. Pradus cites Augustine (on Psalms 4.) and Gregory the Great in support of a view according to which this ε is intended to connect the outward word of the prophet with what he had heard inwardly, with the inward vision (Corn. a. Lapide: “What he had formerly seen in his spirit or heard from God he connects by means of ‘and’ with something else which he saw and heard thereafter, and which he now relates”). Very many expositors have been quite content with a pleonastic Hebrew idiom, and with changing the sense of the future into that of the preterite. (According to Keil, appealing to Ewald (Ausf. Lehrb. § 231, b), it is merely “something annexed to a circle of what is finished—a circle already mentioned, or assumed as known.”)—In the thirtieth year, etc. Where the divine legitimation of Ezekiel for his labours about to be described, and at the same time for his literary labours—this book of his—is to be shown, and where accordingly the prophet speaks of himself in the first person, going on immediately to say: “as I,” so that εΰπι in such close juxtaposition with αωμωινωπδ looks like the usual phrase αοωμωινωπδ, there it ought to appear as simple as it is natural to think, with Origen and Gregory, of the thirtieth year of Ezekiel’s life. There was no necessity whatever for Hengstenberg (comp. Introd. § 3) to urge the significance “as respects the man of priestly family.” The appointment of the thirtieth year in Numbers 4., with a view to “the carrying of the sanctuary during the journey through the wilderness—a work requiring the full vigour of manhood,” cannot in actual fact be applied to Ezekiel; and we must then in a figurative way compare his prophetic labours in exile, especially his preaching of the glory of the Lord, and the circumstance that through Ezekiel’s exercise of the prophetic office the Lord became to the exiles as a sanctuary in the captivity (Ezekiel 11:16), with that carrying of the tabernacle during the time of the wilderness. For “theological exposition,” of course, “the entrance on office of the Baptist and of Christ after completing their thirtieth year” may be kept in view. The indefiniteness of the statement of time, “in the thirtieth year,” is not greater than the indefiniteness with respect to the person: “as I.” As the latter indefiniteness is removed in Ezekiel 1:3 by the mention of the name, etc., so (according to Kliefoth, and also Keil) the corresponding addition: in the fourth month, on the fifth day, by the repetition in Ezekiel 1:2 of the fifth of the month, viz. the fifth day of the forementioned fourth month, is brought into connection with the objectivity of the “fifth year from the carrying away captive of king Jehoiachin,” and in this way relieved of all want of clearness, while at the same time expressly separated from the date: “in the thirtieth year,” just as this latter itself is so much the more evidently left to its simplest, natural acceptation of the thirtieth year of the prophet’s life. If then Ezekiel 1:2 afterwards supplies the period according to which Ezekiel adjusts his first, subjective date, the supposition of another so-called “publicly current era” is superfluous, apart from the fact, that no such era has hitherto been pointed out. Recourse has been had (1) to a Jewish era, and (2) to a Babylonian one. (1) Thus Hitzig adheres to the opinion of many Jewish expositors, that the reference is to the thirtieth year from a jubilee (comp. on Ezekiel 40:1), but combats what is yet so necessary, the more exact definition, e.g., of Raschi, that in this way the reckoning is from the eighteenth year of king Josiah, important on account of the finding of the book of the law, etc. (2 Kings 22. sqq.; 2 Chronicles 34. sqq.); while Hδvernick declares this reckoning (already that of the Chaldee Paraphrast, Jerome, Grotius, and also Ideler) “the only tenable one,” as also that which is “alone suited to the context:” “that with the last period of prosperity there stands contrasted the last period of misfortune (under Jehoiachin): the numbers are prophetically significant statements, pointing to the weighty circumstance of the prophet’s making his appearance in a memorable, fatal time.” We must therefore assume a “priestly” mode of reckoning. Calvin lays stress upon the Greek analogy of Olympiads, as well as the Roman one of reckoning according to consulates, and in favour of the jubilee under Josiah brings forward the peculiarly solemn passover-feast at that time. (2) For accepting a Babylonian era one might urge the sojourn of Ezekiel in Babylon, especially his peculiar attention to chronology, which, dates from this seat of astronomical science. In this case the fifth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin has been reckoned, as the year b.c. 595, and the thirtieth year from that as the year b.c. 625, when Nabopolassar ascended the Chaldean throne; and either the eighteenth year of Josiah has been taken as contemporaneous therewith, or the era of Nabopolassar merely has been clung to (e.g. by Scaliger, Perizonius). But the reckoning does not agree; according to Bunsen, at least, the fifth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin would be the year b.c. 593. Perizonius wished therefore to be at liberty to read in Ezekiel the thirty-second instead of the thirtieth year. J. D. Michaelis helps himself by making the reckoning start not from Nabopolassar’s ascending the throne, but from the conquest of Nineveh and Babylon by him. Comp. besides in Hitzig.—The fourth month, since the first (Nisan) coincides for the most part with our March, corresponds to our June, or, according to J. D. Michaelis, Hitzig, Bunsen, to July nearly. The (probably Babylonian) name of it would be Tammuz; but the prophet follows still the custom of antiquity, which, with only some exceptions, did not give names to the separate months, but merely numbered them.—εΰπιαϊεκΞδβεμδ. As the time is indicated by “in the thirtieth year,” so also next the place is indicated in a personal way: as I was, etc. That the clause might by itself mean, cum essem in medio captivorum, is beyond a doubt; but that the LXX. in this case translate more correctly than the Vulgate is not less undoubtedly clear from Ezekiel 3:11; Ezekiel 3:15. Hitzig’s solution (favoured by Klief., Keil): “in the district (region) of their (the exiles’) dwelling-places (settlements),” is superfluous; more accurate is his remark: “and besides he himself was a captive.” Rightly Ewald: in the midst of the captivity. The historical dates in the prophetic books have a certain designedness, something symbolic about them,—are at all events not simply historical notices; they are intended to be understood in the light of the idea, exactly as that was to be realized in the case in hand, and hence characteristically as regards the prophet in question. In the midst of the misery the prophet was to behold the glory of God for his people (comp. Introd. § 5). Calvin on this occasion enters into a polemic against the notion of the Jews, as if the hand of God were shortened towards the holy land, etc. Ezekiel was, according to Ezekiel 3:11; Ezekiel 3:15, alone by the river, and did not go, till he had had the vision, among the multitudes of his countrymen who dwelt or happened to be nearest him.—By the river Chebar, comp. Introd. § 4 (Calvin attaches indeed no importance to it, but he mentions the opinion of those who regard the rivers as places consecrated for revelations, inasmuch as they give prominence to their symbolical character [“the lighter element of water,” while “the earth appears heavier”], or inasmuch as others think of the “cleansing” power of water and the like. A kind of spiritual reference to Psalms 137:1 Calvin looks upon as forced.) Hengstenberg compares Daniel 8:2; Daniel 10:4; Ezekiel is “removed to the Chebar, because there he is far from the bustle of men, and allured to great thoughts by the rushing of the water.” And then it is alleged he was “there only in vision,” as is clear from Ezekiel 3:12; Ezekiel 3:14! As if, forscoth, the Spirit could not have carried him to and from the actual river! Then we must understand “in the midst of the captivity” likewise as being in vision. In Daniel it is expressly said at Ezekiel 8:2 to be in vision, and at Ezekiel 10:4 as well as here it is to be conceived of as not being so. At Ezekiel 8:3; Ezekiel 11:24, the definition as to its being in vision is expressly added. (Some have also formed to themselves a conception of the sojourn by the water after the analogy of the Romish Ghetto, as Martial says instead of Jew transtiberinus.)—The personal reference is kept up still in the description of the subject in hand, of what took place: the heavens were opened, and I saw—; so much is the divine authorization of Ezekiel the leading thought. The opening of the heavens refers, as respects the form, as regards the character of the vision, to this vision which follows. There is in this respect nothing more general intended by it (John 1:32), as Keil seems to hint. Comp., however, Matthew 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:21; Acts 7:56; Acts 10:10-11; Revelation 4:1; Revelation 19:11. As regards what is essential in all ways and forms, Calvin will be right in maintaining, that “God opens His heavens, not that in reality they are cleft asunder, but inasmuch as, after the removal of all hindrances, He enables the eyes of believers to penetrate to His heavenly glory.” As Jerome has already said: fide credentis intellige, eo quod c�lestia sint illi reserata mysteria. (Grotius makes the heavens to be rent open by repeated flashes of lightning.) “He who says this, testifies that what he has seen he has not seen as something which has come out of the earth or existed first on the earth, but that it has descended from heaven, and consequently been visions of God” (Cocceius). If the opening of the heavens depicts the manner of the thing, how it happened, then the expression, visions of God (Ezekiel 40:2), specifies the thing itself under discussion, and that first of all in accordance with what follows, where the next thing is vision. The genitive relation cannot be rendered by: sublime visions, or the like (as Calvin already rejects as frigid the interpretation: visiones prζstantissimas, quia divinum vocatur in scriptura quidquid excellit), but it might perhaps, in accordance also with linguistic usage elsewhere, pass as equivalent to: divine visions, i.e. in the manner of Isaiah 6., 1 Kings 22:19, 2 Kings 6:17, etc. (Hitzig: heavenly visions). Quia ex c�lo demonstratas, ideoque divinas et a Deo ostensas (Cocceius). As genitive of the subject (auctoris) it might be interpreted in accordance with Numbers 24:4; Numbers 24:16, either: visions which God (as well as they) sees, or: visions which God gives to see (which proceed from God); which would correspond with the aim of the following vision, that of legitimating Ezekiel’s call as a divine one. “The divine visions stand opposed to the visions of one’s own heart, the empty fancies of false prophets, Jeremiah 23:25-26” (Hengstenberg). “Otherwise it would have been incredible, that a prophet should have arisen out of Chaldea. Nazareth even (John 1:47) was still situated in the promised land. Thus the divine call needed to be confirmed as such in a special way” (Calv.). As genitive of the object the meaning would be, visions which have reference to God, have Him as their object; which suits the contents of the vision as expressed at Ezekiel 1:28. Here: visions of God; in Jeremiah 1:1 : words of Jeremiah.—εָ ?ΰֶ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ is the complete form without apocope, as after the ε consecut. not seldom in the first person and in the later books. Ezekiel 1:2 is occupied with a reference to the dates. It was the fifth year from the carrying away captive of ting Jehoiachin, and it is meant of the “objective common era” (Hengstenberg), just as also in the sequel of this notice (Ezekiel 1:3), which is better inserted immediately than later. Ezekiel—a thing which does not occur elsewhere in the book (Ezekiel 24:24!)—speaks of himself in the third person. Without verses 2, 3, with Ezekiel 1:1 simply pushed forward to Ezekiel 1:4, we would have the impression that a private document, a leaf of the prophet’s journal, lay before us. The explicit statement of Eze 1:2 was the more necessary, where already in Ezekiel 1:1 the fifth of the fourth month was to be explained with reference to this fixed period, the most important of course for the immediate hearers of the prophet, and therefore easily intelligible for them, and also retained by the prophet throughout, but for others not equally clear. That Ezekiel 1:2-3 “interrupt” (Ewald) the connection cannot be alleged; we shall find the opposite.—πּ ?εֹ ?μָ ?δ in Ezekiel 1:1 is essentially the same as πָּ ?μεּ ?η in Ezekiel 1:2, the distinction to be made being perhaps this, that the former refers more to the condition, the latter to the action.—As to the historical fact, see 2 Kings 24:6 sqq., 2 Chronicles 36:9 sqq.—ιεֹ ?ιλִ ?ιο as here, in 2 Kings, 2 Chron. ιְ ?δεֹ ?ιָ ?λִ ?ιο, is called in Jeremiah 22:24; Jeremiah 22:28 λָּ ?πְ ?ιָ ?δεּ, in Ezekiel 24:1 of the same book ιְ ?λָ ?πְ ?ιָ ?δεּ, and in Ezekiel 27:20 ιְ ?λָ ?πְ ?ιָ ?δ.—Kliefoth, on the basis of the detailed exposition in Hδvernick, gives prominence as regards this period, on the one hand, to the unpleasant impression of the first circular letter (Jeremiah 29.) to the exiles, and on the other hand, to the inflaming of their minds by the later prophetic announcement in Jeremiah 51:59 sqq. Comp. in the remainder of the Introd. § 5. “That it was already the fifth year, is held up as a reproach to the stiffneckedness of the Jews” (Calv.). The appearance of Ezekiel took place in the most hopeful period of the reign of Zedekiah, when false prophecy was making its voice heard at home and abroad. To all this seeming and fancied glory, opposed as it was to the divine word of the true prophets, Ezekiel’s vision of glory formed the divine antithesis. Ezekiel 1:3. δָ ?ιֹ ?δδιδ, inf. absol., in solemnly rhetorical fashion emphasizing the divine attestation of the prophet: really, expressly, quite certainly. The full unquestionable reality of the transaction is to be indicated.—Though Ezekiel 1:1 spoke of the person, time, place, subject-matter, all the elements of the introduction, yet Ezekiel 1:2 reverted to the time; and so Ezekiel 1:3 speaks anew first of all of the subject-matter as γαψιιΧ, which came to Ezekiel, by which expression this same subject-matter, linking itself on to Ezekiel 1:1 (there, “visions of God;” here, “the word of Jehovah”), is now designated according to its intrinsic, its essential character as the product of the Spirit (1 Thessalonians 2:13). It is at the same time the exact announcement of what follows, and the introduction thereto; for at Ezekiel 1:28 there is a transition from the “I saw” to the “I heard the voice of one that spake,” and this latter is shown from Ezekiel 2:4 to be “the Lord Jehovah.”—As to the name of the prophet and that of his father, as well as the priestly rank of both, with which the personal description is completed, comp. Introd. §§ 1, 3. For the purpose in a quite objective way of making more prominent his divine legitimation, Ezekiel speaks of himself as of a third person. (Like the LXX., the Syriac and Arabic versions presuppose φμι, the reading of several Codd.) Humility also, in a case where he had been deemed worthy of such a revelation (comp. the similar mode of expression in 2 Corinthians 12:2 sqq.), recommended his speaking in the third person.—The renewed mention of the place is not a mere repetition of the words: by the river Chebar, but a more exact definition alike of this river, and especially of the phrase: “in the midst of the captivity,” both being defined by αΰψυαωγιν,—in the sense, however, of land of the Chaldeans=land of the enemy, to which at the close of the verse ων again points back, emphatically, as Calvin remarks. This locality was only too significant a corrective of presumption on the one hand, as of despair on the other, or rather of fleshly narrow-mindedness in general.—If then, finally, the subject-matter is again brought into prominence, and that as respects its producing cause, viz. that the hand of Jehovah came upon him, this certainly is not said without reference to the statement: “and I fell upon my face,” in Ezekiel 1:28, and might indeed have preceded the words: the word of Jehovah came in reality (Hitzig); but the immediately following subject-matter (Ezekiel 1:4) demanded this or some such transition at the close of the verse. Thus verses 2, 3 complete the section. The formula of transition used is one that occurs again (Introd. § 7), Ezekiel 3:22; Ezekiel 37:1; Ezekiel 40:1. Comp. 2 Kings 3:15. The expression the hand of Jehovah always means a divine manifestation of power, but in the sense of action, consequently with will and intention, by means of which self-will and refusal on the part of man are laid in the dust, and the man is prepared for the divine purpose. For whatever may be the natural basis subjectively (intellectually, morally, and spiritually), as well as objectively (as respects the nexus in the history of the time, or of the individual), the prophetic word as God’s word, as visions of God, is neither a product of one’s own effort and exertion, reflection and investigation, nor a result of mere human instruction. It is not gifts, not study that makes the prophet, just as also we do not meet with inclination as a prophetic factor, but constraint must be put upon them,—the prophets needed to be overpowered. Thus something lies in the φμιειγιιΧ. Comp. Jeremiah 20:7. If this appears in a still stronger form where instead of εַ ?δְּ ?δִ ?ι, e.g. at Ezekiel 8:1, we have εַ ?ηִּ ?ξֹּ ?μ, Ezekiel 11:5 certainly explains ιγιιΧ by ψεּ ?ηַ ιιΧ; it is the power of the Spirit. “He has thus expressed the energy of the divine Spirit” (Theodoret). Hence the prophetic preparation in consequence of this is rightly given by Oehler in the first place as a divine knowledge (comp. Jeremiah 23:18 with Amos 3:7), to which there cannot be wanting as a second element the sanctifying as well as strengthening efficacy (Psalms 1-16 sqq.; Micah 3:8). J. Fr. Starck quotes: impulsus inopinatus, illuminatio extraordinaria, spiritus prophetiζ vehemens, afflatus Spiritus Sancti singularis. “Thus he saw what other men did not see, then he recollected all that he had seen and heard, and understood the meaning of the Lord and did His commandment.” Cocc. (On old pictures of the prophets, as well as in the frescoes of the church at Schwarz-Rheindorf, a hand is painted, which is stretched from heaven.) Ezekiel 1:4-28.—Ezekiel’s Vision of the Glory of JehovahIsaac Casaubon, in his once far-famed Exercitationes, 16. de reb. sacr. et eccl. adv. Baronium (Geneva 1655), asserts: “in the whole of the Old Testament there is nothing more obscure than the beginning and the end of the book of Ezekiel.” Under the same impression Calvin declares, that “he acknowledges that he does not understand this vision.” Jerome had pronounced that “in its interpretation all the synagogues of the Jews are dumb, giving as their reason that it transcends man’s capacity, et de hoa et de �dificatione templi, quod in ultimo hujus prophet� scribitur, aliquid velle conari.” The Jewish designation for the following vision is ξֶ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?αָ ?δ, “chariot” or “team of four,” in accordance with the four living creatures and the four wheels. Hδvernick: “It formed the basis and the point of support for the later mystic theology in its endless gnostic speculations about the divine essence and the higher spirit-world.” As their natural theology is called among the Jews αְּ ?ψֶ ?ΰωִׁ ?ιη, so-the mystic is called ξֶ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?α. One is not to read before reaching his thirtieth year either the beginning of Genesis, or the Song of Songs, or the beginning and end of the book of Ezekiel; such is the admonition of Jewish tradition. Comp. Zunz, Die gottesdienstl. Vortr. d. Juden, p. 162 sqq. (the most important work of more recent times in this department). Umbreit, while he denies him the poetic gift, ascribes to Ezekiel “in the rarest degree the ability which is characteristic of the painter, of making visible to the eye what he has seen.” But even the celebrated picture of Raphael in the Pitti Gallery at Florence may pass as a criticism of this assertion. There there is more than one feature quite passed over: what is separate appears grouped together; what is united, on the other hand, appears divided. To the artistic conception of the greatest painter the vision of Ezekiel presented itself with difficulty. We shall be compelled to assert even more positively, that with all the “exactitude of delineation, and with the plastic art in the giving of details” (Umbreit), an obscurity remains over the whole, even merely as respects the setting it before the eye, an invisibility, which is not certainly to be ascribed to “overcrowding,” but which lies in the subject-matter, the object of the vision, which results from the thing itself. The representation of Ezekiel wrestles with its subject, as the amplification, the repetition and recurrence again to what has been said, shows. It must indeed be the case, according to Exodus 33, that (Ezekiel 1:22-23) only the “back parts” of the glory of God are capable of being seen by man here upon earth. Comp. 1 John 3:2. Certainly, if Ezekiel, because he had been carried out of the body, were to have seen the “face” of the glory of God, his after-remembrance in the body of what he had seen would not have been capable of being expressed. Comp. 2 Corinthians 12:4; 2 Corinthians 12:3. The “unapproachable light,” in which God dwells (1 Timothy 6:16), remains from the time of the Sinaitic keynote theophany onwards for the whole of the Old Testament. Exodus 19:9; Exodus 19:16; Exodus 19:20-21 (Deuteronomy 4:11; Deuteronomy 5:19); Leviticus 16:2; 1 Kings 8:12; Psalms 97:2 (Ezekiel 18:12). We may quote the remark of Umbreit, that Ezekiel “repeats more frequently than any other prophet the statement: the word of Jehovah was thus made known to me, as if he had felt the word like a burden, and was unable to reproduce it as such in a very worthy manner; it is only to set down its symbol that he feels himself called in his inmost being.” There is also to be found in Ezekiel as compared with the older prophets a greater complication in the symbolism, in which the following vision especially is expressed in its plastic art. Comp. Introd. § 7. Inasmuch as it is vision, and consequently the divine element is represented visibly in pictures, these pictures have a divine import, are symbols, so that there belongs to them at the same time a concealing, relatively veiling character, especially as regards the people. The word of God must accordingly come in addition to the vision of God, in order to explain it for the prophet and the people. Comp. the distinction between ὀπτασἰας and ἀποκαλύψειςκυρίου, 2 Corinthians 12:1. But it is not so much a peaceful picture which presents itself to our prophet, as rather a phenomenon of a very excited character inwardly as well as outwardly; a circumstance which must not remain unnoticed in the interpretation. The storm brings great clouds therefore. A strong brisk fire, which spreads its brightness round about, forms the interior of the cloud brought by the storm. Such is the first, outermost part of the vision, its porch as it were, which the prophet first of all enters (Ezekiel 1:4). On a nearer view there are formed out of the intensive fire of the cloud as it were four “living creatures,” which have at first sight the appearance of a man, and are therefore to be carried back in thought to this in general, whatever else in detail more exact description perceives in them. And so the fourfold group of the creatures is individualized in a fourfoldness of each of them: man, lion, ox, eagle. In spite of such fourfoldness, which is perhaps also clear from other circumstances (thus they have wings, and at the same time the foot-soles of a calf, and yet the hands of a man, comp. at Ezekiel 1:7), prominence is given expressly to a mutuality of relation, the unity of a whole, Ezekiel 1:9; Ezekiel 1:12; Ezekiel 1:15; Ezekiel 1:20-22 (Ezekiel 1:5-14). Then, further, as the direction out of the north (Ezekiel 1:4) has given the tendency of the vision in its immediate historical reference, so the wheels also bring the whole into connection with the earth. The more expressive connecting link will be the number four, the symbolic number (passing over from the living creatures to the wheels) of the cosmical relations, in which God reveals Himself. (Bδhr, Symbolism of the Mosaic Cultus, 1 p. 341.) The glory of Jehovah from heaven manifests itself with this second part of the vision as a glorifying of Jehovah upon earth, inasmuch as “the spirit of the living creature” unites in the closest way wheels and creatures (Ezekiel 1:15-21). Lastly, the holy of holies of the vision is opened with the vault as of heaven over the heads of the chajah. The living creatures, into union with which the wheels are taken up by means of the “spirit,” are by means of the “voice,” which comes from above the vault, and that while they are at rest, united to Him who is enthroned there, who looked like a man. From Him ultimately everything proceeds, just as to Him ultimately everything tends. As in the holy of holies of the tabernacle and of the temple, the vision culminates in the enthroning of Jehovah in His glory. Hence, too, it cannot be passed over without remark, that in this very excited phenomenon a thrice-repeated advance makes itself known. The first time the fire-cloud λְּ ?φֵ ?ιοδַ ?ηַ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?μξִ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?κְ δָ ?ΰֵ ?ωׁ (Ezekiel 1:4). The second time the fire-picture of the chajoth λֹּ ?φְַ ?ψεֹ ?ϊλְּ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?δδַ ?ξִּ ?ιγִ ?ινλְּ ?πַ ?ηַ ?μֵ ?ιΞΰֵ ?ωׁ (Ezekiel 1:13; Ezekiel 1:7), with the height and dreadfulness and λְּ ?φֵ ?ιοϊַּ ?ψωִׁ ?ιωׁ of the wheels (Ezekiel 1:18; Ezekiel 1:16). The third time: the ψָ ?χִ ?ιφַ λְּ ?φֵ ?ιοδַ ?χֶּ ?ψַ ?ηδַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ψָ ?δ, and the throne ΰֶ ?αֶ ?ονַ ?ξִּ ?ιψλְּ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ, and the fire-bright appearance of the Glorious One thereon, the description of which, however, at last terminates significantly in: “As the appearance of the bow,” etc. Fire, brightness, light,—this remains the common feature all three times; it forms consequently the fundamental characteristic of the vision as respects its interpretation, in which, however, the meaning of the closing rainbow in the cloud must not be left out. Let us now attempt to get at the meaning of the vision. Although the separate symbols must be left over to the exegesis, yet the symbolism as a whole must be understood beforehand, according to which the import of the vision, especially in comparison and connection with other similar visions of the Old Testament, will come to light. Ezekiel himself leaves us in no doubt as to the meaning of his vision, for he says expressly at the close: δεּ ?ΰξַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?δγּ ?ξεּ ?ϊλּ ?αεֹ ?ψιιΧ. It is therefore Jehovah’s glory that presented itself to him, and presents itself to us in the vision. In so far as this can be distinguished more in its personal relation to Himself, and on the other side more in its active manifestation and execution of His will, as Jehovah’s glory and as His glorification, the δεּ ?ΰ of Ezekiel 1:28 may, by a glance at Ezekiel 10:4; Ezekiel 10:19, be more precisely explained by Keil (following Hitzig), but for the interpretation of the vision in Ezekiel 1 it is not advisable. As to the idea λαεγ for “glory,” comp. on Ezekiel 1:28. Although the λָּ ?αεֹ ?γ of God stands for the appearance, hence for what is manifest (Introd. § 10), yet the figurative representation of the same must not be taken as a matter of course for the essential idea. Gesenius says incorrectly in his Pocket Dictionary: “The Hebrew conceives (?) of it as a clear shining fire, from which fire issues, and which is usually enveloped in smoke;” for the Hebrew conceives of it rather (comp. Ges. himself) as “weight, dignity, gravitas.” To the divine essence there belongs a corresponding sovereign dignity and sovereign power,—a glory (Herrlichkeit from “hehr”), as well as a dominion (Herrschaft from “Herr”). The two things conceived of as one idea, and not merely in antithesis to the world, but in the world as the light and the life of the world, is the λָּ ?αεֹ ?γ of God—the significance of God for the world. The heavens declare the glory of God (Psalms 19:1), and the whole earth is full of His glory (Isaiah 6:3). Without it there is nothing but “power and matter” (Bόchner), and our view of the world is an atomistic one. Although the manifest aim of creation has been turned by reason of sin into the goal, yet Psalms 97:6 says and prophesies: “The heavens declare His righteousness, and all nations see His glory;” and in Numbers 14:21 Jehovah swears by His life, that the glory of Jehovah shall fill the whole earth. If with this far-reaching look at the world’s goal, and on the broad foundation of the divine aim as regards the world (“Jehovah” is certainly everywhere “Elohim”), Ezekiel’s vision of Jehovah’s glory shapes itself first of all and predominantly as the righteousness of the Holy One, who will execute the judgment upon Jerusalem, and thus also upon that portion of Israel not yet in banishment by the Chebar, such a thing is easily understood as being necessary for that historical period, alike from the situation of affairs and as regards the persons. And this it is that is symbolized by the fire-cloud in particular, as well as in general by the fire-style, in which the whole is kept. Nevertheless there comes forth as the kernel of the fire-cloud the fire-picture of the four chajoth, whose meaning is as little reached when one goes back and gives them a Judaistic interpretation as the cherubim in the tabernacle or in the temple, as when one christianizes them by anticipation, as Kliefoth does, as the “universality of the economy of salvation founded by Christ when He appeared, in contrast with the particularism and territorialism of the previous economy of salvation.” It might rather be nearer the mark to adopt a third view which would keep fast hold of the glory of God as the original aim of the creation of heaven and earth is well as the ultimate goal of the history of the world; in connection with which the idea of life, so frequent with Ezekiel, pervading as it does the whole book, must not be overlooked (Ezekiel 18:23; Ezekiel 33:11; the whole of Ezekiel 37; Ezekiel 18:9; Ezekiel 18:13; Ezekiel 18:17; Ezekiel 18:19; Ezekiel 18:21; Ezekiel 18:24; Ezekiel 18:28; Ezekiel 18:32; Ezekiel 33:12-13; Ezekiel 33:15-16; Ezekiel 3:18; Ezekiel 3:21; Ezekiel 16:6; Ezekiel 20:11; Ezekiel 20:13; Ezekiel 20:21; Ezekiel 20:25; Ezekiel 47:9; Ezekiel 13:18-19; Ezekiel 13:22; Ezekiel 7:13; Ezekiel 5:11; Ezekiel 14:16; Ezekiel 14:18; Ezekiel 14:20; Ezekiel 17:16; Ezekiel 17:19; Ezekiel 18:3; Ezekiel 20:3; Ezekiel 20:31; Ezekiel 20:33; Ezekiel 33:11; Ezekiel 33:27; Ezekiel 34:8; Ezekiel 35:11 : comp. Ezekiel 26:20; Ezekiel 32:23-27; Ezekiel 32:32). For as God’s glory has its side for Him, according to which it is the self-representation of His life in a majesty invisible for man, so, on the other side, heaven and earth and the world of creatures mirror forth the divine life in a visible glory of God, inasmuch as through them God’s peculiar nature and power come to be seen in a manifoldness and fulness of life. This is His “fame,” His “honour,” which become known from creation conformably to its original design, according to which the investigation of nature was meant to be, as Prof. Fichte says, “an uninterrupted worship, a rational and intelligent glorification of that uncreated wisdom which manifests itself in nature.” And in like manner (according to Beck), “all the threads of life, which the divine faithfulness in revelation preserves within the circle of sinful mankind from the beginning onwards, and evermore strengthens and perfects in a part of the same, converge at the end in a central manifestation of life: ἡζωὴἐφανερώθη, 1 John 1:2. The revelation of life in actual fact breaks the death-power of sin, 2 Timothy 1:10; life is the substance of salvation” (Lehrwissenschaft, 1 p. 448); and this life-development of salvation exercises, on the one hand, a preserving, renewing, and perfecting influence on the still remaining life-power of the world, and on the other hand, a relaxing, judging, and annihilating influence on the death-power of sin, works creatively, so that man and the earthly system come forth as a new creation in eternal and unchangeable life from the catastrophe of conflict and judgment. As arising from such a connection of the life and glory of God, must the spiritual symbolism of the chajoth also be understood in Ezekiel. The retrospective reference to the cherubim of the ark has certainly its truth, but not till Ezekiel 10 (comp. at Ezekiel 9:3 the explanation with respect to the cherubs in general), where Ezekiel also (Ezekiel 1:20) expressly brings them forward; and even there (Ezekiel 1:15; Ezekiel 1:17; Ezekiel 1:20) they are called, as here and at Ezekiel 3:13, “chajoth” or “chajah.” Their symbolic character is necessarily clear even from the symbolic connection in which they appear. The prophet saw also merely a “likeness” of four living creatures, consequently what looked like four living creatures. To their symbolic character corresponds also their designation; the biblical ideas of life and death have a symbolic colouring. But, in particular, support is entirely wanting in Holy Scripture for conceiving of these “living creatures,” as Keil would have us, as “beings who of all the creatures of heaven and earth possess and exhibit life in the fullest sense of the word, and who on this very account of all spiritual beings stand the nearest to the God of the spirits of all flesh, who lives from eternity to eternity, and surround His throne on every side.” What would thus be affirmed of “creatures,” is applicable properly to the Son alone (John 1:4); and how would such “representatives and bearers of the eternal blessed life” harmonize even with the uniquely prominent position of man made in the image of God in the Bible! In opposition to actual individual beings of such a kind, in opposition to “angelic beings of a higher order,” there speaks too evidently their fourfold form, whose meaning, as already settled by the Rabbins, is this, that the vital power according to four types (of man above all and in general because of his life being in highest potency, because of his spirit and its eternal destiny),—comp. Bδhr, Symb. 1 p. 342 sqq.,—is to find an expression, is to be represented in a fulness of the highest possible significance. From the reproach of being “abstract ideas or ideal forms of the imagination,” which would thus be “represented as living beings,” the purely symbolic view is released by this circumstance, that certainly the four types are taken from real life, only the manner of their application and their juxtaposition being ideal. There can be no question of abstraction, where rather the individual element is specially realized by means of the idea of the whole, viz. life. Hengstenberg [“The Cherubim” at the close of his “Ezekiel,” Clark’s Trans.], who in Bδhr’s interpretation emphasizes not so much the “ideal creature” as “the living creation,” limits it, however, to the earth, holding that it must be viewed altogether apart from the heavenly creature. Passages, however, such as Genesis 2:7; Genesis 9:16, which he cites, leave sufficient room for the idea of the living creature in general, since, according to Genesis 2:7, there by no means belongs to the living creature “a double element, the earthly material and the quickening breath of God;” but these two constitute merely the earthly man, and he rather becomes “a living soul” from the fact that God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life,” just as Genesis 9:16 also limits “every living creature” by means of the words “among all flesh that is upon the earth,” the thing spoken of being life upon earth. Theodoret, however, may be right, that the angels likewise are living creatures, and that the relation of mortality is the distinction between their life and that of man. The contrast with death is not less justified than that “with what is lifeless,” and the expression the “living” God scarcely allows the idea of the living creature to be confined to man and beasts. Neither does “the number four in itself” point exclusively to the earth; comp. Bδhr in the work quoted, 1 p. 156 sqq. Only the composition of the number four, consisting as it does of man, lion, ox, and eagle, has, according to the ingenious exposition of Hengstenberg, much of an earthly appearance. That ox and calf alternate in Ezekiel 1:7 (Revelation 4:7), does indeed make the representation of the (tame) cattle by means of the ox and that of the wild animals by means of the lion very probable. But the flying of the eagle would certainly be sufficiently represented by two wings, while the four wings expressly mentioned (Ezekiel 1:6) point beyond this requisite, and in their parallel (Ezekiel 1:8) with the hands of a man—which give prominence to the human element—allow us on their side to conjecture something superterrestrial beyond man and beast, as Keil has rightly remarked. When Hengstenberg makes use of the cherubs of the tabernacle and in Solomon’s temple for his exposition, one does not easily understand how the furnishing of their human form with wings is to spring from this cause, that the class of birds “in the history of creation opens the series of living creatures, just as man closes it;” for in Genesis 1:20 the aquatic animals still take the precedence, and in fact the large ones (Ezekiel 1:21), which play such a part in Holy Scripture. Just as little can “the bird” take “the last place,” as being also that which is relatively “lower,” which is contradicted, as has been said, by the four wings. There is to be noticed in Ezekiel 1:11 (23) the parallel to Isaiah 6:2 (comp. Ezekiel 3:12). Perhaps, also, when speaking of “the noise of their wings” (Ezekiel 1:24), the comparison λְּ ?χεֹ ?μξַ ?ηֲ ?πֶ ?δ (after Genesis 32:2-3) is worthy of notice. The cherubs in Solomon’s temple (and also on the stands of the basins, 1 Kings 7:29) represented not life upon earth, according to its two extremities, but the terrestrial and superterrestrial life of creation. Thus only do the “lions and oxen” before us gain their significance: wild animals and cattle, the strictly animal world as contrasted with the earthly and heavenly spiritual world in their combination in the winged human figure. Otherwise they would not be necessary representations, inasmuch as they were certainly already represented by means of the irrational bird. With the “palm trees” and “flowers” (1 Kings 6:29; Ezekiel 41:18-19; Ezekiel 41:25), the significant vegetable world, too, was added to the earthly creation; while, in the following vision, storm, clouds, fire, light (Ezekiel 1:4) set before our eyes almost literally passages like Psalms 104 : “O Lord, my God, Thou art very great. Thou clothest Thyself with splendour and glory, wrapping Thyself round with light as a garment,—who maketh clouds His chariot, walketh upon the wings of the wind, making His messengers winds, His servants flaming fire.” Psalms 50 : “Our God shall come, etc. Fire devoureth before Him, and round about Him it is very tempestuous; He calleth the heavens from above, and the earth, to judge His people,—and the heavens declare His righteousness.” Psalms 18 : “He bowed the heavens and came down, and cloudy darkness was under His feet, and He rode upon the cherub, and did fly, and was poised upon the wings of the wind, made darkness His covering, etc. At the brightness that was before Him His clouds passed away, hail and coals of fire.” Although it will have to be conceded to Hengstenberg, that the earthly reference of the life of creation preponderates in the vision of Ezekiel, quite similarly as on the other side the human type preponderates, yet the whole continues to have an undeniably superterrestrial character. The fire-cloud with the four living creatures appears to the prophet (comp. Ezekiel 1:1) out of the opened heavens, and it is only the wheels (Ezekiel 1:15 sqq.) that intentionally set down the heavenly phenomenon as being at the same time something earthly. It is meant to be the human-earthly creation in the fulness of its vital power, as appearing from the background of the heaven-stirred, and also spirit-like elemental powers (air, fire), and still more (comp. Revelation 4:8-9; Revelation 5:8; Revelation 5:14; Revelation 19:4) as offering itself continually after the manner of the heavenly messengers and servants in obedience and voluntary surrender (ὡςἐνον̓ρανῷκαὶἐπὶτῆςγῆς, Matthew 6:10), in unceasing activity of service to His honour, and thus continually glorifying Him (Ezekiel 1:19 sqq.). This we may suppose to be the most intrinsically heavenly element in the vision. It is certainly the case with the spectacle at the revelation on Sinai, which, moreover, unmistakably furnishes the keynote here, that the law was given in fire and cloud, but not less through the mediation of angels (Deuteronomy 33:2; Hebrews 2:2; Acts 7:53; Acts 7:38; Galatians 3:19). Hengstenberg speaks strikingly of Ezekiel 1 as “the great panorama of the universe;” and there, certainly, the reference indicated could not be wanting. If the “spirit” (Ezekiel 1:12) determines the first vital operation of the chajoth, their motion, and if (Ezekiel 1:20-21) it is also the determining element for the motion of the wheels, then the (as one may express it) more spiritual motion of the whole, but especially of the chajoth, viz. “the noise of their wings” (Ezekiel 1:24), is determined negatively, i.e. is brought to silence, to rest, by the voice from above (Ezekiel 1:25); so that with this voice from the throne, and therefore with Him who is upon it (Ezekiel 1:26 sqq.), each and all are united, and express themselves as well as move as He pleases (Ezekiel 1:24), or rest according to His intimation. In this way the God of hosts, whom Hengstenberg only co-ordinates with Him who is enthroned upon the chajoth, is rather at the same time declared to be this latter, or the chajoth seem in such manner to be embraced in the idea of the heavenly hosts. To see in the wheels, then, “the powers of nature,” is certainly not so natural as to abide by the view of Hitzig, who appeals in support of it to Daniel 7:9. Keil also must after all admit the idea of a throne-chariot. A throne which is to move upon the earth can hardly be conceived of without wheels. It is not so much, however, “to show the possibility and the ease with which the throne moves to all the four quarters of the world,” as rather to express the motion in the most living manner and expressly for the earth, specially in the first place with a view to Jerusalem, corresponding to the historical circumstances: it is for this reason that we have to do with wheels. The eyes in the wheels are parallel with the faces in the chajoth, and both are to be understood in connection with the “spirit” (ψεּ ?ηַ), and perhaps also not without reference to “the noise of the wings” (2 Chronicles 16:9). The sovereignty of Him who rules in heaven, whom all serve as to Him all live, as it is ready from heaven to manifest itself livingly upon earth, is represented at the close as being the sovereignty “as of a man,” which, when we take into account the rainbow of Eze 1:28 (notwithstanding the preponderating judicial character of the whole), allows of the coming forth full of promise—as the ultimate goal, as the victory of righteousness—of the kindness and love of God toward man (Titus 3:4), in grace and mercy toward Israel, and for the salvation of the world, so that the vision would have its fulfilment in Christ (comp. John 12:41 with Isaiah 6), Revelation 4. After this interpretation of the symbolism of the vision as a whole, its meaning for the prophetic mission of Ezekiel (comp. the introductory remarks to Ezekiel 1-3) must be clear thus far, that above all the prophet will have to announce judgment, not merely in the first place upon Jerusalem, but farther upon the heathen also. To this the fire-characteristic points, which remains with the vision from beginning to end, and behind which whatever promise of mercy if in it steps into the background for the time, so that the prophet falls down under the impression received (Ezekiel 1:28). For a so-called “consecration as a prophet,” this certainly would be too special in its tenor. For this one would be under the necessity of extracting, and that at the same time under a misapprehension “of the dependence of our theophany on that manifestation of God at Sinai,” as Keil does, “in a more general way the symbols of that righteousness, holiness, and grace which God manifests in the upholding, governing, and perfecting of His kingdom.” On the other hand, by means of the fire-character of judgment, which expressed its special tendency, this vision was an introduction of Ezekiel forth-with into his sphere of labour. Nothing else had the prophet at first to testify to the exiles, for their obstinacy with all its ungodly hopes was still founded on the apparent continuance of Jerusalem. The more such high ecstasy—a throwing inwards or spiritualizing, which has its sphere on the boundary of corporeal life (Ezekiel 1:28), as Oehler brings out prominently—along with the mission of Ezekiel attested his call as a prophet, the less need was there of an official consecration for him; his mission under such a vision was so in the highest degree, or at least made a call, calling, consecration to the prophetic office be presupposed in a decided manner in his case, as the Talmudists, even in reference to δָ ?ιָ ?δδָ ?ιֹ ?δ in Ezekiel 1:3 (in the interest certainly of the prophecy, as they assert, being attached to the ark), show therefrom, that Ezekiel was already before a prophet in the holy land. The vision does not by any means consecrate him as a prophet, but it certainly does transfer him to those banished to Tel-Abib (Ezekiel 3:12 sqq.); it thus realizes itself as a mission. And pervading as it does the whole book, it likewise stamps and illustrates the prophetic activity of Ezekiel, Ezekiel 3:23; Ezekiel 8:4; Ezekiel 43:2. The vision is, however, not merely as regards its fire-character, a programme for our prophet, but its much more essential contents informed him that he would have to represent the glory of Jehovah. Judgment in the first place, from the very beginning, however, not without mercy, but rather a glorification of the living God in His people to be accomplished in a glory of vital power, on the basis of creation, and thus from the outset with a view to the whole earth. The meaning of the chajoth in the vision, whence their designation (purposely not called cherubim in Ezekiel 1), and their so-varied form, and the accompaniment of spirit-moved wheels full of eyes are explained, cannot be settled by pointing to the Lord’s dwelling among His people in the holy of holies of the temple, nor explained by the “�cumenical character of the new economy of salvation, for the setting up of which the Lord shall appear upon earth” (which is said to be represented in the fourfold figure of the cherubs and wheels); nor even can it be expressed characteristically enough with Keil in this way, that “the moving of the throne to all quarters of the world is made conspicuous, not merely in order to indicate the spread of the kingdom of God over the whole earth, but in order to reveal the Lord and King, whose power stretches over the whole world,” etc. (p. 28). The prophecy of glory is the characteristic of Ezekiel, whereby he stands distinguished from all prophets. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ 2. The Divine Commission to the Prophet (Ezekiel 2:1 to Ezekiel 3:11)Ezekiel 2:1 And He said unto me, Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I will speak with thee. 2And the spirit entered into me as He spake unto me, and set me upon my feet, and I heard Him that spake unto me. 3And He said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the sons of Israel, to heathens, the rebels, who rebelled against me. They and their fathers have been revolters from me down to this 4very day. And the sons! stiff of face and hard of heart are they, I do send thee unto them [Ezekiel 2:3]; and thou sayest unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah. 5And they, whether they hear or whether they forbear,—for they are a house of rebelliousness,—know then that a prophet was in their midst. 6And thou, son of man, thou art not to be afraid of them, neither of their words art thou to be afraid; for [although] prickles and thorns are with thee, and thou art dwelling among scorpions, of their words thou art not to be afraid, and at their face thou 7art not to be terrified, for they are a house of rebelliousness. And thou speakest my words unto them, whether they hear or whether they forbear; for they are 8rebelliousness. And thou, son of man, hear what I say unto thee: Thou must not be rebelliousness, like the house of rebelliousness. Open thy mouth, and eat 9what I give unto thee. And I saw, and behold, an hand sent [stretched] unto me; and behold, in it a book-roll. 10And He spread it out before me; and it was written within and without, and on it were written lamentations, and groaning, and woe. Ezekiel 3:1 And He said unto me, Son of man, that which thou shalt find eat; eat 2this roll, and go, speak unto the house of Israel. And I opened my mouth, and He caused me to eat this roll. 3And He said unto me, Son of man, thy belly shalt thou cause to eat, and thy bowels shalt thou fill with this roll which I give thee. And I did eat; and it became in my mouth as honey for sweetness. 4And He said unto me, Son of man, go, get thee unto the house of Israel, and thou 5speakest in my words unto them. For not to a people obscure of lip and difficult of tongue art thou sent,—to the house of Israel. 6Not to many nations obscure of lip and difficult of tongue, whose words thou canst not hear [understandest not],—7although I have not sent thee to them, they would hearken unto thee. Yet the house of Israel, they will not be willing to hearken unto thee, for they are not willing to hearken unto me; for all the house of Israel, hard of forehead and stiff of heart are they. 8Behold, I have made thy face hard against their face, and thy forehead hard against their forehead. 9As an adamant harder than stone have I made thy forehead: thou shalt not fear them, and thou shalt not be terrified at 10their face, for they are a house of rebelliousness. And He said unto me, Son of man, all my words that I shall speak unto thee, receive in thine heart and hear in thine ears. 11And go, get thee to the captivity, to the children of thy people, and thou speakest unto them, and sayest unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, whether they hear or whether they forbear. Ch. 2. Ezekiel 2:2. Sept.: ... ἐπʼ ? ἐμξπνευμακ. ἀνελαβενμεκ. ἐξηγειπενμεκ. ἐστησενμε— Ezekiel 2:3. ... τ. οἰκοντ. ̓Ισρ. τουςπαραπιχραινονταςμε, οἱτινες— Ezekiel 2:5. ... ἠπτωηθωσιν, διοτι— Ch. 2. Ezekiel 2:6. ... μηδεἐκστηςἀποπροσωπουαὐτων, διοτιπαροιστρησουσινκ. ἐπισυστησονταιἐπισεκυκλοι— Ezekiel 2:7. Anoth. read.: αιϊξψι (Sept., Syr., Arab., Chald.: ςν). Ezekiel 2:10. γεγαμμεναἠνταὀπισθενκ. ταἐμπροσθεν. Ch. 3. Ezekiel 2:1. ... ἀνθρωπου, καταφαγετ. κεφαλιδα...υἱοις ʼ ?Ισρ. (Anoth. read.: απι, Vulg., Syr., Arab.) Ezekiel 2:2. K. διηνοιξεν. Ezekiel 2:3. ... τοστομασουφαγεαικ. ἡχοιλια...τηςδεδομενηςεἰςσε...μελιγλυκαζον. Ezekiel 2:5. βαθυχειλονχ....συἐξαποστελληπροςτ. οἰχ. Ezekiel 2:6. ... ἀλλογλωσουςοῦδεστιβαρουςτηγλωσσηὀντας... κ. εἰπροςτοιοτους...οὑτοιἀνεἰςηκουσανσου. Ezekiel 2:7. ... φιλονειχοιεἰσινχ.— Ezekiel 2:9. Κ. ἐσται, διαπαντοςκραταιοτερονπετρας...μηδεπτοηθηςἀπο— Ezekiel 2:10. ... οὑςλελαληκαμετασου— Ezekiel 2:11. ... ἐανἀραἐνδωσιν. REMARKS In accordance with the character of the vision of Ezekiel 1 as discussed at p. 31, the installation of Ezekiel to his sphere of labour must now take place, the vision must he realised as a mission (first of all in words). But before the mission conies to be expressed in words (it is said, first of all, merely, Ezekiel 2:1, and I will speak with thee), the prophet is restored, so to speak, physically, i.e. as regards mind and body, to the status quo. Ezekiel 2:1-2.—The Divine Raising up of Ezekiel in order to the Divine CommissionEze_2:1. And He spake. The “voice of one that spake” (Ezekiel 1:28, comp. Ezekiel 2:25) must be that of Him who sits upon the throne (Ezekiel 2:26).—αοΞΰγν, man of men. By this expression Ezekiel is immediately contrasted with Him who is speaking to him; for of Him it is said at Ezekiel 1:26 : “the likeness as the appearance of a man.” Jehovah merely appeared “as a man,” Ezekiel is a son of man. (Cocc. certainly &mi frater, Psalms 22:22; Hebrews 2:11-12.) Hence the view that this form of address is meant to distinguish him from the angels—apart from such a conception of the chajoth in Ezekiel 1.—says too little. On the other hand, it would increase the distinction so as to produce a conflict with the raising up of the prophet which follows, if a humbling of him were meant to be signified by this expression (Raschi),—in order that he may not after such visions exalt himself as being only a man (2 Corinthians 12:7). It is perhaps meant to be said at the commencement,—but even more for those who have to hear him than for Ezekiel himself; and on this account it becomes a stereotyped (Hδver.: more than 80 times) form of address to the prophet,—that he would not to be able to give such revelations from himself (comp. Introd. § 7). But this man of men is called: one whom God strengthens (comp. Introd. § 1). His legitimation for the Church lies as much in the one as in the other; in other words, in both together (1 Corinthians 15:10). The expression son of man is meant to say to Israel: “Thus saith the Lord Jehovah.”—As regards the divine raising up of Ezekiel which is intended, his falling down comes, first of all, to be considered: stand upon thy feet. This human element, which has come to be expressed, is established by the form of address on the part of Jehovah; yet without the design of humbling the prophet (e.g. as the Jews say, because driven out of Jerusalem, like Adam out of Eden!), rather with compassionate condescension (οb φιλανθρωπίαν—Polanus), a divine ecce homo. Then, farther, it corresponds with the stereotyping of this form of address to Ezekiel, and also with an exaltation of him, as respects his prophetic mission, when it is remembered in connection therewith that the vision of Ezekiel 1, with all its direct and special applicability to Israel of that time, had a general human character, and a horizon embracing the whole world: the likeness of a man predominated in the chajoth, the likeness as the appearance of a man was the description of Him who sat on the throne, the number four had the sway numerically over the whole. With this distinction from Ezekiel 9, 10, the mission of Ezekiel takes place, who at the same time is addressed as “son of man,” as prophet not merely of Israel, but of mankind generally. [Rosenm.: pro simplici ΰָ ?γָ ?ν homo. Hδvern.: a standing humiliation, corresponding with the time of the exile, and the strong, powerful nature of Ezekiel, and at the same time, a lesson for his hearers to look quite away from man. Hengst.: the form of address admits what lies before the eyes in looking at the frivolous objections of the multitude. Hitzig: a self-reflection of the prophet as to the distance between God and him. Klief.: because God speaks with him as man to man, as a man talks with his friend. Keil: the weakness and frailty of man, in contrast with God, which appears the more prominent in the case of Ezekiel, through the preponderance of vision, for the people as for him a sign of the power of God in weakness, who can raise Israel even up again, miserable as she is among the heathen. Umbr.: “The call of grace out of the mouth of Him who by the sight of His glory has cast man to the ground in the consciousness of his sin.”]—Ezekiel is to rise to his feet (comp. Daniel 8:18; Matthew 17:7; Acts 26:16; Exodus 33:21), primarily, a corporeal lifting up of the prophet, in order, however, that God may talk with him. ΰֹ ?ϊָ ?κְ, the accusative particle ֹ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ for the prep. ΰϊ (Ew., Lehrb. § 264; Ges. § 101). Comp. Ezekiel 3:22; Ezekiel 3:24; Ezekiel 3:27. Ezekiel 2:2. For the divine summons the divine preparation is not wanting, important for all coming time (Ezekiel 3:24; comp. Revelation 1:17). ψεּ ?ηַ, coming in this way, by means of God’s word, is not “the consciousness, the thinking power” of the prophet, his “animal spirits” (Hitzig), comp. on Ezekiel 1:28; for the spirit comes into him, does not so much return to him (how would he have been able, Ezekiel 1:28, in a state of unconsciousness, to hear one speaking?); but also not the Holy Spirit for the purpose of inspiration, but: the spirit who was also in the chajoth and in the wheels, Ezekiel 1 (Hengstenberg); just as the context makes us think of that first. God gives him the spirit to set him on his feet, but also to catch His words; on account of the latter, this divine quickening is at the same time expressed as a coming of the “spirit” into him; it is a quickening of mind and body conjointly, which brings about the transition from the revelation in vision (ξψΰδ) to the revelation by word. (Hδvern.: the Spirit of God, partly as power that overmasters, seizes him, partly as that victorious, divine power—in himself—of genuine courage and noble alacrity in his calling?) An interesting parallel in 1 Kings 10:5.—ξִ ?γַּ ?αֵּ ?ψ (Ezekiel 43:6) ξִ ?ϊְ ?γַּ ?αֵ ?ψ= partic. Hithp.; in Ezekiel 1:28, ξְ ?γַ ?αֵּ ?ψ partic. Piel. Raschi: “The Shechinah talked within itself in its glory.” In that case, ΰμι = of me. ΰֵ ?ϊ with the participle = Him who (Ewald, Lehr. p. 569 sqq.). Ezekiel 2:3 to Ezekiel 3:11.—The Divine Commission to the ProphetEze_2:3-7. What Opposition he has to encounter from his Hearers, as well as the Divine Consolation thereanentEze_2:3. And He spake unto me—is continually repeated anew, characteristically, indicating the momentary character of the divine communications.—The mission is portrayed after the manner of the address. απι, for which the LXX. have read αֵּ ?ιϊ. The sons (children) of Israel in general are brought down to the level of βειν (which expression is not used for the tribes and families, nor does it, as Hitzig, Klief., mean merely isolated portions of the people),—βּ ?εֹ ?ι (from βָּ ?εָ ?δ), that which is brought together, like ἔθνος, that which hangs together by means of ἔθος, custom, in distinction from λαός—(comp. Hosea 1:9) which is farther explained by: the rebels, and may be illustrated by comparison with Psalms 2:1. The article emphasizes them as such in a decided way, and the clause: which rebelled against me, impressively repeats what is applicable to them. (Hengst.: They are described first according to what they ought to have been, sons of him who wrestled and prevailed in faith with God and man; then according to what they really are, a microcosm, as it were, of the whole heathen world, whose religion and morals were reflected in them; the plural goes even beyond Isaiah 1:4. Polanus refers it to Judah and Israel.) How general the statements are is shown by what follows: they and their fathers—(Jeremiah 3:25). The echo makes itself heard still in the speech of Stephen, Acts 7:51-53.—ςφν, a Pentateuchal word. Ezekiel 2:4. But since it is the sons to whom the divine mission directs the prophet, they are put forward, as it were pointed out with the finger, but by no means as “children of God,” as Hδvern. will have it. Stiff is something thoroughly bad (Isaiah 48:4); it is otherwise with Lard (Hebrews 13:9), which may at all events be determined by cirstances (comp. Ezekiel 3:8-9). Here the face determines the character of the heart, and of its hardness as one that is evil. This evil hardness of the heart explains the before-mentioned faithlessness “down to this very day.” The stiffness of the face excludes alike the emotion of shame and the tears of repentance.—Thee (thus to those who are ηζְ ?χֵ ?ιΞμֵ ?α, one of the ηִ ?ζְ ?χֵ ?ιΞΰֵ ?μ), to the hardhearted one who is hard (firm) in God, comp. Ezekiel’s name, Introd. § 1 (Ezekiel 3:8-9).—Thus saith the Lord Jehovah. And here we are by no means, with J. H. Michaelis, to add in thought: etc. Just this short statement, without any addition, is of indescribable majesty as opposed to the rebels; in connection with it, Virgil’s quos ego may suggest itself to us. [Sept.: κύριοςκύριος. Vulg.: Dominus deus. Philipps.: the Lord, the Eternal. Other Jewish translators: God the Lord.] It is a short form of Exo 20:2.—Because ΰֲ ?γֹ ?πָ ?ι, according to which ιְ ?δεָֹ ?δ is usually punctuated, immediately precedes, ιֱ ?δεִֹ ?δ gets the points of ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν. Ezekiel 2:5. And they strongly emphasizes those who have been mentioned. To supply out of Eze 2:7 : and speak my words unto them, or the like (Hengst.), is not necessary, is even unsuitable, inasmuch as “thus saith the Lord Jehovah” precedes (comp. Ezekiel 3:11), and also confuses the meaning of the sentence, which finds its apodosis after the expressively resumed δξδ in ειγΰε: they know then, or: “they know, however,” etc. Nevertheless, διδ preserves the meaning of was (not: is), although, as both cases are supposed: “hearing” and “forbearing,” i.e. neglecting to hear, δξδειγςεΧ ought not to be so much as: they will then learn by experience, viz. by the fulfilment of the threatenings, which could certainly be applicable to the latter case only. Here the matter in hand is not yet so much hearing and being converted, or not, as is the case afterwards in Ezekiel 3:17 sqq., but only the mere giving ear in general, or the refusing even that; and thus, even whether the prophet finds hearers or not, his “thus saith the Lord Jehovah” is a fact; they know by means of this testimony, which sounded among them, although they may hear nothing farther, that a prophet has been among them. God has by this given sufficient testimony to Himself (John 15:22). Thus the ΰνΞεΰν makes the very least supposition which can be made, and gives the reason for this lowest supposition, hearing as well as forbearing to hear, by means of the clause: for a house, etc., and hence also ιֶ ?ηְ ?γָּ ?μεּ with full accentuation.—For παιΰ, comp. Lange’s Comment, on Deuteronomy, Doct. Reflect, on Ezekiel 13. Ezekiel 2:6. But whatever opposition the prophet may have to encounter as regards those to whom he is sent, in reference to his own person (hence the subjective negation ΰμ)—so runs now the divine consolation—he has nothing to fear (Jeremiah 1:8; Jeremiah 1:17; Matthew 10:26; Matthew 10:28), either from themselves or from their words, which with men usually look worse than themselves, and frequently also are worse, since one pulls down another by such means: slander behind backs creates prejudice, and renders abortive the labours of the preacher. “Thou art not to be afraid” impressively repeated, thus: no, not at all. ρψαιν, only here, is taken by some literally, as an adjective (Gesen.): rebellious; by some figuratively, as a substantive (Meier): straggling briars, or something hard, that injures: prickles, possibly also something for beating: a whip, scourge. Keil: stinging nettles, thorns. ρַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ο, here like νִ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ο, Ezekiel 28:24. Elsewhere also a figurative and non-figurative expression are combined (Psalms 27:1).—αι, according to Keil: if, but better: although. It gives the reason for the charge.—ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?κְ is explained by what follows as being the with of association (Ezekiel 3:15; Deuteronomy 8:15; 1 Kings 12:11; 1 Kings 12:14). A gradation: briars, thorns, scorpions! ηϊϊ Niphal: to be broken, to pass away, to despair (Ezekiel 3:9).—Face, because it is stiff (Ezekiel 2:4).—House (Ezekiel 2:5), here again with special reference to his “dwelling.” Ezekiel 2:7 : Ezekiel 3:4; Ezekiel 2:5. ξει at the close, but with heightened meaning, as it were the incarnation of it. Ezekiel 44:6. Ezekiel 2:8 to Ezekiel 3:11. What Opposition he might have to encounter in himself, and the Divine Strengthening against it. Ezekiel 2:8. Hitherto it was the commission as such, viz. a divine one, now it is the same commission as respects what it will contain ΰϊΰωψΞ. Inasmuch as Ezekiel belongs to that house, ξψι (as hitherto always in pause-form) is attributed to him also. It has been understood as an adjective, or elliptically (supply ΰִ ?ιωׁ, Ezekiel 2:7 : ΰַ ?πְ ?ωֵׁ ?ι). Comp. Jonah; Exodus 4:13; Jeremiah 1:6. The divine commission is symbolized by means of the following demand, with which every objection is cut off. (Illustrating, at the same time, the form of expression in John 6.) With appetite, hunger, we have here nothing to do. Ezekiel 2:9 : εΰψΰδ, comp, Ezekiel 1:1 : consequently in vision. αε, because ιγ is of the common gender; others make the suffix neuter, alleging that ιγ is always feminine.—ξβμϊΞ, written after the manner of the Pentateuch on the skin of an animal, Psalms 40:7; Hebrews 10:7 (Revelation 10:2). J. D. Michaelis makes the remark here: such a book rolled about a rounded piece of wood looks not unlike a baker’s roll (!). Ezekiel 2:10. God spreads out this roll before him, so that he can ascertain what follows, the contents of the divine commission, can become acquainted with his mission. It was a so-called opisthograph (Lucian: Vit. Auct. ix.), Pliny, Ep. 49. Written over inside, and on the back (comp. Revelation 5:1), not merely, as usual, the inside alone; within and without, indicating a writing of great size, whose fulness of contents is also clear at once to every one, by which writing we are to understand the book of our prophet, whose character, as will immediately appear, is to be specified as χιπδ (wailing, mourning, lamentation, 19:1), δβδ(from the low sound), and δι(according to Gesen., for πְ ?δι; Ew.: a sound of wailing δεֹ ?ι). Comp. therewith, Exodus 31:18; Zechariah 5:1; Jeremiah 36:18; Daniel 5:25. Ezekiel 3:1. What he finds before him (Ezekiel 2:8-9); he would certainly not seek it for himself. After the acceptance without objection (symbolized by the eating), the speaking to the house of Israel is to take place: εμκγαψ, ἀσυνδέτως, without ε between them, one idea. Only what God imparts to him he is to preach, and that immediately: and therefore nothing of his own, and no delay in accordance with his own judgment (2 Timothy 4:2). The objectivity and sovereignty of the divine word are strongly emphasized. Comp. Deuteronomy 18:18; Jeremiah 1:9 (Matthew 10:20). Ezekiel 3:2. A symbolical transaction, and also taking place in vision (Deuteronomy 8:3; Psalms 119:130-131). Ezekiel 3:3. An intensification of the thought to the highest degree, so that the prophet is not merely to be willing to accept (to “eat”), but what he has accepted is to be his food, on which he lives, and that which fills his inner man, which determines his activity outwardly. Comp. Psalms 40:8; John 4:31-34 (1 Timothy 4:6; Luke 6:45). Double accusative—εΰαμδ, with emphasis (Gesen. Gramm. § 126), neut.: as respects sweetness, as sweet as honey. A frequent comparison as applied to the fear of God, His word and the like (comp. Jeremiah 15:16). The bitter element (Revelation 10:9-10) is perhaps presupposed in what he saw written on the roll (Ezekiel 2:10; comp. Romans 9:2). In this way the bitter element would come first, and so much the greater an act of obedience would the prophet’s eating appear. And so Klief. might legitimately emphasize the sweet after-taste, and also point to this, that Ezekiel, after and during all the misery which he has to announce, will have also something sweet in his mouth in saying it, or even in merely knowing it respecting Israel. Comp. Introd. § 5; comp. however, Ezekiel 3:14 also. Ezekiel 3:4. μγΞαΰ; comp. the imperative in Ezekiel 3:1; Ezekiel 3:11. A more expressive repetition of the command in the mission. Hence the sweet taste which the prophet experienced in Ezekiel 3:3 symbolizes, first of all, his alacrity; thus the divine preparation, the strengthening experienced in respect of that which would possibly otter resistance in himself; so that there may be a retrospective reference to the main hindrance, namely, that which lay with Israel (Ezekiel 2:3-7). Ezekiel 3:5. It seems like a relief that Ezekiel is not sent to ςξχιΞ, which certainly stands for those speaking a language foreign to a Jew (comp. Isaiah 33:19), as is also explained in so many words in Ezekiel 3:6, and which, in parallelism here with heavy tongue, will mean not so much “deep” of sound, as rather, in accordance with the cognate idea of deep, viz. obscure as regards the interpretation,—is there a reference to the widely-opened lips of the stammering tongue? The plural, because of the collective νς. So already Calvin.—ΰϊδωμεη, standing in the middle, refers alike to the positive and to the negative part of the sentence; we may supply: but.—The house of Israel is the prophet’s own house (Ezekiel 3:11), in whose case, therefore, lip and tongue have not the stamp of strangeness for him. Ezekiel 3:6. This more general thought in Ezekiel 3:5 receives in Ezekiel 3:6 a peculiar colouring, inasmuch as, on the one hand, the many nations are made prominent by the side of Israel,—Ezekiel’s sphere of labour is small and contracted in comparison,—and inasmuch as, on the other hand, stress is laid upon the circumstance: “whose words (if they had to speak to thee) thou wouldst not understand”—thus the hindrance as regards their lip and tongue would lie with the prophet. But in the latter respect, it is rather that he has to speak (“and speakest in my words,” Ezekiel 3:4; Ezekiel 3:11), and not so much to hear. The subject in hand is the power of comprehension which the prophet is to meet with. Now, this is a contrast which lies in thought between the lines. But another connected therewith (just as it is hinted by the contrast drawn between Israel and the heathen, to whom Israel was compared above in Ezekiel 2:3) is expressed in so many words: ΰνμΰΰμιδν, where εαιϊιωΞ Ezekiel 3:7 is to be understood as the principal clause, and δξδΞ as in parenthesis, so that the sense is: Ezekiel is sent not to those whom he ought to understand, and cannot understand, but to Israel, who ought to hear him, and will not hearken to him. Those to whom God does not send him would throw no hindrance in his way; although he might not be able to understand them, they would hearken unto him—ωξς with ΰμ, contrasted indeed with the inability to understand on his part, as well as, of course, on their part also; but only the former reference comes to be considered when the question is as to the right accomplishment of his task, that of speaking God’s words; it does not indeed signify “assent” (Hengst.), but a giving heed, and therefore what presupposes interest at least, if not desire, and what might possibly lead to more, perhaps, as Kimchi remarks: they would seek after an interpreter of thy words. But although the prophet is sent not to such, but rather to Israel, yet (Ezekiel 3:7) the house of Israel does not manifest even the interest which heathens would show, for they will not even pay any attention to Ezekiel, not to speak of becoming obedient to his words. The relief is thus only seeming. Comp. Matthew 23:37. [Similar and different explanations: For the most part ΰνΞμΰ is understood as a formula of swearing, or as an asseveration (verily), and the sentence hypothetically (if I sent thee): comp: on the other hand Hitzig, Keil. For ΰνΞμΰ, Ew. reads ΰνΞμΰֻ instead of μεּ, just as a Lap. does, instead of μεּ ?ΰ! The old translations omit μΰ without hesitation, while the Masoretes, on the other hand, mark the verse because of its threefold μΰ. Hitzig, Keil: =ΰνΞμΰ “but,” referring ΰμιδν and δξδ to Israel, and =ιωξςεΰμικ= they are able, ought to understand thee. The latter expression, however, does not mean the same thing as “to hearken to any one.” Cocc.: If I had not sent thee to them (Israel), those others (the heathen) would hearken to thee. The words have also been understood interrogatively: if I had not sent thee to them, would not those others hearken to thee?] The meaning we have given harmonizes with the history of Naaman the Syrian, of the book of Jonah, of the woman of Canaan, of the heathen centurion (Matthew 8). Comp. also Matthew 11:21 sqq., 12:41.—Not unto thee, because not unto me: what a strengthening of Ezekiel! That must have changed his wrath into the sorrow of love, Ezekiel 20:8; comp. Matthew 10:24-25; John 15:20.—αμΞαιϊ considered as a whole, so that the exceptions do not come into consideration. The wicked hardness of the heart (comp. on Ezekiel 2:4) is here attributed to the forehead, because it finds expression there; that the stiffness of the “heart” is here expressed, proves the correctness of the explanation given on Ezekiel 2:4 of the hardness as applied to the heart (Isaiah 48:4; Jeremiah 3:3; Exodus 32:9; Matthew 19:8). Ezekiel 3:8. The divine strengthening of Ezekiel, now quite clearly expressed, while his labours have become more difficult, and not, as it appeared, more easy, offers itself as the explanation of his name (comp. on Ezekiel 2:4). It is also not without design that the word used in reference to him is not “stiff,” but hard, which we find repeatedly. A divine confronting. Comp. Jeremiah 1:18; Jeremiah 15:20. Ezekiel 3:9. The thought is still further intensified by means of the comparison. ωָׁ ?ξִ ?ιψ (from ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψ, to hold fast; hence: to keep) means something hard; hence a thorn; here the hardest of precious stones. Harder than stone, a proverbial expression of the diamond. Bochart, comparing the σμύρις, emery, understands a substance for grinding and polishing. Comp. also P. Cassel on “Schemir.” According to the Jewish Hagada and Turkish legend: a wonderful worm, whose blood is said to have cut through the stones without noise at the building of Solomon’s temple. μΰΞ, the admonition sounds like a prohibition and promise in one. Comp. Ezekiel 2:6; Ezekiel 2:5. Ezekiel 3:10. The conclusion and return to the prophet himself, in view of the possible resisting element in him (Ezekiel 2:8 sqq.). An allusion at the same time to the symbolic transaction in Ezekiel 3:1 sqq.—All the words, but those which God will first speak to him.—The heart first, because otherwise the ears are of little use (Acts 16:14). Ezekiel 3:11 (Ezekiel 3:15). Comp. Ezekiel 3:4. The “house of Israel” there is the “golah” (captivity) here, as a community, a society, which lies nearer to the prophet, because of its being his own people. Thy, not: My (Exodus 32:7), Ezekiel 33:2; Ezekiel 33:12; Ezekiel 33:17. As often γִּ ?αֶּ ?ψ and ΰξψ together, the words to be spoken following the latter (Ezekiel 2:4). At the same time, a setting forth clearly of the position that he has to speak. Comp. Ezekiel 2:5; Ezekiel 2:7; Ezekiel 3:27. 1. “A deeper meaning lies in this awakening word. First, the creature falls down in silence before the infinitude of the Creator; this is humility, the basis and root of all religious conduct. But he whom the Creator has permitted to come but little short of being himself God, whom He has crowned with glory and honour (Psalms 8:5), is not to remain lying in half-conscious, silent adoration; he is to rise to his feet, that he may hear the word of God. But certainly he cannot set himself upon his feet; the Spirit must raise him up as a spirit, if he is to understand what God says. Lo, this is the holy psychology of Holy Scripture, this is the freedom of the highest thinking about God, which comes through God and from God” (Umbreit). 2. The overmastering divine factor in the prophets does not, however, suffer them to appear by any means unconscious. Ezekiel falling down upon the earth, becomes, even in the midst of the divine revelation, and under the impression of it, thoroughly conscious of what is earthly and human in his own self as contrasted with it [i.e. the revelation]. If this self of the prophet stands in a receptive attitude in that part of the revelation made to him which is pure vision, yet plastic fancy gives symbolic form to the expression, so as to be understood by men, in similitudes drawn from the earthly world, and memory is able to reproduce for us what has been seen. But still farther, where, as in Ezekiel 2, what has been inwardly received and experienced is expressed in words as idea and thought, Ezekiel must first rise to his feet, and become capable in spirit of understanding the divine commission. Besides, a vast elevation of the mere natural life is the unmistakable characteristic of our section; comp. Ezekiel 2:5-6; Ezekiel 3:8-9. 3. John also, although he had lain on the Lord’s breast, at sight of Him (Revelation 1) fell at His feet as one dead. And by this as a standard, that very great familiarity which proclaims itself in so many prayers of far lesser saints ought to learn to measure and to moderate itself. There is, however, in our prayers more fancy and sham feeling than real intercourse with the Lord. 4. “An image of the new birth. When God bids us rise from the death in which we are lying (Ephesians 2:1; Ephesians 2:5; Ephesians 5:14), He at the same time imparts to us His Spirit, who quickens us and raises us up. Similarly is it with our strengthening in all that is good. We are to do our duty; and He brings it about that we are able to do it, Philippians 2:13” (Cocc.). 5. “God does not cast down His own in order to leave them lying on the ground; but He lifts them up immediately afterwards. In believers, in other words, the haughtiness of the flesh is in this way corrected. If, therefore, we often see the ungodly terrified at the voice of God, yet they are not, like believers, after the humiliation, told to be of good courage,” etc. (Calv.) 6. “It was only when the Spirit was added that some effect was produced by the voice of God. God works, indeed, effectually by means of His word; but the effectiveness is not bound up with the sound, but proceeds from the secret impulse of the Spirit. The working of the Spirit is here connected with the word of God, yet in such a way, that we may see how the external word is of no consequence unless it is animated by the power of the Spirit. But when God speaks, He at the same time adds the effectual working of His Spirit” (Calv.). 7. “Signs without the word are in vain. What fruit would there have been if the prophet had merely seen the vision, but no word of God had followed it? And this may be applied to the sacraments also, if they were mere signs before our eyes; it is the word of God only that makes the sacraments in some measure living, just as is the case with the visions” (Calv.). 8. By means of the repeated εַ ?ιֹּ ?ΰξֶ ?ψ the divine revelation in word is identified with the revelation of glory in Ezekiel 1, which was to appear as the “Shechinah” in the Messiah, according to the Targums falling back upon the older tradition. One of the steps towards the Logos in John 1. 9. “In Jehovah and His covenant-relation to Israel lies the necessity of His revelation; His testimony, the tidings from Him, must be heard in the midst of Israel. Thus Jehovah Himself wills not merely the conversion, but also the hardening of the people (Isaiah 6:9 sqq.), in so far as, first of all, He merely wills the preaching of Himself. Hence, if on the one hand the prophetic preaching must be traced back strictly to the will of God, is to be looked upon as an out-come and transcript of it, not less is this the case as regards its effects; the hearing and not hearing of the same is likewise God’s will, since otherwise He would be under the necessity of withholding His word itself” (Hδv.). 10. The symbolical procedure with the book-roll belongs manifestly to the vision, is of the nature of vision, however much, as narrated, it resembles an external occurrence. Bordering, according to Tholuck, on “the rhetorical domain of metaphor,” the representation teaches, at all events, how cautiously the exposition of Ezekiel will have to proceed in this respect. 11. Umbreit remarks on Ezekiel 3:1 sqq.: “Here we have the right expression for enabling us to form a judgment and estimate of true inspiration. The divine does not remain as a strange element in the man; it becomes his own feeling thoroughly, penetrates him entirely, just as food becomes a part of his bodily frame.” “And the written book of the seer,” he says in conclusion, “bears quite the stamp of something thoroughly pervaded alike by the divine and human.” 12. A parallel to the symbolical transaction in Ezekiel, of which Hδvernick remarks that it “is the reality of an inner state, of the highest spiritual excitement, of the true and higher entering into the divine will,” is presented by the second book of Esdras 14:38 sqq. Comp. the difference of this “dead, apocryphal imitation,” by means of which the thought of pure, divine inspiration is meant to be expressed. 13. The unintelligibility of the language of the heathen world for the prophet is to be taken in a purely formal sense; for as respects the material element, the substance, the manner of the thinking, and not of the mere speaking, there is nothing at all said. For the prophet this inner side of the heathen languages would, it is true, present equal difficulty, if not even more, than that outer one. But emphasis is laid on the willingness of the heathen in spite of both, their pricking up their ears in order to understand, which was wanting in Israel. And therefore, what hinders the understanding lies in the case of the heathen merely in the language; in the case of Israel, on the other hand, in this very circumstance. That the language of Israel was the holy language in which God had spoken from the beginning to them, must as regards the import also have lightened the labours of Ezekiel, and consequently have produced a relief in this respect, where, in the case of the heathen, the language brought with it an additional difficulty. It is sometimes easier to exert an influence upon men of the world than upon men who are familiar with the “language of Canaan” (Isaiah 19:18) from childhood up. Just because Israel at once understood what the topic was in Ezekiel’s mouth (“he spake, of course, merely what Moses and the other prophets had spoken,” Coco.), their disgust and repugnance towards God’s word as soon as possible turned aside out of his way. The alleviation through the disposition of heart on the part of the heathen became in this case the reverse through the disposition of heart on the part of Israel. 14. “The distinction which Greeks and Romans made between their language and that of the barbarians, reduces itself to that of culture. It is otherwise with the distinction between the language of Israel and that of the heathen nations. Israel’s language is formed by means of God’s word, while the languages of the heathen nations were formed from purely human developments” (Klief.). 15. There is thus in Ezekiel the same hopeful (although, in reference to Israel, mournful) outlook into the heathen world, which in the Old Covenant already announces the days of the New. “It follows from the stress laid on the receptivity of the heathen, that salvation will yet at some future time be offered to them in an effectual way” (Hδv.). HINTS Ezekiel 2:1. The name Son of man belongs above all to Him who did not fall to the ground before the vision of the divine glory, but descended from the midst of the enjoyment of this glory to our earth.—Ezekiel and Christ, type and antitype.—Daniel also is so addressed (Ezekiel 8:17); and if Ezekiel saw God as a man, Daniel saw the Lord of an everlasting dominion as a son of man (Ezekiel 7). Thus they bore upon them the stamp of the future, of the fulness of the times.—“I know thy weakness, that thou art a man, and canst not bear the splendour of the divine majesty” (B. B.).—“Although preachers are compared to angels, yet they continue men, and ought to keep this always in mind” (Stck.).—“Even the most pious and most gifted teachers are subject to human infirmities, Galatians 2:11” (St.).—“Because teachers are men, hearers ought also to learn to bear patiently with their infirmities, 2 Corinthians 12:13” (St.).—“We ought not to remain lying on the ground, either in sin, or from laziness of the flesh, or with slavish fear, when God calls us” (Stck.).—“So long as man still lies on the ground, God cannot use him for His service” (St.). Ezekiel 2:2. “Let visions be ever so great, yet they are not so useful as the word” (B. B.).—God’s glory is not meant to kill, but rather to make alive.—“It is the Lord Himself, who fills His children with dismay, that also comforts them again, Hosea 6:1” (O.).—“The world smiles, in order to rage; flatters, in order to deceive; allures, in order to kill; lifts up, in order to bring low” (Cyprian).—“A herald of God ought to stand high above the world, with his spirit in heaven” (a. L.).—“The man whom God sends, He also qualifies for it, and furnishes with the necessary powers, giving him also His Spirit, as is ever still the experience of the servants of God” (Stck.).—The real prophetic anointing: “the spirit came into me.”—To whomsoever God gives an office, He gives understanding also. The fact that so many void of understanding are in office, may easily arise from this circumstance, that they have their office from men. For it is the Spirit of God, and not the clerical band, that makes the prophet.—“If God’s Spirit does not uphold, teach, guide, rule, strengthen, keep us, we are nothing” (Stck.).—There is a difference between our setting ourselves on our feet, and God’s Spirit setting us on our feet. The feet indeed remain our own, but the way along which they run is, like the power by which they are able to do so, God’s, and the steps are also sure steps.—“O that we were at all times disposed to hear Him who speaks to us!” (Stck.) Ezekiel 2:1-2. At the installation of a preacher in his office: (1) What the congregation ought to consider: that the preacher is only a man, but one whom God sets on his feet by His Spirit; (2) What the preacher ought to consider: all this, as well as in particular that God wishes to speak with him, and that he also ought to have been a hearer ere he comes before his hearers. Ezekiel 2:3. “When God demands obedience from us, He does not always promise a happy issue of our labour; but we ought to allow ourselves to be satisfied with His command, even if our labour should appear ridiculous in the eyes of men: our labour is nevertheless well-pleasing before God” (Calvin).—“Hence the true prophet does not go of his own accord, just as he does not force himself upon the people, and does not come to seek honour and good days with them” (Stck.).—“So God stretches out His hand to sinners” (St.).—“Even at worldly courts ambassadors of princes are a token of friendship” (Stck.).—Every sinner is a rebel against God.—It is a noticeable feature of the Jews of the present day in general, that they make heathens of themselves, and also take part in revolution against Church and State.—The apple does not fall far from the tree.—There is also a hereditary sin of nations: e.g. French vanity, German cosmopolitanism (want of a fixed centre, Zerfahrenheit), English selfishness (egoism). Ezekiel 2:4. “Through the habit of sinning the countenance becomes stiff, just as the heart becomes hard in sinning” (Stck.).—“And yet the countenance is the noblest, as the heart is the best part of man, Proverbs 23:26; Matthew 15:19” (Stck.).—“Judas Iscariot, e.g., had a stiff countenance: his question Matthew 26:25, his kiss” (L.).—“Thus saith the Lord” is the watchword of God against all opposition of men, the right war-cry. Ezekiel 2:5. “Ezekiel may, of course, have thought with himself as Moses did, Exodus 4:1” (St.).—Preachers ought not to look to, to reckon upon hearers, but to listen to the Lord alone.—To preach God’s word compensates even in the case of empty churches.—A full church, therefore, is not always a testimony for the preacher, 2 Timothy 4:3.—“It serves, at all events, as a testimony, although no other result is attained by the preaching” (L.). Ezekiel 2:6. Fear is a word which does not belong to any vocation of a preacher; but as little also does man-pleasing, which is often merely a form of fear.—“The comparison with thorns has reference in general to their unfruitfulness, in particular to their tendency to wound, to injure, their being interlaced together, their seeming bloom, their ultimate burning. As regards the expression scorpions, we are to think of the poison, the secret sting, the cunning. And what a wilderness must the house of Israel be! Ezekiel does not go to strayed sheep, but dwells with scorpions” (Stck.).—“In none of the prophetic books is the rigorous spirit of Moses more perceptible than in the case of Ezekiel” (Roos). Because God knows our fear, therefore He speaks so repeatedly against it. Ezekiel 2:7. Rebelliousness may well grieve the servant of God, may even rouse him to anger, but ought never to degrade him to the level of a dumb dog.—Spiritual dignitaries are those who carry the word of God high above themselves, even when it meets with nothing but contradiction.—“And fathers of families also are to be like preachers” (L.). Ezekiel 2:8. The enemies of a preacher are not what is worst for him; his friends are often worse than his worst enemies, and his worst enemy of all by far may be his own self. Therefore, know thyself.—“Preachers ought to be patterns, not imitators and followers of the flock” (St.).—“What an influence the surroundings of a preacher have upon him! And Ezekiel belonged to the same people” (L.).—Many a strange thing happens to one when he is with God. On the other hand, the demand: “Open thy mouth, and eat,” is what we should naturally expect; for what does not man eat, and how many useless books are devoured with the greatest eagerness!—“By the mere looking at food no one gets his hunger satisfied, but it must be taken and eaten: and so also the mere hearing and reading of the word of God does not save, but it must be appropriated, and afterwards lived upon” (St.). Ezekiel 2:9. “The word of God is very tender and delicate,—a sweet and deep invitation” (B. B.).—“The hand which presents the Scripture, is the same which also presents to believers the crown, 2 Timothy 4:7-8” (Stck.). Ezekiel 2:10. “Such unfolding takes place with prayer on the part of believers, Ephesians 1; Psalms 119:18 (with burning heart, Luke 24:32; just as in the future with praise and jubilant acclamation, Revelation 5:9), with searching (John 5:39; Matthew 7:8), and not without manifold temptations” (Fessel).—“This book-roll may also be applied to the bad conscience of the sinner, as well as to the condition of a soul under assault from outward oppression, likewise to the book of the law, to the misery of the damned, as well as used in the sense of a reward-book for the ungodly,” etc. (Stck.)—So man finds in his life first the lamentations over the vanity of all things, then there wakes up the sighing over himself, and the last is the woe of dying. Ezekiel 2:8—3:3. The wonderful food of Ezekiel in general (Matthew 4:4) and in particular (John 4:34).—It served him: for protection, for instruction, for strengthening, for quickening. Ezekiel 3:1. “Ezekiel is no prophet of his own heart. Instead of murmuring against the poor instrument who has received so weighty a commission, let them repent” (H.).—“Comede et pasce, saturare et eructa, accipe et sparge, confortare et labora” (Jer.).—“A teacher must have the word of God not merely on his lips and in his mouth, but in his heart, and converted into nourishment and strength” (St.).—“The maxim: ‘Eat what is set before you’ (Luke 10:8), applies also to the divine revelation. The position of a chooser, which, instead of the motto, ‘what I find,’ puts ‘what I like,’ belongs to what is evil” (H.).—“Without having eaten this roll, no one ought to go and preach” (B. B.).—As against resistance from without we are comforted; as against opposition from within, from ourselves, we are strengthened. In the first case there is suffering, in the second it may come to sin. Ezekiel 3:2. “The word of God is the right food of souls” (St.). Ezekiel 3:3. “By our taste our life is determined” (Plato).—“The sweet taste means Ezekiel’s approbation of God’s judgment and commands” (Calv.).—“It is infinitely sweet and lovely to be the organ and spokesman of the Most High” (H.).—“In the case of those who eagerly hear the word of God, it goes into their heart, and as it were into their bowels; it becomes a treasure within them, out of which they bring forth, in overflowing abundance, necessary and wholesome instruction for others” (B. B., St.).—“Even a difficult office ought to be undertaken and discharged with joy; for God can sweeten even what is bitter in it” (St.).—“Even the most painful divine truths have for the spiritually-minded man a gladdening and quickening side” (H.).—“It is in general the quiet secret of all who suffer in true faith, that in their inmost being wormwood turns to honey” (Umbr.). Ezekiel 3:4 sqq. “It was not yet the time of the heathen; it was still Israel’s time, to whom also the Lord Himself would come, whose forerunners the prophets were” (Cocc). Ezekiel 3:7. Forehead and heart in their psychological correspondence.—Where there is the fear of God in the heart, shame still sits upon the forehead. Ezekiel 3:8. “For hard people hard ministers also are suitable, Proverbs 20:30” (W.). For the rough block a rough wedge.—“God gives His prophet merely a firm countenance and forehead, but not a hard heart. In order to encounter a hard heart, a firm forehead indeed is necessary, but never a hard heart. The heart is to be full of love, and from love the firm forehead even is to be gained” (A L.). Ezekiel 3:8-9. “He who has to contend with the popular spirit is lost, unless he has a firm hold of Omnipotence. He who has not God decidedly with him, must come to terms with the majority” (H.).—“Firm preachers of this stamp were Nathan against David, Elijah, John the Baptist, Stephen” (a L.). Comp. Matthew 16:18. Nevertheless, the diamond does not occur either in Exodus 28:17 sqq. or in Revelation 21:19 sqq. Christ will rather be a magnet, John 12:32.—“God imparts to such a strength which far surpasses the strength of the learned. For God never yields to man. Not that the spirit referred to is a stiff-necked spirit, but God gives them words so powerful and mighty, that no one can gainsay them, Luke 21:15” (B. B.).—“This is that ‘holy to the Lord’ which shone forth on the forehead of the high priest, just as it belongs to all the servants of God” (Stck.).—“Carnal men stumble thereat, all who wish to be flattered or spared; for what is to the one class a stone for building, is to the other a stone of offence” (B. B.). Ezekiel 3:10. “Whoever is to hear, must have confidence in him who speaks, and longing to hear, in order that he may lend his ear to the word. The heart, above everything, must be present, else the man does not hear, Acts 16:14” (Cocc). Ezekiel 3:11. “The fact, that it is his own people to whom he had to go, at the same time laid Ezekiel under a solemn obligation” (Stck.).—“We must first hear, then we are to speak” (Cocc). II. THE FIRST OF THE DIVINE .—Ezekiel 3:12 to Ezekiel 7:271. The Installation and Instructions (Ezekiel 3:12-27)12And the spirit lifted me up, and I heard behind me a sound of a great 13tumultuous noise: Praised be the glory of Jehovah from His place. And [I heard] the noise of the wings of the living creatures striking one upon another, and the noise of the wheels beside them, and the sound of a great tumultuous 14noise. And the spirit lifted me up, and took me, and I went bitterly, in the 15heat of my spirit, and [but] the hand of Jehovah was strong upon me. And I came to the captivity at Tel-abib, who dwelt by the river Chebar, and where they were sitting, there I also sat stunned [starr] in their midst seven days. 16And it came to pass at the end of seven days, that the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 17Son of man, I have given thee as a watchman to the house of Israel; 18and thou hearest a word at my mouth, and thou warnest them from me. If I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou warnest him not, and speakest not to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life,—he, the wicked, shall die in [because of] his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine 19hand. But if thou dost warn the wicked, and he doth not turn from his wickedness and from his wicked way, he shall die in [because of] his iniquity; 20but thou hast delivered thy soul. And if the righteous doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I give a stumbling-block before him, he shall die, for thou didst not warn him; in his sin he shall die, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will 21I require at thine hand. But if thou dost warn him as a righteous man, not to sin as being righteous, and he sinneth not, he shall surely live, because he is warned; and thou hast delivered thy soul. 22And the hand of Jehovah came upon me there, and He said unto me, Arise, go forth to the valley, and there will 23I speak with thee. And I arose, and went forth to the valley: and, behold, the glory of Jehovah standing there, as the glory which I saw by the river Chebar: 24and I fell upon my face. And the spirit came into me, and set me upon my feet, and He spake with me, and said unto me: Go, shut thyself within thine 25house. And thou, son of man, behold, they give [lay] bands upon thee, and bind 26thee in them, and thou shalt not go out among them. And thy tongue will I make to cleave to the roof of thy mouth, and thou art dumb, and thou shalt not be to them a man that reproveth; for they are a house of rebelliousness. 27But when I speak with thee, I will open thy mouth, and thou sayest unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: He that heareth, let him hear; and he that forbeareth, let him forbear: for they are a house of rebelliousness. Ezekiel 3:13. Sept.: K. εἰδονφωνην— Ezekiel 3:14. K. τοπνευμαχυριουἐξηρενμε— Ezekiel 3:15.…εἰζταἰχμαλωσιανμετεωρος, κ.. περιηλθοντ. κατοικουντας … τ. ὀνταςἐκει, κ.. ἐκαθισαἐκει—(some mss. and Syr. omit εΰωψδξδΧων). Ezekiel 3:19. Another reading: δεΰψωςαςεπε. Sept. and Arab. have read δψως for the omitted δψωςδ which precedes. Ezekiel 3:25.…δησουσινσεἐναὐτοις, κ. συμηἐξελθηςἐξαὐτων. REMARKS Ezekiel 3:12-15. After the Installation of Ezekiel in his Sphere of Labour by means of the Commission in Word, there follows now the Installation in actual Fact.Ezekiel 3:12. ψεη cannot possibly be anything else here than it has always been hitherto. Both Keil and Klief. unnecessarily bring in “a wind,” which, however, according to Keil, carried the prophet through the air not in body, but in spirit, Ezekiel 8:3; Ezekiel 11:1; Ezekiel 11:24. But here, also, just as in Ezekiel 3:14, there is no reference to being carried through the air. The lifting up by the spirit corresponds entirely to the raising up in Ezekiel 2:2. Only what was there raising up from the earth, in order to stand and hear, is here rather (and that also because of the higher situation of Tel-abib) lifting up from the place of hearing, in order to go and speak; and at the same time, Ezekiel hears immediately behind him χεμψςωβγεμ, by which is signified to him the marching forth of the divine glory, with which movement of the same, his installation in actual fact commences in highest fashion. His mission, shadowed forth by the character of the vision of glory, begins in this way to be realized in actual fact. Thus, and the spirit lifted me up is connected with and I heard, etc., and what Ezekiel hears with his actual introduction to his sphere of labour. As the spirit qualified him (Ezekiel 2:2) to hear Him that spake to him, so the spirit moves, lifts him up to do what he is told (Ezekiel 3:11). Comp. besides, 1 Kings 18:12; 1 Kings 18:46; Matthew 4:1; Acts 8:39. The lifting up quite harmonizes with this influence of the spirit, just as it entirely corresponds with the character of the vision (Ezekiel 3:24-25) in the midst of which it occurs. And because the prophet is moved to betake himself to his fellow-countrymen, he also hears what he hears behind him.—The great tumultuous noise (Ezekiel 3:13, Ezekiel 37:7; Isaiah 9:5; Jeremiah 10:22) takes an articulate form, first of all, as praise of the glory of Jehovah, whereby our view (given at p. 39) of something super-terrestrial, heavenly, in the chajoth is only confirmed. It is not said who gave utterance to this praise; and nothing in the context, at least, compels us to think of heavenly spirits. Thus there remain in fact for it only the chajoth; and for this we may compare not merely Revelation 4:8 sqq., but even Isaiah 6:3.—From His place, no matter whether we refer it to Jehovah or His ααεγ, denotes very suitably, what Keil denies, not indeed so much as: who now leaves His place (Hengst.), nor what is said in Ezekiel 9:3, still less the temple (Hδv.), which is not at all the subject in hand, but perhaps, that from the place where Jehovah’s glory has manifested itself to the prophet, and just as it manifested itself, its praise must and will go forth, and that immediately, over Israel (first), and into the whole world, and among all mankind (Micah 1:3). Hence, also, as respects Ezekiel’s doings and labours, how remarkably in this way the praise of the divine glory introduces him to his sphere of action! ξξχεξε is certainly too far off from εΰωξς, to which Keil wishes to refer it! Philippson refers ξξχεξε to “the creation embraced in the vision: Praised be, etc., from the place where it is borne along, where it tarries” (Isaiah 13:13). Ezekiel 3:13 : comp. Ezekiel 1:24; Ezekiel 1:9; Ezekiel 1:11; Ezekiel 1:23; Ezekiel 1:15; Ezekiel 1:20-21. This was in a manner the musical accompaniment of the laudation expressed above in words. εχεμ dependent on εΰωξς in Ezekiel 3:12.—πωχ, to arrange, to join together. Hiphil: to strike on one another.—It ends, as it began, in the great tumultuous noise. (“The life of the creatures is the boundless sphere of the praise of the Creator of heaven and earth [Psalms 148]. This is the fugue notes of the sublimest music, which makes the universe, itself ring. Finely and beautifully for the melodious harmony, we have the happy expression, that the wings kiss one another: fearful as is the sound of the striking of wings, and of the wheel-work of creation, yet there is unison and love in it; at last comes the soft, gentle whisper, as in the case of Elijah!”—Umbreit.) Ezekiel 3:14 (Ezekiel 11:24) as at Ezekiel 3:12; the ecstatic lifting up is designated as a being laid hold of, a being taken (μχη). Nothing in the context points to “taking away” (J. H. Mich.); on the contrary, he went (εΰμκ), as he had been commanded in Ezekiel 3:1; Ezekiel 3:4; Ezekiel 3:11. Now, therefore, a corporeal movement of the prophet in space took place, but not by means of wind through the air (Jer., Klief.). The vision, as to the matter of it, is at an end with (Ezekiel 3:12-13) the laudation and great tumultuous noise (comp. Genesis 17:22); Keil unnecessarily adopts the view that it ends only with Ezekiel 3:21. Personally, as respects the person of Ezekiel, the vision ends when he is ecstatically lifted up and laid hold of by the spirit, and not by wind, inasmuch as the power of the spirit put an end to all lingering and loitering in him, and prepared him, so that he betook himself to the quarter that was necessary, as was also expressly indicated to him by the departure of the divine glory. And with this the following description necessarily corresponds. Bitterly, in the heat of my spirit—thus he describes what is in his spirit, when he goes now on his own feet, after the spirit lifted him up and laid hold of him, so that he could neither stand still, nor move off in any other direction. The subjectivity of the prophet comes into the foreground (so already Calvin has it). The taste that was so sweet before (Ezekiel 3:3) is followed (as in Revelation 10:9-10) by a bitter after-taste; the joyousness which Ezekiel felt during the vision, gives place, when the vision ends, to bitterness (Matthew 26:41). This bitterness expresses the special feeling of the prophet, while the heat designates the general character of his mental state.αηξϊψεηι, reflecting the fiery style of the vision he has had, shows Ezekiel’s spirit raised to glowing heat by the wrath of God, by the unavoidable judgment on Israel which he has to announce. In so far there is as yet no difference which would have to be got rid of or repressed; the difference respects not so much the relation to God, as the relation to Israel. It is in this direction that the interpretation of ξψ is to be sought (have the LXX. read ψν?), and that simply as an expression for the pain which the prophet specially feels when he goes to his people. That is the human element of bitterness in his divine wrath. Distress and sorrow undoubtedly say too little,—Hitzig: “because the days of cheerful, sportive innocence are now over for him” (!)—but neither is it the “bitterness of fiery wrath because of the hardening of Israel, because of his commission with no prospect of success” (Keil); and just as little have we to think, with Hengsten., of “holy irritation.” In Ezekiel’s spirit there is the wrath of God (Jeremiah 15:17); but love to his people feels it bitter,—feels bitter pain. Hence: the hand of Jehovah was strong upon me (ηζχδ, according to the ingenious remark of Hitzig, different from ααγ in Psalms 32:4), where we must not compare either Ezekiel 1:3 or Isaiah 8:11, but equivalent to: God strengthened him, as the Jewish expositors render it, with an allusion to the name Ezekiel. εְ may be the simple and, not “since” (Ewald), nor as Hengst., who derives the indignation and heat of spirit from the powerful divine influence in him. Ezekiel 3:15. The bitterness of the pain, and the glow of the wrath, and the strengthening of the Almighty, obtain a corresponding plastic expression in the behaviour of the prophet, as soon as he finds himself in the midst of his fellow-exiles.—ϊμΰαια, the dwelling-place of Ezekiel, probably “hill of corn-ears,” so called from the elevated situation and richness in grain of this colonial settlement; for other combinations with Tel in Babylon, see Gesen. Lex., Rosenm.; comp. besides, Introd. pp. 7, 8. Jerome gives a symbolical meaning to the name of the place. The LXX. appear to have thought of a form ϊָּ ?μַ ?μ and ρָ ?αַ ?α. (The Kethib εΰωψ has given rise to many far-fetched interpretations. Even a second river has been made of it. The Qeri reads εָ ?ΰֵ ?ωֵׁ ?α, that he has not only come hither, but also remained [!], not to speak of other explanations. It is simply to be read εַ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, and to be connected with ωָׁ ?ν: and where.) Seven days—not because the week is the unity that most readily suggests itself for a plurality of days (Hitz.), nor as a standard period for cleansing, consecration, preparation for holy service (Keil), but, if this number shadows forth anything, then, according to its leading symbolical signification (Bδhr, Symb. i. pp. 187 sqq., 193 sqq.), the covenant relation of God to Israel, by which the wrath as well as the pain of the prophet might be excited. Comp. Job 2:13; Genesis 50:10; 1 Samuel 31:13 (Psalms 137:1).—ξωξιν partic. Hiph. Hitz.: sunk in fixed silence; Keil: motionless and still. Comp. Ezra 9:3-4. (Hengst.: in a state of horror. But how is this conceivable during the whole seven days?)—Hδv. finds in the text two classes of exiles: those who had recently settled near the Chaboras, and the old inhabitants of former times belonging to the kingdom of the ten tribes still dwelling there. Comp. Introd. pp. 7, 8. Ezekiel 3:16-27. To the Installation of Ezekiel in actual Fact there is appended an Admonition of a more general Character (Ezekiel 3:16-21), and a special One having reference to his Sphere of Labour (Ezekiel 3:22-27). Ezekiel 3:16. The admonition after the installation comes to Ezekiel in a new revelation. (In the usual Hebrew text we find between ιξιν and ειδιγαψΞ the sign Pisca: τρχΰαΰξφςτρεχ, i. e. a pause in the middle of the verse.) Ezekiel 3:17. There is first an admonition of a more general character, but less, as Hitz. supposes, with respect to the relation between the revelation and him, that he is to speak only when he receives a revelation, than as to how he is to look upon himself in reference to his sphere of labour; for the latter reference is that which predominates in what follows. φֹ ?τֶ ?δ partic., not subst., from φτδ, “to draw round,” to draw over, to cover, to take care of, hence: “to keep one’s eyes on anything,”—the seer, the look-out, who from his watch-tower, which, in the case of the prophet, is the divine standpoint, turns to account the revelations which are made to him for the weal and woe of the people entrusted to his care as a watchman. Comp. 1 Samuel 14:16; 2 Samuel 13:34; 2 Samuel 18:24; Jeremiah 6:17; Habakkuk 2:1; Isaiah 56:10; Ezekiel 33:1 sqq.—With the judicial character which predominates in the mission of Ezekiel, the word from My mouth is not revelation in general, but announcement, hint, command, sentence in connection with the threatening judgment of God, with a view thereto, and determined thereby; and, therefore, ζδψ in Hiph. not: to enlighten in the sense of to teach (Hebrews 13:17), but in the sense of to caution, to warn. ξξπι is explained in accordance with the preceding ξξι. Hδv.: “partly in compliance with definite divine instructions received, partly with continual appeal and reference thereto.” Ezekiel 3:18. The ψως, like the φγιχ in what follows, is not so much a rhetorical personification of the species (Hengst.), and that of the people on the one hand, of the little flock on the other, but a characteristic individualization, for this preliminary period of the New Covenant; already the individuals are separating themselves from Israel as a national whole according to their individual qualification, i.e. as they exhibit themselves in their procedure towards the divine judgment on Israel, and the public preaching takes the shape of the special care of souls; and in this way the national mission of the prophetic order, on the one hand, enters more deeply into its spiritual significance, and, on the other hand, brings into prominence its general human side.—If I say unto the wicked, in accordance with Ezekiel 3:17 : “thou hearest a word at my mouth,” equivalent to: when thou hearest what I say unto the wicked, that I announce unto him inevitable ruin in the impending judgment (Luke 10:16; 1 Thessalonians 4:8).—ξεϊϊξεϊ, the original threatening on the transgressor of the divine word (Genesis 2:17) is nothing new, unheard of, is only applied here (Genesis 20:7) to the individual. In order to make his duty quite clear to the prophet, to free it from every objection, whether springing from his own heart, or coming from his fellow-men, or from surrounding circumstances, to fix it for all cases, and thus to enforce it very strongly, the simple and thou warnest him not is expanded still farther into what follows, and speakest not to warn, etc., implying at the same time repetition and urgency. Although the nation as a whole is lost (Ezekiel 3:7), the return of the individual is nevertheless, nay, so much the more, to be sought (Acts 20:31; 2 Timothy 4:2). The substance of such warning: “of” and “from his way;” it is consequently not the judgment of God, this way of God with Israel, for this may issue in life, inasmuch as it awakens to return, to repentance, but it is his own way and will, the life of self-will on the part of the ψως, which, in accordance with God’s righteousness, is changed into death, just as it is in its root a dying, because departure from God, from the divine way, pointed out in the law. There lies at the root of ψως (if not, as contrasted with φγχ, the meaning of what is crooked, awry—Hupf. on Psalms 1:1—and thus deviation from the straight, right way, yet at least) apostasy from God (Psalms 18:22 [21]). He is one who, according to the divine law, the rule for Israel as a nation, appears unrighteous, here as everywhere the opposite of φγιχ—δָ ?ψְ .ωָׁ ?ςָ ?δ, which the LXX. in Ezekiel 3:19 also have passed over, refers to γψαε (like ΰ̇ψַ ?η), construed as feminine, perhaps in order to emphasize the significance of the figurative expression.—μηιϊε, the object of the warning, perhaps at the same time: to bring him to life again (Psalms 30:4 [3]; Hosea 6:2; Ephesians 2:5).—ςε‌ ?ο, properly: what is not straight, perverted in consequence of deviating from the straight, right way, hence: unrighteousness, and also: iniquity. In his perversity the unrighteous man necessarily brings upon himself death as a consequence; there is an ςεοχυ, as it is expressed in Ezekiel 21:30 [E. V. 25].—The close of the verse likewise contains an allusion to a passage in Genesis, Genesis 9:5 (Genesis 42:22), only with this difference, that αχω stands instead of γψω, which latter Ges. explains as: to go after any one, thus of a more active reclamation, while αχω means more a looking after, a seeking with the eyes. It is the life, which is in the blood, of those in Israel which is entrusted to the prophet as a watchman. For this Jehovah, the Supreme Proprietor, demands a reckoning. The prophet who forgets his duty, which he owes to the unrighteous in God’s stead, becomes a man-slaughterer, a murderer of that man, and is regarded as such by God. Ezekiel 3:19. What the way of deliverance is for the unrighteous man, is shown, viz. return, alike inwardly (wickedness) and outwardly. The deliverance of soul, as regards the prophet (here πτω, formerly γν Genesis 9:4), is preservation from the divine avenging of blood. Ezekiel 3:20. Antithetic parallelism of this and the following verse with the two preceding. Hengst., holding fast by the people in his interpretation, denies the personal contrast in φγιχ; they are, according to him, designated as wicked at present, as righteous with reference to their destiny and better past. The description of the righteous man does not certainly rise above a certain outward legality and isolated righteousnesses. Ezekiel 3:18 : αΰξψι, here αΰεα.—His righteousness is that attained by him as regards the law of Israel, the national-legal righteousness; hence, also, departure therefrom is quite conceivable as “committing wickedness (iniquity);” and, for the decision of the matter, the stumbling-block is given by God; i. e., to such a righteous man (comp. however, Proverbs 4:11-12; Proverbs 15:19) the exile, or the state of matters in Jerusalem, becomes a temptation from God, in so far as, for the purpose of deciding the condition of the man, such like outward circumstances are arranged by Him, but not: a stumbling-block “on which he may die” (Ew.); for δεΰιξεϊ begins the apodosis, just as in Ezekiel 3:18 δεΰψως, he shall die,—so it is decided as to the apostate righteous man, who has become like the wicked (Ezekiel 18:24), and therefore must appear still worse than he; just as the stumbling-block to be given by God brings him also in actual fact to utter ruin. The parallel, however, with Ezekiel 3:18 necessarily implies neglect in warning on the part of the prophet; and as such omission is presupposed, so also the death of this “righteous” man, his ruin in the Chaldean divine judgment, must be expressly (αι) referred to the prophet, and, consequently, the possibility of another result be presupposed. How the case will be in reality with this man, who is worse than the ψως, is shown by the statement: in his sin he shall die, which points, not to a false step arising from mere weakness, ignorance, but to wickedness become a habit. The individualizing description of our verse (as already in Ezekiel 3:19) gives additional proof of the fearful corruption of Israel as a whole, which was disclosed in what precedes (Ezekiel 2:3). His righteousnesses mean, according to Hengst., “the good works of pious ancestors, Psalms 132:1” (!). They are the legal deeds of the “righteous man,” or collectively: what he has done in accordance with the law, works without reference to the state of the heart. [Rosenm. reads φִ ?γְ ?χָ ?ϊεֹ as a collective singular with the plural of the verb ϊִּ ?ζָּ ?λַ ?ψְ ?εָ.] Comp. besides, on Ezekiel 3:18. Ezekiel 3:21. εΰϊδαι as in Ezekiel 3:19; but the issue of the case is exactly the opposite: there warning without return, here warning which attains its object. After the three dark pictures which precede, this is drawn in colours so much the brighter. It is the righteous man as he ought to be: and hence also the emphatic mode of expression. Comp. besides, 1 John 3:8-9; 1 John 2:1; 1 John 3:6.—αι as in Ezekiel 3:20. Comp. besides, on Ezekiel 3:19. In Ezekiel 3:22-27 there follows a quite special instruction for Ezekiel as to his sphere of labour, which is introduced by a special demand in Ezekiel 3:22. Comp. Ezekiel 1:3. It is at Tel-abib, also, that this divine revelation is made to the prophet. Hengst. consistently asserts that there is no actual change of place, that Ezekiel’s betaking himself to the valley, like his presence at the Chebar, takes place in the inner region of the spirit (!).—The valley, as distinguished from the height on which Tel-abib was situate, is not exactly the plain extending to the river—not δַ ?ωָׂ ?γֶ ?δ, but δαχςδ, a certain valley between the mountain-walls there. It is not so much the solitude (Hengst.) as the subsequent renewal of the earlier vision of glory which leads to the choice of this locality. (2 Corinthians 6:17; Psalms 45:10-11; comp. Ezekiel 37:1-2.) Ezekiel 3:23; comp. Ezekiel 1:28. The vision begins with: and, behold. ςξγ indicated to him the standing background and protection for his labours, or the Judge before the door! Ezekiel 3:24; comp. Ezekiel 2:2. Hitzig’s conjecture seems a correct one, that this definite ordering of the prophet into the house is connected with the preceding summons to go forth; it appears at least so much the more visible,—which is certainly of importance, if the prophet was, in the first place, to preach to the eye merely of his countrymen. If his procedure in Ezekiel 3:15 was a sermon, this shutting of himself up within his house is, primarily, nothing else,—an action, a condition of Ezekiel’s, meant for a sermon; just as in his case, more readily than in that of any of the other prophets, the inward becomes outward, and the outward is inward. His isolation from the midst of his countrymen in the valley for God is now followed by his isolation among them within his own house; the former a momentary one, the latter of a more enduring character. This latter symbolical sermon is further defined as a non in publicum prodire (Ezekiel 3:25), and more exactly as a silence on the part of the voice calling to repentance (Ezekiel 3:26). Those who are so very eager after what is visible are accordingly directed, first of all, to look at what the prophet will do (Ezekiel 12:6; Ezekiel 12:11). That would necessarily excite attention, and curiosity would necessarily, with ever growing intensity, desire to have it explained, what Ezekiel’s acting has in view, what it means. This is certainly the primary reason why the prophet is not only summoned away by God (Ezekiel 3:22 sqq.) from the midst of his countrymen, but also receives the command to shut himself up in his house in their midst. The shutting himself up in his house is therefore, of course, symbolic, although, at the same time, it explains to us the way in which Ezekiel 4, 5 are to be understood, viz. as domestic occurrences. It has been regarded as a picture of the future of Ezekiel’s own prophetic destiny (Hδv.), and also as a picture of Jerusalem under investment (Ephraem Syrus, Jer.), inasmuch as it was falsely assumed that there was a connection with what follows immediately, or at a later stage. (Raschi: that thou mayest show them that they are unworthy of admonition. Grot.: in order to await the suitable time for speaking.) Moreover, this house of the prophet is the innocent cause of all the “leisure of domestic life,” amid which, according to Ewald, Ezekiel was almost exclusively occupied in literary pursuits. Ezekiel 3:25. The shutting himself up in his house is not intended to shut out his countrymen from him; for what he is to do there is for the house of Israel (Ezekiel 4:3 sqq.), is done before their eyes (Ezekiel 3:12; comp. also Ezekiel 8:1); but he (εΰϊδ) is to be for them one who is shut up, i. e. in the first place, one who is not to go forth into their midst.—For son of man, comp. on Ezekiel 2:1.—Behold, they lay, etc., can only be his countrymen, and that not as being members of his family, who take him for a madman (a Lapide),—a view which nothing in the context favours. But Hitzig’s view (accepted by Keil) of invisible, heavenly powers, which bound Ezekiel (“as it were bands of enchantment”!), is quite opposed to the context. Ezekiel 3:25 by no means moves in the same line with Ezekiel 3:26; but in Ezekiel 3:26 the transition is made from men to God. Ezekiel 4:8, according to Keil’s own explanation, has no connection with this. Everything depends on whether we are to look upon the binding of the prophet as intended to prevent him leaving his house, which would, indeed, fall in with the shutting himself up in it commanded by God, but which would correspond little with the disposition of the prophet’s countrymen, who do not certainly wish what God wishes, but much rather the contrary! (Hence, perhaps, Kimchi: Go into thine house, and thou shalt be shut up therein, just as if they had bound thee with bands.) We are not to assert with Keil that a fettering by means of these would be irreconcilable with Ezekiel 4, 5, since a fettering of this description might take place afterwards, and Ezekiel, meanwhile, might again have become free; and just as little is it to be regarded as a decisive objection to this view, that no trace of such assault is to be discovered elsewhere; our passage itself might contain the missing trace. But εμΰϊφΰαϊεαν is rather (as also Hengst.) = but thou (εΰϊδ) wilt (shalt) not go forth to them. Instead of hindering him from speaking, his countrymen will, on the contrary, in their curiosity, do everything, will even lay violent hands upon him, that he may come forth and speak to them; they will throw bands over him, will bind him with them, in order the more easily to bring him forth. All that they gain thereby, besides his not going forth himself to them in such a case, will be, that, notwithstanding their efforts, he will not speak to them, since Ezekiel 3:26—God will hinder it. The shutting himself up in his house is to become something more definite, viz. the shutting of his mouth at the same time, and that as an ΰιωξεαιη, which is here equivalent in meaning to “a declaimer against vice,” in an almost exclusively formal respect, since they are a house of rebelliousness (Ezekiel 3:5), and nothing material is to be accomplished among them as a whole. Comp. on Ezekiel 3:18. Ezekiel 3:27. εαγαψι points back to αΰξψι in Ezekiel 3:18. Thus the silence of Ezekiel is even here already a judgment of God upon Israel; for the opening of his mouth has for its object the communication of the divine revelation to his countrymen. Comp. besides, on Ezekiel 2:4; Ezekiel 3:11; Ezekiel 2:5; Ezekiel 2:7 (Revelation 2:7; Revelation 22:11). The reference of Eze 3:25-27 is primarily to Ezekiel 4, 5; in a less degree it is carried on to Ezekiel 7; but, perhaps Ezekiel 24:27 and Ezekiel 33:22 refer to Ezekiel 3:26-27. Comp. there. In general, Ezekiel 3:26-27 express the entire dependence of the prophet, alike in silence and in speaking, on God, and consequently his divine legitimation; in particular, the remaining dumb imposed upon him—but that as regards the other character of his prophetic labours from Ezekiel 34 onwards—may be applied to the period down to the destruction of Jerusalem, as characteristic of this period, and therefore significantly repeated at its close. Comp. besides, on Ezekiel 5:5. Additional Note on Ezekiel 3:12-27[This section, which should have formed a separate chapter, records the entrance of Ezekiel on his high vocation, and contains the first message delivered to him respecting it. His former place of abode, it would seem, was not the most advantageously situated for prosecuting with success the work committed to him; and, in consequence, he removed to Tel-abib, which is nowhere else mentioned, but was, in all probability, the best peopled locality, or the chief town of the Jewish colony. When he came and saw the captives dwelling there, in a dejected and mournful condition, he sat down among them for seven days continuously—sitting being the common attitude of grief (Ezra 9:3; Lamentations 1:1-3), and seven days being the usual period for the manifestation of the heaviest sorrow (Job 2:13). By thus spending, at the outset, so many days of desolation and sadness, he gave proof of his deep fellow-feeling with his exiled brethren in their depressed condition, and showed how entirely he entered into their state. Thus sorrowing in their sorrow, and breathing the tenderness of a sympathizing spirit toward them, he sought to win their confidence, and secure a favourable hearing for the words of mercy and of judgment which he was from time to time to press upon their notice. The prophet, however, did not go alone to this mournful field of prophetic agency. He was borne thither under the conscious might of the Spirit of God, and was attended by the symbols of the divine presence and glory. When he rose to proceed on his course, the whole machinery of the heavenly vision began also to move; and amid the crashing or tumultuous noise which broke upon his spiritual ear, he heard the words, “Blessed be the glory of Jehovah from His (or its) place”—certainly a somewhat peculiar utterance, and one not found in any other part of Scripture; yet not materially different from another in frequent use, “Blessed be the name of the Lord.” The glory of Jehovah here was that manifested glory which had appeared in vision to the prophet, and which was, in other words, a revelation of His glorious name. To pronounce it blessed from its place, was in effect to bless God Himself, as thus and there revealing His adorable perfections and divine will. And as the prophet was going to be the representative and herald of these in a sphere where there was much to damp his spirit, and withstand his faithful agency, it was fit that he should go with the solemn word pealing in his ears, from those ideal ministers of heaven, “Blessed be the glory of the Lord.” As much as to say, Let this above all be magnified; whatever is experienced or done, let nothing interfere with that pure and majestic glory of Jehovah, which has now in emblem been exhibited. In regard to the message communicated to the prophet after the seven days of sadness had expired, there is also something peculiar in it; for it is only Ezekiel among the prophets who is described as a watchman appointed by God, to give timely and faithful warning to the people. Habakkuk speaks of standing upon his watch-tower (Ezekiel 2:1), but this was only in respect to his eager and anxious outlook for the manifestations he was expecting of divine power and faithfulness. Ezekiel alone is represented as called to do for others the part of a watchman; and in doing it he was most strictly charged, on the one hand, to receive all his instructions from God as to the existence of whatever danger there might be in the condition of the people, and, on the other, to sound a loud and solemn alarm when he might perceive it actually besetting them. That such should have been the distinctive character given to his position and calling, manifestly bespoke the very perilous condition of those to whom he was sent. It indicated that he had something else to do than merely to sympathize with them in their afflicted state, and speak soothing words to their downcast and drooping spirits. It was to be his rather to open their eyes to the profounder evils that encompassed them, to break the spell of inveterate and cherished delusions, and raise the cry of danger where none was suspected. So that the very form of the commission given to him was like the deliverance of a strong and impressive testimony to the people of the latent corruptions and imminent perils with which they were beset. If we look also to the substance of the communication, or to the particular instructions given to the prophet concerning the discharge of his office, we see at once the grand principle disclosed on which the destiny of Israel was to turn. The question, whether life or death, blessing or cursing, was to be their portion, hung upon another, whether they were to make righteousness or sin their choice? Their return to righteousness was the indispensable condition of their restoration to blessing. If, in despite of this, the wicked should persevere in his evil ways, or even the righteous man should turn aside and practise iniquity, a visitation of wrath must be looked for—the original sentence against sin, to which the language designedly points, that the purpose of God in this respect might be seen to be fixed and unalterable—the sentence, that he who transgresses “shall surely die,” must take effect; for God is unchangeably the same, and what he appointed at first as the wages of sin must continue to be its wages still. But while this part of the charge cut off all hope from a backsliding and impenitent people, the other part of it held out ample encouragement to such as remained stedfast in the covenant of God, or repented of their evil ways. The man who continued to love the paths of righteousness, and the man also who, after having forsaken, again returned to them, was to be assured of the blessings of life; these should as surely live as the others should die. For the prophet, as God’s watchman, was to represent the mercy as well as the justice of God’s administration; he was to have a wakeful eye upon the good, not less than the evil, that appeared among the people; and was to stretch out the hand of fellowship, and display the banner of divine love and protection, in behalf of all who might be inclined or moved to cleave to the service of Heaven. Thus were they to know from the outset that, for the people as a whole, and for each individual amongst them, this one path lay open for their return to peace and blessing.—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 40–43.—W. F.] 1. The revelation of the glory of God, because it is revelation, has always accordingly its special locality (ξָ ?χεֹ ?ν). If heaven, above all, is reckoned the place from which it beams forth (Deuteronomy 26:15; 2 Chronicles 30:27; Isaiah 63:15; Habakkuk 2:20; Zech. 2:17; 1 Kings 8:39), yet even of it 1 Kings 8:27 is true; how much more of all places of revelation upon earth! Thus God Himself remains ὁΘεὸς and ὁπατὴρτῆςδόξης (Acts 7:2; Ephesians 1:17), the independent Possessor and Dispenser of glory, and the self-revelation of God made in Christ is the full revelation of His glory (Luke 2:14); for to Him the angels of God descend, just as from Him also and from no other spot on earth they again ascend (John 1:51). From God, wherever He manifests Himself, on Sinai, in the temple, His praise goes forth accordingly with its destination for the whole world. 2. The praise of God is the glory of God, which is reflected in the blessedness of the creature, especially of man. “It is a momentary celebration beforehand of the eternal perfection, which, momentary though it be, has already an element of eternity in itself,” says Lange with respect to the prayer of the doxology. 3. The servants of God, however mightily, however completely they fulfil their task, so that Ezekiel can speak of the “heat (glow) of his spirit,” yet always remain men, i. e. if ηξδ signifies the holy wrath of God as distinguished from ηψδ, the being angry as the effect of passion, yet we shall meet with pain in the prophet’s natural love to his people; just as Jesus the Son of man has tears over Jerusalem (Luke 19:41). Pain is more active than sorrow, which is more a passive state. We ought to be full of the wrath of God over sin, especially where it has already become punishment, the judgment of hardening; but our feeling towards the sinners can only be pain, because of our love to them as men, as in the case of Ezekiel, or sorrow, if we wish to distinguish the melancholy, sorrowful Jeremiah (comp. Jeremiah 6:11) in this way from the choleric, energetic Ezekiel. The servant of God, who should not find the latter emotions in himself, according to character and the circle in which he is placed, would need to bethink himself, and to mourn over himself. Wrath without love is of the devil, but not of God; just as a love which cannot be angry may be mere nature, mere human weakness. 4. Even a silent preacher may be a loud and very impressive sermon. In certain circumstances silence may be even more expressive than speaking. “This is the wisdom of him who is truly called,” says Umbreit, “that he is sometimes silent, sometimes speaks; but that when he speaks, he lets the divine word stream forth freely without fear and trembling as to whether it is understood; for the light is not to be put under a bushel; it has a right to shine, because it is light.” 5. The prophetic office of watchman, in accordance with the similitude of one who is posted on a height, or a watch-tower, has a twofold application. Inasmuch as the watchman has, in the first place, to keep a look-out—but what meets the prophetic eye is presented to him in vision, or by means of a revelation in word—the office of watchman is identical with the general designation of the prophets as “seers” (Doct. Reflect. 6 on Ezekiel 1:1-3). Thus it is the circumstance of their descrying or not descrying that makes them “watchmen,” not the circumstance that they have always to speak or to be silent accordingly (Hitz.); for the-former, at least as regards Ezekiel, is still dependent on divine instructions. In Ezekiel’s case, the opening of his mouth by God forms the transition to the second and more definite application and interpretation of the similitude of a watchman, viz. that the watchman has to announce the approaching danger, and therefore to warn against it. As such he is certainly not “the mere watchman, i.e. (as Ew. expresses it) the sharp but quiet, calm observer of men, in order to warn each at the right time.” The whole of the people as such, as well as in their governing heads, is what is entrusted to the watchman. But the application of the figure of the watchman, in the direction of warning, rests on the more general duty of prophecy, to be the controlling power of the national life according to the divine law in all respects. Only the warning of the prophetic watchman is of a more special kind, not as regards the law, but in view of the judgments of God,—an express turning to account of the future which he has seen for the immediate present in its existing state. 6. If we find with Ezekiel—of course, on the basis of the nation as a whole, of the theocratic nationality of Israel—individualization already taking place (comp. Ezekiel 33:1 sqq.), such individualization, in view of the period in the kingdom of God, is a sign of this period, and more than the personification, so frequent elsewhere, of what accords with the law and what is contrary to it, in the ideal picture of the righteous man, just as in his opposite, the ψως. Israel as a whole, in contradiction to its idea, begins to resolve itself into the ὅσοιδὲ of John 1:12. Comp. on Ezekiel 9:4. 7. In times when the axe is laid at the root of a whole nation, the mission of those who were originally destined for the whole becomes of itself the work of saving individuals. 8. The emphasizing (in Ezekiel 18 still more explicit) of the statement as to the personal responsibility of the individual has reference to the theocratic delusion and superstition of the hypocrites, the secure, which the false prophets still flattered, according to which the individual, because a descendant of Abraham according to the flesh, might hold himself assured of belonging to a nationality where, and where alone, a sure salvation was to be found. 9. The illustration of the prophet’s office by means of the sixth commandment, supported by Genesis 9, shows not merely how πνευματικός the νόμος is, but what an idea of life ought to be familiar to the ministers of the word. They are not, as it were, in accordance with the world’s policy, “to live and let live.” 10. The disputed question, as to whether the righteous can fall away, as the Lutheran theology along with that of the Jesuits asserts, and which the Reformed doctrine, on the other hand, denies, demands for its solution that we should make the distinction between law and grace. That the man who is righteous according to the law may apostatize unto death, is the very thing asserted in Ezekiel 3:20; comp. Ezekiel 18:24. Just in the same way, it is denied in Ezekiel 3:21 with respect to him who is justified by faith, and who remains righteous when admonished by the Spirit. Only this distinction must not be applied so as to become a distinction between the Old and New Testament, as is done by Hδvernick. For the righteousness of God is one and the same in both (comp. Romans 4). The legal standpoint, although not in its national form, yet in its externality, runs through the period of the New Covenant, just as the evangelical standpoint is not strange to the period of the Old Covenant, although mediated—not obscured—under the law by means of the symbolism of sacrifice. 11. “As the sinner may turn from his way and be saved, so a righteous man may fall away from his righteousness and become a wicked man. The man who is really and truly righteous cannot do so in such a way as to be lost; but he may fall into heinous transgressions, and appear for the time stripped of his faith, like the sun under a cloud, like fire beneath the ashes (David, Peter). But there are also those who believe for a time (1 John 2:19), who become quite manifest during temptation, and also after it is ended, when it is all over with them.”—Lavater. 12. If we speak of a snare which God lays for man, this cannot be sin, what is evil, but the position in which God places man with a view to his own personal decision, as well as with a view to the decision regarding him; and, in fact, this cannot be misfortune merely, but also so-called good fortune, the former leading to despair, the latter conducing to hardening in false security. Of course a snare of God in a definite development of sin may also be already punishment, the beginning of divine judgment. 13. Around the warning as neglected or administered by the prophet, four cases group themselves, four types for all time: the wicked man in general, who goes to destruction without warning,—this being the relative and ever-increasing guilt of Christendom; the wicked man in particular, who, in spite of warning, chooses the way of death; the righteous man, who is so merely in form, whether a conscious hypocrite or not,—just as nominal Christians in the mass have fallen away from the Church in critical times of persecution,—he who without warning falls under the judgment, in connection with whose case the Church ought to remember her duty, as opposed to the Pietism of the future, the diplomatic or government Pietism, as well as the “soldierly-pious” element (“militδr-fromm”); lastly, the upright and sincere righteous man, who also remains so, who lets himself be warned. Of the four, then, there is one against three. What a conclusion may be drawn from this numerical relation of individuals to the whole! 14. No mere declaimer against vice, still less one who is this in the disguise of a homiletic mask, or who labours thereat as being his profession, is in accordance with God’s word. That man only ought to reprove his brethren who has a commission from God for it, and only when he has that commission. “God does not permit mortal men, according to their mere will and pleasure, to condemn or to absolve. And although He sends forth His servants, yet He does not Himself renounce His authority, in virtue of which the supreme sovereignty remains with Him. He is the One Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy (James 4:12)” (Calv.). The so-called “in virtue of our office” is by no means sufficient for this, but our own conscience must legitimate our doing it. HINTS Ezekiel 3:12. “He had come unto me for the purpose of drawing me out of myself, and taking me into Himself” (B. B.).—“The Holy Spirit lifts us up from the earth towards heaven; and where He rules, the man hastens in willing obedience to God to perform his duties” (Stck.).—“Scripture is full of examples of how God has lifted up rulers of the people and His prophets by His Spirit to higher things. Moses thinks no longer of his sheep, but of the people whom he has to lead forth; David is drawn by the Spirit from the flock to something higher; the apostles openly confess Christ, and conspicuous among them Peter, whom a maid had formerly frightened; even with respect to Saul we read of the elevating influence of the Spirit” (L. L.).—“Lest he should execute his work with fleshly zeal, the Spirit is sent him as a Guide. Hence for a time he is transported out of himself, raised on high beyond the bounds of the lower and merely human mode of representation. In this state he hears the judgments of God again” (Heim-Hoffmann). Ezekiel 3:12-13. The servants of our God have not merely His praise as a blessed prospect before them, but behind them also the cloud of witnesses which encompasses them resounds with the praise of His glory.—“All creation glorifies God; only the ungodly blaspheme Him” (Stck.).—A contrast to the people, who accused God of unrighteousness and severity, and thereby insulted His honour, just as when they imagined themselves to be the only people that was worthy and capable of knowing the Glorious One (after Calvin).—“In His glory are comprehended all the perfections of God, which can ever be manifested to man, most of all the glory of His justifying grace (Jeremiah 23:6; 1 Corinthians 1:30). Hence the prophet had formerly seen the divine glory in the likeness of a man upon a throne. The Church wishes this only, that God’s glory should be praised not merely in, but from its place, i.e. throughout the whole world, Malachi 1:5” (Cocc.).—God’s praise is the harmony in which heaven and earth, angels and men, all beings, agree.—One note, yet no monotony.—“By all these voices he might be encouraged and stimulated, as soldiers are by the sound of the trumpet and the drum” (L. L.). Ezekiel 3:14. “How easy it is for God to bring a teacher to any place” (Stck.).—“To those who are younger the preacher’s office appears sweeter than it does when, after due experience, the original sweetness is mingled with bitterness” (Stck.). Ezekiel 3:15. “The silence of the prophets is tin sign of God’s wrath” (Chrysost.).—“Exactly so ought the people to sit in penitent sorrow and humiliation before their God; but their representative, the servant of Jehovah, is, at the same time, a sign of how ungodly the multitude surrounding him are, and how righteous the judgments which are descending upon the people” (Hδv.).—“The stillness of a sick-bed is often a means of salvation to ourselves and to others” (Richt.). Ezekiel 3:17. “It is a splendid misery to be obliged to stand on a height; those who encamp in the valley are decidedly more comfortable” (Stck.).—“That God has assigned him to that position, and placed him in it, ought to make the matter easy for him, and to make him careful in it” (B. B.).—“Jewels can be more easily watched than souls” (Stck.).—“God’s word remains unspoken, partly from fear of man, partly from sloth, partly from desire to please man” (Jerome).—“The first step in salvation is the knowledge of our sins. Of comfort, the principal thing, nothing is said; the prophet is only to warn, for they became capable of comfort only after they had come to know their sin” (L. L.).—“The passage Ezekiel 3:17-21 is a weighty lesson of doctrinal instruction, given in holy earnestness” (Richt.). Ver.18 sqq. “If the prophet neglects his duty, that does not help the wicked; he dies because of his iniquity: hasn’t he got Moses? Where the public ministry does not do its duty, still Holy Scripture is at hand; and it is every one’s own blame if he does not allow himself to be called to repentance by its voice” (H.).—Those murderers who must die by the hangman’s hand are far from being so bad murderers, in God’s sight, as many thoroughly genial and very cultivated men, who look to their office simply as a fat living, and who, by their example, or even merely from their being dumb dogs, allow souls to go to destruction in hell.—The weight of the sin of omission in God’s scale.—“Thou art every moment in danger of becoming a murderer, and of undergoing the judgment of the murderer: this is an effective stimulus for every one who is entrusted with the office of the public ministry” (H.).—God as the sinner’s blood relation and avenger of blood. What an intensity about the divine love!—“The life lost is something lost, the soul lost is everything lost. Oh what folly, when a teacher is silent for the sake of a handful of earth, and over and above brings his own soul into danger!” (St.)—“Plainly and diligently the warning is to be given, with earnestness and impressiveness, not with flattering words, nor half in joke, nor merely touching the skin, but setting forth the danger most carefully” (B. B.).—“God quickens, by means of grace, His servant through the instrumentality of the word of exhortation; the sinner quickens himself by the acceptance of the word. Without spiritual life and quickening here there is no life in eternity, but there also only death. Faith is spiritual life, and piety the sign of this life” (Stck.).—“We are not forthwith to despair of the salvation of the sinner, for at even also many still go into the vineyard (Matthew 20); the malefactor was not converted till upon the cross. God must declare a man wicked and condemned; otherwise he is not so, although the whole world were to shut him out of heaven” (L. L.).—“For in God’s sight nothing is more precious than our souls” (Calvin). Ezekiel 3:19. Every function in his calling is a saving of himself in the case of the servant of God. What need, then, has he to cast a side-look after reward, love, comfort, honours, etc.?—“There are men who do indeed gladly proclaim what God wishes, but who yet, when they see that their words have no entrance and are of no use, are thereby troubled, and, from fear of having deceived themselves, no longer wish to have anything to do with the word. But all who continue to act so are lovers of themselves. An honest servant of God bears the word so long as God will have it, and does not trouble himself about the good result” (B. B.).—That which is demanded of the sinner, viz. return, shows that the prayer finds audience: Turn Thou me, and I shall be turned.—Return is promised by God, but man would rather hold fast what is his own, viz. wickedness and the wicked way.—Progress on the bad road resembles standing still on the good one. Ezekiel 3:20. “It is not enough to have been pious, but we must also have continued so. Be thou faithful unto death, and he that endureth unto the end shall be saved” (Stck.).—“Then does godliness shine most, when it has the opportunity of sinning, nay, is everywhere enticed thereto, and yet does it not; on the other hand, the man who turns away from what is good and from the way of righteousness is worse, and in a more dangerous condition than the man who has never known it, 2 Peter 2:21” (B. B.).—“He who does not admonish the sinner,—a duty to which even common love binds every man, when he sees another in danger, and can in any way help him,—is exposed to the judgment, but much more still, if he is specially appointed by God for the purpose, or pretends to be so”. (B. B.). Ezekiel 3:21. “A faithful teacher must care for converted and unconverted alike; for the latter, that they may awake out of the sleep of false security; for the former, that they may not again fall asleep” (St.).—“Yea, even where parties are found who are willing to help sinners into the right way, there is still difficulty in finding one to offer his hand to the righteous, in order that they may advance with greater ease in the true way” (B. B.).—“We sin indeed daily, but let us beware of sinning knowingly. The man who hates sin flees from it, shrinks back with dread from it, does not sin” (Stck.).—“If a teacher does not seek with all earnestness the salvation of the hearers entrusted to him, it is a sure sign that he is not very much concerned about his own salvation; for if the latter be the case, he cannot neglect the former” (St.). Ezekiel 3:22 sqq. “Isolation is the condition of the receipt of divine communications. God makes Himself known to the mind only when it has been quite withdrawn from worldly influences. We must be in the valley; but we may be in the bustling town, and yet in the valley” (H.). Ezekiel 3:23. “Although the saved will behold the glory of God eternally in heaven, yet they will never become satiated or wearied of it; for here below even the contemplation of the divine glory fills believers with hunger in all the fulness of enjoyment” (Stck.). Ezekiel 3:24. “Those are the true children of God who are continually ruled by the Spirit of God, Romans 8:14” (Stck.). Ezekiel 3:25. “Bands and trouble is the reward for the faithful labour of an unwearied teacher” (Stck.). Whoever is pleased with such a salary is fit for the kingdom of God.—“The bands wherewith believers are bound are of different sorts: misery, pains, the cross, temptations; but God has arranged it beforehand, and frees us from it” (Stck.).—“To feel at home in the world is to feel well in the midst of danger” (Stck.). Ezekiel 3:26-27. “God has His times and seasons. Well for him who gives heed to them” (Tόb. B.).—“It is no good sign God’s hindering His servants when eager to speak, Acts 16:6”(Lg.).—“God must give teachers and preachers a joyful opening of the mouth, if they are to teach profitably” (Cr.).—To be silent to men and to speak from God is the right kind of preacher.—“How great is God’s mercy, that He causes the sermon to reach dumb ears even!” (Stck.) 2. The Four Signs, and their Interpretation (Ezekiel 4:1 to Ezekiel 5:17)1And thou, son of man, take thee a brick, and give [lay] it before thee, and 2portray upon it the city, [viz.] Jerusalem. And give [lay] siege against it, and build a siege-tower against it, and cast a mound against it, and make a camp 3against it, and set battering-rams against it round about. And do thou take thee a pan in [of] iron, and give [set] it as a wall in [of] iron between thee and the city; and direct thy face against it, and it is in siege, and thou layest siege against it: 4this is a sign to the house of Israel. And lie thou on thy side, the left one, and lay the guilt of the house of Israel upon it; according to the number of the days 5that thou shalt lie upon it thou shalt bear their guilt. And I have given thee the years of their guilt, according to the number of the days, three hundred and 6ninety days; and thou bearest the guilt of the house of Israel. And thou accomplishest these, and liest upon thy side, the right one, a second time, and bearest the guilt of the house of Judah forty days; a day for a year, a day 7for a year, have I given it to thee. And toward the siege of Jerusalem thou shalt set thy face, and thine uncovered arm, and thou prophesiest against it. 8And, behold, I have laid bands upon thee, and thou shalt not turn from one side 9to another, till thou endest the days of thy siege. And do thou take unto thee wheat, and barley, and beans, and lentils, and millet, and spelt, and put them in one vessel, and make thee bread thereof; according to the number of the days that thou art lying upon thy side, three hundred and ninety days shalt thou eat 10it. And thy food which thou shalt eat is by weight, twenty shekels a day; from 11time to time thou shalt eat it. And water shalt thou drink by measure, the sixth 12part of an hin; from time to time shalt thou drink it. And barley cake, that shalt thou eat, and in [with] dung that cometh out of man shalt thou bake it 13before their eyes. And Jehovah said, So shall the children of Israel eat their 14bread defiled among the heathen, whither I will drive them. And I said, Ah, Lord Jehovah! behold, my soul hath not been polluted, and neither carcase nor what is torn in pieces have I eaten from my youth up till now; neither hath 15abominable flesh come into my mouth. And He said unto me: Behold, I give thee dung of cattle for dung of man, and thou makest [preparest] thy bread thereon. 16And He said unto me, Son of man, behold, I break the staff of bread in Jerusalem, and they eat bread by weight, and in anxiety; and water by measure, and in 17anguish shall they drink; Because bread and water shall be wanting, and man and his brother are struck dumb [from anguish], and pine away in their guilt. Ezekiel 4:4. Sept.: ... καταἀριθμοντ. ἡμερωνπεντηκοντακ. ἑκατονἡμεραςἁςκοιμθησηἐπ̓αὐτουκ. ἀδικιας. Ezekiel 4:5. ... ταςδυοἀδικιαςαὐτ. ἐςἀριθμονἡμερωνἐνενηκοντακ. ἡμερας— Ezekiel 4:8. Anoth. read.: ξφεψικ plur. Ezekiel 4:9. ... ἐνενηκοντακ. ἑκατον—(Some mss. ηθιν.) Ezekiel 4:16. ... κυριος— Ezekiel 4:17. ὁπωςἐνδεειςγενωνταιἀρτου … (Anoth. read.: αΰηιε). Vulg.: ad fratrem— What the silence of the prophet is intended to signify, in case their own bad conscience should not set it before them vividly, is now represented in emblem to their curiosity by four symbolical actions, of which three are contained in our chapter; the explanatory inscription at the end is always given in shorter or longer terms, according to the expressiveness and completeness of each separate picture. According to Ezekiel 3:24 sq., and as is clear from themselves, the carrying out of these symbolical actions takes place in the house of Ezekiel. Next to his family, and perhaps called in by them, we have to think of his countrymen as spectators. The sections Ezekiel 4:1-3, Ezekiel 4:4-8, Ezekiel 4:9-17, have a connection with one another (Ezekiel 4:7-9 sqq.), and supplement one another. While the siege of Jerusalem, as the theme in the first section, is at the same time carried into further detail, and made more graphic in the second and third, after the inward, the outward condition of the parties concerned is indicated to us. Hengstenberg again transfers everything to the “sphere of the subjective” (similarly Hitzig: allegory), on which account also (according to him) the carrying out of the prophet’s instructions is not mentioned, and agrees with Ewald, with whom likewise the “literary activity” of Ezekiel is the principal thing, for which the objectivity (or not) of the symbolical action is a matter of pure indifference. Calvin, likewise, makes Ezekiel 4:4 sqq. take place in vision. As regards the “almost childish impression” of the action in question as an objective reality, this has to be attributed to Hengstenberg’s exposition itself; but that a publication of what takes place in the house of Ezekiel is not to be a matter of anxiety, follows from the well-known lively intercourse between those in exile and the great mass in the fatherland. (“Meanwhile, as the man of God, though full, is not permitted to speak, he is to employ the silent language of writing. But his writing is in symbol. His heart is with Jerusalem; there he portrays upon a brick the picture of the beloved city.”—Umbreit. “The heavy judgment which is to burst upon Jerusalem is announced, in harmony with the vision of Ezekiel 1, which already held out in prospect the approach of God to judgment.”—Hengst.) Ezekiel 4:1-3.—The First SignEze_4:1. εΰϊδ applies the foregoing special instruction to the prophet; and, at the same time, the imperative passes over into the description of what Ezekiel is to do, hence the perfects with ε consec. “Just the year before Zedekiah had journeyed to Babylon, for the purpose of testifying his submission to Nebuchadnezzar” (J. D. Mich.).—As to μְ ?αֵ ?πָ ?δ, comp. Winer, Realw. 2 p. 731 sqq. We are not to think of real stone, but of something baked from clay (white? chalky?), dried in the sun, or burnt white in the furnace. The walls of ancient Babylon were of bricks, and these Babylonian bricks are one foot long and broad, five inches thick and square. “Such bricks as the Assyrians and Babylonians, just in those districts where Ezekiel lived, filled so often with inscriptions” (Ewald). Besides, there is the significant allusion to Egypt and the bondage of Israel there, Exodus 1:14; Exodus 5:7 sqq. “In order to be able to engrave a delineation that will last,” Hitzig requires the “clay-brick,” which is likewise common in Canaan (Isaiah 9:10). Just so Keil: “white clayey substance.” Others: a brick-shaped slate.—As is usual with those who are thinking about anything, he is to lay the brick before him.—ηχχ is neither more nor less than: to fix, which may be done just as well by drawing as by engraving. “First of all only a city; Jerusalem would be the last of all the cities of the earth to be thought of, when the subject in hand is a city to be besieged by the Lord. After Jerusalem we are to suppose, as it were, a mark of exclamation” (Hengst.).—But to the brick there belongs not merely, as Hengstenberg maintains, the picture of the city, but also (in accordance with Ewald’s view) what follows, describing “how in all regular order, through all the steps from the beginning onwards to the end, one would open a siege against it.” It would be to press the letter, to make the execution of it from the outset impossible or “childish,” if one were to imagine the contents of Eze 4:2 to be outside the brick; and how does Ezekiel 4:3 (comp. Ezekiel 4:7) suit such a view? The stone itself is not Jerusalem! (Hitzig.) Ezekiel 4:2. ξφεψ from φεψ, to press, to straiten. Hitzig: siege-work in general. γּ ?εּ ?χ is Aramaic (Hitzig: it thus belongs to a land whose masters were thoroughly acquainted with fortress warfare, Habakkuk 1:10; Isaiah 23:13) and modern Hebrew: to look out, to fix the eyes upon; whence the noun, probably a Chaldee technical term, γָּ ?ιֵ ?χ, watch-tower (except in Ezekiel, elsewhere only in 2 Kings 25:1 and Jeremiah 52:4), for the most part collectively, and so also here for the (wooden) towers of observation equal or superior in height to the walls round about the city to be besieged, from which weapons were thrown and shot by means of the ballistζ, as well as in other ways. [J. D. Mich.: two lines of circumvallation, a mound and rampart furnished with palisades. W. Neumann: the all prostrating storming-machine.] The plural ξηπεϊ, because several separate camps. αψιν, from the iron ram’s head in front of beams, which, hanging in ropes or chains inside a scaffolding to be moved upon wheels, were directed against the walls and gates in order to push them in. Hδvernick traces back the word to αּ ?εּ ?ψ ,αψδ ,αψψ, “to bore through.” Comp. besides, Josephus, De Bello Judges 3:7, § 19. (Others have understood by the expression, the “he-goats,” i.e. the leaders of the army divisions in the different camps.)—If, then, the prophet, as commissioned by God, enters on such a siege, the real besieger of Jerusalem is the Lord God; and while the Chaldeans appear as mere instruments in the divine hand, Ezekiel 4:3—which brings to a close the first symbolical action—intimates what state of mind, on the part of the Lord, Ezekiel has to represent.—εΰϊδ (just as elsewhere also) introduces a new element, put on a parallel with Ezekiel 4:1 by means of χηΞμκ.—ξηαϊ signifies something bent together, which may be flat for frying or roasting; in such saucepans the flat cakes were fried, Leviticus 2:5. As he is to set the iron pan as an iron wall, it is clear that he has to set it up perpendicularly; it is likewise clear, from the expression between thee and the city, that a relation of separation, of division, between Jerusalem as portrayed upon the brick and the representative of God is meant to be expressed. Only on the ground of such a relation between God and Jerusalem can we explain alike the hostile attitude of the prophet’s face, and specially the clause, and it is in siege, and along with that Ezekiel 4:1-2. But as the wall is to be after the manner of iron (α), the iron pan cannot be taken as a fascine protecting the besieger, because such a thing, as a rule, was not of iron, and because certainly there could be no need of a protection for God the Besieger, but rather of a protection from Him; nor are we to think with Ewald (1st edit.) of the “very strong iron-like wall of Jerusalem” (Raschi), since the suffix also in ΰμιδ does not refer to the pan, but to the city, and the strength of the city wall is not certainly to be made prominent. Ewald also in his very recent 2d edition approaches the view of Hδvernick (who with Ephraem understands “the mass of misfortune which is coming upon Jerusalem”), inasmuch as he makes the prophet put “the merely painted siege more strongly and palpably by means of the picture of a wall, as it were, of iron.” But in this way also the so express attitude of separation, which Hitzig recognises, is lost. The allusion to Jeremiah 1:13 for “the horrors of the siege” (Hδv.) is too far-fetched [a Lapide: the burning of the city; Origen: the horrible tortures of the inhabitants, Jeremiah 29:22; 2Ma 7:5; others: the army-fire of the Chaldeans]. Jerome (that the wrath of God is represented) nearly approaches the correct view, to which Kimchi points by referring to Isaiah 59:2. The pan, therefore, as a wall, symbolizes the strong (Jeremiah 1:18, alike in accordance with God’s decree, and in consequence of the corruption of Israel) wall of separation, which finally explains everything, what precedes and also what follows. Vatablus and Grotius bring in, besides, “their hardness of heart and the blackness of their sins,” just as Hitzig also, “the base metal” and (in accordance with Ezekiel 24:6) “the rust as a picture of defilement through sin.” (Hengst.: first the refusal of divine help, then God Himself even the assailant.) Not so much the preparation of food which follows (Klief.), as the circumstance that such a pan (according to Ewald: “the nearest iron plate”) was at hand in every household (Keil), suggested the choice of the same. As the siege is described with the prophet as besieger, so “certainly it will be carried out, not hundreds of years afterwards, but in the lifetime of Ezekiel, during his labours” (Klief.). The significance of the iron pan would certainly disappear if we imagined that the prophet had grouped the siege in little figures round about the brick. Moreover, what is portrayed upon the stone, and is here spoken of as the city, is called in Ezekiel 4:7 “the siege of Jerusalem.”—The house of Israel is here the same as in Ezekiel 3 Comp. on the other hand, Ezekiel 4:5.—If the symbolical action is to be a sign (in the sense of foreshadowing), then the view, that it was also shown them, that, as it was for them, so it made its appearance objectively before them, is certainly more probable than Hengstenberg’s subjective view, more probable than with Stδudlein, Hδvern., Hitzig, to make the action one that was not really performed, but only discoursed about (Isaiah 20:3). Klief.: “an important action, even when besides it is a silent one, must be performed; although the text does not mention it expressly, a thing that quite explains itself in the case of one who has received a command from God.” Additional Note on Ezekiel 4:1-3[In regard to the part required to be played by the prophet himself, however it may have been understood in former times, we should suppose few now will be disposed to doubt that the successive actions spoken of took place only in vision, and are no more to be ranked among the occurrences of actual life than the eating of the prophetic roll mentioned in the preceding chapter. Indeed, such actions as are described here, though well fitted, when rehearsed as past, and read as narratives of things ideally done, to make a strong and vivid impression upon the mind, would probably have had an opposite effect if transacted in real life. It would have been impossible for ordinary spectators to see Ezekiel conducting a miniature siege with a tile and a saucepan, and such like implements of war, without a feeling of the puerile and ludicrous being awakened; and the other symbolical actions mentioned, especially his lying for 390 days motionless on one side, if literally understood, can scarcely be regarded as coming within the limits of the possible. And along with the physical impossibility of one part of the requirement there was the moral impossibility of another, since to eat bread composed of such abominable materials would have been, (if performed in real life) a direct contravention of the law of Moses,—that law, respectful submission to which was ever held to be the first and most essential characteristic of a true prophet (compare Deuteronomy 14:3; Deuteronomy 23:12-14, with Ezekiel 13:1-5). Besides, we find the prophet (Ezekiel 8:1) represented as sitting in his house before the number of the days to be spent in a lying posture could have been completed. So that, on every account, it is necessary to consider the actions to have taken place in vision, as, indeed, was usually the case in prophetical actions, and uniformly so, as we shall find in Ezekiel.—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel.—W. F.] Ezekiel 4:4-8.—The Second SignOnce more a new appointment, which onwards to Ezekiel 4:8, carrying into further detail the above indicated destiny of Jerusalem, gives us a more vivid picture of it as respects the inner condition of the parties concerned, after the manner of a second symbolic action on the part of Ezekiel. In the position of a prophet, it is implied that such an one may be the representative alike of God and of the people; and as, therefore, Ezekiel represents Jehovah in Ezekiel 4:1-3, so now, and in Ezekiel 4:9 sqq., he represents Israel. “Where in this way Jehovah Himself fights against His people, their downfall is certain; the prophet immediately assumes this position” (Hδv.). The mere circumstance, that he is to lie on the one side and the other (“to sleep,” as the Sept. and Vulg. make it, plainly contradicts the context), is symbolical as regards those whom he represents, a picture of the political situation (Isaiah 28:20; Isaiah 50:11; Amos 5:2; Psalms 20:8; Psalms 44:25); not “as a sick person who can lie only on one side, and must always without shifting lie upon it” (Ewald), not as a figure for a state of political languishing, but in contrast with standing upright, a lying down in consequence of a fall (Hitz.).—As the period fixed is days (which, however, mean years), the reference generally to the besieged (“the frightful constraint from without, during which one cannot move or stir,” Ewald) is to be held fast in the first place; but then, farther, the carrying captive which follows, and the sojourn in exile, is at the same time to be kept in view. First the left side is made prominent when the reference is to the severed house of Israel,—according to Ewald, Hitzig, because of the geographical situation to the north of Judah (Ezekiel 16:46), while the latter lay in the south,—according to Grot., Hδvernick, Keil, because of the superiority of the latter over the former (comp. Ezekiel 23.), Ecclesiastes 10:2. Maldon.: it had the priesthood and the kingdom.—ςεο is the guilt, thus the sin in its consciousness of punishment; neither the former alone nor the latter alone, but the transition from the one to the other in process of being effected for the subjective consciousness. The consciousness of guilt on the part of the people is to be awakened.—Inasmuch as Ezekiel is to lay the guilt upon it, i. e. his left side, the side upon which he himself has to lie, the problem can only be solved when we regard Ezekiel himself, in virtue of his lying upon his left side, as the bearer of the guilt, which is also immediately said. According to Keil, he would come to lie upon the guilt, and not the guilt upon him! That πωΰ cannot here mean “to bear,” as Hengstenberg asserts, one cannot see, because, if he is to lay the guilt upon himself, he will have to bear it also, and the matter in hand is not at all an official and mediatorial or atoning substitution, but only a symbolical bearing of a burden which has to lie heavily upon the people, whom he only represents. As many days as he shall lie upon his left side, so long will he represent the burden of guilt of the ten tribes. This is not certainly meant to signify the number of the years which they have sinned (Rosenm.). Is this, then, asserted by Ezekiel 4:5? The number of the days of his lying means, of course, “the years of their guilt;” but what is carefully to be noticed, as a period given him by God (εΰπιπϊϊιμκ), yet not surely as a period selected by God from their course of sinning for the purpose of being represented by him? is such a divine formulating of the period of their sinning well conceivable? but as the guilt measured by God, to be represented by Ezekiel, and thus to be announced in actual fact, which they have brought upon themselves, and have to bear in years. What comes upon them in years, Ezekiel is to represent to them in days, thus bearing the guilt of the house of Israel. This explanation, simply arrived at from the text, will have to be tested by the interpretation of the periods given. For Israel there are appointed 390 days, and the prophet has accomplished these. Ezekiel 4:6. For his lying on his right side, a second time. to bear the guilt of the house of Judah, 40 days are appointed. The question, whether the 40 days are to be supposed as included in the 390 (with Cocc. and others), is expressly answered in the negative by the ωπιϊ (“for the second time”); there are 390 and 40, in all 430 days, which sum the text certainly does not add together. For the special reason, that the season of punishment has begun long ago in the case of the ten tribes, just as it is already touching Judah also, a division of time readily suggested itself, while the division of collective Israel into Israel and Judah presented itself historically. In getting the 390 years to correspond in respect of sinning, and especially the 40, if they are to be reckoned as actual years, and therefore exactly, even the most diverse modes of explanation have found themselves helpless. The whole kingdom of Israel did not last for 390 years; and we must therefore go back beyond the ten tribes, into the period of the judges, pot to mention other modes of reckoning by means of omissions. Rosenm., therefore, made the distinction between Israel and Judah step into the background as regards the 390 years; and inasmuch as he gets at 386 years from the division of the kingdom down to the eleventh year of Zedekiah (the conquest of Jerusalem), he consoles himself for what is wanting with the poetic rounding off of prophetic language; but Judah’s 40 years of sin are reckoned from the twelfth year of the reign of the pious king Josiah! Hengstenberg understands Israel as collective Israel, begins with 2 Chronicles 12:1 (comp. 2 Chronicles 11:17), i.e. from the fourth year of Rehoboam, “the year of the falling into sin of the whole nation,” and supports himself in this view by Vitringa’s reckoning of 430 years 6 months from the founding of the temple to the destruction of the state; and deducting 37 years of Solomon’s and 3 of Rehoboam’s, there remain 390 years; and Judah, according to him, is contrasted with the whole people, the 40 years being 40 from the collective Eze 390: “the despising of the grace of God in the raising up of king Josiah (2 Kings 23:25), and the frustration of the last attempt made by Jeremiah,” beginning with the thirteenth year of Josiah, the first appearance of Jeremiah on the stage, whose labours down till the destruction of Jerusalem lasted 40 years. The connection with Ezekiel 4:1-3 manifestly makes the time of punishment more probable than a time of sin; and the computation of the number 390 for the days which the siege of the city lasted, from the 10th day of the 10th month of the 9th year of Zedekiah down to the 9th day of the 4th month of the 11th year, can very simply be made to correspond by making a deduction for the temporary raising of the siege on account of the Egyptians (Jeremiah 37:5). On the other hand, every calculation of 390 and of 40 years—which is certainly involved—fails as a time of exile for Israel and Judah. In this state of matters, if one reckons by literal days and years, but still more considering the all-pervading symbolical character of the whole and of the details, the acceptance of symbolical formulas of time for the divinely-awarded punishment of the guilt alike of Israel and of Judah commends itself. For the number 390 in reference to Israel, Kliefoth, by comparing Deuteronomy 25:3 with 2 Corinthians 11:24, in accordance with the number of the ten tribes, arrives at 10 Χ 39 years of punishment as just so many strokes of divine chastisement; and for Judah, on the other hand, as he does not treat it as two tribes, by a fair adjustment he arrives at the highest legal number of just 40 strokes, i.e. years. What Keil remarks in opposition to this view may be said, but is less decisive than the certainly surprising character of such a mode of reckoning for the prophetic symbolism of an Ezekiel. Klief. has been driven to his ingenious attempt at interpretation, because the number 390 baffled every other interpretation. But this number also, which stands for Israel, can claim no peculiar symbolism for itself. The ten tribes, as Klief. himself calls them “torn off branches, atoms of a nation,” have, in view of the longer historical duration of their exile, as well as by reason of their greater liability to punishment, only in general a claim to be more heavily punished. In particular, they do not come into consideration as regards the siege in our verses which applies to Jerusalem, nor in any other way, save that the national prophetic spirit must include them in its conception of collective Israel, for which Judah with Jerusalem is the title. With such a historical meaning also for Judah, with which also the right side of the prophet standing for it corresponds, one need not be stumbled with Kliefoth, although the number 390 should be “in itself quite meaningless.” It is the same as with the left side of Ezekiel, so quite peculiarly taking the lead in Ezekiel 4:4-5, for this reason only, because his misery as an exile, long ago begun, and already entered upon in part by Judah likewise, is fitted to exhibit before the eyes of the remnant of Judah what will not be wanting to them just as visibly. For the symbolism the number 40, which is applied to Judah, is the determining element. The relation of the 40 to 390 may be similar to the case in which Bδhr (2. p. 491) does not allow the Numbers 33 and 66 as such to come into consideration, but only in their connection with 7 and 14, bringing them up to 40 and 80. As respects the number 40 itself, Bδhr says convincingly, according to it, almost universally, such periods are fixed as bring with them a state of more or less constraint and oppression, and yet somehow at the same time a state having a bearing on religious affairs. Keil is right in basing the symbolical meaning of a definite term of divine visitation not simply on the 40 years’ leading of the people through the wilderness (Numbers 14), which properly amounted to 38 years only, but on the earlier passage Genesis 7:12; Genesis 7:17 Comp., in order to determine the meaning of the number 40, Exodus 34:28 (Deuteronomy 9); 1 Kings 19:8; Jonah 3:4; Matthew 4. As in this way the 40 for Judah, which alone properly came under consideration, threw light on the 390, the summing up might be let alone; with some reflection it was done, as a matter of course, and this all the more that the number 390 in itself must of necessity appear meaningless. The possible connection with the actual period of the siege of Jerusalem, or a portion of it (comp. on Ezekiel 4:9), may be regarded as a subordinate reference. “The sufferings of the siege will, in the general sense of severe constraint, certainly continue during the whole exile also,” etc. (Ew.) The addition of 390 and 40 gives (according to Exodus 12:40) the period of sojourn of the children of Israel in Egypt, 430 years, significant for all after periods of the nation, on account of the parallel of this period with the exile (Introd. p. 19), and in the law even (Deuteronomy 28:68), as well as in Ezekiel 9:3; Ezekiel 9:6; Ezekiel 8:13, brought into significant prominence. That the sojourn in Egypt, which sprang from quite a different cause, suits badly as a type for a period of punishment (Klief.), cannot accordingly be maintained. Comp. besides, Genesis 15:13 (Acts 7:6), where we have it in round numbers! “The period of the first heathen tyranny over the people of Jehovah repeats itself in the history of the nation: the old, everlastingly memorable time becomes to the seer—himself already living amid heathen surroundings—a type of the oppressions rushing in anew upon them with irresistible violence; hence the punishment of the exile is intensified by the circumstance that it appears as the antitype of the ancient 430 years’ Egyptian bondage” (Hδv.). But here Klief. is right, when, against a special reference of the 40 years for Judah to the 40 years’ leading of the people collectively through the wilderness (for which Hδv. points to Ezekiel 20:13 sqq., 23 sqq., 35, 36), he raises the objection, that in this way another occurrence lying outside the 430 years is drawn in, while the 40 years must certainly lie within the 430. We must therefore either abide by the general symbolical character of the number 40, or like Keil, who very ingeniously draws attention to the circumstance, that the last 40 years of the Egyptian bondage furnished a reason for a division of the 430 into 390 and 40, find again in the 40 the 40 years of his exile which Moses spent in Midian. Comp. Exodus 7:7 with Acts 7:23; Acts 7:30—not as Keil, Exodus 2:11—3. 10; Acts 7:23-30. “These 40 years,” remarks Keil, “were not only for Moses a season of testing and purification for his future calling, but doubtless for the Israelites also the period of their severest oppression by the Egyptians, and in this respect quite appropriate as a type for the future period of Judah’s punishment; so that as Israel in Egypt lost in Moses her helper and protector, so now Judah was to lose her king, and to be given up to the tyranny of the heathen world-power.” [See Additional Note at the close of the Exegetical Remarks.—W. F.] Instead of the Kethib διξιπι (elsewhere only in 2 Chronicles 3:17) we must read, with the Qeri, δַ ?ιְ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ι.—Comp. on Ezekiel 4:5.—The suffix in πϊϊιο refers to ςεο. Hengst., who takes μξρτψ as=for just as many days (Klief., Keil: for the number of, for a number of), translates: so that for every day there comes a year, I give it thee. [The 190 of the Sept. for the whole, and 40 for Judah, Hδvernick explains to himself by the bringing in of another type, viz. the deluge, Genesis 7:24; Genesis 7:12. They read Exodus 12:40 differently from the Hebrew text. Hitzig makes them reckon their 150 from the year 738 to 588. By means of Eze 4:7 our section goes back upon the first (Ezekiel 4:3), and harmonizes the two symbolical actions. Inasmuch as the prophet represented the people before, and not so much Jerusalem, he can in representing Jehovah set his face toward the siege of Jerusalem (viz. as that was to be represented in Ezekiel 4:1-3), fixedly, sharply, as an enemy. The bared arm,—(Isaiah 52:10) as of a warrior, for the purpose of fighting, stripping it of the garment up to the shoulder,—according to Raschi, prefiguring Nebuchadnezzar, is at the same time the free arm of the prophet, who is lying upon the other. As it must be the right arm for the warlike object in view, we shall have (as against Hitz.) to think of the 390 days in Ezekiel 4:4-5, during which Ezekiel lies upon the left side, with which Ezekiel 4:8 also agrees. The arm outstretched in the same direction strengthens as well as gives effect to the permanence of the look; if it were to be understood as occasionally lifted up, then the ςμ, which is certainly usual elsewhere also in the case of threatening announcements, would be explained still more definitely.—In accordance with Ezekiel 3:25, the expositors understand the prophesying as not so much orally in words, but virtually by means of this very symbolical acting. Comp. however, on Ezekiel 5:5 sqq. Ezekiel 4:8. εδπδπϊϊιΞ in contrast with πϊπεδπδ, Ezekiel 3:25; there in order to move him along, here in order to make him fast. The bands are not the same as there; but whereas those bands of men do not make the prophet obedient to them, a slave to their will, the bands here, on the other hand, which God throws over him, answer their purpose of fixing him according to God’s will. The outward literal bands become in the divine speech a figurative expression for the divine power which will hold him down, and at the same time (Klief.) make him bear it with patience. [According to Hδv., a new element is introduced by εִ ?δπδ; the prophet, in a vivid manner, is placed in the condition of the besieged. According to Calv.: indicating the stability and firmness of the divine decree.]—The turning which is hindered in such wise is that from the left to the right side, onwards till the accomplishment of the days of his besieging; so that he has to represent the siege of the city, which may in this way be specified as lasting 390 days (comp. on Ezekiel 4:6-7), unless what follows was intended to suggest a still more special reference. [Klief. refers Ezekiel 4:7-8 to the whole period of 430 days; Hitz. refers the prophesying to the 40 days merely.] Ezekiel 4:9-17.—The Third Sign. Ezekiel 4:9. A new charge, as in Ezekiel 4:4; a still more detailed amplification, now especially of the outward condition; a third symbolic action, by which also provision is made for the sustenance of Ezekiel while the above described state of affairs lasts; and thus in connection with it. A representation of the people. If already in Ezekiel 4:8 “the state of restraint of the besieged” (Hengst.) were thought of, then an immediate transition would be made from this more general calamity to the more special want of sustenance.—ηθִּ ?ιο, a Chaldaic plural; ο instead of ν, wheat in grains (in the sing especially wheat on the stalk, in the field). Hengst.: as wheat is the usual means of sustenance among the exiles, the Chaldaic form pushes itself forward. Manifestly from a better time (Hδv.: descending from what is better to what is worse and worse); for now there follows what,—however good and in part delicious the ingredients in themselves are,—when baked into bread, as is the case here, is prison-bread,—barley in grains, 1 Kings 4:28 (Judges 7:13; 2 Kings 4:42; John 6:9), beans as well as lentils, a favourite dish (Genesis 25:34), of the latter of which down to the present day the poor in Egypt, in time of dearth, make use as food; γָּ ?βָ ?ο millet (from γη, to swell in water, or from the dark colour, allied with γָּ ?βָ ?ο, “grain”), yielding a bad kind of bread; and πֻּ ?ρְּ ?ξִ ?ιν fitches, spelt (Exodus 9:32), as being one of the poorest sorts of grain, which produces a dry and not very nourishing kind of bread.—The circumstance that Ezekiel is to take of all together does not indeed run counter to the law (Leviticus 19:19; Deuteronomy 22:9), but comes very near the prohibition, possibly indicating circumstances of a lawless character, where one is not so rigid. More expressly it is suggested in this way, that the besieged will in their distress be compelled to gather together everything that can possibly be turned into bread. (Απανπαγάρτοιβρωτὰπολιορκουμένοις.) This state of matters is represented yet more strongly by means of the one vessel, which shows that of each separate sort not much more is to be had (Ezekiel 4:10).—The length of time (=ξִ ?ρְ ?τַ ?ψδιξιν as many days as there are) is given definitely as 390 days. It is therefore “inadmissible,” with Keil, to get rid of this clear and definite statement by the supposition that the greater number merely is given (Prado), and that the 40 days are to be understood with the rest, but (Ewald) are omitted for brevity’s sake (in the case of Ezekiel!!). It is conceivable that for 390 days exactly the famine would make itself specially felt. (2 Kings 25:3; Lamentations 2:20; Lamentations 4:9-10.) At all events, the prophet has to calculate his prison-fare for 390 days, for so many days is he to eat it. (390 loaves, Jer.)—ςμΞςγκ is accordingly his left side (Ezekiel 4:5), before he turned to the right one. Comp. on Ezekiel 4:7-8. Klief. is right as against the including of the 40 days in the 390, not, however, in the extended application which he asserts for these 390 days, viz. on to Ezekiel 4:17, as will soon appear. It is a very good remark of Klief., that the prophet was not altogether prohibited from letting service be rendered to him. Additional Note on Ezekiel 4:9[At Ezekiel 4:9, he is ordered to “make bread according to the number of the days that he should lie upon his side; three hundred and ninety days shalt thou eat thereof.” Here the 40 days are left out, although during them also he was to lie upon his side—not, as commentators generally, and still also Hδvernick, suppose, from the first period being by much the larger of the two, and as such standing for the whole; but to keep the reference clear to the distinctive character of the wilderness-period, which was the point chiefly to be had in view by the Jewish exiles. The eating of polluted bread as a symbol, properly implied a constrained residence in a Gentile country—an unclean region; hence, in the explanation given of the symbol at Ezekiel 4:13, it is declared of the house of Israel, that “they shall eat their defiled bread among the Gentiles.” But in the wilderness Israel stood quite separate from the Gentiles, though still under penal treatment, and in a sense still connected with Egypt (hence “the wilderness of Egypt,” Ezekiel 20:36); and so they who were in a manner to return to that state again were merely to “eat bread by weight, and with care, and drink water by measure, and in desolateness:” a state of chastisement and trouble, but not by any means so heathen-like, so depressed and helpless, as the other.—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel.—W. F.] Ezekiel 4:10. His food is this bad mixed food (Ewald), not the definite portion which he will have to eat (Keil), for it is defined as portions only by what follows. Ezekiel is to have to eat, not as much as he likes, but, as usually happens in a time of scarcity during sieges, by weight (Ezekiel 4:16). 20 shekels (shekel, what is weighed, hence a definite weight, just as mishkol is weight in general)—according to Ewald, about 20 ounces; according to Keil, 22–23 ounces of bread; according to Philippson, equivalent to 400 beans in weight (Leviticus 26:26). Although in those warmer countries a man needs less than in our climate, yet here it is at most the half of what is usually necessary that is specified for each day. The definition from time to time strengthens the daily element, as distinguished from the hunger which is continually making itself known, never satisfied; he will not be at liberty to give heed to this latter, but will have to consider the time, that he has only 20 shekels for each day, hence—seldom, at long intervals, sparingly! [Keil supposes: at the different hours of the daily meal time. He makes Ezekiel provide himself with a store of grain and legumes, and prepare his bread daily therefrom. Precisely so Klief., who brings in, besides, the pan from Ezekiel 4:3 for the purpose.] And as the food is by weight, so the drink—the water is by measure. Ezekiel 4:11 (Ezekiel 4:16). A whole hin is reckoned by the Rabbins at 72 egg-shellfuls; hence one-sixth the same as two logs 12 egg-shells. Too much for dying, too little for living. As in this way food and drink are specified for the 390 days, the idea readily suggests itself, with Grotius and others, of referring Ezekiel 4:12 to the 40 days that still remain. The express mention of the number was not necessary here, because its symbolism (comp. on Ezekiel 4:5-6) in general sways the whole, and because in particular it is, of course, understood as the residue after the 390 had been so expressly made prominent (Ezekiel 4:9). The description may the more readily dispense with the number, as from the facts of the ease it becomes sufficiently clear, on the one hand, by means of the new element of uncleanness, especially after the divine explanation which immediately follows in Ezekiel 4:13, and, on the other hand, by means of that freer movement on the part of the prophet which is demanded by Ezekiel 4:12. The 40 certainly symbolizes (comp. on Ezekiel 4:4-6) chiefly the exile among the heathen, as it was to begin for Judah after the taking of besieged Jerusalem. Hengst. excellently remarks: “the barley cake here has nothing at all to do with the pot in Ezekiel 4:9; that is gone.” Ewald finds in it an “exceptional sort of thing, as if for a feast;” certainly too much, and not in accordance with the character of the period of exile. ςֻ ?βָּ ?δ, the warm cake of bread baked in the hot ashes, just as is usual down even to the present day in eastern lands, especially on journeys, is distinguished as something more common, what is more in order, from the preceding unusual and extraordinary mixed food. The poor standing of exiles causes it to be of barley (comp. Ezekiel 4:9), unless such cakes baked in ashes were as a rule of barley, of which Keil has by no means proved the contrary, as against Hitzig. [Keil, Hitzig, and others translate predicatively: as a barley cake, prepared in that manner, shalt thou eat it. (Is the suffix neuter? is it to be referred to μην in Ezekiel 4:10?)] Since the important thing here, as regards the sense, is merely the emphasizing of the uncleanness of the food, and since the use of dry animal dung as fuel (Ezekiel 4:15) is at least nothing unusual in the East, δΰγνβμμιφΰϊ was the strong term for it. As fuel (comp. for αβμμι, ver Ezekiel 15 : ςμιδν), unlike Isaiah 36:12, it has nothing to do with the siege, beyond which, as regards the symbol, we have now come, as if i were pointing to a scarcity of wood; but at most, it refers to the harassing, immured condition of Ezekiel in his own house. Filth and misery round about on every side: what an overwhelmingly vivid sermon for his countrymen this situation before their eyes! Comp. besides, Deuteronomy 23:12-14. ϊςβπδ from ςεβ, a technical word for ςβδ, either: to make round, to curve, to bend, in reference to the form of these cakes, or: because they were surrounded with hot ashes. (Sept.: ὁἐγκρυφίας.) Ezekiel 4:13. The divine interpretation, which is immediately annexed to this quite extraordinary demand, and just because it is so, lays stress (for the reference is not to the siege, but it is already the exile that is spoken of), not on the difficulty as to fuel, but on its uncleanness, and that not so much in a Levitical as in a moral point of view, as judged by the universal human instinct of decency. Man’s dung signifies the profane sojourn in the heathen world in general with its idols (βμεμιν!). Comp. Ezekiel 9:3. The prophet raises his objection—in Ezekiel 4:14—in the sense: if I have never eaten that which is unclean according to the law of Israel, how should I have anything to do with a thing unclean generally! (Grot.)—ΰֲ ?δָ ?δּ, an exclamation of astonishment, fear, horror. My soul—not so much as: I myself; it expresses rather the living consciousness of the prophet in his feelings, alike as to his antipathies and sympathies (Matthew 26:38). A lively expression of feeling, especially characteristic of a priest! Comp. as to the subject-matter, Deuteronomy 14:21; Exodus 22:31; Acts 10:14; Acts 11:8; Daniel 1:8.—τּ ?βּ ?εּ ?μִ, according to Ges.: something made fetid, stinking; hence, on the one hand: unpalatable, on the other: forbidden to be used by the laws of food, something abominable, disgusting, or: something rejected, worthy of rejection (Leviticus 7:18); also without αωׂ ?ψ, Isaiah 65:4. According to Hδv.: especially characterizing the priest, inasmuch as in the case of the sacrificial meals flesh left over till the third day was reckoned τβεμ, Leviticus 19:7. God makes the concession to him Ezekiel 4:15—with ψְ ?ΰֵ ?δ, corresponding to his δִ ?πֵּ ?δ, of cow’s dung (Kethib: φְ ?τεּ ?ςֵ ?ι, Qeri: φְ ?τִ ?ιςֵ ?ι), like camel’s dung—a very common, odourless fuel. The objection and concession (Hav.: an impressive episode) give a distinctness of their own to the matter in hand; and thereafter Ezekiel 4:16 returns to the beginning, not merely of this third symbolical action (Ezekiel 4:9 sqq.), but, in winding up, of the whole chapter (Ezekiel 4:1 sqq.), and in this way to what is most closely impending, viz. to the siege of Jerusalem. And to this corresponds in point of form the αοΞΰγν, and, as regards the subject-matter, the participial construction δππιΞωαψ, of what is as it were shown in the act of being broken in pieces.—As in Isaiah 3:1 bread and also water are named as that which supports (Delitzsch), or more exactly, that on which one supports himself, so here the staff of bread, since bread supports, i.e. nourishes, strengthens, refreshes the heart of man, Psalms 104:15; Genesis 18:5; Judges 19:5; Leviticus 26:26. This staff being broken on which the earthly man leans, he falls into the dust of death. Defined more exactly, and, at the same time, set forth vividly by means of εΰαμεΞμηρΞ. Comp. Ezekiel 4:10-11.—αωξξεο strengthens αγΰβδ, the anxiety about the means of subsistence (Matthew 6:31-32) rising up into silent, speechless pain, caused by the impending starvation. Ezekiel 4:17. Either dependent on the principal thought in Ezekiel 4:16 : “in order that” (Ewald), or, as this is limited to bread, dependent on the amplification of the same there: because.—The brother also in Psalms 49:7.—In other respects, a quotation from Leviticus 26:39; Lamentations 2:12; Lamentations 2:19 (Luke 21:26). Additional Note on Ch. 4.[Jerusalem in a state of siege represents the covenant-people, as a whole, straitened and oppressed by the powers of this world, as the instruments of God’s just displeasure. And the prophet being appointed to bear, during its continuance, the iniquity of the people, with stinted and foul provisions, points in another form to the same visitation of evil—only with a more particular respect to the cause from which it was to spring, and the penal character it should wear. That the time specified should have been in all 430 years, denoted that the dealing was to form a kind of fresh Egyptian exile and bondage to the elements of the world; but much more so in the case of the one house than in that of the other. The house of Israel having cast off nearly all that was distinctive in the position and privileges of the covenant-people, they had consequently sunk into a condition of greatest danger, one bordering on heathen darkness and perdition—nigh unto cursing. What they might expect was to be bruised and crushed to the dust, as if under the rod of Egypt. But Judah was not so far gone; she had the true priesthood to minister at her altars, and the house of David to rule by divine right over the heritage of God; so that her subjection to the powers of evil was only to be like the time of chastisement and trial in the wilderness, out of which she might again emerge into a state of peace and blessing. As the prophet also again declared, in a later prophecy, “And I will bring you into the wilderness of the peoples (not the wilderness merely, but the wilderness of the peoples, to show that it was to be the same only in character as of old, but not in geographical position), and there will I plead with you face to face; like as I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you, saith the Lord God” (Ezekiel 20:35-38). A new time of chastisement, but mingled, as of old, with mercy; severe and earnest dealing, but for a gracious result—that they might be refined and purified, so as to become fit for enjoying the good which, as a redeemed people, was secured to them for a heritage of blessing. And if any hope remained for the other branch, the house of Israel—if they were ever to escape from their state of Egyptian darkness and bondage, it must be by their going to join their brethren of Judah in the wilderness, and sharing in their peculiar treatment and prospects. On which account, it is not the whole of the 430 years of the Egypt-state that is appointed toward the house of Israel in the vision, but this shortened by the 40 years of the wilderness sojourn, to teach them that a way still lay open for their return to life, but only by their having the Egypt-state merged into that of the wilderness; in other words, by ceasing from their rank idolatries and open apostasy from the way of God, and coming to seek, along with Judah, through God’s covenant and ordinances, a restoration to righteousness and peace and blessing. But why should the prophet, in thus announcing the future dealings of God, have thrown the delineation into so peculiar, so enigmatical a form? Why should he have presented it to the view as a returning again “of the years of former generations”? Not, certainly, on the principle of a bald and meagre literalism, as if he meant us to understand that the clock of Providence was actually to be turned back, and the identical ground trodden over again, the precise measures of time filled up anew, of which we read in the earlier history of the chosen race. He who would interpret in such a style the symbolical visions of an Ezekiel is incapable of entering into the rapt emotions of such a mind, and must necessarily flounder at every step. For here we have to do, not only with a lively and fervid spirit, which is ever breathing life, as it were, into the dead, but that spirit in a state of ecstatic elevation, in which the mind naturally served itself of the more remarkable facts and providences in the past; yet only as aids to the utterance of prophetic thought—appropriate forms wherein to clothe the new things concerning God’s kingdom, that were through the Spirit imaging themselves to the prophet’s vision. And, indeed, the very imperfection that usually appears in the frame of such historical visions, as compared with the past realities,—the partial mingling together here, for example, of the two great consecutive periods of past judgment and trial in the history of the covenant-people, so as to make the second begin before the first had ended,—this very imperfection shows, as it was doubtless intended to do, that an exact reproduction of the past was not in the eye of the prophet, and that the nature of God’s contemplated designs, rather than any definite bounds and limits respecting them, were imaged under those ancient periods of tribulation in Egypt and the wilderness. There were three reasons chiefly why the prophets in general, and this prophet in particular, might be often led to speak of the future under the form and image of the past. In the first place, as the meaning obviously did not lie upon the surface, it called for serious thought and inquiry regarding the purposes of God. A time of general backsliding and corruption is always a time of superficial thinking on spiritual things. And just as our Lord, by His parables, that partly veiled while they disclosed the truth of God, so the prophets, by their more profound and enigmatical discourses, sought to arouse the careless from their security, to awaken inquiry, and stir the depths of thought and feeling in the soul. It virtually said to them, You are in imminent peril; direct ordinary discourse no longer suits your case; bestir yourselves to look into the depths of things, otherwise the sleep of death shall overtake you. Then, again, it conveyed in a few words—by means of a brief allusion—what the most lengthened description without it could scarcely have accomplished. It was employing a device which the most powerful and effective orators have sometimes resorted to with the greatest effect—as in the memorable words of Mirabeau, when, wishing to repel the thought of danger, he flashed out the pregnant interrogation: “Is Hannibal at the gates?” In like manner, the prophet here, seeking to impress upon his countrymen the certainty and the awfulness of God’s impending judgments on account of sin, carries them back to the past; he brings up to their view Egypt and the wilderness as ready to renew themselves again in their experience. What thoughts of terror and alarm were these fitted to awaken in their minds! Centuries of bondage and oppression! A wearisome sojourn amid drought and desolation! And then this foreshadowing of the future, not only rendered more distinct, but also strengthened as to its credibility, authenticated by those stern realities of the past! It assuredly has been; shall it not be again? But this suggests another and, indeed, still deeper reason for such a mode of representation having been adopted; for such renewed exhibitions of the past were among the means specially chosen by God for the purpose of enforcing on men’s notice the uniformity of His dealings, and teaching them to regard the providential facts of one age as substantial predictions of what are to be expected in another. It told men then, and it tells us now (only it was more peculiarly adapted to those who lived in ancient times, as the revelations they possessed consisted, much more than now, in the records of history—yet it tells all alike), that the forms alone are transitory in which divine truth and righteousness manifest themselves, while the principles embodied in these forms are eternal, and can never cease, amid all outward varieties, to be giving forth similar exhibitions of their life and power to those which have already appeared. The eye that can thus look through the shell into the kernel, may see the future things of God’s administration mirrored in the past—not, indeed, the exact copy and image of what is to be, yet its essential character and necessary result. Even those very periods of bygone tribulation and chastisement, which the prophet here represents as coming to life again in his day—have they not also a voice for other times? Are they not still reiterating their lessons, and perpetually renewing their existences, in the case of impenitent transgressors now, as well as formerly, in that of drooping exiles in the cities of the Medes, or on the banks of Chebar? One of these periods—the sojourn in the wilderness—the Baptist still finds prolonging itself to the era of his own ministry. His word of stern expostulation and solemn warning makes itself heard as “the voice of one crying in the wilderness;” for he sees everywhere around him trackless deserts where ways of God need to be opened up—elements of corruption working which require to be purged away by the searching application of divine righteousness, before the Canaan of God’s inheritance can be properly entered and enjoyed. And the lukewarm and fruitless professor still—so long as he cleaves to the ways of iniquity, and refuses to yield a hearty surrender to the will of God—what else is his condition? He is in bondage to the elements of the world, and therefore can have no part in that good inheritance which floweth with milk and honey. The doom of Heaven’s condemnation hangs suspended over his head; and if not averted by a timely submission to the righteousness of God, and a cordial entrance into the bond of the covenant, he shall infallibly perish in the wilderness of sin and death.—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 57–61.—W. F.] 1. In the case of a prophet of Ezekiel’s peculiarity, it must be granted that the boundary between symbolic representation in mere forms of speech, and by means of action in real life, may be a movable one. Where, however, the prophet, just as in the case before us, is not to speak, but to be silent, what he relates as a series of facts can hardly be otherwise understood than as actually so. Preaching by means of things done as a mere form of speech is a contradiction in itself. He is to act as He who has sent him will also act. There is, in the first place, enough of words. And then it would perhaps be difficult to reconcile with the “honesty and uprightness of the prophet,” which, however, Hengst. maintains, what he asserts of his symbolical actions, that they are “only pictures executed in a lively manner, calculated to make an indelible impression on the imagination.” For example, Ezekiel 4:14-15. [But see Note on Ezekiel 4:1-3.—W. F.] 2. “If any one reads what Ezekiel reports here, it will perhaps appear to him like a childish play, which it would also be, if God had not commanded the prophet to make it so. From this we may learn that the sacraments also are distinguished from empty illusions by means of the word of God alone. The authority of God for them is the mark of distinction, by which the sacraments are singled out, and have their meaning. It is not the outward appearance, but the Author that is to be looked at. So also the whole system of divine worship under the law differed almost in no respect from the ceremonies of the heathen; yea, these latter brought their sacrifices, and that even with the greatest possible pomp; but Israel had God’s command and promise on their side” (Calv.). 3. The sinner will not get off so easily before God, however lightly he may appear to deal with his sin before men, and before the tribunal of his own conscience. Sin lies as guilt upon man’s conscience, as a burdensome consciousness that one deserves punishment, has to expect punishment. Between the past, when the sin was committed, and the future, when punishment is deservedly to be expected, guilt is the painful, burdensome present of the sinner. Guilt is an abiding thing, even if punishment is a past thing. 4. If every one in himself has to bear his guilt, this moral side is supplemented by the specifically religions one, that a freeing from the burden of it, an exculpation—not the denial, nor the lessening, the explaining away, but the removal of guilt—has been provided for. Without this thought, by means of which the forgiveness of sins is accomplished, true religion is inconceivable. Such a removal of guilt took place mediatorially in Israel by means of the priesthood. What lay in this case in the office, as of divine form for the period of shadows, lay also in the sacrifice, as of divine substance for the same period of types; by means of the sacrifice, the removal of guilt took place in the way of substitution, of atoning acceptance of that guilt. Everything was in a manner like a bill of exchange, of which God meant to get payment (realisiren) in His own time. This divine realization in the fulness of the times will thus have the form of a priest and the essence of a sacrifice. The Servant of Jehovah in Isaiah 53 is both, priest as well as sacrifice; but the prophet is not so, who has neither to mediate nor to make atonement, but who speaks God’s word or embodies it in action—in our case here the latter; that is to say, he symbolically represents the guilt of the people in his own person, not so much, of course, by action as by suffering. 5. As Ewald already points out, the 40 years for Judah are parallel with the 70 years of the Babylonian exile in Jeremiah. What the latter are in a predominantly numerical point of view, the 40 of Ezekiel are in a purely symbolical. 6. Hδvernick, in connection with the episode of Eze 4:14-15, mentions the case of Daniel, who in deepest sorrow must eat the bread of affliction, and pine away in grief over the sins of his people, but an angel of God comes also, and comforts and strengthens him. So likewise here, as he says, Jehovah alleviates the punishment. The protest of Ezekiel not less closely resembles the εἰδυνατόν of the Son of man in Gethsemane, and the strengthening by an angel from heaven. 7. The circumstance that they were to eat “their bread polluted” among the heathen, pointed at the same time, according to Cocc., to the entire want of the means of cleansing through sacrifice Hosea 9:4). The land of the heathen far from the temple was an unclean land, because there was no possibility of cleansing according to the law of the Sanctifier of Israel. HINTS Ezekiel 4:1. Similar symbolic actions we find performed by Christ also, who places a child in the midst of His disciples, washes their feet, etc. And so God wishes here also to say to Israel: “Thou wilt not hear; open thine eyes at least!” (H. H.)—God sometimes demands things which appear to men foolish, nay, silly. But in God’s foolishness there is wisdom, while in all the wisdom of men there is mere foolishness in the end, 1 Corinthians 1:25.—“Elisha in 2 Kings 13 causes bow and arrows to be brought; Isaiah in Ezekiel 20 walks barefoot; Jeremiah in Ezekiel 27 wears a yoke, bonds, etc. The apostles shake the dust off their feet (Matthew 10), shake their clothes (Acts 18:6); Agabus binds Paul with his girdle (Acts 21). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 5 1And thou, son of man, take thee a sharp sword; as a barber’s razor shalt thou take it; and thou causest it to pass over thine head and over thy chin, and 2takest thee weighing-balances, and dividest them [the hair]. A third part thou burnest in the flame in the midst of the city, as the days of the siege are fulfilled [when they are complete]; and thou takest the [second] third part, with the sword shalt thou smite round about it [the city]; and the [third] third part shalt thou 3scatter to the wind; and I will draw out the sword after them. And thou takest 4thereof a few in number, and bindest them in thy skirts. And thou shalt take of them farther, and thou castest them into the midst of the fire, and burnest them in the fire; therefrom shall fire go forth to the whole house of Israel. 5Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: This [city] Jerusalem, in the midst of the [heathen] 6nations I placed her, and the countries round about her. And she quarrelled with My judgments more wickedly than the [heathen] nations, and with My statutes more than the countries which are round about her; for they despised My judgments, and walked not in My statutes. 7Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because ye raged more than the [heathen] nations which are round about you, walked not in My statutes, and did not My judgments, and [also] did not after the judgments of the [heathen] nations which are round about you. 8Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Behold, I am against thee, even I, and I 9execute judgments in thy midst before the eyes of the [heathen] nations. And I do in thee what I have not done, and the like of which I will not do any more, 10because of all thine abominations. Therefore fathers shall eat sons in thy midst, and sons shall eat their fathers; and I execute judgments in thee, and scatter 11thy whole remnant to every wind. Therefore, as I live, sentence of the Lord Jehovah: Surely, because thou didst defile My sanctuary with all thy detestable things, and with all thine abominations, I also will cut off; neither shall Mine eye spare, neither will I show pity. 12A third part of thee—of the pestilence shall they die, and with the famine shall they perish in the midst of thee; and the [second] third part—by the sword shall they fall round about thee; and the [third] third part will I scatter to every wind, and the sword will I draw out after 13them. And Mine anger is accomplished, and I cause My fury to rest upon them, and I breathe again; and they shall know that I, Jehovah, have spoken in My 14zeal, while I accomplish My fury on them. And I will give thee to desolation and to mockery among the [heathen] nations which are round about thee, before 15the eyes of every passer-by. And it is a reproach and a taunt, a warning and an astonishment, to the [heathen] nations which are round about thee, when I execute judgments in thee in anger and in fury, and in furious rebukes: I, Jehovah, have 16spoken. When I send upon them the evil arrows of famine, which are for destruction, which I will send to destroy you, and I will increase famine upon 17you, and I break for you the staff of bread; And I send upon you famine and evil beasts, and they make thee childless; and pestilence and blood press upon thee; and a sword will I cause to come upon thee. I, Jehovah, have spoken. Ezekiel 5:2. Sept.: To τεταρτον..., κ. ληψητ. τεταρτονκ. κατακαυσειςαὐτοἐνμεσωαὐτης, κ. τ. τεταρτονκατακοψεις— Ezekiel 5:4. ...πυρ. Κ. ἐρειςπαντιοἰκωἸσρ. Ezekiel 5:6. K. ἐρειςτκδικαιωματαμουτηἀνομωἐκτωνἐθνων, κ. τανομιμαμουἐκτωνκωρωντωνκυκλωαὐτηςEzekiel 5:7. Sept.: ...ἀνθ̓ὠνἡἀφορμηὑμωνἐκτ. ἐθνων—(Anoth. read.: ςωιϊν without μΰ Syr.) Ezekiel 5:11. Anoth. read.: ΰβγς. Ezekiel 5:12. To τεταρτονσου …κ. τ. τεταρτ. σουἐνλιμωκ. τ. τετ. σ. εἰςπανταἀνεμον … κ. τ. τετ. σ. ἐνῥομφαια … κ. μαχαιραν— Ezekiel 5:14. ... ἐρημονκ. ταςθυγατεραςσουκυκλω— Ezekiel 5:15. Anoth. read.: αβειν; Sept., Arab., Vulg.: in gentibus. Ezekiel 5:17. … et bestias pessimas usque ad internecionem— REMARKS Ezekiel 5:1-4.—The Fourth Sign. Ezekiel 5:5-17.—The Divine Interpretation of the sameWhat follows may be called a second sign, inasmuch as the three preceding symbolical acts fit into each other as parts of one symbolical whole. There is also the indication of the new section, just as in Ezekiel 4:1 : And thou, son of man. Ezekiel 5:1-4, however, is not without reference to Ezekiel 4. If, then, Ezekiel 4:13 already carried us beyond the siege of Jerusalem as such, so much the more readily may the (numerically) fourth sign which the prophet is to perform place us in the midst of the conquest of the city. For it is with this that Ezekiel 5:1 begins. The whole of the lively action revolves round the sword, which now does its work victoriously; what follows is a threefold act of the sword. Comp. Deuteronomy 32:41. Ezekiel, just as in Ezekiel 4, also represents therein both God and the people. What he is to take to himself is what God will take to Himself in the person of the king of Babylon, whose sword of execution is that of God, here that of Ezekiel. Comp. Isaiah 7:20. (“The mere image becomes a symbolically isolating action; where others only speak of shaving the head as a sign of deepest grief, Ezekiel takes a sword,” etc.—Umbreit.) Ewald’s translation appears to invert the matter, where, namely, the razor is to serve as a sharp sword. Ezekiel is rather to take a sharp sword as a razor. (The purposely-emphasized sharpness of the sword ought to relieve Hengst. of the difficulty which the outward execution causes him. Of smooth shaving, so that no hairs at all are left, nothing is said; and what shall one say, when Hengst. makes the task still more difficult by adding: “especially for a man of predominant subjectivity, who is usually not skilled in such manipulations.” Such a thing sounds ridiculous, but not what Ezekiel is to do.) ηψα is the instrument that “devastates,” “destroys,” not (at all events, in the context of our chapter): a cutting tool in general, knife (Hitzig), although it has to serve as a barber’s razor.—Head and bearded chin come into consideration, neither as being the capital nor as being the head of the nation, the king, in contrast with the land or the people, but solely in reference to the hair, which, therefore, we are also to understand in the clause: and dividest them: they mean the innumerable (Psalms 40:12) individuals of Israel,—in its fulness (the flowing ornament, just as it is the manly strength, of the oriental) the ornament and the strength of a nation,—conceived of especially as inhabitants of Jerusalem. (In Leviticus 21:5, the shaving off of the hair is specially forbidden to the priest, Hδv.)—The weighing balances (dual) symbolize the divine justice, as it weighs out the punishment (Isaiah 28:17), and render possible the division into three parts of equal weight which follows. Ezekiel 5:2 puts us back into Ezekiel 4 : the prophet is to burn a third part of his hair which he has cut off αΰεψ, in the flame of a fire kindled for this purpose. The flame as an emblem represents, not Jerusalem rising up in flames (as Hengst.), but, according to Ezekiel 5:12, the consuming violence of the pestilence and the famine (Lamentations 5:10). Hengst. gives himself unnecessary trouble to make the dead bodies be consumed by the flames. Keil correctly refers αϊεκδςιψ to that Jerusalem which is portrayed upon the brick which Ezekiel is besieging (Ezekiel 4:1 sqq.). Klief.: he is to burn this third part upon the stone. The fourth symbolical action has a common sphere with the three preceding ones. The fulfilling of the days of the siege is thereby put in connection with (αξμΰϊ, Jeremiah 25:12) Ezekiel 4:6-8—comp. there—so that we have to think of the remainder of the time, specially the 40 days. In this period, as the 390 days of the siege are at an end, he has to perform what is here commanded him. The lying on the right side is therefore, according to this statement also (comp. on Ezekiel 4:12), to be understood in a looser sense.—ραιαεϊιδ refers to the portrayed city, round about which, as respects the second third part, Ezekiel is to smite with the sword (comp. Ezekiel 5:12), in this way (while, for the first third part, the siege was still kept hold of) forming a transition to the subject which follows, viz. the capture of Jerusalem. Either in general: what is slaughtered at the capture in the environs of the city, when fleeing out of the same, or more specially: with reference to the flight of Zedekiah (Jeremiah 52:7-8) and his attendants (?). Grot.: during the various sallies of the besieged. Hengst.: while seeking for subsistence or attempting flight (?).—The action with the last third symbolizes (Ezekiel 5:12) the scattering in the fullest sense, and that alike to all the four winds, and in such a way that the wind can make its sport therewith as it will (μψεη), Isaiah 41:16.—ΰψιχΰηψιδν (Exodus 15:9) constructio pr�gnans, a quotation from Leviticus 26:33, consequently not the hairs, but what is signified by them: the Jews, partly those who can flee, in still larger number those who are taken prisoners. Ewald: “even then still pursued by the sword, so that only very few after repeated testings (?) ultimately remain over, Isaiah 6:13.” (Jeremiah 42:15 sqq., Ezekiel 43:10 sqq., Ezekiel 44:11 sqq.) The LXX. have from Ezekiel 5:12—where pestilence, famine, sword, and wind occur—introduced a fourfold division here, against which both the text—that they had a better before them does not appear—and the symbolical meaning of the number three for the divine recompense testify, as also, besides, Zechariah 13:8-9; Revelation 8. Ezekiel 5:3-4 contain a continuation (Keil) or rather the completion of the symbolical transaction. ξΰν, “from there,” because the last third, remaining as it does in life, is conceived of as locally somewhere in the figure and in the reality. It is the third part scattered to the wind that is spoken of, as in every case of such scattering, some part remains lying on the ground, another part comes to rest somewhere farther on.—A few in number. This even indicates a certain care, but still more the symbolic binding (not a collecting, but a preserving) of the hairs in the skirt of the garment. (Hosea 4:19 does not belong to this category.) That “the Lord will gather the remnant of His people from their dispersion, and lead them back to their native land” (Hengst.) is not said: on the contrary, in Ezekiel 5:4 there is also another (ςεγ) taking of them (εξδν), i.e. of those that were taken, the few, counted hairs; and, in fact, not only are those thus taken cast into the midst of the fire and burnt therein, but ξξπε, i.e. from the midst of the fire (ϊεκ), in which they are burning, there shall fire go forth to the whole house of Israel. Neither in connection with these words nor from Ezekiel 5:13 sqq. can the thought arise of testings, of a fire of purification. Nor is it, as Umbreit: “that the most pungent grief over the mournful lot of the besieged of Jerusalem shall seize all Israel.” The fire symbolizes throughout the judgment of the wrath of God, at last annihilating the people as a whole. (Jeremiah 4:4; Zephaniah 3:8.) Jeremiah 29:21-22 is not to be quoted here as Raschi does; but we must rather go back with Grot. to Jeremiah 40 sqq.: these fugitives gathering together in the land may at least easily be compared to the hairs which fell to the earth immediately around the prophet (Ezekiel 5:3); and their destiny also corresponds (Jeremiah 52:30). Hδv., Hengst. think of those brought back from Babylon down to the burning of Jerusalem by the Romans. It is still farther fetched, with Kliefoth, Keil, to drag in Luke 12:49 here: where, pray, has a “cleansing, purifying, and quickening power gone forth from Christ over the whole house of Israel”? There remains certainly a remnant from Ezekiel 5:3-4, only it is neither characterized as a holy seed (Isaiah 6:13), nor even as in Ezekiel 6:8 sqq.: it is left between the lines. [Ewald (1st edit.) translated: from me shall a fire, etc., as if it were ξξπι. Keil, after Hitzig, would refer it (“therefrom”) to the whole transaction described in Ezekiel 5:3-4. But Hitzig makes the sin to be a fire (Job 31:12), and also the prophecy threatening destruction a fire pent up (Jeremiah 23:29), which breaks forth into flame at the moment of its accomplishment. To refer ξξπε directly to ΰω is prevented, of course, by the feminine construction ϊφΰΰω. Hengst.: “from it, i.e. from them, the numerical multiplicity being combined into an ideal unity with reference to the uniting bond of the evil disposition.” Have the LXX. with their ἐξαὐτῆς thought of the city?] Comp. besides, Judges 9:15; Judges 9:20. Inasmuch now as in Ezekiel 5:5 the divine interpretation begins with αδΰξψΞ, what is said in Ezekiel 3:26 (comp. Ezekiel 3:27), as well as a purely symbolical prophesying in Ezekiel 4:7, is thereby modified. “To prophesy” (comp. Ezekiel 37) is also, primarily, to speak in the spirit, as that usually takes place by divine direction. But the divine interpretation begins with the meaning of Jerusalem. This city portrayed upon the tile, viz. Jerusalem, the word of Jehovah points out as placed by Him in the midst of the heathen nations, of course not in a local sense, like Delphi, the navel of the earth. Already the Chinese empire of the centre points as such to the maxims as to the ethical equilibrium prevailing in the Chinese system. But this is the central position as regards the history of salvation of Israel—represented by its capital, hence in local symbolism—for the history of the world, so that from it all the rays go forth to the world as a circumference. John 4:22. (Lamentations 2:15.) In its position, so distinguished by God’s grace, we get the measure of the guilt of Jerusalem, i.e. of those whom it represents, inasmuch as they have come so far short of the obligation therein implied, that Ezekiel 5:6—in God’s sight they appear even more wicked than the heathen (2 Kings 21:9). Ewald reads unnecessarily (because of ξο) εַ ?ϊָּ ?ξֶ ?ψ, from ξεּ ?ψ ,ιָ ?ξַ ?ψ, which in Hiph. is read with α; and δֵ ?ξִ ?ιψ, according to him, means originally: to cause to totter, hence: to exchange something against (λεο) something else, so that it gives way before this latter. (Raschi: “changed My judgments into wickedness.” Similarly Chald. and Syr.) εַ ?ϊֶּ ?ξֶ ?ψ is simply imperf. apoc. from ξψδ Hiph. (an allusion to Exodus 15:23 sqq., the first resistance of the newly-saved people.) Comp. Deuteronomy 1:26; Deuteronomy 1:43; Deuteronomy 9:7; Deuteronomy 9:24, etc. Like a technical term for Israel’s rebelliousness.—ξο, in a comparative sense: more than, leaving the heathen behind them. μψωςδ, unto wickedness; as an adverb: wickedly. (Hitz. infin.: so that they sinned more grievously.) μψωςδ brings into prominence the condition which makes Israel appear worse comparatively than the heathen; hence ξο is most connected with it. Unsuitably, Hengst. compares 1 Corinthians 5., where the question is not about the what, but about a how. Neither have Isaiah 2:6 and Jeremiah 2:10 any connection with this passage. But the more wicked character of Israel is intelligible, partly as contrasted with the grace of God which they have experienced, partly therefore from the circumstance that they were acting contrary to the express will of God. The comparison is, in a general sense, possible, because the heathen also, by means of conscience, know about the divine will, have a law written in their hearts. Romans 2:14-15. αι inasmuch as they so acted, they were rebels convicted by law and statute, apart from conscience, common to them with the heathen. Ezekiel 5:7. μαο (on account of such things), as usual, at the beginning of a weighty, and, for the most part, of a threatening consequence. But before the threatening of punishment there is a second emphasizing of their greater guilt. [Instead of δֲ ?ξָ ?πְ ?αֶ ?ν Ewald reads δִ ?ξָּ ?πֵ ?αֶ ?ν, from ξπδ, to count; Hitz.: it stands for δֲ ?ξָ ?ξְ ?λֶ ?ν, “because of your driving;” Hδv., after the Syr.: because ye were more careless than the heathen (?). Most simply, as also Ges., from δָ ?ξַ ?ο, or as Fόrst, from δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο, going back to δξδ: “because of your raging,” with significant reference to Psalms 2:1.—With αηχεϊι there is inserted an energetic parenthesis of direct address, taking up again the close of Eze 5:6 backwards, in which the ξΰρε (to push away, to reject) is changed into μΰςωιϊν, and in this way occasion is given for the following statement with μΰ. Ewald and others strike out the latter, and that also because of Eze 11:12. If Ezekiel 5:9 manifestly threatens Israel with a heavier punishment than ever before the eyes of the heathen, then it is but too plain we must understand Ezekiel 5:6-7 of a wickedness on the part of Israel greater than that of the heathen; and such acting more wickedly than the heathen is intensified in Ezekiel 5:7 merely with respect to the natural law of conscience; in other words, this reference still left unexpressed in Ezekiel 5:6 is expressly brought in afterwards. God’s laws and statutes they rejected, neither did they act in accordance with the natural laws belonging to the standpoint of the heathen conscience. In yet another application, Ezekiel 16:47. In Ezekiel 11:12 the connection and the reproof is a different one; there is nothing said there of a being worse than the heathen. In Ezekiel 5:8 we have, with μαο (Ezekiel 5:7) repeated, the threatening of punishment, first of all generally, then, in what follows, in a form more and more concrete.—δππιςμικ; comp. Amos 7:9; Revelation 2:5.—βνΞΰπι marks out the interposition of God as being a retribution: hitherto, thou, now I, yes, even I, with a mode of acting corresponding to thine own (Matthew 10:33; 2 Timothy 2:12).—As in Ezekiel 5:7, so also here: ςωׂ ?δ, illustrated by the fundamental passage Exodus 12:12 (Numbers 33:4).—Because Israel has not made itself a pattern to the heathen, an example in what is right and becoming (the negative side to Ezekiel 5:6 is brought in afterwards), God on His part makes it a spectacle for the heathen. The laws (Rechte) of God become judgments (Gerichte) of God. This is the one element of retribution; the other in Ezekiel 5:9 : because Israel has gone beyond the heathen in wickedness, His punishment also will go beyond anything in the past or future.—αָ ?κְ is the resumption of αְ ?ϊֶ ?εֹ ?λֵ ?κְ (Ezekiel 5:8).—λξεδεςεγ = the like of which I will not do again (Matthew 24:21). Ezekiel 5:10 A more concrete exemplification of what is thus threatened. The thought thereby expressed is the breaking up alike of natural family ties and of the theocratic bond of Israel as a nation, this being what has never taken place in the past, and, having once happened, what is not to be repeated in the future. Comp. Leviticus 26:29; Deuteronomy 28:53; Jeremiah 19:9; Lamentations 2:20; Lamentations 4:10; 2 Kings 6:28-29 (Luke 12:53).—ωτθιν (Ezekiel 5:15), penal judgments, more exactly defined as ξωτθιν in Ezekiel 5:8.—εζψιϊι; comp. Ezekiel 5:2; Ezekiel 5:12. Ezekiel 5:11. The repeated μλο is exceedingly impressive. ηιΞΰπι, the adjective being made to precede, properly: living I. Deuteronomy 32:40. He will show Himself to them as being the Living One. Corresponding to the climax of the discourse in the oath, there is the solemn earnestness of the πΰν part. pass. constr. from πΰν (δξδπδν), low, secret speaking; therefore: utterance = speaks a. parenthetical noun-clause.—The desecration with which Israel is charged in Ezekiel 8 has respect to the temple, but to that as being the abode of Jehovah’s glory. The avenging judgment (with a reference to Ezekiel 5:1) holds out in prospect the cutting off (another reading: ΰβγς, Isaiah 15:2) of this noblest ornament of the people, where Jehovah meets with His people, and they with Him. [βψς, in this its simplest sense, too readily suggests itself for us to have recourse, with Hengst., to the fundamental passage Deuteronomy 4:2 (Ezekiel 13:1): to take therefrom of that which God has promised to give them, or, like Hδv.: I also will withdraw from the people what is theirs, or, with Ges., to supply the following ςֵ ?ιβι: I also will draw off mine eye, or, like Ewald, to read, from Ezekiel 24:14, μΰΰτψς: “I will not neglect.” Hitz.: I also will sweep you away (βψσ, 2 Kings 21:13), or (ΰτψς): I also will let myself alone, leave myself scope to do as I please. Keil, like Ges. (Job 36:7), takes εμΰϊηεν adverbially: that it may not feel compassion, and understands the last εβνΞςπι accordingly.] ΰβψς stands emphatically without an object; if it is allowable to refer it to the temple, the following transition (Jeremiah 13:14) to Ezekiel 5:12-13 sqq. announces certainly something more general, more comprehensive. Comp. Ezekiel 9:6. Ezekiel 5:12. After this reference to Ezekiel 5:1, as already in Ezekiel 5:10, we have now the more detailed divine interpretation of Eze 5:2. Comp. besides, Jeremiah 29:17; Jeremiah 16:4; Jeremiah 15:7. By means of what is threatened, the anger of God is accomplished Ezekiel 5:13—inasmuch as it is fully poured out. The full realization is its accomplishment. Up to the point of “causing it to rest upon them,” and, at the same time, in them, so that they have the consciousness thereof, comp. John 3:36. [To give vent to His fury upon them suits badly, after the anger is accomplished.] Comp. besides, Ezekiel 16:42; Ezekiel 21:22 [17].—εδπηξϊι perf. Hithp., by syncope for εδϊπηξϊι. The meaning of the Niphal (to have compassion) does not suit the context, especially in what follows. πָ ?ηַ ?ν is properly: to take draughts of air, to draw in and send forth the breath, whence the Piel: to comfort, Hithp.: to comfort oneself (so also the Niphal). The meaning: “to be revenged,” does not suit here. Comp. Isaiah 1:24. The accomplishing of anger comes therefore to mean also the bringing of it to an end; one might say: grace recovers breath again. The extremely anthropomorphic style of our passage is a highly figurative mode of representing the personal life and acting of God.—ειγςε, knowledge as the result of experience.—γαψϊι twice again (Ezekiel 5:15; Ezekiel 5:17). In the word spoken in zeal we have a guarantee of the certainty of the deed. [The different division of the words by Ew., who takes αְּ ?Ξ as a formula of swearing, is unjustifiable.] Ezekiel 5:14. Like ηֶ ?ψֶ ?α, the “devastator” (in this section of the sword of God), ηψαη is the “devastation,” the desert, wilderness. Leviticus 26:31; Leviticus 26:33; Jeremiah 7:34; Lamentations 2:1 sqq. Alliteratively therewith, ηψτδ: the tearing in pieces; in other words: the dishonouring, derision. Jeremiah 24:9; Ezekiel 36:34. The divine interpretation from here onwards touches on what is said in Ezekiel 5:4—the national annihilation of Israel. Ezekiel 5:15. εδιϊδ, viz. Jerusalem, to which the discourse returns, as in Ezekiel 5:8 (Ezekiel 5:5). (Deuteronomy 28:37; Lamentations 5:1.). Declamatorily in the third person.—εαϊληεϊηξδ, rebukes in actual fact, from ιλη, to reprove, to chastise. Comp. besides, Deuteronomy 29:24. Ezekiel 5:16. Famine is the predominating element. Because sent forth among them by the Lord, its operations are compared to the arrows of a bow. Deuteronomy 32:23; Deuteronomy 32:42; Lamentations 3:12-13.—As in Ezekiel 5:15 διϊδ, so now αδν.—The evil arrows, because they are μξωηιϊ, from ωηϊ, which is explained by what follows.—The description of the famine rises to a climax; first it strikes like single arrows—destruction is present; then it increases, accumulates—the arrows from all sides become thicker; at length the staff of bread is broken (comp. Ezekiel 4:16). Ezekiel 5:17. The famine is again referred to, in order to connect with it what remains, after the manner of the Pentateuch and of Jeremiah; comp. Ezekiel 14:15; Deuteronomy 32:24; Leviticus 26:22; Leviticus 26:25; Ezekiel 28:23. Hengst. understands the evil beasts figuratively of the heathen. Isaiah 56:9; Jeremiah 12:9. Famine and evil beasts, in parallel with pestilence and blood (not = amp; bloody pestilence, as Ew.). Correspondingly with the beginning of the chapter, it comes to an end at last with the sword. 1. It belongs to the prevailing aspect of judgment, that those who are to be saved appear like a minimum, which is indicated, indeed, but not described more fully. This also is characteristic, that their salvation is made dependent wholly on their being concealed and spared (Ezekiel 5:4), without any reference to their subjective state. As judgment reigns on the one hand, so unconditional free grace on the other. 2. Judgment must prevail where the national standpoint is that of the law. This lies as a consequence in the character of the law. It is only his having a certain position towards, or betaking himself to, the person of the Lawgiver that can preserve the transgressor, the sinner, from the sentence of death pronounced by the law. But Israel as a whole stands in opposition to Jehovah, not merely with its unlawful outward conduct, but as regards its thorough ungodliness of heart. Thus compassion ceases, as is expressly mentioned in Ezekiel 5:11. That Jehovah is engaged in the most personal way is attested by the very form of the expression in Ezekiel 5:13. 3. The lost condition morally of the people as such is significantly brought before us, in Ezekiel 5:11, in the profanation of the sanctuary. For this is the most express local symbol of the personal presence of Jehovah in the midst of Israel, with which, besides, the most perfect indwelling of God in the fulfilment (John 2:19 sqq.) is identified. 4. The judgment threatens the national existence of Israel. But if the nationality of Israel is the holy nationality of the people of God, then it is as intelligible, that the peculiar form, the symbolical body, of this idea which is to be realized may perish in the judgment of God, as it is certain that the idea will be realized, in however few it may be; in reality, there has been but One Israel, that was alike sacrifice and priest, people and king. 5. Hδv., Hengst., and others find in our chapter the announcement of yet a second penal judgment, viz. the last by the hand of the Romans, as already Theodoret, Jerome. The truth is, that the more complete (the expulsion of the ten tribes was a partial thing) unfolding of judgment involved in the Chaldean destruction of Jerusalem is not finished till the judgment of the world on the last day (Matthew 24:21). The judgment which still farther diminishes the small number in the skirt of the garment in Ezekiel 5:3 thus finds in the context—where a transition is made from the numerical element to the substance of the matter—its goal in the consuming of the whole of Israel (Ezekiel 5:4). In the Chaldean judgment, Israel’s nationality perished; at that early period, not first by the hand of the Romans. “We have no king but Cζsar” is the answer of the leading men of Israel already in John 19. 6. On Ezekiel 5:9 Hδv. remarks: “Alone of its kind, and to be compared with nothing else, is the judgment of the Lord which runs through the history of the kingdom of God; it is a judgment continually rising higher and higher, as compared with which what goes before always appears an insignificant one, and in this its unceasing progress paving the way for the culminating point of the last judgment.” Hengst. calls the judgment on Israel “a thing unique in the history of the world.” Only one must not choose to read the true fulfilment in Josephus first, but as and because the Chaldean destruction of Jerusalem was the first judgment of the kind, so it remains, as to its essence also, the only one. For where is there a second nation, to which God has stood so near, driven forth in such a way from its land of promise since the days of the fathers, judged and, as being judged, preserved? But as this political mummification serves the world-purpose of the Anointed One, so it is in the same direction that we are to seek the meaning of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, viz. not as a repetition, but merely as an application of the Chaldean judgment to the last period of the world beginning with Christ, to the last day. Hence the general eschatological character of the discourses of Jesus in the Gospels bearing on the subject. 7. For the central position of Jerusalem, in a theological point of view, Hengstenberg quotes “Jeshurun, the congregation of the upright, the pattern nation prepared by God, which was to send forth its light into the surrounding heathen darkness, to honour its God, and to draw others to Him. Deuteronomy 4:5-6; Isaiah 42:19. Comp. Matthew 5:14; 1 Peter 2:9.” 8. Judgment is, in every decisive moment of the history of salvation (in the history of the world), the goal, the end. “Crisis” is the name given to it when one contemplates history from a remedio-pathological point of view. HINTS Ezekiel 5:1 sqq. “By means of the similitude of the hair, the Lord would intimate His exact connection with Israel, how they have received from Him all nourishment and supplies; from which fellowship He now cuts them off like hair” (B.B.).—“On account of its much hair, i. e. its great population, Jerusalem was so proud and full of vain confidence” (C).—“And what an impression must it make, when Ezekiel, who was of the priestly class, contrary to Leviticus 21, shaved head and beard!” (L.)—“The judgments of God have their stages, and come at last, when the measure of sins is full, in a crowd, so that he who escapes the one falls into the other” (Tόb. B.). “Men and all creatures become sharp swords, when God makes use of them in judgment” (Stck.).—“Behold an example of divine providence! God does not strike blindly in His judgments, but, in the midst of the greatest confusion of human affairs, weighs, as it were with scales, all that is to happen to every one” (W.).—“Not even a hair shall be wanting to us; but neither shall a hair escape with the just God” (B. B.).—“God is just, but He is also merciful: let us betake ourselves to His mercy” (L.).—“If one does not himself in time cut off his vanities and bad habits, then must a razor belonging to another make the eyes water, and cut in such a way, that of skin and hair nothing remains” (B. B.).—“In the judgment learn God’s justice, in the foretelling of it His goodness; but sin’s loathsomeness brings on the judgment” (Stck.).—“If one does not fear before the sword of the Spirit or God’s word (Ephesians 6.; Hebrews 4), then must the sword of the enemy come and hew down the barren trees” (B. B.).—God’s judgments: (1) sharp, (2) without respect of persons, but (3) just. Ezekiel 5:2. “Exile is honourable if it happens to us for Christ’s sake; the man who has to endure it because of sin cannot comfort himself therewith” (Stck.).—“These were certainly thoroughly scattered sheep, because they had forsaken their Shepherd! He that will not allow himself to be gathered under the wings of Jesus, will be carried away by the wind of the divine wrath down to hell. And let a man flee whither he will, if he wants a good conscience, then the vengeance of God follows; there is no possibility of escape from Him” (B. B).—Under the sword of God: (1) the man whom the flame in the inner man, the fire of conscience, does not consume, (2) is struck down by the outward calamities of life, (3) or he is carried away by every gust of wind—of pleasure, of opinion, etc., in the world, and so is lost. Ezekiel 5:3. “Divine providence and goodness remembers mercy in the midst of wrath, because of the Messiah, who was to be born of this seed” (Stck.).—“Otherwise it would have happened as in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah” (L.).—Think how we are first bound up in the skirt of the righteousness of Jesus Christ! And no one will pluck us out of His hand. Ezekiel 5:4. “This is not to be literal fire, but something much more real even than this, the fire of the wrath of God, when He gives them over to the curse, and to the everlasting torment of an evil conscience; and this fire is to take hold of all Israel, with the exception of those preserved in the skirt of the garment” (Cocc.). Ezekiel 5:5 sqq. The greater the benefit, the greater ought to be the gratitude.—“In the Church, greater sins are often committed than outside of it” (St.).—After the manner of Jerusalem, those cities acted in later times, where most of Jesus’ miracles were wrought (Matthew 11).—Outward advantages, without the inward disposition to correspond, are tow for the fire.—“We have therefore to see to it, that we bear the pleasure (the burden) of prosperity with a strong mind” (C.).—To whom much is given, of him much may be required, and much is required; and yet there shall only be required faithfulness in stewardship, and that gratitude which is so easily understood of itself.—“He that knows his Lord’s will, and does it not, sins more grievously, and has more grievous punishment to expect, Luke 12:47” (O.).—“Perversion of the true doctrine and of the true worship and unholy living draw the judgments of God after them” (Tόb. Bib.). Ezekiel 5:6 sqq. “The heterodox often show in their worship more zeal, earnestness, and stedfastness than the orthodox” (St.).—“Their vices we often adopt from the heathen, and in what is good allow them the advantage. They ought to have learnt from us, and we may learn even from them” (B. B.). Ezekiel 5:8 sqq. “As it is the comfort of the pious: if God be for us, who can be against us? so it is the terror of the ungodly: since God is against you, who will be for you?” (Stck.)—The divine judgments in the world are a mirror for the world. Ezekiel 5:9. The individuality of the judgments of God an interesting historical theme. Ezekiel 5:10. “Famine has no eyes, no ears, no hands, but teeth. It has no respect of persons, nor does it listen to anything, nor does it give, but is cruel and unmerciful” (Stck.).—Fathers often enough devour their children by the bad example which they give them. And children devour their fathers by their covetousness, want of affection, disobedience, by the grief which they prepare for them. Ezekiel 5:11. In him that does not sanctify God, God sanctifies Himself.—I live, and ye shall live also. But it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. These are contrasts.—How many profane the sanctuary of God by sleep, by extravagance in dress, by their distracted worldly thoughts! Ezekiel 5:13. There thou seest how zealous love can be. This causes the jealousy of Him who is Israel’s Husband.—Therefore we ought to hear betimes, lest we be compelled to feel when it is too late. Ezekiel 5:14. How many such monuments of divine retribution stand on our life-path! We walk past, yes, alas! past them. Into the mirror of the judgments of God we look in vain, just as into that of the divine law.—“If love cannot improve us, then must we feel the iron sceptre” (B. B.). Ezekiel 5:17. “All the creatures are ready for vengeance, and wait merely for God’s command” (Stck.).—“If men do not terrify us, then there are the beasts” (Stck.).—Thus there is a chain of divine punishments; one takes the other’s hand.—“In the end, it is God with whom we have to do. Be not, then, like the dog which bites the stone, and not the hand which threw it!” (Stck.)—“God subscribes the threatening with the royal monogram of His name” (a L.). 3. The Two Discourses of Rebuke (Ch. 6 and 7).Ezekiel 6:1. And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying: Son of man, set 2thy face toward the mountains of Israel, and prophesy to them. And say, 3Ye mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord Jehovah. Thus saith the Lord Jehovah to the mountains and to the hills, to the brook-channels and to the valleys: Behold, I, even I, cause a sword to come upon you, and I destroy your high places. 4And your altars are desolated, and your sun-pillars are broken in pieces; and I make your slain to fall before your dung-idols. 5And I lay the carcases of the children of Israel before their dung-idols, and scatter your bones round about your altars. 6In all your dwelling-places shall the cities be laid waste, and the high places become desolate, in order that your altars may be laid waste and broken in pieces, and your dung-idols be laid waste and done away with, and your sun-pillars be thrown down, and your handiworks be rooted out. 7And the slain falls in your midst, and ye know that I Amos 8 Jehovah. And I leave a remnant, inasmuch as there are to you some that have escaped the sword among the heathen nations, when ye are scattered in the 9countries. And your escaped ones remember me among the heathen nations, whither they are carried captive, when I have broken their whorish heart, which hath departed from me, and their eyes, which go a whoring after their dung-idols; and they feel loathing in their faces for the evil things which they have done in 10respect of all their abominations. And they know that I am Jehovah; not in vain have I said that I would do this evil unto them. 11Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Strike into thy hand, and stamp with thy foot, and say, Woe to all the evil abominations of the house of Israel, who shall fall by the sword, by the famine, and by the pestilence. 12He that is far off shall die by the pestilence; and he that is near shall fall by the sword; and he that remained over, and he that is preserved, shall die by the famine; and I accomplish My fury upon [in] 13them. And ye know that I am Jehovah, when their slain are in the midst of their dung-idols round about their altars, at every high hill, upon all the tops of the mountains, and under every green tree, and under every thick terebinth, on 14whatever place they did offer sweet savour to all their dung-idols. And I stretch out My hand upon them, and make the land a desert and waste more than the wilderness of Diblath, in all their dwelling-places; and they know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 6:3 Vulg.: … rupibus et vallibus—(Anoth. read.: ΰπι ;δπδ is wanting in some.) Ezekiel 6:5. Anoth. read.: μτπιβμεμιλν. Vulg.: simulacrorum vestrorum. Ezekiel 6:6. ... ἐνπασητκατοικιαὑμων. Αἱπολεις— Ezekiel 6:9. Sept.: ... ὁτιὀμωμοκατηκαρδιααὐτων— Ezekiel 6:12. ̔Οἐγγυςἐνῥομφαια...ὁδεμακρανἐνθανατωτελευτησει, κ. ὁ... κ.ὁπεριεχομενοςἐνλιμω—relictus … et obsessus— Ezekiel 6:13. ... ὑμων REMARKSThe first discourse is not exactly a continuation, or even a farther elucidation of what precedes, but a word by itself, although with reference to what went before. Its resemblance to Jeremiah will be shown by manifold points of contact with the style of Jeremiah. According to Calv., Ezekiel turns now from Judah to Israel (?). Ezekiel 6:1. Comp. Ezekiel 1:3; Ezekiel 3:16. Ezekiel 6:2. ωιντπικ expresses the direction, and that simply: toward; the translation of ΰμ by: “against,” is stronger than is necessary.—The mountains of Israel remove, of course, the horizon of the prophet from Jerusalem, which was hitherto mainly the subject of discourse, to a greater distance; but the expression is used, not so much in order to characterize the whole land according to its peculiarity, as a land of mountains in the sense of Deu 11:11 (Hengst.), which in the connection here would be quite superfluous; but the mountains come into consideration, as the sequel shows, as Israel’s well-known, favourite places of sacrifice (Jeremiah 3:6). According to J. D. Mich.: “a prophecy against the remnant of the ten tribes in Palestine, which took part even in Hezekiah’s and Josiah’s passover.” As in the case of words of speaking, ΰμιδν might also mean: “to prophesy of them;” but they are Ezekiel 6:3—formally addressed. Comp. 1 Kings 13:2.—ΰָ ?τִ ?ιχ may be a narrow valley, a defile, and equally well a river-bed, a brook-channel.—For εְ ?μַ ?πֵּ ?ιΰָ ?εֹ ?ϊ we have in the Qeri: εְ ?μַ ?βֵּ ?ΰָ ?ιεֹ ?ϊ. Not for the purpose of depicting the whole land, but in order graphically to set forth the mountains; or because defiles and valleys, on account of the growth of trees, are distinctively for idolatrous services (e. g. the valley of Hinnom, Jeremiah 7:31; Jeremiah 32:35). In the latter respect, the sword comes and destroys the high places, as high places of worship, self-chosen; hence your.—δππιΰπι energetically expressive. The sword-tone from Ezekiel 5 begins again to make itself heard. Ezekiel 6:4. επωξε perf. Niph. of ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ν, comp. Ezekiel 4:17; here of being rendered silent by devastation: to lay waste.—The altars where sacrifices are offered.—ηַ ?ξָּ ?πִ ?ιν only in the plural, statues, images of the Phenician sun-god (Baal-Hamman); Raschi: “sun-pillars.”—βִּ ?μּ ?εּ ?μִ ?ιν likewise only in the plural, certainly not: “stocks,” from βָּ ?μַ ?μ, “to roll” (?), but undoubtedly connected with βָּ ?μֶ ?μ and βֵּ ?μֶ ?μ, “dung,” unless: the “abominable,” “horrible,” from the original meaning: “to separate,” “to divide.” Hδv.: stone monuments (contemptuously: loose stones), dead masses of stone. (Perhaps: “your excrements.”)—μτπι, “in face of,” lying before the face. Dust to dung. Ezekiel 6:5. τβψ is: something fallen, a dead body; comp. Leviticus 26:30.—ςφν is “what is strong,” hence: a bone. (Lav. remarks here, that perhaps also they made themselves be buried beside their idols, and that now the bones of the dead were to be brought out and scattered by their enemies seeking after the ornaments of the dead.) The discourse is addressed to the mountains; but as it is spoken of the children of Israel, so also in reality it is spoken to them. In Ezekiel 6:6 the place of execution is extended by means of αλμξεωαεϊιλν to the inhabited land, more specially to the cities (Jeremiah 2:28).—ϊηψαπδ, with significant allusion to ηֶ ?ψֶ ?α (sword).—μξςοּ the extermination of the idolatrous worship therefore is the object.—ειωξε. Hengst.: “and become guilty,” be convicted as guilty by means of the destruction. ΰων is “to demolish,” “to break in pieces,” and from that morally: to commit a fault, and consequently to become guilty, finally: to suffer punishment. Guilt appears a strange thought for our context here. Ezekiel 6:7. Slain [sing.]; the individual instead of all who are like him, one here, another there.—Because the discourse reaches a pause, after the personal element (as in Ezekiel 6:4-5) has been added to the material, there is mentioned as the result the experimental knowledge of Jehovah,—not so much of His being God alone, as of His eternity; here in contrast with the idols which pass away. With such knowledge taken into view as the effect of later experience, the way is paved at the same time for Ezekiel 6:8. (Ew. converts εδεϊψϊι, which is to him “incapable of explanation” (! !), into γִּ ?αַּ ?ψְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, which he attaches to Ezekiel 6:7.)—The remnant are such as have escaped so far as the sword is concerned, etc.; comp. Ezekiel 5:2; Ezekiel 5:12; Ezekiel 5:3 (Romans 9:27; Romans 11:5).—αδζψεϊֵ ?ιλν, inf. Niph. with plur. suffix, for αְּ ?δִ ?οָּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊְ ?λֶ ?ν. Ezekiel 6:9. Comp. Luke 15:17 sqq. (Leviticus 26:41).—ΰωψ: if, or when.—πωαψϊι Ges. understands in a middle sense: “I break for myself.” Hengst.: “The passivity passes over, as it were, from those whose heart is broken to Him by whom, and in whose interest, it has been broken. I was broken, instead of: I have broken for myself.” [Others: By whose whorish heart I am broken (with pain, Genesis 6:6). Hitz.: their heart and eyes, which could not be satisfied with whoredom (Ezekiel 16:28-29), God will then “satisfy” with bitter feelings (δִ ?ωְׂ ?αַּ ?ςְ ?ϊִּ ?ι instead of πωαψϊι). Ew. reads, instead of ΰωψπωαψϊι, “more simply,” εְ ?πַ ?ωְׁ ?αְּ ?ψεּ. The LXX. have read πωׁ ?αςϊι.] Is there an allusion to David in Psalms 51:17 (2 Samuel 11:2), as Hengst. supposes?—ζπδ is found properly only of the woman, as here also in the application to the marriage relationship of Israel to Jehovah. The word means properly: to incline; but whether is it towards or away from? In the latter sense (Hosea 9:1) we have it interpreted by means of ΰωψΞρψξςμι; in the former by means of ΰηψιΞ.—επχθεֹ (χεθ) with Dag. euphon. in the last.—ατπιδν, not of the idols μτπι=, Ezekiel 6:4-5, but of the escaped, who feel loathing in their own faces (“not reciprocally,” Hitz.). (Hengst.: to become a loathing to themselves. Rosenm.: so that their face shows the loathing.) Ezekiel 20:43; Ezekiel 36:31.—ΰμΞδψςεϊ: “in reference to,” as respecting, etc. Comp. besides, Jeremiah 22:22; Hosea 4:19.—μְ ?λμ, like ΰμ, of which it is an abbreviation. Ezekiel 6:10. Like Ezekiel 6:7, a pause in the discourse, a repetition of the object in view. He remains what He is, but they must change, must away back to Him. In this experimental way they come to know Jehovah.—ηπν (ηֵ ?ο), gratis, frustra, in complete form ΰμΞηπν. That the deed proves the word is not the special point of this second pause in the discourse, but (according to the accents) the eternity of Jehovah, as in Ezekiel 6:7, in contrast with the idols that pass away, so now in contrast with those who change in Israel.—The words “Not in vain have I said,” etc. (comp. on Ezekiel 14:23), show in general how it is possible, by means of the fulfilment of what has been said, that they can acquire from experience the knowledge of Jehovah; and they form, besides, the transition to Ezekiel 6:11 : λδΞΰξψ. Pain and displeasure, in general lively emotion (Numbers 24:10; Ezekiel 21:19 [17], Ezekiel 22:13). Not like Ezekiel 25:6 or 2 Samuel 22:43. But comp., as to the first gesture, Ezekiel 6:14. Either: with the hand upon the thigh (Jeremiah 31:19), or: one hand into the other. The gesture with the foot Hengst. takes in the sense of impatience, which cannot wait for the suffering following upon the sinful action. The prophet symbolizes in his own person the indignation of Jehovah.—ΰωψ, according to Keil, a conjunction: that. Ezekiel 6:12. Since the “house of Israel” (Ezekiel 6:11) as a whole is interpreted by means of ΰωψ in the plural, and since, in fact, more exactly it is those who fall by the sword, etc., the specification of our verse refers to the same parties. He that is far off, who may reckon himself far off from the sword, which is first named in Ezekiel 6:11, dies by that which is last named in Ezekiel 6:11, and hence relatively farthest off: pestilence. He that is near, who is near the death by famine, the second named, does not, however, perish by it, but falls by what is still nearer to him (according to Ezekiel 6:11), the first named sword. He that remaineth over, viz. from the pestilence, and he that is preserved, viz. from the sword, dies nevertheless, as it were of himself, by the famine. The prevailing reference here, according to Ezekiel 4, 5, is to the siege of Jerusalem; but δπφεψ is not on that account: he that is besieged (Hitz.). Comp. besides, Ezekiel 5:13. Ezekiel 6:13. A third pause in the discourse; comp. Ezekiel 6:7; Ezekiel 6:10. The point in hand is the eternity of Jehovah—the beginning being at the same time resumed in a supplementary way now at the close and termination of the discourse—in contrast with the land, consequently with what has been promised and given by Jehovah Himself! Thus the accomplishment of the divine fury just threatened (Ezekiel 6:12) is brought about. Perhaps also the hearers of the prophet are addressed, who may be conceived of as acquiring such knowledge. Comp. besides, Ezekiel 6:4-5; 1 Kings 14:23; 2 Kings 17:10; Deuteronomy 12:2; Isaiah 57:5 sqq.; Hosea 4:13; Jeremiah 2:20; Jeremiah 3:6.—Heights of hills and tops of mountains, as being nearer heaven, the heavenly powers, as it were like natural altars of the earth, adapted also for matching the progress of the sacrifice, of the sacrificial smoke mentioned in what follows.—Not forests, groves, but single green trees found in the brook-channels and ravines.—ΰμδ like ΰַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ο, from its strength, a tree similar to the oak, ever-green, rich in shade, with fruit in clusters, capable of reaching a great age, hence also used for monuments, Landmarks, and the like (Kimchi: our elms). In arboriculture the tree most preferred, perhaps as being sacred to Astarte. ξχενΰωψ, loco quo = ubi.—The standing formula in the law of the offering in general, and in particular of the burnt-offering which is wholly consumed, ψιηπιηη, “savour of rest,” is a bitter criticism, where God must pronounce it of the worship of idols. (“The idea of rest is, like that of peace, synonymous with acceptability, pleasantness, so that the formula is intended to assert that the offering, when it rises up, is acceptable, well-pleasing to God,” Bδhr.) Comp. Genesis 8:21; Ezekiel 8:11; Ezekiel 16:18; Hosea 2:13. Ezekiel 6:14. The exceedingly expressive gesture (Ezekiel 14:9; Ezekiel 14:13) explains itself, in contrast with the foregoing spread of idolatry (επϊϊι over against πϊπεΞων in Ezekiel 6:13).—ωξξδεξωׁ ?ξη is: a waste and desolation, the greatest waste. Comp. Ezekiel 5:14; Jeremiah 6:8.—A wilderness of Diblah is not known elsewhere, hence many have read Riblah, a city which lay on the northern boundary of Palestine (?), with δ local attached to it, in this sense: “from the wilderness (in the south and east) as far as Riblah.” Besides the fact that the change of reading is without support from the ancient translators, there is so much against it in a linguistic and geographical point of view (comp. Deuteronomy 34:11 and 2 Kings 23:33; Jeremiah 39:5; Jeremiah 52:10), that certainly the simpler plan recommends itself, to take ξ comparatively (ξο) and “Diblathah” = Diblathaim (Jeremiah 48:22; Numbers 33:46), which is also in the inscription recently discovered at Dhiban, on the other side of the Dead Sea Comp. Schlottmann’s Osterprogramm, 1870; Nφldeke, Die Inschrift des Kφnigs Mesa von Moab, Kiel, 1870), the Moabite city on the margin of the great wilderness of Arabia Deserta. Comp. Keil on the passage. [Hδv. takes “Diblathah” as a proper name formed by Ezekiel, whose appellative meaning (the form like ϊִּ ?ξְ ?πָ ?ϊָ ?δ, side by side with ϊִּ ?ξְ ?πָ ?δ) is perhaps: “wilderness of ruin, of destruction” (Joe 2:3; Jeremiah 51:26), analogously to “Babylon.”] Additional Note on Ch. 5, 6[In the vision of the siege and the iniquity-bearing, a heavy burden of troubles, partly in progress, and partly still impending, had been announced by the prophet as determined against the covenant people. The afflictions of Egypt and the trials of the wilderness were, in a manner, to pass over them again. But even that was not enough; for as their guilt exceeded the guilt of their forefathers, so the chastisement now to be received from the hand of God was to surpass all that had been experienced in the history of the past. This more severe message is unfolded in the next vision, that recorded in these chapters. The judgments themselves are distributed into three classes, according to the threefold division of the hair: the sword was to devour one-third of the people; famine and pestilence another; and that which remained was to be scattered among the nations. The strongest language is employed to describe the calamities indicated under these various heads, and everything is introduced that might have the effect of conveying the most appalling idea of the coming future. Amid the horrors to be produced by famine and pestilence, the dreadful words of Moses, that “their fathers should eat their sons in the midst of them,” are reiterated, with the addition of the still darker feature, that “the sons should also eat their fathers” (Ezekiel 6:10). The wild beasts of the field, too, were to embitter by their ravages the calamities produced by the evil arrows of famine; and the sword was to pass through the land in such fury, that none should be able to escape, rendering all a desolate wilderness (Ezekiel 6:14), destroying also their idols, and scattering around them the dead carcases of the people, so that the things in which they had foolishly trusted should only in the day of evil prove the witnesses and companions of their ruin (Ezekiel 6:3-6). Finally, in respect to those who should escape the more immediate evils, not only should they be scattered far and wide among the nations, but should there also meet with taunting and reproaches; nay, a sword should be drawn out after them, as had already been predicted by Moses (Ezekiel 5:12; Leviticus 26:33); they, too, were to be for burning (so also Isaiah 6:13); for the anger of the Lord was still to pursue after them with “furious rebukes,” until He had completely broken their rebellious hearts, and wrought in them a spirit of true contrition for sin and perfect reconciliation of heart with God (Ezekiel 6:9). Nothing of a definite nature is mentioned as to time and place in this dark outline of revealed judgments. That the doom of evil was by no means to be exhausted by the troubles connected with the Chaldean conquest is manifest; for that portion of the people who were to go into exile and be dispersed among the nations were appointed to other and still future tribulations. There was to be a germinating evil in their destiny, because there would be, as the Lord clearly foresaw, a germinating evil in their character; and so long as this root of bitterness should still be springing up into acts of rebellion against God, it should never cease to be recoiling upon them with strokes of chastisement in providence. In this there was nothing absolutely singular as to the principle on which the divine government proceeded—only, as God had connected himself with Israel in a manner He never had done with any nation before, nor would with any other again, there should be a certain singularity in their case as to the actual experience of suffering on account of sin. In their history as a people, the footsteps of God’s righteous judgment would leave impressions behind it of unexampled severity, according to the word here uttered: “And I will do in thee that which I have not done, and whereunto I will not do any more the like, because of all thine abominations.” But there is no caprice in the dealings of God. When He afflicts with the rod of chastisement and rebuke, it is only because the righteous principles of His government demand it; and the fearful burden of evils here suspended over the heads of ancient Israel sounds also, a warning-note of judgment to all nations and all ages of the world. There have been, it is true, such changes introduced into the outward administration of God’s kingdom, as render it, for the most part, impossible to trace the execution of His judgments with the same ease and certainty with which we can mark their course in the history of ancient Israel. But it is not the less certain that the principles which produced such marked effects then are in active operation still; and wherever Israel’s guilt is incurred anew, there will infallibly be experienced a renewal of Israel’s doom. For the gospel has brought no suspension of God’s justice any more than of His mercy. It contains the most glorious exhibition of His grace to sinners; but along with this it contains the most affecting and awful display of His righteous indignation against sin. Both features, indeed, of the divine character have reached under the gospel a higher stage of development; and so far has the introduction of the new covenant been from laying an arrest on the severity of God, that not till it appeared did the Jews themselves experience the heaviest portion of the evils threatened against them; then only did the wrath begin to fall upon them to the uttermost, and the days of darkness and tribulation come, such as had not hitherto been known. This vision of woe, therefore, extends alike over both dispensations, and speaks to men of every age and clime; it is a mirror, in which the justice of God reflects itself for the world at large, with no further alteration for gospel times than such as is implied in the words of the apostle: “Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 64, 65–67.—W. F.] 1. But what has Israel sought with all its idolatry? It has sought a strange righteousness instead of that offered to it in the law of God, viz. the heathen righteousness, which is that of the natural man in his self-will. Therefore God’s righteousness in judgment breaks in pieces this self-righteousness in all its manifold forms. 2. It is therefore the first petition in the prayer which the Messiah has taught us: Hallowed be Thy name, of which the first step is thus expressed in the Heidelberg Catechism: Grant that we may rightly know Thee, a point to which this chapter also returns over and over again. And to glorify and praise God in all His works, as the catechism farther teaches, is exactly the opposite of the works of our own hands in Ezekiel 6:6. 3. Without a remnant, the eternity of the divine covenant, and with it the eternity of Jehovah Himself, the essence of His name, would fall to the ground. The continuity of the Church of God is the defence of the divine covenant-faithfulness, the proof of the divine providence (government), the triumph of grace over all judgment. He who judges, sifts. 4. “But first must heart and eye be broken, and fallen man must feel a loathing of himself on account of his wickedness, before he turns to Him who has not spoken in vain. This is the only way to the knowledge of the living and true God; and we all must first with Israel learn to seek and find with broken whorish hearts and eyes the light of the gospel in the shame of captivity among the blind heathen” (Umbr.). 5. “One may certainly feel that he has to do with God, but not humble himself; just as Cain (Genesis 4:6) was compelled to tremble before God, but always remained the same. So it usually happens with the lost. It is certainly a part of repentance to recognise God’s judgment, but the half merely. To be displeased with oneself is the other half” (Calv.). 6. By consenting to God’s judgment, by approving of it and of His righteousness with our whole heart, as the prophet is to smite with his hands and to stamp with his foot, let us judge ourselves, and then we shall not be judged. Our justification of God leads to our justification by God, in the way shown, e.g., in Psalms 51. 7. It is a specialty of the prophecy of Ezekiel, on the one hand, the prominence given to Jehovah, who speaks and will act accordingly (Ezekiel 5.), and, on the other, the emphasis laid on knowledge as the result of experience. Because Jehovah speaks in accordance with His nature, will, decree, He will be what He is, when what He has said comes to pass. In such knowledge of Jehovah, reached through experience of what comes to pass, there lies an eschatological, New Testament element. There is a reference to the fulness of the times, alike in the judgment on Israel, and as regards the salvation of the whole world. The judgment on the heathen element in Israel is, besides, the judgment on heathenism in general. Jehovah is the holy monogram of all the future, the divine motto for the appearing of eternity in time, the manifestation of God in flesh. (Comp. Hosea 2:19 sqq.) HINTS Ezekiel 6:1-2. So a son of man may be brought by God into such a position as to assail “mountains” even, i.e. those who tower like mountains above the level of the rest of men, princes and kings and the like, with the word (Psalms 144:5).—“Sin not only pollutes man, but drags the rest of the creatures also into suffering along with him” (a. L.). Ezekiel 6:3 sqq. Against the sword of God idols are of no avail.—How many a place condemns many a man, and becomes his place of judgment!—There thou seest the manifold ways of men, in which they depart from the One Living God, and make to themselves broken cisterns, Jeremiah 2:13.—In particular, a false worship does not remain unpunished, although it boasts a long time.—The power of strange gods over a heart which is not at home with God, and which follows unceasingly its strange lust: this, namely, that house and heart become desolate places of death. Ezekiel 6:6. God first smites man repeatedly on the hand; at last He smites in pieces the works of his hands. Ezekiel 6:7. “If, therefore, sin is committed in our midst, be not silent, laugh not, give no applause” (Stck.).—God is not less to be known in His judgments. Ezekiel 6:1-7. God and idols: (1) how His word condemns them; (2) how His judgment annihilates them; (3) how those who serve them come to shame, spiritually and corporeally. Ezekiel 6:8. “The Jews among the heathen nations—an example of the goodness, but also of the severity, of God, both leading us to repentance”(Stck.).—“God has and keeps for Himself at all times a little flock in the world, which can be overpowered by no one”(Cr.).—“Yes, what is there that is not scattered over the earth! Only think of the many graves and gravestones!” (Stck.) Ezekiel 6:9. “So long as it goes well with the sinner, he is usually deaf and blind amid all admonitions and judgments. What a benefit therefore conferred by God, when he opens his eyes and ears by means of evil days!” (St.)—“Among the heathen” means grace in the strange land, where one was not to expect it.—The blessing of affliction.—In prosperity misery, in adversity salvation!—Remembrance a way to God.—“Affliction is, as it were, a hammer for our strong heart, and is able to force tears from the eyes” (a L.).—“Misery is the best preacher of repentance, when one will not listen to others. The majority are always like horses and mules; they are not to be brought to God otherwise than by bits and bridles, whips and rods” (B. B.).—In idolatry there is a whorish ardour, as the religious history of heathendom characteristically proves.—“For it is chastity of the sprit to serve God purely” (C.).—How must the good God thus go after us men, in order merely to bring back our heart and our eyes even from destruction!—“The sinner has nothing of his own, neither his heart, nor his eyes, nor his feet; everything belongs to the world, and is in the service of the devil” (a L.).—“The true grief for our sin begins in the heart, manifests itself through the eyes, and proves itself in the whole life and walk” (Stck.).—“Sincere repentance never comes too late, but has always access to the grace of God, Revelation 3:17; Revelation 3:19” (W.).—“When it is right in the penitent heart, there is also loathing of ourselves, Luke 18:13” (after St.). Ezekiel 6:10. “The knowledge of God a fruit of repentance” (C.).—“Men make their boast with empty threatenings; but with God there is earnestness” (B. B.). Ezekiel 6:11. Ezekiel’s exclamation of woe has, as one may say, hand and foot. The whole man is wholly in it with his heart. Such excitement is not to be blamed in any servant of the Living God. The messengers of peace at least (Matthew 10.) are to shake the dust off their feet. And He Himself, the Peaceful One, has in Luke 11. uttered one woe after another.—“God has many rods, wherewith He chastises evil-doers, but three especially, in which all the rest are gathered up” (L.). Ezekiel 6:12. “No man can escape God” (Stck.).—Death overtakes us in all forms; woe to the impenitent!—“There are two kinds of flight from God: one which is of no use, and that by means of true repentance, which avails” (L.). Ezekiel 6:13. “As is the case with Paul in Philippians , 3, it causes the prophet also no annoyance to say the same thing repeatedly” (Stck.).—How sin can turn what is pleasing to the Most High into exactly the opposite! Ezekiel 6:14. “When God has held His hand long enough stretched out to allure, to bless, then at length He stretches it out also to punish” (Stck.).—The wilderness shall blossom (Isaiah 35); but what was blossoming may also become a wilderness, and both from God.—“Jehovah is He who will be what He is; in other words, He who shows His eternity and power, and fulfils His word, and does not change, nor deny Himself” (Cocc.). CHAPTER 7 1, 2And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, And thou, son of man, thus saith the Lord Jehovah: An end to the soil of Israel! the end comes 3upon the four corners [borders] of the land. Now [comes] the end upon thee, and I send Mine anger into thee, and judge thee as thy ways [are], and give upon thee all thine abominations. 4And Mine eye will not restrain itself from [have pity upon] thee, neither will I spare; for [but] thy ways will I give upon thee, and thine abominations shall be in thy midst; and ye know that I am Jehovah. 5Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, An evil, one evil, behold it cometh. 6An end cometh, there cometh the end; it awaketh for thee, behold, it 7cometh. The turn (?) cometh to thee, O inhabitant of the land; the time cometh; the day is near, tumult and not joyous shouting upon the mountains. 8Now will I shortly pour out My fury upon thee, and I accomplish Mine anger upon [in] thee, and judge thee as thy ways [are], and give upon thee all thine abominations. 9And Mine eye will not forbear, and I will not spare; as thy ways [are] will I give upon thee, and thine abominations shall be in thy midst; 10and ye know that it is I, Jehovah, that smiteth. Behold, the day, behold, it 11cometh: the turn (?) springeth up; the rod sprouts; pride blossoms. The violence riseth up into the rod of wickedness; not of them, nor of their multitude, nor of their pomp; neither is there anything glorious upon 12[in, among] them. The time comes, the day arrives; let not the buyer rejoice, nor the seller mourn; for heat [of anger] cometh upon the whole multitude thereof. 13For the seller shall not return to what is sold, even were their life still among the living; for the vision is upon [against] the whole multitude thereof; he shall not return, nor shall they—in his iniquity Isaiah 14 every one’s life—show themselves strong. They blow the horn, and make all ready, and there is none who goeth to the battle; for My heat of anger Isaiah 15 upon [against] their whole multitude. The sword without, and the pestilence and famine within! He that is in the field shall die by the sword; and he 16that is in the city, famine and pestilence shall devour him. And if their escaped ones escape, they are upon the mountains like doves of the valleys, all of them cooing, each one in his iniquity. 17All hands shall be slack, and all 18knees shall dissolve into water. And they gird sackcloth about them, and horror covers them; and upon all faces is shame, and baldness on all their 19heads. Their silver shall they cast upon the streets, and their gold shall be to them for repudiation. Their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them on the day of the outpouring of the wrath of Jehovah: they shall not satisfy their soul, neither fill their bowels; for it was a stumbling-block 20of their iniquity. And the ornament of his decoration—for pride they placed it, and images of their abominations, of their [their accus.] detestable 21things, they made of it: therefore I give it to them for repudiation. And I give it into the hands of the strangers for a prey, and to the wicked of 22the earth for a spoil; and they profane her. And I turn away My face from them, and they profane My secret; and violent ones come into her, and profane 23her. Make the chain; for the land is full of blood-guiltiness, and the 24city is full of outrage. And I bring wicked ones of the [heathen] nations, and they take possession of their houses: and I make the pride of the strong to 25cease; and their holy places are profaned. Destruction cometh [came]; and 26they seek salvation [peace], and there is none. Destruction upon destruction shall come, and rumour shall be upon rumour; and they seek a vision from the prophet; and the law [instruction] shall perish from the priest, and counsel from the elders. 27The king shall mourn, and the prince shall put on blank amazement, and the hands of the people in the land shall be slack: according to their way will I do unto them, and according to their deserts will I judge them; and they know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 7:2. Sept.: ... ταδελεγει... τηγητ. Ἱσρ. τεραςἡκει, τοπεραςἡκειἐπι—(Anoth. read.: χυαΰαΰδχυ.) Ezekiel 7:3. ... τ. κεραςνυν, τοπεραςπροςσε. Ezekiel 7:4. Anoth. read.: λγψλικ. Ezekiel 7:5. Anoth. read.: ΰηψ. Ezekiel 7:7. ... ἡπλοκη … οὐμεταθορυβωνοὐδεμεπ̓ὠδιγωγ—contritio super te … prope est dies occisionis, et non gloriζ montium. (Anoth. read.: ΰμικ fem.) Ezekiel 7:10. Sept.: ... ἡμερακυριου, ἰδουτ. περαςἡκει— Ezekiel 7:11. Κ. συνριψειστηριγμαἀνομου, κ. οὐμεταθορυβωνοὐδεμετασπουδης. Κ. οὐκἐξαὐτωνεἰσιν, οὐδεὡραισμοςἰναὐτοις. (Anoth. read.: εμΰπη. Vulg.: et non erit requies in eis.) Ezekiel 7:13.... ὁκτωμενοςπροςτον. πωλουντα... ὀτιὁρασις... τ. πληθοςαὐτηςοὐκἀνακαμψει, κ. ἀνθρωποςἰνὀφθαλμωζωηςαὐτουοὐκρατησε. Ezekiel 7:14. ... κρινατετασυμπαντα—(Anoth. read.: ϊִ ?χςε, Sept., Arab., Vulg.) Ezekiel 7:16. Ὡςπεριστεραιμελετητικαιπανταςἀποκτενω, ἑκαστος— Ezekiel 7:22.... εἰσελευσονταιεἰςαὐταἀφυλακτως— Ezekiel 7:23.... πληρηςλαων— Ezekiel 7:24. ... κ. ἀποστρεψωτοφρυαγματ. ἰσχυοςαὐτων—(Anoth. read.: ςζν, Arab.) Ezekiel 7:27. … Anoth. read.: ελξωτθιδν. Vulg.: et secundum judicia— REMARKSAccording to Hengst., the first cycle closes here, and, in fact, with a song (?). But the “lyric” element (Ew.) is rather a rhetorical one. Neither is there any “solemn close, which corresponds with the solemn introduction,” but simply a second prophetic discourse attached to the first in Ezekiel 6. The prophet has in his eye the time of the breaking forth of the divine judgment. (Hitzig from Ezekiel 7:3 onwards works himself into the idea of two defective recensions of the original text, for which there is no valid ground. Neteler lays the Hebrew text as a basis, so far as it is confirmed by the Greek translation, in order to obtain a “piece of four parts carried through with complete symmetry.”) Ezekiel 7:1. Comp. Ezekiel 6:1-2. εΰϊδ, as so often, an address to the prophet in contradistinction from the people (Ezekiel 2:8; Ezekiel 3:25; Ezekiel 4:1; Ezekiel 5:1). The Sept. supplied ΰֶ ?ξֹ ?ψ, A mark of exclamation is enough.—μΰγξϊ, not “of” (Hengst.), nor, as Ew. maintains against the accents: “thus saith … to the fatherland of Israel.” ΰγξδ is the soil of a country, for which afterwards δΰψυ; hence the total ruin. Comp. Ezekiel 6:14. The preceding discourse is brought to a point in this, under the motto of the end.—Instead of ΰַ ?ψְ ?αַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ the Qeri gives the more usual form ΰַ ?ψְ ?αַּ ?ς. Ezekiel 7:3. αָּ ?κְ, so that it finds its place in thee, where it can have vent.—Ways for walk. In accordance therewith will be the judgment. Their abominations come upon their own heads. Ezekiel 7:4. ηεּ ?ρ, “to restrain oneself,” hence “to spare” (Ezekiel 5:11), to have compassion.—They are to see their abominations again in their midst, in their consequences, the divine punishments. Comp. besides, Ezekiel 6:7. Ezekiel 7:5. ψςδ, what is destructive, injurious, here conceived of as being so evil, that it is spoken of as one standing alone, and not as a succession of evils. (Comp. Ezekiel 5:9.) J. D. Mich.: “which makes an end at once, so that no second is necessary.”—The curt, abrupt character of the discourse portrays the sudden, violent nature of the judgment.—The Chald. read perhaps ΰηψ. Ezekiel 7:6. δχυδχιυ, a play upon words. After having apparently slept so long and so soundly, the end (not Jehovah) awakes, and therefore it comes.—ΰֵ ?μָ ?ικְ, fem., because Jerusalem is in the background, as in Ezekiel 7:3 also. (“The repetition indicates the certainty, the greatness, and the swiftness.”—a L.)——αָּ ?ΰָ ?δ (fem.) resumes the so strongly-emphasized ψςδ of Ezekiel 7:5, or it stands impersonally (Hδv., Keil), or it prepares for δַ ?φְּ ?τִ ?ιψָ ?δ in Ezekiel 7:7, which means “a crown” in Isaiah 28:5, a meaning which is not suitable here. It might be allowable to translate in our verse: “the turn comes to thee,” inasmuch as φτιψδ from φτψ may be something “arranged in a row together” with something else, where one thing follows another. But this certainly hardly suits ιφΰδ in Ezekiel 7:10. The interpretation most in favour, viz. “destiny” (Hitz.: the goddess of fate, properly: vicissitude of fortune, catastrophe), gives a suitable although heathenish sense; we would be compelled to admit a borrowing on Ezekiel’s part from his Chaldaic surroundings, and yet the expression itself is not thereby explained. It is sought to be explained by the circle of fate, or its being shut up within itself. One might think of the return of the sin in the punishment, wherewith it finishes its course; comp. Ezekiel 7:3-4. (φτψ in Judges 7:3 = to return circuitously.) Others hold fast by the meaning “crown,” and understand by it the kingdom of the Chaldeans, or the king of the Chaldeans. Hδv., who combats this meaning, asserting that in Isaiah 28. it is a plait of hair that is meant, accepts a later Aramaism, φτψΰ=φτιψδ, “the dawn,” viz. of the evil day (Joe 2:1-2). Grot. with reference to δχιυ in Ezekiel 7:6, inasmuch as it was customary for judgment to be administered in the morning. Others in other ways. Was it intended, perhaps, to indicate something equivalent to: what is marked with the graver (φτψο), what is determined, established, as in Jeremiah 17:1?—ΰֵ ?μֶ ?ικָ, masc, because of what follows (Hosea 9:7).—δַ ?ιεֹ ?ν, artic: dies ille.—Tumult, perhaps alarm of war, and in contrast therewith δֵ ?γ, i.e. δֵ ?ιγָ ?γ (comp. Isaiah 16:9-10; Jeremiah 48:33), cry of joy of the vine-dressers (?), or cry of victory, Isaiah 40:9 (J. D. Mich.), or festival-pomp) of the idolaters, Ezekiel 6:3; Ezekiel 6:13 (Rosenm.). Hengst.: “joyful shout of the mountains,” because the shout of joy is heard on them and called forth by them (Psalms 89:13), in place of which will come the painful tumult of those who are seeking deliverance. Hδv. takes δγ for δεֹ ?γ, “brightness,” so that the dawn rises without mountain - brightness (?), without irradiating the mountains which are first to be irradiated (!). Ezekiel 7:8. ςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ; comp. Ezekiel 7:3.—ξχψεα, in Deuteronomy 32:17 of place, here of time (Job 20:5). Comp. besides, Ezekiel 6:12; Ezekiel 7:3-4. Ezekiel 7:9. Comp. Ezekiel 7:4. The added expression smiteth does not announce what follows, but meets beforehand a false interpretation of the same (the sprouting rod). Ezekiel 7:10. Comp. on Ezekiel 7:7.—ιφΰδ, because of what follows of the springing up, like a plant, from the soil of which the sinners are bragging.—The rod is for Israel, in order to punishment, in fact, the staff of the Chaldean ruler, Nebuchadnezzar’s sceptre. What a contrast to Numbers 17:2-3! To the “sprouting” of power, which can, corresponds the “blossoming” of pride, which will. (ζεּ ?γ, to boil, to boil over.) Ezekiel 7:11. Thus the violence, the violent acting which takes place, rises into the rod of wickedness, i.e. which punishes the wickedness of Israel; into the staff, sceptre, of the Chaldean, wherewith Israel’s wickedness is smitten (Isaiah 10:5). Other expositors interpret ξξδ already in Ezekiel 7:10 of the tribe of Judah (Grot.), its royal sceptre (Cocc.), and refer alike ζγεο there and ηξν here to the complete sinful development of the kingdom (Ew.), so that the rod of wickedness would be that rod wherewith wickedness smites itself. Grot, takes μ adversative; the violent Chaldean rises up against the wicked tribe of Judah. Cocc.: Israel’s violent conduct (Genesis 6:11) brings upon them instead of God the sceptre of the Chaldean dominion of wickedness. It would be natural to understand the immediately following not of them, etc., in such a way that this “rod of wickedness,” “of violence,” would now be pointed out more definitely, in as far as it is not to spring forth from Israel (μΰΞξδν), neither from their roaring (δξεο, Isaiah 5:13-14, the noisy, politically-roused multitude), nor from their humming (by paronomasia, equivalent to: pomp), consequently neither of democratic nor of aristocratic origin (comp. 1 Kings 12:11). δָ ?ν or δָ ?ξֶ ?δ, plur. δξιν (only to be found here); ξδξδν for ξδξιδν, Ges.: of their possessions, Keil: the multitude of possessions. [Hengst.: “nor of them, and them (yet again),”—like δνδν in Isaiah 57:6,—however much they may hold up their heads; Jewish expositors resolve it into εְ ?μֹ ?ΰξֵ ?δֶ ?νΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψξֵ ?δֶ ?ν, and understand it of their children (so the Chaldee); Hδv.: cares, anxieties, these are as useless as the multitude of the people themselves!?] The penal judgment will come from outside themselves. Hengst.: “It is a throwing contempt on the ‘we,’ which they had continually in their mouth, and repeated with great emphasis: we, we shall do everything, etc. (Jeremiah 30:21; Zechariah 10:4).”—εְ ?μֹ ?ΰΞπֹ ?δַּ αָּ ?δֶ ?ν, Ges. from πεּ ?δַּ, Keil, from πָ ?εָ ?δּ, “to be prominent;” something glorious. [Hδv.; “and there is a want of beauty in them.” (The word is found only here.)—According to the Jewish expositors, πֹ ?δּ for πֹ ?δֶ ?δ, from πָ ?δָ ?δ, loud lament. Hengst.: “that wailing will be forgotten in deep despair.” (Cocc. making it refer to the falling sceptre of David, they will be obliged to conceal their wailing on that account before the tyrant who conquers them!) Ew.: “Nothing will remain of the wicked, neither of their proud, haughtily blustering, luxurious conduct, in prosperity as hitherto, nor of their sighing or even their discontented grumbling and murmuring in adversity.” Similarly Calvin, of the root and branch destruction of them, their multitude, their possessions.] Accordingly εμΰεμΰμΰ are understood as short sentences descriptive of the result of the stroke of Eze 7:10 (Keil), the effect of the repetition being heightened by the omission of the verb, as if they were exclamations. As for the rest, Hitz. remarks excellently: “unannounced ὡςκλἐπτης the day will come, unexpectedly, and so much greater the shock of surprise.” After a second emphasizing in Ezekiel 7:12 of the leading thought of the proclamation—comp. Ezekiel 7:7—δβις ,αΰ, proph. preterites—the buyer and the seller are given as an exemplification from the dealings of ordinary life. The former is not to rejoice in the possession which he covets; he does not come into the enjoyment of it. The latter is not to mourn over the loss of a property he would fain retain, but which has been alienated from necessity; much else is at stake: for ηψεο, elsewhere ηψεοΰσ, comes upon λμΞδְַ ?ξεֹ ?πδּ (the suffix agreeing with μΰγξηιωψΰμ, or referring to Jerusalem), the whole of the people is consumed. Comp. Psalms 39:6. Hengst.: the multitude which makes so much ado about nothing.—The general reason is followed in Ezekiel 7:13 by a more special one (as Hengst.), or by what is merely a specializing of λι—ּ ?ηψεοΞ might also stand in the sense of: but certainly, i. e. the seller is not to mourn, but certainly he shall not return to his property that is sold; hence the possible return thereto must not be a motive for him not to mourn. That is to say, the seller would have,—and therefore is this specialty introduced, in order, at the same time, to mark the national ruin,—according to Leviticus 25, the prospect of the year of jubilee, the carrying out of which is thus attested here (Hδv.), or at least presupposed in its idea, and therewith the return to what he had sold remained open. (Philipps. thinks of the right of the seller at any time to buy back again what was sold, either himself or through the nearest kinsman, for the selling price, Ruth 4; Jeremiah 32.) But although in other circumstances the man who has no possession, the vexed poor man, has a better chance of being left behind than the man who has a possession, the joyous rich man, in the case impending it will in general be otherwise, i.e. quite alike for the one and for the other. Individuals, indeed, will remain alive. εςεγΞ, a conditional circumstantial clause (Hδv., Keil), so that the case is supposed, that their (viz. the sellers’) life is among the living, that they come out of it with their life. The seller, consequently, is used collectively for the individuals who as such come to be considered. The judgment applies to the persons—this is the leading thought—and not, as the expositors assert, to their possession. Hence λιΞΞΰμΞλμΞδξεπδ is repeated from Ezekiel 7:12, but instead of ηψεο we have by paronomasia ηζεο, the glowing heat seen in the prophetic vision (Ezekiel 1.). ηζεο might perhaps confirm the interpretation of δφτιψδ in Ezekiel 7:7 as what is fixed, determined. In like manner μΰιωεα is resumed from the beginning of our verse, and that in the same sense, so that it is certainly not to be translated: “for the prophecy against the whole multitude shall not return” (Jer.), a thought which is too little in keeping with the exceptional earnestness of the context. Rather is the statement meant to be something additional as to the persons, appended to the special exemplification of the seller. Hence εΰιω equivalent to: since every one has “his life in his iniquity,” and it is therefore very questionable whether (as was parenthetically supposed above) “their life” might be “still among the living.”—μΰιϊηζχε: they shall not show themselves strong, manifest strength, courage; the iniquity cripples their power of life, with which what follows agrees admirably. [Other expositions: Ewald: “But certainly they may become unfortunate or the reverse for a time: he who was compelled to sell his property may not even obtain it in the year of jubilee, or, on the other hand, the divine punishment may no longer light upon the rich brawlers, yet the former remain in their lust after a life of sense in the world, without coming to repentance through adversity (Psalms 17:14), and the latter do not suffer themselves to be drawn out of their sins by prosperity; all are irresolute, cowardly people,” etc. Hδv. explains the last clause also of the year of jubilee still, whose object is “to be strengthened in life” (ηιϊε, an accus. to be connected with the passive ιϊηζχε), so that one springs up into new life: there has been a restoration—a new birth. No one is to obtain a new strength of his vital powers by means of his sin; rather do those fearful Sabbatical years make their appearance, Leviticus 26:34 sq. The second μΰιωεα has also been understood by some in the sense that no one “turns,” although the prophecy summons all to repentance, which agrees just as little with the context. εΰιωΞ is interpreted on the part of some by an omission of the relative: “every one whose life is in his iniquity,” while others take the first suffix pleonastically, in this way: “they shall not any of them strengthen themselves by means of (on account of) the iniquity of his life,” so as to be able to stand against their enemies. The plural with the collective ΰιω. Hengst.: “The seller will in no case return to the property which he has sold, so that he should be obliged to regard it with pain, for the whole land is stripped of its inhabitants; but it may also happen that he loses his life, and he has to account it good fortune if this does not take place, so that the thing sold cannot be a source of pain to him: and many a one (εΰιω) will not retain his life because of his misdeed.”] The LXX. read ςιο instead of ςεο. Ezekiel 7:14. The predicted feebleness is placed before our eyes in a picture all but ironical.—αַ ?ϊָּ ?χεֹ ?ςַ has nothing to do with Jeremiah 6:1 (where Tekoa is a proper name). But an infin. absol., with preposition and article, is grammatically too bold. Neither are we to translate, as Hengst. does: “they blew with a loud blast,” but (as also the Sept.) as designating the instrument wherewith the blast is made. The infin. absol.δָ ?λּ ?ιο (δָ ?λֵ ?ιο)—comp. Nahum 2:4 [3] (a military term)—shortly for the finite verb (Ew. Gram. § 351, c).—μξμηξδ, Hitzig acutely: to the battle, not: into the battle.—Comp. besides, Ezekiel 7:17; Ezekiel 7:12; Leviticus 26:17. Ezekiel 7:15. Comp. Ezekiel 5:12; Ezekiel 6:12; Lamentations 1:20. Comp. also Mark 13:15-16. Instead of acting offensively, not even on the defensive; without resistance they fall victims, partly to the sword of the enemy, which, according to Ezekiel 5:7, is the sword of God, partly to the pestilence combined with the famine. Ezekiel 7:16. The fate of those of them who in any way escape is localized upon the mountains (ΰμ for ςμ, Ezekiel 6:13),—having fled thither (Psalms 11:1; Mark 13:14; Luke 21:21-22), they shall be there like, etc., their condition being compared to that of doves of the valleys, i.e. doves which, having lost their nests, are not like wild doves at home upon the mountains, and which, when frightened by birds of prey, make known their sorrow, their painful feeling.—λμνδξεϊ, rightly Keil: figure and reality mixed up together; in form belonging to the comparison, in reality to the things compared. The stronger expression δξδ, not without reference to δξεπδ in Ezekiel 7:13-14, and their tumult going before.—For ΰιωαςεπε, comp. Ezekiel 7:13. As is their life, if they still save it, so is their expression of that life, and, in fact (by the individualization of the all, λμν), each one gives utterance to his sorrow in his iniquity, as a sorrow that is deserved, therefore as a penal sorrow. [The LXX. read perhaps δξϊι. But the text is not to be changed in accordance therewith, for certainly in what follows the farther description of these fugitives is given.] Hence Ezekiel 7:17 is not to be understood of the whole people (Keil, Hengst.); it is rather the interpretation of the melancholy cooing in Ezekiel 7:16. A picture of the repentance which is wrung from them. The hands refuse to perform their office, nay, even the knees refuse to stand and keep firm. The expression for the latter (Ezekiel 21:7) is intended to portray the complete desolation of their strength; comp. Joshua 7:5 (Isaiah 13:7; Exodus 15:15). The LXX. too literally. (For ημλπδ, comp. Joel 4:18.) Ezekiel 7:18. Along with such (negative) feebleness we have (as positive elements): mourning and horror, shame and grief. As the expression of the first, the cloth of coarse hair, which they girt about themselves with a cord (Isaiah 3:24). For the second, the strong expression λνϊδτμφεϊ (Psalms 55:5): if mourning is their girdle, then horror is their covering. But as shame is upon (ΰμ for ςμ) all faces, so baldness is on the back part of the head of all, as the result of grief, or it must be supposed the custom in mourning (Job 1:20), or that they have plucked out their hair in their pain (Ezra 9:3). Comp. besides, Jeremiah 48:37; Amos 8:10; and Deuteronomy 14:1. Ezekiel 7:19 speaks in the outset of the fugitives still, who cast from them everything that is burdensome. But what one casts away, that he also in a certain measure repudiates; hence πγδ, “detestable thing,” “abomination.” The renewed mention together of the two principal means employed in sinning (silver and gold), in the next place, generalizes the circle of the persons involved, so as to embrace the people generally. Of idols of silver and gold (Isaiah 2:20), however, there is no need as yet to think. It is rather treasures of that sort that are spoken of, which hinder one during a flight, which only provoke the booty-loving enemy still more, nay, which, now that the saving of life is aimed at, appear like rubbish. For that life might be purchased therewith is no longer the case, since the day of the overflowing (ςαψ) wrath of the Eternal (Luke 21:22) is come (comp. Isaiah 13:17; Zephaniah 1:18; 1 Peter 1:18). They have, neither enjoyment (satisfaction) from it, nor even the filling of the bowels by means of it. Silver and gold are, alike for the taste and for necessaries (in a practical point of view, ζsthetically and physically considered), without significance in this day of judgment; the element which comes in that case into consideration is the stumbling-block which they made of it, so that they fell into iniquity over it. In Ezekiel 3:20 we have a stumbling-block which is given. Their riches and their trust in them made them satisfied, so that they needed nothing. As a punishment, these riches do not now satisfy them, do not even fill their belly; nothing can be bought with them so that they may live. The giving of a reason for the punishment drawn from the guilt leads to a farther description of this guilt in Ezekiel 7:20. The εְ is explanatory. Because the riches wherewith Israel was decked out, and might adorn herself like a bride, of course ἐνκυρίω, were, on the contrary, misused for self-exaltation and pride. Comp. Isaiah 2.—ωָׂ ?ξָ ?δεּ; the subject is the people, or: every one, or: one;—the suffix refers to the ornament of his decoration (Hδv., Keil: elegant ornaments), by which others understand, not the gold and silver, but the temple. Hitz. reads ωָׂ ?ξֻ ?δεּ. From the self-exaltation resulted the will-worship, the diversified self-choice in divine worship.—ωχεφιδν, as frequently from Deuteronomy 29:17 onwards; omitted by the LXX.—αε, not: in the temple, but: of the silver and gold. Comp. Exodus 32; Hosea 2:10 [8], Ezekiel 8:4, Ezekiel 13:2.—ςμΞλοπϊϊιε; the idea of retribution here explains the μְ ?πִ ?γָּ ?δ in Ezekiel 7:19.—But as God gives it to them as a thing to be cast away and rejected, so He gives it to their enemies in Ezekiel 7:21, who are described as in Ezekiel 7:24 (Psalms 75:8), for a prey. The victory of the wicked is God’s penal victory.—δΰψυ is not Babylon, but we should rather say the wicked of the earth are the Babylonians. In defence of the Kethibh εְ ?ηִ ?μְּ ?μεּ ?δָ, with fem, suffix (comp. Ezekiel 7:12), where hitherto masculine, Ewald remarks: “a gradual transition from the masc. φαι to the holy city, which, strictly speaking, is meant, and even distinctly named in Ezekiel 7:23.” The Qeri is εְ ?δִ ?μְּ ?μεּ ?δεּ, which Hitzig defends. According to Hδv. (LXX., Vulg.), to be referred to the “elegant ornament;” according to others, to the objects of worship of gold and silver. Ezekiel 7:22. ξδν from those at Jerusalem, so that the enemy can get the mastery over it. Others: I will not look what the enemy shall do, but let them act.—From the “profanation” of what is holy an explanation is got of the preceding characteristic title of the “strangers” as the “wicked of the earth.” φָ ?τεּ ?ο is “something hidden,” something concealed; according to Hδv., of the place: the sanctuary, the holy of holies, where Jehovah dwells in sacred darkness; according to others: the holy land in general; according to Hengst, of the matter in hand: the church-treasure, which is secularized. [The LXX. read perhaps τְּ ?χֻ ?γָּ ?ϊִ ?ι. Ewald: the treasure of My guardianship, i.e. of My country or My people.] The suffixes of αּ ?‍ ?ֽ ?δּ and δִ ?μְּ ?μεּ ?δָ belong to the city, Jerusalem, which always stands in the background. Others prefer a neuter construction; Keil: come “over it.” For violent ones, comp. Matthew 11:12 (which passage is to be understood in accordance with this). Ezekiel 7:23. In form directed to the prophet, like the whole discourse; in substance equivalent to: pronounce the captivity to be ready. “As it were indignant at the profanation, Jehovah commands to put an end to the doings of the enemy by the deportation of those who were left behind” (Hδv.). By means of the article, the putting in chains is declared to be no longer a thing to be doubted, but certain, quite fixed, just as things generally known have the article. Others collectively. “In reality the king was carried away in chains and cast into prison” (Buns.).—The plural γξιν always means blood poured out; hence ξωτθγξιν, a trial which is held with respect to such a case, a sentence which is pronounced upon it, a punishment which is decreed for it, all of which are unsuitable for the parallel ηξρ. Just as unsuitable here is: the right of blood-shedding. We are therefore to understand it of the case in law, the crime, the blood-guiltiness. Comp. Deuteronomy 19:6 (Genesis 6:11). Hδv. understands it of the judgment on blood-shedding (“hence: inexorable, relentless”), while he refers ηξρ to the violent enemies. Of course “blood-guiltiness” gives a reason for (λι) something more than putting in chains, viz. death; but perhaps captivity is thereby meant to be indicated as the least thing that can happen to them after guilt such as theirs. Ezekiel 7:24. “Wicked heathen”—(Ezekiel 7:21) so that they fall, besides, into bad hands of men (2 Samuel 24:14). Comp. Ew. Gram. § 313, c; Habakkuk 1:6 sqq.—βΰεο, either as in Ezekiel 7:20 : pride (Hδv.: everything of which the mighty are wont to boast), or: ornament, decoration, glory, of the temple (Ezekiel 24:21).—They may be called strong, as well because of their real strength, when they preserved their fidelity to the Strong One who dwelt in their midst, as in accordance with their imagined strength (Leviticus 26:19). Ew. reads βΰεοςֻ ?εָּ ?ν, “their proud splendour.”—πημε cannot be the Piel of πημ, which would mean “to divide for a possession,” but is the Niphal of ημμ.—ξχγωׁ ?ιδν, according to Ew. (Gramm. § 215, a) from ξִ ?χְּ ?γָּ ?ωׁ, with vowel pushed back. Rosenm. reads: ξִ ?χְ ?γְּ ?ωֵׁ ?ιδֶ ?ν; Hδv. ξִ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωֵׁ ?ιδֶ ?ν. Hengst.: “those who sanctify them,” hence partic. Piel without Dagesch forte of χψω, understanding the priests now no longer able to discharge their functions, whereby the means of reconciliation are withdrawn from Israel (Leviticus 16; Isaiah 43:26-27). [Others: of unworthy Levitical service, inasmuch as the Holy One of Israel is also his only true Sanctifier, Ezekiel 37:28. “Ezekiel points to the cloud only, Jeremiah in Ezekiel 33 opens the view to the sun hidden behind it.” By their sanctuaries are understood sometimes the buildings of the temple, but, as being no longer God’s, sometimes the self-chosen ones of the Jews. Ezekiel 7:25. χτγδ only here (see Gesen. Lex.). According to Meier, not: destruction, but in accordance with the root-meaning (“to draw together”), as in the Syr., of the drawing together of the skin and hair from fright (horror). Exactly so Ew., Hengst.: contraction, in contrast with the expansion which is connected with all joyful prosperity, and which is founded in the nature of the people of God, Genesis 28:14; Isaiah 54:3. [Hδv.: the conclusion, the close (χυ. Ezekiel 7:2; Ezekiel 7:6).] For the gender and masc. verb comp. Ew. Gramm. § 173, h, 174, g. [Ros.: δ paragog.] αΰ, a proph. perf. (Keil).—“Peace” is too narrow for ωμεν, as also attempts at peace with money-offerings with Nebuchadnezzar, of which some think. The attempts at salvation which they make in vain are specified in what follows. Ezekiel 7:26. While the disasters are accumulating, and the rumours are multiplying (Matthew 24:6), they seek, first of all, from the prophet (the generic idea). Comp. Jeremiah 37:17; Jeremiah 38:14. [Hengst. understands it of the false prophets, and compares for the priests Zephaniah 3:4; Jeremiah 2:8; Ezekiel 22:26. What they seek, viz. a vision, is mentioned, but it is not said that they find it. That they do not becomes clear alike from Ezekiel 7:25, and from the circumstance that instruction perishes from the priest, and counsel from the elders. Comp. Jeremiah 18:18 (Luke 21:25). To the threefold class in Ezekiel 7:26 we have a corresponding parallel in Ezekiel 7:27, the king—the prince of the tribe—the people in the land; and to the want of counsel corresponds the failure in action. It is a national ruin. (As to ιϊΰαָּ ?μ, see Gesen. Gramm. § 53, Obs.) μαω, a well-known figurative mode of expression for being covered with and wrapt up in terror, just as in the case of the king it is a deep silent mourning that is meant (ΰαμ). For ειγιΧ comp,. Ezekiel 7:17 (παρειμέναςχεῖρας, Hebrews 12:12). Like their conduct will God’s dealing with them be, drawn from it, regulated in accordance with it. As to ΰεϊν, see Ew. Gramm. § 264, b. εαξωτθιδν, Hengst.: “with judgments which correspond to their deeds,” and so Ew. also and others. Better: according to what is right in reference to them. Instead of αְ there is also the reading αְ (Ezekiel 7:3). With the well-known (Ezekiel 6:14; Ezekiel 5:15) refrain ειγςεΧ, the two discourses of rebuke in Ezekiel 6, 7 come to a close. 1. We have before us in this chapter an Old Testament pattern for the awe-inspiring Dies ir�, dies illa, the so-called “gigantic hymn” (comp. Zephaniah 1:14 sqq.). What Fr. 5 Meyer says of the latter may be uttered also of this chapter of our prophet: “With the man who is so insensible that he can read it without alarm and hear it without dread, I should not like to dwell under the same roof.” 2. The contents are the same, ever the same. The drops fall without intermission on the stone, the heart of Israel. Unbelief has just the characteristic either that it believes in no punishment at all (2 Peter 3:3 sq.), or that its frivolous mind knows beforehand that what will come will certainly not be so severe nor last so long. And therefore God does not grudge to tell us over and over again our inevitable destiny, and also to push it ever nearer to us. The enduring meaning as well as application of our chapter may be expressed in this way, that the end of those things in which they place their trust, and in which they find their satisfaction, is to be held up before the false security of the men of this world on every side. Respice finem. 3. “Sin has an active and a passive history. When the latter begins, then what was formerly an object of pleasure becomes an object of dread” (Hengst.). “On the day of judgment the abominations stand in Israel’s midst not in their alluring, seductive form, but with all the woe which comes in their train” (Hδv.). 4. “God does indeed punish the sinner from moment to moment in his conscience, but, so far as outward experience is concerned, He causes him to learn the error of his way at first only in omens of the most gently threatening character, so to speak, by means of passing, dimly visible angels of warning. In this way He gives him great scope for freely bethinking himself and for returning of his own free-will, or else for completing of his own free-will his experience of the ruin which lies on his path of bondage. But in this way the divine long-suffering is revealed, which gives the sinner time for repentance. The picture of this long-suffering of God is furnished by the three years of Christ’s ministry. Then at the end of its lingering the long-suffering steps into the background behind the divine wrath” (Lange). 5. The love of God and its ultimate aim in redemption is resisted in particular by the folly of the sinner, which pursues as its object deliverance from misery, and that the misery which at any time happens to be present, and in self-righteousness sets itself against deliverance from sin, sometimes by disputing the causal nexus of sin and misery as punishment, sometimes by the denial of sin altogether. The redeeming love of God, therefore, cannot make itself known, in opposition to man’s vain imagination, in any way more practical and concrete than, first of all, by means of the zeal of divine wrath. In view of the aim, viz. redemption, and as being divine, this zeal of wrath is not merely a thing of the O. T., but not less expressly belongs to the N. T. It is redemptive inasmuch as, through retributive visitation by means of punishment, not only does God, who has vanished from the consciousness of the self-righteous man—self-righteous although both a sinner and a debtor—reveal Himself, but man also by this means is to become free from the hurtful delusion of “envious gods,” of a “blind fate,” of an arbitrary “necessity of nature.” Judgments like that on Judah and Jerusalem are therefore, besides being divine, of a redemptive character. There is an effort after salvation in such crises, and at all events in the biblical wrath of God there is more of the wisdom of love than in the common assertion that a God who is angry is a God who does not love. 6. The tragic truth of the history of the world, and especially of the history of the kingdom of God, celebrates in those epoch-making catastrophes, which are the emblems of the last judgment, the truth of the idea of God’s zeal in wrath, of this fatal curse of sin. 7. Where God is seen angry in Holy Scripture, there we have no mere personification of divine righteousness, but the personality of the Holy and Just One revealing itself; there there can be no reference to human passion; there, in fact, we have divine compassion. The form of sinfulness is just as little an essential and necessary element in wrath as in love. 8. However anthropomorphic the Stamp it may wear, God’s wrath is no less truly a part of His nature, by means of which the absolute antagonism of His spirit and will to sin is expressed from the innermost energy of His holiness. It is not the ebullition of an impure love for unrighteousness, as is the case with the wrath of man, but it is the necessary (unless God chooses to deny Himself) reaction and opposition of His holy love for righteousness. In the operations of divine wrath, therefore, the holy will of God is revealed in its character of righteousness by means of righteous judgment, which recompenses the sinner according to his own works. 9. The continuance of a nation depends not only on the usual material conditions, but on ideal powers of life, which, when despised, show themselves to be powers of death. HINTSEze_7:2 sqq. God’s grace has indeed no end, is an everlasting grace, but its manifestation and our consciousness of it may come to an end, which at the same time announces a perfecting in what is evil.—“What had begun in the ten tribes was completed in the tribe of Judah” (B. B.).—“What is long hidden is not remitted. The longer God delays with punishment, the heavier it is” (W.).—“The end as respects God’s long-suffering; then, in respect of the land, with which it had not yet come to the end; lastly, the completion of the punishments” (Cocc.).—The end: a universal end (not only of Israel, but as of Israel, so of every man and of the whole world); a fearful end (if under the wrath of God according to our abominations); an inevitable end (however safe we seem, however thoughtlessly we think and speak).—“God has his Now (Luke 19:42), which is, of course, hid from our eyes and ruinous, if we have not regarded the Now of our merciful visitation” (Stck.).—“So also in respect of antichristianity, which has spread among the people of the New Testament, its end is fixed, when God will lay upon it all its abominations, and will pour out His vials of wrath” (B. B.).—He that is secure says: Soul, take thine ease; but God says: This night thy soul shall be required of thee (Luke 12:19-20).—What an awakening call for every sinner! The end comes, alike of pleasure and of life.—“If the sinner will not awake, then the punishment must awake” (B. B.). Ezekiel 7:9. “It was not strokes of fate or the like they were to perceive therein, but God’s hand and smiting” (Cocc.).—Every one must know the Lord in the end, if not as one that calls, allures, blesses, then as one that smites, is angry, punishes.—“Let the sinner know that he binds for himself the rod which will smite him” (a L.). Ezekiel 7:11. “Tyrants are God’s scourges” (O.). Ezekiel 7:12 sq. “As for the pious an hour of help is promised, so for the transgressor an hour of destruction strikes” (Stck.).—God’s judgments sometimes remove the distinction arising from prosperity and possession, and make men alike. Ezekiel 7:14. “What avails the trumpet, and of what use all weapons and every preparation, if the Lord departs from a people, from a city, from an army?”—“Courage is also God’s gift, as we see in the case of Gideon, Samson, David, and others.”—“Where God’s terrors are at work, there neither counsel, nor call, nor deed gives help” (Stck.).—“In vain do men blow the trumpet, if that of the Supreme Judge makes itself heard” (Umbr.). Ezekiel 7:15. War, pestilence, famine, these three remain down even to the end, and are bound up with one another.—“The sinner would fain flee or hide himself” (Stck.).—“God can find thee everywhere” (B. B.). Ezekiel 7:16. “Reflect that thou also must one day leave everything, and see to it that thou keep a good conscience” (Stck.).—“So, many kinds of sighs are heard in the world. But the best are the unutterable ones, wherewith God’s Spirit Himself makes intercession for believers, Romans 8:26” (B. B.).—“Late repentance is seldom true repentance” (Stck.). Ezekiel 7:17. “The hands and knees of believers also do indeed sometimes become weary, but they know where to strengthen them” (St.). Ezekiel 7:18. If the inward return is wanting, God knows well how to enforce the outward; and that even as far as to bring about the public confession of the fault, as may be seen, surely, in the case of Judas. Ezekiel 7:19. How can one have such eager desire after what he will at another time cast from him in such cold blood?—“God is the only true and abiding treasure which is to be sought” (Stck.).—“Oh, if one were only betimes to cast it out of his heart, that it might not make him unjust, covetous, and ungodly!” (B. B.).—“Would that this were written on the doors, yea, in the hearts of all the avaricious, and the rich, and those eagerly desirous of riches, that gold and silver will not be able to save in the day of wrath, and in the hour of death, and at the day of judgment! What has been sought after with so great pains, scraped together with much injustice, guarded with the greatest care, that leaves its possessor comfortless and helpless when he most needs help, and leaves him lying on his sick-bed in his pains, and can rescue him neither from the enemy, nor from the sick-bed, nor from death, much less make him blessed” (B. B.). Ezekiel 7:19-20. The danger of riches: in the false estimate of them, in the abuse of them.—The final judgment on riches: how it will take place (by means of the rich themselves, and before God and men); by what means it is incurred (through pride and idolatry).—“How many would have been happy in this world, and blessed in the world to come, if they had not been rich!” Ezekiel 7:20. What adorns is also easily soiled.—What ought to humble man for the most part makes him so much the more proud.—Self-seeking the source of all abuse of earthly blessings, as well as of the neglect and contempt of heavenly blessings.—“This is ingratitude, to misuse such gifts of God for pride, for extravagance, for mere finery, and for idolatry” (H. H.). Ezekiel 7:21. “Our worldly possessions are not ours, but God’s, who can do with them how and what He will.”—“God employs for the carrying out of His judgments heretics and ungodly men, in order that those whom He punishes by this means may be the more pained that they had falsely boasted of the true religion” (St.). Ezekiel 7:22. The face of God the consecration of our life: our free upward look to it, its gracious look on us.—These are the critical turnings in the life of the individual and of whole nations, the turnings of the divine face.—The profanation by the enemy is, alas! always preceded by the profanation on the part of the friends.—God protects Himself against His friends by means of His enemies.—What a sign the profanation of Jerusalem and of the temple for all high-churchism, still so splendid and ostentatious! Ezekiel 7:23. God makes various chains; even that of Paul had been made by Him.—“First transgression is linked to transgression; then comes the chain of the wrath of God; at last come the chains of darkness” (Stck.). Ezekiel 7:24. Pride comes before a fall, and after the fall come the sufferings.—Woe be to us when our sanctuaries are nothing but our sanctuaries! Ezekiel 7:25. “Men often delay so long till death comes, before they trouble themselves about their spiritual peace. Oh, how easily it may come about, that they are snatched away by death before they obtain that peace!” (St.).—The danger of the death-bed.—In order that we may be able to seek it early, God’s salvation is there for us even before our birth. Ezekiel 7:26-27. “On God depends the weal and woe of states” (Stck.).—“Famine as regards the word of God is at such a time the heaviest punishment of all” (Cr.).—“That is the most terrible judgment, when God does not permit the light of His word any longer to shine, and allows us to sink into the darkness of ignorance, because it is a strong comfort, even in the greatest suffering, when the Lord sheds light upon us with His word” (H. H.).—“Therefore David prays: See if I be on any wicked way, Psalms 139.” (Stck.).—In the end, out of all the ways of men, and in accordance with their own desert, God’s truth and righteousness come to light.—“This is life eternal, to know God and Jesus Christ, John 17:3” (Stck.). III. THE OF DIVINE .—Ch. 8–241. The Vision (Ch. 8–11)1. The Abominations in the Temple (Ch. 8)1And it came to pass in the sixth year, in the sixth [month], on the fifth of the month—I was in my house, and the elders of Judah were before me, and there 2fell upon me the hand of the Lord Jehovah. And I saw, and lo a likeness as the appearance of fire: from the appearance of His loins and downwards, fire; and from His loins and upwards, as the appearance of brightness, as the look of the 3brightness of gold. And He stretched out the form of a hand, and took hold of me by the front hair of my head, and the Spirit lifted me up between the earth and the heaven, and brought me to Jerusalem in visions of God, to the opening of the door of the inner [court] that points toward the north, where is the seat of the [idol-] image of jealousy, which provoketh to jealousy. 4And, behold, there the 5glory of the God of Israel, like the vision which I saw in the valley. And He said unto me: Son of man, lift up now thine eyes toward the north. And I lifted up mine eyes toward the north, and behold on the north at [northward of] the gate of 6the altar that [idol-] image of jealousy at the entrance. And He said unto me: Son of man, seest thou what they are doing? great abominations that the house of Israel doeth here, in order to be far from My sanctuary! And yet again shalt thou see great abominations. 7And He brought me to the opening of the court, 8and I saw, and behold a hole in the wall. And He said unto me: Son of man, break now through the wall. And I broke through the wall, and behold an opening. 9And He said unto me: Come and see the wicked abominations that they 10are doing here. And I came and saw; and behold every (every kind of) form of creeping things and beasts, abomination, and of all the (all kinds of the) dung-gods of the house of Israel, portrayed (painted) upon the wall round and round. 11And there stood before them seventy men of the elders of the house of Israel, and Jaazaniah the son of Shaphan standing in their midst, and every one his censer 12in his hand, and vapour of the cloud of the incense rising up. And He said unto me: Hast thou seen, son of man, what the elders of the house of Israel are doing in the dark, each one in his chambers of imagery? for they say, Jehovah 13seeth us not; Jehovah hath forsaken the land. And He said unto me: Yet again 14shalt thou see great abominations that they are doing. And He brought me to the opening of the gate of the house of Jehovah which was toward the north; 15and, behold, there sat the women weeping for Tammuz. And He said unto me: Hast thou seen, son of man? Yet again shalt thou see abominations greater than these. 16And He brought me to the court of the house of Jehovah, the inner one, and, behold, at the opening of the temple of Jehovah between the porch and the altar about five-and-twenty men, their backs to the temple of Jehovah and their faces toward the east, and they bowing themselves toward the east 17before the sun. And He said unto me: Hast thou seen, son of man? Was it [viz. Ezekiel 8:16] a lighter thing for the house of Judah than to do the abominations which they [Ezekiel 8:5-15] have done here? for they filled the land with violence, and returned to provoke Me to anger, and [there], lo, they stretch out the vine-branch 18to their nose. And [but] I also will deal in fury; Mine eye shall not spare, neither will I show pity; and if they cry in Mine ears with loud voice, then I will not hear. Ezekiel 8:1. Sept.: ... ἐντπεμπτωμηνι— Ezekiel 8:2. Sept. and Arab. read: αξψΰδΞΰιω.—Anoth. read.: εμξθδαξψΰδΰω. Ezekiel 8:3. ... τουζηλουςτουκτωμεςου (Sept. and Arab. from χπδ).—Anoth. read.: αξψΰϊ, in visione. Sept, Vulg., Syr., Chald., Ar. Ezekiel 8:6. ... κ. ἐτιὀψηἁμαρτιαςμειζονας. Ezekiel 8:9. ... ὡδεσημερον. Ezekiel 8:12. ... ποιουσιὡδε, ἑκαστος— Ezekiel 8:14. Vulg.: plangentes Adonidem. Ezekiel 8:16. Anoth. read.: ξωϊηειν. Ezekiel 8:17. ... μημικρατωοἰκω 'Ιουδατουποιεινταςἀςομιαςἁςπεποιηκασινὡδε, διοτιἐπλησαν... ; κ. ἰδου... ἰκτεινουσιντ. κλημαὡςμυκτηριζοντες. REMARKSOf the abominations which come to be represented in this vision of our prophet there are four: (1) after an introduction (Ezekiel 8:1-4), the image of jealousy, Ezekiel 8:5-6; (2) the idolatry in the secret place of the chambers of imagery, Ezekiel 8:7-13; (3) the mourning for Tammuz, Ezekiel 8:14-15; (4) the worship of the sun, with a closing threatening of God, Ezekiel 8:16-18. The common feature is the localizing of these abominations at the temple. That in this way a really existing state of things connected with the temple (Ewald) is meant to be reproduced—according to Hδv. a feast of Adonis, which had been held in the 4th month (!) at Jerusalem in the temple—is just as little to be granted as it is to be denied that this or that allusion to the real state of matters may find a place here (2 Chronicles 36:14). Disobedience toward Jehovah, in common with all Israel’s idolatry, could not, at all events, find a more suitable symbolical expression. For sin is a profanation of the Holy One of Israel, and therefore since He has in the temple His palace in the midst of Israel, so much the more is it a profanation of this dwelling of Jehovah, if Israel’s sin is idolatry, since the only place of worship for Israel was to be that connected with the worship of Jehovah in His temple-palace. Hengst. lays emphasis on the circumstance that the temple is “the ideal dwelling-place of the people” (Leviticus 16:16), and thus “every sin polluted the sanctuary.” “So, then, here also all that was present in the land of an idolatrous character is united in a single comprehensive picture, and placed in the temple, to cry thence to God and call forth His vengeance.” Neteler admits also “four idolatrous symbols” as “a figurative delineation of the yet much more dangerous, more subtle idolatry: the first picture a representation of pride, from which the passions spring, which are reflected in the animal forms of the second picture.” “As pride lays waste the soul, so sensuality lays waste the body—represented by the mourning of the women for Tammuz; and this lordship of nature over the spirit is completed in materialism, which holds lifeless matter to be the Absolute, and worships it accordingly.” Hengst. thinks “not so much of idolatry springing from aberration of the religious instinct, as rather of a homage which was paid to the world-powers, for the purpose of attaining to safety through their help without God, nay, even against God.” At all events it corresponds to the symbolical character of the whole, to recognise as symbolized in the number four the realm of heathenism as that of the natural world outside the kingdom of God. (Klief.: “that Israel has brought together its religious rites from all parts of the world, and spread them throughout the whole land.”) The connection of our chapter with the two discourses of rebuke, in Ezekiel 6, 7, is clear, especially from the comparison with Ezekiel 7:20 sqq. Additional Note on Ch. 8[A new stage of the prophetic agency of Ezekiel, and of his spirit-stirring communications to the captives on the banks of the Chebar, opens with this chapter, and proceeds onwards in an uninterrupted strain to the end of the eleventh. These four chapters form one discourse (as the preceding portion had also done, from Ezekiel 3:12 to the close of Ezekiel 7), and a discourse somewhat more specific in its character and bearing, than the revelations previously made. The vision of the siege, and of the iniquity-bearing, described in Ezekiel 4, had respect to the covenant-people generally—including, indeed, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, yet so as also to comprehend the scattered portions of Judah and Israel. This, too, was the case with the vision of the shaven hair, and its foreshadowing desolations, contained in ch, 5–7. The burden there delivered was an utterance of divine judgments against the whole covenant-people on account of sin; because, having been planted as the witnesses and heralds of God’s truth in the midst of the nations, they had themselves fallen before the heathen corruptions, which it was their special calling to have resisted to the uttermost. Therefore, in just retribution for the betrayal of God’s cause into the enemies’ hands, the heathen were become His instruments of vengeance, to inflict on the whole house of Israel the various forms of a severe and prolonged chastisement. But now, in the section of prophecy which commences with Ezekiel 8, the people of Jerusalem, and the small remnant of Judah, who, under Zedekiah, continued to hold a flickering existence in Canaan, form the immediate object of the prophet’s message, not only as apart from the Babylonish exiles, but even as standing in a kind of contrast to them. And it is of essential moment to a proper understanding of the purport of the vision that we rightly apprehend and estimate the circumstances which led to so partial and specific a direction in the message now delivered.—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 81, 82.—W. F.] Ezekiel 8:1-4. The Introduction. The date in Ezekiel 8:1 : in the sixth year, on the fifth day of the sixth month. (August—September.) The year is that after the captivity of King Jehoiachin; comp. Ezekiel 1:2. (“By means of such a reckoning He humbles the Jews,” Calv.) The year of Israel (Winer, Realw. i. 530 sq.) is reckoned at 354⅓ ? days, each of the twelve months at 29–30 days. From Ezekiel 1:1 sqq. to Ezekiel 8:1 there are 14 months = 413 days, as a medium between 406 and 420. But we need according to Ezekiel 4, 390 plus 40 days, to which, according to Ezekiel 3:15, seven days more are to be added, thus in all 437 days. As it is inconceivable (so also Hitz.) that with a date so precise Ezekiel should have been guilty of an inaccuracy so easily avoided, a fourfold solution is possible. (1) Either the symbolical actions in Ezekiel 4, 5 are subjective, or a mere rhetorical turn (Hδv., Hengst., Hitz., Keil): in this case every difficulty disappears. (2) Or we may include the 40 days for Judah in the 390 (comp. on Ezekiel 4:6; Ezekiel 4:9), and get in this way the necessary days. (3) Or the fifth year of Jehoiachin was an intercalary year of 13 months, as such usually occurred every 3 years, sometimes also even with the 2d year (J. D. Mich.); and then there are reckoned for it (Relandi, Ant. Sacr. 4. § 2.) 381–385 days plus 2 months (58–60 days), in all, 439–445 days. (4) Or, lastly, our vision falls into the 40 days for Judah (comp. on Ezekiel 4:12), as Kliefoth’s view is, against which Keil’s objections have no force. And not only the contents, but also the circumstances accord there-with. First of all the place: in my house; comp. on Ezekiel 3:24. ιεωׁ ?α does not necessarily indicate the posture as one of sitting, in contrast with lying in Ezekiel 4, since Χωα means radically: to be fixed somewhere (hence: to dwell, to tarry, to remain) and somehow; hence: to sit, also: to lie, as well as: to stand (ξεωα, Ezekiel 8:3). Then, farther, the representatives of the parties addressed, to whom the prophetic vision is directed (Ezekiel 8:17), correspond: the elders of Judah, of the captivity. That it took place on the Sabbath, that they had come to hear a sermon, is not said. Comp. rather on Ezekiel 3:24. According to Ewald, they were seeking comfort and advice, especially on account of the bitter contempt of the poor exiles on the part of the proud, intoxicated capital. Additional Note on Ch. 8[No express reason is assigned for their sitting there, though we can have little doubt that it was for the purpose of receiving from his lips some communication of the divine will. The Lord also was present, to impart suitable aid to His servant; but, lo! instead of prompting him to address his speech directly to those before him, the Spirit carried him away in the visions of God to the temple at Jerusalem, that he might obtain an insight into the state of corruption prevalent there, and might learn the mind of God respecting it. The message delivered to the elders who sat around him consisted mainly in the report of what he witnessed and heard in those divine visions; and it falls into two parts,—the account given of the reigning abominations contained in Ezekiel 8, and the dealings of judgment and of mercy which were to be pursued toward the respective parties in Israel, as unfolded in the three succeeding chapters. Now, what should have led the prophet to throw his message into such a form as this, but that some connection existed between the exiles of Chebar and the remnant in Jerusalem, which made the report of what more immediately belonged to the one a seasonable and instructive communication to the other? We formerly had occasion to notice, that among the exiled portion there were some who still looked hopefully toward Jerusalem, and, so far from believing things there to be on the verge of ruin, were persuaded that ere long the way would be opened up for their own return thither in peace and comfort. Among those also who were still resident in Jerusalem and its neighbourhood, it appears, there were some who not only looked upon themselves as secure in their position, but eyed their exiled brethren with a kind of haughty indifference or contempt, as if these had no longer anything in common with them! That it was this latter state of feeling which more immediately led to the present interview between the elders and the prophet, and the revelations which ensued, we may not doubtfully gather from the allusion made to it near the close of the vision (Ezekiel 11:15)—where the inhabitants of Jerusalem are represented as saying to the exiles, “Get you far (rather, Be ye far, continue in your state of separation and distance) from the Lord; unto us is this land given in possession.” As much as to say, “It may well befit you to be entertaining thoughts of evil and dark forebodings of the future; your outcast condition cuts you off from any proper interest in God, and renders such sad anticipations natural and just. Abide as you are—but as for us, we dwell near to God, and by His good hand upon us have the city and land of our fathers in sure possession. It is not improbable that this taunting declaration of their own fancied superiority and assured feeling of safety had been called forth by the tidings reaching Jerusalem of the awful judgments announced in Ezekiel’s earlier predictions; as, on the other hand, the express and pointed reference made here to that declaration leaves little room to doubt that the rumour of it had been heard on the banks of the Chebar, and had led the elders of Judah to present themselves in the house of the prophet. For, in their unhappy circumstances, the knowledge of such thoughts and feelings being entertained toward them at Jerusalem must have exercised a most depressing influence on their minds, and could not but seem an adequate occasion for their endeavouring to ascertain the mind of the Lord as between them and their countrymen in Judea.—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 82–84.—W. F.] According to Hengst., the “rousing political intelligence” had arrived, that Elam and Media have joined the coalition! As to the rest, comp. on Ezekiel 1:3; Ezekiel 3:22; Ezekiel 3:14. Klief.: “the hand, etc., because, again, the matter in hand was not revelation in word, but action.” Ezekiel 8:2. The vision, going back and attaching itself to what goes before, begins, like Ezekiel 1, 3, with a theophany. Comp. on Ezekiel 1:4-5. ΰω, from Ezekiel 1 onwards, characteristic, hence also the first impression which Ezekiel receives; comp. Ezekiel 1:27. The Sept. read, or gave as an explanation, ΰιω, of course from the mention of the loins, etc. It looked for the most part like (αξψΰδ) fire, yet there was not wanting upwards ζδψ, the brighter splendour (Daniel 12:3). (Ezekiel 9:4.) As to the rest, comp. on Ezekiel 1:4; Ezekiel 1:27.—δηωξμδ (Ewald, Gram. § 173, h, 1). Ezekiel 8:3. From the fire-picture there is stretched the ϊαπιϊ (from απδ, to build, to form) of a hand. As always, the figurative expression emphasized as contrasted with the spirituality of God. (Junius: the hand is the Spirit, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; comp. Matthew 12:28 with Luke 11:20.) Hence not in a corporeal sense (therefore ψεη, not “wind” [Klief., Kl.]; comp. on Ezekiel 3:12); Ezekiel 11:24; as also αξψΰεϊΰμδιν, comp. on Ezekiel 1:1. Clarius notices the difference between this passage and Ezekiel 40:1 sqq. Thus far the manner of the occurrence, now the direction taken: in general to Jerusalem, in particular to the spot where the gate of the inner court of the temple (the court of the priests, for which the “priest” Ezekiel uses merely δτπιξιϊ, viz. ηφψ, Ezekiel 8:7; Ezekiel 8:16; the fem. gen. would agree neither with τϊη nor with ωςψ, whereas ηφψ is com. gen.) opened (τϊη), looking toward the north. This court of the priests was (Jeremiah 36:10) on a higher level than the great court or the court of the people. The partition-wall between the two was (in order to allow of the people looking on) of so little consequence, that in 2 Chronicles 4:9 there is no mention of the gates in it. The opening of the gate is not toward the court of the people, so that the position of the spectator, as was also suitable for the priest, is taken from the inner court. φτεπδ (comp. on Ezekiel 1:4), in this direction, hence northward we are to understand ΰωψΞων. Hengst.: “from the north the punishment was to come; this position was an actual summons to the north to send forth its avenging hosts; possibly also a reference to the sin already committed, the political adulteries of Jerusalem with the northern power Babylon, against which they alternately conspired and then again sought to gain it over, as Zedekiah, in the same year in which he had treated with Edom, Moab, etc., against Babylon, suddenly made off again to Babylon, Jeremiah 51:59.” Or the expression northwards points out the principal tendency of Jewish idolatry (Hosea 2:18 [16]), viz. towards Bel (Baal) of the Babylonians, who were, of course, in the north, or properly in the north-east. The image of jealousy, which, perhaps, on this very account is mentioned just here (comp. Ezekiel 8:5), is, on the one hand, particularized by means of νξμ (something covered over, an idol-image of that description, Deuteronomy 4:16), and, on the other hand, explained more generally by means of δξχπδ. The latter expression stands for δַ ?ξַּ ?χְ ?πִ ?ιΰ (from χπΰ), as is usually understood. Lightfoot thought of an image of Moloch. In the reign of Manasseh (2 Kings 21:7) we meet with the image of Astarte, which Ewald conjectures here, from the circumstance that love is allied to jealousy. Although with an allusion to an existing state of things (2 Chronicles 36:14), yet, in accordance with the symbolic character of the whole vision, resting much more on the basis of Deu 32:16; Deuteronomy 32:21, Exodus 20:5 (comp. Ezekiel 5:13; Ezekiel 16:38; Ezekiel 23:25), and agreeably to the all-pervading representation of the relation of Jehovah and Israel, we may perhaps with Hengst. (Warburton) have to think of an “ideal concentration of all idolatrous practices,” and these as they were in vogue, in the first place, among the people in general; hence the image in the court of the people. With this also corresponds admirably in Ezekiel 8:4 the so characteristic antithesis of the glory, etc. Comp. Ezekiel 3:22-23; Ezekiel 1:4, as well as in our chapter Ezekiel 8:2; Ezekiel 8:5; farther, Ezekiel 1:28; Ezekiel 9:3; Ezekiel 43:3. ων, as before ΰωψΞων. The God of Israel He is called, in contrast with “the gods of the nations of the earth, the work of men’s hands,” 2 Chronicles 32:19. Ezekiel 8:5-6. The Image of JealousyIn addition to the foregoing virtual description of the image, we have the description in so many words in Ezekiel 8:5; but so expressive is the thing of itself, that Jehovah needs only to summon the prophet to look. The direction repeatedly given is too plain to admit of there being any obscurity with respect to the gate of the altar. Because of this being named, the expression ξִ ?Χμְ ?Χ is used. For, coming from the north, as the “glory” (Ezekiel 8:4) is to be supposed to do (Ezekiel 1:4), this gate led into the court of the priests, where Ezekiel has taken up his position (Ezekiel 8:3), and where the brazen altar of burnt-offering was, in reference to which (Ezekiel 9:2) the name “gate of the altar” (perhaps with an allusion to 2 Kings 16:14) is explained; wherewith, at the same time, an antithesis of the image of jealousy might again be hinted at. Others (e.g. Kimchi) have thought of the altar of the image (2 Kings 21:4-5). At the entrance of the gate, thus in the outer court. Ezekiel 8:6. ξδν, an emphatic contraction in running interrogatory speech: ξָ ?δΞδֵ ?ν (Qeri), sufficiently explained by what immediately follows (the house of Israel, etc.), so that there is no necessity for maintaining that some were actually engaged in worship.—Great abominations, Ezekiel 5:11; Ezekiel 6:9, is the motto, the ever-recurring refrain of the chapter, Ezekiel 8:9; Ezekiel 8:13; Ezekiel 8:15; Ezekiel 8:17.—μψηχδ, Ewald, Hδv., like most of the ancients, supply the Speaker Jehovah: “in order that I may go far off from My sanctuary,” may turn away from disgust (Ezekiel 11:23). Hengst.: “that they (those formerly mentioned) may be removed, as unworthy of dwelling with the Lord, may be driven out, as Adam once was from Paradise.” Hitzig: “what ought to be far away.” As ψηχ means “to be far off,” why not render it by the bare infinitive: merely in order to be far off from My sanctuary? The construction with ξֵ ?ςַ ?μ (Ezekiel 11:15; Jeremiah 2:5) makes them appear as former members of the family, who in going away elevate themselves above Him who is enthroned in the sanctuary. Ezekiel 8:7-13. The Idolatry in the Secrecy of the Chambers of ImageryAlthough at ϊϊςΧπγΧ in the preceding verse we cannot exactly carry out the comparison by supplying a ξֵ ?ΰֵ ?μֵּ ?δ (as in Ezekiel 8:15), yet there lies in the εςεγϊωεαϊψΧ the preparation for, the intention, the beginning of a climax in the thought. In the preceding section: the house of Israel, in this: its elders; this would be a climax. Comp., however, on Ezekiel 8:11. Here: in secret, there: openly; this, at all events, is no climax. Ezekiel 8:7. Where the court opens, the inner one into the outer, for ΰμΞτϊηδηφψ is manifestly the same as ΰμΞτϊηωςψδτπιξιϊΧ in Ezekiel 8:3; thus neither the eastern principal door (Lightf., Ewald, Hengst.) of the court of the priests, nor the northern exit of the court of the people (Hδv., Hitz., Klief., Kl.), in which case mention is made by some holding the latter view of porches with cells (2 Kings 23:11; 1 Chronicles 28:12; Jeremiah 35:4). In favour of the former view, the absence of any farther definition cannot be used as an argument; for while, after enough had been said in Ezekiel 8:3; Ezekiel 8:5, there was no need of any farther definition for the well-known τϊη, there would certainly have been need of it, if all at once the intention was to speak of the eastern door, as is also expressly done in Ezekiel 10:19; Ezekiel 11:1. But as regards the other view, the and He brought me is no support, as the prophet certainly, who is in the inner court, is brought also farther (of course in vision) when he now gets to see the hole (Neteler translates: “a hole for one”) in the wall, viz. the gate portion of the wall which divided the courts. As he is to go still farther, he is commanded in Ezekiel 8:8 to break through, to enlarge the hole which shows him the way (is not “as it were a model,” Hengst.), so that his own person may get through. When this has been done, an opening shows itself, a door or window, or what opens up to him the glimpse which follows. When Ezekiel 8:9—he has approached at the divine summons, idolatry once more reveals itself, and that the so peculiar animal-worship of the Egyptians, a fact which Klief. disputes without cause. According to him, the hole was in the wall of the outer court, and he makes the prophet break through and discover the pictures, etc., on the outside. In that case what was secret about it, as it is certainly represented to be? Hitzig maintains that the worship was in the interior of the gate-building, which contained chambers, but Ezekiel 40:36 is no proof for this temple. The entrance, Hitzig supposes, was built up during Josiah’s reformation in worship. Ezekiel 8:10. Comp. Genesis 1:24; Genesis 9:3; Deuteronomy 4:17-18; Romans 1:23. ωχυ (Ezekiel 5:11) is construed by Ewald, Hitz., Hengst. in apposition with εαδξδ: “beasts of abomination,” “abominable beasts,” since to them was paid the honour due to the Creator—according to Hitz., e.g. dogs, cats, etc.; Kl. takes it as in apposition with ψξω also (according to Hitzig, beetles especially), inasmuch as the representation of both was made for the purpose of paying religious honours to the pictures. Best of all Bunsen: “every form of abominable creeping things and beasts.” What follows might stand by way of explanation: and, in fact, of all, etc., or all idols of this sort are meant, as also birds, etc. (Hitz.: calves [Apis and Mnevis] and he-goats.) Klief., Kl. maintain that in this way all other possible varieties of idol-worship which had spread in Israel are subjoined co-ordinately with πμϊαΧ. But the delineation or painting (ξηχδ, neut. sing.) of all upon the wall of the apartment into which Ezekiel looks through the opening is so characteristically Egyptian, that for one who is unprejudiced anything else is inconceivable. Ezekiel 23:14 is not to be brought into comparison as against this view. As to the βμΧ, so common with our prophet, see on Ezekiel 6:4; in Leviticus 26:30 first, in Deuteronomy 29:17 expressly of the idols of Egypt. The seventy in Ezekiel 8:11, according to Ewald, “a round number to express the great strength of the Egyptian party among the nobles, which according to Jeremiah then existed”; according to others: the Great Sanhedrim, an institution, however, which first arose after the exile. According to our text, they figure either as a representation of the collective body of the elders, a committee (council of elders) drawn from (ξ) these official persons, or they represent the house of Israel, are a representation of the people. [By mentioning precisely this number of elders, the prophet sets before us a representation of the whole people,—an ideal representation, and of such a kind as to indicate the strong contrast that existed between former and present times—the original seventy (Exodus 24) being employed in immediate connection with God’s glory and covenant, while these here were engaged in an act which bespoke the dishonouring of God’s name, and the virtual dissolution of His covenant.—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel.—W. F.] The number 70 is chosen for symbolical reasons, 10 times 7 (Bδhr, Mos. Kult. 2. p. 660) resting on Exodus 24, Numbers 11, in reference to the covenant between God and Israel. In favour of the symbolical character of this number there is also the circumstance that Jaazaniah, the 71st, is not counted among them. The individual named as son of Shaphan is a different person from ιΰζπιδε in Ezekiel 11:1. The name Shaphan we read also in 2 Kings 22; Jeremiah 29, 36, 39. He appears to have had a good reputation, so that for the symbolical meaning by the mention of him the contrast in conduct on the part of his son here might be rendered the more emphatic. Similarly Bunsen, Hengst.: “who probably filled the same post as his father (as chancellor), was perhaps the soul of the negotiations with Egypt; partly on this account, partly because of his ominous name: the Lord hears, which involved the judgment on this procedure, introduced as a historical personality into this ideal company.” Is the expression: standing in their midst, meant to indicate an official superiority as president, or his social consequence among them, or the circumstance that even the son of such a father, with whose name the memory of the pious destroyer of idolatry, Josiah, was united, could be found in the midst of such a company (Psalms 1:1)? μτπιδν, i.e. the idol-pictures on the wall round about. ςϊψ, according to Hengst.: “the prayer of the cloud of incense, because it was an embodied prayer, Psalms 141:2; Revelation 5:8; Revelation 8:3-4.” “They say by the offering of incense before those miserable figures: Deliver me, for thou art my god (Isaiah 44:17).” The Hebrew word means certainly: to press on any one with requests, but also: to press together so that there is a large quantity, to heap up, so that that which swells up, the vapour, may be indicated here. So richly that there was a cloud; comp. besides, Leviticus 16:13. After Ezekiel has seen it, the interpretation is given him in Ezekiel 8:12. In the dark, every one in his chambers of imagery, contains everything necessary for understanding it. First of all, the darkness may certainly be regarded as a symbol of the darkened knowledge of God, but means still more that the procedure of the nobles of the people shuns the light, has its being in secret. In this way we have a complete explanation of the hole in the gate portion of the wall, in the wall of the court (Ezekiel 8:7), of the clandestine manner in which the prophet gets access (Ezekiel 8:8), etc. (“They had in Egypt, in the rocks on the banks of the Nile, deep underground passages, sometimes labyrinths, which led to underground vaults, whose walls were covered over and over with hieroglyphs, and, in fact, the entrance to them is, just as here, only a hole, at which no one imagines there is anything of consequence behind,” etc.—J. D. Mich.) That every one does so proves the representative character of the 71 in Ezekiel 8:11. ηγψ is that which is shut up, the interior of a tent, of a house; hence, a chamber. The chambers of imagery have idolatrous pictures painted on the walls. As it is represented (Ezekiel 8:9-10) in the wall of the court between the higher and the lower court, so it is done within the walls of their own dwellings by the elders of the people, who approached the priests in virtue of their official character. The domestic heathenism, as distinguished from the public in Ezekiel 8:5-6. Hengst. makes the direct participation in Egyptian idolatry step into the background. (“The people relied at that time on the help of the Egyptians, and looked to them as their saviours.”—Cocc.) Ewald maintains that Egyptian animal-worship was at the time really practised in deeply concealed apartments of the temple area, inasmuch as every idolater of that sort offered incense as his own priest, and prayed in a separate apartment (and hence so many of them are found in Egypt), comp. Amm. Marc. Ezekiel 17:7, Ezekiel 22:15. He points in proof of this to the Egyptian vassalage of King Jehoiachim. The pressure of the Chaldean party at the time upon the Egyptian explains, according to him, the expression, repeated in Ezekiel 9:9, of their deep despair of the affairs of the fatherland. Hengst. speaks in a predominantly political sense of the Egyptian fancies wherewith they occupied themselves in their inner man; the revolt from Babylon, undertaken in concert with Egypt, was still, he alleges, “a public secret.” For they say: ΰιοιΧ. This is their so-called right to do it, not meant as an excuse, perhaps. Jehovah shall have the blame. That He seeth not can hardly imply (Isaiah 29:15) a dogmatic denial of His omniscient (Psalms 139; Psalms 94:7) Godhead (Psalms 14:1), just as little as His having forsaken the land is meant to deny in so many words His omnipresent omnipotence; but their speech is practical ungodliness: when He has turned away His eye and presence from us and from the land, when we are no longer anything to Him, then nothing is left for us but to look out for the gods of other nations and lands, that they may dwell with us. Ezekiel 8:13. Comp. Ezekiel 8:6. Ezekiel 8:14-15. The Mourning for TammuzIn Ezekiel 8:7 Ezekiel was between the inner and outer court; in Ezekiel 8:14 he is brought to the opening of the gate of the house of Jehovah. Comp. to the opening of the gate of the house of Jehovah which is toward the north with Ezekiel 8:3 : to the opening of the gate of the inner [court] that looketh toward the north; thus the gate of the house and the gate of the inner [court] correspond with each other, the one as applying to the whole, the other as referring only to a part of the same. The house of Jehovah is the whole of the temple, consequently the opening of the gate of it can hardly be anything else than the place where the outer court of the temple opens to the outside altogether. The northerly direction of the gate also corresponds best with the movement of the prophet hitherto. There, then, are the women, viz. those who are weeping for Tammuz, for this reason sitting on the ground, as was the custom of mourners (Matthew 27:61). [According to Hitzig: the female population represented in the individuals, who are exactly at the place assigned to the women.] First, the people in general; then, the elders of the people; now, the female sex. This is like a climax. The publicity also of the proceedings of the women (as distinguished from the elders) makes the occurrence in so far parallel with the first in Ezekiel 8:5-6. Meier: the name probably signifies: possessor of power, mighty one, ruler; Tammuz = dominus, properly: tamer, lord. ιδεδ and ϊξεζ, a contrast! According to Hδv., a contraction from ϊַּ ?ξְ ?ζεּ ?ζ (ξζζ=ξνν to melt away), or from ϊַּ ?πְ ?ξεּ ?ζ (πָ ?τζ), of persons or things in reference to the “disappearance” (dying, the ἀφανισμός in contrast with the εὕρεσις) of the Greek “Adonis,” who (ΰָ ?γεֹ ?ο, i.e. “lord” with the Ph�nicians) is the Syrian Tammuz (Θαμμούζ. Θαμμούς). According to the fable, the beautiful favourite of Venus, killed by a boar in the chase, but afterwards rising to life again, in whose honour the fourth month (June—July) was called “Tammuz.” At his feast the kinnor (a sort of lyre) was played; hence Cinyras, the father of Adonis, just as Myrrha, from the incense (ξֹ ?ψ) usual thereat, was his mother among the Greeks. It was a funeral-feast in the East, for it celebrated the death of the beautiful life of nature about the time of the greatest summer-heat (ϊχετϊϊξεζ). Byblos in Syria, where the swollen waters of the river Adonis assumed a red colour about this time, when the snow melted on Lebanon, was the principal seat of the god. (Comp. Hδv. against Movers, who makes the oriental celebration of the festival approach nearly to the Greek, in autumn. But comp. also Hitz. on the passage, and Winer, ii. 601 sqq.; Herzog, Realencycl. xv. 667 sqq.) According to Preller (Griech. Mythol. 1. p. 219), the disappearance of Adonis was at first expressed allegorically (ἀφανισμός), after which they sought him (ζήτησις), until at length they found him (εὕρεσις), and now bewailed him as dead, by means of the exhibition of his picture, with gloomy elegies and the usages of a funeral. The solemnity ended with the cry: Adonis lives and has risen; hence with the comfort of his return. Pain for the lost beauty of the year, dread of winter, the ray of hope connected with spring. Sappho already sang of the death of Adonis and of the lamentation for him. Bunsen: “seven days long the women gave themselves up to their lamentations, and were obliged to shave their hair or to sacrifice their chastity” (J. D. Mich.). Hδvernick, as no trace of the worship of Adonis can be found in earlier times among the Hebrews, brings forward the view: that under Josiah’s successors such idolatrous worship obtained a footing, especially through Zedekiah’s political alliance with the Ph�nicians against Babylon; that the seductive charm of this worship, which is attested by its wide diffusion, is to be taken into account; and that the gloomy direction of the popular consciousness at the time (Ezekiel 8:12, Ezekiel 9:9) was in sympathy with nature’s mournful mood. “The Adonis myth was thus a picture of the history of the people, as the natural consciousness arranged it for itself and arbitrarily interpreted it (Ezekiel 11:2-3).” Hengst. lays emphasis on the northern origin (between Tripolis and Berytus) of the worship, the characteristic wailing women, and finds the real import in the seeking of political aid among the Ph�nicians. (Others have thought of a kindred Egyptian worship. Hitzig makes the worship of Adonis come from Egypt; Adonis = Osiris.) Ezekiel 8:15. Comp. Ezekiel 8:12-13. The climax, up till now merely hinted at, is plainly expressed with respect to what follows. Ezekiel 8:6; Ezekiel 8:13 keep what goes before in a co-ordinate relation. Ezekiel 8:16-18. The Sun-Worship (Ezekiel 8:16-17); the Closing Threatening of God (Ezekiel 8:18) Now comes in conclusion the culminating point of the abominations, introduced by the locality, viz. the court of the priests. It takes place in the inner part of Jehovah’s house,—thereby placed in contrast with the publicity going before, and parallel with the actings of the elders in Ezekiel 8:7 sqq.,—and in fact (εδπδ) where the temple (the holy place) opens into the inner court, indicated still more minutely because of the significance of the locality. The porch, 1 Kings 6:3. The altar, the brazen altar of burnt-offering. Comp. Joe 2:17. (Matthew 23:35; 2 Chronicles 24:20-21.) Accordingly there can be no doubt that the persons, the 25 men,—as most expositors along with Lightfoot believe, the presidents of the 24 orders of priests (1 Chronicles 24.) with the high priest at their head,—represent the priesthood. ΄αְּ “asserts the fact expressly, but only in a subjective way” (Hitz.), as what appeared to be the case, the prophet, as it were, not trusting his own eyes. In this way the abomination to be described is greater than what has hitherto been related of the kind. But then, farther, the description of the posture assumed (comp. 1 Kings 7:25; 1 Kings 14:9; 2 Chronicles 29:6; the antithesis of their backs and their faces, the contrast of ΰμΞηιλμιΧ with χγξδ, “toward sunrise”) sets forth what is abominable in the highest degree. The sanctuary of the Eternal is a thing going down behind them; they turn to the new light. For ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊַּ ?ηְַ ?εִ ?ιϊֶ ?ν, which is probably an error in transcription, almost all read ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊַ ?ηְַ ?εִ ?ιν (partic. from ωηδ, Ges. Gram. § 74, 18), as an abbreviation of ΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?ν, “ye,” could not tally with δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ. According to Hδv. an ironical alteration of the usual form, with an allusion to ωָׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ in the Hiphil (to destroy, to do evil). Hengst.: an anomalous form, just as the abnormal certainly cannot surprise us in Ezekiel; the form a quid pro quo, like the conduct indicated by it; by inserting ϊ, the prophet gives a criticism after the manner of a quotation from Exodus 24:1; Deuteronomy 11:16; as much as to say: they worship, whereas it is said in the law of God: Ye shall not worship. If Tammuz is the sun-god, then an easy transition from what goes before is accomplished, without our being obliged here also on that account to look with favour on Hδvernick’s worship of Adonis. It is the primitive Sab�ism; comp. Deuteronomy 4:19; Deuteronomy 17:3. (2 Kings 23:5; 2 Kings 23:11.) Ewald: sun-worship in accordance with Zoroastrian superstition (Job 31:26). Hengst. takes the 25 as princes of the people (Ezekiel 11:1), an ideal representation of the ruling class,—2 from each of the 12 tribes, besides a president (!). Because of the absence of the definite basis in the Mosaic books, which in contradistinction the LXX in Ezekiel 8:11 had, αְּ stands here, “nearly,” “about” (!). The gradation in Ezekiel 8:15 points to the sin, at present just in full bloom (?). The project of a league with Medo-Persia (already mentioned in Isaiah as the destroyer of the Chaldean universal monarchy, Ezekiel 13:17; Ezekiel 21:2) had perhaps called forth the inquiry of the elders in Ezekiel 8:1, especially as the Diaspora was the appropriate instrument for such a coalition, etc. Ezekiel 8:17 : Ezekiel 8:15; Ezekiel 8:12; Ezekiel 8:6. Hitherto the question was followed by something else of a different kind, i.e. of a worse kind. This time a new question winds up: was it a light thing (a small thing—Niph. of χμμ, comp. 1 Kings 16:31) for Judah more than (ξςֲ ?ωׂ ?Χ) = was that which thou hast seen a lighter (smaller) thing than the committing of the abominations? i.e. embracing in one Ezekiel 8:5-15. A negative answer is supposed, since, according to Ezekiel 8:15, what is seen in Ezekiel 8:16 is to be the culminating point of all, more burdensome than all else. And as in Ezekiel 8:12 a αִּ ?ι introduced the alleged justification (in a parallel case) of the elders of the people in their acting by God’s mode of procedure, so God furnishes the reason (αִּ ?ι) of the negative answer expected to His question, so that Judah can have nothing more heinous to be put in the opposite scale from what they have done: for they, etc.; comp. Ezekiel 7:23. (It looks quite like a parallel to the “for they,” etc. of Ezekiel 8:12.) And instead of turning to the Eternal, they have returned merely for the purpose of provoking Him to anger. The thought taken in connection with Ezekiel 8:12 would accordingly be: the land of which they say that Jehovah has forsaken it, they have filled with violence, so that there remained no room in it for the Holy One; but their acting in the temple shows (a climax) that, as regards the Eternal, they are seeking not the expiation for their guilt, but His wrath. He seeth not, say they,—and, lo, they, etc. (the highest point of the climax), so that ωμηινΰϊΧ is either to be understood of a specially provoking gesture in idolatrous worship, or must be interpreted from the context as a proverbial mode of speaking. [Ewald translates: “is it too small a thing for the house of Judah to practise the abominations which they practised here, that they filled the land with injustice and exasperated Me repeatedly, and that now they even put the twig to their nose?” having in view the twig of the sacred tree held before the mouth during prayer (so already J. D. Mich, and many expositors), “as if there were not yet enough in the more ancient revolting idolatries as well as in the already depicted (Ezekiel 7:23) roughness of their everyday life, and as if, besides, this most recent superstition must now be added.”] The climax in the thought and the reference to Parseeism lies in the context, but the “Barsom” (a bundle of different kinds of twigs) does not correspond with δζξεψδ (a vine branch, Ezekiel 15:2; Isaiah 17:10), neither does the solemn holding before the mouth with the left hand correspond much with ωμηΰμΞΰτν. Hengst. assigns as a reason for “the vine-branch” its being “a quite pre-eminent product of the sun”; and, according to him, the nose is mentioned ironically instead of the mouth. A gesture in worship is demanded by the expression εδπν. Klief. confesses himself unable to explain the idolatrous custom. The thyrsus-staff of the worshippers of Bacchus has also been suggested. Keil finds the climax in the acts of violence as compared with the abominations,—the moral corruption shows the full measure of their guilt; but the proverbial mode of speaking has not yet been sufficiently cleared up. Israel himself has been suggested here as the vine-stock (Jeremiah 2:21), ΰσ, translated by “anger” (their anger, viz. which they have provoked on God’s part, or which they cherish towards God and His prophets), and the interpretation given as if the meaning were: to pour oil into the fire, to bring brushwood to the flames. Hδv.: “and, lo! they send forth the mournful ditty (about Adonis, ζξεψδ for ζִ ?ξְ ?ψָ ?δ ,ζְ ?ξִ ?ιψ) to their anger” (that which falls upon them). Hitzig renders ζξεψδ: pruning-knife (“they put the pruning-bill to their nose”), wishing to provoke Me, they provoke themselves (Jeremiah 7:19; Habakkuk 2:10; Proverbs 23:2), in connection with which he quotes the scene in Auerbach’s cellar from Faust, etc. Ezekiel 8:18. Comp. Ezekiel 5:11; Ezekiel 7:4; Ezekiel 7:9; Ezekiel 9:5; Ezekiel 9:10, threatening with corresponding retribution on the part of God. (Ezekiel 11:13; Isaiah 1:15; Jeremiah 11:11). 1. As the idea of salvation is especially dominant in the history of Israel, and draws from it the most manifold types, so in a pre-eminent degree prophecy is ruled by the idea. In verbal prophecy the idea, and especially the Christian idea, of the future, clothes itself at one time in accordance with what is peculiar to the prophets as individuals, at another by making use of allusion to the form of the present, and of the forces, persons, occurrences, etc. moving it, but in general entirely within the sphere of the Old Testament mode of representation; so that what is meant to be just the most striking expression for the idea shows itself, through the later realization of the idea exactly in this form, to be at the same time a prediction, apart from the express predictions of the prophets. (Comp. on this subject Tholuck, die Propheten, ff. p. 105 sqq.) Now what the figurative word accomplishes as regards the object aimed at, that, as regards deepening our views of the truth, appears to be the task of symbol in prophetic action, in dramatic vision. The vision of the abominations in the temple here in Ezekiel is a theologizing one of the apostasy of Israel, now ripe for judgment. 2. The living God of revelation is the measure of the dead idols of the heathen, alike as regards the pantheistic slumping of them in the world, and as regards their polytheistic separation according to the different lands and peoples. He is, and whatever wanders to those others and is falsely attributed to them belongs to Him. On the same deep basis of truth theologically, our vision brings the idolatry of Israel into view in the temple of Jehovah, and therewith into condemnation. The temple becomes the standard for judgment of every heathen worship. 3. It was condescension in the sphere of history on the part of the idea of revelation, that for so long a period a fixed nation, like Israel, was to be the bearer of it, and that, after the general analogy of heathen nations, church and state covered each other. Only with the expansion of the church into its ideal, i.e. into the kingdom of God among mankind as a whole (Revelation 21:3), have: “state religion” and “state church” as ideas become effete. They are merely existing realities of a wretched kind; their ideas, if one chooses to speak of them, are antiquated; they are reproductions of the past, Judaism, if not heathenisms. Progress, and by no means “radical” progress merely, but much more still religious, i.e. Christian progress, points away beyond them. 4. The distinction made between “abominations” and “violence” recalls the difference between the two tables of the law,—sins against God and sins against men. Over against violence in the latter respect, there makes its appearance what God must abhor. As the former fills the land and becomes the fashion, so the latter provokes the anger of God. Ungodliness and immorality in their connection here bear witness to the connection between faith and morals. 5. Superstition and unbelief—the one acting, the other speaking—present themselves together in Ezekiel 8:12 in one sentence, just as these forms of the self-originated theology of the sensuous self-consciousness touch each other from opposite sides. Unbelief, which Holy Scripture never knows absolutely, since to it faith is the original godliness in the nature of man, appears here also as one that “speaks” (Psalms 14, 53) and has gods. Superstition draws its reason from unbelief. As Nitzsch describes the process: “in the depraved working of passive piety man attempts first of all to deny the facts of the religious conscience, wholly or in part; but yet, in so far as the consciousness of God compels him, he leaps over from unbelief into superstition, i.e. he defines for himself the divine as a thing that is human, sensuous, worldly, analyzes for himself the feeling of God into the sensuous, out of which, in the next place, arise fanatical imaginations, sometimes slavish, sometimes audacious, Romans 1:21-25.” When Plutarch, in his well-known treatise περὶδεισιδαιμονίας, gives the preference to unbelief, he underestimated it as a source of superstition; he winds up, moreover, with the converse, viz. that many fall from superstition into unbelief. Jean Paul, on the contrary, who calls superstition “faith with a but,” would “rather live in the densest malarious atmosphere of superstition than under the air-pump of unbelief,” where in the former case one breathes with difficulty, in the latter he is suffocated. 6. Augustine raises the question: why should the Romans, who paid divine honour to all the gods of all nations, as they showed by having a Pantheon, yet have continually refused to honour the God of Israel? and found the reason in the exclusiveness wherewith Jehovah claims to be honoured alone, as being the true God in contrast with the false gods. 7. The mourning for Tammuz reminds us of the sorrow “of the world” in 2 Corinthians 7. Is it unintentional that only this side of this idolatry is indicated in Ezekiel? It worketh death, says the apostle of the sorrow of the world. Over against the pleasure of life in the rites of Tammuz on its mere natural basis, the prophet has to take his stand on the divine sentence of death of the spirit; as there is no repentance on the part of any one, the other side in the worship of Tammuz cannot possibly prophesy of salvation. (As against Bauer, Rel. d. A: T. ii. p. 234 sq.) 8. The front of the temple looked to the east, the back, therefore, to the west. And such is the case, moreover, with most of the ancient nations; and so it meets us again also, for the most part, in Catholic church architecture. But a universal rule it is not (according to Vitruvius, the opposite is the rule for heathen temple-architecture), just as little as the turning of the face toward the east in Christian prayer is a universal rule; sometimes the front, sometimes the apsis, is turned to the east. Some have wished to find the reason for the holy of holies being turned toward the west in the antithesis to heathenism. Maimonides, More Neb. iii. Ezekiel 45 : “Superstition generally at that time worshipped the sun; therefore Abraham turns to the west on Moriah, so that he turned his back to the sun.” Comp. on the other hand, Bδhr, Symb. i. 212. “When the Catholic church architecture built the choir towards the east, the alleged anti-heathenish design of the opposite course was set aside, inasmuch as Christ, as the Sun of Righteousness, now determines the direction; it was imagined also that paradise was there, etc. etc. 9. There is a gradation in wickedness, for there is a development towards ripeness for judgment. And as the greatness of the sin is determined according to the person and circumstances, so the corresponding greatness of the punishment is determined according to the knowledge of and opportunity for what is good. But the Judge and Avenger is God. HINTSEze_8:1. “We may be assured everywhere, whether at home or from home, of the presence of God; hence also we have to fear God everywhere” (Stck.).—The pulpit for the exiles in the house of the prophet.—“Elders also ought to hear and learn God’s word” (Stck.). Ezekiel 8:2. Comp. on Ezekiel 1:27 sq. Ezekiel 8:3. “The saints in mortal flesh are between heaven and earth, for they are not yet indeed completely above, but still they have already forsaken what is below” (Gregory).—“As here by the hair, so by the smallest thing the pious are lifted upwards by God” (Jun.).—“God’s children and servants are led and guided not by the spirit of the world, but by the Spirit of God” (St.).—“Yea, if this body could follow the spirit, it would lead it into heaven with itself.”—“God was Master of the house at Jerusalem, and they brought in to Him another idol: that displeased Him justly” (Randgl.).—See how jealous love can be! the jealousy of Israel’s Husband.—“So God is provoked also by all who admit into their heart passion, pride, arrogance, debauchery, avarice, and other idols” (B. B.). Ezekiel 8:4. Christ and Belial.—God in His jealousy is likewise God in His glory.—“In another way also God lets His glory be seen, when He causes a peculiarly powerful testimony to be borne in His Church, by means of which He unveils the abominations in all ranks, and causes them to be punished through His witnesses, since there also, as here, public worship especially is wont to be assailed.”—To perceive God’s glory in spite of all abominations is the privilege of His faithful servants, of His children, who do not cast away their confidence. Our faith is the victory which hath overcome the world.—“Such a strengthening was needed by the prophet, in order that he might fearlessly withstand the raging audacity and stubbornness of the people; God equipped him in this way with a suit of armour” (C). Ezekiel 8:5. “God places our sins before His eyes, and in like manner also before ours” (Stck.).—“So sits the envious Pharisee also, who has merely an outward righteousness, like an image of jealousy in the doorway, and will not let the simple people enter through the fear of the Lord into the faith and love of Christ, and thus takes away the key of knowledge (Matthew 23:13)” (B. B.). Ezekiel 8:6. “Whoever opens door and gate to sin, falls from sin to sin” (St.).—“Whatever man does, he does it before God’s face, although the blinded sinner thinks God blind” (Stck.).—“God’s people also may fall into great darkness and blindness” (St.). Ezekiel 8:7 sqq. God’s eye sees also through the wall, and He can give His servants a hole in the wall as well as eyes, so as to see what is between the walls.—“Guilty consciences love what is concealed” (Stck.).—Occasionally an Ezekiel comes across those concealed ones.—“Thy heart is to be God’s temple. But how does the Lord find this temple? Just as here. Only dig through the white-washed wall of thy self-love and hypocrisy, then shalt thou perceive in the light of God all sorts of monsters and abominations, which the enemy has gathered together in thee, to the disgust of the Master of the house. Enough of unclean reptiles shalt thou find behind the wall of thy flesh, only dig through!” (B. B.)—“Assuredly, as soon as the true worship of God is forsaken, men have no longer any limit; from one they pass to a myriad” (C).—Idolatry is not merely of the gross kind; nor is that which Christians practise merely of the refined kind.—Yea, everything which is on earth may become an idol to man.—I count everything but dung, Paul testifies in Philippians 3. Ezekiel 8:11. “Those who ought in this way to take the lead of others in showing a good example, are often the worst” (St.).—“The elders before the idols, men before beasts, the living before mere pictures!” (B. B.)—May all assemblies of church-wardens take an example by them! Ezekiel 8:12. God is to blame for our guilt!—Thus many make for themselves a blind God, like Fortune. Ezekiel 8:13 sqq. What a corruption must be among a, people where the old and the female sex are infected!—On ordinary days, the lust of the flesh; on fast-days, repentance and sorrow. Ezekiel 8:15 sq. “Nothing is so absurd as that a man might hot be brought to it, Romans 1.” (St.)—“Daniel turned in his prayer toward Jerusalem” (B. B.).—“All the ungodly turn their back on God” (St.).—“But who will count those who in our time turn their back on God?” (B. B.) Ezekiel 8:18. They turned their back on God, and so He turns His back on them.—The eye and ear of God shut, what a picture! 2. The Judgment on the Guilty (Ch. 9) 1And He cried in mine ears with a loud voice, saying, Near are the visitations of the city, and every one [has] his weapon of destruction in his hand. 2And, behold, six men came from the way of the higher gate, which looketh toward the north, and every one his weapon for breaking in pieces in his hand; and a man in their midst, clothed in linen, and an inkhorn on his loins: and they came and stood beside the brazen altar. 3And the glory of the God of Israel rose up from the cherub, over which it was, to the threshold of the house; and He called to 4the man clothed in linen, which had an inkhorn on his loins. And Jehovah said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, the midst of Jerusalem, and mark a [cross-] mark upon the foreheads of the people that sigh and that groan for all the abominations that are done in the midst thereof. 5And to the others He said in mine ears, Go through the city after him, and smite; your eyes shall not 6spare, neither shall ye show pity. Old man, young man, and maiden, and child, and women shall ye slay to destruction, and [yet] no one upon whom is a [cross-] mark shall ye touch; and ye shall begin at My sanctuary. And they began with the men, the elders, who were before the house. 7And He said unto them., Defile the house, and fill the courts with slain; go ye forth. And they went forth, and slew in the city. 8And it came to pass, when they had slain, and I was left, that I fell upon my face, and cried, and said, Ah, Lord Jehovah! destroyest Thou the whole residue of Israel, whilst Thou art pouring out Thy fury 9upon Jerusalem? And He said unto me, The guilt of the house of Israel and Judah is exceeding great, and the land is full of blood, and the city full of wresting of judgment; for they say, Jehovah hath forsaken the land, and Jehovah 10seeth not. And I also, Mine eye shall not spare, neither will I show pity; their way I give upon their head. 11And, behold, the man clothed in linen, which had the inkhorn on his loins, gave answer, saying, I have done as Thou hast commanded me. Ezekiel 9:1 Anoth. read.: αμι plur., Sept., Syr., Arab. In Ezekiel 9:2, also, the Syr. and some codd. have the plural. Ezekiel 9:2. ... ἐνδεδυκωςποδηρη, κ. ζωνησαπφειρουἐπιτηςὀσφυοςαὐτου. Ezekiel 9:4. ... δοςτοσημειον—Vulg: … et signa Thau super— Ezekiel 9:5. Instead of ςμ anoth. read.: ΰμ. Ezekiel 9:6. ... κ. ἀποτωνἁγιωνμουἀρξασθε.. ... οἱἠσανἐσωἐντ. οἰκω. Ezekiel 9:7. ... πληρωσατετ. ὁδους... κ. κοπτετε. Ezekiel 9:8. Other read.: αδλεϊν, επωΰψ, εΰωΰψ.—εΰζςχχεμβγεμ, Syr. Ezekiel 9:9. (For γξιν they read ηξρ.) Sept.; ... ὀτιἐπλησθηἡγηλαωνπολλων, κ. ἡπολις... ἀδικιαςκ. ἀκαθαρσιως. Ezekiel 9:11. Anoth. read.: αλμΰωψ (Talmud Babyl., Targ.). REMARKSThe iniquity (Ezekiel 8) is now followed, in accordance with God’s threatening (Ezekiel 8:18), by the punishment as the carrying out of the threatening, and that as regards the execution of judgment on the guilty inhabitants first. But in the midst of destruction there is at the same time preservation. Ezekiel 9:1. He; the same as in Ezekiel 9:4. With a loud voice, not without allusion to Ezekiel 8:18; just as also: and He cried in mine ears. The loud voice does not correspond to “the greatness of the abominations which cry to God” (Hengst.); rather is “the strength of the emotion” thereby portrayed (Hitz.)—“the loud outburst of indignation” (Jun.)—at the same time an energetic act of the Lord.—χψαε (Ezekiel 12:23), most simply with Hengst. perf. Kal, as in Hosea 9:7 αָּ ?ΰεּ ?Χ, an announcement meant alike generally and for Ezekiel,—Hengst.: for the special executioners of what has been announced (εΰιωΧ), viz. that it is now the time. χψα in Kal: to press on, to come near, to be near; in Piel, transitively: to cause to approach, to admit, to offer; intransitively (and at the same time intensively): to be very near, to approach with the greatest haste. (Hitzig reads χִ ?ψְ ?αּ ?εּ. Hδv., Kl.: imper. Piel intransitively: “hither ye,” etc.)—τχγδ, as almost always: penal visitation (Hosea 9:7). The plural is not out of place either as regards the meaning of the word or in the connection. A plurality is implied in Ezekiel 5:12; Ezekiel 5:15 sq. [Hitz.: “authority” for: those who have received orders against the city, so that τχεγεϊ is particularized by means of ΰιω. Hδv., Kl.: “overseership,” the guard, the heavenly watchers of the city, who, as an authority appointed by God, are to execute the punishment on the ungodly.] Hitzig asks: to whom is the summons addressed? Cocc. answers: not so much to those entrusted with the visitation, as to the watchers of the city, who have hitherto kept off the former. In the meantime, however, no summons at all is issued, but with express reference to the prophet the approaching punishment is proclaimed by God,—as regards the substance of the thing, expressed in general terms, and as respects the form of its execution, in such a way that it is only in Ezekiel 9:2 that a more detailed definition follows. What sort of persons are to be understood by ΰιω may, of course, be conjectured from their equipment: λμιΧ, according to the context (comp. also Ezekiel 5.): each one his sword; against which Hδv.: “no common earthly weapon is suitable in the hands of such a host.” A hint as to who the persons are is contained, perhaps, in the expression: ξωηϊε; comp. Exodus 12:23; 2 Samuel 24:16. [Bunsen: “the judges of the city, the punishing and destroying angels.”] Ezekiel 9:2. They are men also in Genesis 18:2, but none the less angels. [According to Klief.: men, as such, execute the judgment on Jerusalem; according to Calv.: the Chaldeans; according to Grot.: the generals of Nebuchadnezzar, who from six sides besieged and took the city (?). According to Cocc.: signifying the angelic hosts together with the Babylonian army-corps.] An explanation of the divine judgment makes itself clear (Ezekiel 1:4). The number six, whose interpretation has been attempted even to desperation, needs no explanation, since it is rather the number seven that lies before us with the one man in their midst, etc., the specially sacred number; consequently: how, on the basis of God’s covenant with Israel, punishment and exemption take place. [Hitz.: “the dogma of the seven archangels in germ.”] As Ezekiel is to be supposed in the court of the priests (Ezekiel 8:3; Ezekiel 8:5; Ezekiel 8:16), the higher gate will be the gate indicated there. Comp. that passage.—ξτφε, Jeremiah 51:20 sqq. He who is in the midst of the destroyers proves that in the midst of destruction there is also to be something else. What? His clothing tells us partly, his equipment partly. χρϊδρτψ, only in our chapter, is: a writer’s utensil; not a writing-tablet, but: an inkhorn, such as writers were accustomed to carry hanging in their girdle or on it. From this, however, we are not to infer, with Keil, that he is “a chancellor among the other officials,” for such is not the character of the six; but from that wherewith he is provided we are to infer what he has to do: he is not like those others to destroy, to break in pieces. He has an inkhorn, whereas they have each a sword! [The Sept. read δַ ?ρַּ ?τִּ ?ιψ, and translated: a sapphire girdle.] From the destroyers he is distinguished likewise by his clothing, which is certainly not in conformity with an appointment of that kind. In linens (plural) is explained by Hengst. of the collective linen (Leviticus 16:4; Leviticus 16:23) garments of the high priest, whose antitype is the Angel of the Lord, the Angel of the covenant (Malachi 1:3), who, according to Zechariah 1:12, gets from the Lord good comfortable words for the covenant-people, just as the high priest appears in Zechariah 3. as the type of Christ, as the figure of the Angel of the Lord. So already Hδvernick. Keil, on the other hand, only admits that the one man in relation to the six “stands somewhat like the high priest in relation to the Levites.” According to Hitz. the garment of byssus marks him out as the highest in rank; he appears to be the same in whom, with Zechariah and the author of the Apocalypse, the spirit of prophecy assumes personality, the so-called par excellence Man of God, Gabriel of the book of Daniel and of the Koran; similarly the πνεῦμα in Ezekiel 8:2-3 appears to have assumed angelic form (!). According to Cocc. the Spirit of God is likewise symbolized here, who produces the mark upon the foreheads of believers,—their confession. According to Calvin it is an angel, who is distinguished by the ornamental character of his dress from the men, the remaining six. Keil admits in addition the comparison with Daniel 10:5; Daniel 12:6-7 (Revelation 1:13 sqq.), but holds that the view of the Angel of the Lord is not thereby established, inasmuch as “the shining white robe” is peculiar not merely to this angel or Christ, but the seven angels also in Revelation 15:6 appear in shining white linen, and the shining white colour symbolizes in general divine holiness and glory (Revelation 19:8). In the first place, however, by the expression: clothed in linen, nothing at all is said as to brightness of colour, but it is simply the material of the clothing that is given, which, if it points to anything, points to the clothing of the high priest. Now, as the linen garments of the priests (comp. Ezekiel 44:17 sqq.) mark them out “as the mediators of sanctification,” whose “entire calling had for its aim the sanctification of Israel by Jehovah, and the sanctification of Jehovah by Israel” (Bδhr, Symb. ii. 89), the in linen is admirably appropriate in our context. The sanctification of Israel is limited here, of course, to the separation of certain parties in order to their being spared, as it is given in commission to the man by Jehovah (Ezekiel 9:4); but the sanctification of Jehovah takes place in the case before us not merely through, but on Israel. Ever and always it is a priestly act, in the midst of destruction, to make the mark on what destruction does not touch (Ezekiel 9:6). If, accordingly, it is not so clear from the clothing and equipment who the party in question is, as what he is to do, for what he is designed, yet it is generally acknowledged that his being in the midst of the six is the place of leader, of chief among them. Only after he has marked or not have they to smite; they go after him (Ezekiel 9:4-5); he answers in their name likewise (Ezekiel 9:11). To a position of such distinction, if the six are angels, the Angel of Jehovah thoroughly corresponds. Comp. Zechariah 1:11 sq.; Joshua 5:14; Genesis 18. By their taking up their position at the brazen altar is by no means asserted their taking up their position before Jehovah, i.e. because the glory of God is there, as Keil, Klief.; but the meaning is: where the guilt has reached its climax (Ezekiel 8:16), from that point also the punishment must go forth. [Hδv.: as the coming from the north stood in relation to the sin committed there, so now the heavenly beings appear “as it were looking after and protecting the rights of the altar.” “As a heavy accusation, the forsaken and despised brazen altar stood there;” comp. Amos 9:1. Grot.: they stood there as those who would prepare many victims for God! Isaiah 34:6; Jeremiah 12:3; Jeremiah 46:10. The high-priestly man in linen also corresponds therewith. Comp. besides, Exodus 32:35 sqq. (Hengst.: “the protection of the pious is his privilege; but the work of vengeance also is under his control.” “The angels stand, waiting for God’s beck and command. He whose spiritual eye was opened could only look with deep horror on the people filled with joyful hopes of the future. They appear at the place of transgression, in order to glorify God in the downfall of those who would not glorify Him by their life.”) Ezekiel 9:3 makes the glory, etc. (which is there conceived of as the Shechinah-cloud) move out of the holy of holies (Hδv., Hengst.), and that not merely as far as “the gate of the sanctuary, near which the altar stood” (Hengst.), for, “in order to give commands to His servants,” it is not necessary for Jehovah to go to the place where they are standing; and He called suggests rather a greater distance. As to the house, comp. on Ezekiel 8:14; Ezekiel 8:16. Accordingly, by the threshold of it will not be meant, as Keil supposes, the threshold of the temple porch, through which one entered into the holy place (Ezekiel 8:16), but the outermost point, where the exit was from the court of the people into the city—quite in accordance with the direction which follows in Ezekiel 9:4 sqq. That the glory of Jehovah, according to Ezekiel 8:16, stood over the cherub between the porch and the altar (Keil), is not said in Ezekiel 8:16; and Klief. says at first also merely: “where the vision of God and the prophet had for the moment their station.” We do not forget that the characteristic of Ezekiel is the prophecy of glory (see Introd. to Ezekiel 1:4-28), and that therefore everything comes forth to the prophet always from the glory of Jehovah; but the vision of that glory changes alike as regards the locality and as regards the form of manifestation, so that sometimes this, sometimes that other feature steps into the foreground, and the rest into the background. For this there was a thorough appropriateness in the “variable hieroglyph,” as v. Meyer has happily called the cherub. (Bδhr, i. 312.) The word δλψεα appears in Ezekiel for the first time here, and that in reference to the arrangements of the holy of holies, specially of the ark of the covenant. As the chajoth in Ezekiel 1. are the same as the plural λψεαιν, used by Ezekiel also in Ezekiel 10., and common elsewhere (δַ ?λְּ ?ψεּ ?α collectively, not: for the “ideal unity of the cherubim” (Hengst.), but: for the well-known double ornament of the sacred chest), the converting of the chajoth into cherubim in its application here (Doctrinal Reflections, 12, p. 55) may be looked upon at the same time as a prophetic interpretation of the employment of the cherub in worship, especially over the ark of the covenant, on the basis of the vision in Ezekiel 1. As to the disputed etymology, see Ges. Lex. and Thes.; Kurtz, in Herzog, 2.; Lange, Genes, p. 241. For the prophetico-historic employment of the cherub in Ezekiel 10. in respect of its movement (p. 40), the conjectural derivation from the converting of ψְ ?λεּ ?α (Psalms 104:3; Psalms 18:10) into λְּ ?ψεּ ?α commends itself more than any other, as hinting at the passing of the chajoth of Ezekiel 1. into the cherub. The chariot-element (as against Kurtz) has in the representation of Ezekiel something essential; and if the form is not carried out perfectly as regards the copy in the tabernacle and temple, yet, as far as the idea is concerned, there can be no hesitation about it, as Jehovah may also remove His abode from the midst of Israel, inasmuch as He (ΰμδιιωψΰμ) is no national God in the heathen sense. As to the rest, see Doctrinal Reflections.—With Ezekiel 9:3 is still to be compared Ezekiel 10:4; Ezekiel 10:18; Exodus 40:36 sqq.; Numbers 10:11 sq. The rising up of Jehovah already prefigured the abandonment of the temple to the enemies of Israel for judgment on them.—Over which it was, from the setting up of the ark, in accordance with the idea of the symbol, for threatening and promise, not always visible, but (as here) making itself so in a given case (Psalms 80:1). Ezekiel 9:4. The divine command runs: “Away into the city.” Yet grace shall go before justice. But nothing is said of marking in the temple; and, on the other hand, certainly in Ezekiel 9:6-7 smiting is spoken of. ϊָּ ?εָ ?δ = to make a ϊָּ ?ε, which last letter in the Hebrew was in the ancient Ph�nician alphabet, in the Egyptian writing, as also upon the Jewish coins, of the form of a cross (Τ). Hence as in general ϊεδ (1 Samuel 21:13) is “to mark,” and ϊε “a mark” (Job 31:35), so perhaps here εδϊειϊϊε is used on purpose of the marking of this particular mark. “A cross was just as natural for a mark as for a signature” (Hitz.). Hδv., who (as also Vitringa) conversely derives ϊε from ϊεδ, holds the indefiniteness as required by the circumstance, that the mark was not intended for men. But an indefinite thing is certainly no mark, not even for angels, who are conceived of here in human form; and if it was to be a mark of any kind you like, this certainly would be somehow expressed. Klief. (Vulg.): a Tau as mark. The deeper significance, that a cross was to be the mark for sparing, Christian exegesis has perceived from of old (Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Jerome). As to the rest, comp. Revelation 7:3; Revelation 9:4; Revelation 14:1; Exodus 12. (Genesis 4:15). “By this mark one is separated from the mass” (Hengst.). Consequently, if the mass is dedicated to destruction, he is preserved. Upon the foreheads, according to most: because there it is most easily seen; according to others: as there slaves bore the names of their masters (inscripti, literati servi). Comp. also Exodus 28:38 (Bδhr, ii. 143).—Men, because of what precedes: the city, Jerusalem: inhabitants, citizens. The qualification for the mark is twofold, expressed in words of similar sound. ΰπη inwardly, ΰπχ also uttering it; consequently those who are not only not like-minded, but also audibly make known their pain. (The Niphal, which commonly stands in the case of reflex influences on the mind.) Ezekiel 9:5. ςμ, Qeri ΰμ; as also the singular ςֵ ?ιπְ ?λֶ ?ν, which is unnecessary. Comp. Exodus 32:27; Ezekiel 8:18; Ezekiel 5:11. Ezekiel 9:6. Deuteronomy 32:25; Ezekiel 5:16. The command is not merely to knock them down, but to make an utter end of them. Because of Ezekiel 8., the beginning (supplementary to Ezekiel 9:5) is made with the sanctuary; and this is immediately explained of the courts, which are before the house in the narrower sense, as men (Ezekiel 8:16), elders (Ezekiel 8:11), women (Ezekiel 8:14) were in them. [Keil, following Klief., supposes: “they were in general old men, well stricken in years, who had come into the court to sacrifice, but yet all the while were liable to the judgment.” Hitz.: it was just the Sabbath! Rosenm.: “at My sanctuary,” i.e. at those who have sinned there. Sept.: as if εּ ?ξִ ?ξִּ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωַׁ ?ι = at My holy ones, the priests. “When the Sept. read: ‘inside the house,’ this is manifestly incorrect,” Ew.] Comp. for this beginning 1 Peter 4:17. (Consequently not like 2 Kings 11:15.) In Ezekiel 9:7 what has already been done is not approved in the form of a command (Hengst.), because the Go forth is to follow; but as in this way the beginning is called good, so the order is given to continue onwards till the end. Comp. Numbers 19:11 (Leviticus 11:24). The defiling of the house takes place in accordance with Ezekiel 9:6, inasmuch as the courts belonging to it as a whole (which explanation of δαιϊ is given by means of δηφψεϊ, so that house here = “sanctuary” in Ezekiel 9:6) are filled with corpses. It is only now they go into the city. He pushes them on, as it were, with military abruptness (Hengst.). In Ezekiel 9:8 Ezekiel only is left remaining in the court of the priests of the temple, for it is there the prophet is. (Against Kimchi, Hitz., Keil.) Impressive solitude! (1 Kings 19:10.) It is not as being spared that Ezekiel, speaking as he does of his own accord as a mere spectator, comes into consideration, just as also the preserving mark is not made upon him. His objection is meant, therefore, to be read as occurring between the execution in the courts of the temple and that in the city. πֵ ?ΰωַׁ ?ΰַ ?ψ, Rosenm., Hengst.: third pret. Niph. with ΰ epenthetic for the first = “and he remained over,” viz. “I,” where we are to supply in thought ΰְַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ. Hengst.: “taking the place of the noun: a he-remained-over.” It is at all events surprising, in order to arrest attention, to emphasize the result. Buxtorf: expressing the consternation and perplexity of the prophet by means of the confused form of the word. Keil, following Hitz.: a “malformation, a blending together of the partic. and the imperf., and manifestly a slip of the pen, to be read as a partic. πִ ?ωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ψ, and to be connected with λְּ ?δַ ?λּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ν.” See other attempts at explanation in Hδv. Ew. reads simply: εָ ?ΰֶ ?ωָׁ ?ΰֵ ?ψ Comp. Numbers 16:45; Joshua 7:6. His anguish vents itself in this cry to God (Ezekiel 11:13; 1 Samuel 15:11). For the question, comp. Genesis 18:23 sqq., 20:4. This question is not: “from the soul of those upon whom the judgment has just fallen” (Hengst.), whose representative Ezekiel cannot be, but: from the feeling of his fellow-exiles, of whom therefore no mention is made. That his question is not hindered by his having heard of the pious being spared (Hitz.), shows either his fear in this respect, that in Jerusalem there will be nothing at all to be spared, or that the sparing in comparison with the destruction does not at all come into consideration. Hence λμ. The residue of Israel is that which still remains (especially at Jerusalem) of Israel collectively after the previous (the Assyrian and the Chaldean) catastrophes. Comp. besides, Ezekiel 7:8. Here the outpouring of fury, elsewhere the outpouring of the Spirit. Ezekiel 9:9. As the prophet, on account of the greatness of the destruction, makes no mention of the sparing in his question, in like manner God also does not do so in His answer, because of the greatness (αξΰγξΰγ, in a superlative sense) of the guilt alike of Israel and of Judah (Ezekiel 4:4 sqq.). Comp. Genesis 4:13; Lamentations 4:6.—Ezekiel 8:17; Ezekiel 7:23.—ξξδ, Ew.; perverseness; Hengst.: declension; Hitz.: identical with ξεξδ, Isaiah 58:9. Hoph. of πθδ, perhaps (as such testimony in favour of what is right on God’s part is necessary): of the perversion, the setting aside of the right (Deuteronomy 27:19; Amos 5:12). Apostasy from God does not lie in the context, and would also be more definitely expressed (1 Kings 11:9). As in Ezekiel 8:12 their idolatry is explained in this way from their own mouth, so here their moral corruption. Here also the question is not about God’s being and essence, but about His will and acting. The clauses are inverted to correspond with the present context: in Ezekiel 8:12 it is the “not seeing” that is spoken of first, here it is the “having forsaken.” The filling of the land and city with lawless conduct shows how they imagine they have free scope, and fancy that no one is taking the oversight of them. And with the “not seeing” there is connected in Ezekiel 9:10 a partial confirmation of their saying as regards the eye, which, however, on the other hand, so fearfully demonstrates God’s presence in the land by means of righteousness and judgment (aposiopesis). Comp. Ezekiel 9:5, Ezekiel 8:18; Ezekiel 5:11; Ezekiel 7:9. The way is the bent, and in general the manner, of life. But what they suppose they are treading under their feet comes as iniquity to be punished upon their head, (1 Kings 8:32). Ezekiel 9:11. Already the answer of God gave an affirmative reply to the question of the prophet; but still more is this the case with the announcement of the accomplished fact made by the leader of the mysterious avengers in their name,—an announcement which certainly includes in it also the possible sparing. Comp. on Ezekiel 9:2. Comp. Genesis 37:14; Numbers 13:26. Comp. Luke 14:22; John 17:4. The Qeri λְּ ?λֹ ?μΰְַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ is unnecessary. 1. It is a peculiarity of what our prophet sees in vision, that, however much the vision of glory (Ezekiel 1.) remains at the foundation, and however much on this basis the unity of Him who speaks to the prophet and transacts with him is in substance preserved, yet sometimes the one or the other element of the form of manifestation retires into the background, e.g. in Ezekiel 8:2 sqq. the throne-chariot and the chajoth; and that sometimes, as in the chapter before us (Ezekiel 9:3), a change of view takes place, corresponding to the sphere of the revelation, which is here the sanctuary of Jehovah. The thought which is to be expressed at the time supplies of itself the reason of the distinctive form of expression in vision, while at the same time there is no want of retrospective reference showing that it is one and the same thing, so that, as has been said, amid all the diversity the unity continues. In this way it is the same Jehovah who is seen in His glory in Ezekiel 1. that lays hold of Ezekiel in Ezekiel 8:3, and that everywhere speaks to him and acts as his Guide. And so He who lifts him up, the Spirit (Ezekiel 8:3), certainly controls the movements of the chajoth also in Ezekiel 1:12; Ezekiel 1:20 sqq. And in the seven men of Eze 9:2 it is merely the glory of Jehovah that is again unfolded. 2. Our chapter also furnishes a prelude to the last day, the “evening of the world” (as Lange calls it at Genesis 18), approaching for the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Thus the appearance of angels on the scene is not merely natural by reason of this parallel, but so much the more as the judgment on Jerusalem in Holy Scripture—much more than the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah—is a foil, nay, a constituent element for the last judgment. 3. In the vision of glory (Ezekiel 1.) we have noticed repeatedly (comp. especially on Ezekiel 1:28), along with a predominantly judicial character on the whole, the bright splendour, the sun-bright element, and lastly the rainbow. Thus the priestly form in white linen in the midst of the avengers cannot surprise us. The “one man” in their midst is a vivid allusion to “the likeness as the appearance of a man” in Ezekiel 1:26. 4. Although conceived of executively in a historical form of expression for the immediate object of the vision in Ezekiel 9., yet the group of seven represents substantially the same thing as what Ezekiel 1. set before the eyes of the prophet, in reference, first of all, to Israel. Comp. in this connection especially what is held as established as to the Angel of the Lord in relation to the glory of Jehovah (Lange, Genesis, p. 386 [T. &T. Clark], and our Doctrinal Reflections on Ezekiel 1:4-28). The Son of man, when He shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, as it is said in Matthew 25:31, likewise separates (just as here the mark is the dividing element) the assembled nations one from another. Quite in accordance with the difference of times, of the last day from the time when it is called to-day, just as expressly does the judgment devolve upon Him then as does the sparing in our chapter. 5. It is not “Hebrew poetry,” as was the opinion of the ofttimes more ζsthetic than theological Herder (Geist der hebr. Poesie, ii.), that is to be credited alike with the priestly element in the angel-leader of Ezekiel, and with the angelic element in the priesthood in general. But neither does the “symbolic cultus,” as Bδhr and Umbreit maintain on the other hand, furnish the only ground for it. But it lies in the nature of the calling of the angels (nomen officii) to be the mediating element, mediators of the divine revelations; hence to be in general what constitutes the prophetic office also (Haggai 1:13), but quite specially what belongs to the employment of a priest (Malachi 2:7). If, however, according to Numbers 16:5, the priests are those whom Jehovah permits to come near to Him, are called the χψεαιν (an explanatory designation having the same letters as the cherubim), and if their proper work is the bringing near of the sacrifices, then their mediation lies especially in the direction from Israel to Jehovah; while, on the other hand, the mediation of the angels has its sphere in the other direction, and that exclusively, viz. from God to man, and so they are called “messengers, ambassadors,” and in accordance therewith a doctrine is framed with regard to them in Hebrews 1:14. The perfection of the idea of mediation, where the two directions met, was brought about through Him in whom the divine sending is a self-manifestation of God, and the priestly character is a self-sacrifice of humanity (1 Timothy 2:5). Now Jehovah appears in His angel κατ̓ἐξοχήν, just as on the other side the priestly order represents Israel, the nation of priests, and its head, the high priest, represents the Israelitish order of priests. There would thus be a prefiguration in vision of the perfected mediation in the Angel of Jehovah here in priestly office as well as priestly clothing (“the noble white form of peace,” Umbreit). 6. “We must consider this as beforehand probable,” remarks Hengstenberg, “because the Angel of the Lord is represented elsewhere also as the leading personality in the great divine judgments, which are executed in the interests of the kingdom of God. He it was, e.g., who as the destroying angel slew the first-born of Egypt, Exodus 12:23.” “There lies at the foundation the old picture of the Egyptian passover, but transfigured in the prophetic spirit. As there the destroying angel appeared as the Deliverer of the covenant-people, so here he appears as the Shield of the ideal theocracy, of those truly faithful to God among His people (Ezekiel 9:4 sqq.), as the Avenger of ungodliness on the apostate theocracy (Ezekiel 10:2; Ezekiel 10:7). Both things serve one object, the true welfare of the covenant-people” (Hδv.). 7. For the typical allusion to Christ the following points are enumerated by the ancients: (1) The human form, as having respect to the incarnation as well as to His powerful mediation; (2) that He is “one,” 1 Timothy 2:5; (3) that He is found in the midst, as it were as a prince, pointing to the kingly majesty and dignity of Christ; (4) the linen garment, the symbol of innocence, purity, of priesthood, etc.; (5) that He carries no weapon of destruction, but inscribes the elect in the book of life. In reference to the last, Hengstenberg expresses himself as follows: “It admits of question whether the inkhorn serves at the same time for inscribing the names in the book of life, of which mention is first made in Exodus 32:32 (Psalms 69:28; Revelation 20:12). It is, of course, probable, especially taking into account the fundamental passage, Isaiah 4:3. According to this view, the inscribing the names in the book of life is to be looked upon as the primary thing, the marking of the foreheads simply as a consequence.” 8. Bδhr (ii. p. 75) explains the priestly linen garment as symbolizing at once salvation and life and righteousness, which appears to suit only the commission to spare (Ezekiel 9:4), just as he explains the garment of purity as referring to those who had kept themselves pure from the defilement of Jerusalem’s trespass. 9. The well-known Shechinah of Jewish tradition is equivalent to the glory of Jehovah (John 1:14). If the former is to be regarded more strictly as a cloud, and the latter more as a brightness of light or fire, yet the latter is to be conceived of in closest connection with the former. That this symbol of the presence of Jehovah was a permanent thing above the ark of the covenant in the holy of holies, as was for the most part the view of the older theology along with the Jewish tradition, cannot be drawn from the Scripture passages referring to the subject. Leviticus 16:2 is not indeed to be explained, with Bδhr (i. 395 sq.), Winer, and others, by Leviticus 9:13, but neither does it fix (as Hengst., Keil) such a wonderful manifestation of the divine glory for the great day of atonement, and in fact also for the whole after period of the Solomonic temple; but it is to be understood simply in connection with the cloud of guidance during the journey through the wilderness, Exodus 13:21 sq., 14:24; Numbers 14:14; Nehemiah 9:12; Nehemiah 9:19; Exodus 40:36 sqq., Exodus 33:9; Numbers 12:5; Deuteronomy 31:15; Numbers 9:15 sqq.; Exodus 19:9; Exodus 25:22. The phenomenon on the occasion of the consecration of the tabernacle and of the temple (Exodus 40.; 1 Kings 8.) was an extraordinary one. Comp. the reasons against a permanence of such a presence of God in Bδhr (i. 397). Comp. also Herzog (xiii. p. 476 sq.); and as to the controversy during last century, see the literature in Winer, Realw.; Keil, Archδol. § 21, i. p. 115. 10. The idea which was symbolized by the ark of the covenant in the most holy place is indisputably that of a throne, however much the immediate object was in reality to be an ark (chest) for the law of the covenant. The purpose of the ark was accomplished with the two tables of stone. The idea of the throne was illustrated by the two cherubim. The two cherubic ornaments correspond with the two tables of the law, as these latter, with the capporeth, represent the dualism of the righteousness and mercy of God, which finds in the blood of the sacrifices (Leviticus 17:11) its typical divine institution and promise of adjustment and harmony. The fact of the cherubim being joined in the closest manner to the capporeth strips it of the mere signification of a “cover” for the ark-chest, which already, apart from the destination of the capporeth, receives no countenance from its composition as being a plate wholly of gold. Delitzsch compares with it the heavenly ψχις in Ezekiel 1:22. [λַּ ?τֹּ ?ψֶ ?ϊ from Piel λִּ ?τֶּ ?ψ, in a causative sense: to make to cover (Genesis 6:14), or intensively: to cover entirely, thoroughly, does not signify that the law of God was covered up, which would mean the covering up of God’s rights and righteousness, which are meant to be protected rather, but, as is at once understood of itself: that that sin which becomes manifest through the law finds covering before God, atonement on the capporeth (Leviticus 16:14).] It may certainly be admitted that the view, as it were, of a covering on the ark might have figuratively its point of transition to the idea of atonement. As, then, the ark guards the tables of the law, so the cherubim with their wings protect the capporeth, Exodus 25:20. The manifested presence of Jehovah in righteousness and mercy as holy love is shiningly clear. Understanding the cherubim as the chajoth, as is the case here in Ezekiel, we have in them, in the shape of an ornament, the symbolization of the life of creation (Doctrinal Reflections, 12, p. 55), as it appears in a state of heavenly rest engaged in the worship of God, yet none the less ready always, in the way of active service, to glorify Him alike in judgment and in mercy. In actual fact they acknowledge the heavenly King in Israel, the Holy One of Israel, Jehovah, as the living Elohim of revelation (p. 40), the Most High over all. And when Delitzsch defines the difference thus: that the ark of the covenant as ξֶ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?αָ ?δ (1 Chronicles 28:18) is not so much a moveable, travelling throne, as the throne that is stationary and at rest, with this, of course, accords the circumstance that the double cherub on the capporeth as it were surrounds Him who is enthroned (Exodus 25:22); but yet the circumstance is not to be overlooked, that the staves intended for removing the ark of the covenant were continually to remain in if (Exodus 25:15). As regards the etymology of the word, we must reject that which has been attempted, after the analogy of the root gribh in the Sanscrit, from “greifen” (Eng. to grip, grasp) (Delitzsch: as those who lay hold of and carry forward the divine throne; or Fόrst: like the Greek griffins and the Egyptian sphinxes as guardians), because a laying hold of is nowhere ascribed to the cherubim; and the fact that in Genesis 3:24 they have to keep the way to the tree of life, is not to be derived from a peculiar quality as guardians, just as also we cannot, with Kurtz (Herzog, ii. p. 655), deduce therefrom a “task,” according to which paradise was “entrusted” to the cherub, and that he gave it back “into the hands of man, its original possessor,” having also “preserved beyond the flood its proper essence, the paradisiacal powers,” etc. Nothing of this has any place in Holy Scripture. What is said in Revelation 21, 22 reminds us (Ezekiel 22:1 (?), 2) in some respects of what belongs to paradise, but is by no means paradise, but the holy city, New Jerusalem, the tabernacle of God with men (Ezekiel 21:2-3), which by new creation (Ezekiel 9:5) comes down from God out of the new heaven to the new earth. The cherubim do not inhabit (Genesis 3:24) paradise, but “on the east of the garden of Eden,” consequently outside of it is found the Shechinah (εַ ?ιַּ ?ωְׁ ?λֵּ ?ο), which exhibits Jehovah Elohim. The meaning of this is, that for man henceforth the glorious presence of God is outside paradise, and hence also the approach to the tree of life in the midst of paradise is denied to man. For Israel, life before God and God’s glorious presence are symbolized, as regards worship in the most holy place, specially by means of the atonement on the capporeth and the double cherub, as well as by means of the cloud during the journey in the wilderness, and on occasion of the dedication of Solomon’s temple. In reality, the life is restored for mankind when He whose body is the temple (John 2:21; John 1:14) could say on that great all-accomplishing day of atonement on Golgotha to the. thief: “Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with Me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). Moreover, we have to distinguish the historico-symbolic cherub, the cherub of worship, the cherub of prophetic vision, and the rhetorico-prophetic (Ezekiel 28.), as well as the cherub of poetry (Psalms 18.). 11. If the mark of the cross is the simplest exegesis of the ϊε, we must not merely say with Schmieder, that “this coincidence in any case remains ever memorable for the thoughtful observer of the ways of God, whose counsel has planned everything beforehand,” but it will also be interesting to mention what is analogous in different quarters. The Egyptian Apis was denoted by a white triangle (or square), the characteristic mark of the power of nature (or of the world). On the brow of the Indian Shiva is the picture of the fertilizing stream of the Ganges. Shiva’s or Vishnu’s mark is made on the brow of the Hindoo who has been cleansed in the holy water. The Japanese pilgrim to the temple of Tensjo Dai Sin gets as a token of indulgence a small square box, on which, in large characters, the name of the god is written, and which he carries home upon his forehead. If, according to the ancients (and the more recent mystics also), the four quarters of heaven, the flying fowl, the praying, the swimming, even the walking man, the rowing ship, the ploughing peasant, etc., the Egyptian key of Isis, the hammer of the god Thor, not to speak of the preparation of the paschal lamb,—if all these furnished a “silent prophecy pointing to Christ,” “the providential element may at all events (says Merz in Herzog, 8.) be acknowledged, that the putting to death of the world’s Redeemer must be accomplished by that very instrument of torture, which is capable, as no other is, of being made, represented, set up, and looked upon as a sign before all the world, and in all the world,” etc. 12. It is not Grotius, as Hengst. erroneously asserts, but Junius, who has already remarked that in Egypt it was the doorposts, here it is the foreheads, and that consequently while in the former ease it was still families, houses, here it is merely single individuals that come into consideration. As contrasted with Egypt, it is Israel which in this crisis of the world stands the test, in virtue of a cleansing by means of blood, of a purification from sin. For if God will impute sin, who shall stand? Here in Jerusalem, on the other hand, the question is as to the Israelite (Deuteronomy 6:8), who is so after the spirit and not after the flesh, as it is not all Israelites who are the true Israel. It is a crisis in a narrower sense, consequently a separation. Hence, also, over against the persons comes the person of the Lamb, just as in Matthew 25:12 the “I know you not” is the decisive element. His mark brings about exemption from punishment in Jerusalem (Joe 2:32), while in Egypt it is the blood of the lamb (Exodus 12:13; Exodus 12:7). Whoever has not the Spirit of Christ is none of His. For, finally, the Spirit is the mark wherewith we are sealed, whereby we cry, Abba, Father (Romans 8:15; Revelation 14:1). 13. “The marking” (observes Hengst., as already J. H. Mich.) “does not secure against any share in the divine judgment, for this would not correspond with the nature of the divine righteousness, as even the elect are affected in many ways by the prevailing corruption; it is merely a security against their being carried away with the wicked (Psalms 28:3), against an evil death, and everything which would stand opposed to the rule that ‘all things work together for good to them that love God’ (Romans 8:28). Jeremiah is an example.” Comp. also Jeremiah 39:16 sqq., 45:5. 14. One may, with Hδv., find in the description of those to be spared (Ezekiel 9:4) a characterizing of fidelity according to its negative side merely. They are the Protestants from the bottom of their hearts in Jerusalem. Moreover, the circumstance that they are described in such a way shows how oppressed they are by the corruption universally prevailing, so that their being spared in the judgment is at the same time a deliverance from the wicked (Psalms 1:4 sqq.; Luke 18:7 sq.). HINTSEze_9:1. “Each one is to have his weapon in his hand, not merely by his side or on his shoulder, in order that he may strike out on every side immediately. The Chaldeans were as it were the executioners, the Jews the criminals, and the appointed time was come. When they shall say, It is peace! and reckon the evil day far from them, destruction shall come upon them swiftly” (B. B.).—“The visitation of grace brings salvation for the pious (Luke 1.), while the visitation in wrath is the portion of the ungodly (Psalms 6:1-2)” (Stck.). Ezekiel 9:2. “Those who admonish are followed by the executioners, the prophets by the soldiers, the friends by the enemies” (Stck.).—“Although the Lord sends forth His angels of vengeance, yet the Angel of the covenant is with them, who watches over the children of God” (Tόb. B.).—“From this we deduce, in the first place, the effective threatening for the ungodly, that God has always servants who stand ready to obey Him; in the second place, the comfortable conviction, how even the unbelieving Chaldeans wage war under God’s commands, and must act in accordance therewith; and lastly, we see that God spares His elect. This is just God’s secret providence” (C.).—“The small number of believers need not surprise us; they have often been only few” (L.).—Thou seest how the Son of God at all times gathers for Himself by His word and Spirit a church chosen to everlasting life, and protects and upholds it (Heidelberg Cat. Qu. 54).—A contemplation at the altar, which is fitted to alarm us (by reminding us of our sin, by the thought of retributive punishment), which is meant to comfort us (by means of the atonement, by the act of sparing in the midst of the judgment). Ezekiel 9:1-3. The six and the seventh in their significance for the judgments of God.—The severity and the goodness of God.—Punishment and grace along with one another. Ezekiel 9:3. “The Jews imagined that God was, as it were, bound to the visible temple; but He shows them and us something different. If we imitate the Jews, our pretence of pure doctrine will likewise avail us nothing” (L.). Ezekiel 9:4. “The Holy Spirit is properly the true seal and mark wherewith believers are marked by God, and then the cross, so long as they are still in the Church militant” (B. B.).—“In Revelation 13. we find also a mark of the beast on the right hand or on the foreheads!” (L.)—How many a man bears his mark on his forehead!—We are not to make ourselves partakers of other men’s sins by our looking on with indifference, or by our silence even.—And yet, what power the example of a corruption that is universal exercises!—“If thou art a person in office, cease not to admonish; if thou art merely a private individual, then show at least thy displeasure at what is evil! Noah and Lot did not follow the fashion” (L.).—Fear of man and desire to please man influence many men.—First the eye looks, then the mouth smiles, then hands and feet act.—O what a characteristic mark the sighing of the heart is, of whose child one is! Comp. Romans 8:22-23; Romans 8:26.—But how is it that here there is no mention of prophesying, of casting out devils, or of mighty signs, no mention of men of singular sanctity? Well, in the case of such it may happen that the Lord does not know them, never has known them, as He knows His own. Mention is made only of souls who are in earnest alarm in such a world as this, or even in a Jerusalem. Let these be comforted.—“When the apostle (2 Peter 2:7-8) commends the patience of Lot, he says that his soul was vexed so long as he lived in Sodom. He could not as a single man, one who was besides still a stranger, bring those who were so thoroughly depraved to be think themselves. He did not, however, himself become hardened amid the shamefulness of so many horrible deeds, but he sighed constantly before God, and was in continual sorrow. On the other hand, it is certainly a proof of great lethargy when we see that the holy name of God is despised, and yet feel no pain. Hence it is no wonder if we are involved in the punishments of those sins which we foster by our connivance. For that admonition is to be considered well, that the zeal of God’s house is to eat us up, arid that the reproaches of those who reproach God fall on us” (C.).—Those who are spared—a picture for the cabinet. Their outward and inward mark, according to Ezekiel 9:4. Ezekiel 9:5 sqq. Where God’s grace is followed by God’s judgment, and where the former has been turned into lasciviousness, there the discoveries which we must make in ourselves or in others have something exceedingly strict, harsh, severe about them. Neither the remainder of life, the helplessness and weakness of age, nor the blooming freshness of youth in its vigour, nor its grace and beauty, nor even childlike innocence or honourable appearance, is spared.—The unsparing character of God’s judgments on the despisers of His grace, of His word (comp. Ezekiel 9:10).—“The old take precedence of the young in the judgment, because they did not go before those younger ones in good example,” 2 Chronicles 36:17 (B. B.).—But the beginning is made with the temple, which Christ also cleared first, before the Jewish land was cleared of the Jews.—On ministers, princes, lords, the rich, the distinguished, and on those whom foolish people are accustomed to regard with most envy,—on these God’s sword of justice when drawn falls first of all, or even most of all.—To stand near the house of God is a blessed and also a safe position; but it is also the most dangerous position if it is hypocrisy. Certainly in this case religion is no lightning-conductor, but what the tree is in the storm; those who are under it are sure to be struck dead.—A lie in God’s face, or under the name of truth, is a lie of the worst kind, bringing with it eternal death.—Those who go about with fire lose certainly the dread of fire, but so much the more readily perish by the fire.—“Ye shall not touch any one of those who have the mark on them, is certainly no small testimony on God’s part and no small privilege, of which one stands very much in need at the time of visitation in general judgments, or when God in a special way strikes all around us, since the heart very easily becomes desponding and timorous, distrustful and afraid. But believers must not use it for self-exaltation above others, but rather for true humiliation before God, and for joyful confidence toward Him in trouble and death” (B. B.). Ezekiel 9:7. “In other cases, those who hope to be spared flee for refuge to the temples and places of worship; but here this avails nothing; on the contrary, the slaying just begins there” (L.).—“First the teachers, then the hearers” (B. B.). Ezekiel 9:8. “Ah, Lord! is the voice of His servants, as they look at rampant ungodliness; at the approach of God’s judgments; while they call to repentance; as they make their daily supplication for the Church” (Stck.).—“However cruel the prophets might appear to the Jews because of their threatenings and rebukes, yet they were anything but their enemies, inasmuch as they not only felt intense solicitude, but also made fervent intercession for their people. Such was the case with Moses, with Samuel, with Jeremiah (Ezekiel 9)” (L.).—“So the hearts of believers are full of love, as we see in the case of Paul in Romans 9” (C.) Ezekiel 9:9. “Ungodly men come to know God only after His judgments, but not in the right way of conversion” (Lange).—“God does not answer all his doubts. For God does not free us from all the difficulties in which we are involved, but puts our modesty to the test. We are, however, to learn here not to weigh the judgments of God in our scales, because we Usually extenuate our sins; it is God’s business to sit in judgment on sin” (C.).—“We never sufficiently comprehend the justice of the divine judgments. We always overlook something in God’s judging, however just and right it is. Here the secret providence of God is to be taken into consideration” (L.).—When the cup is full, it runs over. Ezekiel 9:11. It is also an “It is finished” that closes the priestly as well as the judicial work, John 19:30 (John 4:34). 3. The Coals of Fire on the City (Ch. 10). 1And I saw, and, behold, on the expanse that was above the head of the cherubim,—as it were a sapphire stone, as the appearance of the likeness of a throne was seen [appeared] over them. 2And He spake unto the man clothed in linen, and said, Come hither between the wheels, hither under the cherub, and fill thy two hands with coals of fire from between the cherubim, and scatter over 3the city. And he came before mine eyes. And the cherubim stood on the right of the house, at the coming of the man; and the cloud filled the inner court. 4And the glory of Jehovah rose up above the cherub, over the threshold of the house; and the house was filled with the cloud, and the court was full of the brightness of the glory of Jehovah. 5And the sound of the wings of the cherubim was heard as far as the court, the outer one, as the voice of the Almighty God when He speaketh. 6And it came to pass, at His giving the command to the man clothed in linen, when He said, Take fire from between the wheels, from between the 7cherubim; then he came, and stood beside the wheel. And the cherub stretched forth his hand from between the cherubim unto the fire that was between the cherubim, and lifted it, and gave it into the two hands of him clothed in linen; and he took it, and went out. 8And there appeared in the cherubim the form of 9a man’s hand under their wings. And I saw, and, behold, four wheels beside the cherubim, one wheel beside one cherub, and one wheel beside another cherub; 10and the appearance of the wheels as the look of the stone of Tartessus. And their appearance: one likeness to them four, as it were a wheel in the midst of a wheel. 11When they went, they went toward their four sides; they turned not in their going, for whither the head turned, they went after it; they turned not in 12their going. And all their flesh, and their backs, and their hands, and their wings, and the wheels, were full of eyes round about; they four had their 13wheels. As regards the wheels attached to them [or: As regards the wheels, regarding14them], it was cried in mine ears, O wheels. And four faces were to every one: the face of the one was the face of the cherub, and the face of the second the face of a man, and of the third the face of a lion, and of the fourth the face of an 15eagle. And the cherubim mounted upwards: this was the living creature that I saw by the river Chebar. 16And when the cherubim went, the wheels went beside them; and when the cherubim lifted up their wings to mount up from the earth, 17the wheels also turned not from beside them. When the one stood the other stood, and when the one mounted up the other mounted up; for the spirit of the 18living creature was in them. And the glory of Jehovah went forth from above 19the threshold of the house, and stood over the cherubim. And the cherubim lifted up their wings, and mounted up from the earth before mine eyes, when they departed, and the wheels beside them; and it stood at the opening of the gate of Jehovah’s house, the east [gate]; and the glory of the God of Israel was 20over them above. This was the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel at the river Chebar; and I knew that they were cherubim. 21Every one had four faces, and every one four wings, and the likeness of the hands of a man 22under their wings. And [as regards] the likeness of their faces, they were the faces which I saw by the river Chebar, [as regards] their appearances and themselves; they went every one straight forward. Ezekiel 10:2. Sept.: ... τ. ἐνδεδυκοτατηνστολην— Ezekiel 10:6. ... τ. στοληντηνἁγιαν— Ezekiel 10:9. ... λιθουἀνθρακος. Ezekiel 10:11. …εἰςὁνἀντοπονἐπεβλεψενἡἀρχηἡμια—ad quem ire declinabat quζ prima erat— Ezekiel 10:12. ….πληρειςὀφθαλμωνκυκλοθεντοιςτεσσαρσιντροχοιςαὐτ.—plena … oculis in circuitu quat. rot. Ezekiel 10:13. Et rotas istas vocavit volubiles— Ezekiel 10:19. … K. ἐστησανἐπιταπροθυρα— Ezekiel 10:21. Sept.: ... κ. ὀκτωπτερυγες. REMARKSWhat follows is to be regarded as a second act in this dramatic vision, for the first woe closes with the report in Ezekiel 9:11. That the vision makes a new start is shown immediately in Ezekiel 10:1 : And I saw, and, behold (Ezekiel 8:2); and we shall be preserved from manifold perplexity if we mix up nothing from the previous chapter with this.—Comp. first of all on Ezekiel 1:22; Ezekiel 1:25. By this express reference to chapter 1. it must already be clear (comp. Ezekiel 10:20) that δλψαιν are the chajoth known from that passage. Comp. farther on Ezekiel 1:26. The throne making its appearance prepares for the command of Him who is enthroned; but nothing appears except the throne, for the glory of Jehovah is conceived of as above the cherub, from which it moves in Ezekiel 10:4. Keil (Klief.), following the punctuation, takes πψΰδςμιδν as an independent sentence: He (Jehovah) appeared above them. Ezekiel 10:2. Comp. on Ezekiel 9:1-2.—The vision in Ezekiel 1. corresponds with the temple-vision, an application of what was seen there to the case in hand (Matthew 22:7).—αεΰ, as usual, in contrast with δμκ.—αιπεϊμβμβμ is the intermediate space in the wheelwork, hence: between the four wheels on the ground. For although βμβμ does not mean “whirl,” yet neither is it quite = ΰετο (wheel), but it combines at the same time what was implied in the wheel, with the idea of swiftness in rolling, of repeated, frequent motion. Comp. in the meantime for illustration, on Ezekiel 1:15 sq.—ΰμΞϊηϊμλψεα confines within narrower limits the more general expression which precedes; hence λψεα here is neither the double cherub on the ark, nor the whole of the cherubim, but the definite (Ezekiel 10:7) individual cherub.—We are not certainly to think of any hearth for material fire as being between the cherubim, nor is the altar of incense (Isaiah 6:6) to be dragged in for explanation; but it is the wrath of God (comp. Ezekiel 9:8), which destroys Jerusalem, that is symbolized, in accordance with the description in Ezekiel 1:13. [Ew.: the punishment, as in Genesis 19:24, the worst. Calv. adopts the view of a silent antithesis to Leviticus 6:12-13. Herewith properly everything is already said as regards the judgment on the city; the statement ειχηειφΰ in Ezekiel 10:7 brings merely in addition the execution of it, which is immediately followed up by allusions (also to the vision in Ezekiel 1.), mostly of an explanatory character, which are meant to illustrate the matter with all fulness and circumstantial exactness. Ezekiel 10:3 begins to supplement by telling us where the cherubim (Ezekiel 10:1-2) in this second act appeared to the prophet as standing, where they had taken up their position: on the right of the house [on account of the inner court (of the priests) which follows, to be explained of the temple proper]; according to most: on the south side or south-eastwards (Ezekiel 10:19, Ezekiel 11:23), in contrast with Ezekiel 8:5 sq., 14 (Ew.: because the south is the place of fire and death, just as the Indian Jamas dwells there and comes thence); according to others: on this very account, and because of the execution of judgment by the Chaldeans, on the north side. Along with the cherubim the whole vision is transferred from Ezekiel 1., although first of all it is merely the cloud that is mentioned, which is certainly also the first thing in Ezekiel 1:4 (comp. there). The circumstance that it fills the court of the priests is an impressive contrast to 1 Kings 8:10 sq. Ezekiel 10:4 is almost a verbatim repetition of Eze 9:3, and accordingly the expression ξςμδλψεα is to be understood as there of the double cherub on the ark, so that, as in Ezekiel 9. in connection with the judgment on the citizens, so here in connection with the burning of their city, the abandonment of the temple on the part of Jehovah is prefigured. The prophet explains how the connection in the latter case was made clear to him,—how, namely, outside the temple-edifice the cherubim (chajoth) stood ready with the coals of fire, and the cloud threateningly filled the inner court, when at the same time in the most holy place the glory of Jehovah rose from its old resting-place, which the worship Sabbatically celebrated, so that it mounted up (ειψν) over (ςμ, which may of course be for ΰμ, but rather stands here in contrast with ΰμ in Ezekiel 9:3) the threshold of the whole, visible as well as raised high above all; “cherubim” and “cherub” balancing each other in this way, that the house (in the narrower sense) became full of brightness from the cloud which filled the inner court, the (inner) court became so from the glory of Jehovah taking its departure out of the most holy place. Comp. on the “cloud” and the “brightness,” Doctrinal Reflections, p. 117. And as the brightness in this way attended the glory of Jehovah visibly through the court of the priests, so in Ezekiel 10:5 the sound of the wings, etc., ready for movement, accompanies it audibly; comp. on Ezekiel 1:24. The mention of its being heard as far as the (outer) court proves the correctness of the exposition given of Eze 10:4, as being parallel to Ezekiel 9:3. Comp. besides on Ezekiel 1:24 (Exodus 19:16; Exodus 19:19; Exodus 20:1; Exodus 20:18 sq.). Accordingly, after the adjustment of the relation of cherub and cherubim (the explanations of Eze 10:3 sq. are attached to the latter), Ezekiel 10:6 returns to Ezekiel 10:2, resuming the command to the man clothed in linen. The execution of what is there commanded is described as it began. δΰετοΰφμ, i.e. beside the one definite wheel to which he went; not “an ideal combination of the wheels,” as Hengst, or = plural (Sept. [Eng. Vers.]). Then Ezekiel 10:7 tells us how he obtained the fire (the coals of fire of Eze 10:2). The cherub next to that wheel (Ezekiel 10:9) took it and gave it to him. Thus the band of avengers (Ezekiel 9.) under his leadership, in whom we recognised a setting forth of the divine glory, is parallel with the cherubs of the vision; one hand grasps the other (Revelation 15:7; Revelation 8:5). The character in which the priestly man appears as mediating exemption from judgment (Ezekiel 9.) has thus (quite in accordance with the departure of Jehovah on the throne of grace out of the most holy place, where also no sacrificial mediation is possible any longer) assumed the form of a mediation of pure judgment. This abandonment of the temple on the part of Jehovah, which is much more prominently connected with the judgment on Jerusalem than in Ezekiel 9:3, prefigures the ειφΰ of the man (comp. Ezekiel 9:7), who thus takes his departure from the court of the priests for the city. But the mention of the hand of the cherub in Ezekiel 10:7, as well as of the wheel in Ezekiel 10:6, gives occasion for the continuation of explanatory additions which follows. First comes Ezekiel 10:8. Ezekiel 8:3; comp. on Ezekiel 1:8.—Then in reference to the wheel, Ezekiel 10:9; comp. on Ezekiel 1:15 sq., Ezekiel 1:4; Ezekiel 1:16. A distributive repetition of the statement. Ezekiel 10:10. Comp. on Ezekiel 1:5; Ezekiel 1:13; Ezekiel 1:16. As the appearance of the wheels is described in two aspects, the expression is repeated, just like ξψΰδ in Ezekiel 1. Ezekiel 10:11. Comp. on Ezekiel 1:17; Ezekiel 1:8-9. The head, according to Hengst, is: “what is upmost, highest, most excellent, i.e. the wheel which for the time had the direction, and which the others required to follow.” Hitz.: “This is also the case with ordinary vehicles; but where each wheel has a fourfold movement, there are also four heads, consequently; the head which begins the movement and carries the other three heads along with it.” Keil: “whither the foremost turned.” All these explanations keep aloof from any reference to the cherubim, while in Ezekiel 10:9 the wheels stand beside them, and the following Ezekiel 10:12 mentions the cherubim first. Comp. Ezekiel 10:14. δψΰω is therefore = τπιν in Ezekiel 1:15, to which also ιτπδ seems to point. Consequently it is the primus motor, the face of the cherub giving the direction, which they followed as their head (comp. on Ezekiel 1:11). Ezekiel 10:12. And all their flesh, etc., can only refer to the cherubim, which accordingly are described (Revelation 4:6) additionally to Ezekiel 1:18 (comp. there). μΰψαςϊνΰετπιδν expressly specifies the connection between the cherubim and wheels thus characterized. Ezekiel 10:13. Hengst. translates in a meaningless way: “the wheels were called the whirl in my hearing.” Comp. for βμβμ, Ezekiel 10:2, and for αΰζπι, Ezekiel 9:1. The verse docs not so much wind up as prepare for what follows. The call (δַ, the sign of the vocative) is not, however, addressed to the wheels, as Keil: “to the wheels, to them it was cried in my hearing, O whirl”; but it contains what was cried, as giving the signal for departure, in reference to them (as Ezekiel 10:14 also shows), with a view to the cherubim, which are described according to their faces, which give the direction (comp. Ezekiel 10:11). Comp. first on Ezekiel 1:6; Ezekiel 1:10. The description of the faces in detail makes prominent only one of each of the four cherubim. (Is it that which is directly in front of the prophet?—Keil.) [Kimchi incorrectly: the first, second, etc., of the four faces of each.] The face of the one (first) was δλψεατπι, i.e. simply of the one definitely referred to in Ezekiel 10:2; Ezekiel 10:7 (Klief.). That it is the ox’s face is proved from the connection. If the north side is taken for it (see on Ezekiel 1:10), then the definition in detail of the faces, significant as it is for the quarter from which the judgment breaks forth (Ezekiel 10:3), may possibly be according to the quarter of the heavens, and not according to the standpoint of the beholder, so that on all four sides of the vision as a whole, one face would be made prominent. [Hence it is vain to connect with this the etymology of the word λψεα, which is still spoken of as worthy of notice by Kurtz, and accepted by Schmieder, viz. λψεα = arator, according to the Syriac; which would lead, as Umbreit assumes on grounds purely conjectural, to an “ox-form as specially prominent in the whole phenomenon of the cherub, particularly on the ark of the covenant.” Hitz., following the Sept., makes the whole verse disappear as a gloss.] Ezekiel 10:15. Now comes the soaring aloft of the cherubim, thus prepared for (Isaiah 33:10); and in this connection already (Ezekiel 10:20) we have the identification with the vision in Ezekiel 1. Comp. there, Ezekiel 10:20. Ezekiel 10:16. The connection of cherubim and wheels in their harmonious movement, repeated just as in Ezekiel 1., with the mention, however, here of their wings, which were not mentioned there. Comp. Ezekiel 1:19 (Ezekiel 10:11). Ezekiel 10:17. Ezekiel 1:21; Ezekiel 1:20. Ezekiel 10:18. ειφΰ corresponds with ειφΰ in Ezekiel 10:7. It was really the last moment before the complete departure from the temple! The glory of Jehovah, after it had risen up “from above” the cherub in the most holy place, had shown itself aloft above the threshold of the temple-edifice as a whole (Ezekiel 10:4); now it betakes itself thence, so as to be over the cherubim (Ezekiel 10:3); and in Ezekiel 10:19 the now (as in Ezekiel 1.) united (ειςξγ) whole—cherubim, wheels, and glory of Jehovah—completes the abandonment of the temple as a whole.—αφΰϊν (comp. their standing-place in Ezekiel 10:3), corresponding with ειφΰ in Ezekiel 10:18.—τϊηωΧ—where the court of the people opened toward the city, at the east gate of the temple-edifice.—(δχγξεπι, comp. Genesis 3:24 : ξχγν.) Ezekiel 10:20. A repetition in completed form of Eze 10:15. There the cherubim were the living creature; here the living creature is the cherubim. The recognition of the chajoth as being cherubim is the explanation of the vision of Ezekiel 1., as referring to Jerusalem, and it was brought about by means of the double cherub on the ark of the covenant. The cherubim must certainly have been well known to the priest-prophet from that quarter. The circumstance that they had appeared to Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1.) as the living creature, threatened therefore alike the dead worship in the most holy place, and the service of the dead idols everywhere in Israel, with the wrath of the living God (ΰμδιΞιωΧ), with infallibly certain judgment. Their appearance by the Chebar predicted already the departure of the glory of Jehovah from the most holy place, and the abandonment of the Holy City; it had predictions at the same time for those who were in exile, as Ezekiel 11. will show. Thus it appears important to Ezekiel to recapitulate in Ezekiel 10:21-22 the common features which serve as proof. 1. It is much less to the judgment on the city, of which the account is a very brief one, that the prophet directs his attention, than to the showing of the coincidence with Ezekiel 1. If the vision there was that of the glory of Jehovah, as Ezekiel expressly says in summing up (Ezekiel 1:28 : ξψΰδΧδεΰ), its relation to the glory of Jehovah above the cherubim, in the most holy place of the temple at Jerusalem, remained an open question. Has the glory of Jehovah, therefore, forsaken the temple, or will it? is it about to depart from thence, that it appears by the Chebar amid the misery of the exile? We know from the Introduction to our book how important this matter is for Ezekiel’s mission and labours. The question, then, which had remained open, is answered by Ezekiel 10; and this the prophet does not merely by repeated allusion, running throughout the whole of Ezekiel 10., to Ezekiel 1. in the description, but also by the quite definite statement in Ezekiel 10:15, and still more expressly in Ezekiel 10:20 : διΰδηιδ. The removal of the presence of Jehovah (Ezekiel 10:4; Ezekiel 10:18) from the ark of the covenant (already in Ezekiel 9:3), the corresponding manifestations in Ezekiel 10:1 sq., 5, etc., to the well-known vision of Ezekiel 1. (already in Ezekiel 8:4), form the exceedingly dramatic, and at the same time the characteristic element of our chapter, which consists in the identity of the symbol of the divine presence for purposes of worship in the most holy place of the temple with that seen in vision by the Chebar, having so important a bearing on the downfall of Jerusalem as well as on the prophetic task of Ezekiel and the prospects of his companions in exile. 2. Bunsen remarks: “Hence the glory of God in the temple was none other than that which is reflected on the spirit of the pious man from the created universe. But this implies also that to the prophet, the law, or the ark of the covenant in the most holy place of the tabernacle, and afterwards of the temple, was a temporary phenomenon, and that the time for the spiritual knowledge and worship of God was approaching. It is a foreshadowing of what is announced in John 4:21, shortly before the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem. But this latter already wanted the ark of the covenant and the glory of the Eternal bound up therewith. We must, moreover, compare the departure to the Mount of Olives (Ezekiel 11:22 sq.), and the entrance into the new temple (Ezekiel 43:2 sq.).” Cocceius says: “God’s proper dwelling-place is not between the cherubim made of gold, in which there is no life, no energy, no motion, but between the cherubim which are chajoth, i.e. living creatures, who have eyes to see, who possess the light of truth and the fire of love in themselves, God’s life in them, and who therefore glorify God: where this is the case, there is God’s dwelling, His holy temple, His glorious presence.” 3. If (Ezekiel 10:14) it is just to the ox-faced cherub that the dispensing of the fire (Ezekiel 10:7; Ezekiel 10:2) is assigned, then, in fact, we have an approximation to Lange’s interpretation of the bullock as the “suffering and bleeding life-form” (Lebens-gebild), the “tragic-sacrificial animal.” Light-foot: “When the high priest approached the ark in the holy of holies, the cherub, which of necessity first met his eye on his right, was turned to him with its ox-face.” 4. The approach of the man clothed in priestly linen garments has, according to the representation of the prophet, not only something which reminds us of the entrance of the high priest into the holy of holies on the great day of atonement, but, in the fire of the divine wrath being handed out to him here, has a significant Christological feature in it, where the aspect of eternity at the fearful moment and the noble simplicity of the transaction have an overawing effect. Comp. Deuteronomy 18:15-16. 5. “The holy fire of God cleanses every creature which it touches; but in the case of the pious, the burning coal is a gracious power of cleansing, as in Isaiah 6; for those who are thoroughly corrupt, it is a consuming fire of judgment” (Schmieder). 6. In the harmony wherewith the glory and cherubim and wheels are represented as moving, there is mirrored, as Hδvernick remarks, the ideal character of the heavenly world. (For the rest, see Doctrinal Reflections on Ezekiel 9:1.) HINTSEze_10:1 sq. “By this it was meant to be shown that Christ’s majesty and power are higher than the heavens (Hebrews 7:26),—not, indeed, in respect of a residence in space, but in respect of the greatness of His glory” (St.).—“How great is the glory of the Lord, the great God, and how terrible is His majesty, when He rises up to punish sinners! Nahum 1:2” (Tόb. B.).—He who formerly made the mark for sparing, behold, he now scatters coals of fire upon the city. So the Son of man is likewise the Judge of the world (John 5:22; John 5:27).—“Christ the Messiah was the Judge not only in the destruction of the last Jerusalem, but also in the destruction of the first (Luke 19:44)” (Tόb. B.).—The exact counterpart in the New Testament to this judgment with fire on Jerusalem in the Old Testament is the day of Pentecost at Jerusalem, fiery though it also was: instead of the coals of fire, tongues of fire. Ezekiel 10:3. “So oughtest thou also to be prepared and to stand prepared to execute the divine will; as in heaven, so on earth ought it to be” (Stck.).—“That every one, therefore, should execute his office and calling as willingly and faithfully as the angels do in heaven” (Heidel. Cat. 124).—“For the last time, when the glory is already on the way to take its departure. But also a beautiful type of the incarnation of the Word” (B. B.). Ezekiel 10:4. This is to be forsaken indeed, when God prepares to forsake us. Lo! then more than ever darkness comes over all the powers of man’s spirit and over his life, and even trusted, loved countenances of friends go into shadow. Good thoughts grow ever fewer, impulses to prayer ever more rare; admonitions of conscience cease; the holy of holies in the man becomes empty down to the four walls and the usual pious furniture, etc. Ezekiel 10:5. “The wings of the cherubim were heard in the confession of believers and in the executionary troops” (B. B.).—So also in the announcement of the shepherds (Luke 2:15 sq.), as well as in the declaration of the wise men from the East, and then later and specially in the preaching of the apostles, was this rushing to be heard.—The thunder of the Almighty will make itself be heard more distinctly at the end, where He has hitherto spoken tenderly to draw the miserable out of the world. Ezekiel 10:6 sq. “In the execution of important works, one ought to offer his hand to another (Exodus 4:28; Exodus 4:30)” (St.).—“Willingness and ability to perform the divine will is the meaning of the man’s hand; its being concealed under the wings shows the servants of God in their mysterious dependence on God’s beck and command” (St.). Ezekiel 10:9 sq. Comp. Homiletic Hints on Ezekiel 1.—“By this repeated and still plainer description the ‘galgal’ is to be made very clear to us” (Cocc.). Ezekiel 10:10. “In the kingdom of Christ everything stands in a close union and beautiful harmony” (St.). Ezekiel 10:11. “Now so ought it also to be among God’s children and servants. Not the one thing here, and the other out there. At the same time, one may be in front, whom the others follow; this detracts nothing from the equality” (B. B.).—“Dear friend, take no long counsel with flesh and blood, but follow after” (St.). Ezekiel 10:12. “The expression: ‘full of eyes,’ points to the enlightenment for looking to the ways of the Church, for watching that the church wheels may always be on the way of righteousness” (Lampe). Ezekiel 10:13. It may also be cried: Revolution! that everything must be turned topsyturvy. Evolution is better. But if the people, princes, and potentates will not themselves turn, then the Spirit of God in judgment causes them to be turned in manifold ways, so that the foremost comes to be hindermost.—“Oh, involution and change of all things in the world, until the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdom of God and of His Christ!” (B. B.)—“The believer is always in motion; there is no standing still in the Christian life, but continual progress in virtue and purity” (Stck.). Ezekiel 10:14. “Laboriousness, humanity, heroic courage, and depth of insight into the mysteries of God are especially the gifts of grace wherewith God is wont to endow men for the spread of His kingdom” (Lange). Ezekiel 10:15. “So ought it to be with us also, Colossians 3:1 sq.”—“Where God departs, His angels go with Him” (B. B.). Ezekiel 10:16 sq. Repetition makes it the more certain. Ezekiel 10:20 sq. The prophet also grew in knowledge. Ezekiel 10:22. “Like them ought we, none the less keeping our goal in view, to go after Him.” 4. The Leaders of the People (Ch. 11.)1And the Spirit lifted me up, and brought me unto the gate of the house of Jehovah, the east one, which looketh eastward; and behold, in [at] the opening of the gate five-and-twenty men; and I saw in their midst Jaazaniah the 2son of Azur, and Pelatiah the son of Benaiah, the rulers of the people. And He said unto me, Son of man, these [are] the men that devise mischief, and 3that counsel evil counsel in this city; That say, [it is] not “near,” “building 4of houses”; it [is] the caldron, and we [are] the flesh. Therefore prophesy upon them, prophesy, son of man. 5And the Spirit of Jehovah fell upon me, and He said unto me, Say, Thus saith Jehovah: Thus said ye, O house of 6Israel, and the things which rise up in your spirit, I know it. Ye have multiplied your slain in this city, and filled its streets with slain. 7Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Your slain, whom ye have laid in its midst [the city’s], they [are] the flesh, while it [is] the caldron, and one brings you 8forth out of its midst. A sword ye feared; and I cause a sword to come 9upon you: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And I bring you forth out of its midst, and give you into the hands of strangers, and execute judgments on 10[among] you. By the sword shall ye fall; on Israel’s border will I judge you; 11and ye know that I am Jehovah. It will not be the caldron for you, so that 12ye should be the flesh in its midst; on Israel’s border will I judge you. And ye know that I am Jehovah, ye that walked not in My statutes, neither executed My judgments, and [but] did after the judgments of the heathen which were round about you. 13And it came to pass, as I prophesied, that Pelatiah the son of Benaiah died; and I fell upon my face, and cried with a loud voice, and said, Ah, Lord Jehovah! art thou making an utter end of the 14remnant of Israel? And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying: 15Son of man, thy brethren, thy brethren [are] the men represented by thee as kinsman, and [yea] the whole house of Israel, it wholly, to [of] whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem say, Be far from Jehovah; unto us was it—the land —given for a possession. 16Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because I removed them to a distance among the heathen, and because I scattered them in the countries, I become [became] to them for a sanctuary for a little in the countries whither they came. 17Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, And I gather you out of the nations, and assemble you out of the countries in which you were scattered, and give you the land of Israel. 18And they come thither, and they take away all its detestable things and all 19its abominations out of it. And I give them one heart, and a new spirit will I give in your inward part, and I take away the heart of stone out of their flesh, and give them a heart of flesh. 20That they may walk in My statutes, and keep My judgments, and do them, and may be to Me for a people, and 21I may be to them for a God. And [as for them] whose heart walketh after the heart of their detestable things and their abominations, their way give I 22upon their head: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And the cherubim lifted up their wings, and the wheels [were] beside them, and the glory of the God of Israel over them above. 23And the glory of Jehovah rose up from over the midst of the city, and stood over the mountain which is on the east of 24the city. And the Spirit lifted me up, and brought me to the land of the Chaldeans, to the exiles, in the vision, in the Spirit of God; and the vision 25which I had seen rose up from above me. And I spake to the exiles all the words of Jehovah which He showed me. Ezekiel 11:1. Sept.: ... τ. ἀφηγουμενουςτουλαον. Ezekiel 11:3. …οὐχιπροσφατωςὠκοδομηνταιαἰοἰκιαι;—Nonne dudum ζdificatζ sunt domus?Ezekiel 11:7. Anoth. read.: ΰεφιΰ. Sept.: Κ. ὑμαςἐξαξω—and all the Versions. Ezekiel 11:13. λδπΧ; anoth. read.: αδπαΰι. Ezekiel 11:15. The second ΰηικ is omitted by some Codd., Sept., and Arab.—Sept.: ... καιοἱἀνδρεςτ. αἰχμαλωσιαςσου... κ. πκς... συντετελεσται, οἱςεἰπαν— Ezekiel 11:16. …εἰςἁγιασμαμικρον—in sanctificationem modicam— Ezekiel 11:17. …αν̓τους— Ezekiel 11:19. …καρδιανἑτερανκ. πνευμακαινον... ἐναὐτοις—(Anoth. read.: μαηγω–.επϊϊιμαν, Syr.—αχψαδν, αχψαν, Syr., Sept., Arab., Chald., Vulg.—μλν, ξαωψλν, in some Codices.) Ezekiel 11:21. instead of εΰμΞμα, there is a reading εΰμλμ. Ezekiel 11:24. …κ. ἀνεβηνἀποτηςὁρχσεως— REMARKSThe execution of judgment on the guilty inhabitants of Jerusalem is followed, as a second act, by the fire of wrath on the city, in connection with the departure of Jehovah from, the temple (Ezekiel 10). The vision is brought to a close by means of a striking occurrence. But, as in Ezekiel 9 in the midst of destruction there was at the same time the exercise of forbearance, so here also comfort and promise are joined with it. In the outset we have in Ezekiel 11:1 (comp. at Ezekiel 3:12; Ezekiel 3:14; Ezekiel 8:3) a new ecstatic commencement as regards the prophet. The locality to which (from where it is not said, and Ezekiel 8:16 is not the rule for it; comp. on the other hand, Ezekiel 10:5) he is transported is that mentioned in Ezekiel 10:19. As in Ezekiel 8:16 we have χֵ ?γְ ?ξָ ?δ from χֵ ?γֶ ?ν, so here χָ ?γִ ?ιξָ ?δ from χָ ?γִ ?ιν. The express repetition of the quarter of the heavens has something which points to Ezekiel 8:16, without thereby identifying the five-and-twenty here with those mentioned there; it is only the similar turning away from the God of Israel towards an east, rich in hope, as they imagine, that can be hinted at therein. Comp. on Ezekiel 8:16. “At the opening of the temple” is not=at the opening of the gate. Moreover, those mentioned in Ezekiel 8:16 cannot (in accordance with Ezekiel 9:6 sq.) be conceived of as any longer alive. The Jaazaniah (ιַ ?ΰֲ ?ζַ ?πְַ ?ιָ ?δεּ ?=ιַ ?ΰֲ ?ζַ ?πְ ?ιָ ?δ) in their midst, who is first mentioned by name, accords in name and appositional statement with Ezekiel 8:11 : “and Jaazaniah … standing in their midst,” but without the possibility of their being the same person, as their fathers are different; only their parallel disposition (we shall be able here also to notice it) might have been meant to be hinted at. There is some allusion to Ezekiel 8 in the expression. We know nothing more otherwise, either of the first named or of the second. [Hengstenberg extracts symbolically from the names of the men themselves and of their fathers the concentration of their thoughts: “all was full of joyous music to them.” “God-hears, the son of the Helper, and God-helps, the son of God-builds,” are to him “excellent names for men who promise themselves salvation without repentance, the direct opposite of the name Jeremiah: God-casts-down.”] The fact that the two who are named are designated as “princes of the people,” as it is commonly translated, does not at the same time assign this position to the remaining twenty-three, as the expositors admit; on the contrary, they appear thereby to be distinguished above the rest of the men; and the reason for it seems to be given in their importance, which immediately follows (Ezekiel 11:2). The ωָׂ ?ψֵ ?ιδָ ?ςָ ?ν, however, are by no means πְ ?ωִׂ ?ΰֵ ?ιδָ ?ςֵ ?γָ ?δ; but the more general meaning of ωַׂ ?ψ admits of the sense demagogues, those having sway over the people, rather than of elders (ζְ ?χֵ ?πִ ?ιν), or presidents of parts of the city, or members of the Sanhedrim, or presidents of the classes of priests, or of our thinking of the twelve princes of tribes and the twelve royal officials (colonels), with the king himself (Klief.) or commander-in-chief of the army. In their quality as bearing sway over the people they come into consideration, not as representing the civil authority of Israel, as those in Ezekiel 8:16 represent the spiritual chiefs of the covenant-people (Keil.). In this way, also, it might be explained why the two are mentioned by name. The number given (25) may be intended to express a parallel with Ezekiel 8:16, just as a parallelizing tendency to Ezekiel 8 seems to belong to the expression here at the close of the vision. With the patriarchically representative constitution of Israel, where the influence of the elders and heads of families easily pervaded the whole nation (Saalschόtz, Archδol. ii. 432, § 4), the two individuals named may nevertheless also be, if not princes of tribes, yet elders of the people, although they are not here designated as such officially. It is no ordinary sitting of a college, as Hitzig alleges, but an assemblage of persons like-minded (officials, notables, individuals out of the mass) that is represented; perhaps, however, in order to represent the “house of Israel” (Ezekiel 11:5) amply, designedly in the form of two for every tribe, and one more besides. Ezekiel 11:2. Son of man, Ezekiel 2:1.—ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο, with no fixed boundary between cause and effect, stretching from the moral to the physical, from the subjective to the objective,—mischief, as it results from injustice. Their evil counsel turns out ill. Their manner of speaking in Ezekiel 11:3 is the popular-rhetorical, which makes an impression on the sensuous mass by its striking, figurative character, and is easily remembered. How they think, and what corresponding counsel they give, is shown first of all by the statement: It is not near, building of houses,—their reply, namely, to the prophets of this period, who supplement one another, Ezekiel and Jeremiah. The distinctive expression in the case of the former—comp. Ezekiel 7, especially Ezekiel 11:7-8 (ςָ ?ϊַּ ?δξִ ?χָּ ?ψεֹ ?α)—is met by the bold denial μֹ ?ΰαְ ?χָ ?ψεֹ ?α, and at the same time, αְּ ?πεֹ αָּ ?ϊִּ ?ιν (building of houses) ridicules the letter of Jeremiah to the exiles (Ezekiel 29:5), beginning with αְּ ?πεּ αָ ?ϊִּ ?ιν (“build ye houses”), which threatened those at Jerusalem with sword, famine, and pestilence, etc. [Other explanations of these words are either hardly justifiable linguistically,—such as Luther’s, those of the Sept. and Vulg. (Ewald takes μֹ ?ΰ as a question, Gram. 324a),—or give a far-fetched sense, such as Hitzig’s.] Positively their meaning is expressed to this effect, that Jerusalem will keep its inhabitants, as the caldron keeps the flesh; and therefore their counsel is, to remain and to trust to the secure walls, instead of trusting the word of the prophets. [According to Hδvernick, with allusion to Jeremiah 1:13; according to Kliefoth, alluding to Jeremiah 19?] Bunsen: “We sit here in Jerusalem warm and protected, like the flesh in the caldron.” Their reply to the prophetic word is answered in Ezekiel 11:4 : therefore—the repeated prophesy; and in Ezekiel 11:5 we have Ezekiel’s immediate carrying out of the command in virtue of the divine equipment; comp. Ezekiel 8:1. The Spirit, instead of the hand of Jehovah, because of the revelation in word (ΰֱ ?ξֹ ?ψ). Jehovah knows what rises up in their spirit (Ezekiel 20:32), as His Spirit also goes forth to meet their spirit. Thus there is a return to their saying. [Ξιδָ refers to ξַ ?ςֲ ?μεֹ ?ϊ (Deuteronomy 31:21; Hosea 5:3; Psalms 139:2; John 2:25), or it is a collective feminine.] The expression: house of Israel, emphasizes almost ironically the contrast of what they pretended, what they also ought to be. Their mischievous devising, their bad counsel (Ezekiel 11:2), is set before their eyes in Ezekiel 11:6 in its ultimate effect in actual fact, by means of the result to which it will lead when they are brought forth (Ezekiel 11:7). Not that their deeds hitherto are to show the wickedness of their plots,—neither from “the epoch of Jeconiah” (Hitz.), nor, in accordance with a more general interpretation, of murder in a refined and gross sense (Hδv.),—which would lie outside the context, but the slain (δַ ?μָ ?μ, properly: “to pierce through,” as happens in the case of those who are put to the sword) are those to be slain by the Chaldeans, already slain from the standpoint taken up in the discourse of God. They are by their wicked counsels the authors of their death (Hengst.). ηָ ?μָ ?μ, comp. Ezekiel 6:7; Ew. Gram. 278a. Ezekiel 11:7. A retributive (μָ ?λֵ ?ο) interpretation of their proverb in accordance with such a result of their counsel. It is fulfilled, but how? Not for themselves. Inasmuch as they—in contrast with their remaining in the city, which they have strongly asserted (Ezekiel 11:3)—are brought forth, they remain alive, as distinguished from those slain as the result of their counsel. Yet comp. Ezekiel 5:2. (Like the Sept. and Vulg. [Eng. Vers. also], Ewald reads ΰεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰ instead. of δεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰ.) [J. D. Mich.: “Many citizens misled by you shall perish in the city, for whom it will be the caldron, and they the flesh which is cooked therein; only ye yourselves shall not be the flesh in this caldron, but shall be dragged forth and cut in pieces elsewhere.”] Ezekiel 11:8. From fear of those who are able to kill the body (Matthew 10:28), but not from fear of God (otherwise they would have hearkened to the word of His prophets), they took the walls of Jerusalem as a “caldron,” which was to enclose them securely as the “flesh.” (“Ye would not give yourselves up to the Babylonians, as Jeremiah advised you, because ye were afraid of being put to death by them,” etc., a Lap. “Their revolt from the Chaldean king, the coalition and Egypt, will not save them from the sword of Babylon, on the contrary will bring it upon them,” Hengst.) Ezekiel 6:3. Comp. also at Ezekiel 5:11. Ezekiel 11:9. Now comes the question how it will be with the bringing of them forth (Ezekiel 11:7). First of all, Jehovah (not Babylon, as it may appear outwardly) is He that brings them forth. Then farther, there is along with that His design, His aim; comp. Ezekiel 7:21; Ezekiel 5:10; Ezekiel 5:15. Ezekiel 11:10. Ezekiel 5:12. Comp. the fulfilment, 2 Kings 25:18 sq.; Jeremiah 39:6; Jeremiah 52:10; Jeremiah 52:24 sq.—ςַ ?μΞβְּ ?αεּ ?μ, or ΰֶ ?μβְּ ?Χ, in Ezekiel 11:11 (Ew. Gram. 351a), removes the judgment not merely outside Jerusalem, which was to be a “caldron” for them, but outside Israel, which they have represented so badly (Ezekiel 11:5). Ezekiel 11:12 explains more definitely what is meant by the experimental knowledge of Jehovah in Ezekiel 11:10,—that where they have not made themselves known before the heathen as Israel by doing what is right, He will make Himself known to them as Jehovah by means of His judgment, which deprives them of city and land. Comp. Ezekiel 6:7; Ezekiel 6:13; Ezekiel 5:7. The sudden dying of Pelatiah takes place literally within the sphere of the vision merely, although in his case there may have been a corresponding reality at the same time, or at least about this time. As the prophet had to predict to the individual in question, as well as to his fellows, their being brought forth out of Jerusalem for judgment by the sword, but not their immediate death (Ezekiel 11:4 sq.), this incident, whose awful character (Acts 5:5) is attested to us by the impression upon Ezekiel, symbolizes prophetically the certainty in actual fact of the judgment of death on the others also (comp. besides, Jeremiah 28:17). And so Ezekiel sees them all already dead, and Ezekiel 9:8 repeats itself. Comp. there. Just as there, so here also it is the portion of the people still remaining at Jerusalem, in the land of Israel, and the standpoint of feeling is likewise (as against Hengst.) that of the exiles. For λָּ ?μָ ?δςωֶֹׁ ?δ, comp. Jeremiah 4:27; Jeremiah 5:10; Jeremiah 5:18; Ezekiel 20:17. According to Hδvern.: a juridical term for the carrying out of the final sentence. [Hδvern. and Hengst. find an allusion besides to the name of the individual in question,—that the “help of Jehovah” is at an end, that with him, as it were, all salvation for Judah fell to the ground (?).] But while Ezekiel 9:9 sq. emphasized guilt only, and God’s justice only as confronting it, Ezekiel 11:14 introduces, and that solemnly, God’s mercy.—Still Ezekiel 11:15 does not on that account form any “antithesis” (as Hδvernick), but rather confirms what is announced in Ezekiel 9:9. For those in reference to whom remark will be made, and not merely of their being spared, but more positively even of their being preserved in an extraordinary manner, are different from those for whom Ezekiel interceded. He did so from a brotherly heart, and, because speaking from the standpoint of feeling of the exiles, characterized these also at the same time, in accordance with Jeremiah 24. Thy brethren, thy brethren, namely, those who are so in truth, and not merely according to the flesh (Matthew 12:48; Romans 9:3). The repetition in the first place lays emphasis on this, but then farther, at the same time, puts in his right place the prophet of the glory of God in the midst of the exile, as we have seen Ezekiel to be (see the Introd.) in this his calling. For the designation of the exiles as “men of thy βְּ ?ΰֻ ?μָּ ?δ” (predicate, not subject) is not=thy kinsmen (Gesen.), which after such emphasizing would be equivalent to a weakening of the idea, but it reminds the prophet of his duty. [The Sept. read βּ ?εֹ ?μָ ?ϊֶ ?κָ.] βְּ ?ΰֻ ?μָּ ?δ embraces the whole duty of the βֹּ ?ΰֵ ?μ (the brother or nearest kinsman): redemption of goods and property, of liberty and life, the avenging of blood, the marriage obligation, and thus the entire representation of, giving of assistance to, and attorneyship for him who was reduced to poverty, slain, or dead. The expression: and the whole house of Israel, just as little adds “the laity” (Hitzig) to the others, as by the expression: the men, etc., is meant the priests only, as Hδvernick also understands, in accordance with his view of the twenty-five in Ezekiel 11:1; but the discourse sets over against the title (Ezekiel 11:5) the thing itself, over against the name the reality, and at the same time deals with the (as in Ezekiel 9:8, so here in Ezekiel 11:13) so-called “remnant of Israel,” inasmuch as, corresponding to the repetition (“thy brethren,” etc.) at the beginning of our verse, the whole house of Israel (Ezekiel 9:8), by being repeated through means of: it wholly, is made emphatic. (Ezekiel 20:40; Romans 11:26.) Hengst.: “The contrast is, of course, such only on the whole; otherwise Jeremiah even would be no true Israelite. According to Ezekiel 9., even in Jerusalem there is an election under the Lord’s sheltering protection, although it cannot prevent the downfall of the city; and according to Ezekiel 14. there is also among the exiles much refuse.” [John 1:47 (Ezekiel 48.); Romans 2:28-29; Romans 9:6; Jeremiah 7:4; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 Corinthians 3:9. The idea which is expressed by λֻּ ?μֹּ ?δ stands forth still more prominently by means of the contrast, so far as appearances go, to which those who are still for the moment the inhabitants of Jerusalem (Ezekiel 12:19) give expression, in accordance with their Pharisaic, hypocritical self-exaltation. Their characteristic dictum is quoted. For the imperative ψַ ?ηְַ ?χεּ, comp. on Ezekiel 8:6 and John 9:22. What they themselves are inwardly in reality, the appearance of that—its outward realization—they cast to those in exile. “They fall into a kind of holy zeal. In this position which they assumed toward their brethren, they themselves bear witness that they are not in the true sense brethren” (Hengst.).—μְ ?ξεֹ ?ψָ ?ωָׁ ?δ, Exodus 6:8. Over against such a saying (Ezekiel 11:15) on their part, Ezekiel 11:16 places the retributive saying of Jehovah: Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord, etc. And what is retribution towards Jerusalem is at the same time promise towards the exile. But there are two things said and therewith promised by God. The first, which is in reply to that saying: “Be far from Jehovah” (Ezekiel 11:15), which made a declamatory use of their being outwardly far from the temple at Jerusalem, is the declaration so rich in promise: I become a sanctuary to them,—a thought which must from the first in Ezekiel 1, along with other things, have been indicated by the vision at the river Chebar, but which especially the vision in Ezekiel 8 sq. has brought as a compensation for the symbol of the presence in the outward temple of Jerusalem. The older Jewish expositors think of the synagogues. λִּ ?ι, not before the direct speech, like: Yea, etc., and therefore impressively repeated (Hitz.); but in fact granting the reality, although tracing it back to Jehovah expressly, it begins like a protasis which gives the reason, or at least in the sense of: “if,” “although,” or the like, [ξִ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωׁ, according to Gesen. “asylum,” which is too narrow.] ξְ ?ςַ ?θ, either the length of time, or in the sense of measure (in some measure), which does not suit the context so well, and a promise of God, as here, still less.—(Isaiah 8:14; John 2:19; Revelation 21:22.) The second answer to the saying of the inhabitants of Jerusalem has reference to the statement: “to us was the land given” (Ezekiel 11:15). Hence Ezekiel 11:17, with therefore, parallel to Ezekiel 11:16, and continuing the promise by means of εְ, in the oratio directa. I gather you (Jeremiah 23:3)—comp. John 11:52—for which the return from Babylon was merely the outward substratum. In how spiritual a sense the return is conceived, namely, as at the same time an inward return to Jehovah (Jeremiah 24:7), and therefore into the land promised by Him, is shown immediately by Ezekiel 11:18. And they, etc., i.e. the parties addressed, the parties mentioned. The history of the Jews after the exile proves the purification of Palestine from the previous idolatry (Ezekiel 5:11).—To the gathering corresponds the divine bestowal in Ezekiel 11:19, just as it explains the reformation (Ezekiel 11:18). [Hitzig: ΰַ ?ηֵ ?ψ, “another” heart, like the Sept.] The one heart (Acts 4:32) and the new spirit in the inward part are parallel. The old spirit which ruled them inwardly did not permit the harmony and concord which now ensue. But with the gift of a new spirit, the heart of stone, the unnatural element, is at the same time removed out of the flesh, and the natural element—an heart of flesh—is given. It is therefore no antithesis of Holy Spirit and flesh, as elsewhere,—not the contrast of nature and grace, but “a new spirit” and the opposite of the “one heart” that is to be given, i.e. the old spirit, that confront each other,—nature and the unnatural. The manner of expression is peculiar to Ezekiel. As they take away (δֵ ?ρִ ?ιψεּ) all the detestable things and abominations out of the land, so Jehovah takes away (δֲ ?ρψֹ ?ϊִ ?ι) the heart of stone out of their flesh. The “stony heart” stands in relation to the idols; so also the “heart of flesh,” “the new spirit,” the “one heart,” stands in relation to the only true God (1 Kings 18:21; Psalms 86:11; James 1:8; James 4:8). Comp. the opposite in Ezekiel 11:21. [Commonly the heart of flesh is taken as a soft heart, receptive of the impressions of divine grace, and the stony heart as the human heart in its natural condition.] Comp. Ezekiel 36:26; Jeremiah 31:33; Jeremiah 32:39; Psalms 51:12 [10]. Israel, by her apostate, polytheistic conduct, has fallen entirely out of what was natural to her as a people,—that she should be the people of the one true God, the people of His holy law. This unnatural element of her conduct as a nation is to cease by means of the divine gift and working, and so μְ ?ξַ ?ςַ ?ο in Ezekiel 11:20 fits in quite simply as defining the purpose. Comp. besides, Ezekiel 11:12. Ezekiel 11:21. In contrast, either those at Jerusalem who have filled the land with their idolatry (Ezekiel 11:18), or those among the people of God to be restored who shall prove worthless (comp. Ezekiel 14:3), or the latter as well as the former. (In a grammatical point of view, comp. Ew. Gr. 333, p. 820.) Just as one may take up idols into his heart, so a heart may be ascribed to them. It is only the practical side of his becoming one with them, so that one is represented as one heart (Ezekiel 11:19) and one soul with them, when his heart walketh after their heart, instead of walking in Jehovah’s statutes (Ezekiel 11:20). Comp. besides on Ezekiel 9:10. Ezekiel 11:22. The closing scene of the vision of Ezekiel 8-11 Comp. the previous scenes connected with the movement and departure of the glory of God out of the most holy place of the temple, as equivalent to and parallel with the vision of glory in Ezekiel 1:1-28; Ezekiel 8:4; Ezekiel 9:3; Ezekiel 10:3-4; Ezekiel 10:18-19.—Comp. Ezekiel 10:19. Ezekiel 11:23. The expression: from over the midst of the city, points at the same time to this circumstance, that the execution of judgment and the exercise of forbearance within the city (Ezekiel 9), as well as the throwing of the coals of fire over the city (Ezekiel 10:2), were a manifestation of glory. The position in Ezekiel 10:19; Ezekiel 11:1 (“inasmuch as the city stretches to the north and south beyond the temple,” Hitz.), indicates also the middle of the city. Such an abandonment of the temple, therefore, is at the same time an abandonment of the city (Hosea 5:15). While the vision still lasts, the glory of Jehovah stands over the Mount of Olives (2 Samuel 15:30; Zechariah 14:4), as is the view of ancient and modern expositors alike. Its situation and height are suitable (“the commanding point in reference to Jerusalem, which is overlooked from it in its whole extent,” Hengst.). (Comp. Luke 19:37; Luke 19:41 sq., Luke 21:37, Luke 22:39; Acts 1:12.) Comp. Ezekiel 43:2. Whether for the purpose of there presiding over the judgment on Jerusalem and the temple, or whether for the purpose of going back from thence to heaven, it is not said. This is objectively the end of the vision, but likewise subjectively as regards the prophet, Ezekiel 11:24; comp. on Ezekiel 11:1, Ezekiel 8:1; Ezekiel 1:1; Ezekiel 3:11 (Acts 10:16). The fulness of the description lays emphasis on the divine superhuman as well as non-human character of the revelation made to him, with a view specially to those to whom he in Ezekiel 11:25 communicates it. γִּ ?αְ ?ψֵ ?ι, as throughout Holy Scripture. Yet the word, in a pre-eminent sense (John 1), is finally the deed, the Word of God κατ̓ἐξοχην. 1. Demagogism in Israel is characterized in Numbers 16 as a laying stress on the universal priesthood of Israel, as opposed to the special office of Moses and Aaron. In our chapter its seductive skill in words is turned against the prophets of the period, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, inasmuch as the popular orators harangue their public on the possession of Jerusalem and the dwelling in the promised land. If, therefore, in Numbers 16 the argument is borrowed from the idea of Israel,—what she is to be according to Exodus 19:6,—it is argued in our case from the existing reality of Jewish affairs at the moment; hence, in comparison, also a degenerate demagogism, just as everything in Israel’s case points downwards. Perhaps we may compare the relation of social demagogism to the old republican demagogism, which latter at least still inscribed the ideas, liberty, equality, fraternity, on its red banner, while socialism agitates merely in reference to the actual relations of society for the moment. 2. Hδvernick admits the “remarkable literal fulfilment” of Ezekiel 11:9-11, but refuses, on the other hand, with Grotius, to understand them as “a prediction.” The idea of the threatening in our prophet here “lies much deeper, in the nature of the subject itself; the extent of its application accordingly is also much wider.” Hengstenberg remarks: “The prophecy cannot have been framed merely after the event; Ezekiel laid his book before his contemporaries, who were able to put him right. And the guarantee for the predictions which were fulfilled in the lifetime of the prophet lies in those which did not come to be fulfilled till long after his death. The confidence of Ezekiel is a sufficient proof that there is a supernatural element,” etc. Certainly neither the canon of Nitzsch, that the prediction must not destroy the history, nor the limitation of Tholuck, that the detailed prediction must not be expressed before the subjects who are actors in the history, can suffice for regulating the prophetic gift of divination. Alike the psychologico-anthropological and the specifically theological elements are deprived of an adequate scientific basis. 3. “It is lamentable if we must gain the knowledge of God (Ezekiel 11:10; Ezekiel 11:12) by our own destruction—if He in whom we live, and move, and have our being, is known only by the strokes which break our own head. The knowledge has in this case, moreover, no moral import. It is a mere passive knowledge, forced also upon the ungodly, unconnected with repentance” (Hengst.). 4. Although the prospect which the divine promise (Ezekiel 11:16 sq.) opens up regarding the captives of Israel is expressed everywhere in forms of Old Testament life as it appears under the law, yet the New Testament background, the “Messianic salvation” (Ewald), shows itself behind it. The realization of the covenant into which God entered with Israel for the human race, that they should be to Him a people and He should be to them a God, remains a theme down even to Revelation 21:3. With this the fulfilment also coincides, as it brought the return from the exile. The exiles were gathered out of their banishment to be a people again, and that on the “recovered soil of Israel,” under Zerubbabel, Ezra, Nehemiah; just as those who had continued to dwell in the heathen countries solemnly professed by their visits to the feasts at Jerusalem (Acts 2.) that they belonged to the nation of the Jews. The reformation of the religious condition was an energetic one, as directed against the heathenish lusts after idolatry on every hand which prevailed before the exile. Comp. also the period of the Maccabees. Monotheism became the purifying fundamental dogma of the Jewish nation. And there was also developed a scrupulous legality, down even to Pharisaism, in the trivial actions of life. It was “a new spirit,” and proved to be in general, and in comparison with the previous “stony heart,” which God’s judgment had broken in pieces, an “heart of flesh;” but yet it was merely an heart of flesh. The New Testament interpretation must not as a matter of course be put upon Ezekiel 11:19 sq., as is done by Cocceius and the most of believing expositors. The prophetic words do not affirm this; but the prospect into the New Covenant does not open till at the close, where God gives the assurance that He will make Himself known as their God to those who have become His people. For this took place when He εἰςτὰἴδιαἦλθε, John 1:11. Only ὅσοιδὲἔλαβοναὐτὸν, ἔδωχεναὐτοῖςἐξουσίανκ. τ. λ. (Ezekiel 11:12). The renewal for that is not contained in Ezekiel 11:19 sq. Cocceius, indeed, interprets ξִ ?χְ ?γָ ?ωׁ ξְ ?ςַ ?θ (Ezekiel 11:16) by: sanctuarium paucorum, i.e. Deum per inhabitationem suam in aliquibus, paucis, eos sanctificare, and finds therein the antithesis to Isaiah 53:12 and Romans 8:29! 5. What the vision of the glory of Jehovah which Ezekiel had at the Chebar already signified, but still more in accordance with its supplementary confirmation as well as renewal by means of Ezekiel 8 sq., that obtains in the statement: “I become to them for a sanctuary” (and that not merely in a rhetorical sense, as it may be understood in Isaiah 8:14, and hence as an emblem of protection and also of blessing), its retrospective, but, at the same time, preparatory (as regards Ezekiel 40 sq.) expression, and, in general, one that is predictive and rich in promise. The saying in Ezekiel 11:15 does not indeed affirm anything expressly of the temple, but would make the presence of Jehovah be decided as a matter of fact by the possession of the land. But so much the more does the divine reply, in contrast with the material possession of the land, draw attention to the “sanctuary,” by means of which Jehovah’s presence in the land is brought about, and in which one is able to draw near to Jehovah (χָ ?ψַ ?α, as opposed to ψηַ ?χ). Since, then, Jehovah promises to be to them a sanctuary, i.e. a temple in this connection, the priestly-prophetic office of Ezekiel is brought specially to light, by means of which the exiles approach God, and God makes Himself known to them, and in addition to which there is the glorifying of the name of Jehovah in and through Daniel; but along with that in general, there is promised a presence of God in spirit and in truth, as John 4:20 sq. expresses it in respect of worship. Thus the exile might be to the Jews a school as regards the indwelling of the Word in flesh among men full of grace and truth, as regards the revelation of glory as of the Only-Begotten (John 1:14), as regards the temple which appeared in Jesus Christ (John 2:19 sq.). [“The dispersion, besides being a just chastisement on account of sin, and a salutary discipline to lead the heart of the people back to God, had an important end to accomplish as a preparatory movement in Providence for opening the way for Messiah’s kingdom. It was very far from being an unmixed evil. As a mere external arrangement, it was destined to be of great service in diffusing the knowledge of God, and providing materials for the first foundations of the Christian Church, by giving the bearers of God’s truth a place and an influence in many of the most commanding positions in the heathen world. But still more important and necessary was the end it had to serve, in spiritualizing the views of the better part of the Jews themselves, and training them to the knowledge and service of God, without the help of a material temple and an earthly kingdom. Practically it had the effect of indefinitely widening the bounds of Canaan, or of giving to the world at large somewhat of its distinctive characteristics, since the devout worshipper at Babylon, Alexandria, Rome, or wherever he might be placed, found himself a partaker of God’s presence and blessing as well as in Jerusalem. What a mighty advance did the kingdom of God thus make toward the possession of the world! And in rendering the dispersion of His people instrumental to the attainment of such a result, how strikingly did the Lord manifest His power to overrule a present evil for the accomplishment of an ultimate good! Nor were it, perhaps, too much to say, having respect to the issues of things, that the dispersion of the Israelites among the nations was fraught with as much blessing for the Church and the world as even their original settlement in Canaan.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, p. 114.—W. F.] “For a little,” it is said in Ezekiel 11:16, Jehovah Himself will be a sanctuary; in view of the destiny of the Jewish people, the state in exile could only be of a provisional character, only preparatory. For salvation is of the Jews, and the destiny of the people—and this must be upon its own soil—is the building of the temple of the kingdom of God (Ezekiel 40. sq.). Palestine became the cradle of the incarnation of God in Christ, and thus of the Church on earth. But now, when the exile of the Jews has become a long period, the Jews must have fallen out with their destiny, as in such a case they have neither recognised their temple in Christ, nor built themselves as a people for a temple of God (Ephesians 2:21; 1 Corinthians 3:16 sq.; 2 Corinthians 6:16; comp. John 17:19 sq.). 6. “How different the Babylonian exile from the present! In the latter case, no proof of the presence of God; the people can keep only feasts of commemoration, and dream of the future; between the distant past and the distant future an immense empty space, a complete Sahara. In the former case, for him who looks more deeply, in the deepest humiliation there are everywhere traces of the loving care of God, pledges of the enduring election, of the future glorification” (Hengst.). 7. As against Keil, who quotes Hengstenberg for his view, we must assert that the passage Deuteronomy 30:6 does not lie at the foundation of the promise in Ezekiel 11:19, as was held already by Cocceius, who quoted in addition Colossians 2:11 sq., and the Epistle to the Hebrews. The “one” heart can only mean in the case of the individual a united heart,—a heart, therefore, which does not in its thoughts go from one thing to another, which does not through its lusts scatter itself on outward things, but is held together by the fear of God in its bent towards Him; which comes to the same thing as μְ ?αωָׁ ?μֵ ?ν, i.e. a whole heart, not divided between God and any other (Deuteronomy 6:5; Deuteronomy 10:12). But here it is the people as a whole and generally that are spoken of. Their σκληρο-καρδία is well known (Matthew 19:8); it has come to light by means of their history, that even the best, the noblest of this people shared in it (Mark 16:14). We call attention to the passages in our prophet, Ezekiel 2:4; Ezekiel 3:7. Comp. Isaiah 48:4 (and this, too, with reference to idolatry); Jeremiah 5:3. They have hardened themselves in such a way (Deuteronomy 10:16, like Pharaoh under the plagues) in opposition to the law, that God’s law, which was written on tables of stone, is written as it were, with its penalties and its curse, upon stony Israel. But whatever their hardness may be, there is confronted with it (Deuteronomy 9:27) what they are in Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; in other words, that they are as flesh, that is their nature, and hence to be the Lord’s servant. And that God says He will give back, restoring what originally belonged to their nature (“an heart of flesh”), in contrast with the unnatural and that which is against nature which has grown up in them (“the heart of stone”). Comp. on the other hand, John 1:13. 8. There is generally more said than ought to be said according to God’s word, that “in its natural state man’s heart” is “hard as a stone” (Hengst., Keil). It becomes the “heart of stone” only by hardening. By nature it is rather “an heart of flesh,” which grace confronts with spirit of Spirit (John 3:6). Even in the case of Pharaoh there comes forth on repeated occasions the fleshy element of his heart (Exodus 8:4; Exodus 8:21; Exodus 8:24 [ Exodus 8:8; Exodus 8:25; Exodus 8:28], Exodus 9:27, etc.). And with the fleshy state of the heart manifold gifts of God are conceivable, as was the case with Israel from their fathers (hereditary blessing). 9. The “heart of stone,” which has become such by hardening, God breaks in pieces. Thus it happened to Pharaoh. He does not break it; in that case it must have been an “heart of flesh.” But this is done in Zechariah 12:10. Or, as in our chapter, God takes away the “heart of stone,” and gives “an heart of flesh.” The keeping apart of flesh and stone is as important as that of flesh and spirit. 10. “In a threatening (Ezekiel 11:21) the whole terminates in a remarkable way. The idols are in themselves dead—mere reflexes and objective representations of the popular spirit; but even as such they exercise an enormous power over individuals. What power has Mammon now, as a Jewish (?) national god, over Jewish minds, although he is in himself a mere shadow?—Jehovah even may be an idol. With the idol-images the idols themselves do not yet disappear from a land”(Hengst.).“Little children, keep yourselves from idols,” the disciple of love still says to us (Umbr.). 11. The Messianic significance of the Mount of Olives, which is not denied by the Jews even, has its Christological fulfilment in the Gospels; but in addition, the whole movement of the glory of Jehovah in Ezekiel 10, 11 has its meaning for the life of the Son of God in the flesh. Jerome remarks: “By degrees the glory of the Lord takes its departure from Jerusalem. After it leaves the temple, it stands first on the threshold, thereafter at the entrance of the east gate, finally over the Mount of Olives, whence the Saviour ascends to the Father.” Comp. the beginning in Luke 2:46, the continuation in John 2:14 sq., along with the New Testament passages already quoted in the exposition; and for the end, still farther, Matthew 21:12 sq., Matthew 24:1 sq. (Matthew 27:5; Matthew 27:51). One might say, Ezekiel has seen beforehand the life of Jesus in its elements of judgment in reference to the Jewish people. 12. Baumgarten (The Acts of the Apostles, on Ezekiel 1, Clark’s Trans.) remarks on the glory of Jehovah in relation to the Mount of Olives: “It was therefore a departure, and yet a remaining in the neighbourhood; if the outward protection and blessing of Jehovah should be withdrawn from His people, the invisible power of His Spirit will remain near them, and perhaps manifest itself the more gloriously. It is the very same Ezekiel, who has afterwards brought vividly before us this side of promise and hope even in the departure of the glory of Jehovah; it is just Ezekiel who has beheld, represented, and described in the most impressive way the awakening, creative power of the Spirit of Jehovah for the whole nation of Israel (Ezekiel 37.). In like manner, Jesus, in whom dwelleth the divine glory bodily, withdraws from the Jews (John 8:21); but His standing on the Mount of Olives is a sign that He remains invisibly and blessedly near them, Acts 3:26.” HINTSEze_11:1-3. “Do thou also give thyself up to the drawing of the Spirit of God. Wherever He may lead thee, it will be to a joyful end at last. But beware of the leading of the evil spirit” (Starck).—When those who bear sway over the people are not able even to master their own wicked thoughts and words, but rather strive against God’s thoughts and words, it must certainly turn out ill both for themselves and for the people. The beautiful names of such leaders avail nothing, just as little as the voice of the people is, as is said, the voice of God, unless it be that God’s judgment is made known by it.—“We learn from this chapter how great a blessing from God it is for a people to have pious leaders.”—“That the prophet names only two may show us how it is the few who draw so many after them: so it is in the senates of princes, so it is in the free states” (Luther).—Thus God reveals the thoughts of men, 2 Corinthians 5:10. Ezekiel 11:3. “They allude to Jeremiah 1:13, and insinuate that the prophet contradicts himself. What! thou threatenest us with captivity, and yet thou sayest this city is the caldron, and the Chaldeans will be the fire! If it is God’s pleasure to cook us, then we shall remain in the caldron! Just as abandoned and profane men are always in quest of subtleties wherewith they may put down the heavenly doctrine, so they turned what was said by the prophets into the opposite: Well, then, we shall be thoroughly cooked, and shall therefore remain in Jerusalem onwards to extreme age” (Calv.).—“Impenitent sinners delight themselves in their sins, and do not suffer themselves, in the midst of their ungodly conduct, to dream of anything but pure good fortune, Jeremiah 5:12” (O.).—“In this way reason is accustomed always to drive all judgments out of the mind, or to comfort itself with the thought how it is quite able to withstand them by means of the flesh” (Berl. Bib.).—“Now-a-days still there are certain men who love to make the word of God contradict itself” (Luther). Ezekiel 11:4. They are against the prophets, and therefore prophecy is against them, and that without regard of their persons, or of the multitude at their back. Our prophet mentions the ringleaders even by name. How indelicate! how imprudent! how defiant! Is it not? But with God’s word at our back, we have the Almighty Himself at our back, and God’s servants are neither to be dumb dogs nor flatterers of men.—“Son of man” the prophet remains notwithstanding; his is the weakness, the power is God’s.—“God does not suffer Himself to be mocked, Galatians 6:7” (Starck). Ezekiel 11:5. “It is not the commissioned servants that speak, but the Spirit of their Father, Matthew 10:20. He is the Preacher, they are merely the voice, John 1:23” (Berl. Bib.).—What rises up out of the heart of man (Matthew 15:18-19) is of such a nature, that God must put a bridle on it; and this is just God’s bridle, that the darkness is dragged to the light, and reproved by the light, Ephesians 5:13.—“It is of no use, therefore, to make a show in the theatre of the world, even if the matter obtains the applause of men, because it goes at last before the heavenly tribunal, where God alone will be Judge. He knows our thoughts, and will not accept our subterfuges, nor allow Himself to be mocked by our subtleties. What men have held to be the highest wisdom, God will show them to be a vain conceit, and worthless” (Calv.). Ezekiel 11:6 sq. God is in word and deed a righteous Judge. To that very point to which the counsel of the ungodly brings those who follow them, God brings the ungodly themselves in the end. He judges them according to their words, although not as they mean them.—The irony in the divine retribution.—The “caldron,” the coffin.—The “flesh” is slaughtered; the “caldron” broken in pieces.—The retribution of God (1) attaches itself to the form of the sin, but (2) changes the substance of the sin into the substance of the punishment. Ezekiel 11:8. “The sword, therefore, does not come by chance where it comes, but God’s hand is in the matter” (Berl. Bib.). Ezekiel 11:9-12. “He who will not bend his heart before God must bend his head to strangers” (Starck).—“They had not chosen to know God from His word, and so they were now to learn to know Him, according to His word, from His works. If God’s law does not enlighten so as to impart a knowledge that is saving, then must God’s righteousness in judgment enlighten so as to impart a knowledge which is not saving” (Luther). Ezekiel 11:13-14. “If one will not listen to words, then God must speak by means of examples, which in that case call to us, Luke 13:3; Luke 13:5” (Berl. Bib.).—“A sudden death in the case of the ungodly is the most terrible thing that can happen, 1 Thessalonians 5. To the pious, on the other hand, who are always living in sight of death, even the most sudden death does not come unexpected” (Luth.).—“Although the pious do not find fault with God’s sentence, yet they look on the ruin of the ungodly with a sigh” (O.).—“When an angry father is going about in the house with a rod, even a dutiful child is afraid, falls at his feet, and pleads for his brothers and sisters: this a believer also does for the ungodly when God punishes them, Exodus 32.” (Starke). Ezekiel 11:15. It is not the word “brother” that is of consequence, but what the word expresses, and therefore it is repeated; and just as little is it the dwelling together that is of consequence, but their being one with each other (Ezekiel 11:19) is the reality of brotherhood.—1 John 5:16 : There is a sin unto death, for which one is not to pray.—What the inhabitants of Jerusalem say reminds one of the manner of speaking of many in the “only-saving” Church, as well as of many who fancy that they are “the community of the faithful.”—Comp. the Pharisee, Luke 18:11.—But the meek shall inherit the land, Matthew 5.—“There is a passage here which is worth noting, that we may learn not to estimate the state of the Church according to the common judgment of men, nor according to the glitter, which for the most part dazzles the eyes of the simple. For thus it comes about that we suppose we have found the Church where there is no Church, and are in despair when it does not present itself before our eyes. Rather are we to hold fast by this, that frequently the Church is preserved in a wonderful way in secret; and farther, that members of the Church are not those puffed-up people who impose upon fools, but rather the common people, whom no one regards” (Calv.). Ezekiel 11:16. The exile a Jewish school, in which the Jews (1) may learn the spirit of the temple, (2) may be prepared for the Spirit of Christ, (3) might have been educated in the spirit of true Christianity. Ezekiel 11:17-20. True return home is return to the true God. Ezekiel 11:18. “The true cleansing of the Church has taken place under the New Covenant; the perfect cleansing will take place on the day of harvest, at the last judgment.”—“True reformation of life must show itself by earnest hatred of what is evil, Psalms 119:128” (Starck). Ezekiel 11:19-20. “To the one heart belonged the outward union of the tribes under one name (Jews), the unity of endeavour on the part of all to return to Canaan, the unity in the doctrine of Moses, their unanimity against all idolatry, etc. From the stone we may take the following properties: that it is hard, deaf, fixed, etc. The flesh, on the other hand, is soft, moveable, receives impressions, feels pain and blows” (Starck).—The grace of God makes man again natural, human; before he is unnatural, inhuman.—“For true Christianity it is not enough to perform this and that other act of outward worship, at times even to do what is good, but one must become another man” (Starke).—“It is not merely gross idolatry that is to be rejected, but everything that is at variance with the word of God” (Luther). Ezekiel 11:21. “The walk after the heart of the idols stands opposed to the walk after the heart of God” (Hengst.).—“The fountain of all evil is to be sought nowhere else but in the innermost depth of the heart, Matthew 15:19” (Starke). Ezekiel 11:22. Jesus lifts up His hands (Luke 24:50), and departs in the act of blessing; here, on the other hand, the uplifted wings announced the outpouring of the curse. The Mount of Olives on both occasions, the contrast and the predictive type.—The life of Jesus in decisive moments, and the glory of the Lord in Ezekiel. 2. The Signs (Ezekiel 12:1-20) 1. The Sign of the King’s Departure (Ezekiel 12:1-16) 1And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 2Son of man, thou dwellest in the midst of the house of rebelliousness, who have eyes to see, and they see not; and they have ears to hear, and they hear not: for they are an house of 3rebelliousness. And thou, son of man, make thee [therefore make thee, thou son of man] baggage of the emigrant, and remove by day before their eyes. And thou shalt remove from thy place to another place before their eyes,—perhaps they will 4see?—for they are an house of rebelliousness. And thou shalt bring forth thy baggage as baggage of the emigrant by day before their eyes. Yet thou shalt 5go forth at even before their eyes, like the removals of the emigrant. Before 6their eyes break thee through the wall, and bring forth thereby. Before their eyes shalt thou lift up upon thy shoulder, in the darkness shalt thou bring forth; thou shalt cover thy face, and thou shalt not see the land: for as a wonder-sign have I given thee to the house of Israel. 7And I did so as I was commanded; my baggage brought I forth, as baggage of the emigrant, by day, and at even I dug through with my hand; in the darkness brought I 8forth, I lifted up upon my shoulder before their eyes. And the word of Jehovah came unto me early in the morning, saying, 9Son of man, said they not unto thee, the house of Israel, the house of rebelliousness, What doest 10thou? Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: The prince is this lifting up [Ezekiel 12:7] in Jerusalem, and the whole house of Israel that [are] among them [or, therein]. 11Say, I am your wonder-sign; as I have done, so shall it be done unto them; into banishment, into captivity they shall go. 12And the prince who is in their midst, to his shoulder shall he lift up, in the dark, then shall he go forth; through the wall shall they break to bring forth thereby; he shall cover his face, because he shall not see with his eye, he [shall not see] the 13land. And I spread My net over him, and he is taken in My snare; and I bring him to Babylon, the land of the Chaldeans; and he shall not see it, 14and there shall he die. And all that are round about him, his help and all his forces, will I scatter toward every wind, and a sword will I draw out after 15them. And they know that I am Jehovah, when I disperse them among the 16nations, and scatter them in the countries. And I leave over of them men of number, from the sword, from the famine, and from the pestilence, in order that they may declare all their abominations among the heathen, whither they come; and they know that I am Jehovah. 2. The Sign of Bread and Water (Ezekiel 12:17-20) 17And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 18Son of man, eat thy bread with quaking, and drink thy water with trembling and with anxiety. 19And say unto the people of the land, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah of the inhabitants of Jerusalem on the soil of Israel: They shall eat their bread with anxiety, and drink their water in pain, that her land may become waste from its fulness, because of the violence of all the dwellers in it. 20And the cities, the inhabited ones, shall be laid waste, and the land shall become desolate; and ye know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 12:2. Sept.: ... ἐνμεσωτωνἀδικιωναὐτων— Ezekiel 12:3. Sept.: ... ὁπωςἰδωσινδιοτι— Ezekiel 12:6. …ἐπ̓ἐμωνἀναληφθησηκ. κεκρυμμενοςἐξελευση— Ezekiel 12:7. …κκεκρ. ἐξηλθον, ἐπ̓ὠμ. ἀνεληφθηνEzekiel 12:10. Sept.: ... ταδελεγει... εἰτοντωἀρχοντικ. τωἀφηγουμενωἐν...κ. παντιοἰκω— Ezekiel 12:11. ... εἰπονὁτιἐγωτερατατοιωἐνμεσωαύεης. (Another reading: ιςωδμλν, Syr.) Ezekiel 12:12. …ἐπ̓ὠμωνἀρθησεταικ. κεκρ. ἐξελευσεταιδιατ. τοιχου, κ. διορυξειτουἐξελθεινδἰαὐτου— Ezekiel 12:19. For ΰψφδ there is a reading: ΰψφν and ΰψυ without the suffix. For ξξμΧ there is a reading: εξμΰδ. REMARKSThe visions in Ezekiel 8-9 have the connection we have seen with the vision in Ezekiel 1. Ch. 12. now, in the first place, takes up what is said in Ezekiel 2, 3, in order afterwards to give us, in close connection with Ezekiel 4-5, the continuation of the prophet’s discourse in the language of signs. If we take Ezekiel 8 sq. along with Ezekiel 4 sq., then we get information about the siege, the taking of Jerusalem, and we are made acquainted, not only generally, but in detail, with the destiny of the inhabitants. The fate of the distinguished popular leaders (Ezekiel 11) offers the most natural transition to the person of the king in its meaning for the whole. If, moreover, what has hitherto been referred to from Ezekiel 3:24 onwards was transferred inter parietes, then so much the more strikingly does the prophet now step abroad. Ezekiel 12:2. Comp. on Ezekiel 2:5 sq., Ezekiel 3:26 sq. The description of the state of the exiles is kept in accordance with what they have seen (especially Ezekiel 4:5) and also heard (Ezekiel 11:25). Thus it is with them at the time, while at another time, which the promise has in view, it is to be as in Ezekiel 11:16 sq. Comp. Isaiah 6:9-10; Jeremiah 5:21. The reason given is the universal and all-pervading rebelliousness (different from Deuteronomy 29:3 [4]). Hence in Ezekiel 12:3, “perhaps they will see;” and because of this possibility, which would not be supposed in the case of hardening in consequence of judgment, Ezekiel is to perform the sign in question before their eyes (repeated). λִּ ?ιΧ is, just because of the parallel close of Eze 12:2, not to be rendered by “that” (Hitz.). The thing meant also is merely “seeing” (i.e. in the sense of hearing how it will happen to them), and not by any means comprehending what they are. We are to think of a question implying doubt, whose doubtful purport, and along with that (or merely in general) the action commanded, is supported by a reason.—βּ ?εֹ ?μָ ?δ, “emigration” (Hengst.: “the emigrants,” an ideal gathering into one of the emigrants), consequently utensils such as are usual in a case of the kind,—not simply travelling gear, as hat, staff, bag (Matthew 10:9-10), but rather vessels for food and drink, household furniture, as distinguished from personal apparatus for a journey. Hence ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δ is not: “to make,” or: “to furnish oneself with” (Klief.), but equivalent to: “to put together” (comp. Ezekiel 12:4). βּ ?εֹ ?μָ ?δ (Jeremiah 46:19) is immediately explained, but, as the more detailed definitions which, follow show, the explanation is kept general. Comp. on Ezekiel 12:6. The emigration is specified as regards its starting point and goal.—In favour of the objective reality of the action to be performed, the remarks made on Ezekiel 4:5, as against Hδvern., Hitz., Hengst., have a still more pointed application in the present case. Ezekiel 12:4. The bringing forth of his household stuff, so far as it can be taken with him, describes more fully the “make thee,” etc. of Ezekiel 12:3; and it becomes clear at the same time how the expression there, εּ ?βְ ?μֵ ?διεֹ ?ξָ ?ν, must be understood, viz. of the beginning of the emigration, of the first preparation for it. Lastly, ιεֹ ?ξָ ?ν is explained, by means of αָּ ?ςֶ ?ψֶ ?α, as meaning the daytime in its most proper sense; and the prophet’s own migrating from his dwelling-place is characterized in the most definite way, in contrast with a mere journey, by the expression λְּ ?ξεֹ ?φָ ?ΰֵ ?ιβεֹ ?μָ ?δ (comp. on Ezekiel 12:6), a comparison which Hδvern. considers applicable to the time of departure alone. Comp. Hengst. on Micah 5:1. His rendering here is: “as emigrants go forth,” in the costume and garb of emigrants, combining, as he does, “bag on shoulder, staff in hand,” with their being “sad, and their heads drooping” (Numbers 33:2). Ezekiel 12:5 describes more minutely the bringing forth of the stuff in question (Ezekiel 12:4). The prophet is to break for himself a hole for the purpose (εְ ?δεֵ ?φΰϊָ, as in Ezekiel 12:4) in the wall, i.e. of course, of his house, perhaps a clay wall; for were it to be the city wall of Tel-Abib, as Hengstenberg, in the interest of his “subjectivity” of the symbolic action, asserts, thereby throwing into confusion the occurrence and the text, then it must, especially with this detailed description here, have been expressed more definitely. Hengstenberg makes Ezekiel bring his baggage as far as the city wall, and when the darkness came on, break a hole through it, etc. The text, on the other hand, makes the breaking through of a hole in the house wall (instead of the usual exit by the house door), for bringing forth the stuff, take place, like the bringing forth itself (Ezekiel 12:4), before their eyes, consequently in clear daylight, since the taking up upon the shoulder (Ezekiel 12:6), though happening also “before their eyes,” has to take place (comp. Ezekiel 12:4) “at even,” both as distinguished from αָּ ?ςֲ ?μָ ?θָ ?δ (ςֲ ?μָ ?θָ ?δ, from ςָ ?μָ ?θ, the restrained light), in thick darkness (Genesis 15:17). It may be taken for granted that Ezekiel, with this breaking through, for which he is not forbidden to use a tool, will have the whole day to do it. Neither Klief. nor Keil has correctly apprehended the course of the action. As Ezekiel 12:6 portrays sufficiently the departure of Ezekiel himself, when he puts his goods and chattels on his shoulder, there is no need for understanding the Hiphil ϊּ ?εֹ ?φִ ?ιΰ intransitively, or for supplying πַ ?τְ ?ωְׁ ?κָ. Moreover, by the expression is meant the emigration with bag and baggage from his own place to “another” (Ezekiel 12:3); hence the complete departure, as distinguished from εְ ?δεֹ ?φֵ ?ΰϊָ, like ϊֵּ ?φֵ ?ΰ and εְ ?δεֹ ?φֵ ?ΰϊָ in Ezekiel 12:4. It corresponds to the darkness about him that he is to cover his face besides; and in this way the expression λְּ ?ξεֹ ?φָ ?ΰֵ ?ιβεֹ ?μָ ?δ (Ezekiel 12:4) is explained for us, inasmuch as emigrants’ departures usually take place with shame and sorrow, which do not allow themselves to be seen, and which will no longer cast a look on the home that is to be forsaken (2 Samuel 15:30). Yet the land which he is not to see (comp. Ezekiel 12:12-13) is perhaps still more that to which he is going forth. Hence Ezekiel 12:5-6 are two parallel (μְ ?ςֵ ?ιπֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν—μְ ?ςֵ ?ιπֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν) and more minutely descriptive statements as regards Ezekiel 12:4.—ξεֹ ?τֵ ?ϊ (either from ιָ ?τָ ?δ, “something shining,” similar to the derivation of the German “Wunder” (miracle), or from an assumed root ιָ ?τַ ?ϊ, what is suddenly “turned,” singularly “twisted,” “turned away” from what is usual), therefore, not merely ΰεֹ ?ϊ, simply a significant sign, but specially a sign of a divine sort, and that, in the sense of our context, equivalent to τύπος, Psalms 71:7. In this word there meet together the superhuman (miraculous) character alike of the purport and of the cause, the surprising character of the spectacle, as well as the manner of working of the astonishment and the typical object in view. In Ezekiel 12:7 Ezekiel reports as to his execution of the divine command, whose objective reality Keil admits in the case before us. The report of the prophet is a recapitulation, in which the points of time (by day, at even, in the darkness) form the salient points, to which, without keeping up the order of succession as to the rest (since this is certainly contained in the preceding command of God, according to which Ezekiel acted), the detail with reference to the interpretation (of the symbolical action) which follows is attached. As in what follows the double reference—to the people as a whole, and to the prince in particular—comes out, so Ezekiel makes prominent in his report, (1) what is the thing which is impending over them in general (my baggage, etc., as emigrants’ baggage, by day), and (2) in what way the prince personally gets out, viz. by breaking through in the night-time. Accordingly, because of the significance attached to the digging through the wall, which may possibly be indicated even in Ezekiel 12:5 by the expression ηַ ?ϊָ ?ψΞμκָ, and which becomes complete only when the prophet himself comes through the hole in the wall, he connects his day’s work with his own departure at even. αְּ ?ιָ ?γ is meant to express in general the idea: with my own hand, as contrasted with the help of others. The emphasis lies on the personal element in the action. As distinguished from: I brought forth … by day, the expression: I brought forth in the darkness, refers to the removing from out of the dwelling-place. μְ ?ςֵ ?ιπֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν at the close adjusts the execution of the command to the object in view, and at the same time to the explanation which follows; and for this reason the thing which lies nearest and is still visible, although occurring before the complete “darkness” of the departure properly so called, viz. the taking up upon the shoulder at even, is mentioned. The transaction is (and this is also Umbreit’s view) to be conceived of in this way: the elders (Ezekiel 8.) might have left the house of the prophet. In accordance with what has been remarked at the commencement of the chapter, the impression made by Ezekiel’s disclosures (Ezekiel 11:25) may have been but slight, or not lasting. Just then a hole is opened in the wall of his house, ever growing wider and wider. It is easily understood how the multitude gathers from curiosity. Perhaps late in the afternoon of the day, what a man can carry of household furniture is brought out through the opening in the wall. At even the prophet himself steps forth, loads himself with the emigrant’s baggage, and takes his departure, with his head covered, in the midst of total darkness, etc., from Tel-Abib for some other place. Ezekiel 12:8 assigns the divine word of interpretation to the early morning of next day. Comp. 2 Chronicles 36:15. Ezekiel 12:9. δְַ ?μֹ ?ΰ (as against Klief., who does not admit a question at all) presupposes that they have asked Ezekiel for the meaning of what he has done. By means of the expression: house of Israel, the exiles are put on an equal footing with those in Jerusalem; just as by means of the expression: the house of rebelliousness (see on Ezekiel 12:2), they are at the same time characterized as regards their disposition while putting the question. Therefore Ezekiel is, in reply to what they have said unto him, in Ezekiel 12:10 to say unto them what Jehovah says. He has answered them the evening before by silence (Ezekiel 3:27), and has merely done as he was commanded (Ezekiel 12:7).—δַ ?πָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ, either passively: “he who has been lifted up” or: “he who lifts himself up.”—Hengst.: “one on whom something is laid, who is burdened with the government, which he bears, as it were, on his shoulder,” Isaiah 9:6 (?)—as αִּ ?ιψεּ ?ωַָׁ ?μִ ?ν shows, the king (Ezekiel 7:27) Zedekiah. There is an unmistakable play upon the word δַ ?πָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ in δַ ?ξַּ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ, which (likewise derived from πָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰ) means: the lifting up, and, without our being obliged with all the expositors to think of the meaning “sentence” (judicial utterance of God) or “burden” (threatening prediction), as elsewhere, refers simply to the statement (Ezekiel 12:7): ςַ ?μλָּ ?ϊֵ ?σπָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰϊִ ?ι, which paves the way for the interpretation. Comp. the Syriac translation. Hence the meaning is: this lifting up on the shoulder of emigrants’ stuff on my part means the prince. The meaning is not (as Hengst.): “prince and burden, as it were, cover each other,” so that he is wholly swallowed up by misfortune, the crushing burden leaves nothing of him remaining; but this: the prince is what the prophet represents by his action. The exalted personage in Jerusalem, still seated on a regal throne, and this lifting up of mere emigrants’ baggage, impressively confront each other. Thus a day, an evening, a night changes everything! [Commonly (and so Eng. Vers.): the prince is the subject of this burden or of this sentence. Hitzig refers to Jeremiah 23:33; but Kliefoth: this burden-bearing, undertaken as a sign, concerns the prince and the house of Israel (as accusatives!). Ewald: “O thou crown-bearer of this burden in Jerusalem, and those of the whole house of Israel who are in its midst!” δַ ?πָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ being imagined to be in the construct state to what follows.] Because emigration is to be the common lot, the people are added to the king, and in fact the whole house of Israel (according to the older expositors: those out of the ten tribes who had fled to Jerusalem), among whom, especially as having already emigrated, the fellow-exiles of Ezekiel are included (αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λָ ?ν, like ΰְַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, referring to the house of Israel); or better, because of what follows, as Hengstenberg does, referring the suffix to Jerusalem or its inhabitants, inasmuch as there was yet another house of Israel; Ezekiel 11:15.—Quite evidently he speaks now of the fate of the whole in Ezekiel 12:11. With the expression: “your wonder-sign,” the exiles (in conformity with Ezekiel 12:6), for whom it is meant in the first place, are addressed; while μָ ?δֶ ?ν refers to those at Jerusalem, hence also, perhaps, δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ in Ezekiel 12:10.—λֵּ ?οιֵ ?ςָ ?ωֶׂ ?δμָ ?δֶ ?ν might also mean: so will it be done by them. In any case it is an explanation of what precedes. αַּ ?βּ ?εֹ ?μָ ?δαַ ?ωְּׁ ?αִ ?ι, an emphatic asyndeton: it will be no voluntary, but a compulsory emigration. Ezekiel 12:12. The king specially. ΰְַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψαְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λָ ?ν, the reference being undoubted, confirms the interpretation we have preferred of αְ ?ϊεֹ ?λָ ?νΰְַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΞδֵ ?ξָּ ?δ. So also ΰֶ ?μΞλָּ ?ϊֵ ?σιִ ?ωּׂ ?ΰ confirms our view of εְ ?ιֵ ?φֵ ?ΰ—ּ ?δַ ?πָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰδַ ?ξַּ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰδַ ?εֶּ ?δ, then, etc., lingering over the picture of the moment. Keil, like Klief., against the accents: “he will lift it up in the darkness and will go forth.” ιַ ?ηְ ?ηְ ?ψεּ, i.e. the attendants, his suite. (Rosenm.: in order to bring him forth.) The prediction of what is recorded as having happened some years later (Jer. 39. 52.; 2 Kings 25). As the lifting up upon the shoulder of the baggage does not necessarily indicate any selfish grasping at the valuables, but may symbolize the emigration, so the breaking through the wall does not necessarily mean this in a literal sense but the haste and hurry of the flight by the speediest available route; and just as little have we to prove the covering of his face to be historical. Besides, the latter was among the circumstances, as is understood of itself, suggested by prudence even; pain or shame is not to be thought of at all. Comp. on Ezekiel 12:6. Certainly there was yet another object in view beyond that, which had influence, as is expressed in Ezekiel 12:13. μַ ?ςַ ?ιִ ?ο and the δεּ ?ΰ placed after it draw attention to something peculiar, and ΰֶ ?ϊΞδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ is the land of the Chaldeans. (Ezekiel 12:13.) The being taken prisoner,—in addition to the emigration (Ezekiel 12:11),—which, the prophet had not prefigured, is depicted by means of the figurative mode of speech borrowed from the catching of fish, from the chase (Isaiah 19:8; Jeremiah 16:16). In spite of his hasty, violent flight, he does not escape his fate; like the darkness of night, the holy penal order of the Judge and Avenger in heaven is laid around him. Umbreit, who views the breaking through the wall as a breaking forth from the city perforated by the enemy, finds in the circumstance that the king shall not see the land of the Chaldeans, his full and complete imprisonment expressed.—To Babylon, etc., is the “other place” of Ezekiel 12:3.—In how far the king would not see the land where he was to die, must remain incomprehensible for so long, until the blinding (a common punishment with the Persians, and probably also with the Babylonians, for the dethroned) of Zedekiah at Riblah, after he had been caught in his nocturnal flight not far from Jericho, by the Chaldeans, made it palpable to the senses. Ezekiel 12:14. What is round about him may be the attendants fleeing along with the king, and his help may perhaps be the hoped-for Egyptian help. ςֶ ?ζְ ?ψֹ ?δ (ςְ ?ζְ ?ψεֹ) is a play upon words with ΰֲ ?βַ ?τִּ ?ιν ּ ?ΰֱ ?ζָ ?ψֶ ?δ, only in the plural, and peculiar to Ezekiel; according to Gesen.: “wings” (Isaiah 8:8); according to Hitzig: “bands,” the whole military power, with which a king stands or falls. Comp. Jeremiah 40:7; Jeremiah 40:12; Jeremiah 52:8. We may compare besides, Ezekiel 5:2; Ezekiel 5:10; Ezekiel 5:12. Ezekiel 12:15. Ezekiel 5:13; Ezekiel 6:8. Ezekiel 12:16. Ezekiel 6:8. Men of number—Hitzig: that may be counted. Few in comparison with Ezekiel 12:14.—Comp. on Ezekiel 5, 6.—Narrators of their guilt with the knowledge gained from experience of the holy punitive justice of God. [Rosenm., Hitzig, and others refer the refrain thus repeated to the heathen! Klief. translates: “count,” that they shall ponder their sins one by one thoroughly!] The second and connected sign which is introduced in Ezekiel 12:17, like the preceding one in Ezekiel 12:1, but which has along with it its divine interpretation without an introduction, as is the case in Ezekiel 12:8, depicts (with an allusion to Ezekiel 4:16) the misery of the inhabitants, just as the interpretation by the word of Jehovah (similarly to Ezekiel 6:14) announces the misery of the land inhabited by them. Ezekiel 12:18. Bread and water, not exactly scanty food (Klief.), but merely the food that is necessary. The significant thing, however, is the quaking, trembling, and anxiety which the prophet’s expression of countenance, appearance, and demeanour must have expressed during the carrying out of the divine command (which is not indeed narrated, because understood as a matter of course). The people of the land in Ezekiel 12:19, those addressed, are the poor, wretched Jewish people in Chaldea (Ezekiel 12:12-13); according to Cocc., the message is meant for the heathen, that these might not ascribe the fate of the Jews to their Bel, inasmuch as Jehovah has caused it to be represented three years before by Ezekiel.—Comp. besides Ezekiel 12:10. The inhabitants of Jerusalem may possibly be (in accordance with Ezekiel 11:15) those who at the time were still there, although in the condition during the impending siege (so Hengst.). But in connection with the preceding sign they are rather the poorest remnants of the people still remaining on the soil of Israel (ΰֲ ?γָ ?ξָ ?δ, comp. on Ezekiel 7:2) after the flight of the king and the leading captive of the people, Jeremiah 39:10; Jeremiah 52:16. And such an explanation corresponds also with what follows. μְ ?ξַ ?ςַ ?ο (Ezekiel 4:17) is meant (according to Hitzig) to be a particle assigning the reason: because their land, stripped of its fulness, will become stiff; that is to say, their torpid amazement mirrors forth the motionless stiffening of the land. Certainly with more correctness, and more in accordance with the context: their misery will cause the land’s also (ΰַ ?ψְ ?φָ ?δּ, i.e. Jerusalem’s), which is the design of Jehovah; they will in their anxiety and anguish content themselves with mere necessaries (bread and water), and not cultivate its fruitfulness, etc. According to the other explanation, the invasion of the enemy will leave the land waste behind them. Comp. besides Ezekiel 7:23; Ezekiel 8:17. Ezekiel 12:20. Ezekiel 6:6.—Cocc. (comp. above) refers the clause: “and ye know,” etc., to the heathen, the Chaldeans, just as in Ezekiel 12:16. 1. When Stephen (according to Acts 7:51) brings the charge against the Jews, that they were always resisting (ἀντιπίπτειν—using this strong and, in the New Testament, unusual expression) the Holy Ghost, that they, like their fathers, were stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, we need not, with the expositors since Hδvernick, fall back upon Deuteronomy 29:3 [Deuteronomy 29:4]; and this the less, as the meaning is certainly somewhat different in this so-called fundamental passage. In Isaiah 6:9-10 it may be made use of as a text; Ezekiel, like Jeremiah (Jeremiah 5:21 sq.), has to do with the bad national character of the Jewish people. The “perverse will” is brought into special prominence by both prophets, as Hδvernick remarks, continuing as follows: “a feature which runs through their whole history, down to the appearance of the Redeemer.” But who will be able to deny that in this way, in the bad character of the Jews as a nation, the corrupt nature of fallen humanity as a whole is portrayed? This people have merely exhibited it carried to its farthest consequences, inasmuch as they were placed in a position, by means of the law and the prophets, and lastly God’s Son, where they must either let their wills be broken or ruin themselves. But then, farther, as the Jews are a standing historical decision with respect to natural men, so, on the other hand, in contrast with their national character (here also: “perhaps they will see?”), we have mirrored forth all the riches of divine long-suffering and patience. “Ye would not,”—this on the one hand; but on the other: “how often would I have gathered thy children together!” (Matthew 23:37.) The mirror of human perversity is at the same time the mirror of divine grace, Romans 5:20. 2. “If any one is so far enlightened that he is able to see and understand what is necessary, then it may be said that he has eyes to see, etc. The natural (unregenerate) man perceiveth not, etc. (1 Corinthians 2:14). But any one may also be so far enlightened that he sees much, and by this means he may be brought to see what is necessary to be seen; and especially that he recognises the word which contains the true wisdom as being God’s word. Those who have come this length may, however, neither see nor hear what is necessary to be seen and heard, in so far as they cannot rightly judge of what they see and hear, through the opposition of their fleshly wisdom, which perverts God’s words. Such parties no longer err in the usual way, but are hardened, so that they fancy their error is God’s word. They are also difficult to cure. The cause of one’s not understanding God’s word is disobedience. For fleshly wisdom and the love, of it is in truth disobedience” (Cocc.). 3. From the importance which is attached in the history of the Jews, in a good as well as a bad sense, yea, in the highest sense (i.e. the Messianic), to the king, in asking whom (1 Sam.) the people at first expressed their wish to be “like the other nations,” we can understand the express symbolical representation, in this special and preeminent way, of the fate of Zedekiah. “The mass of mischief is concentrated first of all in the king,” for which Hδvernick adduces as a farther reason “the existing circumstances,” among which “the political faithlessness and dishonesty of the king, as well as his anti-theocratic conduct, his idolatry, his mockery of all prophetic warnings and threatenings,” were prominent, “although he was in Jerusalem and among the exiles the idol of trust.” Hengst. in this connection designates the king as “the centre of their dreams of the future, which were preventing repentance.” 4. The prediction in our chapter—of which Tholuck (The Prophets and their Predictions, p. 108) gives the following estimate, that “against the prophetic character of the passage no critical objection is raised from any quarter; the genuineness of the book and the integrity of the passage are beyond a doubt; that divergent interpretations found no place; and that reference is made merely to its fulfilment according to the authentic testimony of history”—ought properly to have been removed from all the attempts at half or wholly naturalistic interpretation, by the repeated divine explanation that it is a “mopheth” (see the explanation of the word at Ezekiel 12:6). Nevertheless, while Eichhorn and Hitzig decree simply a prophecy after the event, and while Ewald makes it out that the prophet had happy presages, correct foresight, Umbreit attempts as far as possible to keep the text free from what might press us to the acceptance of a supernatural prediction. On the other hand, Josephus even (Antiq. x. 10. 11) has in his mind our prophetic testimony when he tells us how Zedekiah may not have been able to give credence to Ezekiel, because he said that the king would not see Babylon, whereas Jeremiah had prophesied Jo him that he would be carried captive thither. To Nitzsch, the prediction of occurrences resting on divine communication is neither so impossible as Cicero asserted it, nor so useless or even hurtful as Kant attempted to show. The prediction sustains interest in this way, by announcing a result which could not have been known beforehand by any human means. Even in the case where the foreknowledge is of no use, it may yet awaken a wholesome attention, and, confirmed by the result, it may, by producing a testimony for persons and affairs, come to serve important ends in other directions. J. D. Michaelis holds the view that the exact announcement beforehand was of service against the communis sensus of polytheism at the time, when even among the Jews the faith in one God alone kept its ground only in a sickly way, as being to every one an easily understood and irrefragable confirmation of the true religion. One may have recourse to the genius of great minds, their far - reaching historical glance in certain cases; may lay stress upon the secret power of divination in the human mind, the connection of the human conscience with the judicial steps of the moral order of the world (Herzog, Realencycl. xvii. 640 sq.); but what Ezekiel here expresses in symbol, he knows he has received from Jehovah’s mouth, and every criticism of this consciousness runs the risk either of accusing the prophet of self-deception, or even of making him a hypocritical deceiver, especially where a chapter like the 13th follows. HINTSEze_12:1 sq.: “We ought not, therefore, to allow ourselves to be deterred either by the view that we ourselves and the doctrine which we teach would be rejected, or even by the impression that we would be engaged in something ridiculous” (Calv.).—“Rebelliousness does not spring from weakness, but from wickedness” (Stck.).—“How many there are who are sharpsighted in earthly and temporal things, and who know how to turn everything prudently to their own advantage, but who, on the other hand, in what is spiritual, are found to the last degree blind and stupid, as well as incapable of faith! Hence they have ears likewise to hearken to what pleases the flesh, and to the talk and lies of the false prophets, but they have no ears to hear God’s voice. They hear and hear, but not with obedience and faith” (Berl. Bib.).—“They had ears to hear, because from youth up they were instructed in the law of God, and the threatenings were held up before them by the prophets” (Calv.).—The natural blindness and deafness of man in spiritual things causing God to proclaim His word. The wilful blindness and intentional deafness of him who yields to God with suffering and affliction. The blindness and deafness which God hangs as punishment over the hardened sinner. Ezekiel 12:3 sq. “Perhaps they will see?” Thus God leaves nothing untried: this is the exercise of His long-suffering and patience.—“When we see that others are falling into misfortune, trouble, adversity, we ought to reflect: This is a sign to me, and ought to apply it to our own improvement, Luke 13:2-3” (Wόrtemb. Bib.). Ezekiel 12:5. “What fear can do ! For it no door was high enough or broad enough; in their flight they ofttimes squeeze themselves through the most miserable wretched hole” (Stck.). Ezekiel 12:6. The earthly mind will see only the earth—nay, such an one will at length become earth; yet, when the eye is darkened, and the gloom of death covers everything, he will no longer see even the earth. Ezekiel 12:7. “Such things would call to mind the days of Noah and Lot” (Calv.). Ezekiel 12:8. God’s grace is new every morning. They who seek Him early find Him; and those who ask after Him will be answered by Him. Ezekiel 12:9. There is something precious about a right question. Ezekiel 12:10. “Princes are called exalted, but certainly not because they are to exalt themselves; for He that is enthroned in heaven knows how to humble princes even” (Stck.).—“Every ruler, prince, or king, however little he may have taken up upon his shoulders, will at least be compelled to bear the burden of his sins and the wrath of God, which will fall heavily enough upon him, provided the burden of his duties has been sitting easily upon him” (Berl. Bib.).—“God does not overlook the mighty even when they sin, but makes them feel His heavy hand” (Starke).—God’s judgment on a laud embraces prince and people alike, although a people may also have God’s judgment already in their prince, and a prince may have it in his people. Ezekiel 12:12. “The ungodly walk about with a bold countenance, but in the judgment they will conceal it” (Stck.). Ezekiel 12:13. First the net of pleasure and vanity, then the net of death and hell.—“He that lives wildly is hunted and taken like the wild beasts” (Stck.).—God a fisher and hunter. Ezekiel 12:14. “Of what avail to the sinner all his imagined succours and pretended helpers?” (Stck.)—We will by and by withdraw our confidence from all creatures.—The Eternal blew, and the Armada was scattered to all the winds of heaven.—“If God is our enemy, we have no friend in heaven or upon earth” (Stck.). Ezekiel 12:15. Alas that we should become wise only by injury, and should come to know God only from experience of punishment, instead of tasting and thus seeing how good the Lord is! Ezekiel 12:16. Thus it is that God receives honour because of His righteousness, when His grace is despised.—“God blesses the chastisements which He sends forth upon His people to unbelievers also” (Starke). Ezekiel 12:18. “Only those who have their standing in grace can eat their bread without fear and carefulness” (Starke).—It is not in vain that Christ has taught us the petition: Give us this day our daily bread.—“A verse which we may read with profit in the midst of plenty” (Stck.). Ezekiel 12:19. “That one is able to eat and drink in rest and peace is a great benefit from God, but one that is not known by the thousandth part of men” (Starke).—“Jerusalem and her inhabitants are eloquent orators, and preach with unction” (Stck.). Ezekiel 12:20. “If one will not learn to know God from His benefits, then he must often do so in the midst of punishment, Daniel 4:30-31” (Starke).—Thus the wilderness was Israel’s school, and became Israel’s judgment. 3. The Near Execution of the Punishment (Ezekiel 12:21 to Ezekiel 24:27). 1. The Repeated Preliminary Announcement (Ezekiel 12:21-28) 21And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 22Son of man, what [meaneth] this proverb of yours upon the land of Israel, saying, The days are prolonged; 23and every vision comes to nought? Say unto them therefore, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: I will make this proverb to cease, and they shall no more use it as a proverb in Israel: but speak unto them, The days are at hand, and the word of every vision. 24For there shall be no more any vision 25of deceit nor flattering divination in the midst of the house of Israel. For I, Jehovah, will speak whatever word I will speak, and it will [shall] come to pass; it shall be no more prolonged, for [but] in your days, O house of rebelliousness, I will speak a word, and perform it: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 26And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 27Son of man, behold the house of Israel, who say, The vision that he seeth is for many days, and he prophesieth for [of] times afar off. 28Therefore say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: There shall none of my words be prolonged any more; the word which I shall speak shall be done: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 12:24. Sept.: ... καιμαντευομενοςταπροςχαριν.—(Another read.: εξχρνηγμ, and divination shall cease. απιιωׂ, all the versions.) REMARKSAnnouncement of the end as one that is near, and that repeated (Ezekiel 12:26 sq.). For after the wind-up, as it were, which precedes, with the misery coming upon land and people, there remained only the announcement of the same, preliminary to its near occurrence. Hitherto it has been a going back upon Ezekiel 6, now we have a return to what was said in Ezekiel 7. Ezekiel 12:22. Derived as it is from a verb meaning: to go before, to lead, to preside,—to represent something, to signify,—to pronounce a sentence, etc., ξָ ?ωָׁ ?μ is equivalent to “maxim,” the form being always that of similitude, proverb, derisive verse (Isaiah 14:4). Here also not without the derisive element. The common saying, in which the current sentiment among those still dwelling in the land of Israel (Ezekiel 12:19) had found for itself suitable expression (beati possidentes), derided the Eternal in His prophets by means of the comfort of the time, that the time is passing away, and what was alleged to be seen in vision is passing away with it; as nothing is coming out of it, so neither shall there be anything in it. The days that are being prolonged may refer to Jeremiah’s long ago uttered prediction of ruin; comp. too on Ezekiel 11:3.—μָ ?λֶ ?ν combines the prophet with the mockers, as being his people. On such fellowship of the servants of God with their people is based at last in a pre-eminent sense the relation of the incarnate Son of God to the human race (Exodus 16:28). Ezekiel 12:23. δִ ?ωְׁ ?αַּ ?ϊִּ ?ι, prophetic preterite: “to bring to rest;” after the trouble they give themselves, their inventive labours, comes the Sabbath of Jehovah (Genesis 2:1 sq.).—Are at hand (Ezekiel 9:1; Ezekiel 11:3), in contrast with the preceding: “are prolonged,”—εּ ?γְ ?αַ ?ψλָּ ?μηָ ?ζεֹ ?ο, the verbal contents of every vision of His prophets,—the word, and the thing meant by the word. Keil rightly: the days in which every predicted word shall be realized. (Hengst: “as against a merely partial fulfilment, as if the prophets had exaggerated somewhat,” etc.) Ezekiel 12:24. As there is also a false (2 Peter 2:1) prophecy (ωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ),—mere divination (ξִ ?χְ ?ρָ ?ν), which deceives in the way of flattery with its smoothness,—the divinely inspired prophecy is distinguished first of all from it, as the following contrast shows, and as will, of course, be shown still more in Ezekiel 13. There shall be no more, etc., is parallel with: “and they shall no more use it as a proverb in Israel” (Ezekiel 12:23): that mocking proverb had taken shape with the help of the false prophecy in Israel. Hence in Ezekiel 12:25 a co-ordinate or resumed λִּ ?ι. The disjunctive accent (rebii) over ιְ ?δεֹ ?δ makes “I Jehovah” a sentence by itself, so that the Author of true prophecy sets Himself face to face with the false. In like manner, pashta at the end of ΰְַ ?γַ ?αֵּ ?ψ acts as a disjunctive, while the conjunctive telisha-kethannah with ΰֵ ?ϊΧ connects what follows. Jehovah reserves for Himself uncontrolled power to speak, and almighty power to make it good. And with this is joined the statement that there will be no farther delay, no longer postponement (with reference to that proverb): in your days (Matthew 16:28; Matthew 24:34), therefore with a subjective, personal application. Such a fulfilment of the divine prediction will at the same time be the end of the false divination, which by this very means is covered with disgrace. In some sense also the I Jehovah, as being Messianic, is contrasted with preceding prophecy in general. Comp. besides on Ezekiel 12:2, Ezekiel 11:8. In Ezekiel 12:27 there follows the more objective application, referring to the matter itself. The statement that if there is a prophecy at all that will yet be fulfilled, it at all events refers to times that are far off (Daniel 8:26; Daniel 8:17), is rejected by the Lord as regards Ezekiel. Before it was a mockery of Jehovah, here we have a mockery of His prophet rather in the words quoted. Ezekiel 12:28. See as to the feminine ϊִּ ?ξָּ ?ωֵׁ ?κְ here, as in Ezekiel 12:25, Ewald, Gram. § 295a. 1. The significance of prophecy and its fulfilment for the divine credibility of the prophetic testimonies, and thus of Holy Scripture generally, has been understood by Apologetics from the beginning. See Keith’s Evidence of the Truth of the Christian Religion derived from the Literal Fulfilment of Prophecy. Besides, already in Deuteronomy 18:21-22, the fulfilment of what has been predicted is put as a characteristic mark of genuine prophecy. 2. If the absolute and almighty power which God attributes to Himself in the section before us, as contrasted with false divination, is our creed, then the word of prophecy ranks with the word of creation, and what serves as an argument for the divine sovereignty in the latter connection is not less an argument in the former. By the word of the Eternal were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth (Psalms 33:6). The living God is also the law of prophecy as regards its fulfilment. 3. What is accepted as true of the divine power in Creation comes to be applied for the fulfilment of prophecy still more by faith in Divine Providence, the co-operation and government of God. The Eternal (“Jehovah,” Ezekiel 12:25) is not merely the God of the beginning and the end, of the origin and the goal, but also He who is co-existent with the life of the world and specially of mankind. It is the divine element in and mixed up with the history of the world with which prophecy has to do. But this is not merely the eternal idea, which is continually realizing itself anew, so that what refers to time and place would in comparison with it have to be regarded as the mere form of representation, but this divine element is alike the real which is predicted, and the necessary which is prophesied. As respects the divine decree, which because of sin has developed itself from the world-plan of the Creator into the counsel of salvation in Christ for the world, things small and great may be distinguished; but because both are serviceable in carrying out the decree of God, both alike are divine, and therefore suitable for prophecy. 4. It is of importance, however, as respects the delay, as respects the postponement, e.g. of the realization of the prophecies of judgment, that there is a correspondence between the prolonging of the days and the divine long-suffering and forbearance (2 Peter 3:9), as in the case before us in Ezekiel. The prophecy of judgment is besides a preaching of repentance, so that if it produces the repentance which it preaches, the fulfilment of the prophecy may be hindered. But even apart from such conditionality lying in the thing itself, other circumstances, always, however, willed by God, may give to a prophecy the character of perspective foreshortening. 5. “Prophecy was an act of faith; it likewise demanded faith. And as what true prophecy insisted on above all was conversion of heart, it resisted the sinful consciousness and life of unbelief, and was resisted by it (Amos 6:3). It is the nature of sin to reckon itself to be no sin, and hence as far as possible to break up the connection and separate between sin and punishment” (Hδv.). NOTE [“We cannot but think with wonder, when we look back upon the times of these Old Testament prophets, of the obstinate incredulity and measureless content in which so many of the people seem to have shut themselves up, alike in defiance of the most solemn warnings of God, and in spite of several lowering appearances in Providence, which seemed to give no doubtful indications of a coming storm. … But it is well for us to bear in mind, that the spirit of unbelief and false security, which prevailed so extensively then, is ever springing forth anew, and is plainly announced in New Testament Scripture as destined to form a distinguishing characteristic of the last times. It was a significant question of our Lord, and evidently pointed to the great defect in this respect that should discover itself before the consummation of all things, ‘When the Son of man comes, shall He find faith in the earth?’ Such faith, namely, as He had been speaking of,—faith realizing in firm confidence the certainty of the Lord’s manifestation to put a final end to the evils that afflict His Church, and in this confidence waiting, hoping, praying to the last. The apostle Peter also still more distinctly intimates in his second epistle what might be looked for: ‘There shall come in the last days, scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the world.’ It will readily be understood that the danger from this source to this faith of God’s elect will always be the greater, the more the time is lengthened out that is to intervene between the first and second coming of the Lord. For time, which is justly said to try all things, in this respect also tries faith, that it silently impairs in men’s minds the foundation on which faith rests—the word of God. In common with other things of meaner value, this, too, seems to wax old as time proceeds, and to become, the longer it is in use, the less in power and value. Even already it is looked upon by many as comparatively antiquated, out of date; the facts of which it testifies are but faintly descried in the distant past; centuries have rolled away since they took place and were put on record; and the record itself has been so long in existence, so frequently handled, and so fully discussed, that, with those to whom nothing is interesting but what possesses the freshness of novelty, the sacred volume, so far from being able to nourish and support a living faith, has itself become stale and dead. “Thus it is that natural men judge of God’s word, as if, like their own productions, it were subject to wasting and decay. They know not that this word of God, being the expression of His own eternal nature, has in it what lives and abides for ever,—what is as new and fresh to the heart of faith still, as the very moment when, ages ago, it proceeded from the lips of those who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Then, along with a prevailing ignorance or forgetfulness of this great truth, there is the fascinating influence which is apt to be wielded over men’s minds by the onward movements of society in knowledge and civilisation. Here they find an attractive contrast to the stationary character of the ground and objects of faith. For everything in this lower field seems constantly in progress, and big with hope for the future. It is deemed incredible, that while such vital powers are at work, and such a career of advancement is in prospect, God should lay a sudden arrest on the vast machinery, and wind up the affairs of the world by bringing in the fixed and final issues of eternity. Nay, the belief of a personal God, separate from the workmanship of his own hands, and capable of suddenly introducing a state of things altogether new, is, in many quarters, fast giving way. In a new and peculiarly subtle form, the old carnal and idolatrous tendencies are reviving, impiously commingling the divine and human, identifying the creature with the Creator. And, judging from present appearances, there is too much reason to conclude that, precisely as before Christ came to execute judgment upon Jerusalem, a rage for worldly saviours was one of the reigning delusions of the time, so, as the period draws on for His coming to execute judgment upon the world, a like rage will prevail for a worldly gospel,—one that will seek to confound heaven and earth, God and man, and, in a manner, possibly even more daring and presumptuous than in the Papacy, will dispose man to ‘exalt himself in the temple of God, and show himself that he is God.’ What need, then, for those who would escape the condemnation of the wicked, to look well to the foundation of their faith, and to see that this stands not in the wisdom of man, but in the word of God! How careful should each be to dwell beside the fountain of Israel! For times of trial manifestly are coming, in which they only who are taught of God, and kept by the power of His Spirit, can expect to resist the swelling tide of delusion, and maintain even the appearance of godliness.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 124–126.—W. F.] HINTSEze_12:22. “God spares the ungodly, and thereby invites them to repentance. But what is it they do? They scoff at the servants of God, and reckon their words to be idle tales” (Heim-Hoff.).—“Thus they despised the riches of divine goodness and forbearance and long-suffering, and instead of allowing themselves to be led thereby to repentance, after their hardness and impenitent heart they treasured up unto themselves wrath, etc., Romans 2:4-5, 2 Peter 3:4” (Cocc.). Ezekiel 12:23. The Sabbath which awaits the proverbs of the world, when every tongue which has not suffered itself to be hallowed to the Lord shall be hallowed to the Lord by the judgment of condemnation. To be compelled to confess that Jesus is Lord is indeed a terrible Sabbath, if one has not otherwise hallowed Him.—The lying mouths which God’s word cannot stop are removed by God’s deeds. Ezekiel 12:24. “Prophecy and roughness, these go hand in hand among a sinful people” (Hengst.).—“If Jesus, who came after the Babylonian captivity, had been a false prophet, or His disciples, as the Jews assert, then must the promise of this verse have been false” (Cocc.).—“And so also shall all flattering representations of a flourishing state of the Church, which have sprung from reason and fleshly learning, come to an end” (Berl. Bib.). Ezekiel 12:27-28 : “What God says we are not to separate’ ‘from its fulfilment, because God who speaks is not in Himself divided; when He opens His mouth, He stretches out His hand at the same time to the work, so that the hand itself is in a manner included in the word” (Calv.). 2. The Discourses against the False Prophets and Prophetesses (Ezekiel 13.) 1And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 2Son of man, prophesy unto the prophets of Israel that prophesy, and say unto the prophets out of their own heart, Hear ye the word of Jehovah; 3Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Woe unto the foolish prophets, who walk after their own spirit, and that they 4have not seen! Like foxes in the ruins have thy prophets become, O Israel. 5Ye have not gone up into the gaps [breaches], nor built a wall round the house of 6Israel, to make a stand in the war in the day of Jehovah. They beheld deceit and lying divination who say, Sentence of Jehovah,—and Jehovah sent them 7not,—and expect confirmation of a word. Saw ye not a deceitful vision, and spake ye not a lying divination, and [that while] saying, Sentence of Jehovah, and I have not spoken? 8Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because ye speak deceit, and see a lie, therefore, behold, I am upon you: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 9And Mine hand is [comes] upon the prophets that see deceit, and that divine a lie: in the assembly of My people shall they not be, and in the register of the house of Israel they shall not be registered, and into the land of Israel shall they not come; and ye know that I am the Lord Jehovah. 10Because, even because they seduced My people, saying, Peace [salvation], and there is no peace; and they [i.e. the people] build a wall, and, lo, they [i.e. the false prophets] daub it with a coating. 11Say unto them which daub with a coating: And it shall fall: there comes a pouring rain; and ye, O hailstones, shall fall, and stormy wind shall 12[thou, O stormy wind, shalt] break forth. And, lo, the wall falls; shall not one say unto you, Where is the daubing wherewith ye daubed? 13Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: And I cause stormy wind to break forth in My fury, and pouring rain shall fall in Mine anger, and hailstones in My fury, unto utter destruction. 14And I break down the wall that ye daubed with a coating, and cast it to the ground, and its foundation is uncovered, and it [Jerusalem] falls, and ye perish 15in its [Jerusalem’s] midst; and ye know that I am Jehovah. And I accomplish My wrath upon the wall, and upon them that daubed it with a coating, and I will 16say unto you, The wall is not, neither are they that daubed it; The prophets of Israel who prophesied upon Jerusalem, and who saw for it a vision of peace, 17and there is no peace: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And thou, son of man, set thy face toward the daughters of thy people, who prophesy out of their own heart; and prophesy thou concerning them, 18And say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Woe to those who sew together for themselves coverings upon all joints of My hands, and who make the veils upon the head of every stature to hunt [catch] souls! Ye will hunt the souls among My people, and ye will save souls 19alive among you! And ye will profane Me in face of My people for handfuls of barley and for bits of bread, to slay souls that should not die, and to save souls 20alive that should not live, by your lying to My people that hear lies! Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Behold, I am against your coverings, wherewith ye there [where ye hunt] hunt the souls when flying, and I tear them out of 21your arms, and let the souls go that ye hunt,—souls in their flying. And I tear in pieces your veils, and deliver My people, and they shall be no more in your 22hand as prey; and ye know that I am Jehovah. Because of troubling the heart of the righteous falsely, and [when] I did not make him sad, and that ye strengthen the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, to remain alive: 23Therefore ye shall no more see deceit, nor divine divinations; and I deliver My people out of your hand; and ye know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 13:3. Sept.: ... προφητευουσινἀποκαρδιαςαὐτων, τ. πορευομενοιςἀποτ. πνευματοςαὐτ.— Ezekiel 13:5. ... κ. συνηγαγονποιμνια, κ. ἐπιτ. οἰχοντ. Ἰσρ. οὐκἀνεστησανοἰλεγοντεςἐνἡμερακυριου,—Vulg.: Non ascendistis ex adverso neque opposuistis murum pro domo— Ezekiel 13:6. ... κ. ἠρξαντοτουἀναστησαιλογον. Vulg.: et perseveraverunt confirmare sermonem.Ezekiel 13:9. …ἐνπαιδειατ. λαουμουοὐκ— Ezekiel 13:10. Vulg.: … liniebant eum luto absque paleis.Ezekiel 13:11. Sept.: ... κ. δωσωλιθουςπετροβολουςεἰςτ. ἐνδεσμουςαὐτων, κ. πεσουνται, κ. πνευμαἐξαιρον, κ. ῥαγησεται. Ezekiel 13:14. ... ὁνἠλειψατε, κ. πεσειται... κ. συντελεσθησεσθεμετ̓ἐλεγχων,—Vulg.: … linistis absque temperamento … et cadet it consumetur in medio ejus— Ezekiel 13:15. … κ. πεσειται, κ. εἰπαπροςὐμας— Ezekiel 13:18. ... ἐπιπανταἀγκωναχειρος... Κ. αἱψυχαιδιεστραφησαντ. λαουμου, κ. ψυχαςπεριεποιουντο, Vulg.: … Et cum caperent animas … vivificabant animas eorum, Ezekiel 13:19. Another read.: ωξς—γαψιλζα, audienti mendacium. Ezekiel 13:20. ... τ. ψυχαςαὐτ. εἰςδιασκορπισμον, Vulg.: animas ad volandum; (Sept., Syr., Hexapl., the Targum read: πτων.) Ezekiel 13:21. ... ἐνχερσινὑμ. εἰςσυστροφην. Vulg.: … ad prζdandum; (Other readings: ιδιδ—αιγλν, ξιγλν erit, ειγςϊν.) Ezekiel 13:22. …τοκαθολουμηἀποστρεψαι— REMARKSNow that the text has been given in Ezekiel 12:24, there follows in two parts (Ezekiel 13:1-23)—in each case first the characteristics with which they are reproached (Ezekiel 13:1-7, Ezekiel 13:17-19), and then the penal sentence (Ezekiel 13:8-16, Ezekiel 13:20-23)—the sermon upon the text, a detailed treatment of the theme, viz. false prophecy in Israel, as the same was in vogue both at home and in the exile (comp. Jeremiah 29.), and cannot be overlooked as an element in the interchange of false hopes and expectations in either case, and of mutual intercourse (Introd. p. 9). While the second part is usually understood of false prophetesses, Hengst. makes the false prophets the subject here also, merely “on account of their feeble nature, like Women” (!). He brings forward as an argument for this Oriental and poetic exegesis the “designedly interspersed masculine pronouns (Ezekiel 13:19-20),” whereby the prophet “all but expressly says that he has to do with women in men’s clothes;” and farther, that in the whole of the Old Testament “a false prophetess is nowhere mentioned,” “so that so serious a punishment as we have here would have been out of place.” Comp. as against both statements, the exposition of the section in question below. Neteler sees in the prophetesses “striking representatives of the synagogues,” with their interpretations, sayings, commentaries. Ezekiel 13:2. ΰֶ ?μ indicates the destination of the prophetic discourse which follows, which, as regards its tendency and contents, is directed against the prophets of Israel. Who are meant, δַ ?πִּ ?αָּ ?ΰִ ?ιν tells us, viz. those who prophesy—who, from the fact of their prophesying, and consequently being in authority, are (alas!) the prophets of Israel. “Jeremiah in Jerusalem, and Ezekiel among the exiles, stood as oddities there, and had the government and the spirit of the age and of the people absolutely against them” (Hengst.). A more exact definition follows as regards the source whence their prophecy flows or is drawn: out of their own heart; and thus out of what is their own (Nehemiah 6:8), in contrast with the true prophet, who utters God’s word from God. And in this way their pretended office, their dignity in Israel, is already gone, and an ironical light falls upon the title, prophets of Israel. It fits into the contrast indicated with the true prophet, that they are to hear the word of Jehovah. Ezekiel 13:3. Woe, already announcing the due punishment inevitably awaiting them, an exclamation of grief; telling at the same time with mingled pain and anger (as in Isaiah 1:4; Matthew 23:13 sq.) what ought not to be, but is the case with prophets of what is their own. ηַ ?πְּ ?αָ ?μִ ?ιν, a paronomasia with δַ ?πְּ ?αִ ?ιΰִ ?ιν. Why they are called fools is clear from Psalms 14:1; Psalms 53:1. To exhibit themselves as prophets, and not to be so from God, was a practical denial of God, especially of His avenging justice; was ungodliness, and at the same time stupidity in the highest degree. Where wisdom is wanting in this way, and where God is not the source, man “walks after his own spirit.” The “heart” with its lusts is the source, the spirit the guide, i.e. instead of the Spirit of God, the thoughts, which take shape as they come out of the heart, make themselves master of the man; the man goes after his imaginations, fancies, himself at last believing in them. According to Hδvern., therefore, the two necessary conditions are wanting, the right starting-point and goal. ψָ ?ΰεּ εּ ?μְ ?αִ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, usually taken as a relative clause: “and after that which they have not seen” (?). For the woe, at all events, a positive as well as negative reason is given. Comp. Doct. Reflect., p. 54. They are compared to the foxes in Ezekiel 13:4, as destroyers in a general sense, because the foxes are hurtful creatures; and there is no need for us to think specially of the undermining of the ground, hence of the “sapping of the moral foundations of the state” (Keil), or of depasturing the vineyard (of Israel, Isaiah 5.; Jeremiah 12:10), Son 2:15 (Rosenm.), or of injuring the game (Hengst.); and, least of all, have we to think of what is proverbial with us, the cunning of the fox. Comp. besides, Luke 13:31-32; Matthew 7:15; Acts 20:29. The ruins, on the one hand, indicate the favourite haunt of foxes and similar animals, and on the other, point to the ruin of Israel. [Klief.: “The ruins of the theocracy are undermined by the false prophets besides, inasmuch as they take up their abode in them.” Hengst.: “At no time were the false prophets rifer than in the last days of the Jewish state.” Kimchi: “Thy prophets,” which are not Jehovah’s.]—Their conviction, however, in the form of an energetic address in reference to Israel’s welfare, turns in Ezekiel 13:5 not so much on what they have done, as on what they have neglected to do as regards the “ruins.” As prophets, as men of God, they had to place themselves in the gap, or to build a wall, etc. Both images are chosen with reference to the siege of Jerusalem. (According to Hδvernick, the thing meant is the watching of the vineyard against thieves and wild beasts!) To make a stand in the war has reference both to what is required of the person and to what the state of affairs requires. The day of Jehovah is the time fixed by Him with reference to the reckoning to be given in to Him. Although the case is only as yet impending, yet it is spoken of as if it were an accomplished fact. It cannot happen otherwise with them, considering what they are (Ezekiel 13:5), and how they are acting (Ezekiel 13:6). [Ewald: “But what follows from such internal perversity has already taken place long before, while they, when wrath breaks forth as in the divine assault, and the helpless people are panting all the more after prophetic help, withdraw from cowardice, speaking flatteringly where it causes them no danger,” etc.] Comp. Ezekiel 22:30 (Psalms 106:23; Isaiah 58:12; 1 Samuel 25:16); Amos 5:18; Amos 5:20; Mal. 3:23 [Ezekiel 4:5]. For the meaning of the figurative language in Ezekiel 13:5, we must think with the older expositors of intercessory mediation, of the awakening of Israel to repentance, the putting a stop to their wickedness, the building of them up in newness of spirit, etc. In the day, etc., and in the war, throw light on each other, so that he who wages war against Israel is Jehovah in the day of His wrath (Ezekiel 7:19; Isaiah 63:10; Job 38:22-23). The “breach” is the sinful condition of the people. (Hitz., Hengst.) [Hδv., like Cocc., understands μְַ ?ςַ ?ξֹ ?γ of the house of Israel (others: of the wall). The day of the Lord means, according to Cocc., the day of Christ’s appearing!] Ezekiel 13:6. Jeremiah 23. εְ ?ιִ ?ηְַ ?μεּ, according to others, is dependent on ωְׁ ?μָ ?ηָ ?ν: that they might hope, etc. Inasmuch as they believe their own lie, they wait (in vain) for its becoming true by being realized, that I would confirm it. Instead of this, in Ezekiel 13:7, just as in Ezekiel 13:5, guilt is brought home in a direct address on God s part. Hengst.: a question of conscience. Ezekiel 13:8. The retributive punishment. ΰְַ ?μֵ ?ιλֶ ?νδִ ?πְ ?πִ ?ι is the explanation of the ΰֶ ?μ in Ezekiel 13:2. After the purpose has been expressed generally, there follows in Ezekiel 13:9 a carrying out of it in detail. ρεֹ ?γ, abbreviated from ιְ ?ρεֹ ?γ (ιָ ?νַ ?γ), “a taking together,” is: an assembly, a council, and also a confidential circle; here the former.—λְּ ?ηָ ?α, the roll of citizens, and that the new one that is to be drawn up.—The exclusion from the people, just as their assembling, taking note of their condition, and afterwards returning home,—implying, of course, an advance,—refer to the (Ezekiel 11:17 sq.) promised restoration. Comp. Psalms 1:5; Psalms 87:6; Ezra 2:62.—ιַ ?ςַ ?οεּ ?αְ ?ιַ ?ςַ ?ο, in Ezekiel 13:10, formally and solemnly, in the style of judgment (Leviticus 26:43). In this way an additional and special retribution is introduced; the unauthorized announcement of salvation (Jeremiah 6:14; Jeremiah 8:11; Isaiah 48:22), which is expressively compared to the daubing of a wall, beneath which the slim and worthless building material, as well as any gaps that may exist, disappear from the eye, is to be punished with the manifestation in actual fact of the misleading activity of the false prophets. And they build, viz. the people, not the false prophets. Compared with Ezekiel 13:5, instead of the wall which the prophets were to build, the people left to themselves in their self-help are reduced to a clay wall (ηַ ?ιִ ?υ) merely, which they erect for themselves with their wishes and hopes. (Hengst.: the political effort made by the coalition, to which the false prophets gave the appearance of a higher sanction.) The daubing which masks the unstable handiwork is provided by those prophets with their announcement of salvation. ϊָּ ?τֵ ?μ, not θִ ?ιηַ, as in Ezekiel 13:12, because the sense, the meaning, breaks forth from the figure. Ewald: “elsewhere what is absurd intellectually, what is inconsistent with itself; here the mortar that does not hold together, clay without straw, or dry clay.” They spread their dull, stupid coating of words of salvation over it. Hengst.: absurdity (Jeremiah 23:13; Lamentations 2:14). Comp. also Acts 23:3; Matthew 23:27.—The fall of the wall in Ezekiel 13:11 is in fact the special sentence on the daubers, ιִ ?τֹּ ?μ having a resemblance in sound to ιִ ?τֹּ ?μ.—δָ ?ιָ ?δ, as it were beginning a narrative, after the manner of a parable (Ewald).—A lively address (and ye) to the powers of nature. The circumstance that the description proceeds in this physical strain is perhaps intended to suggest the thought, how much as a matter of course it lies in the very nature of such a wall that it should fall, in spite of all the art of the daubing and coating.—ΰֶ ?μְ ?βָּ ?αִ ?ιωׁ, peculiar to Ezekiel, is hail, an expansion of βָּ ?αִ ?ιωׁ, “something stiffened” (ice), with ΰ prosthetic and dagesh forte following ΰֶ ?μְ ?βָּ ?αִ ?ιωׁ = ΰַ ?βָּ ?αִ ?ιωׁ, a Chaldee form. Ewald: probably from ΰֵ ?μπָּ ?αִ ?ιωׁ, “a mist of hail,” i.e. thickest hail frozen together. Gesenius summons to his help unnecessarily the Arabic article; Hδvernick regards the whole word as Arabia, as the crystal came to the Hebrews from Arabia. Comp. Exodus 9:18; Joshua 10:10 sq.; Isaiah 30:30; Psalms 18:13-14 [12, 13]; Job 38:22; Matthew 7:25; Matthew 7:27; Revelation 16:21. Hail, though rare in Palestine, is a thing well known in its devastating effects.—νְ ?ςָ ?γεֹ ?ϊ, because of the violent rushings. ϊְּ ?αַ ?χֵּ ?ςַ may also be the second person, but can hardly as an address apply to God: a stormy wind thou shalt rend (!), as Hengstenberg. Expositors have also thought of a breaking through the wall. [So the Eng. Vers.: “a stormy wind shall rend it.”]—In Ezekiel 13:12 now δַ ?χִּ ?ιψ, which it ought to be, the wall, instead of ηַ ?ιִ ?υ in Ezekiel 13:10. The daubing was meant to give it the appearance of a solid wall. Ezekiel 13:13. Ezekiel 8:18; Ezekiel 11:13. Ezekiel 13:14. Breaking down to the foundation. αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?αָ ?δּ, the feminine suffix pointing from the figure to the thing itself, the city to be destroyed, viz. Jerusalem, as πָ ?τְ ?μָ ?δ already does. Ezekiel 13:15. The discourse plays upon the λָּ ?μָ ?δ; comp. Ezekiel 13:13-14. There is a bringing to an end (Ezekiel 5:13; Ezekiel 6:12; Ezekiel 7:8), and hence an application in Ezekiel 13:16 to the false prophets, against whom this first part of the discourse is directed. In Ezekiel 13:15 we need not read with Ewald: εְ ?ΰָ ?ξַ ?γ, “that it is said of you.” What is impending will be a sermo realis.Ezekiel 13:16. An apposition which brings the reference to the false prophets to an end. Ezekiel 13:17. The False Prophetesses.—Peculiar to Ezekiel, and so much the more interesting, and none the less accordant with the actual condition of those last days of a life ever more and more mixed up with heathenisms. The prophetess Huldah appears, however, in 2 Kings 22:14, as a divinely inspired woman on the side of the living God. In caricature of her, in connection with idolatries like Ezekiel 8:14, the class of false prophetesses, against whom Ezekiel is to bear testimony, may have been formed. Hδvernick mentions the old Arabian legendary history.—Set thy face toward, etc., Ezekiel 6:2.—ςַ ?ξְּ ?κָ, as it were: to this has it come with them! Comp. on Ezekiel 13:2. The Hithpael perhaps more sharply emphasizes their betaking themselves thereto, their conducting themselves as such, their female vanity, ςַ ?μ indicates therefore the correspondingly superior prophetic commission of Ezekiel. Ezekiel 13:18. Comp. Ezekiel 13:3. Like the false prophets, the false prophetesses also prophesy out of their own hearts, but quite in womanly fashion “sewing together for themselves (Ew. Gr. § 120b, with bad assiduity) kĕ ?sathoth, and making mispachoth.” (1) The literal interpretation of these words: Ewald makes both things be placed on the body of these divineresses as ornament, so that while thus employed they were wont to look as upon a magic mirror upon the “knobs” which were sewed firmly on the wrist or arm, and with their mantles hanging over their heads they imitated the mantles of the prophets. Farfetched; especially “the children’s heads,” which Ewald brings forward in addition to the sorceries.—According to Calvin, a kind of sleepy condition was aimed at in this way, whereby they carried themselves and others away in transport from the earth.—[Old expositors explained the expressions in question of armlets for the purpose of divination; more modern ones, like J. D. Michaelis, explained them of magic fillets on the hands and head, which preserve the life of the wearer, but which bring death to the enemy.] Hδvernick notices, first of all, the contrast of the luxurious, wanton life (Isaiah 3:16 sq., Ezekiel 32:9 sq.) with the pretence of being prophetesses, and then compares for the catching of souls, Proverbs 6:26; Ezekiel 7:21 sq. The unusual form αְּ ?νָ ?ϊεֹ ?ϊ is, according to him, a technical term for a definite kind of coverlets, rugs, which are sewed together for cushions, sofas. ιָ ?γַ ?ι he takes as an abbreviated dual form, and understands by ΰַ ?φִּ ?ιμֵ ?ι the joints of the hand in the wider sense (Jeremiah 38:12), so that every joint of the arm has its rug. Thus they lie on a comfortable couch (Proverbs 7:16), in luxurious clothing besides—instar omnium ξִ ?νְ ?τָּ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ, a word which (Isaiah 3:22; Rth 3:15), as a designation of the upper garments, the large shawls of the women, is put by Ezekiel for ξִ ?θְ ?τָ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ, with an allusion to ξִ ?νְ ?τַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ (scab, Isaiah 3:17); taken in connection with ςַ ?μΞψֹ ?ΰωׁ, hence coquettish wearing of veils over the head for every stature. That rugs were not laid over or upon (ςַ ?μ) the joints, elbows, shoulders, cannot certainly be maintained by Keil as against Hδvernick, since ςַ ?μ may here as well as afterwards be rendered by “for” of the standard.—Hitzig thinks of the analogy of the ϊְּ ?τִ ?μִּ ?ιο, which one fastened during prayer on his left hand, and of the θַ ?μִּ ?ιϊ, a long and broad piece of cloth with which the suppliant covered his head. (2) The figurative interpretation: According as ιָ ?γַ ?ι is referred indirectly or directly to God; in the former case, so that: “upon all joints of My hands” = those of My people, hence that Jehovah regards Himself as injured in His people;—they impede the free movement, cover the eyes of every one (Umbreit) by their lies and flatteries (usually: they lay the people in a bed of deceitful rest, cover them with all sorts of excuses, high and low alike); in the other case, as Klief. has it: it is brought as a charge against the prophetesses, that they cover by their false divination the word of God and the threatening hand of the Judge therein, and that they veil, exactly according to the stature of the individual, men’s hearing and seeing.—There is a correspondence between the analogy of the preceding discourse to the false prophets, which is certainly to be held fast, and the figurative interpretation, to which Hengstenberg and Keil also have given in their adhesion. What in the former case is daubing with a coating, is here covering and veiling. [αָּ ?νָ ?δ is: “to cover;” νָ ?τַ ?η, to draw together, to envelope closely. ςַ ?μΞψֹ ?ΰωׁ, however, is not meant of the standard by which one is regulated, but is simply “over,” inasmuch as they know how to counsel every χεֹ ?ξָ ?δ (height, stature) of those who trust them.]—Jewish expositors have unnecessarily taken δַ ?πְּ ?τָ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ϊ as a question. The contrast with ηָ ?ιָ ?δ shows what φεּ ?γ has in view. Hence what tends to destruction in the one case, is meant to turn out for preservation in the other. Such a result cannot possibly occur where the living God and these women confront each other (among My people and among you), and where He would be profaned. [Hδv.: μְ = those belonging to the people—those belonging to you, i.e. your own souls. Others draw the distinction between members of the people and adherents of the false prophetesses, to the former of whom they threaten destruction; to the latter, on the other hand, they promise prosperity. Ewald: souls of honest men they render gloomy and sickly, and thus they bring them down to death; souls of sinners they strengthen in their sins, in order that they themselves also through their gratitude may be the better able to live along with them. Luther: when ye have caught them among My people, ye promise them life. Klief.: they steal from the people of God their life, and take care of their own.] Ezekiel 13:19. In contrast with the intended profanation of Jehovah, specially of His name by their lying (in face of My people, as afterwards: to My people), the price is emphasized sharply, the wretched life of the body (Micah 3:5; Titus 1:11; Romans 16:18). Those that should not die are the souls of the people of Jehovah (Ezekiel 3:17 sq.); those contrasted with them are the souls of the prophetesses themselves (Deuteronomy 18:20). According to others: the former are the pious, the latter the wicked. Comp. Ezekiel 13:18. αְּ ?λַ ?ζֶּ ?αְ ?λֶ ?ν, the masc. suffix, embracing at the same time the false prophets along with them, or an inaccuracy of Ezekiel’s (Hδv.). Comp. on Ezekiel 13:20. Comp. besides, Micah 2:11. Thereafter, in Ezekiel 13:20, the judgment, as in the case of the false prophets (Ezekiel 13:8 sq.). There—the coverings are, as it were, the ground on which the hunt takes place, according to Hengstenberg. According to others: there, at Jerusalem (Ezekiel 13:16).—μְ ?τֹ ?ψְ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ (from τָּ ?ψַ ?η, to break through (αָּ ?ψַ ?κ), like αָּ ?ψַ ?η, to flee) is rendered by Hδv.: “to rejoicings (excesses).” Proverbs 7:18. Neteler: “in their bloom.” Others: “to blooming pleasure-gardens”; others still: “in order that they may blossom,” according to your prophecy. Philippson: “to flutter in the net.” Hengst.: “like birds.” Ewald: “as if they were birds of passage.” τֹּ ?γְ ?ϊεֹ ?ϊ, Aramaic, means “flying ones”; so it is acknowledged by most in what follows, and so it is here likewise, only that the connection makes the difference,—that here they are hunted, caught, as such, but instead of this, in what follows, with piquant repetition, they are let fly. The very sameness of the expression, amid opposite surroundings, is the point. Because the false prophetesses are conceived of here (Psalms 11) as fowlers, who are usually men, the masc. suffix preceding the comparison is easily understood. The souls are torn out of the arms in question; according to the usual interpretation: the coverings are torn away from the arms of the false prophetesses.—εְ ?ωִׁ ?μַּ ?ηϊִּ ?ι, as in Deuteronomy 22:7 (Exodus 21:26). Ezekiel 13:21. With the feminine suffix the address returns again to the women. While hitherto Ezekiel 13:18 was kept in view, with Ezekiel 13:22-23 the reference is to Ezekiel 13:19. While they threw suspicion on the pious among the exiles, and made them sad, etc., they strengthened those in Jerusalem in their pride of expectation. They did evil to the good, and to the bad they did no good. And so shall all their doings come to an end. By the events shall they be put to shame, and they shall perish in them. 1. Cocceius gives the name of false prophecy to the doctrine which is contrary to God’s word, to the false exposition of Scripture, as well as to prophesying without having seen and heard God’s word, as well as, above all, to the imagination of, or the laying claim to, possessing such divine revelation. [2. “Here, then, lay the grand characteristic of the true prophet, as distinguished from the false. There was exhibited objectively to his soul, through the operation of the Spirit of God, a thought, or succession of thoughts,—an action, perhaps, revealing the mind and will of God; and then taking up this in the apprehension of his mind, he went forth to declare it to others, as from his own inward consciousness, clothed in such words as fitly expressed what had been seen within. With the false prophet, on the other hand, even supposing him to be perfectly sincere in what he uttered, all proceeded from the impulse of his own inflated imagination or excited feelings; the whole was from within merely, nothing from without, from above. Yet, with this distinction so clearly traced, and traced for the express purpose of drawing the line of demarcation between the true and the false in prophetic utterances, we are still presented with views and theories of inspiration, which, in the case of inspired men generally, prophets as well as evangelists and apostles, if they do not altogether discard the objective, render the subjective alone prominent,—make so much account of the internal consciousness or intuitional sense of the subject of inspiration, as necessarily to throw into the background the divine communication made to him from above. But in the two classes of prophets here presented to our notice, the one could lay claim, as well as the other, to the internal consciousness of some spiritual thought or idea; the only question was, whence came the idea? Did it spring up from within, as of itself? or was it presented there by the Spirit of God? Was the mind’s consciousness of the thoughts and feelings it experienced of its own awakening, or was it awakened by a divine and formal communication from above? If we lose sight of this important distinction, we virtually make no account of what constitutes the fundamental element of a divine revelation, and leave ourselves without a fixed landmark between the movements of God’s Spirit and the capricious workings of human fancy. And confounding thus things that essentially differ in regard to the origin of a revelation, we lay ourselves open to the farther error of disparaging the value of a revelation, when made; we totally change it, indeed, and lower its character, and assign it only a kind of higher room among the views and cogitations of men’s own imagining.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 133, 134.—W. F.] 3. “False prophecy does not believe in any day of judgment of Jehovah’s” (Hδvernick). 4. “Because God will never be separated from His word, while He is in Himself invisible, He manifests Himself only in His word. Hence in the case of false prophecy, making constant use as it did of the expression: ‘The Lord hath said,’ all the attributes of the divine nature necessarily ran the risk of being denied or profaned” (Calvin). 5. Prophecy in Israel was a gift of the Spirit, and already, as being so, had no restriction as to sex. But when it came to be upheld by the Spirit of Christ, in whom there is neither male nor female (Galatians 3:28), this overlooking of all sexual distinctions of necessity still more characterized it. 6. It is a symptom of dissolution of all social bonds when women are in power in such fashion as we find them here in Ezekiel. The French Revolution and the most recent so-called emancipation question [emancipation of women] are proofs of this. 7. On the other hand, in the sister of Moses, in Deborah, in the mother of Samuel, during the time of the Old Covenant even, we have illustrations of what was to be set forth in the highest degree by the blessed among women, viz. the religious capabilities of the female sex. The caricatures of the holy are also its foil. 8. Inspiration is essentially a thing belonging to women. If the apostle (1 Timothy 2; 1 Corinthians 14) prohibits the female sex from teaching, yet he shows, even in the former of these passages (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:3), how receptive woman is for the spirit-world, for all that is transcendental in word and deed, in form and substance; and not less must we take into account the influence of the female sex, and the art (so easy to them) of deception, of seduction. HINTSEze_13:2. “Prophecy against prophecy, the prophecy from above against the prophecy from beneath: this is the everlasting ordinance in the kingdom of God” (Hengst.).—“But when he says that God is coming against the false prophets, he by no means intends to excuse the people. For the people had the law and likewise true prophets. In Deuteronomy 13. the distinguishing marks of the true and false prophets were given. Theirs was blindness in clear day. And therefore God suffered the arrogance and disobedience of the people to be punished” (Calv.).—“Satan’s power is especially very great in the case of teachers and preachers, 1 Kings 22.” (Lange.)—“Thus prophet came into collision with prophet. And now-a-days still God will in this way test the faith of His own, and disclose the hypocrisy of many (1 Corinthians 11:19). It is not in vain that He permits the servants of Satan to rise up against sound doctrine, and that the Church is torn in pieces by divergent opinions, and that vain conceits are able to attain such strength that the truth must have the worst of it. For in this way the stedfastness of the pious comes to light, and equally the lightmindedness of the hypocrites, who suffer themselves to be carried away by every wind” (Calv.).—The presence of false prophets a sign of dissolution, as well as of the judgment of God.—The false prophets involve the people in guilt; the people are to blame for the false prophets, 2 Thessalonians 2:11.—The word of God, that which is to be heard by all, in all things, and at all times. Ezekiel 13:3. Self-deception and the deception of others go together.—“From this we see how it stands with man’s spirit, for God presupposes here a standing controversy between man’s spirit and the revelation of His Spirit” (Calv.).—And yet, for the most part, it is just the wise people that are found among these fools.—The wisdom of the world and folly before God.—“Whoever will open the eyes of others, let him see to it beforehand whether he himself has an eye open Godwards” (Stck.). Ezekiel 13:4. “The spiritual foxes flourish the better, the more degraded the condition of the people” (Hengst.).—“The people in the wilderness of the exile were very much exposed to the false prophets” (Luth.). Ezekiel 13:5. False prophets cannot pray.—The intercession of the prophets steps into the breach.—“Right doctrine is the right wall, just as it also teaches right living” (Calv.).—“There is no better wall than reformation of life” (Berl. Bib.). Ezekiel 13:6-7. Without being sent by God, no one ought to enter a teacher’s office. Ezekiel 13:8-9. We have to give an account of our words even.—God convicts sinners sometimes out of their own mouth. Ezekiel 13:9. “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of God; a king’s hands we may escape, but not God’s” (Stck.).—“Because the Jews have refused to become Christians, they have not been enrolled in the register of Israel” (Cocc.).—“It is not enough that men should reckon us members of the Church. We must know in our own hearts whether we have the inward marks whereby the children of God are distinguished from those who do not belong to His family” (Calv.). Ezekiel 13:10. “Ungodly teachers preach to their hearers of good days merely, and comfort them into hell, Jeremiah 8:11” (Starke).—“The wall is the mere external service of God; and yet all the while the false prophets flatter them, treat them as pious persons, all without exception saints in Christ” (Berl. Bib.).—The world, too, wishes peace, but not the peace of God through Jesus Christ.—“God proclaims peace to us, it is true. But we must wage war with ourselves and with our vices” (Calv.).—There are among preachers those who build without a foundation, and, alas! also mere outside-daubers.—[Scott: “Some teach men to expect safety from a comparative decency of moral character; some on account of formal or superstitious observances; some because they belong to an orthodox part of the Church, and have got some notions of certain important doctrines; some because of their impressions and enthusiastic reveries; and others even by a direct abuse of the gospel, and making Christ the minister of sin. Men of learning and ingenuity employ themselves in daubing these tottering walls with untempered mortar, to prevent their weakness from being discovered. But they are all alike distant from Christ, the true foundation: they build not on Him by a penitent faith, that worketh by love, and produceth obedience; they either leave out His merits and atonement, or the work of His new-creating Spirit, or the substantial fruits of righteousness; and in different ways endeavour to varnish, paint, and repair the old building, instead of erecting a new one on a new foundation, for ‘an habitation of God through the Spirit.’ ”—W. F.]—“We believe much more readily those who preach to us of glory, riches, and peace, than those who promise us nothing but the cross. And yet the words of glory are deceitful words, and the devil can very easily mix himself up with prophecies of that sort, and does it too; but the cross abides and remains” (Berl. Bib.).—False hope of life is a sign of approaching death. Ezekiel 13:11 sq.: “Every building of which faith has not laid the foundation helplessly gives way when God’s storms come” (Umbreit).—“No doctrine of mere human reason can stand in the time of trouble and temptation; but he who is built upon the doctrine of the holy apostles and prophets has built his house firm and sure, Ephesians 2:20” (Cr.).—Man’s work, slim work; God’s storms, bad storms.—Vain conceits, hypocrisy, and deceit do not stand in the divine judgment. Ezekiel 13:14. “The foundation is the important thing in building, and even when the wall falls. For one may (1 Corinthians 3:12; 1 Corinthians 3:15) build on the true foundation all sorts of things, which are consumed in the fire, yet so that the builder himself is saved. Here, on the other hand, the foundation is false, and therefore building and builder alike disappear” (Cocc.).—“It is besides a peculiarity of the judgments of God, that they are a revelation, and make manifest to all the world what was deceit and falsehood” (Luther). Ezekiel 13:17 sq. “False prophets for the most part rear for themselves false prophetesses” (Cocc).—“The woman Jezebel speaks (Revelation 2:20), alleging that she is a prophetess, by false interpretation, application, and perversion of Scripture, whereof each one chooses for his own use what suits him best. Of such cushions there are enough in the present day still, and God’s mercy itself is so perverted. But whenever one would hunt and would fain catch something, it is commonly the destruction and death of the object that he has in view. And so here one seeks his gain and advantage with and from the destruction of other people” (Berl. Bib.).—“What Satan cannot accomplish by means of the male sex, he attempts by means of the female, Acts 16:16” (Starke).—“Effeminate is all accommodation theology. It is its nature to set aside, as in general all that is uncomfortable for the old Adam and gives him pain, so especially the energy of the requiring and punishing divine righteousness—the severity of God, Romans 11:22. Where Ezekiel puts the cushions, there we put perhaps the icy glove. Besides the cushions for the hands of the Lord, which touch [men in their natural state] very ungently, they make coverings for the heads of their penitents, that the hand of God may not touch them ungently, and indeed for heads or people of every stature, always according to the greatness of the reward to be expected—the greatest for the king. The higher any one is placed, the more zealously do they endeavour to clear his conscience, as Jesuits before the Jesuits, differing from their successors in this, that the latter had in view the interest and power of the Church, while the former serve merely their own belly” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 13:18. “It is a striking, awful word, that a lie has the power to catch and to kill souls” (Umbreit).—A heart, indeed, for every head, for the wrong-headed even, the servant of God ought to have, but not pious caps for all heads.—“Satan keeps a large richly furnished store of rugs and pillows, such as cherished habits, the example of others, the way of all the world, church-going even, partaking of the Lord’s Supper,” etc. (Stck.)—“God is angry with them, for they prop up souls, hinder them, lay under their deeds a pillow of reward, teach them to place their reliance in their own thoughts and imaginings, instead of in the truth. But they become still worse through a certain emotional power, which flatters them with a semblance of life in the midst of death. The prophets who know how to produce this feeling of life with their promises are more readily accepted as true prophets than those who cut off all supports, and bring about death. A true prophet announces nothing but destruction—war, famine, and death (1 Kings 22:8). And the reason is this, that the prophesying of death must precede the prophesying of life” (Berl. Bib.). Ezekiel 13:19. The prophetic spirit of lying, a spirit of murder, and also of blasphemy, putting an end alike to men’s fellowship with one another and to their fellowship with God.—“God is the truth; with it He too vanishes, becomes the ghost of one that is dead. But it was a special pledge of His love that God gave them prophets, that He had promised the gift of prophets to Israel. With the prostitution of the name of prophet God’s own gracious name must of necessity in a special way nave been put to shame, and that among His own people, as distinguished above all other nations” (Calv.).—“They profane God among His people, by making Him take up a friendly position toward sin” (Hengst.).—To cast away the living God for the means of sustaining this earthly life, what self-murder!—“Mark it, ye brethren of Gehazi, what hateful leprosy, 2 Kings 5.” (Starke.)—“The true and faithful servants of God also kill souls and make them alive; for the word of God is life, and brings salvation to lost men; and not less does it become a savour of death unto death to those who are lost, 2 Corinthians 2.” (Calv.)—“Whoever wishes to live, let him betake himself to the living God, to whom the word of life of all true prophets points us. Every soul must die that does not tread this way of life” (Calv.).—“Those who have no pleasure in the truth, must, in accordance with the righteous judgment of God, believe a lie” (O.).—“They would so fain have it, that the false might turn out truth” (Cocc). Ezekiel 13:20 sq. That they do not remain unpunished is no special act of judgment on God’s part, but nothing else save the revelation of judgment contained in the third commandment.—The ten commandments are full of judgment-seats for God.—“It is the everlasting comfort of the poor human race, exposed as it is to that spirit who is a liar and a murderer, that the almighty God of truth rules as a defender and protector of souls. The Lord will also save and set free captive souls from the hands of their deceiver and seducer; for in truth they are not irrational birds, destined for fluttering and flying, but images of their Divine Creator” (Umbreit).—“Pious hearts are filled with fear of God’s name, and hence they are easily vexed and taken captive with false doctrine, delivered to them in God’s name” (Randgl.). Ezekiel 13:22. “It is nevertheless sin not to comfort or to trouble still more those who are troubled, as well as to strengthen the stiffnecked in their wickedness, Isaiah 5:20” (Cr.).—The unlawful “trouble” caused by certain preachers of repentance.—Rightly to divide the word of God, a gift and distinguishing mark of a true teacher.—False doctrine makes wounded hearts, but also hard hands. Ezekiel 13:23. False prophecy also was to cease until the appearance of the Great Prophet, the Son of God.—“Thus God was resolved to save His people under the New Testament; so that brother should no more need to teach brother, because the fulfilment would be in their midst. The Word Himself would in very deed become flesh” (Cocc.). 3. The Testimony against the Idolatrous Seekers after Oracles (Ch. 14.) 1And there came unto me men from the elders of Israel, and sat before me. 2And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 3Son of man, these men have caused their filthy idols to go up upon their heart, and the stumbling-block of their iniquity have they given before their face; shall I indeed 4allow Myself to be inquired at by them? Therefore speak with them, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Every man of the house of Israel that shall cause his filthy idols to go up to his heart, and shall put the stumbling-block of his iniquity before his face, and comes to the prophet, I 5Jehovah, do I answer him in that,—in the multitude of his filthy idols? In order to take the house of Israel in their own heart, who have departed from Me in all their filthy idols: 6Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah; Repent, and turn from your filthy idols, and from all your abominations turn away your face. 7For every one of the house of Israel, and of the stranger that sojourneth in Israel, if he shall separate himself from Me, and shall cause his filthy idols to go up to his heart, and shall put the stumbling-block of his iniquity before his face, and comes to the prophet 8to inquire in Me, I Jehovah answer him in Myself, And set My face against this man, and make him desolate, for a sign, and for proverbs, and cut him off from the midst of My people; and ye know that I am Jehovah. 9And the prophet, if he shall let himself be enticed, and speaks a word, I Jehovah have enticed that prophet, and stretch out My hand upon him, and 10destroy him from the midst of My people Israel. And they bear their iniquity; as the iniquity of him that inquires, so shall the iniquity of theprophet be; 11That the house of Israel may go no more astray from Me, and may no more be polluted [defile themselves] in all their transgressions; and that they may be to Me a people, and I may be to them a God,—sentence of 12the Lord Jehovah. And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 13Son of man, if a land shall sin against Me, so that it acts very treacherously, and I stretch out mine hand upon it, and break for it the staff of bread, and 14send upon it famine, and cut off from it man and beast; And there are in the midst of it these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job,—they shall deliver their own soul [life] by their righteousness,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 15If I shall cause evil beasts to pass through the land, and they bereave it, and it becomes a desolation, because no one passes through because of the beasts; 16These three men in the midst of it—as I live, sentence of the Lord Jehovah—they shall deliver neither sons nor daughters; they alone shall be delivered, and the land shall be a desolation. 17Or if I shall bring a sword upon this land, and I say, A sword shall go through the land, and I cut off from it man 18and beast; And these three men are in the midst of it—as I live, sentence of the Lord Jehovah—they shall deliver neither sons nor daughters; for they alone shall be delivered. 19Or if I shall send a pestilence on that land, and 20pour out My fury upon it in blood, to cut off from it man and beast; And Noah, Daniel, and Job are in the midst of it—as I live, sentence of the Lord Jehovah—they shall deliver neither sons nor daughters; they shall deliver their own soul [life] by their righteousness. 21For thus saith the Lord Jehovah; How much more when I send My four sore judgments—sword, and famine, and evil beasts, and pestilence—upon Jerusalem, to out off from it man and 22beast! And [yet], behold, therein is left an escaped portion, who are brought forth, sons and daughters; behold, they come forth unto you, and ye see their way and their doings, and ye are comforted concerning the evil that I 23have brought upon Jerusalem, all that I have brought upon it. And they comfort you, when ye shall see their way and their doings; and ye know that not without cause have I done all that I have done in [upon] it,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 14:1. Another read.: ειαΰε. Ezekiel 14:3. Sept.: ... ἑθεντοταδιανοηατααν̓τ. ἐπιτ. καρδιαςαν̓τ. κ. τηνκολασιντ. ἀδικιωναν̓τ. ἐθησανπρο— Ezekiel 14:4. Other read.: αι , αΰ? Sept.: ... ἀποχριθησομαιαν̓τωἐνοἱςἐνεχεταιἡδιανοιααν̓τον, Ezekiel 14:5. ὁπωςμηδιαστρεψωσιντονοἰκοντ. ̓Ισρ. κατατ. καρδιαςαν̓τ. ταςἀπηλλοτριωμεν̀αςἀπʼ ? ἐμον— Ezekiel 14:7. … καιἐκτωνπροσηλντων—ἀποκριθησομαιαν̓τωἐνὡἐνεχεταιἐναν̓τω, Ezekiel 14:15. Sept. read.: εωλμϊιδ, et orbavero illam. Ezekiel 14:21. Sept.: Ἐανδεχαι—Vulg.: quod et si. Ezekiel 14:22. … ν̔πολελειμμενοιἐναν̓τηοἰἀνασεσωσμενο; ἐξκγονσιννἱονς— Ezekiel 14:23. Some add: ΰμ; there is a reading: ΰμϊπν. REMARKSEze_14:1-3. The Occasion. The outward occasion for the divine testimony in this chapter is first mentioned, and then the inward occasion is Bet forth plainly. Ezekiel 14:1. The outward occasion is furnished by a deputation—in this way we explain the singular of the verb (εַ ?ιָּ ?αεֹ ?ΰ), which surprised the old commentators. More certainly is meant than il vient des hommes. Grotius supposes ambassadors from Palestine, on occasion of the embassy of Zedekiah to Babylon (Jeremiah 51). They were certainly from the exiles (Keil); to be distinguished, however, from those of Eze 8:1. Those latter are already with the prophet; the former first come to him. It is not, however, merely because of the different expressions used,—“elders of Judah,” in Ezekiel 8:1, while here we have: men from the elders of Israel,—but rather because of the keeping apart as well as putting together which follows in Ezekiel 16, that we shall have to think of ambassadors from the exiles of the kingdom of the ten tribes (comp. Introd. pp. 7, 8); whether they were themselves elders is not exactly said, but simply that they came from the elders of Israel, out of their midst. Comp. Ezekiel 20.—That they sat down before the prophet, seems to show that they were waiting to see whether they might not hear something from him, of course concerning Judah, concerning Jerusalem, for in this direction was the interest of all who were in exile turned (Introd. pp. 8, 9). [“For what purpose they came—whether to ask counsel from the prophet regarding some point of difficulty that had occurred to themselves, or to hear what he might be prompted by the Spirit to communicate of seasonable instruction—we are not expressly told. But that they came in the character of inquirers may be almost certainly inferred from Ezekiel 14:3, where the Lord at once proceeds, through His servant, to repudiate the idea of His being inquired at by persons of such a character—persons who had ‘set up their idols in their heart, and put the stumbling-block of their iniquity before their face.’ After this it is scarcely possible to doubt that they came in the character of inquirers: though what might be the precise object of their inquiry is nowhere indicated in what follows, unless we can suppose (what is in the highest degree probable) that the message of the prophet was so framed as in some part to meet the proposed subject of inquiry, and thus incidentally to discover what the subject itself really was. This supposition is confirmed by the fact, which strikes us the moment we glance over the contents of the chapter, that it falls into two parts,—the first (Ezekiel 14:3-11) referring to the preliminary point respecting the character of the inquirers, and the remaining portion addressing itself to a subject entirely distinct—God’s method of dealing with a land and people when they have reached a state of hopeless corruption and depravity. It is more than probable, therefore, that while God refused to give any formal answer to such inquirers as those who now sat before the prophet, He yet, in this latter portion of the message, gave a substantial deliverance on the question about which their anxiety had been raised.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 143, 144.—W. F.] He was able certainly to anticipate their question—as is actually done in Ezekiel 14:2 sq.—inasmuch as, by means of divine revelation, the still unexpressed design of their coming is made known to him, and in this way they are made manifest before him. They wish, according to Hengst., “to make an experiment, whether they cannot obtain a more favourable answer through the prophet, whose fearfully threatening announcement they have heard not without shuddering” (grace without repentance); but from the text we can only learn that the older portion of the exiles put themselves in an exactly similar position toward Ezekiel as that which, alike in the exile and at Jerusalem, the people assumed toward the false prophets. Hence, Ezekiel treated like the false prophets,—that is the immediate connection, the connection with what precedes. The meaning is not (as Hδv., and also Cocc.), that the guilt of the people in general, who so willingly hearken to the lie (Ezekiel 13:19), is to be brought out in detail, by way of supplement to the guilt of the false prophets already handled; nor does Ezekiel intend by his own example to make clear and prominent the contrast between true and false prophets. But by the example of these men from Israel, while he speaks to their conscience, he predicts the impending divine judgment upon Judah and Jerusalem. The internal necessity of it, from the connection of sin and punishment, is justified to their consciousness. This is the more remote connection, the connection with what follows. Hence Ezekiel 14:3, giving what forms the inner reason for the divine testimony.—On βִ ?μּ ?εּ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν, see at Ezekiel 6:4.—The statement: these men have caused their filthy gods to go up, etc., as bearing on the object of the discourse we have just indicated, is expressed more exactly by what follows: and the stumbling-block of their iniquity, etc. (see on Ezekiel 7:19); inasmuch as their idols are up upon their heart (Ezekiel 11:5), the occasion taken therefrom (to fall into sin) is given or put before their face (Ezekiel 14:4). [“Anything which, in consequence of the inward disposition of mind and will, is conceived of also as an object of attention outwardly, and as the immediate occasion of corresponding actions, is spoken of as coming up or put upon the heart, Isaiah 65:17; Jeremiah 3:16; Jeremiah 51:50; 1 Corinthians 2:9; Jeremiah 7:31; Jeremiah 19:5; Jeremiah 32:35; 2 Kings 12:5 [4]; 2 Chronicles 7:11; Acts 7:23.—Daniel 1:8; 2 Samuel 7:3; 1 Chronicles 17:2; Acts 5:3.”—Beck.] They are portrayed accordingly as persons whose spirit cleaves to the old idolatrous memories; they are sinners against Jehovah, they have already even been punished by Him, but in heart, just as before, they are not freed from their idols. This, of course, is the explanation of the strongly negative character of the question. δַ ?ΰγָּ ?ψωׁ, inf. abs. Niphal, for δ, δγָּ ?ψωׁ being changed into ΰ, according to Kimchi, because of the doubling of the δ. In γָּ ?ψַ ?ωׁ there lies an element of urgency or zeal, with which one seeks in order to find—in the case before us, asks in order to get an answer. Ezekiel 14:4-11. A further Disclosure of the Divine Mind, with a more, general reference, and in Ezekiel 14:9 sq. a special application to the prophet. Idolatrous oracle-seekers, as Ezekiel 14:4 a second time portrays them, generalizing the case before us (ΰֶ ?μΞμִ ?αּ ?εֹ, although merely to the heart; ΰִ ?ιωׁ ΰִ ?ιωׁ, without exception), have therefore (μָ ?λֵ ?ο, see Ezekiel 14:4 at the end) to expect what corresponds to their state. For ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν, comp. on Ezekiel 2:1. I Jehovah, in emphatic antithesis to the filthy idols. Hence, as well as because of Eze 14:3, where an answer is absolutely refused, πַ ?φֲ ?πֵ ?ιϊִ ?ι is a question without any particle of interrogation, which after Ezekiel 14:3 is unnecessary (Hengst.). The Niphal of φָ ?πָ ?δ means: to be inclined, to show oneself willing to answer. [Ewald: “I am become bound to answer him in Myself, for,” etc., i.e. I can no longer remain in a mere state of indifference toward him, but must treat him at the right time as he deserves (!). Castel also, without the form of a ‘question: I answer him, as is becoming in the case of such idols. Cocc. refers to this category such an answer on the part of the prophet, that the inquirer remains fixed in the multitude of his idols, does not repent, 1 Kings 22:23. αָּ ?δּ (Qeri, αָּ ?ΰ), because of the antithesis to Jehovah, a pregnant announcement beforehand of what follows: αְּ ?γֹ ?α֜, indicates the condition in which the inquirer is. [Others: according to it. The fem. instead of the plural; while others have taken it as αֹּ ?δ, referring to ψֹ ?α, or as a neuter: for it, for this coming to the seer, or (like Hitz.) read αִּ ?ι (Jehovah will answer in actual fact).] Ezekiel 14:5 is understood by most of a good intention on the part of God in such answering, which is to correspond to their idolatry, and is to be given first in Ezekiel 14:8. Keil:—not merely to move and to benefit them, but to bend their heart by means of judgments, etc. Hitz. on the other hand: in order to take them in their state of mind, as their acting is perhaps legal. According to Hengst., giving the reason for refusing an answer: in order that they may attain to a knowledge of sin, to touch their conscience. Rather does μְ ?ξַ ?ςַ ?ο place in the foreground the ruling purpose in the call which follows. It is their heart God means to reach, just as it is there their idols live (Ezekiel 14:3-4). ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, a pronoun, not a conjunction.—αָ ?ζֹ ?ψεּ, as in Isaiah 1:4, Niph. reflexive of ζεּ ?ψ, expressing deliberation; where we have in that case ΰָ ?ηεֹ ?ψ for ξֵ ?ΰָ ?ηεֹ ?ψָ ?ιε, here we have ξֵ ?φָ ?μַ ?ι, corresponding to what follows: αֻּ ?μָּ ?ν—.εְ ?δָ ?ωִׁ ?ιαεּ χֵ ?φַ ?μ is t.hers as a repetition of the subject: all of them together. Ezekiel 14:6. εְ ?δָ ?ωִׁ ?ιαεּ, namely: τְּ ?πֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν; not: your heart, as Hengst., Rashi. (Others: your wives, children, etc.) Ezekiel 14:7. Comp. Leviticus 17:8; Leviticus 17:10; Leviticus 17:13; Leviticus 18:26; Leviticus 20:2. If it is the rule for the stranger, much more for every one of Israel.—μִ ?γְ ?ψָ ?ωׁ ?Ξμεֹ αִ ?ι, Hδv.: to apply to the prophet (as organ) for counsel from Me (so that at bottom he inquires of Me). Similarly Hengst.: to inquire of him in Me = to inquire of Me through him. Rosenm.: inasmuch as he pretends faith in Me. Keil: to seek Me for himself (μεֹ reflexively, or dat. commodi of him who inquires). αִּ ?ι forms the antithesis to αָּ ?δּ αְּ ?ψֹ ?αΧ (Ezekiel 14:4) or αְּ ?πִ ?μּ ?εּ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν (Ezekiel 14:5). The case is—after the demand being made by the prophet (Ezekiel 14:6), as is presupposed—one of aggravated hypocrisy, that is, no longer mere coming to the prophet with idolatrous hearts (Ezekiel 14:3-4), but an express appeal to the Lord in spite of inward cleaving to idolatry; hence, a putting of trust in Him, although one is away from Him (Ezekiel 14:7). Hence ΰְַ ?πִ ?ιΧ is no longer (as Hengst.) a question, a refusing to answer, but in this case Jehovah reveals Himself as giving an answer. But how? Ezekiel 14:8. The divine answer demanded turns out to be one in actual fact; the word of God is God’s judgment. Comp. Leviticus 17:10; Leviticus 20:3; Leviticus 20:5-6; Deuteronomy 28:37. In the face we have the revelation of wrath. In the individual the land is already personified (Ezekiel 14:13 sq.). εַ ?δְַ ?ωִׁ ?ξεֹ ?ϊִ ?ιδεּ from ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ν, “to be desolate” (Ezekiel 20:26); according to others in the meaning: to put in a state of dumb terror. Ew.: from ωׂ ?εּ ?ν, as also the ancient translators [and Eng. Vers.] (Psalms 44:15 [14]). μְ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊΧ, so that he becomes a sign, etc.—Comp. on Ezekiel 12:22. With a special application to the prophet, Ezekiel 14:9 sets forth the case of one to whom one has come to inquire in the name of the Lord (Ezekiel 14:7). That a prophet like Ezekiel was thought of, is not to be inferred from the occasion (Ezekiel 14:1); at most we may say with Hengst.: “Let not one make demands on the true prophets which they are not able to fulfil, appealing to the utterances of the false prophets.” Hitzig certainly maintains that the case of a prophet is supposed in the future who really has, or in good faith imagines that he has, a word of God. But that the prophet supposed is a false prophet is shown by the result. First of all, τִּ ?ϊָּ ?δ itself means: to talk over a credulous person; and hence the person meant here is one who, from his own want of true faith, is not himself acting rightly in a religious point of view, and therefore cannot judge rightly what such acting is, and what is not. Of a desire for gain, honour, or such like, nothing is said; we are not o think of Balaam. Then, farther, there is the expression: εְ ?ψαֶּ ?ψγָּ ?αָ ?ψ, being talked over he gives himself to talk, speaks where he ought to have been silent (Ezekiel 3:27), or was at least bound to demand repentance (Ezekiel 14:6), or else to announce judgment—consequently, speaks in a way to flatter the sinner. The case is made quite evident by the explanatory apodosis; what has already happened is God’s judgment on the prophet, punishment, since Jehovah rather speaks to His prophets, gives them His word; and the result which follows in the case of this prophet is therefore merely the completion of the divine judgment. Comp. Ezekiel 6:14. (1 Kings 22, where we have demoniac elements, does not properly belong to the category before us). From fear of man, or from desire to please man, the prophet suffers himself to be persuaded to speak. Because he so depends on men, men get the mastery over him, but in these men the hand of God shows itself against him. His leaning to men is his divine judgment; the conjuncture brought about by God, the prophet in this conjuncture left to himself and to men. According to J. H. Michaelis, Hengst., it is intended in this way to obviate the objection drawn from the solitary position of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Ezekiel 14:10 combines Ezekiel 14:8-9. By the equality of punishment, the equality of the offence is proved. The oracle-seeker and the oracle-giver thus, by means of their punishment, expiate their guilt, with which they have burdened themselves in consequence of their sin; and as the punishment of the one offence corresponds to that of the other, it is thus clear that the guilt in both cases is alike in God’s sight. The divine intention therein Ezekiel 14:11—is, in respect to all Israel, to prevent their going astray, their defilement or polluting of themselves, on such devious paths (in all sorts of transgressions); for Israel’s destination continues to be the holy one of being Jehovah’s people, even as Jehovah’s promise continues to be the glorious one of being their God. Comp. Ezekiel 11:20. With this reference, so general in its character, the special case of the prophet comes to an end. Ezekiel 14:12-23. The Application to Jerusalem (Ezekiel 14:21), and the Justification thereof (Ezekiel 14:22-23).—In accordance with what, from the outset, has formed the expectation of those who had come to Ezekiel, viz.: that they should know the fate of Judah (of Jerusalem), and in accordance farther with what has been expressed, in a general way, by the divine discourse of the prophet in the shape of judgment on false oracle-seeking and false oracle-giving,—in accordance therewith the section (Ezekiel 14:12 sq.) closes, inasmuch as there is an application of the judgment pronounced, first to an unfaithful land, and then to Jerusalem expressly; an application which is seen to be the more justifiable, as the going astray and the pollution, which God designs to put away for the future by means of the judgment, still characterize the miserable remnant (Ezekiel 14:22-23). Ezekiel 14:13. A land, indefinitely; not, however, for the purpose of giving utterance to a general proposition as a rule (Keil), but because the nearer definition is expressed by means of the character of the land, and that as a character attaching to it as a whole. The “sinning” in general is specialized as: μִ ?ξְ ?ςָ ?μΞξַ ?ςַ ?μ, which is to be understood therefore in the strict sense which it everywhere has when it is a special expression. Comp. Lev. 5:21 [Leviticus 6:2]; Numbers 5:12; Deuteronomy 32:51; Joshua 22:20; 1 Chronicles 10:13. There cleaves to the word a contrast between the inward and the outward; it speaks of secret unfaithfulness, of concealed acting, and the like. And so it stands here also, quite in accordance with Ezekiel 14:3 sq., where the subject in hand was the duplicity of oracle-seekers, false prophets, and at the same time paving the way for Ezekiel 15:8. (Ewald sees in ξַ ?ςַ ?μ the treachery of Zedekiah, as a vassal bound by oath to his liege-lord of Babylon, by his leaning toward Egypt.) After such definiteness in the description of the sin of the land, the indefiniteness of the land itself can occasion no difficulty. What is thus kept indefinite rouses the hearers the more to think for themselves what land it will be. The indefinite expression presupposes, in particular, that those “men” (Ezekiel 14:1), from their own conscience, might easily supply what was wanting. There is also an element of retribution—a certain measure of secrecy on the part of God, in return for their secret state of heart. Would that they would only ask! We find ourselves in the act of applying what has gone before to that land for which Jerusalem is the title (Ezekiel 14:21). Hence the expression: and I stretch out, etc., literally the same as in Ezekiel 14:9. As to the rest, there is a retrospective reference to Ezekiel 4:16; Ezekiel 5:16-17. Cut off, as in Ezekiel 14:8. Ezekiel 14:14. As the description up to this point is an appeal ad hominem, to reflect and to determine the land for themselves, so this number: three, might perhaps draw attention to the difference at Genesis 18:32. There it is promised that there will be no destruction if there are ten righteous. Here it is only three that are supposed, belonging to quite different periods, nay, not even mentioned in chronological order. The case supposed is therefore, after all, an inconceivable one, to show at once the impossibility of the land being delivered; or, if the thought were admitted that three men like these were in it, yet the deliverance of the land is meant to be denied, since the three would save their own life merely. The judgment on the land, and that as a judgment that is all-embracing, corresponding with the character belonging to each and all, is to be set forth in all four directions (comp. Ezekiel 5:17) in which it is pronounced, as one that is unalterable, that stands fast for that land. That is the thought. That the elders who had come to the prophet, as well as the people, had cherished the hope (Keil) that God will, for the sake of the righteous, avert the destruction of Judah and Jerusalem, is certainly nowhere even hinted. [True, indeed, there is no express statement to that effect. But why is the prophet’s message thrown into this particular form? Why should he so emphatically declare—once and again, and again, and even a fourth time—that the presence of these three righteous men in the land could not avert its destruction, if no such thought was lurking in the minds of the elders and of the people generally? Keil’s view, which is also that of Fairbairn, is of course a conjecture, but a conjecture that has not a little probability.—W.F.] As the diminution in number from ten in the fall of Sodom to three here is noticeable, so as regards Noah, Daniel, and Job personally, a lowering in the thing itself is to be observed. For these parties come into consideration here neither as regards their righteousness, as being patterns of it, nor even as examples of those who had been themselves spared, as is commonly supposed. αְּ ?φִ ?γְ ?χָ ?ϊָ ?ν (also in Ezekiel 14:20) gives the reason for their deliverance merely, and μְ ?αַ ?γָּ ?νΧ, in Ezekiel 14:16; Ezekiel 14:18, isolates them merely for the case in hand. According to their history, which is related to us along with their names, all three, in fact, not merely saved their own lives, but exercised influence in the direction of saving others along with themselves. In addition to Noah himself (Genesis 7:13 sq.), his family was saved in the ark, and even a selection of the creatures. Daniel not only saved himself and his companions, but also arrested the execution of the wise men of Babylon (Daniel 2:18). The representation of Hδvernick, and of those who follow him, is in this matter as incorrect as in respect to Job, to whose intercession for his friends Jehovah certainly has respect (Ezekiel 42:8 sq.). The climax, also, which Klief. and Keil still concede to Hδvernick, has therefore no existence. In the parallel passage in Jeremiah 15:1, Moses and Samuel are not supposed to be inhabitants of the land, like those here named; who are also not so specially Israelitish personages, but of a more general historical character, in harmony with the indefinite mode of conceiving the land. (But comp. also for the connection with what precedes, Jeremiah 14.) Daniel figures between Noah and Job, not certainly in order to his being canonized by means of the two primeval personages (Hengst.), but—if this lifting into prominence of a still youthful contemporary by the insertion of his name between theirs is not to be reckoned mere flattery—because of his universally (and especially by the exiles) recognised real and high importance for the faith of Israel at the royal court. Comp. also Ezekiel 28:3. According to Ezekiel 8:1 (comp. with Ezekiel 20:1), we are in the sixth year of Jehoiachin’s captivity. Thirteen or fourteen years earlier, in the reign of Jehoiakim, Daniel was carried into exile in his youth. The divine discourse, therefore, makes rhetorical use of them as three personages universally known for preservation against destruction, in order to represent the state of affairs here in question as the more hopeless; for Noah, Daniel, and Job will save nothing but their own life, i.e. as the repeated assurance in the three following cases expresses it with pathetic emphasis, neither son nor daughter, not to speak of others, or even friends; whereas Noah was able to save beasts even, Daniel Chaldean magi, Job such as were actually outside the community of Israel. The apodosis begins with δֵ ?ξָּ ?δΧ. [Fairbairn: “The two most powerful and honoured intercessors, Moses and Samuel, could not prevent or rectify the evil by their intercession, Jeremiah had said. No, responds Ezekiel from the banks of the Chebar; nor could three of the most righteous men that have ever lived, either in past or present times, do it by their righteousness. Though Noah, Daniel, and Job were all at this moment in the land, they could not stay the judgment of God from proceeding.”—W. F.] Ezekiel 14:15. μεּ, with the imperf., used of things not now actually existing, but perhaps possible.—The wild beasts of prey conceivable in connection with every kind of devastation (comp. Ezekiel 14:21), here placed between famine and war. (Hengst.: “In the usual sense or in human form.”) Comp. Ezekiel 5:17; Leviticus 26:22; 2 Kings 17:25.—Ezekiel 12:20.—ξִ ?αְּ ?μִ ?ιΧ, because of the want of, because there is not, or: so that there is not = Ezekiel 14:16 : ΰִ ?νΞεְ ?ΰִ ?ν, they shall not do so, quite certainly. Ezekiel 14:17. Ezekiel 6:3; Ezekiel 11:8. Ezekiel 14:19. Ezekiel 5:17; Ezekiel 9:8. αְּ ?γָ ?ν, not: because of blood shed, blood-guiltiness, but: so that the outpouring of divine wrath manifests itself in the shedding of human blood, i.e. either generally: through dying, or more specially: through violent death, hence: as in war, or that (Hengst.) the epidemic is represented as an execution as it were with the sword, or (Hitz.) that a peculiar epidemic, which should make itself known by a vomiting of blood or the like, would be meant. Ezekiel 14:20. A winding up, and therefore a repetition of the three in the form of Eze 14:14. Ezekiel 14:21. αִּ ?ι does not introduce the application, for all that precedes was already that; but gives the reason why for the whole deliverance is not to be thought of, only destruction, Jerusalem being now named, as we shall see, in order to justify such procedure with it. ΰַ ?σλִּ ?ι, a climax, inasmuch as the separate judgments given above as examples are now all four together, and with definite certainty (ωִׁ ?μַּ ?ηְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, perf.) pronounced upon Jerusalem. (Hengst.: How much more must it manifest itself in the servant who knew his master’s will, and did it not!) The number four may possibly symbolize the completeness of the judgment, as one on all sides (Klief.). Formerly famine was first; here it is the sword, because the calamity of war lay immediately before them. In consequence of it the other three judgments came after one another, and side by side with one another. War brings famine into the cities, corpses outside, which attract the beasts; and from all there follows the pestilence. It is superfluous in Hengst. to point to Ezekiel 19:2 for figurative beasts. Jerusalem is thus the “land” formerly spoken of, represents it. Ezekiel 14:22. It is exceedingly striking (εְ ?δִ ?πֵּ ?δ), that after all a number escape the judgment, who are carried captive to Babylon (to you); but they are not those who save their life by their righteousness, but those who are to justify Jehovah’s righteousness ad oculos (δִ ?πָּ ?ν), and that by means of their way; not in the sense of lot, or what happens to them, but in the connection here, where ςֲ ?μִ ?ιμεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν gives the more exact explanation, as designating their walk, just as ςֲ ?μִ ?ιμεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν itself indicates their habitual actings, and, indeed, their bad way of acting. Ye shall convince yourself with your own eyes that these escaped ones might rather be regarded as an irony, a caricature of these three men. ΰֵ ?ϊλָּ ?μΧ: “as respects all that.” Still more clear is it in Ezekiel 14:23 that it will be a comfort through the persons themselves, and that it will consist in the knowledge that such corruption had deserved such destruction. μΰ̇ηִ ?πָּ ?ν, comp. Ezekiel 6:10. There of speaking, here of acting. Hence, as it is there said in reference to the consequence, the result, so here in reference to the cause—not without being deserved. Chap. 6 of the remnant themselves; in our passage of those to whom they are added as exiles. We see that there is not much hope of conversion for the former as a whole. That, even in the case of a relentless extermination of the bad, “there should yet be left a remnant of good” (Neteler), is certain, but is not said here. It is thus opposed to the context when Hitzig, appealing in a singular way to Numbers 14:31, understands by δַ ?ξּ ?εּ ?φָ ?ΰιν the younger race who had not grown old in sin, who shall conduct themselves in an irreproachable way, just as they have by their blamelessness saved themselves merely, not their parents also; whereby, however, compassion will be only the more stirred; they will be a pleasing spectacle in their inoffensive and God-pleasing life. The right knowledge is therefore to be this, that God has exterminated the wicked, has saved the innocent, consequently has judged righteously (with good cause). Just as little have we here an asseveration (really, truly), as Hδvernick understands ΰַ ?σλִּ ?ι, announcing a new, unusual judgment besides the four. 1. Not merely in view of the dangerous position of Israel in the midst of the heathen nations, but as flowing from the peculiar relation of Jehovah to His people as chosen from mankind, there is a prophecy under the Old Covenant mediating that covenant. For the Holy Ghost was not yet present, John 7:39. God speaks and manifests Himself in demonstration of the Spirit and of power by the mouth of His holy prophets. Extraordinary gifts of the Spirit assert a place for themselves; things perceived in vision, disclosures by means of the dream, profoundly significant utterances and signs occur even in the service of individual needs. But prophecy becomes a prophetic office and formally an order of prophets, and that especially the more the priesthood sinks, and the commonwealth of Israel is secularized by means of the kingdom. Ever stedfast to Jehovah, and regulating itself by His law, this prophecy preserved its genuine character and proved its genuineness; just as it continued to uphold, with the force of constitutional law and with a reformer’s energy, the sovereignty of Jehovah against every power which rose up against it. As, however, in spite of this, the national life sank to the verge of dissolution, there appeared, in opposition to the divine ordinance of true prophecy, an order of false prophets, devoted to idols and to the court, which enjoyed the sympathies of high and low. It cultivated the rhetoric of a phraseology at once yielding and heroic, in other respects having manifold affinities with the journalism of the present day as it is exhibited by the French press. In itself thoroughly ungodly, it affects outwardly the appearance of a species of religiosity, which certainly desires to know nothing of sin, and consequently also nothing of punishment. It brands with the suspicion of fanaticism and hypocrisy the zealous prophecy of the law, which, in opposition to the ridicule as well as blandishments of the spirit of the age, has to proclaim the reformer’s call to repentance, and along with that, in ever louder tones, the prophecy of judgment. 2. As Jeremiah 29:13 explains the zealous seeking (γָּ ?ψַ ?ωׁ) with the whole heart, the seeking (αָּ ?χַ ?ωׁ) which finds, it is a standing requirement from all who would draw nigh to God that they believe that He is (Hebrews 11:6). The idolatrous practical atheism corresponds neither to the one nor the other. Thus there can be no talk of finding or letting oneself be found. The answer of God, which is therefore no answer, as the parties in question also have not yet inquired, is consequently a declinature; and that of a special kind, to allow of its being got by inquiry. But it is the nature of idols to be able neither to hear nor to answer. Accordingly, if Jehovah is not to wear the semblance of an idol, He must not only show Himself as one that hears, but as one who tries the heart and reins, and understands the thoughts afar off; and His silence will have to be regarded as speaking, in the same way as His speaking as it passes over into the virtual answer of punishment, of judgment. 3. In the heart the stream of our life is gathered up, alike in its outflow and inflow. To it the Bible assigns the central place, both in a corporeal and spiritual point of view. Comp. Beck, Umriss der bibl. Seelenlehre, 3 Aufl. p. 74 sq. Its hidden depths are known to God alone, who at the same time takes hold of man in his conscience, when He takes him in his heart. In this way He makes the unanswerable witness speak of guilt and punishableness; and alike for faith and for love, the whole heart, the full activity of man’s reason and emotional nature, as it has its sphere in the moral self-determination of the personal consciousness, is claimed. In accordance with such a meaning of the heart must the call to turn from their idols be understood as a taking hold on God’s part of the heart of Israel. 4. The case of the prophet who allows himself to be persuaded, to be enticed, illustrates to us the course of punishment. It is not merely that God permits the temptation, the misleading,—although it proceeds originally from the indwelling sin (James 1:14),—for every following sin is at the same time a punishment of that which goes before. “In virtue of a divine law, the man is compelled either to take back the sin with regret, repentance, conversion, to its commencement and its principle, or to continue in its path towards his punishment” (Nitzsch). “God has no inactive part in the development of sin; He knows how to guide the matter throughout, so that sin attains its full maturity, and brings on punishment. He takes care that there can be no standing still, no halting at an intermediate stage; He makes the occasions and removes the hindrances” (Hengst.). Thus God gives up the sinner to his sin, but reveals Himself at the same time in His power, whereby there is always given along with the sin corruption, and that as punishment; and in this way He causes the righteous reward to come upon him. 5. As the false prophets appear in connection with national corruption as a definite stage in the development, so likewise they are put in relation to Jehovah, and in this relation are recognised as a dispensation of God, as a divine judgment, although at the same time meant for separation and decision in Israel. To this we must refer the “testing,” for which provision is made in Deuteronomy 13. “The fact that false prophecy sprang up with quite peculiar energy about the period of the exile, appears accordingly not to be accidental and devoid of significance. The process of separation between the pious and the ungodly was thereby accelerated. But that period is only the bringing to light of a truth which retains its import onwards to the end of the world, 2 Thessalonians 2:9 sq.” (Hδv.) [“The point chiefly to be noticed in this deliverance of the mind of God is the connection between the self-deceived people and the deceiving prophet; regarding whom it is said, in peculiarly strong language, ‘I the Lord have enticed (or deceived) that prophet.’ It is an example in the highest sphere of the lex talionis. If the people were sincere in their desire to know the mind of God, for the purpose of obeying His will, the path was plain. They had but to forsake their idolatries, and the Lord was ready to meet them with direction and blessing. But if, on the other hand, they were bent on playing the hypocrite, professing to inquire concerning Him, while their hearts in reality were cleaving to corruption, punishment was sure to overtake them, and that, too, in the first instance, after the form of their own iniquity. God would chastise their sin with a corresponding sin; and as they had rejected the safe direction of the true light, he would send the pernicious delusion of a false one. Prophets would be given them, who should reecho the deceitfulness that already wrought in their own bosom, so that their iniquity should prove their ruin.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, p. 147.—W. F.] 6. “In the juxtaposition of Daniel with the exalted figures of Noah and Job, we have a solid support for the historical character of the book of Daniel. Besides, the connection with eminent wisdom in Ezekiel 28. is exactly the characteristic feature in the personality of Daniel, as it is represented in his book” (Hengst.). HINTSEze_14:1 sq.: “Hypocrites may indeed deceive men, but not God, Psalms 12:2-3” (Cr.). Acts 5.—“So also the scribes and Pharisees came to Christ in the gospel: not that they wished to learn of Him, but for the purpose of tempting Him” (Luther).—As the prophet is here warned of God, set right through the Spirit, so Jesus knew what was in man (John 2:24-25).—“We learn from this how false men are; for who could have supposed this of old men, who were near the grave?” (Luther.)—To listen to God is to get clear insight as to men.—“It is not wrong for one to ask counsel of teachers in doubtful cases; but those teachers are to give it not according to the imaginations of their own heart, but according to the leading of God’s word” (Starke).—“Those parties do not judge rightly who do not wish to put the images out of the temples until the idols are away out of men’s hearts. We ought rather to give testimony against both, because God in His word rejects images and idols alike. For if the former are not removed from the eyes of men, there remains the danger that one may again worship them. From the adulterous woman, the clothes, rings, letters of her paramours must be taken away, that she may not again be reminded of her lovers. This holds good also of the spiritual adultery of superstition” (Luther).—“Such a filthy idol is one’s own righteousness, the high opinion which a man has of his own works, Philippians 3:7-8” (Cocc).—“Most men have something on which their heart’s dependence is placed, and in this way are chargeable with a refined species of idolatry. Hence it is no wonder if God does not hear their prayer, John 9:31” (Starke).—“From the despisers of the truth the word of God is taken away, Acts 13:46” (O.).—The speaking and silence of God here, as in the case of Jesus before the Sanhedrim and before Pilate.—“Answering as well as greeting is a sign of good-will and friendliness; and so God shows His indignation when He does not answer, or does not answer as one desires. As e. g. happened to Saul” (Luther). Ezekiel 14:4. “God leaves sinners without answer and help, in order that they may come to the knowledge of their sin” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 14:5. God aims at the heart of man. Ezekiel 14:6. Conversion is a step backward, but one which is also a step forward, and that from idols to the living God. Ezekiel 14:7-8. As with respect to whole lands, so with respect to the individual man, visitation ends at last in utter destruction. He that wooed to repentance adjudges to perdition. The heart which has become stone is rejected.—Lot’s wife, for example, is a sign; proverbs are such as Sodom and Gomorrha, Dathan and Abiram, Judas, etc.—The cutting off from Israel often takes place inwardly, so that only the individual himself knows about it.—“Although God does not always cause hypocrites to be publicly put to shame, yet the testimony of their own conscience is often punishment enough” (Cr.).—“Because God sees, hears, knows all, He will one day also give an answer as respects all, not only to pious hearts, but also to the ungodly, although such an answer is long delayed” (W.). Ezekiel 14:9-10. “When the men of the world do not hear from the true prophets what they would like to hear, they are wont to seek out the false prophets. In this way they have already fallen into the judgment of God, for there are no false prophets without God’s will. But now they are expressly said to share also the judgment on the false prophets” (Luther).—“Such miserable men, who themselves lie under the destiny of God, are led by Him whither they will not, and are hastening to meet the judgment, cannot possibly furnish a staff for others” (Hengst.).—He who does not wish the truth—and truth for man consists first of all in the knowledge of sin—is brought to ruin at last by the lie, notwithstanding all his asking after truth and speaking of truth.—God manifests Himself therefore to hypocrites also, but as righteousness.—“God plants the pious, but roots out the ungodly, hearers and teachers alike” (Starck). Ezekiel 14:11. And yet all at last turns out for the good of His children.—“If the flourishing of the false prophets serves to test the faith of the pious, their fidelity in confession, their stedfastness, the judgment on them and on those who follow them confirms the pious in their piety” (Luther).—Even the burning houses of the wicked are a light on the way of the pious.—The universal approbation which apostasy from God enjoys in the world would lead, if it were possible, to the very elect being seduced in such days as ours. And therefore not only must the world pass away with the lust thereof daily before the eyes of those who, blessed be God, can see, but striking judgments of God as well must confirm to those that hear God’s word the fact that it alone abideth for ever.—“How merciful is God, who reclaims the wanderers, and cleanses the polluted, and in His judgments still fulfils His promises!” (Luther.) Ezekiel 14:13. Land and people,—the former suffering for the sake of the latter, the latter through the former.—Sin the destruction of the people.—“Although public calamities have their natural causes, they stand under God’s government” (Starke). Ezekiel 14:14. “The Jews in all likelihood placed much reliance on the commandments and the intercession of the saints, and supposed that on this account they need not be afraid of the threatenings of the prophets. But such empty hope Ezekiel dismisses” (Luther). Ezekiel 14:15 sq. “If the godly in such judgment cannot be heard when they pray for the ungodly, how much less will the latter find audience for their own persons!” (Luther.)—Godliness has the promise of this life also.—“The cause of wars is sin, which God means to punish; but He means to test the godly also in their patience, and to visit them” (Luther). Ezekiel 14:21-23. “In a similar relation with the people of the Old Covenant stand the Christian nations, only that in their case the responsibility appears enhanced” (Hengst.).—God’s righteousness is clearly manifested in those that perish, as well as by means of those that escape.—“The ungodly man, so long as he remains unconverted, at most keeps in check, but never changes, his disposition” (Luther).—“Comfort lies in the justification of the ways of God. Knowledge of the greatness and depth of sin—this is in all cases the chief foundation of the theodicy” (Hengst.).—Even these miserable ones may be an apologetic.—“So long as we do not understand that God on just grounds acts sternly, so long are our souls distressed and tormented” (Calv.). 4. The Parable of the Vine Tree for the Burning (Ezekiel 15.) 1And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 2Son of man, what shall the wood of the vine be more than any wood? the vine-branch which was 3among the trees of the forest! Is wood taken thereof to do any work? Or do they take a peg of it to hang any vessel thereon? 4Behold, it is [was] given to the fire for fuel [food]; its two ends the fire consumed, and its middle 5is scorched; is it fit for any work? Behold, in its uninjured state, it will not do for any work; how much less, when the fire hath devoured it, and it Isaiah 6 scorched, will it still do for any work? Therefore, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, As the wood of the vine among the wood of the forest, which I have given to the fire for fuel, so have I given the inhabitants of Jerusalem. 7And I have set My face against them; from the fire they went out, and the fire shall consume them; and ye know that I am Jehovah, when I set My 8face against them. And I have made the land a desolation [a wilderness], because they have committed treachery: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 15:2. Sept.: ... τιἀνγενοιτο—Vulg.: … quid flet. Ezekiel 15:4. Παρεξὁπνριδεδοται... τηνχατʼ ? ἐνιαντονκκθαρσινἀντηςαν̓αλισχει— Ezekiel 15:6. For αςυ there is a plural reading: αςφι. figure (Ezekiel 15:1-5) and its application (Ezekiel 15:6-8). The former is carried out in detail; the latter follows in the shape of interpretation. With much plausibility, Neteler (comp. Ezekiel 15:7 with Ezekiel 14:22 sq.) refers what follows specially to “the remnant left over,” in support of which the connection with what precedes might be pleaded; but it must not be forgotten that this remnant are the justification of the judgment on the whole; and hence, that the reference generally to Judah and Jerusalem is to be maintained. Ezekiel 15:2. The figure of the vine or vineyard is in current use for Israel (Deuteronomy 32:32; Isaiah 5; Hosea 10; Jeremiah 2:21; Psalms 80:9 [8]; Matthew 21:33 sq.) in manifold shades of meaning,—sometimes the noble vine, sometimes the degenerate, sometimes the wild vine. The latter is perhaps the idea lying at the foundation, no stress, however, being laid upon it; but the vine in general, as compared with other wood, is meant to be spoken of, so that the figure of the vine furnishes merely, as it were, the customary title of Israel. What superiority has Israel, although the so-called “vine,” as a nation over other nations? Culture makes the vine a vine, just as it causes it to bear noble fruit. Now, however, instead of the despised culture, there manifests itself the judgment of God! Hence, also, ςֵ ?υΧ: the wood of the vine.—ξַ ?δΞιִ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ, not so much: what superiority has it? as rather: what will be its fate? how will it fare with it? as judgment is hinted at.—ξλָּ ?μΞςֵ ?υ. Every other wood can be made use of; the vine, on the contrary, is of no service except for its fruit. The answer supposed for the question, therefore, not merely denies the claim to a better fate, but even makes the wood of the vine inferior to other wood, that is to say, when it fails of its aim. This is the intermediate thought, which the apposition (corresponding as it does with the accents): δַ ?εְּ ?ξεֹ ?ψδΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΧ, explains. Differently the Sept. and Vulg. ζְ ?ξεֹ ?ψָ ?δ (commonly so called from paring or pruning; according to others, from intertwining; or, “that which shoots;” ζָ ?ξַ ?ψ is used to express a process—that of nipping off—derived from vine-culture) is the plant of the vine (Isaiah 17:10), which accordingly has been removed from its original habitat in the wilderness, in order to be planted, to be cultivated. The masc. δָ ?ιָ ?δ refers to wood, as being the connection in which the ζְ ?ξεֹ ?ψָ ?δ is thought of. So also in what follows. If it has not repaid the planting, and this is the case here—but it is not expressly said that it had become degenerate, had borne no fruit at all or bad fruit (Hengst.: “the vine-shoot which is among the trees of the forest” = the vine which corresponds with the forest-trees in barrenness, as it is mere wood; the wild vine does not occur at all in Scripture),—the questions that follow naturally suggest themselves in this connection. Ezekiel 15:3. For use its diameter even unfits it (Hitzig); while its appearance is too paltry for ornament, and it is too weak to bear anything except fruit. Ezekiel 15:4. Useless as wood, because it is of service merely for its fruit, it falls of right to the fire (John 15:6; Matthew 7:19). But still less is to be thought of it, and therefore, just as at the beginning (Ezekiel 15:2) a question was put as to its fate, the question is renewed in view of the effect of the fire. The two ends are in the application perhaps not so much the kingdom of the ten tribes and Judah, as rather those tribes of Israel on the one side and on the other; so that the middle piece, which may still come in question, is Judah with Jerusalem, or the latter alone. πָ ?ηָ ?ψ partic. Niph. of ηָ ?ψַ ?ψ. Figure and reality running into one another. What is in prospect is in part realized fact, on the ground of which a further question is put (Matthew 3:10; Hebrews 6:8). Ezekiel 15:5. δִ ?πֵּ ?δ resumes the parallel δִ ?λֵּ ?δ of Ezekiel 15:4. What could not even be in its uninjured state, can much less be when the case stands with it as in Ezekiel 15:4. The carrying out of the figure already indicated its reference generally; the application now interprets it expressly of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Ezekiel 15:6. ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΞπְ ?ϊַ ?ϊִּ ?ιε, such a destiny as has just been made to take effect. Hengst.: “which I give” by a law of nature with regard to the vine. Ezekiel 15:7. Ezekiel 14:8.—From the fire, etc., that is to say, in the sense of Eze 15:4-5. Already burnt, they would have required to be on their guard against the fire. But in this way that is only “the beginning of the end” (Hengst.). Many expositors point specially to the experiences of the divine wrath under Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin. But comp. on Ezekiel 15:4-5. (Grot. proverbially: coming out of the one, the other will fall upon them.)—Ezekiel 5:4; Ezekiel 10:2. Ezekiel 15:8. Ezekiel 14:15-16; Ezekiel 14:13. 1. The temple of Herod even was decked off with the “distinguishing mark” of Israel, the vine and its clusters (Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 5:6. 4). 2. What is here called the “wood,” Paul would express by the words: “after the flesh.” 3. “The chosen people of God, if they deny and profane the Holy Spirit of heavenly fruitfulness, who works in them, are, as regards the barren wood of their original stock, less than all other nations” (Umbreit). 4. “A nation or an individual to whom God has made Himself known, and who turns His grace into lasciviousness, sinks far beneath those who have not known God. Hebrews 6:4 sq.” (Hengst.) 5. “The Church is not to be a wilderness, but a vineyard; is not to bear flowers only, or leaves and twigs merely, but fruit. She is not an apple-tree or fig-tree, but a vine. Wine cheers, inspirits, enlivens. Outwardly insignificant, there is the noblest power within. The grace of Christ working through poor apostles” (a Lapide). HINTSEze_15:2 sq. The question as to superiority was called forth by the vainglory and self - complacency of Israel. They boasted of being superior, and therefore what they are to become is held up before them; for it is not what we seem to ourselves to be that constitutes our superiority over others, but it is what has come out of us that will ultimately show whether we are to go to the right hand or to the left. The end decides the matter. It is not: the beginning good, everything good.—“Our faith constitutes our superiority; proving itself as it does in our conduct and edifying others” (Starck).—If thou hast, why boastest thou thyself, seeing thou hast received it? Keep what thou hast, that no man rob thee of thy crown.—“The intention of the prophet is to humble the foolish self-confidence of the people, who boasted themselves of the gifts of God’s grace, as if they were mere natural excellences. On the ground of His benefits they took a stand against God” (Calv.).—“The comparison with plants and trees is in many respects a suitable one for man” (Starck).—“Believers have but a mean appearance before the world; but in Christ, the True Vine, they are fruitful, John 15.” (Starke.)—“He who looks at the vine as regards its wood will scarce reckon it among the trees. It lies at the feet of the trees of the forest. Their wood far surpasses its wood. But because God had planted Israel, he came forth from the wilderness of all the nations. Out of Egypt God brought him (Psalms 80:9 [8]sq.). Other nations, on the contrary, flourished by means of arts, riches, population, capacity for war, etc. These were lofty forest trees, which drew the eyes of all upon them. Israel stood and fell with God’s grace” (Calv.).—To the Jews the law was given very much as a vine-dresser’s knife, that they might bring forth more fruit. Ezekiel 15:6 sq. “God is always punishing; but the punishment is unto destruction when He sets His face against the sinner” (Luther).—“The fact that one evil is past makes men secure without reason, for another comes after it” (Starck).—“Let us learn from this chapter to beware of fleshly security” (Luther). 5. The Story of the Lewd Adulteress (Ezekiel 16.) 1And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 2Son of man, cause Jeru salem to know her abominations; 3And say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah unto Jerusalem: Thy origin [extraction] and thy birth is of the land of the Canaanite; 4thy father was the Amorite, and thy mother a Hittite. And [as regards] thy birth, in the day that thou wast born, thy navel was not cut, neither wast thou washed with water for cleansing; and thou wast not rubbed with salt 5at all, nor wast thou wrapt in swaddling-bands at all. No eye had pity upon thee [looked upon thee compassionately], to do one of these things for thee, to bend over thee; and thou wast cast out upon the face of the field [upon the open field], 6in contempt of thy soul [life], in the day that thou wast born. And I passed by thee, and I saw thee stamping [or, trampled] in thy blood, and said unto thee, 7In thy blood live! and [yea] said unto thee, In thy blood live! Ten thousand [myriads] like the bud of the field I made thee [to be, to become]; and thou didst increase [didst grow up] and wax great, and camest to most excellent ornament; thy breasts became firm [rose up], and thy hair grew, yet thou wast naked and 8bare. And I passed by thee, and saw thee, and, behold, [it was] thy time, a time of movements of love, and I spread My wing over thee, and covered thy nakedness; and I swore unto thee, and entered into covenant with thee 9—sentence of the Lord Jehovah—and thou becamest Mine. And I washed thee with water, and rinsed thy blood from off thee, and anointed thee with oil. And 10I clothed thee with broidered work, and shod thee with tachash, and wrapped thee round with byssus, and covered thee with silk. And 11I decked thee with ornament, and put bracelets upon thy hands, and a chain about thy neck. 12And I put a ring in thy nose, and earrings in thine ears, 13and a splendid crown upon thy head. And thou didst adorn thyself with gold and silver, and thy clothing was byssus and silk and broidered work; fine flour, and honey, and oil didst thou eat; and thou wast [becamest] exceedingly beautiful, and didst prosper into [attain unto] a kingdom [kingly authority or 14dignity]. And thy name went forth among the heathen for thy beauty; for it was perfect through My adornment, which I put upon thee—sentence of 15the Lord Jehovah.—And [yet] thou didst trust in thy beauty, and didst play the harlot upon thy name, and didst pour out thy fornications upon every 16one that passed by; his it was. And thou didst take of thy garments, and didst make for thyself high places, spotted [patched] ones, and didst play the harlot 17upon them: they should not come, neither should it be. And thou didst take articles of thy splendour [thy splendid jewels] of My gold and My silver, which I had given thee, and didst make for thyself images of men, and didst 18play the harlot with them. And thou didst take thy broidered garments, and didst cover them; and My oil and My incense thou didst set before them. 19And My bread which I gave thee, fine flour, and oil, and honey I gave thee to eat, and thou didst set it before them as a sweet savour: and it was so—20sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And thou didst take thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou barest unto Me, and didst sacrifice them to them to devour; 21was it less than thy whoredoms? And thou didst slay My sons, and gavest them up, in causing them to pass through [the fire] for them [i. e. for the idols]. 22And with all thy abominations and thy whoredoms thou didst not remember the days of thy childhood [youth], when thou wast naked and bare, wast stamping [trampled] in thy blood. 23And it came to pass after all thy wickedness—woe, 24woe unto thee! sentence of the Lord Jehovah—That thou didst build for thee a vault, and didst make for thee a high place in every street. 25At every head of a way [crossway, parting-way] thou didst build thy high place, and didst put to shame [didst abhor] thy beauty, and didst spread out thy 26feet to every passer-by, and didst multiply thy whoredoms. And thou didst whore after the sons of Egypt, thy neighbours, great of flesh, and 27didst multiply thy whoredoms, to provoke Me to anger. And, behold, I stretched out My hand over thee, and diminished thy allowance, and gave thee to the soul of them that hated thee, the daughters of the Philistines, 28who were ashamed of thy lewd way. And thou didst whore after the sons of Asshur for want of being satisfied; and thou didst whore with 29them, and still wast not satisfied. And thou didst increase thy whoredom unto the land of Canaan, Chaldea, and even with this wast not satisfied. 30How exhausted [spent with longing] is thy heart—sentence of the Lord Jehovah—when thou doest all this, the doing of an imperious whorish woman. 31When thou didst build thy vault at the head of every way, and madest thy high place in every street, thou wast not like the harlot, to scorn the hire. 32The woman that committeth adultery under her husband receiveth strangers! 33To all harlots they give [are accustomed to give] a present [a gift], and [yet] thou gavest thy presents to all thy lovers, and didst make presents to them, to 34come to thee on every side for thy whoredoms. And there was in thee the contrary of women; in thy whoredoms they did not follow after thee for whoredom, and in thy giving of hire when no hire was given to thee; and 35[so] thou wast the contrary.—Therefore, O harlot, hear the word of Jehovah. 36Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because thy brass was poured out [emptied out], and thy nakedness uncovered in thy whoredoms with thy lovers, and with all the filthy idols of thy abominations, and according to the blood of thy sons, 37whom thou hast given unto them; Therefore, behold, I am gathering all thy lovers, to whom thou wast pleasant, and all whom thou hast loved, with all whom thou hast hated; and I gather them against thee from round about, 38and uncover thy nakedness unto them, and they see all thy nakedness. And I judge thee with the judgments of adulteresses and of those who shed blood; 39and I make thee into blood of fury and jealousy. And I give thee into their hand, and they throw down thy vault, and demolish thy high places; and they strip thee of thy clothes, and take the articles of thy splendour [thy splendid 40jewels], and leave thee naked and bare. And they bring up a company against thee, and cast at thee with stones, and hew thee down with their swords. 41And they burn thy houses with fire, and execute judgments upon thee before the eyes of many women; and I make thee cease from being a harlot, neither 42shalt thou give hire any more. And I make My fury rest in thee, and My jealousy departs from thee; and I take rest, and I will no more be angry. 43Because thou hast not remembered the days of thy childhood [youth], and didst rage against Me in all this, behold, I also have given thy way upon thy head—sentence of the Lord Jehovah—and hast thou not committed lewdness above all thy abominations? 44Behold, every one that deals in proverbs shall utter a proverb against thee, saying, As is the mother, so is her daughter. 45Thou art thy mother’s daughter, that spurneth [casteth off] her husband and her children; and thou art the sister of thy sisters, who spurned their husbands and their 46children; your mother is a Hittite, and your father an Amorite. And thy great sister is Samaria, she and her daughters, that dwell at thy left; and thy smaller sister than thou, that dwelleth on thy right, is Sodom and 47her daughters. And [yet] thou didst not walk in their ways, nor didst after their abominations; as only a little, thou wast more corrupt [didst act more corruptly] than they in all thy ways. 48As I live—sentence of the Lord Jehovah—if Sodom thy sister hath done, she and her daughters, as thou hast done and thy daughters! 49Behold, this was the iniquity of Sodom thy sister: pride, fulness of bread, and rest free from care [tranquil security], were to her and her daughters; and the hand of the poor and needy she did not take hold of 50[strengthen]. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before Me; 51and I removed them when I saw it. And Samaria hath not committed the half of thy sins; and thou didst multiply thy abominations more than they, 52and didst justify thy sisters by all thy abominations which thou didst. Thou also bear [take upon thee] thy disgrace [shame], which thou didst adjudge to thy sisters; by thy sins, wherein thou hast done more abominably than they, they will be more righteous than thou; and [yea] also be thou ashamed, and bear thy disgrace, because thou didst justify thy sisters. 53And I turn back their misery, the misery of Sodom and her daughters, and the misery of Samaria and her daughters, and the misery of thy miseries in the midst of them. 54That thou mayest bear thy disgrace, and be 55ashamed of all that thou hast done, in that thou comfortest them. And thy sisters, Sodom and her daughters, shall return to their first estate, and Samaria and her daughters shall return to their first estate, and thou and thy daughters 56shall return to your first estate. And Sodom thy sister was not for a report in thy mouth in the day of thy haughtinesses, 57Before thy wickedness was discovered, as at the time of the scorn of the daughters of Aram, and of all her [Jerusalem’s] surroundings, the daughters of the Philistines, who despised thee round about. Thy lewdness and thy abominations, 58thou hast borne 59[bearest] them—sentence of Jehovah. For thus saith the Lord Jehovah: And I did with thee as thou hast done, who didst despise the oath to break the 60covenant. And [yet] I remember My covenant with thee in the days of thy 61childhood [youth], and establish unto thee an everlasting covenant. And thou rememberest thy ways, and art ashamed, when thou receivest thy sisters, those greater than thyself along with those smaller than thyself; and I give 62them to thee for daughters, and not by thy covenant; And I establish My 63covenant with thee; and thou knowest that I am Jehovah. To the end thou mayest remember, and be ashamed, and there may be no more opening of thy mouth because of thy disgrace, when I cover for thee all that thou hast done: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 16:4. Sept.: ... ον̓κἐδησαςτ. μκστονςσον... ον̓κἐλονσθηςτονκριστονμον—Vulg.: non es lota in salutem—Sept., Syr., hex., and Arabic read: ωγκ, ubera tua. Ezekiel 16:5. …ὀφθαλμοςμονἐπισοι... τοντων, τονπαθειντιἐπισοι... τησκολιοτητιτηςψνκηςσον— Ezekiel 16:6. ... πεφνρμενηνἐντωαἱμ.... ἐκτοναἱματοςσονἡζωησον, κ. πληθνγον (Ezekiel 16:7.)—For ηιι, there is a reading ηιικ, vita tua. Ezekiel 16:7. ... κ. εἰσηλθεςεἰςπολειςπολεων—Vulg.: Multiplicatam quasi germen … et ingressa es et pervenisti ad mundum muliebrem; … nuda et confusione plena.—For εγιν, there is a reading: ωγικ. Ezekiel 16:8. ... ὡςκαιροςκαταλνοντων. Vulg.: tempus tuum, tempus amantium. Ezekiel 16:12. κ. ἐδωκαἐνωτιονἐπιτονμνκτηρασον... κστεφανονκανχησεως— Ezekiel 16:13. For εξμαεωκ, there is a reading: εξμαεωικ, et vestimenta tua; Sept., Syr. Ezekiel 16:15. ... ὁον̓κἐσται—Vulg.: … ut ejus fieres.—Sept. reads: ϊζπεϊκ, in the sing. Ezekiel 16:16. ... κ. ον̓μηεἰσελθηςον̓δʼ ? ον̓μηγενηται. Vulg.: … sicut non est factum neque futurum est. Ezekiel 16:19-21. ... κ. ἐγενετομεταταυτα…κ. ἐλαβες…̔Ωςμικραἐξεπορνευσας, κ. ἐσφαξαςτ. τεκνα…ἐντωἀποτροπιαζεσθαισεαὐταἐναὐτοις. (Many Codices and the Complut. have the plural: ξϊζπεϊικ; see also Ezekiel 16:25-26.) Ezekiel 16:27, ʼ ?Εανδεἐκτεινωτην... κ. ἐξαρω... κ. ταραδωσωσεεἰςψνχας... ταςἐκκλινονσαςσεἐχτ. ὁδονσονἡςἠσεβησας. Vulg.: et auferam justificationem tuam—(Another reading: εΰπγς.) Ezekiel 16:28. ...θυγατερας ʼ ?Ασσουρ... χἐξεπορνευσαςκ. οὐχἐνεμπιπλω, Ezekiel 16:29. κ. ἐπληθυναςτηνδιαθηκηνσουπροςγηνΧαν. κ. Χαλδ.—Vulg.: … in terra Chan. cum Chaldζis— Ezekiel 16:30. Τιδιαθωτηνθυγατερασου... ἐντωποιησαισε... κ. ἐξεπορνευσαςτρισσωςἐνταιςθυγατρασινσου—Vulg.: In quo mundabo cor tuum … cum facias omnia hζc …? Ezekiel 16:31. ... κ. ἐγενουὡςπορνησυναγουσαμισθωματα. Vulg,: … nec facta es quasi meretrix fastidio augens pretium, sed (Ezekiel 16:32) quasi mulier adultera— Ezekiel 16:32. ‘Ηγυνη... ὁμοιασοι, παρατ. ἀνδροςαὐτηςλαμβανουσαμισθωματαπασιν (Ezekiel 16:33) τ. ἐκπορνευουσιναὐτηνπροσεδιδουμισθωματα. Κ. συδεδωχας...Ezekiel 16:34. ... ἐξεστραμμενονπαρατ. γυναιχαςἐτ. πορςειασου, κ. μετασουπεπορνευκασινἐντωπροσδιδοναισεμισθωματακ. σοιμισθοὐκἐδοθη—Vulg.: et post te non erit fornicatio— Ezekiel 16:36. For εαγξι, the Sept., Chald., Arab., Vulg. read: εαγξι. Ezekiel 16:37. ... κ. ἀποκαλυψωτ, κακιαςσουπροςαὐτους— Ezekiel 16:40. ... ἀξουσινἐπισεὀχλους— Ezekiel 16:42. ... κ. οὐμημεριμνησωοὐκετιEzekiel 16:43. ... κ. ἐλυπειςμε... κ. οὑτωςἐποιησαςτ. ἀσεβειανσουἐπιπασαιςτ. ἀνομιαιςσου. Vulg.: … provocasti e…et non feci juxta scelera tua in omnibus abominationibus tuis. (For αψΰω, there is a reading: αψΰωκ, which also that of Syr. and Arab.—Sept., Syr., and Arab, read: ςωιϊι, without the negation.) Ezekiel 16:46. ... ἡπρεσβυτερα... ἡνεωτερα— Ezekiel 16:47. Κ, οὐδʼ ? ὡς... οὐδεκατα... παραμικρονκ. ὑπερκειοκι—Vulg.: fecisti pauxillum minus; pene sceleraiora fecisti. (Another reading: ξδν.) Ezekiel 16:49. ... κ. ἐνεὐθηνιαοἰνουἐωπαταλωναὑτη— Ezekiel 16:50. Vulg.: sicut vidisti. (Another reading: λΰωψψΰιϊ.) Ezekiel 16:51. Another reading: ξξπδ, prζ illa. Ezekiel 16:53. Vulg.: Et convertam restituens eas conversione Sodomorum c. filiabus … et conversione Samariζ … et convertam reversionem tuam— Ezekiel 16:55. ... ἀποκατασταθησονταικαθωςἠσανἀπʼ ? ἀρχης— Ezekiel 16:56. κ. εἰμηἠνΣοδομα— Ezekiel 16:57. προτου... ὁντροτοννυνὀνειδοςεἰ ?—Vulg.: Palζstinarum—(Another reading: απεϊΰγν (Edom), Syr.) Ezekiel 16:61. κ. δωσωαὐταςσοιεἰςοἰκοδομην— REMARKSThe humbling prophetic discourse passes from the designation of the vine to that other, where Jerusalem specially is spoken of as the “daughter” of Zion. At the basis of such a conception of the people, i.e. of Judah as a woman in their still standing capital city, the leader of fashion, there lies the mystery of Jehovah’s covenant as a marriage. To the course of sinning stretching over centuries, and with special reference to ξָ ?ςְַ ?μεּ ξַ ?ςַ ?μ in Ezekiel 15:8, there corresponds the detailed picture, which borrows its colours and therewith obtains its justification from the thoroughly sensual idolatry into which the people had fallen. It is spoken after the manner of the East, and must be translated into the language of the West,—in other words, traced back to its spirit and the ideas lying underneath. The story which is therein related is in so preponderating a degree a story of sin (Ezekiel 16:2-34), and the punishment of sin (Ezekiel 16:35-52), that the glimpse of grace, with which the long chapter concludes, only occupies the verses 53–63. (“The whole representation runs on like a progressive drama, which in an earthly picture see forth so vividly the conflict of the holy love of God with man’s unfaithfulness, that many a reader certainly, with feelings of shame, will exclaim: My soul has been the faithless spouse of God!”—Schmieder.) Ezekiel 16:2-14. The Grace at the BeginningIn this way (comp. Deuteronomy 32) the abominations (Ezekiel 7:3-4; Ezekiel 7:9) of Jerusalem—representing the people in their own land—are to be the more affectingly brought home to her consciousness, are to be held up before her in so much the more shameful a light (“the abominations of Canaan,” Hδv.). “He first loved us,” is the golden background for the dark and gloomy picture which follows, but which even in Ezekiel 16:2 is kept in view, and already in Ezekiel 16:3 hints at Jerusalem’s Canaanitish origin. Of such a nature are those abominations of hers which the prophet is to make known to Jerusalem, that such an inference seems justifiable, and one that may be drawn. (Kimchi, Grotius, have supposed an announcement by means of a letter!)—As in the figurative expression: ξְ ?αεּ ?ψָ ?δ (from αָּ ?ψָ ?δ, to dig), the reference is to the place where metals are found (comp. Isaiah 51:1), or to the source (Hδv. compares Ezekiel 21:32 [30], and understands: “place of generation,” corresponding to the father, just as the place of birth corresponds to the mother), so also ξεֹ ?μְ ?γεֹ ?ϊ, which is likewise in the plural, means something belonging to the sphere of nature. The higher divine origin of the people is, in fact, lost sight of; they are conceived of as regards the land of their natural development, where their capital city is situate. The intermediate thought is the implied accusation, that they have not dealt with the inhabitants of the land in accordance with the promise (comp. Exodus 23:32 sq.; Deuteronomy 7:1 sq.), but have become degenerate like them, and therefore themselves ripe for extermination. Just as in John 8:44, in contrast with Abraham, “the devil” is spoken of as the “father” of the Jews, so here the Amorite (Genesis 15:16; Joshua 10:5), who by himself, or also along with the Hittite, is elsewhere named instead of the Canaanite in general, either because these two were the most distinguished of the Canaanitish nations, or because with them more than the rest of the Canaanitish the earliest reminiscences of the fathers of the Jewish people were connected (Genesis 23; Genesis 26:34-35; Genesis 27:46; Genesis 28:1; Genesis 28:6; Genesis 28:8). Where, as here, the reference was to the land, it was the Canaanite (in Greek: the Ph�nician) who principally came into consideration with the Jews (Genesis 38:2). What is implied in the expression Canaanite might be seen already in Genesis 9:25, were not the Hamitic corruption of this people (comp. in what follows the different hints of this) a fact established from profane literature even. The close intercourse with the Semitic tribes, already carried on in earliest times, is reflected especially in the Semitic character of the language of Canaan; it was the overpowering spirit of the Semitic to which almost all the Hamitic dialects have succumbed: so much the more ignominious must the spiritual dependence of the degenerate Jews, with which Ezekiel charges them, appear. (Comp. Zephaniah 1:11.) Ezekiel 16:4. The circumstances connected with the birth, of which the description is still continued in Ezekiel 16:5, point to Egypt, where the nation first saw the light of day.—δεּ ?μֶּ ?γֶ ?ϊ, inf.: the being born. The dagesh after shurek is unusual.—αָ ?ψַּ ?ϊ and ωָׁ ?ψֵּ ?κְ both times γ with dagesh: shorrech, chorrath.—The bandaging and cutting of the navel-cord, as is necessary after the birth for the independent life of the child. And just as in this way there is expressed what is necessary, so in the washing with water we have what is customary and fit. ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ςִ ?ι only here; probably a Chaldaic form for ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ςִ ?ιϊ. Other derivations from ωָׁ ?ςַ ?ς or ωָׁ ?ςָ ?δ: ad lenimentum, Jarchi: “for brightness,” Cocc.: ad jucundum aspectum meum.—What was done elsewhere to new-born infants (according to Galen), and is still done in the East down to the present day, in order to harden the tender skin, according to Hδv. and Hitz., because of the symbolic meaning of salt, in order to express the hope and wish for a vigorous life,—Augusti derives from this the usual sprinkling of salt in baptism,—is perhaps at the same time intended to serve for a more thorough cleansing, or (according to others) for healing the wound of the navel. It was not fostering care that fell to the lot of Israel’s national life in the times that succeeded Joseph, when they grew from a family into a nation, but envy, persecution, contempt on the part of the Egyptians; so that they must have looked like an exposed Bedouin female infant (foundling) abandoned to its misery (a heathen custom prevailing in many quarters), given over to perish. Ezekiel 16:5. Those who had looked up to Joseph did not even look down with compassion on thee.—“The existence (soul) of Israel as a nation was an object of abhorrence to the Egyptians. The image of a child the more suitable, as Moses, the type of his people, was actually exposed,” etc. (Hengst.) [Others: inasmuch as thou wast to them an object of loathing; or: in the loathing which thou hadst of thine own life.] Such outward misery is not conceivable without a corresponding inward misery. Hengst. makes the wretched condition in Egypt to be a punishment of the evil tendencies dwelling in Israel from of old (Genesis 15:13-14). In contrast with such neglect (Ezekiel 16:4) and such treatment (Ezekiel 16:5) on the part of man, the divine compassion rises up into greater prominence in Ezekiel 16:6. Jehovah is portrayed after the similitude of a king (as so often in the German legends a king’s son finds a deserted maiden), who passed thereby, perhaps on the chase.—In the blood still adhering from the time of birth (Juv. Sat. Ezekiel 7 : adhuc a matre rubentem). But by this expression is at the same time meant to be signified the danger to the life of the child, and not merely its impurity (quanquam f�da es sanguine, volo te vivere). [Targum and Rashi: of the blood of circumcision and of the passover lamb; the verse Blessing in the ritual of circumcision.] As in this way from the very commencement αְּ ?γָ ?ξַ ?ιּ ?κְ is connected in thought with the desperate movement or situation of the child, in like manner it is afterwards to be joined both times with ϊְַ ?ιι. It is from the first the word of promise (εָ ?ΰξַ ?ψμָ ?κ twice), but as being seriously meant and certain, and hence continued without interruption, rendered more vivid by means of the repetition. ξִ ?ϊְ ?αּ ?εֹ ?νֶ ?νֶ ?ϊ, Hithpalel of αּ ?εּ ?ν, Ges.: given up to be trodden under foot. The root-meaning is “to tread down,” “to trample.” (“This child was able to survive such trampling.” Hengst.) Hδv.: “despised,” in a derivative signification. The continued promise of life in the midst of danger continually threatening, makes us think besides of Exo 3:2.—In Ezekiel 16:7 there follows the mightily efficacious blessing in the increase of the people, a visible confirmation and realization of the word of promise (Exodus 1:7; Exodus 1:12). According to Hitzig, we have by this means a transition from the figure to the thing signified. According to Hengst., the subject in hand is an ideal child, that comes to view in a multiplicity of separate existences; ψְ ?αָ ?αָ ?δ is not one myriad, but a numerical measure, an ideal unity, embracing a multitude of actual myriads (Numbers 10:36; Deuteronomy 33:17).—αַּ ?ςֲ ?γִ ?ιςֲ ?γָ ?ιִ ?ιν, either: into the age when maidens think of dress and finery (when would that be?), or, from the fact of her being naked, of the highest charm of youthful beauty, which would quite fit into the context. [Hδv.: “the most distinguished morning-time of life, the most beautiful season of youth.” And just as he appeals in support of this view to Psalms 103:5 [4], so Hitzig at the same time appeals to Psalms 32:9 for an explanation in the sense: “and thou wentest along in the ornament of cheeks.”]—The sprouting hair about the pudenda as a sign of becoming marriageable. Indecent (Hδv.) nakedness is not the subject in hand, but merely nakedness in contrast with clothing and ornament. Ezekiel 16:8 brings to view a significant act of grace on Jehovah’s part, parallel to that in Ezekiel 16:6. The parallel is not, that after “the founding of the city” there comes now “its passing into the hands of Israel, and that for the dwelling-place of Jehovah;” nor that in the one case we have “the wandering horde,” and in the other “the covenant at Sinai” (Hitz.); but it consists in this, that as Jehovah’s mercy was shown to the people by their preservation and increase in Egypt, so it was shown by their deliverance from Egypt, which reached its immediate close in the giving of the law at Sinai; in the former case more outwardly, in the latter for the most part in an inward way.—Thy time, connected by means of the “seeing” with what goes before, is defined by the following ςֵ ?ϊγֹּ ?γִ ?ιν (wooing-time), as meaning that the marriageable one has become ripe for love.—The spreading of the corner of the upper garment and the covering of the nakedness symbolize in general, that He took the miserable, helpless one under His protection, interested Himself in her; specially, however, with the thought of conferring the honour of betrothal, marriage—comp. Rth 3:9 (in which connection Cocc. makes mention of the covering cloud at the departure from Egypt and the passage through the Red Sea); a thought which is solemnly carried out in the swearing and entering into covenant, by means of which Israel, grown into a nation, now became the peculiar people of Jehovah. Comp. Ezekiel 20:5-6; Exodus 19; Exodus 20:2; Exodus 20:5; Exodus 20:24; Deuteronomy 5:2; Ephesians 5:32. Ezekiel 16:9 in part resumes Ezekiel 16:4, in order to make the cleansing appear as thorough as possible; even what still cleaved to Israel from his birth was to be put away, the reason being that they were sanctified by God to be wholly and entirely His people, to occupy a priestly place among the nations. This peculiar destiny of Israel as a nation is symbolized by the washing. [Hδv.: cleansing in the solemn covenant-sacrifice, Exodus 24. Hitz., as already older expositors: of the laws of cleansing, e.g. Leviticus 15:19. At the reception into the royal harem, lengthened preparations, especially purifications, are customary in the East; comp. Esther 2:12; Rth 3:3. To the same category belongs also the anointing. We are not debarred from thinking of spiritual benefits—the gifts of the Spirit in Israel. Ezekiel 16:10. After the cleansing and anointing comes the clothing, in view already of the kingly character of Israel generally, Exodus 19:6; Psalms 55. The Egyptian colouring of the painting is at the same time, perhaps, not unintentional.—γִ ?χְ ?ξָ ?δ, from ψָ ?χַ ?ν (to puncture), is embroidered work, specially of variegated colours; here with gold and silver, figures, flowers, etc. The art of working in various colours is even at the present day very much developed among the Egyptians.—ϊַּ ?ϊωׁ, elsewhere only in the Pentateuch, of the outermost covering of the tabernacle and of the sacred furniture; here manifestly an article of luxury. Some have thought of the seal, the dolphin, the fox, a species of hyena, etc. (Winer, Realw. ii. p. 596 sq.), of whose skin the shoes were manufactured. The old translations, on the contrary, leave out of view the material, and lay stress upon the colour of the leather; not exactly blue, but of a dark colour, red, violet. Bynζus, De Calc. Hebr.: scarlet. Hengst.: morocco. Niebuhr heard in Arabia, from a learned Jew, that tachash is the red-coloured skin of the ram. To tanning and colouring the root-meaning of the word may possibly have some reference.—ωֵׁ ?ωׁ, Egyptian shens or shenti (comp. Ezekiel 9:2), means, like βύσσος, cotton, of which splendid garments were worn, but also linen, which is fine like cotton. Here the finest linen headband (turban) must be meant (ϊָ ?αַ ?ωׁ), Exodus 28:39.—εָ ?ΰְַ ?λַ ?νֵּ ?κְ (comp. Ezekiel 16:8) in no way necessitates the meaning of covering with a veil (Hitz.), but Ezekiel 16:13 uses the word ξֶ ?ωִׁ ?ι of the clothing, which is, according to the tradition of the Jewish commentaries, silk (τρίχαπτον = threads fine like hair), but according to Hitzig, coloured cloth. Comp. Braunius, De Vest. etc. At all events, it is meant to be the highest degree of splendour, where the clothing even is like ornament. Ezekiel 16:11-12. Plainly the bride’s ornaments, by the detail of which the rich and splendid era of Solomon is still more vividly set before us. Comp. besides, Genesis 24:22; Genesis 24:30; Genesis 24:47. But if even the chain about the neck is something peculiar (Genesis 41:42), so above all is the crown (Lamentations 1:1; Isaiah 62:3; Jeremiah 13:18). Ezekiel 16:13. In consequence of the divine adorning, Israel could adorn herself (ωֵׁ ?ωִׁ ?ιεָ ?ξֶ ?ωִׁ ?ι, one of Ezekiel’s paronomasias), and nothing was too costly; and to such riches corresponded the maintenance, the rest of the living, as the husband has to provide it for his wife, above all in the East. The choice delicacies appear to form the contrast to the usual food of the people in Egypt. By the word μִ ?ξְ ?μεּ ?λָ ?δ there is now expressed what was hinted at already, along with the priestly elements in what goes before. By means of their kingdom the kingly character of the people in general was suitably represented before the heathen nations also, but so much the more gloriously as the Messianic idea was symbolized thereby. Besides, there is also a preparation for Ezekiel 17. Comp. in addition, Son 7:7 [6]; Lamentations 2:15.—The extraordinary beauty of Israel is their law (Deuteronomy 4:6 sq.) and their Messiah (Psalms 45:3 [2]). Ezekiel 16:14. Already exemplified in Exodus 15:14 sq.; still farther in 1 Chronicles 14:17; 1 Kings 10. Let it be noted that Israel is thus spoken of as perfect through Jehovah, of grace, not by nature or by reason of merit. Faithfulness, therefore, would have kept them in this glory. (Hosea 2:10 [8]; Micah 2:9.) NOTE [“The second stage of this allegorical history, exhibited in Ezekiel 16:8-14, represents the singular honour and glory conferred on the ideal virgin in her exaltation to the rank of a spouse to the King of Zion, and her decoration with apparel suited to her elevated station. … The description presents a vivid and impressive image of the singular goodness of God to Israel, from the time that He visited them in Egypt, and raised them from the low and depressed condition which they held there, to the nearest fellowship with Himself, and the highest place among the kingdoms of the earth. The relation formed between Jehovah and Israel at that interesting period had already been more than once represented under the image of the marriage-union.” See Isaiah 50:1; Isaiah 54:1; Hosea 1-3; Jeremiah 2:2. “Indeed, no earthly relation could so fitly have been employed as that of marriage to exhibit the nature of that hallowed union, in virtue of which the Lord not only conferred upon them the rich dowry of temporal good, but also graciously condescended to maintain with them a most intimate and endearing interchange of love. … It is the internal relationship established between them and God, and the spiritual blessings immediately growing out of it, which are here primarily and chiefly referred to. Even the outward temporal blessing secured in the covenant, and in part also realized, should never have been viewed as an ultimate and independent good, but rather as the expression and emblem of something higher and better. They were not properly blessings at all, except in so far as they were held in connection with the favour of Heaven, and bespoke the fellowship of love that subsisted between Jehovah and His people. … But considering the state in which they were found in Egypt, they much needed to undergo a process of purification, to fit them for bearing aright so high and ennobling a character. That many rites of cleansing should have been prescribed to them, and a long course of preparatory discipline appointed, only betokened the Lord’s earnest desire to have them qualified for the exalted state and destiny He wished them to fill. And throughout, nothing was wanting of tender compassion and faithful dealing on His part. From the first He crowned them with marks of His goodness. A fulness of power and glory rested on them far surpassing what their numbers alone might have warranted them to expect. And when the kingdom at last rose to meridian splendour, and received the confirmation and enlargement given to it, especially in the days of David and Solomon, the surrounding heathen were compelled to own that there is a great reality in the favour and blessing of Heaven. They saw in Israel, as a people, living monuments of the mighty efficacy of divine grace, how it can exalt the feeble, and lay the powers of the world, as well as the bounties of nature, under contribution to the furtherance of its beneficent designs.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 166–168.—W. F.] Ezekiel 16:15-34. The Horrible, UnfaithfulnessEze_16:15 is in the form of an introduction, which announces two parts of what follows: (1) the nature, (2) the extent (Ezekiel 16:23 sq.) of the people’s sinning. The inmost nature of it is represented as being a trusting (αָּ ?θַ ?η) in the gift, conceived of apart from the Giver, hence as self-righteousness, pride, security. The way in which such a self-pleasing disposition expressed itself is portrayed, in accordance with the image of a wife, as fornication, alike in a political and in a religious point of view, from the time of Solomon. ςַ ?μΞωְׁ ?ξֵ ?κְ (in connection with Ezekiel 16:14), on the ground of the report, the fame of thy beauty; on that ground, relying thereupon as upon a charter, that thou certainly hadst the name above others, as if nothing could rob thee of thy privilege (Judges 4; Revelation 18:7). [Others: “because of” (so Eng. Vers.); or: “notwithstanding,” forgetting the name which thou hadst received from thy husband; or: against, i.e. against thy husband, so that adultery would be specified, which is dragged in from Ezekiel 16:32. Deuteronomy 32:15; Hosea 13:6.—The flowing forth of unrestrained desire, the extent to which the degeneracy reached, is expressed in the strongest way in the words: and didst pour out, etc. (Ezekiel 14:19).—μεֹ ιֶ ?δִ ?ι. Hengst.: “his be it,” as if the words of the adulteress, that is to say, to him will I yield myself. Hitz.: ιְ ?τִ ?ι, though at some distance, is the only possible subject; properly εַ ?ιְ ?δִ ?ι, but the copula has fallen away because of μεֹ going before. Klief.: his it became, indefinitely: what thou hadst to bestow. A contrast to εַ ?ϊִּ ?δְ ?ιִ ?ιμִ ?ι: “and thou becomest mine,” in Ezekiel 16:8. (Comp. Psalms 45:12 [11].) Ezekiel 16:16. A description in detail of the idolatry and the idolatrous worship as an abuse of the gifts and blessings of Jehovah, and a more and more heinous robbery of Him.—The worship of the high places was still a worship of Jehovah, but was already a self-willed degeneracy from the command that there should be one sanctuary (Deuteronomy 12), a divergence according to fancy and foreign examples. The αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ are in themselves high places, natural heights set apart for worship, meant as they were to help the lacking elevation of heart, affecting as they did the high flight of the imagination; here, in connection with the garments: tents, made of variegated stuffs for garments, or provided with curtains of the same, or—shall we say?—laid out with variegated carpets, seeing that such things were woven by women for the Punic Venus (2 Kings 23:7). Hengst.: “small idol-temples for domestic use.” Ewald: small altars (Ezekiel 16:24; Ezekiel 16:31). The worship of Astarte (?). Because of the epithet: θְ ?μֻ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ, Hitzig makes mention of “smaller pieces of cloth also,” but rejects the interpretation: “patched” high places; referring, however, to Genesis 30:35 sq. (“the sensuous piety became wanton over the party-coloured rags!”)—ςְַ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν, masc. referring to αֶּ ?πֶ ?γ, the ςַ ?μ pointing to the “high places,” i.e. to the high places thus clothed. [Hengst.: to be referred to the paramours, in the sense of: “with them.” Others: on the carpets (?) in the tent-temples.]—αָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ, a paronomasia with αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ, μֹ ?ΰαָ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ, i.e. according to the law of Israel. They ought not to find entrance. [Cocc.: which do not come from God to you, like the ark and the temple, but are inventions of your own heart!] εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιִ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ, in reference to the clause: “and didst play the harlot upon them.” [Others: the like has not come to pass, nor will it ever be. Hengst.: the like shall not come nor happen, as denoting unprecedented shamelessness.] Ezekiel 16:17. A contrast between what was taken and the purpose for which it was taken. At the same, time there now comes into view (εַ ?ϊִּ ?χְ ?ηִ ?ι in Ezekiel 16:18 for the third time) the robbery of Jehovah. Images of men—(idolatry in general) because of the figure of a woman the idols are represented as men. [Hδv.: images of the membrum virile (phallus). Ewald: penates (teraphim), covered with ornament, set up in the house, honoured with lectisternia.] Ezekiel 16:18. The “covering,” according to Hitzig, is meant of the clothing of the idols with splendid drapery; Movers: of the wrapping up of the phalli, when they are placed in the shrine. The “setting before” them took place in sacrifice (Leviticus 2:1-2).—My, not only as being from God, but still more as being destined for Him (Exodus 30:23-25). Ezekiel 6:13; Ezekiel 8:11. Ezekiel 16:19. As for the erection of sanctuaries (Ezekiel 16:16) and the making of idols (Ezekiel 16:17), so for the honour paid to the same, Israel deprived herself not only of her clothes, but even of the divine food (Ezekiel 16:13). The rich heathen worship of Hither Asia!—εַ ?ιֶּ ?δִ ?ι, not interrogatively, but the simple shocking fact. Ezekiel 16:20. The last step of apostasy, even their own children!—εַ ?ϊִּ ?χְ ?ηִ ?ι once more, as in Ezekiel 16:18; Ezekiel 16:17; Ezekiel 16:16.—The worship of Moloch, as it existed from the time of Ahaz. ζָ ?αַ ?ϊ is: to slay in sacrifice; and the same thing is expressed by μֶ ?ΰֱ ?λεֹ ?μ with which ωָׁ ?ηַ ?θ in Ezekiel 16:21 is to be connected, in order to explain to us αְּ ?δַ ?ςְַ ?αִ ?ιψ as a lustration in the shape of burning; 2 Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 32:35; Jeremiah 7:31. Hengst.: “The passing through was the mode of slaying, and the devouring was the consequence of it. The idol was supposed to be present in the fire.”—To the question: δַ ?ξְ ?ςַ ?θξִ ?Χ, a negative answer is expected, as in Ezekiel 8:17 : Was it (the sacrificing of the children) less than, etc.? On the contrary, it far exceeded them. [Hδv.: Was there still too little of your whoredom? namely, to stop with Ezekiel 16:15-19. Hengst.: Hadst thou too little of thy whoredoms?] Instead of: “thy,” we have in Ezekiel 16:21 : My; what was in the former relation inhuman, was in the latter not only a robber’s, but also a murderer’s outrage against God. Ezekiel 16:22. Where there is now a transition to the extent of the idolatrous actings, we have a very suitable retrospective glance in recapitulation (αָּ ?μ), and, corresponding to the worst degree of outward idolatry, the forgetfulness of God in the inmost heart. The recollection of the first condition (Ezekiel 16:6-7) would necessarily have become the remembrance of Jehovah. Self-pleasing (Ezekiel 16:15) did not allow it to come to this, but such non-remembrance was the parent of such gratitude. Ezekiel 16:23. The extent to which, with such aggravation, the unfaithfulness reached. The picture, hitherto having reference to religious matters, now assumes a political hue. It appears that the representation given in Ezekiel 16:15-22 is now used as a clothing for the thought in a figurative way. After all, etc. Hengst. understands the expression of time: with the oppression by the world-powers the apostasy became properly national. In that case the wickedness would require to be taken as calamity, and the misery that has come to Israel in consequence of such sins against Jehovah would have to be read between the lines, or the: woe, etc. would have to be connected with εַ ?ιְ ?δִ ?ι. But the repeated exclamation seems rather to be a preparation for something future, the judgment still to come, and hence to be conceived of as a parenthesis, and εַ ?ιְ ?δִ ?ι to be introductory to Ezekiel 16:24; and therefore it seems necessary to interpret ΰַ ?ηְַ ?ψֵ ?ι, not indeed in the way of climax (Hδv.: even beyond, etc.), for Ezekiel 16:20 sq. closed with the highest degree of guilt, but rather of the moral consequence. Such apostasy from Jehovah could not fail to be followed by the inner (political) decline of the theocracy, and the falling away to all possible world-powers. Ezekiel 16:24. πָּ ?α, in a collective sense, related to ψָ ?ξָ ?δ, perhaps as altar to ψָ ?ξָ ?δ temple-height. Both are constructed, and thus αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ is distinguished from the natural αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ The actual idolatry, or the national decline set forth under this figure, showed itself in the midst of the bustle of the city. (According to others: πָּ ?α = fornix, in the service of those religions of nature; farther defined by means of ψָ ?ξָ ?δ as in an elevated situation, striking the eye.) Comp. Ezekiel 6:13. Ezekiel 16:25. Comp. Proverbs 8:2.—εַ ?ϊְּ ?ϊַ ?ςְַ ?αִ ?ι, as if thou thyself hadst an abhorrence of thy national glory (Ezekiel 16:13-14). [Others causatively: to make an object of loathing.]—Israel lay on the path for manifold intercourse with the world, especially between the Asiatic and African world-powers. Ezekiel 16:26. The sons of Egypt are not its gods, and therefore the reference is to political whoredom. Let it be remembered how in express terms intercourse with Egypt was forbidden to Israel, how return thither is threatened them rather as the worst punishment (Deuteronomy 28:68); and let one compare, from the days of Solomon onwards, 1 Kings 3:1; 1 Kings 9:16; 1 Kings 10:28; 2 Kings 18.; Isaiah 30; Isaiah 31:1; Isaiah 36:6; Jeremiah 37:5; Jeremiah 37:7.—(2 Kings 17.) But πִּ ?γְ ?μֵ ?ιαָ ?ωָׂ ?ψ is characteristic for the licentious character of Egyptian worship (Mendes!). αָּ ?ωָׂ ?ψ, the membrum virile. Comp. Hengst. Authentic, 1. p. 119 sq.; Mos. und Egypten, p. 216. This expressive mode of designating them is, according to Hengst., intended to mean great of power. It marks rather the brutal lowness of having dealings with a state of such a character, religiously considered, of longing after it. In accordance therewith we have the provoking of Jehovah to anger, and what follows in Ezekiel 16:27 (Ezekiel 6:14; Ezekiel 14:9; Ezekiel 14:13). The “diminishing” is in contrast with, the “increasing,”—ηֹ ?χ. Hengst.: “law;” in general: what accrues of right to the wife in respect of sustenance, clothing, lodging (Exodus 21:10); here in particular: what is destined for Israel by Jehovah in respect of maintenance, nurture, adornment, increase (Ezekiel 16:9 sq.); only not exactly with Hδv.: “the destined inheritance.” As regards the thing meant, we may compare what the nation lost in land, and people, and influence, and splendour, or the like, especially indeed through Egypt, 1 Kings 11:18; 1 Kings 11:21; 1 Kings 11:40; 1 Kings 14:25. (Joel 4. [3. 19.)—Gave thee to the soul, etc., usually interpreted, with an unwarranted quoting of such passages as Psalms 27:12; Psalms 17:9; Psalms 41:3 [Psalms 41:2], Psalms 64:19, of a giving up to the desire, rage, bloodthirstiness, as if it were like πָ ?ϊַ ?οαְּ ?ιָ ?γ, whereas here at least the disposition of soul of the Philistine cities or states is expressly said to be different.—“Haters” they were already, but they became despisers.—ξִ ?γַּ ?ψλֵּ ?κְ ζִ ?ξָּ ?δ is kept too closely to the figure by Hitz.: “because of thy profligate conduct, which is a disgrace for her also, because for the whole female sex;” while Hδv. interprets too definitely of the thing meant, and has besides mistaken the meaning: they themselves brought back the ark (1 Samuel 5, 6).—ζִ ?ξָּ ?δ, craftiness, baseness, (Leviticus 18:17) most shameful uncleanness. Either a descriptive genitive or an emphatic apposition: thy conduct pure lewdness. The Philistines, who are introduced rather as spectators than as parties actively engaged, to whose contempt Israel was given up by Jehovah, turned away with shame from Israel’s heathenish policy, inasmuch as they, in pleasing contrast thereto, stuck by their gods. Comp. Jeremiah 2:10 sq. (Grot.) [Hδvernick’s view is that the Philistines are named instar omnium, in the sense of outward violence inflicted by fiercest enemies. Hitz. puts out of view the period of the judges, and refers to 2 Chronicles 28:18; Joel 4 [3] 4, 5; 2 Chronicles 21:16; comp. besides the article in Winer, 2 p. 252 sq.] Ezekiel 16:28. Having got no satisfaction in the African, they betake themselves now to the Asiatic world-power. Hitz. lays stress rightly upon the difference between ζָ ?πָ ?δΰֶ ?μ (already in Ezekiel 16:26) and ζָ ?πָ ?δ with the acc, where in the case before us the two are contrasted with each other: first longing after, and then no satisfaction even when the longing is realized. (Comp. 2 Kings 16:7; 2 Chronicles 28:16; Jeremiah 2:18; 2 Kings 23:29.) And with this Ezekiel 16:29 connects the Babylonians. Ever more and more (Ezekiel 16:25-26) of insatiable lust.—λּ ?πַ ?ςַ ?ο is taken by most in an appellative sense, as meaning commerce, trade; hence: the land of traders, Chaldea (Ezekiel 17:4; Isaiah 23:8; Job 40:30 [Job 41:6]), a view which is suggested by no kind of hint in the passage. Then, certainly, to translate: “with the land of Canaan,” and to think of Canaanitish (Ph�nician) idolatry (Psalms 106:38) “as far as Chaldea,” or “at the same time turned to Chaldea,” i.e. while taking in addition the Babylonish worship of Belus and Mylitta, is still less suitable. But λְּ ?πַ ?ςַ ?ο means simply: “low ground” (low land); why not keep by the proper name in this sense? With an allusion to this, this downward step would be held up before the elevated Judah-Jerusalem, when in Chaldea, in the longing after political fellowship with the Babylonians, it hoped at the same time to get the land of Canaan, i.e. to get the Promised Land kept through such help of Asia herself against Asia. λַּ ?ωְׂ ?γִּ ?ιξָ ?δ, with δ parag., is the explanation which is added, to show in what sense ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υλְּ ?πַ ?ςַ ?ο is meant. Hengst., referring to Ezekiel 23 and Isaiah 39, and to the want of satisfaction spoken of here, points to the fact that they had at this very time turned back again to the Egyptians. Their new “Canaan” came to stand them in still worse stead than their intercourse with Assyria; Chaldea’s friendship showed itself to be pure selfishness. Ezekiel 16:30. By means of the exclamation (surprise, complaint?) a pause is introduced; what has been said (Ezekiel 16:15 sq.) is forcibly summarized.—Ewald: “how languishing is thy heart!” biting sarcasm; how great must be the languishing of love! Similarly Ges.: “How thy heart languished from lust!” Hengst.: “how withered,” etc.; design edly the form μִ ?αָּ ?δ, not elsewhere occurring in the sing.: a womanish heart, which has lost its sap and vigour in the world. ΰְַ ?ξֻ ?μָ ?δ, likewise only here as partic. Kal.—Imperious, instead of being under thy husband, bold, unruly. Ezekiel 16:31. αִּ ?αְ ?πεֹ ?ϊַ ?ικְ, inf. with plur. suff. for αִּ ?αְ ?πεֹ ?ϊֵ ?κְ. Comp. Ezekiel 16:24-25. The “doing” mentioned in Ezekiel 16:30 is exemplified, and then its imperiousness is unfolded: thou wast hot like the harlot, namely, in that, as a thoroughly genuine harlot does, who wishes merely to play the whore at any price, thou thoughtest little of, scornedst the harlot’s hire. Ezekiel 16:33 will show that she rather paid such hire to her lovers, purchased some for herself therewith. εְ ?μֹ ?ΰΞδָ ?ιִ ?ιϊָ ?δ is to be taken along with μְ ?χַ ?μֵּ ?νΧ = thou scornedst not, etc. Commonly: in that thou scornedst, etc. [Others: not like the harlot, who despiseth, scorneth her hire, that is to say, wishes to extort more, because it appears to her too small: but thou didst accept everything, because the only object with thee was to satisfy thy lust. Others still: like the harlot who boasteth of her hire.]—As the people are portrayed from Ezekiel 16:8 onwards as the spouse of Jehovah (comp. ΰִ ?ωָׁ ?δ in Ezekiel 16:30), we have in Ezekiel 16:32 very suitably, just as also in Ezekiel 16:30, the exclamation (Hδv.: “O adulterous woman, who taketh!”), which lays stress upon the adultery involved in this policy with the foreign world-powers. ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ, while she was under the authority of her husband (Romans 7:2), i.e. was legally and morally bound to be faithful to him. Others [as Eng. Vers.]: “instead.” The horrible unfaithfulness is set forth as the whoredom of a married woman. Going back upon Ezekiel 16:31, Ezekiel 16:33 portrays her whoredom, explaining fully the μְ ?χַ ?μֵּ ?νΧ there. πֵ ?γֵ ?δ, here merely instead of ΰֶ ?ϊְ ?πַ ?ο. Hδv. thinks of πγָּ ?δ, res f�da. The lovers are not the heathen gods,—although not without reference to them (comp. Ezekiel 16:36), in contrast with Jehovah,—but the strange nations (Ezekiel 16:26 sq.); and these as bought. Comp. 2 Kings 16:8; Hosea 8:9 sq., Ezekiel 12:2 [1]; Isaiah 30:5-6. Hitzig: the presents through ambassadors, the yearly tribute, etc. As she was still always drawing upon her Husband’s resources, she might well give presents. That she did so with such a view, for such an object, how horrible! Ezekiel 16:34. The contrary or the reverse, so that from among all women thou standest forth alone of thy kind. What nowhere else finds an imitator among women, when a woman has done it before! In general there was no following after thee in thy whoredoms; but in particular (Ezekiel 16:33) there was no one imitated thee in such giving of hire for whoredom. Ezekiel 16:35-52. The PunishmentEze_16:35. As if in a public judicial process, the indictment is read out. Ezekiel 16:36. To pour out, comp. Ezekiel 16:15; here brass (Gesen.: copper, the art of tempering which was known), either used for metals of all kinds; or goods and chattels generally (comp. Ezekiel 16:10 sq., Ezekiel 16:16 sq.); or money in particular, in which case it admits of question whether copper money was in use, not to speak of being common. (Matthew 10:9; Mark 12:41.) It is put instead of the “whoredoms” of Ezekiel 16:15, because according to Ezekiel 16:33 these were purchased by means of presents; and this the more appropriately, as in Deuteronomy 8:9 (comp. this Comm. in loco), and in Ezekiel 33:25 of the same book, in the blessing of Moses, the richness in brass of the Promised Land is significantly referred to. Hence (1) the misuse and squandering of the dowry of the people, as it was given them in their own land. [Hδv.: brass as an ignoble and impure (?) metal, because of the disposition and the use made of it. Buns.: “because thy kettle ran over,” to denote the overflowing of lustful desire.]—(2) Shameful self-prostitution in national and religious respects, as contrasted with Ezekiel 16:8, and visited with retribution in Ezekiel 16:37.—Policy led at the same time to the introduction of the gods of the world-powers (Ezekiel 8:10). Ezekiel 16:16 sq. εְ ?ςַ ?μ is taken by many in the same sense as ιַ ?ςַ ?ο: “and because of,” unnecessarily; but εְ ?λִ ?γְ ?ξֵ ?ι must be so taken. As respects idolatry, the sacrificing of their own children even. Ezekiel 16:20 sq. Hence (3) murder. These are the separate counts of the indictment. Ezekiel 16:37. The public judgment. First of all, the assembling of the lovers as witnesses. She who has dishonoured and brought herself to shame becomes now, by the interposition of God, to the one party an object of loathing, to the other an object of mockery. The last attraction, and what might still have been an object of regard, vanishes. Hδvernick refers to the procedure in the case of a married woman suspected of adultery, Numbers 5:18. Ezekiel 16:38. The sentence, which is one of death, because for adultery and murder; the jealousy referring to the former, the fury to the latter.—Into blood, i.e. so that thou shalt be dissolved into that in consequence of such fury and jealousy; Ezekiel 5:13; Ezekiel 5:15. Ezekiel 16:39. Those who before were witnesses now appear as executioners of the sentence. Grotius thinks of the temple. But it is the annihilation of the national life, which had fallen away from Jehovah, and not so much the plundering of Jerusalem, as generally the stripping of Israel of all her glory as a nation, that is the thought, expressed figuratively in accordance with the foregoing representation (Ezekiel 16:24; Ezekiel 16:7). Ezekiel 16:40. χָ ?δָ ?μ, in accordance with the procedure in the case of adulteresses, as it were a “local community.” Most interpreters make the stoning, which is merely a keeping up of the figure, refer to the ballist� of the besiegers. The murder (Ezekiel 16:36; Ezekiel 16:20 sq.) is punished with the swords. Ezekiel 16:41. Comp. Deuteronomy 13:16; 2 Kings 25:9. The many women are the numerous spectators, and these are the nations. Israel becomes a spectacle to the world. The opportunity and means for political intercourse with the heathen will disappear with the political independence. Ezekiel 16:42. Comp. on Ezekiel 5:13. The divine justice comes to an end in its character of jealousy; in other words, as the injured faithfulness and love of Israel’s Husband.—The departing of the jealousy might perhaps, by comparison with Isaiah 11:13, show grace in the background; but the connection with what follows requires rather a thought like Hosea 2:4 [2]. Jehovah gives up the adulterous whorish wife. No more—in wrath there is certainly love still! Ezekiel 16:43. ζָ ?λַ ?ψְ ?ϊְּ ?ι, with appended ι, as in Ezekiel 16:22, and frequently in Ezekiel and Jeremiah.—2 Kings 19:27 sq. Hengst.: “thou wert angry with Me in all this,” i.e. notwithstanding all the benefits, etc.; Isaiah 8:21. Better at all events than: “thou didst provoke Me to anger by all this,” for the Kal stands firm.—Ezekiel 9:10.—ςωιϊι is usually taken in the second person, either in the sense: “and [that] thou shalt not commit a deed of shame in addition to all,” etc., that is to say, the measure is full, and in the place of the sin the punishment shall enter; or in the sense: “for thou hast not taken thought (δַ ?εִּ ?ξָ ?δ) to thyself = hast not repented concerning all,” etc.; or interrogatively: “hast thou not committed this great transgression in addition to all,” etc.? Others have taken the verb in the first person, alleging that the clause was to be understood as meaning that Jehovah repelled from Himself the charge of having borne with the whoredom of the people, and hence of having Himself committed it, inasmuch as he had not punished it,—a very singular thought, surely. δַ ?ζִּ ?ξָ ?δ is emphatic, and with a reference back is the same as in Ezekiel 16:27; and the clause can scarcely be understood otherwise than as an interrogation, inasmuch as certainly the peculiar unfaithfulness of the people, depicted so prominently in Ezekiel 16:30 sq., is elsewhere distinguished from all their abominations. Ezekiel 16:44. Comp. on Ezekiel 12:22. The poet, perhaps also he who makes use of such proverbs, takes them into his mouth, utters them, for he can do it rightly.—ΰִ ?ξָּ ?δ, either for ΰֵ ?ν, like μִ ?αָּ ?δ for μֵ ?α in Ezekiel 16:30, here also betokening the effeminate, womanish character, or for ΰִ ?ξָּ ?δּ: “as is her mother,” etc. Not the Jerusalem of former days, but (comp. Ezekiel 16:3 with Ezekiel 16:45) the style of Canaan. Ezekiel 16:45. The husband is God, who can only be one and the same, either with reference, e.g., to Melchizedek, who could point back to a better primeval time, or generally, because all idolatry is adultery, apostasy from God; Acts 17:24 sq.; comp. Isaiah 54:5.—The aversion for their children was shown in the worship of Moloch; Leviticus 18:21; Leviticus 18:24; Deuteronomy 12:30-31.—ΰֲ ?ηεֹ ?ϊֵ ?κְ, according to Ges., a plural; according to Rosenm., “the dual, comp. Ezekiel 16:46;” according to Hengst., an ideal person, the sisterhood. Ezekiel 16:46. As “their husbands” were spoken of, because the relation in the case of Samaria was certainly different from that in the case of Sodom, Jehovah in the one, Elohim in the other, so Samaria and Sodom—sisters of the Jewish kingdom, because belonging to the same mother-country, and at the same time homogeneous in character—are still farther distinguished as to their size, in respect of the number of the tribes and cities, which are the daughters, and also as to their northern and southern position. Both come significantly into consideration as regards Judah, as being already judged. Ezekiel 16:47. λִּ ?ξְ ?ςַ ?νχν, according to Ges.: “it would be only a little;” Ewald: “only a little while;” Hengst.: “it wanted a little” (a softened “almost”); Hδv.: “for a short time it caused thee loathing, disgust” (!?). The meaning is perhaps: as if it were only a little, how Samaria and Sodom have conducted themselves, and what they have done, thou even wentest beyond them. [So Eng. Vers.] Others connect it with what goes before: “thou didst not walk, etc. a little merely, but thou wast,” etc. Some have even taken μεּ ?ΰ = μΰ: “yea, hadst thou only, etc., but,” etc. Comp. besides, Luke 12:48; Matthew 11:24. Ezekiel 16:48. A solemn denial, as regards the more notorious of the two sinners (Sodom), that she has done like Judah. Hence in reality her acting was “as it were only a little” in comparison with thee ! For she had neither Moses nor the prophets. Ezekiel 16:49. It was the ordinary natural man who in Sodom ripened himself for judgment, in presence certainly of the riches of divine goodness, but not of the clearest revelation of truth. For the close of the verse, comp. the inhospitality in Genesis 19. Ezekiel 16:50. Comp. Genesis 18:20-21. Ezekiel 16:51. The specification is wanting in the case of Samaria, not only because the remembrance too readily suggested itself, but also because the thought was a familiar one from Jeremiah; Jeremiah 3:11. Judah had the temple, the royal house of David, at all events, with a longer season for repentance, not only Sodom’s, but also Samaria’s judgment before her eyes.—The justification is a comparative one: in relation to thee, Sodom and Samaria must appear as righteous. There is perhaps also the thought, that this relative justification so much the more demands the divine judgment upon Judah-Jerusalem. Ezekiel 16:52. The mention of the judgment upon Samaria is wanting,, as well as the mention of the details of her sinning; the inference is immediately drawn in its application to Judah. The disgrace is the judgment, the punishment, to those with whom she agreed, which she recognised in reference to the others as being righteous. Comp. Romans 2:1. [Ewald: “thou who hast called in question thy sisters.” Hengst.: “thou who didst judge” [so Eng. Vers.]. Older expositors: “because thou hast been intercessor,” hast virtually absolved.] She reviled them; now she must revile herself, or at least she is reviled, and this all the more as through Judah’s sins they are more righteous than she. Ezekiel 16:53-63. The Return of GraceEze_16:53. Just as there is grace at the beginning, so the end is grace.—For ωׁ ?εּ ?αωְׁ ?αεּ ?ϊ or ωְׁ ?αִ ?ιϊ, comp. this Comm. on Deut. The fundamental passage is Deuteronomy 30:3. A standing, as it were, proverbial phrase, but not necessarily of the bringing back from exile, rather Messianic in sense; for the abstract ωְׁ ?αεּ ?ϊ, from ωָׁ ?αָ ?δ means in general: destiny, misery, as here a state of punishment. Of an exile of Sodom certainly nothing can be said! This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ 6. The Riddle about the Royal House of David (Ezekiel 17.) 1And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 2Son of man, put forth a riddle, and speak a parable unto [for] the house of Israel. 3And say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, The great eagle, with great wings, with long wing-feathers, full of feathers, which had divers colours, came unto Lebanon, and 4took the topmost branch [leafy crown] of the cedar. The topmost of its shoots he cropt off, and brought it to the land of Canaan; in a city of merchants he 5set it. And he took of the seed of the land, and put it in a seed field; took 6it to many waters, set it as a willow. And it sprouted, and became a spreading vine, of low stature, so that its branches might turn toward him [the eagle], and its roots should be under him; and it became a vine, and produced 7branches, and shot out leafy twigs. And there was another great eagle with great wings and many feathers; and, behold, this vine turned languishingly in its roots toward him [the other eagle], and shot forth its branches toward him, 8that he might water it, from the beds of its planting. In a good field by many waters was it planted, to produce leaves and to bear fruit, to become a 9splendid vine. Say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Will it thrive? will he not pull up the roots thereof, and cut off the fruit thereof, that it wither? In all the leaves of its shoots it shall wither; and not by a great arm or by 10many people will it have to be lifted up from its roots. And [yea], behold, it is planted, will it thrive? will it not utterly wither as soon as the east wind 11touches it?—And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 12Say now to the house of rebelliousness, Know ye not what this is? Say, Behold, the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem, and he took its king and its princes, and 13he brought them to himself to Babylon. And he took of the royal seed, and made a covenant with him, and caused him to enter into an oath; and the 14rams [strong ones] of the land he took: That it might be a kingdom of low condition, that it might not lift itself up; that his covenant might be kept, 15that it might stand. And he rebelled against him, so that he sent his messengers to Egypt, to give him horses and much people—Shall he prosper? shall he escape that doeth this? And he broke the covenant, and should he escape? 16As I live—sentence of the Lord Jehovah—surely in the place of the king that made him king, whose oath he despised, and whose covenant 17he broke, with him in the midst of Babylon he shall die. And not with great power and much people shall Pharaoh act with him in the war [battle], in casting 18up a mount and in building a siege-tower, to cut off many souls. And [yea] he despised the oath, to break the covenant; and, behold, he gave his hand: and all this he did; he shall not escape. 19Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, As I live, surely My oath which he despised, and My covenant 20which he broke, I give upon his head. And I spread My net upon him, and he is taken in My snare, and I bring him to Babylon, and I contend with him there because of his treachery which he hath committed against Me. 21And all his fugitives in all his squadrons, they shall fall by the sword, and those that remain shall be scattered to every wind; and ye know that I, Jehovah, have spoken. 22Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, And I take of the topmost branch [of the leafy crown] of the high cedar, and set [give]; from the topmost of its shoots will I 23crop off a tender one, and I plant it upon a mountain high and exalted. On the elevated mountain of Israel will I plant it, and it bears leaves and produces fruit, and becomes a glorious cedar: and under it there dwell all birds of every wing; in the shadow of its branches shall they dwell. 24And all the trees of the field know that I, Jehovah, brought down the high tree, exalted the low tree, made the green tree wither, and made the dry tree to flourish; I, Jehovah, spake and did. Ezekiel 17:3. Sept.: ... ὁςἐχειτοἡγημαεἰσελθεινεἰςτ.Λιβανον— Ezekiel 17:4. ... εἰςπολιντετειχισμενην—Vulg.: … in urbe negotiatorum— Ezekiel 17:5. ... ἐπιβλεπομενονἐταξεναὐτο. Vulg: … et posuit illud in terra pro semine … in superficie posuit illud. Ezekiel 17:7. ... ποτισαιαὐτηνσυντωβωλωτηςφυτειαςαὐτης. (Another reading: λπτδ, alarum instar produxit. ξςψπϊ, ab areola. Syr. and Arab.; see Ezekiel 17:10.) Ezekiel 17:9. Another reading: ηϊςμη, interrog. Ezekiel 17:10. ... συντωβωλωἀνατοληςαὐτηςξηρανθησεται. Ezekiel 17:17. ... ποιησειπροςαὐτονΦκραωπολεμον— Ver 20. ... κ. ἀλωσεταιἐντηπεριοχηαὐτου.—(Another reading: αξςμε, propter scelus efus. ςμξςμι Syr.) Ezekiel 17:22. ... καρδοιαςαὐτωνἀποκνιωκ. καταφυτιυσω... ὑψηλον, Ezekiel 17:23. Κ. κρεμασωαὐτουἐνὀρειμετεωρωτουἸσρ. κ. καταφυτευσω … κ. ἀναπαυσεταιὑποκατωαὐτουπανθηριον, κταπιτειναὑποτηνσκιαναὐτουἀναπαυσεταικ. τ. κληματααὐτουἀποκατασταθησεται. REMARKSAfter the preparatory hints in the preceding chapter, e.g. Ezekiel 17:13, the discourse, as in Ezekiel 12., turns specially to the subject of kingdom. Ezekiel 17:1-10. The RiddleEze_17:2. ηεּ ?γηִ ?ιγָ ?δ, always in this connection (Judges 14:12-13; Judges 14:16) means: to tie a knot of speech, which is to he loosed; according to others: from ηָ ?γַ ?γ, a sharp saying; but in how far sharp? (Comp. Doct. Reflec. 1.) What requires sharpened wits to understand it, is certainly too remote from the connection. ηִ ?ιγָ ?δ is in general the figurative speech, and therefore used in parallel with ξָ ?ωָׁ ?μ (comp. Ezekiel 12:22); which may be, and for the most part is, in this form, especially as contrasted with the plain, literal statement. Designedly veiled, it is meant to rouse us to remove the veil, and thus with the process of reflection so much the deeper an impression is made. As the discourse is to be addressed to the house of Israel (Ezekiel 17:12), there is no need for quoting, as Hitz. does, Ezekiel 16:44. Ezekiel 17:3. The great eagle is Nebuchadnezzar, as Ezekiel 17:12 shows; and the same figure is employed in Jeremiah 48:40; Jeremiah 49:22, so majestic and powerful as well as strikingly appropriate, without for that reason being a specially Babylonian title, or an animal form appearing in the armorial bearings of the Babylonian rulers. The points of comparison are the royal character, the robber-conqueror element, the power of rapid flight, the sharp vision from which nothing can be concealed, the power of stroke; perhaps also Matthew 24:28. With great wings, points to the extent of dominion; with long wing-feathers, to the energy, especially of the military power; full of feathers, to the multitude of subjects; the divers colours, to the diversity of the subjugated nations in speech, customs, dress.—Lebanon, if it stands for Judah, does so because the latter represents the whole of Israel, and in this case, according to Hengst., “because the mountains in Scripture language mean kingdoms;” but rather, perhaps, inasmuch as for the king of Babylon Lebanon is the boundary of the land, the first sign of the Jewish land. More correctly, however, in connection with what follows, and in accordance with Ezekiel 17:12, it is taken as a symbol of Jerusalem; and that not so much because of the temple and the other palaces, as because of the king’s house, constructed of cedar beams, on Mount Zion, for which comp. 1 Kings 7:2; 1 Kings 10:17; 1 Kings 10:21; Jeremiah 22:23.—φַ ?ξֶּ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, a word peculiar to Ezekiel for the topmost foliage of the cedar, by which is meant in general what stands out prominently, namely, what stands out prominently in the house of David; so that from the generality of the expression we may include in the exposition “the princes” of Ezekiel 17:12-13. Hengst. happily: “the then royal court.” The more special statement follows in Ezekiel 17:4 : the topmost of its shoots, etc. The tip, the highest of the shoots which together form the topmost branch, with an allusion at the same time to his youthful years, means king Jehoiachin. Canaan, here the same is in Ezekiel 16:29. Comp. there. Ironically: yea, into a new Canaan! a low land as contrasted with the lofty Lebanon! Similarly Hδv. The city of merchants does not necessitate our interpreting the “land of Canaan” as a land of merchandise, as most expositors take it, but side by side with the ironically so-called “Canaan” = Babylonia, there is placed in addition a special feature, for which comp. Introd. p. 19. The market of commerce in contrast with the king’s house! As in Babylon all possible products of commerce were huddled together, so in a manner also were huddled together the most diverse crowns and princes. Hengst. supposes that the Chaldean diplomacy is meant as being a policy of interests, as we also speak of international intrigues. “Self-interest is the point of comparison between politics and trade” (Revelation 18.). Ezekiel 17:5. The seed of the land denotes, as contrasted with a foreign ruler, and specially with a Babylonian viceroy, one of the native royal family (Ezekiel 17:13), namely, Zedekiah (Introd. p. 6). But in the difference between the “top of its shoots” (Ezekiel 17:4) and the “seed of the land,” there is set forth prominently a difference between Zedekiah and Jehoiachin (Matthew 1:12). It is not so much, perhaps, the policy of Nebuchadnezzar, as Hengst. puts it, “in order to secure for him the sympathies of the people,” as rather the considerateness, the clemency of the procedure, that is meant to be brought out.—αִּ ?ωְׂ ?γֵ ?δζֶ ?ψָ ?ς, in a seed field, which is described more particularly in what follows. What is meant is the as yet favourable circumstances, as Judah was neither a “sterile land,” nor even an exhausted soil.—χָ ?η with kametz (Hosea 11:3), see Hδv. on the passage, a resuming of the preceding εַ ?ιִּ ?χַּ ?ϊ. The many waters portray the fertile situation, in harmony with φַ ?τְ ?φָ ?τָ ?δ, a word peculiar to Ezekiel, which Gesenius derives from the inundated, well-watered soil which the willow loves. There is no need for supplying a comparative λְּ, as the accusative is an apposition. The LXX. derive it from φָ ?τָ ?δ: he caused it to be watched over. So also the Syriac Version. Ezekiel 17:6. If a humiliation is implied in the illustration used: “as a willow,” the statement that it became a vine may possibly be meant to make up for this. But however luxuriantly the vine stretched out, yet it was no longer the Davidic cedar, as is specially indicated by the low stature (Ezekiel 17:14); which at the same time forms the transition to the intentional μִ ?τְ ?πεֹ ?ϊΧ, that it was to continue turned toward the Babylonian ruler, and subject to him with all its growth and with the roots of its existence and vigour. (Klief.: it was not to stretch out its branches toward its own post, etc.) εַ ?ϊְּ ?ιμְ ?πֶ ?τֶ ?ο, a short repetition, to prepare for what now follows (Ezekiel 17:7), as being the opposite of what was intended. The “carefully selected” (Hδv.) form of expression (αַּ ?γִּ ?ιν and τּ ?ΰψֹ ?ϊ) brings out in strong colours the overweening self-conceit. Ezekiel 17:7. πֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΞΰֶ ?ϊָ ?γ, another, as distinguished from the one pointed out emphatically in Ezekiel 17:3. Comp. Ezekiel 17:15. The description is similar to that in Ezekiel 17:3, but more meagre, corresponding to the inferior position of the Egyptian king in respect of power. In λָּ ?τַ ?ο there is a certain play upon the word πֶּ ?τֶ ?ο. The meaning is (comp. Ezekiel 17:6) plainly to turn strongly in some particular direction,—is it to wind because of hindrance from the soil in which it had been planted? or is it to languish, to thirst after, portraying the vehement self-willed longing?—The “watering” is probably not without allusion to the process of irrigation peculiar to Egypt by means of the overflow of the Nile.—From the beds, etc., i.e. from the spot where it had been planted by Babylon, went forth its leaning toward Egypt, which marks already the discontent, the ingratitude, the unfaithfulness, and thus paves the way for Ezekiel 17:8. Comp. besides Ezekiel 17:5.—ΰַ ?γָּ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, according to some, from a root “to be wide” (to have it comfortable); according to others, from a root “to be strong.” Ezekiel 17:9. The difficulty of the riddle is presented for solution; the consequence to be foreseen from such conduct is put as a question. According to Hδv., with an expression of displeasure; according to others, ironically. But the prophet does not in this case utter his own sentiment, but what the Eternal says. The divine sentence may be learned from the riddle. From the additional question annexed to it, it follows that the first question is to be answered in the negative. (Comp. Matthew 21:40 sq.; Ezekiel 20:15 sq.) φָ ?μַ ?ϊ is: to force a way in, to force a way through, to come forward. Keil in his exposition takes it as a neuter: will it succeed, prosper? and what follows, in his translation also, indefinitely: will they not pull up? etc., instead of referring it to Nebuchadnezzar. The roots have respect to his existence as king; the fruit is the produce, the result of this royal existence by Nebuchadnezzar’s grace; there is no special allusion to Zedekiah’s children (2 Kings 25:7). All the leaves of its shoots = the whole productive energy and vital force which such a kingship in any way showed. The subject is the vine, as also in Ezekiel 17:10. The common interpretation is, Nebuchadnezzar will not need for this purpose his whole power, specially his whole military forces. But μְ ?ξַ ?ωְּׂ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ (a feminine infinitive form), in accordance with the interpretation of Eze 17:17, is rather to be understood of the lifting up again from the roots, into which it has sunk down withered. [Hδv.: And without great power and without much people, scil. it will parch up (?), when one pulls it up from ts root, that is to say, without the expected help of Egypt he will sink. Hengst.: Nebuchadnezzar, who did indeed, according to Jeremiah 34., lead a numerous army against Jerusalem, did not require to make so great preparations (Deuteronomy 32:30; Leviticus 26:8). The taking away with the roots = the total annihilation of the national existence, Mark 11:20; Matthew 3:10; Luke 3:9. Ezekiel 17:10. A strengthening repetition (Ezekiel 17:9) to produce greater attention. Comp. besides Ezekiel 17:8. The east windVery appropriate for the Babylonians, dwelling in the east, as well as in the figure, because it is dangerous for plants—is employed in conclusion to disguise for the second time, quite after the manner of a riddle, the instrument of punishment.—With a mere touch, and on the spot of his ungrateful oride, he will find his judgment. Ezekiel 17:11-21. The InterpretationEze_17:12. Because now “the house of Israel,” to whom the riddle was proposed, are to know the meaning, are in any case to have the riddle interpreted to them by the prophet, although they are called a house of rebelliousness (Ezekiel 2:5-6), the case before us is a different one from that in Matthew 13:10 sq., and from that in Isaiah, to which Jesus there refers back. We are to think of the exiles as favourably distinguished from those at Jerusalem.—For the interpretation, comp. Ezekiel 17:3, and 2 Kings 24:11 sq.; Jeremiah 24:1; Jeremiah 29:2.—The princes of Jerusalem along with the king, the “topmost branch” in the riddle of which Jehoiachin is the top-shoot (Ezekiel 17:4). Ezekiel 17:13. Comp. Ezekiel 17:5; Jeremiah 41:1; 1 Kings 11:14; 2 Kings 24:17 (Introd. p. 6). In reference to the vassal’s oath of fidelity, see 2 Chronicles 36:13.—The ΰֵ ?μֵ ?ιΧ cannot perhaps be taken as a simple resumption of the “princes” of the preceding verse, yet they may be understood as included. But the expression is to be interpreted especially from 2 Kings 24:14; 2 Kings 24:16. Hitz.: the owners of property, rich proprietors, artisans, and warriors. The intention (Ezekiel 17:6) is clearly expressed in Ezekiel 17:14; the parties in question were not so much meant to be hostages.—Keil: “that he might keep his covenant, that it might stand.” Ezekiel 17:15. Comp. Ezekiel 17:7; likewise 2 Kings 24:20. The Egyptian was to support him with that which was peculiar to Egypt (Deuteronomy 17:16), and which Zedekiah needed. Did the latter wish to appoint the riders for the horses?—The much people refers back to Ezekiel 17:9, and likewise to the question of Eze 17:10, which is at the same time explained.—The answer is given in Ezekiel 17:16 in a divine utterance, such as we have in Ezekiel 17:9, only that the terms are still stronger, taking the well-known form of an oath.—Comp. Ezekiel 12:13-17. And not with great power, etc., refers back to the “horses and much people” of Ezekiel 17:15, and is meant to explain the statement in Ezekiel 17:9. Pharaoh is the subject. The meaning is, either that he will not be willing to render Zedekiah the expected help, or that he will not be able. Comp. Jeremiah 37:5; Jeremiah 37:7. The “acting,” on which it depends, turns out insignificant—nothing more than a feeble demonstration on the part of Egypt. [Hengst.: Pharaoh will leave his protegι in the lurch, when he is hard pressed by his enemies. That the Chaldean needs no great military force against Jerusalem (Ezekiel 17:9), finds its explanation here in the circumstance that the Egyptians, against whom alone such a force was necessary, do not come to its help with such a force.]—The march of the Egyptian auxiliary army took place when Jerusalem was besieged by the Chaldeans. Comp. in this connection on Ezekiel 4:2. To cut off, etc., draws attention to the fact of how necessary powerful help would be in such a situation. Ezekiel 17:18. The riddle is interpreted, but the divine discourse lingers still over the breach of oath and covenant, because such acting on Zedekiah’s part, with what is implied in it, is still to be judged and to have sentence pronounced upon it by Jehovah. Ezekiel 17:19, just like Ezekiel 17:16. It is not only that every oath, and hence also this oath, is of a religious character, and that the despising of it necessarily compromised the God of Israel in the eyes of the heathen; but still farther, considering the clemency of Nebuchadnezzar in making such a covenant, as Jehovah’s instrument, Jehovah’s goodness was turned into lasciviousness.—Comp. besides Ezekiel 11:21; Ezekiel 9:10. Ezekiel 17:20. See on Ezekiel 12:13. The “contending,” the going into court with him, involves the punishment.—Ezekiel 15:8-8. Instead of ξִ ?αְ ?ψָ ?ϊָ ?ε (Qeri: ξִ ?αְ ?ψָ ?ηָ ?ιε), fugitives, the Chaldee reads: ξִ ?αηψָ ?ιε, “chosen ones” (Ezekiel 12:14). So also Hitzig. He who thinks to save himself by flight—hence the whole military forces of Israel are driven into flight—shall be slain by the sword. But for the people left over, for all the remnant generally, the fate in store is the same as in Ezekiel 5:10; Ezekiel 5:12. Bitter experience brings them to know and understand, although, alas! too late, that God had spoken by the mouth of His prophet. Ezekiel 17:22-24. The PredictionWith a very beautiful variation the close of our chapter, which follows, takes the form of the theme of the riddle at the beginning. The threatening colours there are exchanged here for those rich in promise. Ezekiel 17:22. εְ, marking a continuation; but as the μָ ?χַ ?η is that of Nebuchadnezzar, there is rather an antithesis. Ingeniously Hitzig: “Jehovah, who is Himself in Deuteronomy 32:11 and Exodus 19:4 compared to an eagle, appears upon the scene, confronting the former one (Ezekiel 17:3).” And He who asserts His dignity in opposition to him, whom neither Jerusalem nor Egypt is able to oppose, can really do so: ΰָ ?πִ ?ι, with emphasis. He does as Nebuchadnezzar does, and yet He does so quite differently! He brings low that which would fain be high; He exalts that which is apparently reduced to nothing (Ezekiel 17:24). Of the topmost branch, etc. Thus the illustrious original house of David (the cedar) is still in existence; and not only the royal family, but its royal position as well (the topmost branch). And thus the statement is modified, that (Ezekiel 17:3) the great eagle took the topmost branch of the cedar. The δָ ?ψָ ?ξδ here, which is wanting in the former case, is not without significance. Thus the matter presents itself to God s eye. His taking is really “giving” (εְ ?πָ ?ϊָ ?ϊִּ ?ι).—In Ezekiel 17:4 we have ΰֵ ?ϊΞψΰֹ ?ωׁ, here ξֵ ?ψΰ̇ωׁ; so that in spite of the taking away of Jehoiachin, his kingdom is still supposed to continue. The definition added: a tender one, may be interpreted of the planting, shoots of this kind being generally used; still better, perhaps, of a child (Luke 2:12). The Chaldee paraphrases: of his children’s children a little child. At all events, it cannot here mean a thing small and insignificant, as Hengst. supposes, nor something weak. [Hitzig takes “tender” as = youthful; but this idea lies already in the word “shoot.” Comp. on Ezekiel 17:4. Tender youth, which is just childhood, is indicated by the stronger expression.]—ΰֶ ?χθֹ ?σ, decisio significant mortem, Isaiah 53:8; Daniel 9:26 (Cocc.).—The contrast lying at the foundation is a twofold one,—to Jehoiachin too (Ezekiel 17:4), but much more to Zedekiah (Ezekiel 17:5), in whose case “planting” is spoken of. In the same direction chiefly the contrast of the mountain also is kept. It is the contrast to the low country generally,—on the one hand to the Canaan of Babylon, on the other to the Canaan of Jerusalem (Ezekiel 16:3). The partic. pass., ϊָּ ?μεּ ?μ (only here), adds to the natural height an extraordinary exaltation besides, whether it be to serve as a powerful counteractive to the depression that has taken place, or whether it be to hint already at the approaching glory of Eze 17:23. A farther designation of the mountain is given in Ezekiel 17:23. The elevated mountain of Israel is not Zion directly as such, nor Zion in the wider sense, as embracing also Mount Moriah, as must of course be the view taken if appeal is made to Ezekiel 20:40 (Isaiah 2:2; Micah 4:1); but Jerusalem is here meant, in the same way as in Ezekiel 17:3 it was spoken of as “Lebanon.” Comp. there. (Ezekiel 34:13-14.) Hence restoration (in accordance with Ezekiel 16.), and that with increased splendour. Because such restoration of Jerusalem, of Judah, is brought about by means of the royal child of David’s line, in thought the reference to Zion may predominate, Psalms 48:3 [Psalms 48:2], Psalms 2:6, Psalms 68:17 [Psalms 68:16]. That the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, springs from the Jews for the whole world, is aptly symbolized by the planting of the royal shoot in the royal city, and by what now follows. It is to be observed that the mountain is a mere foil, the typical substratum, and that it neither “comes into view as the seat and centre of the kingdom of God,” nor does it even “denote this kingdom itself;” but the kingdom and all its glory are conceived of as in the shoot of David, and represented as proceeding from him, behind whom all else steps into the background. Klief. alone correctly: “the person of the Messiah will grow into His kingdom, which becomes the spiritual home of all the nations of the world.” However historical, yet the promised personality is in this respect kept in an ideal shape. Fulfilling what is typical, becoming the full embodiment of what was shadowed forth by Israel, he attains to what he is meant to be; he realizes completely his idea, which has to do with mankind generally. The foliage is in order to the shadow. The fruit, as being a tree, as it must be, perhaps also one which yields nourishment to those to whom it gives shelter (Isaiah 11:1). As in Ezekiel 17:8 we had ΰַ ?γָּ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, so here ΰַ ?γִּ ?ιψ: what Zedekiah had not become as a “vine,” that He who is here meant is as a “cedar,” so as to fulfil the promise given to David regarding his posterity. For the clause: and under it there dwell, etc., comp. Ezekiel 31:6; Daniel 4:9 [12]; Matthew 13:32. An emblem of the universal sovereignty, to which all submit themselves, but in which also they rejoice and put their confidence (in the shadow, etc.).—The expression: all birds of every wing, points to Noah s ark of safety, Genesis 7:14. The meaning is: all the different nations and families of men upon earth, Ezekiel 31:6; Ezekiel 31:12; see also Psalms 8:7; Psalms 8:9 [Psalms 8:6; Psalms 8:8], Psalms 84:4 [Psalms 84:3]. A contrast alike to Ezekiel 17:6 and Ezekiel 17:7! Ezekiel 17:24. All trees, etc., are the collective ruling powers of this world, the princes and kings of the earth.—δַ ?ωְּׂ ?ψֶ ?δ looks back perhaps to Ezekiel 17:5 (8); other than mere earthly kingdoms Nebuchadnezzar and his compeers are able neither to found nor to rule.—The bringing low of the high tree, just as correspondingly the exalting of the low tree, refers specially to Jehoiachin; while the making the green tree to wither, and the making the dry tree to flourish, in accordance with Ezekiel 17:9 sq., point back to Zedekiah, inasmuch as through him the kingdom in Judah came to ruin. The revivification of this kingdom, the sending forth of shoots from that which withered with Zedekiah, and the raising up again of the seed of David from the humiliation of Jehoiachin,—all this is accomplished by Jehovah through the Promised One (I, Jehovah, spake and did). Hitzig, like most, takes the sentence as a general thought (1 Samuel 2:7). In form it is kept general, but its import is certainly special, referring to what lies before us. Only the thing to be considered is the right interpretation. According to Hengst., of course, the high tree is the worldly sovereignty; the low tree, David or his family; the green tree, Nebuchadnezzar’s sovereignty of the world at the time. 1. The form of the discourse here, just as in the case of our Lord, who has developed the parable into one of His ordinary modes of teaching, is to be explained chiefly from the object in view,—partly as it was designed for a circle of hearers, or rather or readers, which, although mixed up in all sorts of ways with higher interests, is yet to be thought of as living mainly in the world of sense, and especially as bound fast in the misery of the exile, and sympathizing in the false and faithless policy prevailing at the time in Jerusalem; partly as it might recommend itself to the prophet in the political circumstances by which he was surrounded. The mashal before us in Ezekiel goes, therefore, far beyond mere popular illustration. Still less is it to be explained away from the ζsthetic standpoint, as merely another rhetorical garb for the thought. 2. As in the parable the emblematic form preponderates over the thought, so also here. What the prophet is to say to Israel is said by the whole of that mighty array of figurative expression, for which the animal and vegetable worlds furnish the figures. But the eagle does what eagles otherwise never do; and what is planted as a willow grows into a vine; and the vine “is represented as falling in love with the other eagle” (J. D. Mich.). The contradictory character of such a representation, and the fact that in the difficulties to be solved (Ezekiel 17:9 sq.) the comparison comes to a stand, and the closing Messianic portion in which the whole culminates, convert the parable into a “riddle.” A trace of irony and the moral tendency, such as belong to the fable, are not wanting. 3. As to the predictions in this chapter, see what is said on Ezekiel 12, Doct. Reflec. 4, pp. 136, 137. As respects the time, Ezekiel 17 stands between the 6th month of the 6th year and the 5th month of the 7th year of Jehoiachin’s captivity; and its contents, therefore, would probably be spoken from four to five years before the destruction of Jerusalem. 4. Not only does Ewald call Ezekiel 17:22-24 “a short and beautiful picture of Messianic times,” but Hitzig gives a still more definite exposition: “the passage is an actual prediction, and in fact a Messianic one.” Bunsen makes our prediction be “partly fulfilled” in Zerubbabel (“the prince of the Jews after their return from the captivity, Ezra 1:8; 1 Chronicles 3:19; Matthew 1:12; Luke 3:27”), adding, however, that the glory of the new king as here described “goes far beyond that of Zerubbabel.” Similar is the view of Hengst., viz. that as Zerubbabel “in a certain sense did everything which God did generally for the re-establishment and maintenance of the civil government in Israel,” he also might be regarded as included under the terms of the prediction, because Ezekiel has before his eye, “not the Messiah as an individual,” but “the whole family of David.” As against this view, Hδvernick points (1) to the image of the cedar-shoot as a descendant of the house of David; and (2) to the context, where only personalities are spoken of (Jehoiachin, Zedekiah, Nebuchadnezzar). The oldest Jewish exposition understood the passage of King Messiah. 5. The kingdom of Judah, even although it had become idolatrous, yet could not (as Ziegler remarks) all at once be cast off—for David’s sake. The house and family of David appear like a stay and support in Judah. “For David, Jehovah cherishes an unceasing and solicitous regard throughout the whole history of this kingdom, just because this kingdom itself was to be nothing else than the link of connection between David and his Son κατʼ ? ἐξοχήν. David is the point always referred to in the history of this kingdom; he is the factor ever present and ever working in that history, just as the Son of David is the factor at work beyond.” 6. Hδvernick has already pointed out the inner connection between the Messianic announcement here and that in the preceding Ezekiel 16:53-63. What is to be understood there by the turning of the misery and the restitutio in pristinum becomes quite clear to us by means of the prediction as to Messiah in our chapter. 7. The Church of God is not destined to disappear in the kingdoms of this world: but all the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdoms of God and of His Anointed. 8. “Among the manifold predictions of the Lord’s Anointed and of His kingdom in the world, this of our prophet stands forth like a cedar; in this similitude, so grand, and yet so simple, he has most strikingly portrayed. the future salvation in its most universal significance and verity” (Umbreit). 9. Hengst. draws attention to the fact that at the close the interpretation of the symbol is not added,—“for the same reason that in Ezekiel there is no prophecy against Babylon, while the whole of the prophecies of Jeremiah find their close in such a prophecy. The prophet prophesied in the land of the Chaldeans, and had to exercise caution in view of the surrounding heathen.” HINTSEze_17:1 sq. “Formerly, how they have broken God’s covenant; here, how they have not kept faith with men” (Luther). Ezekiel 17:3 sq. “Princes also have no security against misfortune; those who are nearer the clouds are nearer the lightning also. They should not forget that they also are men, and that God alone is the King of kings” (Stck.).—“The eagle is an emblem of empire and dominion: he is called the king of birds. Pyrrhus, when saluted as an eagle by his soldiers, was much pleased, telling them that they had raised him on high with their weapons, as it were with wings” (ΰ Lap.).—The important eagles in the history of Israel: Nebuchadnezzar, Pharaoh, Rome. Ezekiel 17:4. “Thus many a one suffers in a strange land for the sin he has committed in his own” (Stck.). Ezekiel 17:5. The soil is often better than the seed which is sown in it. Ezekiel 17:6. Prosperity turns out for the advantage of but few men. Most grow on all sides and produce leaves, but bear no fruit, or bad fruit. Ezekiel 17:7. Ingratitude makes no situation better, does not render dependent circumstances more pleasant, and brings to shame every one who is guilty of it, let the object of it be who he may.—It is not easy to rest contented with God’s ordering and leading; the discipline of the Spirit of God is needed for it: let my ways be pleasing in Thine eyes. We must give up our heart to the Lord, and keep it directed toward Him—our heart, with all the thoughts which come out of it, and which would fain be as God, yea, wiser than God.—Keep me in Thy paths, in the way which Thou Thyself showest me. Ezekiel 17:8. Discontentment has driven many a one from a snug spot. Ezekiel 17:9 sq. “When God wishes to punish the wickedness of men, He needs no great warlike host for the purpose” (O.).—Unfaithfulness beats its own master.—Those who have not God on their side, who have only their own wits, can be driven to flight in thousands by one.—“It is a bad thing to trust in man’s wisdom; take thou counsel with God, open His word, look to thy calling, ponder thy duty, and think of the end” (Stck.). Ezekiel 17:10. The east wind of divine judgments.—Thus the place of fortune becomes the place of misfortune; the scene of wickedness, the scene of punishment; the theatre of ingratitude (toward God also), the theatre of ruin. Ezekiel 17:11 sq. It is not all riddles that are interpreted to us; we are guessing away at many during our whole life; but we also make far too little use of the key of self-knowledge.—Misfortune it is said to be, while it is only crime. Ezekiel 17:15 sq. The oath is to be kept to every one and by every one. Even by the emperor Sigismund to the “heretic” Huss!—“Kings, and those in high position generally, ought to be a good example to others. How much their example can build up as well as pull down!” (Stck.)—“If the Lord humbles one, he must bear the tribulation with patience, and not seek by forbidden means to extricate himself from it, Hebrews 12:7”(Tόb. Bib.).—“God avenges and punishes perjury with the greatest earnestness” (O.).—“For God is the truth, and will see to it that fidelity is upheld among men, and hence abhors all deceit and perjury. Even if we have promised anything by constraint which is in other respects unjust, we are not to break our word, because the name of God is to be dearer to us than all earthly advantages, Psalms 15:4” (Heim-Hoff.).—“The humiliations as well as the exaltations of earthly kingdoms are certainly foreseen and appointed by God” (Stck.).—How many a one is the architect of his own misfortune at least!—“The chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof!” said Elisha of Elijah.—Psalms 33:17.—“Think not to whom, but remember by whom, thou hast sworn an oath” (Jer.).—Why is there so much oath-breaking and perjury in Christendom itself even yet!? Ezekiel 17:16. God lets man’s righteousness too get its rights, just because it means to be righteousness.—What Babylon has made, Babylon also destroys.—This is security, to be a plant of the heavenly Father’s planting, Matthew 15:13.—“The earth is everywhere the Lord’s, but to be laid with one’s fathers is certainly more pleasant.” Ezekiel 17:17. The help of man is of no avail when God means to destroy. God’s help, on the other hand, avails even against man’s help. Zedekiah with Egypt, Nebuchadnezzar with Jehovah. Look at the copartneries for thyself, and bestow thy confidence accordingly. The latter firm is the more reliable.—Cursed is the man that trusteth in man, Jeremiah 17.—Men promise, and break their promise; God promises, and does not break His. Ezekiel 17:19. God’s oath as against Zedekiah’s perjury.—God does not swear, and then fail to keep His oath: that shall be learned by experience by those who swear falsely, or who do not keep their oath.—If thou appealest to God as a witness, thou summonest Him also as a judge, as an avenger!—We have never to do with men alone. Ezekiel 17:20 sq. No one can escape God.—“The enemy’s sword is sharp; God’s sword is sharper still” (Stck.).—Comp. what is said to the Hebrews of the word of God.—God’s judgments are always meant to lead to the knowledge of Himself as well, and not merely of ourselves. Ezekiel 17:22 sq. The riddle of Israel is the riddle alike of the human heart in its perversity, and of the heart of God in Christ.—The omnipotence and love of God join hands, and the result is the grace of God.—“Whosoever laid up this promise thoroughly in his heart would thereby be delivered from the region of vain political hopes and intrigues. The saying of Augustine applies here: ‘That which thou seekest is, but it is not where thou seekest it’ ” (Hengst.).—“Because the Church of Christ has been planted by God Himself, it shall certainly remain” (Cr.).—“The planting on Golgotha” (Witsius). Ezekiel 17:23. “Babylon, and with it the whole series of the old world-powers, are dried up; David flourishes and bears fruit, and under the shadow of his offshoot the fowls of heaven dwell” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 17:24. The history of the world is to be recognised as God’s government.—The divine government of the world culminates in Christ.—Everything turns out in the end according to God’s word.—(Fr. W. Krummacher preached in 1852 on Ezekiel 17:22-24 : “The Tree Christ, which God has prepared for us, (1) as to its nature, (2) as to its destiny.—Summer and winter the cedar is green, and never loses its leaves nor its verdure. The everlastingly green Tree of Life is Christ. No wood is more durable; so Christ is the indestructible foundation for our hopes, etc.—We are the branches in the Cedar of God. Our fruits are Christ’s, who produces them in us and by us. John and Peter, Paul and James, what boughs in that Cedar! and the Fathers and the Reformers, and all believers since, what a Tree! What a green, flourishing, fruit-laden array of branches that which sways around it! What a mighty, densely-foliaged, far-shadowing crown! and in the crown what gales, and zephyrs, and rustlings of holy life and divine love! Here there is promised to Christ and His cause nothing less than final triumph over the whole world.—The pompous glory of Babylon, Egypt, Rome, and Athens, where is it to be found?”) 7. The Laws of the Divine Punitive Righteousness (Ezekiel 18) 1, 2And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, Why do ye use this proverb upon the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour [wild] grapes, and the teeth of the sons are set on edge? 3As I live—sentence of the Lord Jehovah—if ye shall have occasion to use this proverb longer in Israel 4[ye shall no longer use this proverb]. Behold, all souls to me they [belong]; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine. The soul that sinneth, it 5shall die. And if any man be righteous, and do judgment and righteousness: 6Has not eaten on the mountains, nor lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, nor defiled his neighbour’s wife, nor drawn near to his wife 7in her uncleanness; And oppresses no one, restores his debt-pledge, robs not, 8gives his bread to the hungry, and covers the naked with clothing; Gives not on usury, and takes not increase, withdraws his hand from injustice, 9exercises true judgment between man and man; Walks in My statutes and keeps My judgments, to do truth,—he is righteous, he shall surely live,—10sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And should he beget a violence-doing son, a shedder of blood,—and he [the father] did towards his brother each of those 11[things]:—And he [the son] does none of all those things, for [but] he has eaten 12upon the mountains, and defiled his neighbour’s wife; The poor and needy he has oppressed, he has robbed, he restores not the pledge, and to the idols 13he has lifted up his eyes, he has done abomination; Has given on usury and taken increase, and shall he live?—He shall not live. He has done all these 14abominations; he shall surely die. His blood shall be upon him, And, lo, should he beget a son who sees all the sins of his father which he hath done, 15and sees and does not the like:—He has not eaten upon the mountains, nor lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel; he has not defiled his 16neighbour’s wife, Nor oppressed any one, nor taken pledge in pledge, nor robbed; he has given his bread to the hungry, and covered the naked with 17clothing; From the needy he has turned away [withheld] his hand, usury and increase he took not, he executed My judgments, he walked in My statutes: 18he shall not die in [on account of] his father’s iniquity; he shall surely live. His father, because he practised extortion, committed robbery against his brother, and did that which is not good in the midst of his people, lo, he died in his 19iniquity. And ye say, Why has not the son borne the iniquity of the father? Because the son has done judgment and righteousness, kept all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live. The soul that sinneth, it shall die. 20The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, and the father shall not bear the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him [the one], and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him [the 21other]. And if [because] the wicked shall turn from all his sins which he hath done, and keep all My statutes, and do judgment and righteousness, he shall surely live, he shall not die. 22All his transgressions which he hath done shall not be remembered to him; in [on account of] his righteousness which he hath done, he shall live. 23Have I any pleasure at all in the death of the wicked? Sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Not when he turns from his way [ways] and 24lives!? But if the righteous turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and do according to all the abominations which the wicked commits, shall he live?—All his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; in [on account of] his faithlessness which he hath practised, and in [on account of] 25his sins which he hath sinned, in [on account of] them shall he die. And say ye, The way of the Lord is not equal!? Hear now, O house of Israel, is My way 26not equal? Are not your ways unequal? When the righteous turns from his righteousness, and does iniquity, and dies thereby; in his iniquity which 27he hath done he dies. And when the wicked turns from his wickedness which he hath done, and does judgment and righteousness, he shall save his soul 28alive. And should he see and turn from all his transgressions which he hath 29done, he shall surely live, he shall not die. But they of the house of Israel say, The way of the Lord is not equal!? Are My ways not equal, O house of Israel? Are not your ways unequal? 30Therefore I will judge you, each man according to his ways, O house of Israel,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Return, and turn [you] from all your transgressions, and iniquity shall not be your ruin. 31Cast away from you all your transgressions, in which ye have gone astray, and make you a new heart, and a new spirit; and why will ye die, O house of Israel ? 32For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dies,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah; therefore turn ye [be converted] and live! Ezekiel 18:2. Sept: ... τιὑμινἡπαραβοληαὑτη— Ezekiel 18:4. ... αὑτηἀποθανειται, κ. τουφαγοντοςτονὀμφακααἱμωδιασουσινοἱὀδονσεσαὐτου. Ezekiel 18:7. Vulg.: … pignus debitori reddiderit— Ver 10. Sept.: ... κ. ποιουνταἁμαρτηματα, (11) ἐντηὁδωτ. πατροςαὐτουτουδικαιουοὐκἐπορευθη,—Vulg.: … effundentem sanguinem, et fecerit unum de istis, (11) et hζc quidem omnia non facientem—(10. Some codices read: ξΰηϊ fem.) Ezekiel 18:14. Sept.: ... κ. ἰδη... κ. φοβηθη—The Chald. only translates: et vidit; Sept., Vulg., Arab.: et timuerit. Ezekiel 18:17. κ. ἀποἀδικιαςἀπεστρεψεντ. χειρα—Vulg.: … a pauperis injuria averterit manum— Ezekiel 18:18. Vulg.: Pater ejus quia calumniatus est et vim fecit fratri— Ezekiel 18:22. Omnium … non recordabor— Ezekiel 18:23. Sept.: Ὁτιοὐβουλομαιτ. θανατον... ὡςτοἀποστρεψαιαὐτονἐκτ. ὁδου... κ. ζηναὐτον. (For ξεϊ there is a reading: αξεϊ; for ξγψλιε,ξγψλε in plur.) Ezekiel 18:24. Vulg: Si autem averterit … et fecerit iniquitatem secundum omnes abominationes quas operari solet impius, numquid vivet?— Ezekiel 18:29. Another reading: γψλλν, sing., Sept., Arab. Ezekiel 18:30. Sept.: ... κ. οὐκἐσονταιὑμινεἰςκολασινἀδικιας. Vulg.: … et non erit vobis in ruinam iniquitas. Ezekiel 18:31. Sept.: κ. κνευμακαινον, κ. ποιησχτεπασαςτ. ἐντολαςμου. REMARKSEze_18:1-4. The Principle of the Divine Punitive RighteousnessEze_18:2. Comp. Ezekiel 12:22. A popular expression, arrogating to itself the authority of a divine voice, has established itself in Israel in opposition to the word of God.—The land of Israel should emphatically not be the place for such language, as it is the scene of God’s holy justice as well as His gracious mercy.—The question is not one of mere surprise, but of solemn anger, as befits divine speech.—Fathers taken generally, so that it is left to each to consider for himself who are particularly designated (2 Kings 24:3; Jeremiah 15:4). Our chapter at the same time links itself on thereby to what has gone before (especially Ezekiel 16). The proverb took the prophet, as it were, at his word.—ιΰֹ ?λְ ?μεּ corresponding to the general form of statement: to be accustomed to eat.—The sons, on the other hand, are the definite persons who are exposed to suffering in the existing state of things. In the most thoughtless and frivolous manner the popular criticism of God’s way,—of the history of Israel, expresses itself. What those did wrongly must be visited on us! There is no sense of sin, nor acknowledgment of guilt, and just as little reference to divine judgment and retributive righteousness. Hδvernick refers rightly to the “heathenish” disposition of the people, who, “destitute of faith in a living God, were driven to the delusion of a blind Nemesis,” a natural necessity. “Accordingly repentance seems useless”. (Hengst.). They could thus shield themselves against the ever-repeated call to radical repentance. The divine answer sets itself over against the people’s word, energetically, in the form of an oath, Ezekiel 18:3, in which, according to the two-sided tenor of our chapter, it remains undecided whether the impending judgment, or the Messianic redemption, embraced in conversion, shall bring this style of speech to an end in the future.—αְּ ?ιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ, a thing unbecoming even “upon the land of Israel” (Ezekiel 18:2), above all, unbecoming among the people to whom (Romans 3) the oracles of God are committed.—After the form has thus been found fault with, the substance, Ezekiel 18:4, is objected to; and since the question actually touched is the retributive righteousness of God, its ground-principle is first of all stated, from which its individual laws naturally proceed. Behold points to an undeniable fact, and therefore presupposes universal assent.—All souls, sq.: “perhaps an allusion to Genesis 18:25” (Hδv.). In other respects, as Calvin: not merely would God here maintain His paramount authority and lordship, but, still more, evince His fatherly love towards all mankind as their Creator. Hengst.: “God would surrender His property if souls suffered punishment for the guilt of others; since they are in the likeness of God, souls cannot be degraded into servile instruments.” Hitz.: “I am not under the necessity of punishing another,—the son,—as if I could not lay hold of the guilty father.” Philipps: “Before God all souls are equal, so that each man represents himself only.” All these explanations are insufficient to meet the thought. The proposition is in reality a fundamental principle, for it goes back to the origin of things, according to which the souls of men, created by the breathing of the divine Spirit of life into corporal matter, breathe supernatural, spiritual vital energy, in a sentient form of life and activity. This divineness of men, at least in respect to their souls, which, on the other hand, they possess in common with the lower creatures as animal life, is opposed to every form of dependence on nature, whether on a heathen fate, or, in particular (which is here the immediate contrast), on bodily parents, therefore to the dependence of the son on the father. God’s exclusive property-right (emphasized by the repeated μִ ?ι) in persons could not be maintained, if any man required to suffer death from the fact of being his father’s son. Die, the end of a process,—the separation of the soul from its life-source, the Spirit of God. (Deuteronomy 30:15; Jeremiah 21:8; Proverbs 11:19.)—Comp. on Ezekiel 3:18. This cannot happen without an act of God’s retributive justice, so that the punishment inflicted by God must correspond to man’s guilt. The soul that sinneth—disloyalty to the living influences of the Spirit of God, considered as a continuous present—it shall die. Through this latter, as a judicial utterance, the general proposition as to God’s possessory-right is more specifically expressed in reference to His authority to judge. Comp. James 4:12. Ezekiel 18:5-9. The Law of the Righteous ManEze_18:5. The first application of the principle is made to the righteous man. Comp. Ezekiel 3:18 sq. He is described according to Being and Doing,—essentially and actually; in particular, doing judgment, in general, righteousness: his doing is then more precisely depicted, not without a tendency to antithesis. Ezekiel 18:6. Even kings who were otherwise loyal to the law, were unable to abolish the worship of the “high places.” [Usually the expression is made to refer to the gross forms of idol-worship (1 Corinthians 8:4-10; 1 Corinthians 10:7); and what follows, to the more refined.]—The feasts referred to are sacrificial feasts which were not observed in the sanctuary, Deuteronomy 12.—The second thing, singled out in reference to the first table of the law, is the undoubtedly rare case of complete apathy and indifference towards the popular idols of Israel. Hitzig understands it of supplicating, worshipping, Job 31:26 (Psalms 121:1). Hδvernick, of inward longing. Comp. Ezekiel 6:4.—The natural transition, after Ezekiel 16, to the marriage relation singles out from the second table of the law not ordinary adultery (the word is neither πָ ?ΰַ ?σ, nor even ϊָ ?ξַ ?γ, Exodus 20), but the more precise and deeper defilement (θָ ?ξֵ ?ΰ) of the neighbour’s wife, in order, through the selected expression, to throw a clear ray of light on their own marriage relation and its mysteries (domestic purity). Comp. Leviticus 18:19; Leviticus 20:18. Ezekiel 18:7. Oppression in general, in its more peaceful as well as its directly violent (εָּ ?ζֵ ?μ) form (Leviticus 19:13).—ϊεֹ ?α, according to Hengst., the accusative of restriction: debt-pledge; Hδvernick, on the other hand: his pledge, a debt, i.e., along with the pledge, the obligation, softening the always rather offensive signification of ϊְַ ?αֹ ?μָ ?δ (from ηָ ?αַ, to bind, to tie), so that just demands are referred to. Hitzig makes the word a participle: “restores his pledge to the debtor (Gesen.: for debt).” Compare besides at Exodus 22:25; Deuteronomy 24:12. Following this, more positive benevolence. Ezekiel 18:8. Comp. Leviticus 25:36-37; Deuteronomy 23:20.—The close of the verse probably refers to the special activity of a judge or arbiter. Ezekiel 18:9. Concluding summation corresponding to the introduction in Ezekiel 18:5,—the apodosis to the protasis. Righteousness before God in contradistinction to its semblance (μַ ?ςְַ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ϊΰְֶ ?ξֶ ?ϊ). The Septuagint read ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν.—ηָ ?ιֹ ?διִ ?ηְ ?ιֶ ?δ, live in the fullest, deepest sense of the word. Ezekiel 18:10-13. The Law of the Unrighteous SonA second application of the principle deals with the case of an unrighteous man,—the son of the righteous man. Personally there is a connection (should he beget), essentially, the greatest contrast, as τָּ ?ψִ ?ιυ, etc., immediately shows. But the actual contrast shall become still more decided, and shall, for that reason, appear as a personal one,—therefore εְ ?ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δ, etc. Ezekiel 18:10. The description of the father reduced to a minimum: if there was any one of these forementioned just and righteous things, he did it,—in short, he was righteous. [ΰϊ Hengst.: in relation to his brother, as the antithetic parallel in Ezekiel 18:18 decidedly recommends. So also the Chaldee version. Rosenm.: simile quid. According to others, it is the apocopate form of ΰַ ?ϊַ ?γ. Others, again, have omitted it. ΰϊ has also been proposed as a reading. Hitzig., Ewald: = ΰַ ?κְ, “only.”]—The contrast follows more at length in Ezekiel 18:11, in the description of the son. And he does none of all those things, which are then mentioned in detail. Comp. Ezekiel 18:6. Ezekiel 18:12. Poor and needy illustrates the undefined object of Eze 18:7. Compare in other respects with Ezekiel 18:6. Ezekiel 18:13. See Ezekiel 18:8.—εָ ?ϊָ ?ι, the apodosis. The facts oppose every other issue; the emphatic divine negative only adds confirmation. His deeds adjudge him to death,—yes, he himself is to blame. With the judicial form of expression (ξεֹ ?ϊιεּ ?ξָ ?ϊ, not as in Genesis 2:17) comp. Leviticus 20:9; only that in this case the son curses his righteous father virtually by his life! Ezekiel 18:14-20. The Law of the Righteous SonThird application of the principle, in which, as in the first case, the reference is to a righteous person,—the son of the forementioned unrighteous man,—who takes warning from his father’s sins. Always father and son, corresponding with the proverb which was being answered. Ezekiel 18:14. Comp. Ezekiel 18:10. He sees, repeated for the sake of emphatic description. The reading εַ ?ιִ ?ψָ ?ΰ, followed by the Sept. and Vulg. in the latter part of the verse, is to be rejected. Ezekiel 18:15. Comp. Ezekiel 18:6. Ezekiel 18:16. Comp. Ezekiel 18:7.—(“He allowed himself even less than he might,” in contrast to the conduct of his father—Hitzig.) Ezekiel 18:17. From the needy, etc. Not only doing him no violence, but, as described, showing him compassion. Ewald reads ξֵ ?ςָ ?εֶ ?μ from Ezekiel 18:8. Comp. as to further details, Ezekiel 18:8-9. Here and in Ezekiel 18:18, ςָ ?εֹ ?ο, in anticipation of Eze 18:19. In order to separate and contrast father and son as decidedly as possible, the former is once more briefly described. Ezekiel 18:19. There is here no allusion, as most suppose, to Exodus 20:5. Nothing necessitates this. Since the proverb (Ezekiel 18:2) in its frivolous rude form was at once disregarded, and since the divine reply to it immediately made it more profound, and, especially from Ezekiel 18:17, applied it to the question of guilt and perdition on the one hand, righteousness and life on the other—so with the inquiry as to the why, a perception of the deeper signification of its contents generally may therefore be attributed to the people. This not only recommends itself on rhetorical grounds, since in the case before us the conclusion is introduced by it,—and the thought can hardly be introduced in a more lively manner than by the deduction of a general maxim from the foregoing concrete examples,—but the moral presumption that the people are so far interested in the profound gravity of the subject, requires that they also should contribute the “why,” which was altogether so natural (not merely with reference to the law), and which sounds so full of meaning, because by what has gone before the unity of Israel must seem shattered, nothing being taken into account but the individual. “Have ye (supposition) said: Why,” etc. The individual facts answer you. So say ye; so did he! Comp. further, Ezekiel 18:5; Ezekiel 18:9. Ezekiel 18:20. A quotation from Ezekiel 18:4, which is impressively extended, concludes the paragraph with a statement which so sharply contrasts righteousness and wickedness, that a new solution, to wit, through the action of the one or the other, i.e. through a change of disposition, must come into view. Ezekiel 18:21-32. The Principle of Grace, as against the Principle of Retribution, expressed in the Call to RepentanceEze_18:21. Comp. Ezekiel 3:18 sq. Return from wickedness to God’s righteousness, evidenced by facts, ensures true life instead of death. The principle of divine retribution affected the case of persistent, continued sinning only. Whoever abandons sin is left untouched by the retributive righteousness of God. Ezekiel 18:22. In such an event, viz. of return, the past, however full of sin, is left out of account; one is not required to bear the penalty of one’s own, much less of another’s sin. Righteousness is done. But the principle thus contrasted with the previously explained law of retribution proclaims itself in the plainest way as the principle of grace and divine compassion. Ezekiel 18:23. If the retributive righteousness of God—the law of His government—must occupy itself with the sin of the sinner, the sinner himself is God’s property (Ezekiel 18:4), and to the profoundest law of the Divine nature (ηָ ?τֵ ?υ) not death, but life corresponds, although for righteousness’ sake, the right of the divine Possessor must exhibit itself in the case of the sinner who continues in sin, or who apostatizes, as the might of the Judge.—Hengst. translates ϊְַ ?μΰֹ ?Χ, “Should he not live if he returns,” etc.? Ezekiel 18:24. The foregoing strengthened and confirmed by a counter-proof, as it were, and that the strongest imaginable, by a caricature of the holy—the reverse if conversion. The previous sentence is still in a manner continued by αְ, yet so that with the contrasted case the appropriate negative is also understood; then it breaks off, and the matter of fact which is adduced brings in the question which must naturally be negatived,—εָ ?ϊָ ?ι, as in Ezekiel 18:13. The usual translation is: “but if the righteous turn, etc., should he live?”—“All his righteousness,” etc.—The antithesis to Ezekiel 18:22. Comp. Ezekiel 3:20; Ezekiel 15:8; Ezekiel 17:20. Ezekiel 18:25. ϊָּ ?λַ ?ο, to measure, weigh; to be equal. Comp. 1 Samuel 2:3. The assumed objection presupposes, like Ezekiel 18:19, that the people have intelligently followed the exposition up to this point. “And (supposed) say ye,” etc. Measure your own ways! Hitzig rightly refers the questioned “way of the Lord” to a procedure, such as has just been described in regard to an apostate righteous person, which would leave all his righteousness unweighed. The counter-accusation, contained in the divine answer, is in complete harmony with the scope of our chapter, since it points at self-examination, and thereby at the sense of sin. For the argument finally occupies itself with each individual man, and with the way which each chooses, and continues in. Ezekiel 18:26 is therefore a recapitulation from Ezekiel 18:24, as Ezekiel 18:27 from Ezekiel 18:21.—But as the conclusion of the whole is to be the call to repentance, the case of Eze 18:27 is again introduced with this in view. Ezekiel 18:28. Comp. Ezekiel 18:21. Ezekiel 18:29. Renewed remonstrance, with the object of inducing them to seek self-knowledge by means of trying their own ways—see Ezekiel 18:25. (Not: “and ye say,” but: and they of the house of Israel say.) ιִ ?ϊָּ ?λֵ ?ο, the singular, according to some: each of your ways, thus individualizing them; or, the actual diversity of the way comprehended in the ideal unity of the walk; or better, what they had said of the Lord’s way (it is not equal) adopted as a motto which is far more applicable to their ways. Ezekiel 18:30. μָ ?λֵ ?ο points, in the first place, as a reason for judgment, to the equity of God’s way as compared with Israel’s; then, as a reason for every one being visited according to his ways, to the principle of Eze 18:4 sq. Finally, however, Ezekiel 18:27-28, as Return, etc. shows, also come in with the greatest emphasis. Comp. Ezekiel 14:6.—ςָ ?εֹ ?ομְ ?ξִ ?λְ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?μ, rendered by Hitzig and most others as in Ezekiel 14:3; sin as a stumbling-block, whereby one falls into guilt and punishment. This is right in point of fact, but not in this connection (nor according to the accents), according to which iniquity, even their own, does not prove their ruin, and this because Israel shall abstain from everything which entails guilt. Hengst.: “let not iniquity be your ruin.” Ezekiel 18:31. And make you, to be understood agreeably to Ezekiel 11:19, and therefore without difficulty. The divine gift of grace stands as it were ready, and Israel only requires to cast away sin (Ezekiel 11:18; Hebrews 12:1) and to lay hold of it, while death is equally in their choice (Matthew 23:37)! Comp. Philippians 2:12-13. And as this readiness of divine grace here, so in Ezekiel 18:32 the statement of Eze 18:23 is made as intense as possible. Instead of ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς we have δַ ?ξֵּ ?ϊ (Deuteronomy 17:6),—the wicked being represented as already the victim of death. (“The prophet unveils to us the nature of the divine retributive righteousness in its most glorious light. Here no one but the unrepentant sinner dies unblessed. Whoever repents, and does what is good in God’s sight, receives the gracious promise of life. The Living One can have no pleasure in death,” Umbreit.) 1. Proverbs reflect the moral and religious mood of a people in any particular period. 2. The proverb cited here and in Jeremiah 31:29 is usually regarded as containing a reference to Exodus 20:5 (Ezekiel 34:7). The words of the proverb do not require this, nor does the surrounding context involve the slightest allusion. Neither is its substance, nor, corresponding to that, the divine controversy against it, of a nature to lead us to infer that a misunderstanding of the passage of the law in question, regarding the visitation of the sins of the fathers on the children, is to be combated. The idea that Ezekiel here and Jeremiah in Ezekiel 31. announce the repeal of the retribution-doctrine contained in the law of Moses, is quite foreign to the sense and connection of the passage. Ezekiel appears here neither as improver nor yet “simply as expositor of the law” (Hengst.). Hitzig is of opinion that Exodus 20:5 “leaves the question undecided (!) whether children, who are themselves guiltless, also bear the sin of their fathers,” and that “the fact that the son is often quite unlike his father morally, has at last gained recognition, and subjectivity received its due at the hands of Ezekiel.” The assumed indefiniteness of the teaching of the decalogue would place the law of God (Genesis 18:25) upon the same level with ‘the righteousness of men in the east,” from which, as from heathen retributive justice universally, the judicial practice which should obtain in Israel is expressly distinguished (Deuteronomy 24:16). Comp. also 2 Kings 14:6; 2 Chronicles 25:4. The jealousy of the holy and righteous God which subscribes the two first commands (Exodus 20:5) is illustrated and made more conspicuous by the well-known words, “visiting the iniquities of the fathers,” etc.; the words only say that sin, especially the sin of hating God, shall certainly be overtaken by divine vengeance, even if not till the third and fourth generation, although it was not punished judicially in its own time, nor even appeared to incur divine retribution. Moreover, the national character of the ten commandments is also to be taken into account, and the fact that Israel’s national life rested essentially on the family, and especially the relation between parents and children. But the defence of the truth and equity of such retribution is foreign to our purpose, for the proverb which the prophet uses as the text of his discourse has nothing to do with Exodus 20:5; Exodus 34:7; Numbers 14:18; Deuteronomy 5:9 (comp. also Jeremiah 32:18; Lamentations 5:7). For this style of criticising the national circumstances which had taken the form of a proverb never once touches the question of sin and chastisement—into this region the proverb is first carried by the divine address—but merely the question of the natural result of an insipid craving being visited upon those who yet “will not eat sour grapes,” who consider themselves too prudent to do so (Matthew 23:30). Only when one perceives the levity (the gallows-humour) of the self-satisfaction and self-righteousness which display themselves in the proverb, will one be in a condition to recognise the thunder of the Eternal in Ezekiel’s treatment of it. 3. According to Jeremiah, the proverb ceases to be used contemporaneously with the dawning of the Messianic epoch. The connection in Ezekiel is to be similarly interpreted, especially with Ezekiel 17:22 sq. It should, however, be peculiar to the Messianic redemptive-period, that while Israel as a people would reject the Messiah, the individual would be brought to account for himself, according to his personal guilt, for his unbelief, the result of his outward, seeming, hypocritical work-righteousness. One supposes oneself planted among statements like John 3:17 sq. The question is not one of outward family or national weal and woe, but of life and death in their most pregnant and individual sense. The case before us is just as little that of teeth set on edge in regard to the children, as of sour grapes in regard to the fathers. (Comp. Ezekiel 16:17.) The moment of judgment decides as to the soul’s salvation and blessedness, but it is a self-determination, a self-judgment. “To every man will be given the opportunity of turning to God, the door will stand open to all; he only who persists in wickedness through his own unbelief shall die” (Cocceius). 4. As in the law, even the taking of a pledge is difficult, almost impossible, so according to it, whatever could be properly called interest or usury falls aside. What was permissible towards a foreigner, the duty of benevolence towards the fellow-Israelite, as well as the fellow-inhabitant of the land, even though he were a stranger, for bade. Lending in these circumstances could only aim at relieving sudden, personal, domestic necessities. (Israel was not a mercantile people, at least in an inland sense.) [“The tendency of usury is to oppress one’s brother, and hence it is to be wished that the very names of usury and interest were buried and blotted out from the memory of men,” Calvin.] 5. If Ezekiel 16. depicted the Jewish people as it were in their ancestral sin, according to their Canaan-nature, the turning to grace, repentance, which is wholly in Christ, exonerates from the ancestral sin. Liability to death, increased by each actual sin, issues in the punishment of death in his case only who does not flee from it in the appointed way of God’s righteousness (judgment and grace). “Thereby a contrast is indicated between nature’s order, and the supernatural order of grace” (Neteler). “Dying, according to our prophet, means more than returning to the dust of the ground, for that happens to all, even to the repentant. Still the latter do not die, but live. The reference is not to the judgment of God which follows sin, but the reference to divine grace is to be held fast” (Cocceius). 6. Israel’s question (Ezekiel 18:19) must not be narrowed by referring it solely to Exodus 20:5. It is a “why” from the Old Testament view-point as a whole; and in so far as in the answer to it the significance of the individual becomes more prominent, so far also is another view-point, viz. that of the New Testament, placed in opposition to that of the old, which is emphatically abandoned. The matter could not have been settled in this way from a merely Old Testament standpoint. 7. “The expression of the prophet has rightly been reckoned as a dulcis exhortatio ad peccatores for all times. God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, is a dictum of itself sufficient to refute the charges of a modern heathenism (Feuerbach), which professes to discover its own cold, unfeeling God in the Old Testament. The God of the Old Testament has a heart: Himself the essence of all blessedness, and mirroring Himself in the blessedness of the creature, He has a heart for every being who has fallen away from Him, and who is exposed to death. The fundamental feature of His character is holy love: He delights in the return of the sinner from death to life” (Hδv.). 8. “How deeply and clearly our prophet sees into the nature of redemption! Here are crowded together, the law with its demands, God’s rigour in executing its sentences, His boundless grace and compassion, the conversion of the sinner to God, the laying hold of that divine grace which obliterates all guilt, and the proof of repentance in sanctification of life” (Hδv.). 9. As the sinner who persists in sinning, rather than sin, comes into view in this chapter,—sins are treated of in so far as they bring to light the sinful personality of the sinner,—so righteousness also is here that which the man who was previously righteous, or who becomes so by conversion, manifests in his life and walk. To be in the law as in the covenant of God, through faith, or to return to the law of the covenant God full of grace and compassion, by repentance; this is righteousness. The law was there for the knowledge of sin, so also the righteousness of the law is a mirror, that Israel, recognising itself in its distance from God, may seek the righteousness of God which is His grace. (See Introd.) 10. Manasseh, son of Hezekiah, may be regarded as an example of a godless son (Ezekiel 18:10 sq.) of a God-fearing father, as Hezekiah, son of Ahaz, of the opposite case (Ezekiel 18:14 sq.). Manasseh (see 2 Chronicles 33:11 sq.) may also illustrate the case of Eze 18:21 sq. HINTSEze_18:2. “It is the way of the old Adam never to acknowledge sin, but always to put the blame on others, Genesis 3:12-13” (O.). “There is no greater folly than a man’s murmuring against God on account of chastisement, and exculpating himself before this all-seeing and most righteous Judge” (Tόb. Bib.).—“The insolent sinner has neither shame nor sorrow, but must boast and proclaim himself before the whole world “(Stck.).—“The teeth are set on edge only when a man himself eats sour grapes” (B. B.).—“Men lay hold of and quote bad proverbs more readily than good” (St.).—The end of all the words we have spoken will be that for each useless word we shall require to give an account.—“The cause of its cessation is the severity of the divine judgments. When these appear, the fig leaves fall off, the slumbering conscience awakens and cries out, It is I and my sins! There is a multitude of theorems and theological dogmas which are possible only in certain times, and slink away abashed when the thunders of divine judgment begin to roll” (Hengst.). Either one recognises in judgment—in the self-judgment of a believing repentance—his guilt before God, or God makes the whole world recognise it in us, through the judgment which overtakes us, even when we would deny our guilt.—God swears by His life; for where His righteousness is called in question, His life in this world of sin and death is assailed. Ezekiel 18:4. If God is the father of all souls, other fathers cannot destroy souls. Each man is his own self-destroyer through unbelief. Ezekiel 18:5 sq. “Righteousness of life is necessarily associated with the righteousness of faith, Romans 6:22” (St.). Righteousness is defined by the law of God, but the end and fulfilment of the law is Christ; whosoever believes in Him is righteous.—There is a righteousness in works which is a mere semblance, but one is not justified by it. The justified man must be righteous. Ezekiel 18:6. “God’s table and the devil’s do not agree” (Stck.).—“What the idols are here, creatures to whom one cleaves idolatrously are now-a-days” (Lange).—“God abhors these three, atheism, indifferentism, syncretism” (Stck.).—Our conduct towards our neighbour, towards the nearest of all also, who is one flesh with us, reflects our relation to God. Ezekiel 18:7. “Covetousness is a root of all evil, and a vice which is too little accounted of, 1 Timothy 6:10” (St.). Ezekiel 18:8. “Not without reason is that which is said of usury coupled with compassion and gentleness towards the poor; Christ also connects giving and lending, Matthew 5:42” (Cocc.). Ezekiel 18:9. “Were it possible for a man to abandon all that is evil, and yet do nothing positively good, should he fulfil the will of God? Isaiah 1:16 sq.” (St.)—By conduct it is made clear of whose spirit one is the child. If the fruits are wanting, where is faith? Ezekiel 18:10 sq. The apple often falls far from the stem. Nothing has so much power as children, to bring shame and disgrace on their parents.—That struck at the hope and boast of the Jews, that they were the children of Abraham, who was justified by faith. Ezekiel 18:11 sq. “Sins are linked together; whoever plunges voluntarily into one sin will not shrink from another when the temptation comes. This is to be noted, for when Satan entices us at the beginning, we believe that we are always free to turn back as soon as it seems good to us. But we are presently entangled in this sin and that, and when we are now taken in the snares of Satan we no longer desire to become free. Since one can make such progress, let each be careful lest he fall into any sin” (H.-H.). Ezekiel 18:15 sq. “It does no harm to pious children that they have had godless parents, provided they walk not in the same footsteps” (St.).—“The righteousness of the works of the children of God is no doubt but halting, although they are at pains to fashion themselves according to the directions of God’s law; yet it is regarded by God as perfect, because He does not impute to them their sins, and their works are pleasing to Him because His Spirit operates in them. Sanctification of life proceeds doubtless from faith alone. Yet God also recognises the hidden faith of those who have not yet come to clear knowledge of His saving grace, but who sincerely fear Him, and commit themselves to the discipline and guidance of His Spirit” (H.-H. after Calv.). Ezekiel 18:19. “Men are more concerned about the question of God’s equity than with searching into their own sins” (Stck.). Ezekiel 18:20. “Sinner, see to it that thou thyself sinnest not!” (Tόb. Bib.). Ezekiel 18:21. “If a man turn honestly to God, he must resolve to forswear all sins: here no reservations can be made, 1 Peter 3:11” (St.). —“The true turning consists in this, that one gives his sins their dismissal, and consecrates himself to God for obedience. One sees a half conversion in many: they join virtues with transgressions, and imagine that their guilt will be removed when they do something praiseworthy. But that is as if a servant should bring to his master spoiled wine, for God will not so save men as to abolish the distinction between good and evil” (H. -H.).—How do we escape death, and enter into life? By passing over from the sin which is our own to the righteousness which is God’s. Ezekiel 18:22. “To the truly penitent sins are so forgiven as if they had never been committed, Isaiah 43:25” (O.).—He who turns does righteousness. Ezekiel 18:23. The immediate element in the turning is faith in God’s mercy.—“A word of comfort which can and should encourage every forlorn sinner to turn” (Schm.).—The question from heart to heart.—It grieves God when the wicked perish.—Life is not on our way, when our way is not God’s. Ezekiel 18:24. The bad and the good turning.—One can fall from righteousness, but that he can fall from grace is not here said. Ezekiel 18:25 sq. Jehovah’s way, and the ways of Israel.—Accusations enough, only no self-accusation!—God must be weighed by sinners! Ezekiel 18:26. “As thou leavest this life, so must thou appear before the judgment-seat” (B. B.). Ezekiel 18:27 sq. Turning from iniquity a defence against death.—The true life assurance.—The sinner is blind; but he who repents receives eyes to see. Ezekiel 18:30. Iniquity brings ruin when it is not removed through forgiveness, as in the case of the repentant.—The thought of divine retribution a motive to repentance. Ezekiel 18:31 sq. “God, who is rich in love, as it were meets the sinner’s soul wandering under its burden of sins on the way which leads to perdition. Although it will not recognise Him, yet in beseeching love and compassion He unceasingly addresses it” (Scriv.).—“David made himself a new heart when he entreated God to create it within him, Psalms 51.” (Cocc.).—“Give what thou requirest, and require what thou wilt!” (Aug.) Why will ye die? Again a question from heart to heart.—“As a worthy forerunner of the great apostle, the prophet exhorts us, not only to put off the old filthy garment of sin, but to put on an altogether new man” (Umbr.). 8. The Lamentation over the Kingdom of Israel (Ezekiel 19.) 1, 2And do thou take up a lamentation for the princes of Israel. And say: How has thy mother lain down—a lioness among lions [lionesses], among young lions she reared her whelps! 3And she brought up one of her whelps; he became 4a young lion, and learned to catch prey; he devoured men. And the heathen peoples heard of him, he was taken in their pit, and they brought him in chains 5to the land of Egypt. And she saw while [when] she waited, her hope had perished; then she took one of her whelps, made him a young lion. 6And he went up and down among the lions [lionesses], he became a young lion, and learned to catch prey; he devoured men. 7And he knew [knew well] his widows [palaces], and he laid waste their cities; and the land and its fulness were desolated 8by the noise of his roaring. And the heathen nations round about from the provinces set against him, and spread their net over him; he was taken in their pit. 9And they put him in ward in chains, and brought him to the king of Babylon, brought him into a stronghold, that his voice might no 10more be heard upon the mountains of Israel.—Thy mother [is, was] like a vine, in thy blood, planted by the waters; fruitful and full of branches was it, 11from many waters. And it had strong rods for staves [sceptres] of rulers; and its growth was high, up among the clouds, and was conspicuous in its 12height, in the multitude of its branches. And it was plucked up in fury, cast to the ground, and the east wind dried up its fruit; broken and withered 13were its strong rods, fire consumed [devoured] them. And now it is planted in 14the wilderness, in a land of drought and thirst. And fire went out of a rod of its boughs, consumed [devoured] its fruit, and there was not in it [more] a strong rod, a staff [sceptre] for ruling. This is a lamentation, and shall be for a lamentation. Ezekiel 19:1. Sept.: ... ἐπιτονἀρχοντα— Ezekiel 19:3. K. ἀπεπηδησενεἱςτων— Ezekiel 19:5. K. ἰδενὁτιἀπωστσιἀπʼ ? αὑτηςκ. ἀπωλετοἡὑποστασιςαὐτης, κ. ἐλαβενἀλλον— Ezekiel 19:7. ... κ. ἐνεμετοἐντ. θρασειαὐτου, κ. τ. πολειςαὐτων—Vulg.: Didicit viduas facere, et … in desertum adducere— Ezekiel 19:9. ... ἐνκημω, κ. ἠνεγκαναὐτονἐνγαλεαγρα—(For ξμκααμ other copies read ΰψυααμ.) Ezekiel 19:10. ... ὡςἀμπελος, ὡςἀνθοςἐνῥοαἐνὑδχτι—Vulg.: … quasi vinea in sanguine tuo super aquam—(For αγξκ there is a reading: αψξκ in celsitudine tua. Ezekiel 19:11. χ. ἐγενοντοαὐτηπ̔αβδοςἱσχυοςἐπιφυληνἡγουμενων, χ.... ἐντωμεγεθειαὐτηςἐνμεσωστελεχεων—Vulg.: statura ejus inter frondes— Ezekiel 19:14. Sept.: ... φυληεἰςπαραβοληνθρηνουἐστιν, χ. ἐσταιεἰςθρηνον. REMARKSThe parallel to Ezekiel 17. shows itself clearly in substance and form: that also referred to the kingdom of Jerusalem; this has the same enigmatic style, the same borrowing of figurative expressions from the plant and animal world, and agrees partially in general, and in particular expressions. Ezekiel 19:1. εְ ?ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ, introducing a partial contrast, so that the “proverb” of the previous chapter, from the side of the people, is now confronted by the lamentation, from the side of the prophet. It is an elegy (possibly on the model of songs like 2 Chronicles 35:25, Hδv.), a lament, whose occasion is contemplated as an existing reality. That which hangs over the kingdom is already an accomplished fact; one only requires to summon what has happened into the present, in order to anticipate easily what is about to happen. Comp. Ezekiel 2:10.—The princes (Ezekiel 7:27; Ezekiel 12:10; Ezekiel 12:12) are evidently the existing kings, Jehoahaz and Jehoiachin, as royal types for the future of the Israelitish kingdom. According to Hδv., the lament was devoted to the Davidic royal race in general. Purposely of Israel, because David’s house alone was legitimate over all Israel (Hδv.).—ωָׂ ?ΰ, paronomasia with πְ ?ωִׂ ?ΰֵ ?ι. Ezekiel 19:2-9. The KingsEze_19:2. The address is directed to the people. According to Hengst., to the tribe of Judah, the people of the present. [Ewald makes Ezekiel sing beforehand, in the spirit of prophecy, a lament over Zedekiah, and his inevitable overthrow. Hitzig even alters the plural, princes, into the singular, prince (following the Sept.), for the sake of this interpretation. Rosenm. makes Jehoiachin the subject, who, like Ezekiel, was in exile.]—The mother of the people is Jerusalem (Ezekiel 21:25 [20]). Comp. Galatians 4:25 sq. [Ewald: the ancient church. Hitzig: the people of Israel. Hδv.: ancient Israel in its earlier glory. Klief.: Israel as a historical people. Hengst.: the people per se.] Perhaps an allusion to Isaiah 29:1 sq. Jerusalem-Judah, as in Ezekiel 16.—The retrospective reference of the figure employed to Genesis 49:9 sq. is evident, recommends itself also by the allusion to Judah, and is not gainsaid by Klief.; just because the figure is here turned in malam partem, all the more would the contrast suit as a set-off to the promise in Genesis 49. Comp. Numbers 23:24; Numbers 24:9. The royal nature is meant to be depicted (“of equal birth with other independent and powerful nations, as this royal nature was historically displayed, especially in the times of David and Solomon,” Hengst.): Jerusalem the royal city (Revelation 5:5). The complaint fairly begins with ξָ ?δ. [Klief., on the other hand, assumes a double reproach, that Israel conforms itself to the heathen world-powers, and that it thus destroys its kings (!). Hence it is rather a complaint against the Israel of that time.]—That she lay down among the neighbouring royal states betokens majestic repose and conscious security,—the fearless one exciting fear by imposing power. (Comp. further Ezekiel 16:14.)—The simple result is, that among young lions (αּ ?τִ ?ιψ is the young lion which already goes after prey; αּ ?εּ ?ψ is any young creature which is still with its mother, in particular the young of the lion) Jerusalem brought up her royal children in royal splendour, for a kingly destiny. Perhaps also a hint at the first establishment of the kingdom of Israel, which would be “like all the nations” (1 Samuel 8:5-20)! Ezekiel 19:3. She—the royal mother-city (Lamentations 1:1).—The one of her young ones, so that in ψִ ?αְּ ?ϊָ ?δ may be included the idea of the increase of the family, is described entirely from the natural side as a real young lion. θָ ?ψַ ?σ is: to snatch away; hence: to acquire as booty; also: to tear asunder, into which sense the clause, he devoured men, immediately passes over. Comp. as to Jehoahaz, 2 Kings 23:32. What is there said (2 Kings 19:30) of the “people of the land” in reference to the anointing of Jehoahaz is taken by Hengst. in connection with this verse. He became a young lion, can also be equivalent to: became a king; and what follows may betoken the political development of kingly power. Ezekiel 19:4. Heard of him: as when the rumour of the proximity of a devastating lion spreads, and the hunting of the ravenous beast now begins; or, that their attention was directed towards him by his roaring, so that they proceeded to hunt him. As to the fact, see 2 Kings 23:33-34—ηָ ?η is a hook, a ring, which one puts through the nose of animals that require to be restrained (2 Kings 19:18), to attach to it the bridle by which they are led, by which also their power of breathing can be lessened. Ezekiel 19:5. Up to this point, Egypt; now the other world-power, Babylon (2 Kings 24:7). Comp. Ezekiel 17. Pharaoh Necho had appointed Jehoiakim king, who is left out of account in the lament, because death had deprived him of his crown, 2 Kings 24:6. For the connection, he is omitted as Egyptian, and therefore not answering to the representation of Eze 19:3 (comp. Ezekiel 19:6). After Jehoahaz only Jehoiachin can come into view.—πεֹ ?ηְַ ?μָ ?δ, Niphal from ιָ ?ηַ ?μ (ηεּ ?μ), to expect; Ewald: to be in pain, to feel feeble, hence to despair; she saw that she was deceived—her hope lost. Hδv. as Genesis 8:12 : and she saw that her hope was deferred and had come to nothing, to wit, the hope entertained at first of possibly procuring the deliverance of Jehoahaz through the humiliation of Egypt. Expectations from the other world-power, to which the eye could turn, are here most appropriate, since the Babylonish world-power was forming itself at that very time, λִּ ?ιΧ is simply: while (when) she waited, she saw; her hope touching the one royal son had perished. Then she took, etc., 2 Kings 24:8 sq. λְּ ?τִ ?ιψΧ answers perfectly to the youthful age of Jehoiachin. Ezekiel 19:6. Jehoiachin conducted himself as a king, exactly like other kings; comp. Ezekiel 19:3. If ΰֲ ?ψָ ?ιεֹ ?ϊ is to be translated lionesses, then the idea might thereby be made prominent that he acted after the manner of his mother, Ezekiel 19:2-7. εַ ?ιֵּ ?γַ ?ς. Against the sense which Hδv., Hengst., and others adopt, it may be said that the figure would be abandoned, and that 2 Kings 24:9 refers to nothing so special as the defilement of widows. Hδv.: their (collective: of the slain, Ezekiel 19:6); Hengst.: his (whom he as king was bound to protect), at the same time the people’s widows, the person� miserabiles. Others: he observed his widows (whom he had made so by devouring their husbands). He had them before his eyes. ΰַ ?μְ ?ξְ ?πεֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε can hardly signify here “widows” in the ordinary sense, it would be so entirely against the parallelism (εְ ?ςָ ?ψιδֶ ?ν). The passage remains figurative; although the king referred to breaks through the figurative drapery, he is spoken of in a still more appropriate pictorial manner. As in Isaiah 13:22, the word in question is used poetically of widowed palaces, i.e. forsaken of their inhabitants, so here ironically. Jehoiachin is described (2 Kings 24:9) as altogether like his father (Jehoiakim), which must not be overlooked; while (2 Kings 23:32) it is said of Jehoahaz, more generally that he did as “his fathers.” If we were entitled to colour the portrait of Jehoiachin from our knowledge of Jehoiakim, then Jeremiah 22, especially Ezekiel 19:13 sq., offers, in what is said of his despotic passion for building, all that is necessary for a good understanding of our passage. ιֵ ?γַ ?ς is therefore: he perceived, i.e. was anxious about (Genesis 39:6), knew—his palaces, built by his father, which so soon (after three months) became widowed palaces. And as that was the object of his anxious thought and longing, his conduct corresponded, inasmuch as, for his palaces, he devastated the cities of others (their). [Ewald (like the Chald.) reads εַ ?ιָּ ?ψַ ?ς, from ψςς: “shattered their palaces.”] The words εַ ?ϊֵּ ?ωַׁ ?νΧ describe the disorder of the land. Ezekiel 12:19. Ezekiel 19:8. The object of εַ ?ιִּ ?ϊְּ ?πεּ is completed from what follows. The heathen peoples round about, etc. Ewald: The gay Chaldean host (Ezekiel 17:3). Hengst.: “The provinces are the surrounding countries, as parts of the Chaldean empire; comp. 2 Kings 24:2, according to which the Syrians, Ammonites, and Moabites were summoned against Jehoiakim, the father of Jehoiachin.”—Comp. Ezekiel 19:4; Ezekiel 12:13. Ezekiel 19:9. “It is customary to transport lions in large and very strong cages” (J. D. Mich.).—The heathen-world thus made an end of the dominion. εַ ?ιִּ ?ϊְּ ?πֻ ?δεּ recalls Ezekiel 19:8. In chains, as Ezekiel 19:4. To the king of Babylon, counterpart to “to the land of Egypt.” As to further parallels, see the verses. Stronghold (Heb. pl.), an indefinite, poetic, general] term (Judges 12:7). That his voice, etc., points back to Ezekiel 19:7. 2 Kings 24:12 could not be expressed otherwise, by means of the foregoing figure, than in terms parallel to Ezekiel 19:4. The more special element of the history is concealed by the poetic veil. Ezekiel 19:10-14. The Mother of KingsJust as in Ezekiel 17, a transition to another figure, namely, to that which is there (Ezekiel 19:5 sq.) used as to King Zedekiah, the subject still remaining the kingdom. Ezekiel 19:10 The address, as in Ezekiel 19:2, and the mother, who is compared to a vine, is also, as there, Jerusalem (Psalms 80:9 [8]). In thy blood; Ewald: in his likeness, like thee (Zedekiah!):—analogous to in thy name.—Hengst.: “it concerns thee” (γְּ ?ξεּ ?η = γָּ ?ν, comp. ἐνπαραβολῇ, Hebrews 11:19), i.e. what is here said of the mother applies pre-eminently to the people of the present—tua res agitur, etc. Kimchi and Rashi fix on αִּ ?γְ ?ξεּ ?ϊְ ?κָ, others derive γָּ ?ν from γָּ ?ξָ ?δ, or read πִ ?γְ ?ξָ ?δ; where as Piscator, Hδv., and others adopt γָ ?ξָ ?δ, γּ ?εּ ?ν, in silentio tuo, in thy rest, the happy peaceful time (Isaiah 38:10), which hardly suits the line of thought, and doesn’t at all fit into the figure of the vine. Gesen. reads: αַּ ?ψְ ?ξְ ?κָ, “in thy vineyard.” The Sept. reads: αָּ ?ψִ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ο, “by the pomegranate tree,” because vines and pomegranates were often found together (Numbers 20:5). Hitzig: He had thus a support in contradistinction to Ezekiel 17:4. The simplest rendering is “in thy blood,” i.e. in the life of the stem of Judah. Ezekiel 19:2 looked back to Genesis 49:9 sq., and this verse looks back to Ezekiel 19:11 of the same chapter, where the figurative allusion to the blood of the grape (Deuteronomy 32:14) suggests the point of connection with the vine figure. Comp. further at Ezekiel 17:8; Ezekiel 17:5. Ezekiel 19:11. There grew up in Jerusalem-Judah strong shoots of David, able to rule (Genesis 49:10).—χεֹ ?ξָ ?ϊεֹ, Ezekiel 17:6. The singular suffix refers not to πֶּ ?τֶ ?ο, but rather to ξַ ?θֶּ ?δ, either to the one who was before their eyes, i.e. Zedekiah, or better still, with Hengst., to the sceptres conceived of as one, and thus to the royal race as a whole. The plural ςֲ ?αֹ ?ϊִ ?ιν, which is peculiar to Ezekiel, has made many think of “thickets,”—a profuse growth between the thick branches, rising above them. According to Ewald and most moderns, it stands for thicket-clouds and darkness. Hengst.: “among the clouds, through and over them.”—And was conspicuous: subject ξַ ?θֶּ ?δ. Ezekiel 19:12. Without the intervention of anything farther, there follows its splendid growth, like a lightning flash from the clear heavens, the complete overthrow of the vine, i.e. of Jerusalem-Judah, the birthplace of kings, and therewith the Davidic kingdom. Answering to it, there is here the Hophal of πָ ?ϊַ ?ωׁ, its only instance. Only one must not assume, with most interpreters, that the banishment of the people is what is meant (Ewald also makes “the whole congregation fall with the king”). The distinction between the two paragraphs is merely this, that while Ezekiel 19:2-9 bewailed the existing kings, both as bearers of the Davidic royalty, and at the same time as suggestive, by their fate, to the actual king; now Zedekiah, as he with whom the Davidic kingdom is subverted, becomes the subject of the lament, just as if everything had already happened. (Comp. Deuteronomy 29:27; 1 Kings 14:15; Jeremiah 12:17.)—Ezekiel 8:18. Through the anger of God. To the ground, etc. Pictorial, but not indicating the expatriation to another land.—Ezekiel 17:10; Ezekiel 17:9.—ξַ ?θֵּ ?δΧ, collective; comp. with Ezekiel 19:11. The singular, construed with the plural of the verb, comprehends the strong rods in a single view, with reference to Zedekiah. The suffix Ξδεּ refers to ξַּ ?θֶּ ?δ, not to πֶּ ?τֶ ?ο. Comp. Ezekiel 15:5; Ezekiel 15:7. The fire, the divine judgment in its consuming character, as is explained by Ezekiel 19:14. Ezekiel 19:13. And now, spoken in presence of the circumstances of the exile, concerning the remnant of the Davidic royal line. Hence “planting” after the withering and burning can still be spoken of, and this not on account of the people, but because the residue of the Davidic royal line is likewise in exile.—The wilderness (figurative)—without any allusion to Israel’s passing through the wilderness (Hengst.), which was altogether different—simply describes, in contrast to Ezekiel 19:10 sq., a condition of chastisement in which the vine, Judah’s kingdom, cannot prosper.—Drought, objective; thirst, subjective. Ezekiel 19:14 adds to (1) the wrath of God, and to (2) the Chaldeans as instruments (Ezekiel 19:12), the explanation of the fire (Ezekiel 19:12), to wit, (3) Zedekiah’s offence (according to Ezekiel 17:15 sq.). Comp. Ezekiel 5:4; Judges 9:15.—Rod of its boughs (Ezekiel 17:6) is the rod which the boughs made, which the strong vitality of the royal vine caused to shoot.—The closing sentence appropriately includes both parts of the chapter,—that which has happened and that which is to happen. εַ ?ϊְּ ?δι, prophetic perfect. (“It is not the fancy of a gloomy seer, but the prediction of a lamentation which will actually flow in a thousand voices from the mouth of the people,” etc., Hengst.) Hδv.: “And it was for,” etc.; as historical notice of the subsequently written prophecy, to attest its true fulfilment. REMARKS 1. Hδvernick describes the fundamental character of this chapter as lyrical, prophetically elegiac. Ewald calls it “the model of an elegy”—“artistic as to the construction of its lines,—the finest and most touching of all in the Old Testament.” As to the form, he says: “The long line prevails, but it is almost always divided in the middle into two complete halves, so that the second half abruptly broken off follows the first only like a brief, transient, sighing echo. And thus, what the construction of the whole song is, as to its two directions, is repeated in the line.” 2. It is a song of three kings; or of two broken, and one breaking sceptre. 3. In regard to the historical relations, the carrying away of Jehoahaz to Egypt is parallel to that of Jehoiachin to Babylon. The intermediate Jehoiakim is left out; but because he is the more important and the characteristic person, for the beginning of the Babylonian servitude, Jehoiachin is retained in his true colours. (As similarly Zedekiah in Jeremiah 27) 4. In the lion-figure, the nobler passes over into the less noble aspect, on which Hengst. remarks: “By the constitution of human nature, arrogance is inseparably connected with high rank, and therewith a rude barbarity towards all who are barriers in its way. He only who walks with God can escape this natural consequence, and the walk of faith is not the attainment of every man. It should, however, be the attainment of every one of the people of God; and where it is wanting, so that the corrupt nature unfolds itself without opposition, there the divine vengeance takes effect. Jehoahaz showed himself a barbarous tyrant towards his own subjects, whereas the kingdom of Israel was designed to exhibit a heroic energy against the enemies of the people of God. On this account he was punished.” 5. The Messianic hope was bound up with the Davidic kingdom, whose subversion is here illustrated from Ezekiel 18:22 sq., and its fulfilment is shown in this, that He who appeared in the world, declared, not without a reference to our chapter, “I am the true Vine.” HINTSEze_19:1 sq.: “In all times the sorrowful and the joyful have been expressed in poetry” (L.).—Sacred poetry a companion on the heights and in the depths of life and feeling. See the Psalms.—“Princes should be pious people, who care for the eternal as well as temporal welfare of their subjects, who judge equitably, avoid tyranny, and corrupt none by their example. But when subjects do not pray for their princes, and descend everywhere to the level of beasts in their habits, God gives them beasts as princes. For the sins of a people tyrants rule over them” (L.). Ezekiel 19:2. “So long as the Jewish people acted according to the law of God, they rested in safety and without fear” (Schm.).—“Judah brought up, in its princes, the rods of God’s chastisement” (Richt.).—“The society of bad men only makes one become more wicked” (Stck.). Ezekiel 19:3. “A royal up-bringing, when it is merely that, makes royal sinners. Great lords, alas! frequently bear lions and such like not merely on their escutcheons. That they also do, who drain men of everything, even to their blood” (B. B.).—There are men-eaters who yet devour no men. Ezekiel 19:4. Violence is always topped by greater violence or cunning.—Many a court, though it be the prince’s own, is the pit in which the lion is taken!—There are also chains for kings—their minions. Ezekiel 19:5 sq. In the place of one tyrant a second can come. Ezekiel 19:7. Through a prince, his land also suffers.—“The king’s voice should be terrible to the wicked only, never to the good” (L.).—To the lion’s roaring belong cabinet orders, royal edicts. Ezekiel 19:8 sq. What a network is woven about princes by court intrigues!—“The fate of tyrants has usually been a sad one. God has pits, nets, hunters, and cages for them even in this world, but certainly in the next” (L.).—“He who lives like a beast, shall be requited like a beast” (Stck.).—At last the lion’s roaring on the mountains dies away. Ezekiel 19:10. In Judah there was royal blood,—the lion and the vine together.—“Apply that to the blood of Christ!” (Richt.)—“He who can count the drops of water, may count the number of God’s acts of love” (B. B.).—“It is of God’s unmerited grace that some royal houses are blessed beyond others, and for this He will be honoured and praised, 2 Samuel 7:18” (St.). Ezekiel 19:11 sq. “The higher the ascent, the deeper the fall; God remains the highest, the highest over all.”—The night before destruction is sometimes full of happiness and splendour.—The bloom of princely houses, as of great cities and famous trading houses, is of a tender and easily withered nature. Ezekiel 19:13. “Where God’s gracious presence with His word and Spirit is wanting, there a desert is; and the whole world is a land of drought, which can give no refreshment to the soul which hungers and thirsts for God” (B. B.).—The prosperous soil for princes and also for people is true religion.—Where God’s word is despised, kingdoms themselves become a waste. Ezekiel 19:14. “Each man supplies the fire for his own burning” (Stck.).—“The fire of one’s own unrighteousness kindles the wrathful judgment of God, Isaiah 1:31” (Schm.).—“Men first become parched, then the fire consumes them” (Stck.).—“A little spark, a single sin apparently, and at first really a little one, can cause a great fire” (Stck.).—“Till Christ no other king from David’s stem” (Richt.).—“Every sin ends in lamentation, even here, but certainly there” (Stck.). 9. The Survey of the Leading of the People from of old (Ezekiel 20.) 1And it came to pass in the seventh year, in the fifth [month] on the tenth [day] of the month, that men of the elders of Israel came to enquire of 2Jehovah, and sat [down] before me. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 3Son of man, speak to the elders of Israel, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Do ye come to enquire of Me? As I live, if I will be enquired of by you! Sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 4Wilt thou Judges 5 them? Wilt thou judge, son of man? Make them to know the abominations of their fathers. And say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah; In the day that I chose Israel, then I lifted up My hand to the seed of the house of Jacob, and made Myself known to them in the land of Egypt, and lifted up 6My hand to them, saying, I [am] Jehovah [am] your God. In that day I lifted up My hand to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt, into the land which I had sought out for them, flowing with milk and honey,—which is a 7glory [ornament] to all lands. And I said to them, Cast ye away, every man, the abominations of his eyes, and defile not yourselves with the idols of 8Egypt. I, Jehovah your God. And they rebelled against Me, and would not hearken unto Me; they did not cast away every man the abominations of his eyes, nor forsake the idols of Egypt. And I said that I would pour out My fury upon them, that I would accomplish My anger in them, in the 9midst of the land of Egypt. And I wrought for My name’s sake, that it might not be polluted before the eyes of the heathen, among whom they were, in whose sight I made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the 10land of Egypt. And I led them out of the land of Egypt, and brought them into the wilderness. 11And I gave them My statutes, and made known to them 12My judgments, which, if a man do, he shall live in them. And I also gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between Me and them, so that it might be 13known [they knew] that I Jehovah do sanctify them. And the house of Israel rebelled against Me in the wilderness; they walked not in My statutes, and they despised [cast away] My judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them, and they grievously profaned My sabbaths. And I said that I would 14pour out My fury upon them in the wilderness to destroy [uproot] them. And I wrought for My name’s sake, that it should not be polluted before the 15heathen, in whose sight I brought them out. And also I lifted up My hand to them in the wilderness, that I would not bring them into the land which I had given, flowing with milk and honey—which is a glory to all lands,—16Because they despised My judgments, and walked not in My statutes, and 17profaned My sabbaths, for their heart went after their idols. And [yet] Mine eye pitied, instead of destroying them, and I did not make an end of them in 18the wilderness. And I said to their sons in the wilderness, Ye shall not walk in your fathers’ statutes, nor observe their judgments, nor defile yourselves 19with their idols. I am Jehovah, your God; walk in My statutes and keep My judgments, and do them. 20And hallow My sabbaths, and they are for a sign between Me and you, that ye may know that I am Jehovah your God. 21And the sons rebelled against Me; they walked not in My statutes, and they kept not My judgments to do them, which if a man do, he shall live in them; they profaned My sabbaths; and I said that I would pour out My fury upon 22them, that I would accomplish My anger in them in the wilderness. And [yet] I turned My hand, and wrought for My name’s sake, that it should not 23be polluted before the heathen, in whose sight I brought them out. I also lifted up My hand to them in the wilderness, that I would scatter them 24among the heathen, and disperse them in the countries; Because they executed not My judgments, and despised My statutes, and profaned My 25sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers’ idols. And I also gave them statutes that were not good, and judgments in which they could not live; 26And I polluted them in their gifts, inasmuch as they caused all that openeth the womb to pass through, that I might desolate them, that they might know 27that I am Jehovah. Therefore speak to the house of Israel, son of man, and say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah; In this again your fathers mocked 28[blasphemed] Me, in dealing faithlessly with Me. And I brought them into the land, which I lifted up My hand to give them, and they saw every high hill, and every thick [dark] tree, and there they offered their sacrifices, and gave there the provocation of their offering, and there they presented their 29sweet savours, and there they poured out their drink-offerings. And I said to them, What is the high place to which ye go? And its name was called 30“Bamah” to this day. Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah; In the way of your fathers do ye pollute yourselves, and do ye 31go wantonly after their abominations? And in the offering of your gifts, in making your sons to pass through the fire, do ye pollute yourselves according to all your idols to this day, and shall I be enquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—if I shall be enquired of by you! … 32And that which has come up in your mind shall not at all happen, that ye say, We shall be as the heathen, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone. 33As I live,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—if I shall not rule over you with strong hand, and with outstretched arm, and with fury poured out! … 34And I will lead you out from the peoples, and gather you out of the countries in which ye have been dispersed, with strong hand, and with outstretched arm, and with fury poured out, 35And I will bring you into 36the wilderness of the peoples, and contend with you there face to face. As I contended with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I contend with you,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 37And I will cause you to pass under the staff [sceptre], and bring you into the bond of the covenant. 38And I will purge [separate] out from among you the rebels, and the transgressors against Me; out of the land of their wanderings [strangerhood] will I lead them forth, and [yet] he [they] shall not come to the land of Israel, and ye shall 39know that I Jehovah. And ye, house of Israel, thus saith the Lord Jehovah,—Go, serve every one his idols. Yet afterwards,—if ye will not [now] hearken unto Me, ye shall not further pollute My holy name with [in] your offerings 40and with [in] your idols. For upon My holy mountain, upon the high mountain of Israel,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—there shall they serve Me, the whole house of Israel, the whole of it in the land; there will I accept them graciously, and there will I require your [heave] offerings, and the first-fruits 41of your oblations, with all your holy things. As a sweet savour will I accept you graciously, when I lead you out from the peoples, and gather you out of the countries, in which ye have been dispersed, and sanctify Myself in you before the eyes of the heathen. 42And ye shall know that I am Jehovah, when I bring you to the land of Israel, to the land which I lifted up My hand to give to your fathers. 43And there shall ye remember your ways, and all your doings, in [with] which ye have been defiled, and loathe yourselves in your own sight, for all your wicked things [evil deeds] which ye have done. 44And ye shall know that I am Jehovah, in My dealing with you for My name’s sake, not according to your wicked ways, and your corrupt doings, O house of Israel. Sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 20:3. Sept.: ... ζωἐγωεἰἀποκριθησομαιὑμιν... εἰ (4) ἐκδικησωαὐτουςἐκδικησει.—(Another reading, Ezekiel 3 : ΰμζχπι.) Ezekiel 20:5. ... ὠφἡςἡμετισςἡρετισα... κ. ἐγνωρισθηντωσπερματι... κ. ἀντεγαβομηντηκειριμουαὐτων— Ezekiel 20:12. The LXX add: Κεἰταπροςτ. οἰκ. τ. ʼ ?Ισρἐντ. ἐρημωʼ ? ʼ ?Εντοι; προσταγμκσινμουπορευεσθεκ. τ. δικαιωματαμουφυγασσετετουποιειναὐτα, ἁτοιησειαὐταἀνθρωτοςκ. ζησεταιἐναὐτοις. Ezekiel 20:18. ... μησυικναμιγνυσθεκ. μημικινεσθε. Ezekiel 20:22. Κ. οὐκἐποιησα, ὀπωςτοὀνομαμου— Ezekiel 20:26. Κ. μιαινωαὐτους... ἐντωδιαπορευεσθαιμεπαν... ὁπωςἀφανισωαὐτους.—Vulg.: Et pollui … cum offerrent omne quod— Ezekiel 20:27. ... ʼ ?Εωςτουτουπαρωργισανμε— Ezekiel 20:28. ... κ. ἐθυσανἐκειτοιςθεοιςαὐτων— Ezekiel 20:30. Sept.: Εἰἐν. τ. ἀνομιαιςτ. πατερωνὑμων.— Ezekiel 20:31. κ. ἑντ. ἀπαρχαιςτ. ὸομκτωνὑμωνκ. ἐντ. ἀφορισμοιςυἱωνὑμ. ἐνπυρι—(Another reading: απιλνεαπϊιλν.) Ezekiel 20:32. κ. εἰἀναβησεταἐπιτ. πνευμκὑμ. τουτο. Κ. οὐκἑωταιὁντροπονὑμειςλεγετε— Ezekiel 20:36. Another reading: ΰωτεθΰϊΧ. S pt., Vulg., Arabs: judicabo vos. Ezekiel 20:37. ... κ. εἰσαξωὑμαςἐνἀριθμω. (Targ. et versiones.) Ezekiel 20:38. Another reading: μΰιαΰε. Ezekiel 20:39. Sept.: ... ἑκαστος... ἑξαρατε, κ. μεταταυταεἰμηὑμειςεἰσακουετεμου, κ. τ. ὀνομα— Ezekiel 20:40. ... ἐκειδουλευσουσινμοι... εἰςτελος— Ezekiel 20:43. ... τ. ὁδους... κ. τ. ἐπιτηδευματαὑμ. ἐνοἱςἐμιαινεσθε.—Vulg.: … et displicebitis vobis in conspectu vestro— Ezekiel 20:44. ... ὁπωςτ. ὀνομαμουμηβεβηλωθηκατατ. ὁδουςὑμ.... κ. κατατ. ἐπιτηδευματαὑμ. ταδιεφθαρμενα— REMARKSEze_20:1-4. The Occasion and Theme of the DiscourseEze_20:1. A date is prefixed to the occasion of the following prophetic discourse, which points us back to Ezekiel 8, and which at the same time applies to Ezekiel 21-23 [Klief. reckons 11 months 5 days since Ezekiel 8:1; Ezekiel 2 years 1 month 5 days since Ezekiel 1:2 (adhering to the captivity of king Jehoiachin): and 2 years 5 months before Ezekiel 24:1.—The parallel to Ezekiel 14:1 is evident. There, indeed, we have ΰֵ ?μַ ?ιεεַ ?ιָּ ?αεֹ ?ΰ, and here only αָּ ?ΰεּ. But they are called men of the elders of Israel in both places. That they were the same persons (Klief.) is questionable; probably not. Rather can they be considered as the successors of that deputation, and they may be distinguished from it by the fact that they mentioned the purpose of their visit, to inquire, etc., although what they asked is not stated, while the former deputation can be depicted as sitting before the prophet in speechless amazement. That a middle, a turning point in Ezekiel’s labours is indicated, as Klief. thinks, by the fact of a spirit of inquiry being excited in the minds of his hearers, is too much to draw from the words. Hengst. sees in the men “representatives, not of the totality of the exiles, but of the great mass of those only externally fearing God, while internally addicted to the spirit of the world and of the age,” as in Ezekiel 14, and conjectures a special occasion in a favourable turn which the affairs of the coalition had taken.(?) Owing to the interest felt in Judah and Jerusalem by all the exiles, nothing prevents us understanding here also, as in Ezekiel 14, envoys (if not elders themselves?) from the elders of the exiles of the ten tribes. As these had been so long in a state of exile, the existence of the elder-organization is the more intelligible. That the divine message of the prophet is addressed to the whole people, does not prevent its being coloured with a special regard to the ten tribes, as the details of our exposition may possibly show. Ezekiel 20:3. Comp. Ezekiel 2:1; Ezekiel 14:3. Ezekiel 20:4. The repeated question, Wilt thou, etc., is connected with the appearance of the men of Israel, who are thereby represented as if standing before a tribunal, but at the same time destitute of an advocate, and of any ground for self-justification. Hitzig rightly perceives in the repetition evidence of the emotion which the presence of unworthy persons had excited. “The form of a question makes apparent the impatient wish that the thing, should happen, and so includes a command.” Therefore the imperative: Make them to know the abominations, etc. The theme of the discourse is a review of the objective [leading], and over against that, the subjective [behaviour] conduct of the people from the days of old (Ezekiel 22:2; Ezekiel 23:36). The reference to the fathers points to an ancient and deep-rooted evil which demands a radical cure (Hengst., Calvin). Matthew 23:32; Acts 7:51; Ezekiel 16:2.R Ezekiel 20:5-9. Israel in EgyptEze_20:5. αָּ ?ηַ ?ψ with αְּ, as Israel is subjected to examination, so Israel remains the object of the divine election. “Choosing in the sense of divine, prevenient love and grace, Deuteronomy 7:6; Deuteronomy 14:2” (Hδv.).—The lifting up of the hand, as the gesture of one making oath (Deuteronomy 32:40; Exodus 6:8), assured and confirmed the choosing of Israel as the people of God (Deuteronomy 7:6; Deuteronomy 14:2) with reference to Canaan (Ezekiel 20:6; Ezekiel 20:15; Ezekiel 20:28).—Israel is significantly interchanged with Jacob. The former points to the grace of their election to the position of Jehovah’s warriors; the latter points to their natural origin.—As interpreted by the clause: and made myself known, etc., the day was the period when Jehovah in point of fact revealed Himself to the people in Egypt as that which He had called Himself to Moses (Exodus 3:14, etc.) by signs and wonders, as by an actual, renewed oath (therefore the very significant repetition of the lifting up of the hand). Ezekiel 20:6. A sort of conclusion. Once again, I lifted up, etc., and emphasizing of the day, in order to mark God’s solemn determination, as well as what had taken place. The imaginations of priests and vain sayings of the people are not the point in question. The object was “bringing out,” therefore freedom, redemption, which is described according to its issue and goal.—Sought out (comp. Numbers 10:33), ere ever they had spied it out.—Exodus 3:8.—The μְ in μְ ?αָ ?μΧ, either, datively, that all lands reckon it so; or with respect to or, above all lands (?). Ezekiel 20:7. The Sinaitic law also said this plainly, as it rested expressly upon the ΰֲ ?πִ ?ιιְ ?δεָֹ ?δΧ, Exodus 20:2. But from the beginning the same was proclaimed by the fact of election, which involved a reciprocal obligation on the part of the people. [“The very form given to the commission of Moses to go and vindicate the children of Israel for God, that they might come forth and serve Him, was itself a proof how much the worship of Jehovah had fallen into abeyance, and how generally the people had allowed themselves to sink into the prevailing idolatries. They must go out of the polluted region, where other lords, spiritual as well as temporal, have had dominion over them, that they may stand free to worship and serve Jehovah. And so the whole design and purport of the commission of Moses might be regarded as a protest against their connection with the abominations of Egypt, and a call not only to Pharaoh, to let the people go, but also to the people themselves, to come out and be separate, as a seed whom the Lord had chosen.”—P. F.—W. F.] Of the eyes, not merely which the eyes see, but whereon they fix, with which they become familiar, etc. Ezekiel 20:8. Israel’s further rebelliousness in the wilderness would even justify a similar inference as to their behaviour in Egypt. Compare further Joshua 24:14; Exodus 32:3; Leviticus 17:7 (Psalms 106:7).—And I said; not to them, nor to Moses, but to Myself. It corresponded to the character of God and the actual condition of the people. Comp. Exodus 20:5; Exodus 32:10.—Ezekiel 7:8; Ezekiel 5:13; Ezekiel 6:12; and besides, Exodus 5:3. Ezekiel 20:9. And I wrought, forms a contrast to: “and I said;” consequently the thing contrasted with what was said,—the object of the verb “wrought,”—which can be gathered from what follows, may also be assumed as known.—For My name’s sake, etc. (Psalms 106:8); they were unworthy of it, had not merited it. But the revelation which I had given of Myself before the eyes of the heathen among whom they were was not to be desecrated before these same eyes, especially before the Egyptians, as if to wish well to My name were present with Me, but not the power of performance (regard being had at the same time to the heathen, as Israel was placed in a peculiar position in regard to humanity as a whole). Comp. Numbers 14:13 sq.; Exodus 32:12 (Numbers 23:19). Ezekiel 20:10-24. Israel in the Wilderness. Ezekiel 20:10-17, The First; 18–24, The Second GenerationEze_20:10-17. The First Generation in the WildernessEze_20:10. Transition from the foregoing to the following. Ezekiel 20:11. The giving of the law on Sinai, as introduction to the present leading of the people, after being brought out, Exodus 20. sq.—Statutes and judgments, as often, comprehending the general idea of the law. Live includes prosperity and blessedness, body and spiritual, temporal and eternal. Comp. Deuteronomy 4:1.—The law was given for life, Romans 7:10; Matthew 19:17; Exodus 20:12, etc. Which if a man do. The leading through the wilderness served to test them as to this. [Keil translates: “Which a man shall do in order to live through them.”] Ezekiel 20:12. Exodus 20:8; Exodus 31:13. A sign must denote something, so the Sabbath repeating itself (therefore the plural with each week’s close betokened the rest of God, into which the people of God are to enter after all their works, Hebrews 4. This is a common element to Jehovah and Israel on the ground of the covenant. As the Sabbaths of Jehovah are to be hallowed by Israel, and to be separated from the other days of the week, it would thereby be made evident that Jehovah sanctifies Israel, and separates them from the world-peoples to be His own peculiar people. This is the reciprocal relation of the Sabbath to Jehovah and Israel. Therefore the Sabbath was so characteristic for Israel.—As the prophetic sense of the law, and of the Sabbath-law in particular, reaches far beyond a formal, outward observance of it, so the prophet is speaking not of the mere letter of the law as a whole, nor in Ezekiel 20:13 of merely external desecration of the Sabbath (Isaiah 58:13-14). Compare further Exodus 16:27 sq.; Numbers 15:32 sq. Also Ezekiel 5:6-7 Ezekiel 20:11 Ezekiel 20:8—With Ezekiel 20:14 comp. Ezekiel 20:9 Ezekiel 20:15. And also = and even; for after the contrast to: “and I said,” in Ezekiel 20:13 has been expressed in Ezekiel 20:14 by: “and I wrought,” εְ ?βַ ?νΧ resumes the thread. The thought as to the destruction of the rebellious expressed itself even in the oath which excluded the first wilderness generation from Canaan; Numbers 14:11 sq.; Psalms 95:11, etc. [Hengst. interprets εβνΧ of retribution; so they, and I also!] Ezekiel 20:6 Ezekiel 20:17 carries out the idea of Eze 20:14 (Ezekiel 16:5).—Ezekiel 11:13. The sequel shows what is meant. Ezekiel 20:18-24. The Second Generation in the WildernessEze_20:18. The contents of the fifth book of Moses belonged peculiarly to the sons (children)—the spared second generation in the wilderness. The fathers in question are represented in their constant disobedience to the laws which Jehovah gave (which even necessitated their repetition and renewal in Deuteronomy), as in some sort lawgivers according to their own ideas and on their own authority. Ezekiel 20:7 Ezekiel 20:19. But!—Comp. Ezekiel 20:11 Ezekiel 20:20. Comp. Ezekiel 20:12 Ezekiel 20:21. Numbers 15:16-17 Ezekiel 20:8; Ezekiel 20:13 Ezekiel 20:22. Contrast to Ezekiel 20:21; Numbers 16:21 sq., Ezekiel 17:9 sq. Ezekiel 20:14; Ezekiel 20:9 Ezekiel 20:23. I also, as in Ezekiel 20:15, here in relation to Ezekiel 20:21—Ezekiel 12:15; Ezekiel 6:8. The threatening with exile, Deuteronomy 28:30; Leviticus 26:33 sq.; and as an oath, Deuteronomy 29:13; Deuteronomy 29:18. Ezekiel 20:24. As Ezekiel 20:16. Ezekiel 20:25-31. Israel in Canaan. Ezekiel 20:25-29. The Fathers. Ezekiel 20:30-31. The People of the PresentEze_20:25-29. The Fathers in CanaanEze_20:25. Transition, linked to the foregoing with εְ ?βַ ?νΧ, as in Ezekiel 20:23 βַּ ?νΧ hinted at what succeeds. The threat of exile, the fulfilment of which had begun in the people of the present, could be denounced against the second generation in the wilderness, because they were brought into Canaan, and along with the following generations, in so far as they could come into account as “your fathers” (Ezekiel 20:27), they are set over against the existing people. The second generation, in the wilderness was therefore the medium of transition to, and at the same time became, Israel in Canaan. Therefore, although it was not executed against the second generation in the wilderness, the threat of exile remains in its original force and form. The reference to Canaan, which Ezekiel 20:28 formally makes, determines the peculiar forms of expression in Ezekiel 20:25-26. Such a progress in sin is made, that at last God makes sin its own punishment. Thus Ezekiel 20:7. They are warned against idolatry in Egypt, which is followed up in Ezekiel 20:11 sq. by the Sinaitic legislation in the wilderness.—In Ezekiel 20:18 sq., over against their own law-making, of which the first generation was guilty, there is the renewal of the Sinaitic law with reference to Canaan, but even already under the threat of exile (Ezekiel 20:23). Finally—in Canaan as a beginning of the judgment of God, there were given to Israel for chastisement the wicked statutes and the death-bringing judgments of Canaan. Because they would not have My good law, I gave them Canaan’s law, which is not good, etc. Thus the force of: I gave, etc., is to be maintained, and by no means to be weakened to permission or any similar idea, as Jewish and Christian interpreters wish.—Not good is sufficiently explained by μָ ?δֶ ?ν going before, and by the parallel μΰֹ ιִ ?ϊְ ?ιεּ ?Χ. Ezekiel 20:26 shows clearly what sort of “statutes” and “judgments” are meant, from the result which they produced, more precisely describing: “I gave,” as: I polluted them. The pollution of Israel was very notably exhibited in that which they did with their first-born male children, who in virtue of Exo 13:12-13 required to be redeemed. This ordinance, according to the connection in Exodus 13, being characteristically associated with the redemption of the people from Egypt, the allusion in our verse is most significant. Comp. also Exodus 13:11, which introduces the statute in question. As a guide to the understanding of μַ ?ιδεָֹ ?δ ,αְּ ?δַ ?ςֲ ?αִ ?ιψ, which is associated with δַ ?ςֲ ?αַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ in Exodus 13, is here omitted, and αָּ ?ΰֵ ?ωׁ is added in Ezekiel 20:31, so that the Canaanitish Moloch - worship is undoubtedly meant. (Leviticus 18:21, comp. Ezekiel 20:3; Deuteronomy 18:10; Deuteronomy 18:9) Comp. Ezekiel 16:21. So the life, the continuous life which the people of Israel should have enjoyed in their sons, became its opposite, death. How could these be good statutes! [Cocceius also connects δַ ?ςֲ ?αַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ with Exodus 13:12, and understands the pollution of Israel as a declaration of the uncleanness of the people (Hδv., on account of the heathenish turn which had been given to the law), since Aaron and the Levites had been installed by Jehovah in the sacred office instead of the first-born, Numbers 3:45!] Comp. as to the whole, Romans 1:24 sq.; Acts 7:42; 2 Thessalonians 2:11.—As to the “desolation,” comp. Ezekiel 14:8. Others render it: to be benumbed, shocked, so that if possible they might be brought to reflection from what was so abhorrent to parental feeling. According to our rendering of the word, preparation is here made for the idea of the wilderness, which is afterwards so prominent in the chapter: they came to resemble a wilderness people even before they were brought into the wilderness of the peoples (Ezekiel 20:35). Ezekiel 20:27. The people of the present are addressed, although the matter itself still concerns the fathers in Canaan. Ezekiel 20:30 sq. will define more precisely the meaning of this address.—In this again (Ezekiel 16:29), besides what was formerly adduced. The thing meant is first of all indicated more generally as mockery and faithlessness (Ezekiel 15:8; Ezekiel 14:13), and is then in Ezekiel 20:28 stated more in detail. Comp. with Ezekiel 6:13; Ezekiel 16:16.—λַּ ?ςַ ?ρΧ refers to the forementioned mockery, whereby they aroused the displeasure and wrath of Jehovah (Deuteronomy 32:16; Deuteronomy 32:21); ψֵ ?ιηַ ?Χ (comp. Ezekiel 6:13; Ezekiel 16:19) to the faithlessness which could present sweet savours of various kinds to idols. Ezekiel 20:29. And I said, etc. By the question there is recalled to mind God’s ever-repeated opposition to and condemnation of the worship of the high places (therefore the collective singular: δַ ?αָּ ?ξָ ?δ, in contrast to the one sanctuary—the temple), with all that He had said against it. [Hδv. adopts the explanation of Kimchi, who refers it to the high place at Gibeon, 1 Kings 3:4; 2 Chronicles 1:3.—εַ ?ιִּ ?χָּ ?ψֵ ?ΰ, the thing itself, as well as its name, continued to this day. Ezekiel 20:30-31. The People of the PresentEze_20:30. μָ ?λֵ ?ο, resuming the strain of Eze 20:27, and substituting ΰֱ ?ξֹ ?ψ for γַּ ?αֵּ ?ψ, directly addresses the people of the present, i.e. the inquirers of Israel who had come to the prophet in the interest of those who still remained in Canaan. Ezekiel 20:31. The note struck in the question of Eze 20:29 is still maintained, not merely to express astonishment, but still more to compel self-reflection. I ask what further communication you would have?—Comp. Ezekiel 7:20.—Ezekiel 6:9. Ezekiel 20:26.—Comp. Ezekiel 14:3. Ezekiel 20:32-44. Prophetic Survey of the yet Future Dealing with the People. Ezekiel 20:32-38. In Judgment. Ezekiel 20:39-44. In MercyEze_20:32-38. The Impending JudgmentEze_20:32. Transition to what follows.—Comp. Ezekiel 14:3; Ezekiel 11:5.—However much the people had become like the heathen, yet they were not to become heathen, which the inquirers of Eze 20:1 may have said to themselves, with a feeling of satisfaction or of despair, Deuteronomy 4:28; Deuteronomy 28:36; Deuteronomy 28:64. Such was not to be the end of the people of God. But Jehovah will manifest Himself to them as their King. Ezekiel 20:33. Backward glance at His mighty, royal dealing in former times, when they were redeemed from Egypt (Deuteronomy 4:34; Exodus 6:6, etc). Comp. Ezekiel 6:14. But it is immediately added, in order to point to retributive judgment (see Exodus 6:6): and with fury poured out, which is repeated in Ezekiel 20:34 in connection with the “leading out,” and “gathering,” by which the aforesaid (Ezekiel 20:33) royal authority will also manifest itself, so that these too must be regarded as acts of divine judgment. A future leading into Canaan (against which see also Ezekiel 20:35), after the conversion of all Israel, is thereby strictly excluded. But: out from the peoples, and: out of the countries, when rightly taken, namely, in contrast to: “into the wilderness of the peoples,” by no means excludes a reference to the existing Babylonish captivity. That Israel was then dispersed in one land only, and among one people (Klief., Keil), is not in the least to the point, when the empire of the king of Babylon could be described in such a manner as, e.g., in Jeremiah 27:5 sq.! The exile, says Jehovah, the King whose supreme power they were to experience, shall not be mere dispersion among “peoples” and in “countries” (different from the fatherland, Canaan), where the external relations of life may be to some extent of an agreeable character, as was the case (see Introd). I will lead you thence and conduct you into another exile, for Ezekiel 20:35—I will bring you into the wilderness of the peoples,—an expression whose deepest interpretation is immediately added, viz.: and contend with you, etc.; a change of condition is meant—an intensifying of exile to “a wilderness of the peoples,” which must be taken figuratively (comp. Hosea 2:16), like the leading out and gathering of the previous verse, and the “wilderness” in Ezekiel 19:13. (Hδv. compares Ezekiel 6:14.) In the form of the word, the previous expressions (Ezekiel 20:34): “countries,” and: “peoples,” coalesce. As “the bringing into” corresponds to: “the leading out,” so Jehovah’s “contending” corresponds to the “gathering.” The “dispersion” becomes a gathering face to face, i.e., person opposite person—the people opposite the King who contends with them. In such a connection the idea of Hitzig and others is weak. They refer the expression to the great wilderness which separates Babylon from the lands on the shore of the Mediterranean, which lay in the way of the exiles who ultimately returned. It is almost analogous to the word “world” in the New Testament. Although Keil explains the “leading out,” etc. of Ezekiel 20:34 as neither local nor material, yet we do not understand it with him “of a spiritual separation from the heathen world” (to which they are immediately brought, Ezekiel 20:35), “lest they should be absorbed in it,” etc., but of an aggravation of their exiled condition, a spiritual experience of it, so that they should know and feel that they as the people of God were once more in the wilderness, but not at all in the same sense as before (Deuteronomy 8:15; Deuteronomy 32:10). [Cocceius with perfect right here points still farther forward to the Roman period.] The future “contending” (comp. Ezekiel 17:20) is compared in Ezekiel 20:36 to a former contention with their fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt. As the fathers, according to Ezekiel 20:27, are the second generation, which reached Canaan from the wilderness, the “contending” with them is to be referred not to Numbers 14:28 sq., but rather to such judicial scenes as Numbers 17:5-6; Numbers 17:10. The Babylonish exile was formerly called “wilderness of the peoples,” in relation to the “peoples” from among whom Israel (Ezekiel 20:34) was to be led thither; in like manner the Arabian wilderness, to which the expression “wilderness of the peoples” alludes, is called the wilderness of the land of Egypt, because the people had been led out into it from Egypt. They were not led thither as a punishment, although on account of their disobedience it often became a place of punishment; but the divine intention was to try them (to prove, Deuteronomy 8:2 sq.), from which resulted separation of individuals, purification, which was so strongly urged upon them in reference to Egypt, whither they were always looking back (Numbers 20:5; Numbers 21:5). While, therefore, the “contending” of Ezekiel 20:36 also includes chastisement, yet in the application of it to the future, Ezekiel 20:37, the idea of the separation—the purification of the people through divine chastisement is the prevailing one. The judgments which God brought on Israel (Numbers 16:17; Numbers 16:20, affecting even Moses and Aaron!) were only purifying separations. The question is not that of a possible re-entrance into Canaan, so that, with reference to this result, the future guidance of Israel is represented as a repetition of their former guidance (Keil), nor with Neteler can we understand by: “the wilderness of the peoples,” Palestine (?); but Ezekiel 20:33 as well as Ezekiel 20:36 point back to Egypt, to the exodus thence, which Keil also on the other hand admits. [Hengst. supposes that the part taken by the exiles in the political intrigues of the home country brought upon them also severe sufferings (Jeremiah 29:21-22); but that by true repentance many may have been freed from participation in the punishment here threatened!!] They shall go out of the state of exile (Ezekiel 20:38), but this going out shall be a passing under the staff (the “contending,” in Ezekiel 20:35 sq., is here viewed in a new way). The underlying figure is that of the shepherd (Leviticus 27:32; Micah 7:14; Jeremiah 33:13), under whose staff the sheep were required to go individually in order to be inspected and numbered (Hitz.); but its application is here to be understood of the royal sceptre of Jehovah, agreeably to the expression: “rule over,” in Ezekiel 20:33. Comp. further Exodus 13:12; 1 Samuel 16:8. The meaning of the figurative expression is neither subjection to the government of God (Hengst.), nor a special guardianship of God (Keil), nor anything similar, but choice, with a very narrow inspection of individuals, the idea distinctly expressed in Ezekiel 20:38 as to separation and purification being the prominent one. The result intended by this royal inspection, as the parallel sentence: and bring you, etc., brings out more fully, alludes to the giving of the covenant-law at Sinai after the passage of the Red Sea (comp. Exodus 14:16). Under the bond (χָ ?ρֹ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, contr. for χָ ?ΰֲ ?ρֹ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, from the root ΰָ ?ρַ ?ψ) is a much preferable rendering to: under “the discipline (ιָ ?ρַ ?ψ?) of the covenant,” whether the penalties of the covenant only, or its promises also, be thought of. The law, which must not be conceived of apart from its promises and penalties, and which may be either a bond of love or an oppressive chain according to one’s personality, became, from the fact of men turning to it and observing its statutes, a medium of separation between heathenism and Judaism, and also between the people themselves. The extent to which this was the case is shown especially by the history of Pharisaism since the exile, both on its bright and its shady side. Ezekiel 20:38 now states explicitly what end is contemplated by the impending leading forth of the people in judgment. Hδvern. notes a paronomasia in εּ ?αָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊִ ?ι and δַ ?αְּ ?ψִ ?ιϊ.—Comp. Ezekiel 2:3.—Land of their wanderings, i.e. wherein they were strangers, Canaan is elsewhere called, Genesis 36:7; Exodus 6:4. Here, with a fine antithesis, it is the land of their exile.—μΰֹ ιָ ?αεֹ ?ΰ, Hengst.: “the rebels are here collected into one ideal person.” Keil, who understands the “leading forth” as an utter sweeping of them away, takes the singular in a distributive sense: not one of the transgressors shall enter in. It accords better with the context to regard: I will lead them forth, as containing a retrospective reference to Ezekiel 20:34, so that the rebels and transgressors in the close of the paragraph are again taken together with the whole people. Yet not to the land of Israel, would then say negatively what the “wilderness of the peoples” in Ezekiel 20:35 said positively, consequently that Jehovah will enter into judgment with them all (Ezekiel 20:35). The singular subject to μΰֹ ιָ ?αεֹ ?ΰ can therefore from ΰַ ?γְ ?ξַ ?ϊιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ be Israel. (Possibly even, with an eye to the inquirers of Eze 20:1, with a reference to the always doubtful question of the return of the ten tribes!?) With: and ye shall know, etc., the message is again directed to the persons who spoke to the prophet; if not to Israel in a special sense, at least to Israel in general. Ezekiel 20:39-44. The Promised Mercy of GodEze_20:39. Since judgment, as has been stated, approaches the house of Israel, every man who will not do otherwise may be commanded to go and serve his idols. The impending judgment will make a separation, and the future will belong to the people of God. Comp. Revelation 22:11. The holy irony of Him who knows that mercy is laid up for the future.—εְ ?ΰַ ?ηַ ?ψ is not to be translated: “also afterwards,” and coupled with serve, nor yet can it be joined with what follows imperatively, but it stands by itself, as if with a—.ΰִ ?ρΞ can be simply a conditional particle: if ye will not hearken (in the present) unto Me, then (εְ takes up εְ ?ΰַ ?ηַ ?ψ again) ye shall not farther, etc. The majority of expositors take it as a particle of swearing, introducing with the negative (ΰιο, with Part) an affirmative sentence, so that the sense would be: and afterwards ye will surely hearken unto Me, and ye will no longer profane My holy name, etc. (comp. Ezekiel 36:20). Ezekiel 20:40. The positive ground. Comp. Psalms 2:6, and Ezekiel 17:23.—They shall serve Me, in contrast to: “serve . … idols,” Ezekiel 20:39.—αָּ ?μΧ, and again λֻּ ?μֹּ ?δΧ, point to the healing of the breach between Judah and Israel. Comp. also Ezekiel 11:15. The emphatically repeated: there, just as in the contrasted Ezekiel 20:38, remains within the horizon of the Old Testament (comp. the New Testament expansion, John 4:20 sq.), as the form and clothing of the thought in the rest of the verse maintains the phraseology of the Old Testament worship. Ezekiel 20:41. The previous steps are now recapitulated. Through the leading out and gathering already brought into view in Ezekiel 20:34, the people, purified by judgment, shall be acceptable to Jehovah as a sweet savour (comp. Ezekiel 6:13), and in them as a holy people, anew consecrated to God, shall be exhibited to the heathen the holiness of Jehovah. Ezekiel 20:42. But then shall they also, as was assumed in Ezekiel 20:40 (“in the land”), return to the land of Israel (Ezekiel 20:38). Ezekiel 20:43 finally adds a portrait of the inner condition of the people—the complement to Ezekiel 20:40. Comp. Ezekiel 6:9; Ezekiel 14:22-23 (Ezekiel 16:61). Ezekiel 20:44. Conclusion. The knowledge of Jehovah from an experience of His gracious dealings with them for His name’s sake (comp. Ezekiel 20:9; Ezekiel 20:14). 1. The prophet may judge (Ezekiel 20:4), for Jehovah will manifest Himself as King to His people. Prophetic activity in interpreting and applying the divine law was always based on the royal might of God in relation to Israel. 2. The exile was a political and a religious question of the day. The former might easily be confounded with the latter. Therefore in the chapter before us the history of the people is simply opened up, and the exile is exhibited to their conscience as the righteous result of their own conduct. 3. The experience which succeeded to Egypt was the wandering in the wilderness, where the people were purified. The exile which followed Canaan was designed by God to accomplish a similar result, only deeper and more essential in its character, as an ever-increasing corruption had fastened upon Israel’s inner being. If, therefore, the wilderness of Egypt was especially an external experience, and the testing came from without, the exile was to be more decidedly an internal exile—a wilderness of the peoples—to the people of God, in order to give them a felt experience of the “world,” and of “anguish” in the world. 4. Since the still existing kingdom of Judah, and the people as a whole, were to be upbraided with sin, the kingdom of Israel, which had already sunk into the condition of exile, supplied the most appropriate materials for colouring the accusation. It had from the beginning adopted the way of the heathen, and maintained it almost without interruption. Because it had become like the heathen, it at last fell completely under the dominion of the heathen. And thus there was at hand a course pursued up to the point of judgment, from which a demonstrative argument could be deduced. 5. Already, with their self-willed abandonment of the sanctuary at Jerusalem, but above all with their enforced removal from the Holy Land, the kingdom of Israel became the “Diaspora,” instar omnium, the “dispersed among the Gentiles,” and “scattered in the countries.” 6. That which the history of the people testifies regarding their conduct is stated in the ever-repeated refrain of our chapter: “and they rebelled against Me,” etc. (Ezekiel 20:8; Ezekiel 20:13; Ezekiel 20:21). God’s leading (the objective in opposition to the subjective conduct just mentioned) shows itself throughout, on the other hand, as law according to Ezekiel 20:37, i.e. as a judicial statement (Ezekiel 20:7), as a formal enunciation of law (Ezekiel 20:11 sq.), as a recapitulation of the law which had been given (Ezekiel 20:18 sq.). Therewith threatening is connected (Ezekiel 20:8; Ezekiel 20:13; Ezekiel 20:21, also 33 sq., 38). God’s threat strengthens itself to an oath (Ezekiel 20:15; Ezekiel 20:23; Ezekiel 20:31; Ezekiel 20:33), had even been fulfilled as punishment (Ezekiel 20:15; Ezekiel 20:23; Ezekiel 20:25 sq.), and still remains to be similarly fulfilled (Ezekiel 20:34 sq., 38). But the patience and long-suffering of God (Ezekiel 20:9 sq., 14, 22, 28), His mercy (Ezekiel 20:17), walk side by side with the law from the beginning to the end; and just as life was promised to the people in the law itself (vers.11 sq., 21), so mercy promises the ultimate purification of the people (Ezekiel 20:32; Ezekiel 20:35; Ezekiel 20:37-38), so as to make them a sanctified “all” Israel, well-pleasing to God (Ezekiel 20:39 sq.). As Ewald expresses it: “In order to bring the redeemed to a proper recognition of their former great transgressions, and thus to confirm the other and still greater truth which lies in the ancient history, namely, that in the end, grace is still the deepest and the all-surviving element in Jehovah.” 7. “I am Jehovah, your God.”—On this the law is based, and this underlies the whole history of the people from the beginning to the end. (Ezekiel 20:5; Ezekiel 20:7; Ezekiel 20:9; Ezekiel 20:14; Ezekiel 20:19-20; Ezekiel 20:22; Ezekiel 20:44.) The history of God’s people is the evolution of the name of Jehovah, the people of God being in regard to it after the flesh, what the Son of God was after the Spirit. 8. “Not the old race, adhering to idolatry, but a race spiritually new, devoted to Jehovah in profound love and dependence, was to leave Egypt” (Hδv.). 9. The divine discourse of the prophet does not draw its materials from tradition apart from the Pentateuch, as from very different standpoints has been assumed by a Vitringa and a Vatke, in order to explain what the prophet states as to the condition of Israel in Egypt. Criticism would fain show therein a conflict between Ezekiel and the Pentateuch. But the evident dependence of the prophetic statements on the Pentateuch is made prominent throughout, and here also in Ezekiel 20. We note, besides what has been brought out in our exegesis, that the spirit of the prophets knew how to read “between the lines” of the history, while criticism attempts, at the most, to import its own spirit into the Holy Scriptures. 10. For the theological understanding of the chapter, the emphatic reiteration of the expression “wilderness” is important. Neteler has entitled the passage: “The people in two wildernesses.” Hengst. and Hδv. define the idea of the wilderness as “calamity, spiritual and bodily need.” As to the kernel of the matter, this, however, would be better: alone with God, when the judicial character of the leading of the people in question would not so distinctly refer to experiences of which the heathen peoples could be eye-witnesses. 11. “The precepts which God gave His people also imply, above all things, that they shall confess their sins, and seek forgiveness in the blood of atonement. This is required by the laws concerning the sin-offerings, which in the Mosaic law form the root of all the other offerings; the pass-over, which so strictly requires us to strive after the forgiveness of sins, and connects all salvation with it; the great day of atonement.” (Hengst.). 12. “The fundamental feature of life through sincere devotion to the law is holiness, and God, as the sanctifier of Israel, is therefore the law’s centre. This idea of the sanctification of the people through their God comes notably to the front in the Sabbath. It is the sign of God’s creative activity, as well as the expression of man’s relation to God: rest in God after life’s toil” (Hδv.). The life of man is therefore a divine one,—the life of God, just as the justifying righteousness which appeases the conscience and satisfies the law is also the righteousness of God. See Bδhr’s Symbolism. (“From the expression: ‘and also My Sabbaths,’ they could learn that the commands as to works in which the man lives who does them were not given with the view of making them attempt to live by works, but that they might renounce their own righteousness after learning what kind of a righteousness is essential to life; and since God had declared that it was His will to sanctify them, that they might believe that He who cannot make void His own law (the reward of life is connected with the doing of the commandments, to show that an obedience of this sort is required in order to gain life) would provide an offering by which their conscience could be cleansed, and a priest through whose obedience they could be made righteous, so that they might keep God’s commands, hate and avoid all that is opposed to them, from a spirit of grateful love,” Cocc.) 13. “Only those who truly fear God celebrate the Sabbath in a right sense, so that all that in the books of Moses attests the want of true godliness among the people in the wilderness involves at the same time the charge of desecrating the Sabbath” (Hengst.). “The Jews were careful to observe the Sabbath, but they missed its meaning and end” (Calv.), “for they perverted it to their corrupt, dead righteousness” (Cocc.). 14. [The command as to the Jewish Sabbath “must have been, and it was, intended not only to separate the people from their worldly employments, but also to call out their hearts in suitable exercises of faith and love to God, and in brotherly acts of kindness and good-will toward those around them. On no other account could its faithful observance be represented as indicative of a sound and healthful state of religion generally. And we might ask, without the least fear of contradiction, if the same practical value is not attached to the careful observance of the Lord’s day now by those who have an enlightened regard to the interests of religion? When this day ceases to be devoutly observed, all experience and observation testify that there never fails to ensue a corresponding decline in the life and actings of religion.”—P. F.—W. F.] 15. “God has so constituted human nature, that revolt from Him must be followed by total darkness and disorder; that no moderation in error and sin, no standing still at the middle point, is possible; that man, however willing he may be to stand still, must, against his will, sink from step to step. Revolt from God is the crime, excess in error and moral degradation the merited doom, from which all would willingly escape if it were in their power” (Hengst.). 16. The temptation (Genesis 22), in which Abraham, as representing all his descendants, the people who were to settle down in the land in which he wandered as a stranger, was taught experimentally the difference between Jehovah and Moloch, did not influence them as it ought to have done—they surrendered their first-born to the bloody cultus of the land; Abraham’s temptation became Israel’s judgment. 17. That Israel should become like the heathen would be repugnant to the nature of God, especially to His name Jehovah. The very reverse would be much more in harmony with it, namely, that the heathen should become like Israel. For the idea informed in this people, and for which it was chosen out of all peoples, is the idea of the people of God, with God as King and Lord (the idea of the theocracy), whereby Israel is at the same time the bearer of the idea of humanity as a whole; and just as this idea, conformably to creation, is, to be of God (τοῦθεοῦ, Luke 3:38), so is it realized through the restoration of man to God by redemption, whereby God becomes all in all (1 Corinthians 15:28), and men become His willing subjects as He becomes their God (Revelation 21:3). Now, as the realization of this idea of Israel, and of humanity generally, takes place in the fulness of time in the One Man, who is both Israel and “the Son of Man,” so His historical appearance is linked, according to the flesh, to Israel (this is the meaning of the genealogies of Jesus); but according to the Spirit there is developed out of Him the new humanity, which He Himself is in Spirit and truth, and which it was the office of Israel to prefigure. The pouring out of the Spirit promised by Him, shows that Israel had not become heathen (unless in so far as the languages were concerned), but that the heathen had been incorporated in Israel, Acts 2. Only this can be the spiritual fulfilment of Eze 20:40, according to the idea of the “all” Israel (λμδ). Every other would apply to a privileged nationality, and therefore to the flesh. That for a long time after the dissolution of the kingdom of Israel, Judah gave the tone to the Old Testament people of God; that from the very first the theocratic elements of the kingdom of Israel were attracted to Judah (2 Chronicles 11:13 sq.); that, like Benjamin, many from the other tribes returned with Judah from exile, so that it thereafter furnished a name for the whole people,—all that was a transient historical manifestation, as it was nothing more than that when the kingdom of Israel, on account of its size, its greater populalation, and in the consciousness of more fully representing the whole people, appropriated the name of the whole, and called itself Israel, under which name it was acknowledged by King Mesa on the recently discovered Moabitish stone. Ezekiel 20:40 sq. is undoubtedly Messianic, and in this sense apocalyptic. Klief., who includes in the idea of the Babylonish exile the present dispersion of the Jews, seeing in this the real wilderness of the peoples, makes Ezekiel 20:40-44 prophesy the gathering of the Jews, their conversion to Christ, and their return as a Christian people to their own land, and holds that God, after the θλῖψιςμεγάλη of the and (Revelation 12.) shall have intervened, will separate this believing Israel, together with all other believers, from the wicked, and openly establish them in the life everlasting. 18. “The heathen stood under the divine long-suffering (Romans 3:25); not so Israel, to whom God had so gloriously made Himself known. Wherein the heathen prosper, therein must Israel decline” (Hengst.). 19. Cocceius remarks on our chapter, that, “when the Jews had returned from Babylon under Zerubbabel and Ezra, along with those who adhered to them from all the tribes, they formed a unity, possessed a temple at Jerusalem, and became a single people under the same presidency. Thus matters continued under the rule of the Persians and also of the Greeks. But God freed them from all foreign authority, so that He alone was their King, and made them greater than in the days of their fathers, and the Asmonζaus ventured to assume the royal diadem,” etc. 20. Calvin’s prelections on Ezekiel end with the twentieth chapter, as to which Schipper says: “After he had completed this last prelection, that distinguished man Dr. John Calvin, who was previously ailing, began to feel himself much worse, which is the reason that he left off at the end of the twentieth chapter, and never finished the work so well begun.” HINTSEze_20:1. “Here we see that the people of God, even in exile, did not repair to magi, star-gazers, enchanters, and such like, but to the prophet, Deuteronomy 30:12 sq.” (C.)—“The fifth month is our month July. Thus the Spirit of God notes day and date” (Stck.).—It is enough to say merely that they came to inquire, for from the prophet’s mode of answering them we see that they made no inquiry as to deliverance and the way of salvation; they were troubled as to political things, the duration of the exile, the end of the Babylonish power, the issue of Zedekiah’s faithlessness. We too ask, Watchman, what of the night? rather than, How shall I find grace?—Why are we so concerned about the future? It will be like our past. We should be deeply concerned on account of the past.—“In our approaches to God, humility and reverence should be combined with a strong and assured faith, which must acquiesce in the authority of the one God, and yet must not object to hear God speak through His servants” (C.).—Summon thyself to the study of the prophets and apostles through whom God has spoken!—God will be inquired of, but still more should His will, which is sufficiently known to us, be done.—“To call on God, and yet not to obey Him, is an abomination in His sight. He heareth not sinners, John 9:31; Isaiah 1:15” (Tόb. Bib.). Ezekiel 20:2 sq. God’s suggestive silence, and His more suggestive answer.—God in the mouth, and idols in the heart, a most critical condition.—God speaks not the smallest word of comfort to hypocrites. “For hypocrites there is in the heart of God, and in the Holy Scriptures, no other counsel but to sincere repentance, Isaiah 55:7” (St.).—“Thus they were not in a condition to hear God’s word. God hides Himself from those who hear His word with their gaze fixed only on their idols. They have no part in God’s word” (Cocc.). Ezekiel 20:4. That is an upbraiding grounded on their ancestral sin, which therefore (Ezekiel 18) cannot be denied.—One should not merely touch (Ezekiel 20) ulcers, after the manner of the moral preacher, but cut them out according to the law of God. The former tickles, the latter causes pain. Here God impels to judge, and in the new covenant the word is always, Judge not! But the Son of God Himself, who yet was not sent into the world for judgment, becomes to the unbelieving a self-judgment. Here Ezekiel sets in motion God’s, and not man’s, judgment.—Fathers are judged in their sons, but sons may also be judged in their fathers. Ezekiel 20:5 sq. Three witnesses against Israel,—Egypt, the wilderness, Canaan.—“God anticipates men with His grace” (O.).—God’s election in relation to merit and demerit; not resting on the one, nor hindered by the other.—Circumcision was the sign of the election. The substance consisted in God’s willingness to be their God. The result of Israel’s election was the whole leading of the people; the choosing of a people for the preparation of humanity to be a praise to God’s glorious name,—an Israel out of all peoples.—“By no act of God’s good-will do we acquire desert, but by each we come under obligation” (Stck.).—If God is to be anything to a man, He must give him an experimental knowledge of Himself. The first experience of God is the recognition of His revelation in the word: the various experiences of His requiring, chastising, forgiving love, follow.—“Oh how many are the ways in which God makes Himself known to men as a gracious God! Acts 17:27-28” (St.).—“God lifts up His hand to swear; one day His hand will execute what He has sworn, the threatening as well as the promise” (C.).—“We call God our God by faith” (Stck.).—“The time when faith in Christ is bestowed on us, and we as it were hear the assurance, I, the Lord, am your God, is the day of our election. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ 10. The Approaching Judgment (Ezekiel 21) 1And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 2Son of man, set thy face toward the right, and drop toward the south, and prophesy against the forest of the field in the south; 3And say to the forest of the south, Hear the word of Jehovah. Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I am about to kindle in thee a fire, and it will devour every green tree in thee, and every dry tree. The flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces shall be scorched in it 4[by it], from the south to the north. And all flesh shall see that I, Jehovah, 5have kindled it; and it shall not be quenched. And I said, Ah! Lord God, 6they say to me [of me], Doth he not speak parables? And the word of 7Jehovah came to me, saying, Son of man, set thy face toward Jerusalem, and drop toward the holy places, and prophesy toward the land of Israel, 8and say to the land of Israel, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I am against thee, and I have drawn My sword out of its scabbard, and will cut off 9from thee the righteous and the wicked. Because I cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked, therefore shall My sword go forth out of its 10scabbard against all flesh from south to north. And all flesh shall know that I, Jehovah, have drawn My sword out of its scabbard, nor shall it return 11again. And thou, son of man, sigh with breaking of loins, and with bitterness 12shalt thou sigh before their eyes. And it shall be, when they say to thee, Wherefore dost thou sigh? that thou shalt say, For the tidings, because it cometh; and every heart melts, and all hands hang down, and every spirit faints [is dulled], and all knees are dissolved into water. Lo, it comes, and has 13happened: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And the word of Jehovah came 14to me, saying, Son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith Jehovah; say, A 15sword, a sword, sharpened and also furbished [is it]! To kill with slaughter it is sharpened; furbished [is it], that it may glitter as lightning! Or can 16[shall] we rejoice over the staff [sceptre] of My son, despising every tree!? And He gave it [it is given] to be furbished, that it may be taken into the hand; it is a sword sharpened and furbished, that it may be put into the hand of the 17slayer. Cry and howl, son of man, for it shall be upon [against] My people, upon all the princes of Israel; they are given up [thrown] to the sword along 18with My people, therefore smite upon the thigh. For it makes trial [trial is made]. And how?—If also the despising staff [sceptre] shall not be!—Sentence 19of the Lord Jehovah. And thou, son of man, prophesy, and smite hand against hand, and the sword shall be doubled to the third time; it is the sword of the pierced-through, the sword of one pierced through, of the 20mighty, that penetrates to them. In order that the heart may faint, and the stumbling-blocks be multiplied at all their gates, have I given the threatening 21of the sword. Ah! made for flashing, drawn for slaughter! Unite thyself, turn to the right; direct thyself, turn to the left, whither thy face is appointed. 22And I also will strike My hands together, and I will cause My fury to rest.23I, Jehovah, have spoken. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 24And thou, son of man, set thee two ways for the coming of the sword of the king of Babylon; out of one land shall they both proceed; and make a finger-post 25—at the head of the way of a city make [it]. Thou shalt set a way for the coming of the sword to Rabbah of the sons of Ammon, and to Judah in 26Jerusalem, [the] inaccessible. For the king of Babylon stands at the mother of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination; shakes the arrows 27together, inquires at the teraphim, inspects the liver. In his right hand is the divination “Jerusalem,” to place [battering-] rams, to open the mouth in slaughter, to lift up the voice, in the war-cry, to place rams against the gates, 28to cast a mount, to build siege-towers. And it is to them as lying divination in their eyes that have sworn oaths for themselves; and [yet] he remembers iniquity, 29in order to take [them]. Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because ye shall remember [bring to remembrance] your iniquity, since your transgressions are made bare, so that your sins are seen in all your doings, because ye are come 30to remembrance, ye shall be taken with the hand. And thou, pierced-through, wicked one, prince of Israel, whose day has come at the time of the iniquity 31of the end, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Remove the head-band, take off the crown. This [is] not this. The low is [to be] exalted, and the high [to be] 32brought low. Overturned, overturned, overturned will I make it. Yea, this [also] is not, till He comes to whom the judgment belongs, and I will give it to 33Him. And thou, son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah concerning the sons of Ammon, and their reproach; even say, A sword, a 34sword, drawn for slaughter, furbished sufficiently to glitter! While they see vanity for thee, while they divine a lie to thee,—to lay thee upon the necks of the pierced-through, of the wicked, whose day has come at the time 35of the iniquity of the end. Let it return to its sheath. In the place where 36thou wast formed, in the land of thy origin will I judge thee. And I will pour out My indignation upon thee, with the fire of My wrath will I blow upon thee, and will give thee into the hand of consuming men, forgers of 37destruction. Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt not be remembered, for I, Jehovah, have spoken. Ezekiel 21:7. Another reading: ΰμξχγων, ad sanctuarium eorum. Syr. Sept. et Arabs. have the suffix. Ezekiel 21:14. Sept.: ... ὀξυνουκ. θυμωθητι, (15) ὁπωςσφαγια, ὀξυνουὁπωςγενηεἰςστιλβωσιν, ἑτοιμηεἰςπαραλυσιν̓σφαζε, ἐξουδενει, ἀπωθουπανξυλον.—Vulg.: Qui moves sceptrum … succidisti omne lignum. Ezekiel 21:17. ... αροτησονξτιτηνχειρασου,—Vulg.: … Israel qui fugerant— Ezekiel 21:18 ὁτιδεδικαιωται. Καιτιεἰκαιφυληἀπωσθη;—Vulg.: … quia probatus est. Et hoc cum sceptrum subverterit, et non erit— Ezekiel 21:19. ... ἡτριτηῥομφαιατραυματειωνἐστιν, ῥομφαιατραυματειωνἡμιγαλη, κ. ἐκστησειαὐτους,—ac triplicetur gladius interfectorum: hic est gl. occisionis magnζ, qui obstupescere eos facit,—There is a reading: δηψγϊ, perterrefaciens). Another reading: μλν. Ezekiel 21:20. ... Κ. πληθυνθωσινοἱἀσθενουντεςἐπιπασανπυληναὐτων. Κ. ταραδεδονταιεἰςσφαγιαῥομφαιας, εὐγαγονενεἰςσφαγην, εὐγεγονενεἰςστιλβωσιν.—et multiplicat ruinas. In omnibus … conturbationem gladii acuti et limati ad … amicti ad cζdem. Ezekiel 21:21. Another reading: δϊΰηψι, retro ito vel: mora, retarda. Ezekiel 21:24. Et manu capiet conjecturam, in capite … conjiciet. Ezekiel 21:26. Sept.: ... τ. ὰρχαιανὁδον … ἀναβρασαιῥαβδιακ. ἐπερωτησαιἐντοιςγλυπτοις— Ezekiel 21:27 Ἐκδεξιωναὐτουἑγενετο … στομαἐνβοη. Ad dexteram ejus facta est … os in cζde— Ezekiel 21:28. Κ. αὐτοςαὐτοιςὡςμαντευομενοςμαντειανἐνωτιοναὐτων, κ. αὐτοςἀναμιμνησκωνἀδικιαςαὐτωνμνησθηναι. Eritque quasi consulens frustra oraculum in oculis corum, et sabbatorum otium imitans; ipse autem recordabitur iniquitatis ad copiendam.Ezekiel 21:29. For αλμ, read ελμ. Ezekiel 21:30. ... βεβηλε, ἀνομε—Vulg.: profane … dies in temp, iniquitatis prζfinita. Ezekiel 21:31. Ἀφειλου … ἐπεθουαὐτητονστεφανον, οὐτοιαυτηἐσται. ἐταπεινωσαςτο … ὑψωφας.—Vulg.: … nonne hζc est, quζ humilem sublevavit— Ezekiel 21:32. Ἀδικιαν … θησομαιαὐτην, οὐτοιαυτηἐσται … ὡκαθηκει—Vulg.: … ponam eam; et hoc non factum est, donec— Ezekiel 21:35. Ἀποστρεφε, μηκαταλυσης …Ezekiel 21:36. ... βαρβαρων—Vulg.: … insipientium. REMARKSTo join Ezekiel 21:1-5 with Ezekiel 20 (as is done in the Eng. Ver.) would be against the connection; while, as the first part of Ezekiel 21, it both admirably introduces the whole, and in particular, by Ezekiel 21:5, paves the way for the explanation in Ezekiel 21:6 sq. Ezekiel 21:1-5 [ch. Ezekiel 20:45-49].—A Picture. Ezekiel 21:2. Comp. Ezekiel 2:1 to Ezekiel 6:2 (Ezekiel 13:17); Luke 9:51. The right, according to Ezekiel 21:7, is Jerusalem. Drop is after Deuteronomy 32:2 a very common expression for prophetic discourse. It is suggested by the rain or the dew, and points to the place of its origin,—above, and also to the beneficial influence which it is intended to exert, and is used even when the discourse does not contain promises merely, but also threatening and judgment, as is the case here exclusively, and to a large extent also in Deuteronomy 32. May it not also hint at the concise, abrupt style of composition adopted in the chapter? γָּ ?ψεֹ ?ν, the bright, sunny south, in Ezekiel 21:7 the expression is: the “holy places.”—πֶ ?βֶ ?α (either “dryness,” or also from “brightness”) defines the forest of the field, more precisely, as situated in the south, pertaining to the south country (Ezekiel 21:3), as Judea is often described. The threefold direction symbolizes perhaps the divine element in his commission. For field, comp. Ezekiel 17:5; “land of Israel” in Ezekiel 21:7 corresponds to it—the fruitful native soil of the whole people; Hengst.: because an agricultural people are here treated of. Forest, figurative for people, on account of the density of the population, but by no means with any reference to the degeneration of the noble vine (Isaiah 5) to a wild forest (Umbr.), or the impending reduction of the land to an uncultivated and forest condition, nor yet on account of its forest stretches; just as the southern definition of the direction from the standpoint of the exiled prophet is not to be taken in a precisely geographic sense. Besides, that which is said of the north in Ezekiel 1:4 is here confirmed. Ezekiel 21:3. Ezekiel 6:3.—The fire suits both the forest-figure and the idea of Jehovah’s avenging wrath. Comp. Ezekiel 1. (Ezekiel 15) Comp. Ezekiel 17:24. Green and dry become in Ezekiel 21:8 “righteous” and “wicked” (Luke 23:31).—μַ ?δֶ ?αֶ ?ϊωַׁ ?μְ ?δֶ ?αֶ ?ϊ, assonant ascending climax, to which the result corresponds. Endeavouring, in a far-fetched way, to conform to the figure, Hitzig interprets faces of the outside, as that which the fire first consumes. A similar view is maintained by Schnurrer in a special dissertation on the previous chapter,—“on all sides—out and out.” Ezekiel 21:4 explains “all faces” by: all flesh—all Israel; and so εְ ?ψָ ?ΰε also can be understood as: seeing to their own hurt (Ezekiel 21:9-10). Hengst. makes the “faces” stand for the persons, as the material which the fire is to consume. Comp. Ezekiel 5:10. [Cocc. refers it to the judgment on Babylon, which was to follow the judgment on Israel.]—All flesh, equivalent to: every man. What does not pass speedily away, but endures to completion,—that which abides, makes on short-lived, fading man the impression of eternal duration. Ezekiel 21:5. Is it a complaint, owing to experiences following on what has just been propounded, or to his experience generally as a prophet? Perhaps an indirect petition for a less figurative message; as Hitzig, following the Chald.: “accept my petition.”—Comp. Ezekiel 17:2 (2 Corinthians 4:4).—Transition to Ezekiel 21:6 sq. Ezekiel 21:6-12 [1–7]. The Interpretation (through the Sword) It is noteworthy that the foregoing figure is explained by another (Matthew 13:10). Ezekiel 21:7. Comp. Ezekiel 21:2.—Holy places (comp. Ezekiel 7:24). Hengst. refers the plural to the glory of the one sanctuary, and understands it of “the spiritual abode of the people.” Others have thought of the individual buildings of the temple, its two or three parts. [Cocc.: “because many buildings were erected by men in addition to those authorized by God, or because Ezekiel prophesies not only of Solomon’s, but at the same time of Zerubbabel’s temple.”] Ezekiel 21:8. The land of Israel, equivalent to: “the forest of the south,” Ezekiel 21:3. What follows is also parallel. The explanatory figure is the well-known one (Ezekiel 5, 6) of the sword.—The righteous and the wicked (comp. at Ezekiel 3:18 sq.). According to Hengst., not in contradiction to Ezekiel 9:4, “for if two suffer the same, yet it is not the same (Romans 8:28).” The contrast is to be taken like young and old, rich and poor, similarly to Matthew 9:13. Those whom you call righteous and wicked,—all, fall under the power of the sword. With which Ezekiel 21:9 harmonizes; for all flesh, etc., points to the whole extent of the Jewish territory as the field for its exercise. [“As is manifest from the whole nature of the representation, it is the merely external aspect of the visitation which the prophet has in his eye. The sword of the Lord’s judgment, he announced, was to pass through the land, and accomplish such a sweeping overthrow, that all, without exception, would be made to suffer in the fearful catastrophe. This did not prevent, however, but that there might be, in the midst of the outward calamities which were thus to burst like a mighty tempest over the land, a vigilant oversight maintained, and special interpositions of Providence exercised in behalf of the pious remnant who still continued faithful to the covenant of God. It was this distinguishing goodness to some, even amid the horrors of a general desolation, which, as we showed before, was the real object of that sealing of God’s servants on the forehead in a former vision; while here, on the other hand, it is merely the general desolation itself which is contemplated by the prophet. And the very circumstance that he should now have looked so exclusively on the outward scene of carnage and distress, which he descried in the approaching future, seemed to say that this was to be the grand feature of the time, and that the special interpositions which were to be put forth in behalf of the better portion would be so few that they scarcely required to be taken into account.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 233, 234.—W. F.]—Others: on the ground of this certain universal destruction in Israel, a still more extensive judgment shall take place, e.g. on the Ammonites. [Cocc. thinks of all wars, etc. up to the subjugation of the nations to Christ.] Ezekiel 21:10 recalls, however, Ezekiel 21:4. There: “it shall not be quenched,” here: nor shall it return. In other words, a full end. Some see the distinction between this and earlier judgments indicated here. Ezekiel 21:11. Symbolical description of intensest expression of sorrow. With breaking, etc., when the prophet sinks down like one whose loins are broken, and who is unable to stand upright (Deuteronomy 33:11). [Others: a pain which can break the seat of man’s strength; or as spasmodic pains; or as in travail-pangs; or with girdle burst asunder, etc. Ewald; smiting on the thigh.] Quite conceivable, without any hypocrisy, owing to Ezekiel’s sympathy with his people. Comp. Romans 9:1 sq. In bitterness, the pain at the same time audibly expresses itself. They shall become aware of it (before their eyes). Ezekiel 21:12. Ezekiel 7:26; Ezekiel 7:2 sq. That which to others is merely tidings, is to the prophet already coming, or it is to him a “thing heard” (Umbr.: a revelation made at an earlier time), which is passing into fulfilment; therefore his pain. But they shall be compelled to experience in themselves what they perceive in him. In all, courage gives place to terror, activity to prostration, counsel to perplexity. No one holds out any longer; as to which comp. Ezekiel 7:17.—It is not merely coming, i.e. on the way, but that which the tidings bode, which they actually are (Ezekiel 21:13 sq.), is as good as already accomplished. Ezekiel 21:13-22 [8–17]. The SwordThe prophet’s bitter pain (Ezekiel 21:11) is audibly expressed in this sword-song, as it has been called. Ezekiel 21:14. The subject of the tidings emphatically repeated as a sword.—(δεּ ?ηַ ?γָּ ?δ, perf. Hophal from ξְ ?ψεּ ?θָ ?δ—.ηָ ?γַ ?γ, partic, pass.) Ezekiel 21:15. It shall slay, and even before it proves its sharpness, terrify (δֱ ?ιֵ ?δ, infinitive). αָּ ?ψָ ?χ, from its gleaming brightness. (Deuteronomy 32:41) ξֹ ?ψָ ?θָּ ?δ, partic. Pual for ξְ ?ξֹ ?ψָ ?θָ ?δ, with the euphonic dag. forte.—The close of the verse is a crux interpretum. The abrupt statement of the contrary to that which was demanded of the prophet by Jehovah in Ezekiel 21:11 is intelligible, and all the more so as an inquiry as to the reason for his exhibition of pain of heart has been already presupposed in Ezekiel 21:12. Or can [shall] we rejoice, etc.? In this case the prophet can associate himself with Jehovah, while “crying,” etc., again (Ezekiel 21:17) remains his occupation alone. The latter is made all the more prominent by the clause: “Can we rejoice?” The staff, in accordance with Ezekiel 19:11 sq., is to be understood of the sceptre, and thus of the kingdom (comp. Ezekiel 16:13). My son must be the same as “My people” in Ezekiel 21:17—namely, Judah; which is all the more appropriate, as there is before us the promise of Gen 49:8 sq. (see Ezekiel 19), which was also confirmed to David, 2 Samuel 7:23. The sceptre of Judah, on account of this promise to bless Israel,—Jehovah regarding it as His own,—is perpetual. Despising every tree, conformably to Ezekiel 17:24,—every other prince and king. (May not, conformably to Ezekiel 21:3, allusion be also made to the man-despising wickedness (Ezekiel 21:30) of the last Jewish kings, so as to yield the very striking sense: Or could we rejoice in the reigning wickedness which the sword makes an end of!?). The construing of the masculine ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?θ as a feminine (which Rosenm. calls the supreme difficulty of the passage) is sufficiently explained by the underlying idea of lordship. (See Hδv. and Rosenm.) Therefore: in respect of the sword, is there room for any feeling but pain? Could there be joy over the kingdom, which shall not depart from Judah, according to the blessing which rests on it, and the promise made to David,—joy that Judah still survives, while the princes of Israel’s kingdom have long since passed away?! Should we be able to rejoice? Even this kingdom is about to fall beneath the sword, etc. Ezekiel 21:17 sq., 19, 30 sq. But doubtless the Messiah will also come, Ezekiel 21:32. The connection decidedly recommends this interpretation. One must remember what the kingdom and the last remnant in Jerusalem were, even in the lament of Jeremiah (Lamentations 5:15). [Other interpretations: “Shall we rejoice, namely, over this sword, which despises the stem (?) of My son Israel, and every tree?” Or ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?θ is taken as the chastening rod (?) of Israel, which this sword is, and which rod in hardness and solidity surpasses every other wood (Rashi). Hengst.: the punishment hanging over Israel exceeds in rigour all other punishments, according to the law set forth, Luke 12:46. (“We—I and thou—spoken from the soul of the people.”) Hδvern. takes ΰε ironically: “or should (πָ ?ρִ ?ιν = πָ ?ωִׂ ?ιωׂ (projecting) with a play on πָ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ) the sceptre of My son be haughty (Exodus 4:21; Hosea 11:1; Genesis 49:9; comp. therewith 1 Kings 22:11; Deuteronomy 33:17), despising every tree (with reference to all other powers)?” Umbr.: “The rod of My Son—that which concerns Him—despises every (feeble) tree, has transformed itself into unbending iron.”] Ezekiel 21:16. The most probable subject of εַ ?ιִ ?ϊֵּ ?ο is the “son,”—Judah itself prepared the Chaldean sword of vengeance. Comp. Ezekiel 19:14. Or indefinitely: it was given. Ezekiel 21:17. As the joy was groundless (Ezekiel 21:15), so all the more is the emotion of Eze 21:11 enjoined, Ezekiel 9:8; Ezekiel 11:13.—That which δָ ?ιְ ?ϊָ ?δαְ would say both as to the people and the princes of Israel is expressed by ξְ ?βεּ ?ψֵ ?ιΧ (part. pass. Kal of ξָ ?βַ ?ψ). Others: “Terrors (ξְ ?βεּ ?ψִ ?ιν from βεּ ?ψ) because of (ΰֶ ?μ) the sword being upon (ΰֶ ?ϊ) My people.” Which, however, says too little in this connection.—Upon the thigh, as women upon the breast; pain, terror. Ezekiel 21:18. For, resumes what is said in the previous verse.—αֹ ?ηַ ?ο, proving, trying; or impersonal perf. Pual, trial is made. Hδv.: “for there is a proving” in relation to the judgments of God. Too far-fetched. Hengst.: “for (it is) a trial.” A brief statement of the threatening character of the impending period. Phillips.: “for a purification must take place.” Consequently, either of the past (as Rashi), of the sufferings whereby the people have already been tried, or with reference to the future. According to the connection, the trial, if not spoken directly of the sword, must be thought of in relation to its terrible murderous violence, as shown in Ezekiel 21:17.—εּ ?ξָ ?δ, briefest continuation, but rather an exclamation than a thought. What, in fine, when people and prince are doomed to the sword,—when even the scornful (become inhuman in its arrogance, comp. Ezekiel 21:15) kingdom of Judah shall now be brought to an end? [Rashi: And what will happen to My son when the sword overtakes him? He shall perish. Kimchi: The sword will be for trying. And what if that sword, despising the stem of Israel also, should not smite it? There would be no trial. Hδv.: “And how? if the sceptre is still so arrogant, it shall not stand.” Hengst.: “And how? should the despising rod (the punishment that far outstrips all other punishments) not be?” Keil: When even the sceptre of Judah fails to show the might expected from it, what shall then be? Neteler “And how? if also the sceptre of the despiser (Jerusalem) shall not be!”] Ezekiel 21:19. Comp. at Ezekiel 6:11. The gesture here is the sign of an impending energetic action (Hengst). To say that it expresses lively excitement of feeling is little; rather it arouses the sword to demand redoubled slaughter, which immediately follows. One stroke shall not be enough, but the strokes are repeated. Not that Ezekiel shall call out the following words, repeating them three times; nor yet is threefold doubling (?) nor threefold multiplying meant (as doubling is the thing in question). But once, twice, and yet a third time a double sword-stroke, to wit, with reference to the people, princes, and king, so that what is stated before (Ezekiel 21:17-18) is compressed. [Klief.: For the third time the sword is a slayer, after it had previously come doubled (twice); the number three is symbolical.] It is called the sword of the pierced-through, from the multitudes whom it pierces. Hδv.: the sword of the slain.—Sword of one pierced through, of the mighty. The subject is indefinite, but becomes definite in the adjective. “Among the crowd of the slain there is also one pierced through, made altogether like to them, who is the great one” (Hδv). As the sword-song throughout keeps the kingdom in view, the king (Ezekiel 21:30) is undoubtedly referred to, to wit, Zedekiah. The fact that his sons were slain before his eyes, that his own eyes were put out (2 Kings 25:7), that he died in bonds in Babylon (Jeremiah 52:11), especially when one considers how the context as well as other passages point, sufficiently justifies the application of the “pierced-through” one to him; so that it is not to be referred to “the great” collectively, nor to the wicked Chaldee king (! ?), nor to “the great sword of the slain which surrounds them.” (Comp. Keil in opposition to Hitzig.) δַ ?ηֹ ?γֶ ?ψֵ ?ϊ, from ηָ ?γַ ?ψ. Gesen.: to surround, to besiege, “lies in wait for them.” That penetrates to them, with an allusion to ηֶ ?γֶ ?ψ, the inner chamber. The old translations: which puts them in terror. Ezekiel 21:20. In order that; that which will abundantly come to pass is also abundantly expressed. The intention made prominent by being placed in the forefront. ΰִ ?αְ ?ηַ ?ϊ is found here only = threatening, or quivering, or shaking, or destroying, etc.; or a misprint for θִ ?αְ ?ηַ ?ϊ (shambles of the sword). But whatever the precise meaning of the word be, it qualifies the sword, so that by means of it the courage of the people fails, and at all their gates obstructions lie on which they stumble,—either “crowds of corpses hard by the gates where the besieged made their sallies,” or circumstances which exposed them to slaughter. The flashing explains the fainting, etc.; the slaughter points to the stumbling-blocks.—Ezekiel 6:11. Abrupt exclamation of the prophet.—ξְ ?ςֻ ?θָ ?δ, ἁπ. λεγ.; meaning: polished, sharpened (Gesen.); Meier: whetted; Hδv.: drawn; others the very opposite: covered, still in the sheath. Ezekiel 21:21. Address to the sword. Up to this point no more than one sword has been spoken of, so that the one must be summoned to ally itself with all other possible swords. But the concentration of the thrice-repeated double stroke in a single stroke, which would better correspond with Ezekiel 21:19, could be the meaning. Or it is to collect its energies for the directions which are to be presently given it. [Hitzig reads: “turn thyself backwards,” and completes δָ ?ωִׂ ?ιξִ ?ι supplying τָּ ?πֶ ?ικָ; “turn thyself forwards,” in order to procure the two additional directions to right and left. Ew.: “Collect thyself southwards, assail northwards, whithersoever thy points are appointed.”] Hδv. connects: “Turn thyself with all vigour to the right,” and (corresponding to this): “direct (thy face, thy edge) to the left!” There are, however, four words which depict the activity and rapidity of the individual sword-strokes; perhaps they are also military commands? If δָ ?ωִׂ ?ιξִ ?ι and δִ ?ϊΰַ ?ηֲ ?γִ ?ι correspond, then the rendering must be: “attention,” “to your post!” (Gesen., Hengst.) Besides, it is perhaps preparatively to the following paragraph as to Jerusalem and Ammon that only a twofold direction, “right” and “left,” is specified. The destination whither, etc. concludes the passage. [Cocc. is not amiss in regarding ΰָ ?πָ ?δ as an interrogative; Hitzig does the same.] Ezekiel 21:22. Comp. Ezekiel 21:19. Jehovah makes the gesture of the prophet His own. Comp. further Ezekiel 16:42; Ezekiel 5:13. What a rest, and, going before it, what an agitation! Ezekiel 21:23-29. The King of Babylon against JerusalemA symbolical action, as in Ezekiel 21:11 (17, 19). Hengst., as always, makes it belong to the internal world; but what would have been the meaning of a command of this sort, were it not to be carried out externally? The whole point lies in its external representation. It is a demonstration ad oculos (Ezekiel 4:1 sq.). Ezekiel is to place before himself on a table or tablet a sketch of the nature mentioned, by means of cutting or engraving, as may be surmised from αָּ ?ψֵ ?ΰ, Ezekiel 21:24.—The two ways already point to another reference besides that to Jerusalem.—The sword of the king of Babylon is the “tidings” which come (Ezekiel 21:12); into his murdering “hand” (Ezekiel 21:16) this approaching sword is given.—The one land (or land of one, namely, the Babylonish king) from which both ways shall proceed, owing to the manner in which it is emphasized, leads one already to suppose that both ways were originally one, which at a later point was parted into two.—ιָ ?γ, the finger-post which here points the way to a (still indefinite) city. At the head of the way, i.e. where the way in question begins, the hand shall be formed. Ezekiel 21:25. More particular description of the way, according to which it appears as two ways (hence: for the coming of the sword, as in Ezekiel 21:24), with the finger-post for guide. As to Rabbah, the capital city of the Ammonites, see Deuteronomy 3:11. The city at the head of whose way the finger-post stands can properly mean Rabbah only, from the fact of its being first mentioned; and this points it out as the place lying nearest on the way of the coming sword, so that (as Hengst. rightly remarks) the human probability was that the vengeance of the king of Babylon would begin with Ammon, which had provoked it by adhering to the same anti-Chaldean coalition (Jeremiah 27:3). As if less exposed, behind it appears Judah, more precisely defined by Jerusalem; which supports our way of taking Judah-Jerusalem in Ezekiel 19. (See Doct. Reflec. there.) In, because Judah exists essentially in Jerusalem; and the way of the sword goes thither, so that the sword rests there. Its strength, its inaccessible elevation, shall be merely nominal (Deuteronomy 28:52). Ezekiel 21:26. Even the king of Babylon is uncertain which way to choose.—Mother of the way, is immediately explained by: the head of two ways, to be the point whence they branch off like two daughters from the way which had previously been one. [Hδv. avails himself of the Arabic idiom, according to which “mother of the way” means the great military road, along (ΰֶ ?μ) which Nebuchadnezzar is about to proceed, which then divides into two ways.]—The tacit contrast between: to use divination, and: to “prophesy” (Ezekiel 21:19; Ezekiel 21:14; Ezekiel 21:7; Ezekiel 21:2) is interesting; they are nevertheless unified by the divine will. (Comp. at Deuteronomy 18:10.) Perhaps on account of this divine element in the background, it is carried out in a threefold manner, according to the symbolism of numbers.—Does the arrow-oracle refer to the significations of χμμ, “light,” or “gleaming,” so that the divination is founded on the fact of the one flying more swiftly than the other, as being the lighter, or on the fact of its shining more brightly? It is the simplest way, however, to think of two arrows, the one marked “Rabbah,” the other “Jerusalem,” being put into a vessel, perhaps a helmet, when the decision is made according as the one or the other is first drawn or shaken out; unless the quarter to which the head of the lighter arrow points on falling out, either right or left, be the ground of the decision. Comp. Hδv. on the passage.—It is impossible to decide as to the method of consulting the teraphim. See Winer, Realw.; Herzog, Realencycl. Ezekiel 16:32. Israel brought them out of Chaldea, Genesis 31:19; Genesis 31:34. According to Hδv.: gods of fortune; Hengst.: intermediate gods, serving for the investigation of the future. Hδv. supposes a transference of the Hebrew popular faith to Babylonish divinities analogous to Gad and Meni. Hitzig: his household gods, private idols (θέραπες). As to the inspection of the liver, see Hδvernick’s Commentary. Such circumstances were taken into account as its condition, size, whether large, with inwardly bent lobes, etc., whether dry, defective, ulcerated, etc. Ezekiel 21:27. In his light hand is the divination, requires to be understood neither as: into his right hand came, etc., nor yet, with Hitzig, of the arrow-lot in particular, which pointed to Jerusalem, if it be only stated that Jerusalem was designated by the divination ceremony as the object to be attacked,—therefore, the “right hand.” “The right hand is employed; he has the decision spiritually therein; is determined in his actions by the decision given for Jerusalem in its three forms” (Hengst.). Hence there immediately follows: μָ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?ρΧ. Comp. at Ezekiel 4:2. To open the mouth, etc., either: the battle-cry calling and exciting them to destroy, or (with Jun.): to open a mouth (breach) in the wall by destroying and piercing it. [Hengst.: “with slaughter,” which is virtually contained in the slaughter-cry. Hδv.: here, the cry of the besiegers according to its intention, afterwards according to its outward expression.] As the siege is the thing in question, the expression: rams, is repeated, with special reference to the gates. As to the rest, comp. at Ezekiel 4:2 (Ezekiel 17:17). Ezekiel 21:28. While the oracle determines the Chaldeans to proceed in this way, that which the prophet proclaims on the point is, to the Jews, as a lying divination in their eyes, inasmuch as they rely on the visible fact that Jerusalem still stands before their eyes.—ωְׁ ?αֻ ?ςֵ ?ι, ωְׁ ?αֻ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ, apposition clause: “who have sworn oaths” (Gesen.), and these for themselves (μָ ?δֶ ?ν). And this circumstance, owing to their consciousness of infidelity towards the king of Babylon (comp. Ezekiel 17), must make the near approach of his unlingering vengeance in the highest degree probable. The latter (and he remembers) therefore assists their faithless memory in an active way (ςָ ?εֹ ?ο, Ezekiel 18:30), so that they are taken and crushed by punishment (Ezekiel 14:5). [Other interpretations:—Kimchi: Because the Chaldeans had sworn oaths to them (or: the Chaldeans were to them, as the oath of oaths, the most sacred oath), they were bound by oath to them, so that Nebuchadnezzar must first remember their treachery against him. Cocc. refers μָ ?δֶ ?ν in both cases to the Babylonians, to whom the oracle appeared delusive, because they remembered the strength of Jerusalem and the fate of Sennacherib; whereupon the Chaldean divines made repeated protestations, and some one then called to mind the guilt of the Jews, who, having fallen away from their God, were given into the hand of the king of Babylon. There is a whole story on the subject, as to which see Targ., Rashi,—namely, that Nebuchadnezzar inquired at the oracle forty-nine times, and always received the answer, Besiege Jerusalem. (Similarly Eich., Schn.) Hδv.: “Oaths of oaths are to them,” namely, from God; so that the Jews relied on God’s most holy promises, which were assured to them (!). To which, however, the sin of Judah stood in opposition, which Jehovah, as her husband, would bring to remembrance (Numbers 5:15). Hengst.’s view, who translates similarly, is at all events better: “that which was sworn to them by oath,” so that “the sworn of the oaths” is the announcement of destruction, sworn to them by oath (“as truly as I live”) in various ways, which they repelled as a delusion, while the prophet, behind whom the Almighty stands, makes known to them anew His irrevocable decree. “In this way Judah brings to remembrance (Ezekiel 21:29) the iniquity, which it was its duty to atone for by sincere repentance.” Umbr.: But the inhabitants of the city live on in blind confidence, in spite of the most sacred protestations of God, etc. Yet Jehovah brings guilt to remembrance, so that Jerusalem shall at last be overtaken by punishment. Ewald: “They thought they should have weeks upon weeks,” while He (as their adversary—God) “recalls the (their) guilt (faithlessness towards Him), as a sufficient cause for allowing them to be besieged and taken.”] Ezekiel 21:29. It seems most appropriate to the previous context to regard them as brought to remembrance, and thus everything else stands in close connection with that fact.—Ezekiel 16:57.—Ezekiel 20:43.—Ewald: “Because ye come to remembrance, ye shall be taken by the hand.” Phillips.: “Because He hath brought sin to your remembrance, since, etc., because they are brought to your remembrance, ye shall be taken by His hand.” Rosenm.: Because ye are remembered—before Me.—αַּ ?λַּ ?σ is equivalent to: violently (Ezekiel 12:13; Ezekiel 19:4). Usually it is understood of the minister of divine vengeance (Hengst.).—Nebuchadnezzar, with reference to Ezekiel 21:16. Ezekiel 21:29 in connection with Ezekiel 21:28 forms the transition—the introduction to the following paragraph. Ezekiel 21:30-32 [25–27]. The Prince of IsraelA NOTE [“By a lively and energetic turn in the discourse, the prophet passes from the people at large to address himself immediately to Zedekiah, and styles him not only wicked, but also pierced through, although, it is well known, he was not actually slain in the calamities that ensued. But it is not exactly what was to be done by the external sword of the Babylonians that comes here into view; it is the execution of the Lord’s judgment, under the same form and aspect of severity as that which had been presented in the former part of the vision—the terrors of His drawn sword. The sword is but an image of the judgment itself, precisely as the devouring fire had been in the vision immediately preceding; and it is not the less true that Zedekiah fell under its powerful stroke, though he personally survived the catastrophe. Driven ignominiously from his throne, doomed to see his family slain before his eyes, to have these eyes themselves put out, and to be led as a miserable and helpless captive in chains to Babylon, he might with the most perfect propriety be regarded as the grand victim of the Lord’s sword—already, in a manner, pierced through with it; for, to the strongly idealistic spirit of the prophet, the wickedness and the sword, the sin and its punishment, appear inseparably connected together. The overthrow to which he was destined seemed to the prophet’s eye at once so inevitable and so near, that he could speak of it no otherwise than as a thing already in existence. “But it was to be no merely personal loss and degradation; the overthrow to be accomplished on Zedekiah was to draw along with it the complete subversion of the present state of things. Therefore, while the prophet represents the day of visitation as coming upon him, he also speaks of it as being at the time when sin generally had reached its consummation, and the completeness of the guilt was to have its parallel in the complete and terminal character of the judgment. All must now be made desolate; the mitre of the high priest (the emblem of his official dignity and honour, as the representative of a consecrated and priestly people), as well as the crown of the king, was to be put away, and everything turned upside down. Such a convulsed and disorganized state of things was approaching, that, as it is said, ‘this should no longer be this;’ in other words, nothing should be allowed to remain what it had been, it should be another thing than formerly; as is presently explained in what follows: ‘The low is exalted and the high is brought down,’—a general revolution, in which the outward relations of things should be made to change places, in just retaliation upon the people for having so grossly perverted the moral relations of things. Yet the agents and participators in these revolutions are warned not to expect any settled condition to come out of them; ‘this also,’ it is said, ‘shall not be,’ it shall not attain to permanence and security; and so, overthrow is to follow overthrow; ‘nowhere shall there be rest, nowhere security; all things shall be in a state of fluctuation, until the appearing of the great Restorer and Prince of Peace.’ ”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 242, 243.—W. F.] Ezekiel 21:30. One is specially singled out and apostrophized (comp. Ezekiel 21:19).—ηָ ?μָ ?μ is not: “profane,” or “sacrilegious,” as ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς (we recall the contrast to φַ ?γִּ ?ιχ in Ezekiel 3:18) stands beside it. The Chaldee gives: “worthy of death.”—Comp. at Ezekiel 12:10.—The day is the time of judgment, of punishment, of overthrow (1 Samuel 26:10; Psalms 37:13; Job 18:20).—The time of the iniquity of the end (Ezekiel 7:2) is when iniquity, (breach of oaths) brings the end (generally). [Schn., Cocc.: The end-guilt as the last and utmost.] In what sense the end is to be taken, how far Zedekiah’s guilt, who is therefore the subject of address, brings it about, Ezekiel 21:31 shows.—The infinitive denotes the mere action, without stating from whom it proceeds (Hengst.), more expressively than the imperative ξַ ?φְ ?πֶ ?τֶ ?ϊ, from φָ ?πַ ?σ (Isaiah 22:18 : “enwrap”), denotes in the Pentateuch (11 times) the head-band (turban) of the high-priest. As ςֲ ?θָ ?ψָ ?δ, from ςָ ?θַ ?ψ (to surround), denotes the royal crown, and thus stands for the kingdom in contradistinction to the high-priesthood, so δָ ?ψִ ?ιν (from ψεּ ?ν) could also be taken in as absolute contradistinction to δָ ?ρִ ?ιψ,—as Hitzig interrogatively renders it: “lift,” “raise,” or “maintain in elevation.” But that the kingly dignity should remain untouched, cannot, in the light of the context, be a matter of uncertainty, and even in Hitzig’s opinion Jehovah’s negative to such a question is undoubted. φְ ?πִ ?εֹ ?σξְ ?μεּ ?αδ, in Isaiah 62:3, combines the royal and priestly, not merely in a figurative sense, but on the ground of Exo 19:6. Besides, Ezekiel is speaking of the end as a whole, not of the subversion of the kingdom merely; although it comes to pass specially by means of the iniquity of the king who is apostrophized, and the judgment (Ezekiel 21:32) points to the priesthood as well as the royalty. Thus nothing remains but to interpret δָ ?ψִ ?ιν as synonymous with δָ ?ρִ ?ιψ, even without a ξִ ?ιִּ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ, which can be easily supplied from the context (Zedekiah is expressly designated “Prince of Israel” in Ezekiel 21:30). Consequently, “sentence of death is pronounced on the theocracy,” according to its existing form, which the history of the people subsequent to the exile confirms. Comp. Keil on the passage. [Cocc. takes both as designating the kingdom as a whole, not merely Zedekiah’s; and then understands the following as referring to the elevation of the Asmonζans, whose crown, however, would not be the Messianic one promised. In reference to this latter, Ewald remarks: “This corrupt earthly kingdom is not this Messianic kingdom which is to come.”]—ζεֹ ?ϊμΰֹ ?Ξζεֹ ?ϊ (neuter) indicates, according to most interpreters, the complete subversion of the existing state of things (Ezekiel 21:32), so that the low is to be elevated, and the lofty made low, as Ezekiel 21:32 shows, by Jehovah. Israel having abased herself by sin, God thoroughly abases her by punishment. Hδv. takes δַ ?ωָּׁ ?τָ ?μָ ?δ—ָ ?δ as: “turned towards the low,” a constructio pr�gnans, betokening the condescension of God. Compare at Ezekiel 17:24. Then ζΰֹ ?ϊΧ would be understood thus: This (what has just been brought low) is not this, namely, what it should be (according to its ideal), but a “not this.” And with this is connected elevation (ch Ezekiel 17:24), namely, through the Messiah, as is seen in what follows; whereupon the bringing low of the high, which is more forcibly depicted in Ezekiel 21:32, returns again to the existing condition of things under Zedekiah; and “this also,” merely recapitulating = Yea, this cast-down priesthood and royalty is not (namely, according to Ezekiel 21:31) what it should be, and thus in reality is not, and this condition endures till its elevation in the Coming One (till, ideal terminus, like Genesis 49:10). Ezekiel 21:32. The thrice-repeated overturn (found here only) accords with the well-known symbolism of the divine. Usually taken as emphatic, to denote total destruction. [According to Abarbanel, it refers to the three last kings, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah; according to others, to the three destructions—the Babylonish, the Greek under Antiochus, and the Roman.] Comp. Isaiah 24.—Ξπָ ?δ goes back on ζΰֹ ?ϊ, or means the land (?).—According to most, this also indicates an additional overthrow; it is more natural to regard it as betokening the present overthrow. δָ ?ιָ ?δ, masculine, being construed with it, shows ζΰֹ ?ϊ to be neuter. But this inverted state of things is not to be for ever. ςַ ?γ, according to its root-signification, includes the future, so that the Person in question brings to an end the overthrow, or the abasement to “nothing,” since He completes it, i.e. makes it complete in form; but at the same time, through realization of the idea in the “overthrown” or “brought low,” effects the fulfilment.—The judgment is God’s, Deuteronomy 1:17, therefore here also Jehovah gives it. The expression speaks of a re-establishment of “the judgment” by means which include chastisement; it embraces the royal and priestly office (Exodus 28:29; 1 Kings 3:9 sq.). Comp. besides, Genesis 49:10; Psalms 72:1; Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 42:1; Jeremiah 23:5; Jeremiah 33:17; John 5:22; Acts 7:14. NOTE ON Ezekiel 21:32[“We can have no hesitation in understanding by this person the Messiah, whether we translate, ‘Till he comes to whom the right is,’ or, ‘Till he comes to whom the judgment belongs;’ ‘and I give it to him.’ It is not expressly said what was to be given him, and should stand waiting for its proper possessor till he should come; but the context plainly forbids us to understand anything less than what was taken away—the things represented by the priestly mitre and the royal crown. The true priestly dignity, and the proper regal glory, were to be gone for a time into abeyance; some partial, temporary, and fluctuating possession of them might be regained, but nothing more; the adequate and permanent realization was only to be found in the person of Messiah, because in Him alone was there to be a fitting representation of the divine righteousness. It is true there was something like a restoration of the standing and honour of the priesthood after the return from the Babylonish exile; and if the ideas currently entertained upon the subject were correct, there might appear in that a failure of the prophecy. But there was no right restoration of the priestly, any more than of the regal dignity at the time specified; it was but a shadow of the original glory. For there was no longer the distinctive prerogative of the Urim and Thummim, nor the ark of the covenant, nor the glory over-shadowing the mercy seat; all was in a depressed and mutilated condition, and even that subject to many interferences from the encroachments of foreign powers. So much only was given, both in respect to the priesthood and the kingdom, as to show that the Lord had not forsaken His people, and to serve as pledge of the coming glory. But it was to the still-prospective, rather than the present state of things, that the eye of faith was directed to look for the proper restoration. And lest any should expect otherwise, the prophet Zechariah, after the return from Babylon, took up the matter, as it were, where Ezekiel had left it, and intimated in the plainest manner, that what was then accomplished was scarcely worth taking into account; it was, at the most, but doing in a figure what could only find its real accomplishment in the person and work of Messiah. Especially at Ezekiel 6:14 : ‘And he (the branch) shall build the temple of the Lord, and he shall bear the glory; and shall sit and rule upon his throne, and he shall be a priest upon his throne.’ Thus the mitre and the crown were both to meet in him, and the temple in its noblest sense be built, and the glory be obtained, such as it became the Lord’s Anointed to possess. Meanwhile all was but preparatory and imperfect.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 244, 245.—W. F.] Ezekiel 21:33–37 [Ezekiel 21:28-32]. Against AmmonAs the prince of Israel had his counterpart in the Messiah, so the declaration “against Jerusalem” in Ezekiel 21:21-24 sq. finds its counterpart in this paragraph; hence also the analogous expressions. Ezekiel 21:33. Reproach is injuring by words: directly,—reviling; or indirectly,—self-glorification. Thereby the mention made of the Ammonites is illustrated. When Babylon first of all inflicted punishment on Jerusalem, Ammon took occasion to boast over the besieged (Ezekiel 25:3; Ezekiel 25:6; Zephaniah 2:8; Lamentations 1:2; Lamentations 3:61), and to applaud the conquerors. Ammon’s self-exaltation had exhibited itself practically by their seizing a portion of the trans-Jordanic territory of the former kingdom of Israel (Jeremiah 49:1 sq.).—Comp. Ezekiel 21:14; Ezekiel 21:19; Ezekiel 21:15; Ezekiel 21:20. μְ ?δָ ?λִ ?ιμֹ, according to Gesen., for δַ ?ΰֲ ?λִ ?ιμ (from ΰָ ?λַ ?μ), to cause to consume (?). Others: from λּ ?εּ ?μ, holding, containing (Ezekiel 23:32); almost adverbially: as much as possible, or (ιָ ?λֹ ?μ) as much as can be. Hengst.: abundantly. Hitzig: to dazzle; properly: to make the eyes dull of vision. (Oxymoron.)—That it may glitter, Ezekiel 21:15. Ezekiel 21:34. αְּ, equivalent to: “notwithstanding that,” and to be taken as parenthetic. Even in Ammon, therefore, false prophets and false confidence! Ezekiel 13:6; Ezekiel 7:9; Jeremiah 27:9-10. Klief.: The oracles of Nebuchadnezzar, Ezekiel 21:26, while they pointed to Jerusalem, showed Ammon false. See Keil in opposition to this notion.—μָ ?ϊֵ ?ϊ, Hitz.: the occasion of the sword’s being placed (reading ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?δּ) on the necks. (Of the pierced-through? Wherefore this again?) Others: that I may lay thee; or: that one (the enemy) may lay thee; or, as Ewald (History of the People of Israel): as it is falsely prophesied to thee that thou shalt be laid on the necks of the Jews to destroy them, I will return thee to thy sheath,—namely, the sword of the Ammonites which is addressed. It depends rather on the foregoing verse. The pierced-through of the wicked—from among the Jews; comp. Ezekiel 21:30; Ezekiel 21:19. They have received the death-blow of the sword on their necks, which are brought into prominence for the sake of pictorial description. Thus Ammon is judged like the prostrate Judah, which it mocked. Comp. Ezekiel 21:30. Ezekiel 21:35. Address to Ammon. The sword, which is to be supplied, is not mentioned, because it does not come into account in contrast to the sword of God’s vengeance against Ammon. The gender (δָ ?ωַׁ ?α, with Patach, masc. imper.) alternates with feminines, the sword-bearing men with the nation as a feminine idea. [Ewald, infin. absol. as in Ezekiel 21:31. Therefore all resistance is vain. (Matthew 26:52!) It receives its sentence from Jehovah,—its end where it originated. Comp. Joseph. Antiq. x. 9. 7.—Ezekiel 16:3.—Ezekiel 11:10. [Should one, with Jerome, in Ezekiel 21:35 (Rashi, Ezekiel 21:34) regard the Babylonians as the persons addressed, so that with the: “against Ammon,” an: “against Babylon” is joined, but which from intelligible reasons is simply implied, then Ezekiel 21:10 would not be opposed to this view. A separation of Jehovah’s sword from that of Babylon, which as such scarcely comes still into account, especially in reference to that which follows, has nothing inconceivable in it; and since Jehovah judges Babylon, His sword would remain drawn. The scabbard does not therefore require to be understood as meaning the land, but the meaning would be, that after the completion of the judgment against both Jerusalem and Ammon, by means of war, Babylon’s sword should be sheathed, and should await the judgment of God in its own land. The execution of it by the Persians would be characteristically depicted in the following verses, while in relation to Ammon the statement seems rather strong; and the supposition of Hδv. that Ammon represents heathenism generally, or, according to Hengst., “the world-power hostile to the kingdom of God,” is very suggestive of perplexity.] Ezekiel 21:36. ωָׁ ?τַ ?κְ (Ezekiel 14:19) makes a paronomasia with ωָׁ ?τַ ?θ, immediately before. ςֶ ?αְ ?ψָ ?δ, “outpouring;” hence used of wrath as poured out. αְּ may also be translated by: blow upon, as, when fire is blown upon or against any one, the fire itself is blown on. Hitzig, however: “with the fire of My fury I will breathe upon thee.” In the end the subject passes over from the sword to the fire, as in the beginning, from the fire to the sword. Consuming men are those who prepare this fire; Hengst.: “burning men are those who are filled with glowing anger.” [In the explanation which points to the Persians, an allusion to their fire-worship!] Hδv.: fierce, cruel; Gesen.: foolish, brutish, Psalms 94:8. So also Hitzig, in relation to the language of the Chaldeans, which was unintelligible (stupid) to the Ammonites. Ezekiel 21:37. Ezekiel 15:4; Ezekiel 15:6.—Thy blood, etc., in which the figures of fire and sword are unified,—in the midst of the land, as in Ezekiel 21:35: “in the place,” etc., “in the land,” etc. It will fall on them in their homes, so that weapons of defence shall be of no service. Contrast to a war of offence. Others: “flowing everywhere in the land” (?). Ewald: “Thy blood shall remain in the midst of the earth, and thou shalt not be made mention of.”—Hengst.: “from the times of the Maccabees, the Ammonites and the Moabites have quite disappeared from history.” Their subversion is complete, while Israel has still something to look forward to. REMARKS 1. The bitterest and most painful plaint finds expression in poetry. A truly spiritual grief and the poetic form readily combine. This is the psychological truth of the chapter. The unusual forms of expression, the rapid transitions, and the idiomatic difficulties which this chapter presents, are accounted for by its poetic construction. This subjective-logical, abrupt-dithyrambic text has been marred by a Philistine criticism which tramples on psychology and ζsthetics. 2. Fire and sword are the two figures in which, divine judgment clothes itself. The latter is, however, more than a picture, if the significance of war in the history of the kingdom of God among men is not overlooked. 3. Every judgment of God keeps in view the establishment of the right on earth, and is unimaginable apart from grace and mercy. 4. It is to be noted as to the Jewish kingdom, now ripe for destruction, that it “despised every tree;” whether that means that which was subject to it, or mankind generally. It thus became inhuman, lost sight of Israel’s essential relation to humanity, and became faithless to the fundamental significance of the people of God. 5a. Justice will be done to the text by regarding the manifold Chaldaic divination as nothing more than a highly dramatic representation of the idea of Providence. Hδvernick, indeed, since he makes the agreement of soothsaying and prophecy—brought about, of course, by divine guidance—subservient to the carrying out of God’s will, goes still farther; so far, indeed, as to maintain that there is in Ezekiel, notwithstanding his “otherwise markedly Levitical character,” “a decided recognition of divination.” He finds the occasion in the exile-period, when “Hebraism was so remarkably tinctured with the soothsaying of heathenism;” as appears also in Daniel, etc. 5b. [“What a sublime proof of the overruling providence and controlling agency of Jehovah! The mightiest monarch of the world, travelling at the head of almost unnumbered legions, and himself consciously owning no other direction than that furnished by the instruments of his own blind superstition, yet having his path marked out to him beforehand by this servant of the living God! How strikingly did it show that the greatest potentates on earth, and even the spiritual wickedness in high places, have their bounds appointed to them by the hand of God, and that however majestically they may seem to conduct themselves, still they cannot overstep the prescribed limits, and must be kept in all their operations subservient to the higher purposes of Heaven!”—P. F.—W. F.] 6. In his oft-cited work, The Prophets and their Prophecies, Tholuck calls attention to the distinction between “subordinate” divination, which, “resting upon a natural substratum, divines the future from this” (interpreters of oracles, diviners, augurs, haruspices), and the “higher” method of the “revealer of the future who is immediately impelled by God” (Divination, Prophecy). Plutarch, Vita Homeri, Ezekiel 212; Cicero, De Divin. i. 18. After giving a sketch of the views of the fathers, Tholuck comes to the conclusion: “Whatever we may ascribe to the agency of priestly fraud and superstitious self-deception, it is now universally acknowledged by philologists, and investigators into antiquity, that at the foundation there was a reality.” He then refers more particularly to the insight gained, since the end of last century, into a middle territory between the divine and the non divine agencies of divination (the phenomena of magnetism and somnambulism, which are ranked by medical men and philosophers as physiological and psychological facts). 7. “There is a natural divination,” says Beck, “inasmuch as the course of the world developes itself according to certain original and standing fundamental laws in exact regularity, which we are taught by our conscience to regard as the moral order of the world. As, by means of a definite consciousness of this standing divine order, conscience often gives a man, in relation to his own doing and suffering, very clear indications of his own future, so a living and vigorously aroused conscience can lead him to a perception of how the past and present must have come about in virtue of that moral order, and partly of what must farther emerge from it. Where, however, this prophetic conscience is intensified by especially profound experiences, or earnest investigation of history, the moral connection between past, present, and future may often become clear even to the smallest details. But this divination extends only to the world-bond already existing under the universal government of God, and to the historical bond regulated and limited by internal and eternal moral laws. Into new determinations of the course of the world, which first became manifest by special governmental acts of God which reveal them,—the proper divine order and development of the kingdom,—mere divination cannot penetrate, for it is destitute of the necessary preliminary conditions.” 8. As to the relations between divination and prophecy, see Tholuck in the treatise referred to, § 8, and Herzog’s Realencycl. xvii. p. 641 sq. In regard to the substance of the matter, the difference proves itself to be, that while, at most, room is made for the former by the providence of God as the principle of world-government, redemption, i.e. Christ’s redemption, lifts the latter to its post of elevation. Then also divination must always be estimated in relation to the physical region in which it moves, and according to whose laws it is excited; while prophecy finds its sphere not only in the soul, but also in the spiritual life, and, though dealing in some measure with individual, national, human interests, ever stretches beyond to eternal truth as the object of its supreme interest. 9. It is to be observed that the Davidic king, by whose means the ruin of Israel is brought about, on the other hand also serves here as a medium for the Messiah. Not only did David’s family furnish in point of fact the last “prince (king) of Israel,” but the idea of an everlasting royalty in Israel was bound up by God’s promises with David’s house. The contrast between sin and grace, despair of all and hope for all, death and resurrection, is concentrated in the last representative of David’s family. It is peculiar to our prophet to have so strongly emphasized this contrast, Ezekiel 21:30-32. 10. Israel ought to have been a kingdom of priests to Jehovah. As Israel fell away from this position with the fall of the priesthood and the kingdom, so on the other hand, with the renewed bestowal of priesthood and royalty in the Messiah, Israel is also reinstated in Him as that which it ought to be, 1 Peter 2:9-10. 11. The high-priesthood, indeed, still continued after the exile. But in that period it fared with the priesthood as with the temple. “Both,” says Hδv., “bound together in the closest way by divine arrangement, fell short of that which they had been before the exile. There was only a shadow of the ancient glory, as the temple was only a provisional one for an abnormal state of things. This was outwardly apparent, for there was no ark of the covenant in the temple, and the high priest was denied the right of consulting by Urim and Thummim, Ezra 2:63. As, then, the high-priesthood was totally in abeyance so far as the exiles were concerned, and as after the exile only its shadow was provisionally set up, so in the eye of prophecy the exile and the appearance of the Messiah are closely connected facts.” 12. As to the kingdom, Zerubbabel, the leader of the people after the exile, although of David’s line, was no king on David’s throne. But Herod, who becomes king over Israel, is of Edomite origin. 13. “In the remarkable passage of the Tract. Sota, p. 1069, ed. Wagenseil, it is said: The Urim and Thummim, and the king from David’s stem, had ceased with the destruction, and their restoration is to be expected only when the dead are raised up, and the Messiah, David’s Son, appears” (Hδv.). 14. The old versions, with great unanimity, have made use of the Messianic passage here in Ezekiel for the explanation of “Shiloh,” Genesis 49:18. Hengst. complains, in his Christology, that instead of an allusion, they have mostly assumed an explanation; to him the relation of Ezekiel to the passage in question seems unrecognisable. But while the prophet supplemen’s Genesis 49 from Psalms 72:1-5, where righteousness and judgment are the basis of the peace introduced by the Messiah, we do not find in Ezekiel that which we might expect,—to whom the “peace,” but “to whom the judgment,” belongs. In Ezekiel, however, the peace is also in the background, for the advent of Him whose is the judgment makes an end of destruction. That dangers would threaten the sceptre of Judah before the coming of Shiloh, even Jacob intimated by the stress which he put on: it “shall not depart from Judah till,” etc. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ 11. The Conviction of Ripeness for Judgment: (a) Of Jerusalem’s in particular (Ezekiel 22); (b) and of Judah’s and Israel’s as a whole (Ezekiel 23). (a) Jerusalem ripe for Judgment (Ezekiel 22.) 1, 2And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, And thou, son of man, wilt thou judge? Wilt thou judge the city of blood [blood-shedding]? Then make 3her to know all her abominations. And say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, A city that sheds blood in the midst of it, that her time may come, and has 4made idols for [over] herself that she may be defiled! In thy blood which thou hast shed thou hast become guilty, and in thine idols which thou hast made thou art defiled; and thou hast caused thy days to draw near, and art come to thy years: therefore have I given thee for a reproach to the heathen, 5and for a mocking to all lands. Those that are near, and those that are far from thee, shall mock at thee as one polluted in name, and full of confusion. 6Behold, the princes of Israel, every one according to his arm, were in thee in 7order to shed blood! Father and mother they lightly esteemed in thee; with [in relation to] the stranger they have acted unjustly in the midst of thee; 8the widow and the orphan they have oppressed in thee. My holy things 9thou hast despised, and hast profaned My sabbaths. Men of slander have been in thee to shed blood, and in thee they have eaten upon the mountains; 10they have committed lewdness in the midst of thee. In thee, one has uncovered a father’s nakedness; in thee they have humbled her that is unclean in 11her separation. And one has committed abomination with his neighbour’s wife; and another has lewdly defiled his daughter-in-law; and another has 12humbled [ravished] his sister, his father’s daughter, in thee. They have taken bribes in thee to shed blood; thou hast taken usury and increase, and hast overreached thy neighbour by extortion, and thou hast forgotten Me: sentence 13of the Lord Jehovah. And, behold, I have smitten My hand at thy gain which thou hast made, and at thy blood-shedding which was in thy 14midst. Will thy heart endure [be stedfast]? or will thy hands be strong for the days when I shall deal with thee? I, Jehovah, have spoken, and will do 15[have done]. And I will scatter thee among the heathen, and disperse thee in the countries, and will consume [make to cease] thy filthiness out of thee. 16And thou shalt be profaned in thee [through thee] before the eyes of the heathen, and thou shalt know that I am Jehovah. 17And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 18Son of man, the house of Israel has become to Me dross; the whole of them are brass, and tin, and iron, and lead, in the midst of the 19furnace; they have become the dross of silver. Therefore, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because ye have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather 20you into the midst of Jerusalem, [As] a gathering together of silver, and brass, and iron, and lead, and tin into the midst of the furnace, to blow the fire upon it that it may be melted, so will I gather you in My anger and in 21My fury, and I will leave you and melt you. And I will collect you, and will blow upon you in the fire of My wrath, and ye shall be melted in the midst thereof. 22As silver is melted in the midst of the furnace, so shall ye be melted in the midst of it; and ye shall know that I, Jehovah, have poured out My 23fury upon you. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 24Son of man, say to her, Thou art a land that is not cleansed, that has no rain in the day 25of indignation. The conspiracy of her prophets [is] in her midst; like a roaring lion ravening the prey they have devoured souls, taken treasure [property] and precious things [jewels]; her widows they have multiplied in the midst of her. 26Her priests have done violence to My law, and profaned My holy things; they have not distinguished between holy and unholy, nor discerned between clean and unclean; and they have hidden their eyes from My sabbaths, and I 27am profaned among them. Her rulers [princes] in the midst of her were like wolves ravening the prey, to shed blood, to destroy souls, and to make gain. 28And her prophets have daubed for them with whitewash, seeing vanity and divining lies for them, saying, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, when Jehovah hath not spoken. 29The people of the land have practised oppression, and committed robbery, and have vexed the poor and needy, and oppressed the stranger against the right. 30And I sought for a man among them that might build up a wall, and might stand in the breach [step into the gap] before Me for 31the land, that I might not destroy it; and I found none. So I poured [pour] out upon them My indignation, in the fire of My wrath I consumed [consume] them; I have recompensed [recompense] their way upon their head: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 22:3. Sept.: ... κατ̓αὐτης—Vulg.: … contra semetipsam. Ezekiel 22:4. ... κ. ἠγαγεςκαιρονἐτωνσου. (The Oriental Jews, etc. read: ςϊωπεϊικ.) Many codices: αβειν. Ezekiel 22:5. ... πολληἐνταιςἀνομιαις—Vulg.: … sordida, nobilis, grandis interitu. Ezekiel 22:6. ... ἑκαστοςπροςτουςσυγγενειςαὐτουσυνανεφυροντοἐνσοι— Ezekiel 22:9. ... Ἀνδρεςλησται— Ezekiel 22:11. ... τηννυμφηναὐτου— Ezekiel 22:12. ... κ. συνετελεσωσυντελειανκακιαςσουτηνἐνκαταδυναστιιασου, ὁτιἐμουἐπελαθου— Ezekiel 22:16. κ. κατακληρονομησωἑνσοι—Vulg.: possidebo te. Ezekiel 22:18. ... ἀναμεμιγμενοςχαλκω … ἐνμεσωἀργυριουἀναμεμιγμενοςἐστιν. Ezekiel 22:19. ... … παντεςεἰςσυγκρασιμιαν— Ezekiel 22:24. ... γηοὐβρεχομενη, οὐδεὑετοςκαταβησιταισοι—Vulg.: immunda et non compluta— Ezekiel 22:25. Οἱἀφηγουμενοιαὐτης … ὡςλεοντεςἐρευγομενοι … ἐδυναστευσανἐνδυναστεια, δωραἐλαμβανονἐνἀδικια—Sept. and Arab. read: ΰμξπεϊικ. Ezekiel 22:27. Sept.: Οἱἀρχοντες … αἱμα, ὁπως— Ezekiel 22:28. ... πεσουνται— Ezekiel 22:29. Τονλαον … ἐκπιεξουντες— Ezekiel 22:30. ... ἀνδραἀναστρεφομενονὀρθωςκ. ἑστωτα … τοὀλοσχερεςἐνκαιρωτηςὀργηςμου, τουμηεἰςτελοςἐξαλειψαιαὐτην.— REMARKS[“This chapter stands closely related to the last chapter, and may fitly be regarded as supplementary to it; the former having presented a striking delineation of the Lord’s purpose to execute the severity of His displeasure upon the people of Jerusalem, while this returns to lay open the fearful mass of corruption on account of which such severity was to be inflicted. In what is written here there is nothing properly new; in its general purport, it is a repetition of the charges which were urged in Ezekiel 20; and so the chapter begins much in the same way,—with a call upon the prophet to judge the people, and set before them their iniquities. There, however, the charge took the form of a historical review for the purpose of connecting the present state of wickedness with the past, and showing how continuously the stream of corruption had flowed through all periods of their national existence. Here, on the other hand, the prophet looks exclusively to the present, and brings out in fearful array the many heinous and rampant sins which were crying in heaven’s ear for vengeance.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, p. 249.—W. F.] Jerusalem becomes especially prominent at the very beginning of the chapter; and to the close, the fundamental reference of the divine discourse is to Jerusalem, in its significance for Judah and the land.—The oft-repeated: “in the midst of,” points significantly to Jerusalem as the place where sin had been, and in which punishment would be, concentrated. Jerusalem was the Paris of the land of Judah.—The chapter comprises three sections. Ezekiel 22:1-16. Jerusalem’s Abominations, which had made it ripe for JudgmentEze_22:2. Comp. at Ezekiel 20:4.—The plural, γָּ ?ξִ ?ιν comp. at Ezekiel 7:23), points to bloody acts, and tells of blood-guiltiness (Ezekiel 22:4). The explanation of this title of Jerusalem follows in Ezekiel 22:3 (Ezekiel 9:9). To such a pitch of violence have the abominations reached. (Comp. at Ezekiel 22:3.) Comp. Ezekiel 5:11; Ezekiel 16:2. A summary statement of her abominations is a judging of Jerusalem. Ch. 20 speaks especially of the abominations of their ancestors, this of the abominations of the existing generation, as facts visible to every one,—proving their ripeness for judgment. Ezekiel 22:3 speaks of shedding blood, as Ezekiel 22:22, on the other hand, of shedding (pouring out) fury. It may refer to murderous deeds generally; specially to judicial murders, consequently to the shedding of the innocent blood of righteous, God-fearing men, prophets, etc. Comp. Matthew 23:37. The city which had its name from “peace” has become a city of death to those who require true peace.—μְ, de eventu; it is the inevitable result; while it so acts, it also brings its time,—the final day of judgment (Ezekiel 21:30, 34). The making of idols (comp. at Ezekiel 6:4) explains the “abominations” of Ezekiel 22:2.—ςָ ?μֶ ?ιδָ simply means the lifting up of the idols over those who worship them. [Keil: as it were, covering the city therewith. Hδv.: Jerusalem, as it were, laden with idols, as of an intolerable burden and debt. Hengst.: so that it heaps upon itself defilement with its consequences. Hitz.: “For itself,” in order to make the idols gracious. Others: “Against itself,” i.e. to its hurt, or: “beside itself.”] Ezekiel 22:4. The deeds of blood are Jerusalem’s blood-guiltiness; the abominations of the idols which have been made are its defilement. The one is rooted (αְּ) in the other. But therewith and thereby the sinful city has herself brought near her days (comp. Ezekiel 22:14; Ezekiel 22:3), thus wantonly shortening the respite of grace; she is the more quickly ripened for judgment (Ezekiel 9:1; Ezekiel 12:23). Phillips.: “As the punishment is first introduced by the therefore, it is intimated that Jerusalem has squandered all her days and years in bloodshed,” etc. (?) According to Hengst., the days and years are those of decision, of the crisis which she brings on by her violent dealing. And art come to thy years, is evidently parallel to the previous sentence; at least the “years” cannot be those of chastisement and judgment (Keil); and Hitzig rightly opposes the idea that there is any parallelism with Jeremiah 11:23 (Ezekiel 23:12). The figure of a person ripe for death (not exactly aged) underlies the expression, as Hitzig puts it: that has arrived at (ςַ ?γ) their full measure.—Reproach; comp. Ezekiel 21:33; so that what Ammon is there to be punished for, appears here as deserved. (Ezekiel 5:14-15.) Ezekiel 22:5. Fuller explanation of “mocking to all lands,” which are more precisely described as the near and the far. The mock, since Jerusalem must seem to them sullied, so far as its name is concerned; which is not to be understood morally,—of the sins of the “holy” city, but of its fate, which dooms the city of God to fall into the hands of the heathen. What they themselves have done by sin (Ezekiel 22:3 sq.) is requited to them in a corresponding punishment. The confusion may be internal (through fear) and external overthrow and ruin (Deuteronomy 7:23; Deuteronomy 28:20); also tumult, like Ezekiel 7:7. [Hitz.: Inward moral and religious confusion.] Ezekiel 22:6. Instances are now stated; and since violence was first of all referred to, the finger is, as it were, pointed to the example of the princes, as a something patent to the eyes of all. The arm alone was taken into account by them: not right, but might; neither equity nor duty—not even the responsibility of their position. Israel’s princes were princes “according to the arm,”—each according to his own power, not ex gratia Dei. This connects “princes” with “were.” It has also been by some coupled with what follows: “to be there with the intention,” etc. Each, according to his power, strove; and then follows the ωְׁ ?τָ ?κְ γָּ ?ν, which is constantly repeated in relation to the “city of blood-shedding” (comp. Ezekiel 19).—[Hδv.: Directed towards his arm. Ewald: Each according to his own authority, i.e. arbitrarily. Hitz.: Were helpful the one to the other (Psalms 83:8).] Ezekiel 22:7. To the disorder in the higher circles corresponded the complete dissolution of those bonds of subordination between children and their parents (Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy 27:16), which must underlie the obedience of subjects to their princes. At all events, as the princes carried it towards the people, so the people carried it towards those who were entitled rather to demand consideration and protection,—as the stranger, the widow, and the orphan, Ezekiel 18:18; Ezekiel 18:7. Comp. Exodus 22:20 sq.; Deuteronomy 24:14 sq. Ezekiel 22:8. And, finally, Jerusalem became towards God what it was towards men. Comp. farther, Ezekiel 16:59; Ezekiel 20:12; Ezekiel 20:24. Ezekiel 22:9. A second group of sins. A comparison with Leviticus 19:16, to which it is parallel, leads one to think of false witnesses like those mentioned in 1 Kings 21:10 sq., who acted as informers in subserviency to the princes. ψָ ?λִ ?ιμ, properly: the slanderer, which fits in admirably with the foregoing. Hengst.: “the slanderer as an ideal person.” A clique of this nature had formed itself into a corporation in Jerusalem. Comp. also Ezekiel 22:6.—Ezekiel 18:6. The relation to God is coupled therewith,—the falsity of the worship of false gods, with lying against one’s neighbour (in thee, to be understood of the inhabitants of Jerusalem), with which worship, “lewdness” (Ezekiel 16:27) of every kind was naturally bound up. Ezekiel 22:10. Mother or step-mother; comp. Leviticus 18:7-8; Leviticus 20:11 (1 Corinthians 5:1). An ΰִ ?ιωׁ is to be supplied as the subject of the verb.—Ezekiel 18:6. In consequence of child-bearing, as well as during the monthly period. Comp. at Leviticus 18:19; Leviticus 20:18. Ezekiel 22:11. ΰִ ?ιωׁ ?—ΰִ ?ιωׁ ?—εְ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ. There were such cases! Impurity in every form. A specimen of the moral atmosphere as a whole.—Ezekiel 18:6.—Leviticus 18:15; Leviticus 20:12.—Leviticus 18:12 (2 Samuel 13:12). Tacitus, Hist. Ezekiel 5:5. Ezekiel 22:12. Third group of sins. As false witnesses (Ezekiel 22:9), so also unrighteous judges, served the “princes.” The corruption of the higher classes is emphasized,—it proceeded from above downwards,—so that the prominence of the rulers of Israel for the judgment of God (Ezekiel 21:17) is justified; while in a sense so very different, all good should have come to Israel from those in authority, and especially through God’s representatives. Comp. Exodus 23:8 (1 Samuel 8:3).—Ezekiel 18:8; Leviticus 25:36. The discourse now gathers itself for the direct form of address; hence the brevity and the energetic close. Self-seeking, which makes one ignore one’s “neighbour,” finally abolishes the remembrance of God, which is the soul of all moral relations. Ezekiel 22:13 passes over to the subject of punishment for such conduct. As the guilt is apparent (“Behold,” Ezekiel 22:6), so also is the judgment (Behold), when there is such ripeness for it.—I have smitten My hand, is usually regarded (like Ezekiel 21:22; Ezekiel 21:19) as an indignant gesture at (on account of) thy gain, etc. (Ewald: as a signal that the last hour should come); which neither the words nor the connection can recommend. Hitzig, far more appropriately: Jehovah is in dignantly occupied with the matter of their gain; as being unrighteous, it is brittle, and He shall smite it with the hand, etc. αָּ ?φַ ?ς means: to cut off, to plunder, also: to break; so that in the “lightly come,” there may already lie the “lightly go.”—The avenging hand of retributive righteousness strikes the gain first, because this was mentioned first in Ezekiel 22:12; but at once a return is made to the (collective) “shed blood,” ςַ ?μ very appropriately alternating with ΰֶ ?μ. [Hengst.: δָ ?ιεּ, a pluralis multitudinis: “of which there is much in thy midst.”] Ezekiel 22:14. The judgment is not yet come, hence the future; but the result is absolutely sure, therefore the interrogative forms, which are equivalent to negatives. Comp. therewith Ezekiel 21:12; Ezekiel 21:20; Ezekiel 7:27; Ezekiel 6:5-9; Ezekiel 17:24. Ezekiel 22:15. Ezekiel 12:15; Ezekiel 20:23.—The complete extinction of Jerusalem’s uncleanness can only be understood as the extinction of its polluted inhabitants, Ezekiel 22:3 sq. Others compare it with Isaiah 4:4, and think of a purification of the people during the exile. Ezekiel 22:16. εְ ?πִ ?ηַ ?μְ ?ϊְּ αָּ ?κְ, if from πָ ?ϊַ ?μ, either=“thou possessest thyself,”—while formerly thou wert My inheritance, the heathen shall see that thou art so no more (!); or=“thou art possessed,” either by the heathen who rule over thee; or = I inherit thee, take thee in possession, as all the heathen shall perceive. Altogether forced. Therefore the more recent interpreters derive it from ηָ ?μַ ?μ; comp. Ezekiel 7:24.—In thee. Hengst.: So that thou must experience in thyself the desecration as punishment for Ezekiel 22:8. Hδv.: “Then Jerusalem stands out as an unholy city, which has profaned itself by its own conduct, and as such has received its recompense before the eyes of all peoples, Ezekiel 22:4-5.” [Hitz.: Through all those who belong to her, who through her mournful fate shall tend to her dishonour; thus is she her own spot, Deuteronomy 32:5. Comp. at Ezekiel 22:18. Ezekiel 22:17-22. The Judgment in Jerusalem a Melting in the FurnaceEze_22:18. The figure (as to which see Introd. p. 18) in which the discourse clothes itself, in order to rouse and occupy the attention of the hearers all the more, takes its theme from the immediately preceding verses, 15 and 16. According to Ezekiel 22:15, annihilation shall accomplish the cleansing of Jerusalem. Things have come to such a pass with the holy city, that there is for it no other purification. Those who think of any other purification, from what is spoken of in Ezekiel 22:15, must regard it as taking place outside Jerusalem, to wit, in the exile. The house of Israel, as far as it comes into account, has become dross (νεּ ?β here only, elsewhere νִ ?ιβ, refuse of metals). νִ ?πִּ ?ινλֶּ ?νֶ ?σ (the reverse order: λֶּ ?νֶ ?σνִ ?πִּ ?ιν, in Proverbs 26:23—silver dross which is not yet purified) is not even ore containing silver, but means (Proverbs 25:4) dross which has been separated from the silver. The figure indeed employs a noble metal, but nothing of it save the ignoble (comp. at Ezekiel 22:20; Ezekiel 22:22) dross—of which a clearer idea is presently given by: the whole of them are brass and tin and iron—continues to exist in Jerusalem (Isaiah 1:22; Jeremiah 6:27 sq.). Thus—would God say—thus has Jerusalem, anticipating the impending judgment, shown itself as a smelting furnace. Light is hereby thrown on the peculiar phrase of Eze 22:16, εְ ?πִ ?ηַ ?μְ ?ϊְּ αָּ ?κְ: That which Jerusalem shall completely become, through divine punishment, it has already become in itself through its sins; it is already profaned in itself,—according to the figure, it has become the ignoble dross of noble silver. It appears as nothing else to Jehovah (δָ ?ιεּ ?Ξμִ ?ι); it only remains that the fact of its guilt should become evident as a fact, to the eyes of the heathen, through the judgments of God. For this purpose Jerusalem, which had ministered to sin, now becomes the furnace which is employed for its punishment, and the ignoble dross-community is completely consumed; in other words, annihilated. If the text be viewed in this way, no objection can be made to the figure, and all the earlier and later misunderstandings of it may be corrected. Ezekiel 22:19 clearly expresses the thought underlying the figure employed. As the individual persons are to be thought of as scattered here and there, and as seeking protection in the fortified city on the approach of the enemy, the gathering together of all into Jerusalem by Jehovah is not to be understood in a merely figurative sense—even though in Ezekiel 22:20 the expression is again employed in accordance with the figure of the furnace. The λְּ of comparison (χְ ?αֻ ?φַ ?ϊ) is dropped for the sake of euphony. That silver is still spoken of in regard to the impending judicial process partly arises from the necessities of the figure, as Ezekiel 22:22 shows still more plainly (“as silver is melted”), and partly from the fact that the word contains a significant and painful reminiscence of that which Israel had been, and of that which it could become in the crucible of God-sent tribulation! In the brass, etc. there is still some silver, interpreters say; but this idea is entirely excluded by the “dross” of Ezekiel 22:18. The meaning of the comparison is rather this, that while in other cases there is also silver along with the brass, etc., or that which is cast into the furnace is only silver ore, from which art and skill then extract a noble metal (Malachi 3:3, so here a similar process takes place in anger and fury, resulting no more in purification (Umbr. finds the purifying judgment of God prefigured in the complete melting)—at least neither the text nor context points to such an issue—but in complete annihilation. Keil, like Hitzig, is obliged to admit that the “melting” is here regarded as punishment only, and the separation of the ignoble portions is not taken into consideration. Ezekiel 22:21. Ezekiel 21:36. NOTE ON Ezekiel 22:17-22[“In modern metallurgy lead is employed for the purpose of purifying silver from other mineral products. The alloy is mixed with lead exposed to fusion upon an earthen vessel, and submitted to a blast of air. By this means the dross is consumed. This process is called the cupelling operation, with which the description in Ezekiel 22:18-22, in the opinion of Mr. Napier (Met. of Bible, pp. 20–24), accurately coincides: ‘The vessel containing the alloy is surrounded by the fire, or placed in the midst of it, and the blowing is not applied to the fire, but to the fused metals. … And when this is done, nothing but the perfect metals, gold and silver, can resist the scorifying influence.’ And in support of his conclusion he quotes Jeremiah 6:28-30, adding, ‘This description is perfect. If we take silver having the impurities in it described in the text, namely, iron, copper, and tin, and mix it with lead, and place it in the fire upon a cupell, it soon melts; the lead will oxidize and form a thick, coarse crust upon the surface, and thus consume away, but effecting no purifying influence. The alloy remains, if anything, worse than before. … The silver is not refined because “the bellows were burned,” there existed nothing to blow upon it,’ ” etc. (Smith, Dict. of the Bible, art. “Lead.”)—W. F.] Ezekiel 22:23-31. Jerusalem’s Ripeness for Judgment extending to all ClassesThis third section runs parallel with the first, Ezekiel 22:1-16. Thus the end returns to the beginning, and the whole is rounded off. There the character of the prevailing corruption is described, here its extent, as one which has penetrated to all classes in Jerusalem. Ezekiel 22:24. Many interpreters unnecessarily refer μָ ?δּ to ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ; Hδv.: The pronoun is placed before the noun to which it refers for the sake of emphasis. The whole land is named because the far-reaching extent of their sin is borne in mind. It will be quite sufficient if μָ ?δּ (as is the case throughout the chapter) be referred to Jerusalem. For Jerusalem is constantly taken for the whole land and people, so that this relation scarcely requires, at least here, to be made specially prominent. In that case ΰַ ?ϊְּ ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ is evidently a figurative form of address; Jerusalem=Judah, is likened to a land in the manner then following. Finally, it can be all the more regarded as a “land” from the fact that everything which is in the land is to be collected into Jerusalem. The land is called not cleansed, namely, from the weeds, briars, and thorns with which it is overgrown; comp. Hebrews 6:8. [Not, as Hδvernick puts it: “unclean, stained with sin,” which lies outside the figure.] μΰֹ πֻ ?ωְׁ ?ξָ ?δּ must contain a corresponding statement. That which best harmonizes with the context is: whose rain is not, i.e. appears not in the day of judgment—namely, the rain belonging to it, and which should have made it fruitful (Hebrews 6:7). In the words of the Epistle to the Hebrews: found good for nothing, it is nigh unto cursing, and its end is to be burned. [Other interpretations:—Hδv.: “Its rain shall not descend on the day of indignation,” namely, that which, as a gracious pledge (Leviticus 26:4; Deuteronomy 11:14; Deuteronomy 28:12), was promised to the people. Comp. Joe 2:23; Hosea 6:3; Jeremiah 5:24; Zechariah 10:1; Ezekiel 34:26; Revelation 11:6, etc. Thus no trace of grace will appear in the judgment. Hengst.: “that has no rain,” etc., that finds no grace, because impurity is not removed. The rain could extinguish the flame of divine indignation. Or, with Kimchi, βֻ ?ωְׁ ?ξָ ?δּ is taken as the 3 fem. pret. Pual: that “is not rained upon.” This reading Keil adopts, and (because rain is not a purifying medium according to Hebrew ideas) he makes ξְ ?θֹ ?δָ ?ψָ ?δ = “that is not shone on by light;” so that, enjoying neither sunshine nor shower in the day of wrath, the land falls under the curse of barrenness. Ewald, again, thus gives the sense: While in other case’s fire can be mitigated and extinguished, on the day when the land is overtaken, Ezekiel 22:22 (31), by the fire of God’s indignation, it shall not be freed from its glowing heat nor made fruitful by rain from heaven.] Ezekiel 22:25. The conspiracy (Isaiah 8:12; Jeremiah 11:9) of her (false, comp. at Ezekiel 13) prophets, indicates that they acted not merely as separate individuals, but as a corporation, made strong by combination and unity, so that they were careful not to contradict each other’s lies. They appear as a sort of inquisition, everywhere prepared to denounce the servants of God to the animosity of the great, and to hand them over to the sword of the princes. [Hitz.: As the prophets appear again in Ezekiel 22:28 (but comp. there!), as Ezekiel 22:27 says almost the same thing (as Ezekiel 22:25) of civil dignitaries (which, however, is no reason for supposing the same class to be referred to!), while what is said of prophets and priests, Ezekiel 22:26; Ezekiel 22:28, is totally dissimilar (which, however, proves nothing),—on these grounds Hitzig reads πִ ?ωִׂ ?ΰֶ ?ιδָ, conjecturing that Zephaniah 3:3 is the original of our passage. He also lays stress on the fact that Ezekiel 22:6 began with the princes, so that instead of the prophets he understands in our verse the royal family, together with the great officers of the crown.] The first section of the chapter, with which the last runs parallel, made prominent, violence on the one hand, and godlessness on the other. To this twofold division there corresponds a twofold class-personification—in Ezekiel 22:25-26, prophets and priests; in Ezekiel 22:27-28, civil officers and prophets. The significance of false prophecy (comp. at Ezekiel 13) is indicated by the fact that it is here referred to at the beginning and at the end. All which is swept away by Hitzig’s unnecessary alteration of the text, to which even Keil assents, in opposition to old authorities. The portraiture of the prophets in regard to their violent dealing, as soul-devourers, is founded on the figure (Ezekiel 19:7) of the “roaring lion” (collective, or each of them). With this compare 1 Peter 5:8, and also Ezekiel 13:18-19, which is not very foreign to the subject, and to which the ravening the prey (Ezekiel 19:3) may also contain an allusion. They enrich themselves with the possessions of the pious, whom they surrender to death, thereby increasing the number of the widows of Jerusalem. Ezekiel 22:26. Her priests. The reference is to godlessness; the transition is made by the word violence. The law of God is violated by the priests in regard to those very things from which it was the duty of the priesthood to debar the people. Laxity in doctrine, as well as laxity in life, was a violation of God’s authority in Israel. (Zephaniah 3:4; comp. also Mark 7:9.) Hitz.: “Not content with making the law a sham, they went in the very teeth of it.”—The very comprehensive expression: holy things (Ezekiel 22:8), is unfolded (a) with a retrospective reference to Leviticus 10:10-11; (b) with reference to the Sabbaths (Ezekiel 20:12). In regard to the former, they should have watched lest the holy should become profane, as it was also their duty to teach how the unclean could be cleansed; with which latter the mention of the Sabbath is suggestively coupled. The two sets of opposites are not simply placed in contrast, and αֵּ ?ιοΞμְ is not chosen without design; for, besides the matter of their differences, the change of the one into the other is in question, δεֹ ?γִ ?ιςεּ (discern) is to a certain extent a judicial expression, since, in relation to the “clean and unclean,” it points to their official determinations (Luke 17:14).—From My Sabbaths, etc., not only means that they saw them desecrated by the people without offering any opposition, but that they did not wish to do so, since they themselves had forsworn, and lived in neglect of, the Sabbath law. Ezekiel 22:27. ωָׂ ?ψֶ ?ιδָ can also be: her princes, but in Ezekiel 22:6 the word is the precise πְ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰֵ ?ι. Comp. at Ezekiel 11:2. It means properly the heads of tribes, families, etc., on whom lay the obligation of administering the laws. [Hengst.: “the political authorities and officials.”] They are described in relation to their “violence.” Comp. Zephaniah 3:3. As to the rest, comp. with Ezekiel 22:12. The authorities of Jerusalem, the judges of the people (this follows from the similar conduct, Ezekiel 22:25), act on the same principle as the false prophets. This is again expressly confirmed in Ezekiel 22:28, where μָ ?δֶ ?ν must be referred to what goes immediately before. The false prophets are here mentioned in relation to their godlessness. [Bunsen: “They are depicted in Ezekiel 22:25 principally on the side of their selfishness, and here as the responsible watchmen of the people (Ezekiel 3:17 sq.), appointed by God to prevent them being lulled to sleep.”] Comp. at Ezekiel 13:10; Ezekiel 13:9; Ezekiel 13:7. Ezekiel 22:29. The common people resemble the dignitaries and authorities at Jerusalem. Comp. Ezekiel 18:18; Ezekiel 16:49. (Exodus 22:20; Deuteronomy 24:17.) Ezekiel 22:30. According to the significance of false prophecy (comp. at Ezekiel 22:25), among them is to be referred to the false prophets; Ezekiel 13:5 makes this certain. [Hitz.; Not by intercession, but as a righteous man. But where, then, was Jeremiah! And how is this consistent with Ezekiel 14:12 sq.?] As Jerusalem stands for the land, so one of its prophets ought to have been found, who would intercede for the land, and thus avert its destruction by Jehovah. Ezekiel 22:31. Ezekiel 7:8; Ezekiel 7:4; Ezekiel 9:10, etc. REMARKS 1. Here, as in Ezekiel 18, Ezekiel shows an understanding of the law according to the spirit of the Messiah, who is in him, i.e. in Christ’s manner. See. the Sermon on the Mount. The connection between God’s obligations and human duty is treated quite according to Christ’s spirit and manner of apprehending it. 2. “The distinction between religion and morality is a fiction opposed to experience” (Hengst.). 3. The loosening of the bonds of filial obedience, disrespect to the rites of religious worship, a disordered condition of the relations between the sexes, open licentiousness, adultery, a social opinion which tolerates or recognises it, bribery, extortion, the arrogance of wealth, oppression of inferiors, and such like, are in all times the cloud-streaks presaging the gathering storm which will burst on a people. 4. False prophecy leans on civil authority, and therefore flatters and serves it. In God and His law, in human conscience and personal faith, it has neither root nor support. That is always the civil position of false theology, as of every court clergy, however orthodox it may otherwise be. 5. The dissolution of a nation’s life takes place when false doctrine comes into vogue. Going hand in hand with the passions, it banishes conscientiousness from official life. Priests become worldly courtiers, who aim at making a career for themselves; judges become dependent and open to influences, and take their cue from the reigning power and from public opinion. When the Church and the bench take their tone from party spirit, then, along with sound teaching and civil rights, the religious and moral foundations of national life are swept away. The ruling principle becomes mere caprice, which undermines the penal code with frivolous distinctions, shallow conceptions of law, alleviation of penalties, lax views as to responsibility, etc. HINTSEze_22:1 sq. “Thus God’s complaint against His people is ever renewed; and our times are not unlike those. But one should not be weary of administering reproof” (Stck.). Ezekiel 22:2. Comp. at Ezekiel 20:4.—“The prophets are judges through God’s word, the apostles through the Spirit, who convinces the world of sin, John 16:9. The saints judge the whole world, 1 Corinthians 6:2 sq. The spiritual man judgeth all things, 1 Corinthians 2:15. This judgment-seat is better than a worldly one. This is the employment of the keys in binding and—loosing—the ‘power of the keys’ ” (H. H.).—“A Jerusalem may become a Sodom, a holy city a den of murderers. Let no one think himself so secure as to be in no danger of falling, Romans 11:20-21” (W.). Ezekiel 22:3. “God has meted out to sinners the time of forbearance, the day of grace” (Cocc.).—The sinner imagines that he can go on without end, and so hastens on all the faster to the end. Ezekiel 22:4. He who wantonly wages war makes himself blood-guilty.—“They made idols for themselves, which is even worse than cherishing the ordinary superstition of the idolatry which has been handed down to us” (L.).—Whoever mocks God, is mocked by God in His own time, through men. Ezekiel 22:5. “We bear the name of evangelical, we believe that we possess the pure doctrine; therefore we should be the more careful to keep the gospel before our eyes, and to remain far from pollution and false doctrine” (L.).—“Every one shrinks from a polluted name, but not from a polluted life, which makes one dishonourable before God” (B. B.).—Sin brings the best order into confusion. Ezekiel 22:6. “See how it is laid on the conscience of teachers and preachers to condemn the sins even of those who are high in station” (Tόb. Bib.).—Since their example is so much taken notice of, princes should look more intently to God’s word and law than to their own authority.—Civil power-should be for a terror to evil-doers, but should not minister to the gratification of the flesh.—Blood-stains may be seen even upon the purple.—Might goes before right—even an Old Testament experience. Ezekiel 22:7. Parents are themselves to blame for the disobedience of their children, but at last a whole people is required to bear the blame.—God is assailed in the persons of the stranger, widow, and fatherless; they are God’s wards.—A man should be most on his guard against, and especially sensitive to, that which most easily leads him astray. Ezekiel 22:8. Jehovah’s holy, things were places, things, persons, times, etc.—“The idea of the sanctuary is as wide as that of the Jewish religion” (Hengst.).—Comp. at Ezekiel 20:12.—He profanes the Sabbath who does not celebrate it, who celebrates it ill or who consecrates it to the service of sin. Ezekiel 22:9. “The slanderer is a thief” (Stck.).—Where the ruler is wicked, false tongues are plentiful.—Where there are wicked judges, false witnesses are not wanting.—False speech is base coin. Compare at Ezekiel 18:16; Ezekiel 16:16.—Impurity and idolatry in their combination. Ezekiel 22:10 sq. Custom and morals go together.—Impurity ruins the individual, the family, and the state, in body and soul.—God sees when we suppose ourselves unseen.—Though the ruler be still, God is not silent.—There are sins which sink man, who was made in the image of God, lower than the beasts. Parents, watch over the members of your families from earliest years. Ezekiel 22:12. Every man has his price, for which he can be bought.—“Men in authority, counsellors of kings, take heed of covetousness, of gifts, of violence and misuse of your office, otherwise God’s vengeance will surely smite you and your houses!” (Tόb. Bib.)—Jewish tradition ascribes the destruction of Jerusalem to covetousness, because it is the root of all evil.—“Not only he who demands more than is just, but he also who shows no forbearance, oppresses his neighbour, Matthew 18:28 sq.” (Stck.)—“Avarice spares neither friend nor foe, its rule is self-interest” (Stck.).—He who loves not his neighbour as himself has forgotten God.—“Forgetfulness of God opens the window to every wicked action” (H. H.). Ezekiel 22:13. How God’s hand in the end strikes upon all the hands of men! Ezekiel 22:14. In sin and in the time of God’s judgment how different is the bearing of men !—When God is against us, heart and hand, courage and power, fail.—“God speaks not in vain, and will do more than terrify” (B. B.). Ezekiel 22:15. Awful cleansing—the extirpation of the ungodly!—When we make no end, God makes it. Ezekiel 22:16. God hides His own from men, but here sinners are given up to the heathen. Ezekiel 22:17 sq. Threefold smelting furnace: Of sin, in which one can become dross;—of trial, where the silver is tested;—of judgment, where even the dross is consumed.—The dross-communities.—“Oh that a salt may still continue among us, that we may be preserved from utter corruption!” (Tόb. Bib.) Ezekiel 22:18. The dross does not typify hypocrites; but where what one had, has been taken away, there the past may have been very noble. Ezekiel 22:19. The heaping up of sins, and the gathering of sinners for judgment. Ezekiel 22:20 sq. God’s anger and fury—sad smelters! Unsavoury salt is trodden under foot, Matthew 5:13. Ezekiel 22:23 sq. The judgment-day considers whether cleansing has taken place and fruit been brought forth.—Not merely the soil, but much more the heart of man, yields all manner of weeds. God has denied rain to no soul, His word has been richly bestowed on us. Ezekiel 22:25. It should not impose on godly men that false prophets keep together; falsity must be aided by falsity.—Satan the great conspirator to the end of time.—The avarice and worldliness of false theology.—“A hireling is never a soul-seeker” (Stck.). Ezekiel 22:26. Not only by direct transgression, but also by false explanation and interpretation of the law of God, is violence done to it.—The sacred boundary-guard between Christ and Belial.—“The teacher who does not make a marked difference between the godly and ungodly in applying saving truth, profanes the name of the Lord in the sanctuary” (St.). Ezekiel 22:27. No one is placed so high as to be beyond the reach of divine punishment. The loss of a single soul over against the gaining of the whole world. Ezekiel 22:28. Comp. at Ezekiel 13. Ezekiel 22:29. Where prophecy does no good, a people must become a waste. Ezekiel 22:30 sq. The pious are the lightning-conductors of God’s judgments.—“The want of pious people is a terrible want, the premonition of judgment” (Cocc.). (b) Judah and Israel’s Ripeness for Judgment (Ezekiel 23.) 1And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 2Son of man, there were 3two women, the daughters of one mother; And in Egypt they played the wanton; in their youth they wantoned, there were their breasts pressed, and 4there were the teats of their virginity bruised. And their names were “Oholah,” the great [greater], and “Oholibah” her sister; and they were mine, and bare sons and daughters; and their names were Samaria—Oholah, 5and Jerusalem—Oholibah. And Oholah when under me played the wanton, 6and doted upon her lovers,—on Assyria, her neighbours, Clothed in purple, captains and rulers, all of them comely young men, knights riding on 7horses. And she bestowed her wantonness upon them, all the choice of the sons of Assyria; and with all on whom she doted, with all their idols she 8polluted herself. And her whoredoms brought from Egypt she did not leave; for they lay with her in her youth, and they bruised her virgin breasts, 9and poured their whoredoms upon her. Therefore I gave her into the hand of her lovers, into the hand of the sons of Assyria, upon whom she doted. 10These discovered her nakedness [shame]; they took her sons and daughters, and herself they slew with the sword, and she became a name to women, and 11they executed judgment upon her. And her sister Oholibah saw it, and made her wantonness more corrupt than she, and her whoredoms more than 12the whoredoms of her sister. She doted on the sons of Assyria,—captains and rulers, her neighbours, clothed gorgeously, knights riding upon horses, all 13of them comely young men. And I saw that she was defiled; they had both 14one way. And she still added to her whoredoms; and she saw men portrayed 15upon the wall, likenesses of the Chaldeans, painted with vermilion, Girdled with a girdle on their loins, flowing turbans on their heads, all of them having the appearance of leaders, the likeness of the sons of Babylon, of the Chaldeans 16in the land of their birth. And she doted upon them as soon as her17eyes saw them, and sent messengers unto them to Chaldea. And the sons of Babylon came to her into the bed of love, and defiled her through their whoredoms; and she was polluted with them, and her soul was estranged 18from them. And she discovered her whoredoms, and discovered her nakedness; and My soul was estranged from her, as My soul had been estranged 19from her sister. And she multiplied her whoredoms, so that she remembered the days of her youth, when she played the wanton in the land of Egypt. 20And she doted on their paramours, whose flesh is the flesh of asses, and their 21issue the issue of horses. Yea [and] thou didst seek after the lewdness of thy youth, when the Egyptians bruised thy teats on account of thy youthful 22breasts. Therefore, Oholibah, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I will stir up thy lovers against thee, from whom thy soul is estranged, and I will 23bring them against thee from every side; The sons of Babylon, and all the Chaldeans, Pekod, and Shoa, and Koa, all the sons of Assyria with them, comely young men, captains and rulers all of them, leaders and men of renown, every one riding on horses. 24And they shall come against thee with weapons, chariot and wheel, and with an assembly of peoples; target and shield and helmet they shall set against thee round about; and I will set judgment before them, and they shall judge thee with their judgments. 25And I will set My jealousy upon thee, and they shall deal with thee in fury; they shall take away thy nose and thine ears, and thy remnant shall fall by the sword; they shall take thy sons and thy daughters, 26and thy remnant shall be devoured by the fire. And they shall strip thee of 27thy clothes, and take away thy fair jewels. And I will make thy lewdness to cease from thee, and thy whoredom from the land of Egypt; and thou shalt not lift up thine eyes to them, nor remember Egypt any more. 28For thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I will deliver thee into the hand of those whom thou hatest, into the hand of those from whom thy soul is estranged. 29And they shall deal with thee in hatred, and shall take away all thy earning, and leave thee naked and bare; and the nakedness of thy whoredoms shall be discovered, and thy lewdness and thy wanton courses. 30This shall be done unto thee because thou hast gone a-whoring after the 31heathen, because thou hast defiled thyself with their idols. In the way of thy sister thou hast gone, and I give her cup into thy hand. 32Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, The cup of thy sister, the deep and wide, thou shalt drink; it shall be for laughter and mockery according to its measure. 33Thou shalt be filled with drunkenness and sorrow; a cup of wasting and desolation is the 34cup of thy sister Samaria. And thou shalt drink it and suck it out; and thou shalt gnaw its sherds, and tear off thy breasts; for I have spoken,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 35Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because thou hast forgotten Me, and hast cast Me behind thy back, do thou 36also bear thy lewdness and thy whoredoms. And Jehovah said to me, Son of man, wilt thou judge Oholah and Oholibah, then show them their abominations. 37For they have committed adultery, and blood is in their hands, and with their idols they have committed adultery; and also their sons whom 38they bare unto Me they have made to pass through the fire to them. This besides they did to Me; they defiled My sanctuary in the same day, and profaned 39My Sabbaths. And when they had slain their sons [children] to their idols, they came to My sanctuary on the same day to profane it; and lo! 40thus have they done in the midst of My house. Yea, they sent even to men coming from afar, to whom a messenger was sent; and, lo, they came, for whom thou didst wash thyself, paint thine eyes, and deck thyself with ornaments; 41And thou satest upon a stately bed, and a table was laid before it, 42and My incense and My oil didst thou set upon it. And the voice of a loose crowd [was] in her [Jerusalem], and to people of the multitude were brought drunkards from the wilderness, who put bracelets on their hands, and a 43beautiful crown upon their heads. And I said of her worn out with adulteries, 44Will they now commit her adulteries? And she [also]? And they went in to her as they go in to a harlot. Thus they went in to Oholah and 45to Oholibah, the lewd women. But righteous men, they shall judge them with the judgment of adulteresses, and the judgment of those that shed blood; for they are adulteresses, and blood is in their hands. 46For thus saith the Lord Jehovah, I will bring up a company against them, and give them to maltreatment and spoiling. 47And the company shall cast stones upon them, and cleave them with their swords; their sons and their daughters 48they shall slay, and burn their houses with fire. And I will cause lewdness to cease out of the land, so that all women shall be warned, and shall not do after your lewdness. 49And they shall recompense your lewdness upon you, and ye shall bear the sins of your idols, and ye shall know that I am the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 23:3. Sept.: ... ἐπεσονοἱμαστοι … διεπαρθενευθησαν. Ezekiel 23:12. … ἐνδεδυμενουςεὐπαρνφα—Vulg.: indutis veste varia— Ezekiel 23:13. … μεμιανταιὁδοςμια— Vet. 15. διεζωσμενουςτοικιλματα … τιαραιβαπται … ὀψιςτρισση. Ezekiel 23:20. κ. ἐπεθουἐπιτουςΧαλδαιους, ὡνἠσανὡς … αἰδοια—Vulg.: insanivit libidine super concubitum … Ezekiel 23:21. Sept., Vulg., Syr. read: αξφψιν. Ezekiel 23:23. … πανταςτρισσουςκ. ὀνομαστους—nobiles, tyrannosque et principes … duces et magistratus … principes principum et nominatοs— Ezekiel 23:24. … ἀποβοῤῥα, ἁρματακ.τροχοι, ἱπποι, μετα … κ. βαλειἐπισεπροφυλακηνκυκλω. Ezekiel 23:29. … τουςπονουςσουκ. τουςμοχθουςσου— Ezekiel 23:31. Sept., Syr., Arab, read: αιγικ. Ezekiel 23:32-33. … τοπλεοναζοντουσυντελεσαιμεθην, κ. ἐκλυσεωςπλησθηση—Eris in derisum … subsannationem, quζ est capacissima … repleberis, calice m�roris et tristitiζ— Ezekiel 23:34. Sept.: ... κ.ταςἑορταςκ. ταςνουμηνιαςαὐτηςἀποστρεψω— Ezekiel 23:37. … δι’ ἐμπυρων;Ezekiel 23:41-42. … προπροσωπουαὐτης … ἐξευφραινοντοἐναὐτοις, κ. φωνηνἁρμονιαςἀνεκρουοντο—vox multitudinis exultantis … in ea et in viris qui de … adducebantur et veniebant de deserto— Ezekiel 23:41. Vulg. reads: μτπικ. Syr., Chald., Arab, read: μτπιδν.—42. Some codd.: ιγιδν; some also: γΰωιδν. Ezekiel 23:43. K. εἰπα·οὐκἐντουτοιςμοιχωνται; ἐργαγυναικοςπορνηςἐποιεις; Vulg.: ei, quζ attrita est in … Nunc fornicabitur in fornicatione sua etiam hζc. Ezekiel 23:44. Another reading: ειαΰε. Ezekiel 23:46. Many codd.: ςμιδο. Ezekiel 23:47. λιθοιςὀχλων. Ezekiel 23:49. Codd. and Syr.: επϊϊι. REMARKSThe allegory in which the ripeness for judgment of Judah and Israel is represented, is closely allied to that of Ezekiel 16. The remarks made on it are to be compared with the present chapter. In contradistinction to Ezekiel 16, which gave prominence to the love borne to the faithless one by her lawful husband, Ezekiel 23 directs our attention rather to the seductive power and splendour of the lovers for whom Jehovah was forsaken. The prospect of pardon presented by the earlier chapter here disappears behind the penal judgment. [Fausset: “The imagery is similar to that in Ezekiel 16; but here the reference is not, as there, so much to the breach of the spiritual marriage-covenant with God by the people’s idolatries, as by their worldly spirit, and their trusting to alliances with the heathen for safety, rather than to God.”—W. F.] Ezekiel 23:1-4. PrefaceEze_23:2. The one mother may be presupposed from Ezekiel 16 as the Hittite. Comp. at Ezekiel 23:3; Ezekiel 23:44 sq. As, however, it is not the present object to give prominence to the ancestry in the sense of Ezekiel 16, the word simply describes the original unity of the people. This also explains what is said in Ezekiel 23:3 relative to Egypt. The two kingdoms which form the theme of the chapter are assumed as already two in Egypt; but in point of fact, what is said holds as to the yet undivided people. [Hengst., indeed, appeals to Genesis 49, in which the two tribes of Judah and Ephraim appear as two independent powers.]—On account of the legitimate relation in which the nation stood to God from its very origin, namely, of a marriage-covenant, the political and religious departure of both kingdoms from the principles laid down in the law, appears as wantonness (ζָ ?πָ ?δ), Ezekiel 16:15 (James 4:4).—Here also (comp. Ezekiel 20:7 sq.) they are said to be tainted with the spirit of Egypt. Comp. also at Ezekiel 16:26. In their youth, points (comp. Ezekiel 16:22; Ezekiel 16:43) to their innate corruption, showing itself early in sinful lust.—Even when still unwedded (Ezekiel 16:8), as Jehovah’s betrothed, the conduct of the people was to be judged according to Deuteronomy 22:23. Comp. farther, Ezekiel 16:7; Hosea 2:4 [2].—ςִ ?ωּׂ ?εּ, the Egyptians (Ezekiel 23:8). Egypt was the means of exciting the first carnal impulses of the youthful people to a heathenish mode of feeling and action, whereby they were robbed of their virgin purity. The Sept. explains their virginity according to Deuteronomy 22:20. Hitz. repels the idea of any allusion to idolatry, and makes the reference to be to the oppression by the Egyptians. Ezekiel 23:4. Oholah = her tent, i.e. either generally (Hengst.): that has a house of her own, an independent existence, or (on account of the contrast to Oholibah): who possesses her wilfully erected sanctuary (1 Kings 12:28 sq., 16), which makes it unnecessary to think of an abbreviation of ΰָ ?δֳ ?μָ ?δִ ?Ξαָ ?δּ, her tent in her. Hδv., while maintaining the Hittite reference, Ezekiel 16:3, etc., makes prominent the allusion found in it to the history of Esau, and explains Oholibah relative to Genesis 36:2, inasmuch as Aholibamah [Oholibamah], who is called Judith in an earlier passage (Genesis 26:34), could most appropriately represent the kingdom of Judah. While Aholibamah merely means (tent of the high place): My tent (house, family) is a height (“I have a high tent”), in the name Oholibah—My tent (namely, Jehovah’s, who speaks) in her—the reference is taken from the tabernacle; whereby one is reminded of the habit which prevailed among the exiles of naming their children from the temple and similar objects (1 Chronicles 3:20; Ezra 2:43; Ezra 2:59), to express their yearning for restoration. (Moreover, the members of a family in the East often bear the same or like-sounding names.) The kingdom of Judah had also the advantage of possessing the one true sanctuary, which, however, made its guilt the more aggravated. The great is to be rendered, as in Ezekiel 16:46, and not with Hengst.: the elder, with an allusion to Joseph’s precedence, Genesis 49:26, to that of Ephraim in the time of Joshua and the judges, and to that of Benjamin which belonged to the ten tribes in the time of Saul, while Judah attained supremacy only in the time of David (Psalms 78.). Hδv. combines with the political importance of Samaria, owing to its greater extent, its priority in sin as well as in punishment.—Comp. Ezekiel 16:8; Ezekiel 16:20. Hδv. translates εַ ?ϊִּ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?ιπָ ?δμִ ?ι: “And they belonged to me as wives,” with emphasis.—The explanation of the names as those of Samaria and Jerusalem (representing Judah as hitherto) closes this introduction. Ezekiel 23:5-10. Oholah’s Adulterous Wantonness (Ezekiel 23:5-8) and Punishment (Ezekiel 23:9-10) Ezekiel 23:5-8. The HarlotriesEze_23:5. Comp. at Ezekiel 16:32. Hitz.: “When she turned her back on me” (?). So also the Chaldee. But rather is the marriage relation pointed to, in the line of Eze 23:4 (Hosea 4:12). Umbr.: “While she rests under her husband, her thoughts run wantonly after others.”—ςָ ?βַ ?α, found only in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, means: to desire, to burn. The description of the Assyrians begins with χְ ?ψεֹ ?αִ ?ιν. If is in apposition, like all that follows. The nearness is to be taken neither locally, nor yet morally—of inward relationship, but it brings into prominence the historical element, the time when the Assyrians became neighbours of Israel; comp. 2 Kings 15:17 sq., Ezekiel 16:9, Ezekiel 17:3. [The supposition of a loose connection of the words=“and neighbours,” who were somewhere in her neighbourhood, is not consistent with what follows. Others: Who came near her lustfully (Genesis 20:4). Hδv.: “So closely related, intimate, trusted friends,” that alliances were made with them, and their favour courted, until, from being bosom friends, they became deadly enemies. There is nothing of all this in the context, which only states that on the first opportunity, namely, when the Assyrians approached, Israel was captivated by the carnal glory of the world-power, which is then portrayed with greater minuteness.]—This political power is Assyria, which does not come into view, in the first place, on the side of its idolatry; but when Israel wantoned after it from political motives, this infidelity to the idea of their complete dependence on God could not fail to issue, from the first, in apostasy from God, and the other natural consequences of the forbidden relationship. Ezekiel 23:6. Description of the Assyrians from the view-point of Israel’s apostate heart, to whom this world-power seemed most imposing, as Hengst. remarks: “with a touch of irony.” The impressions are entirely such as are made on the mind of a carnal woman, whereby the previously mentioned doting gaze is accounted for.—ϊְּ ?λֵ ?μֶ ?ϊ, either from its thick, hard shell, or from its dark colour, is the name of a mussel (helix ianthina) with a purple shell, from which a blue or violet purple was made.—τֶּ ?ηָ ?δ is a foreign word, denoting the military governor of a province. Similarly νָ ?βָ ?ο (νֶ ?βֶ ?ο) = the representative of the prince, commander-in-chief. (Something like governors and generals.)—The special mention of horses is intended to distinguish the noblest and proudest class of riders from those riding on asses and camels. Ezekiel 23:7. ξִ ?αְ ?ηַ ?ψ briefly resumes Ezekiel 23:6, in order, perhaps, to suggest, besides the “choice,” etc., those who were of less account; at all events, she doted also on others, as the Egyptians, who are presently mentioned.—εּ ?αְ ?λֹ ?μΧαְּ ?λָ ?μΧ, the one illustrating the other; the political confederation with the heathen led to idolatry. (Hengst.: The idols of the world-powers are not beyond and above them, but themselves made objective.) Ezekiel 23:8. Thither Jeroboam’s calf-worship pointed back, so that their ancient deliverance from Egypt, instead of remaining a fact, had become a mere tradition. As to the political application (Rashi), 2 Kings 17:4 is to be compared. Hitzig takes it in an exclusively political sense. Ezekiel 23:9-10. The PunishmentEze_23:9. The recompense for Ezekiel 23:7 : “And she bestowed,” “Therefore I gave.” Comp. 2 Kings 17 Ezekiel 23:10. The shame of her wantonness is succeeded by the shame of punishment, executed by her paramours themselves. Comp. besides, Ezekiel 16:37. So in the figure; as to the fact, it was accomplished by the captivity of the people, the slaughter of those on whom the existence of the kingdom depended, of the men who were able to bear arms, so that Israel became notorious among the nations on account of its shameful overthrow, Ezekiel 16:41. Ezekiel 23:11-35. Oholibah’s Guilt (Ezekiel 23:11-21) and Punishment (Ezekiel 23:22-35) Ezekiel 23:11-21. The GuiltEze_23:11. She saw both the transgressions and their recompense. The former should have filled her with loathing, by the latter she should have been warned. But her corrupt conduct was still worse than that of Samaria (Ezekiel 16:47). Ezekiel 23:12. Comp. 2 Kings 16:7 sq.; 2 Chronicles 28:19 sq.—Comp. at Ezekiel 23:6; Ezekiel 23:5.—ξִ ?λְ ?μεֹ ?μ (in Ezekiel 23:6, ϊְּ ?λֵ ?μֶ ?ϊ) means: perfection, therefore: splendour; not exactly (Sept.): “with beautiful (purple) fringe,” as Hitz. Ewald: “clothed in martial coats of mail.” Ezekiel 23:13. And I saw, counterpart to εַ ?ϊֵּ ?ψֶ ?ΰ, Ezekiel 23:11. (Comp. Jeremiah 3:8) The way and end of both sisters were the same. Ezekiel 23:14. The description of Judah’s baser conduct follows. Her relations with the Assyrians were similar to those of Samaria. They had in reality approached the kingdom of Judah, as they had the kingdom of Israel. In regard to the Chaldeans, on the other hand, the relation to them was brought about by means of likenesses, which Judah saw,—ξְ ?ηֻ ?χֶּ ?δ, partic. Pual, something engraven or sketched, painted. (Hδv.: probably coloured bas-reliefs), in vermilion (which would be all the more appropriate for warriors); or perhaps in ochre, as frescoes of this description for the glorification of the Chaldean commanders and their victories were sufficiently common in Ezekiel’s neighbourhood. The representation here, therefore, may possibly be the mere drapery of the thought, that the bare report of the military prowess of the Chaldeans had inflamed the imagination and the senses of Judah. So Hengst. Owing to the undeniable intercourse between nations in the Old World, which certainly obtained between Palestine and Babylon, it is not in itself unimaginable that such wall-pictures of representatives of foreign nations may have existed in the royal palaces of Judah. Hitz. here takes note of “the influence (of pictures) on a woman’s imagination,” under which figure Judah is personified. Hδv. cites Ezekiel 8:10, and thinks of “pictorial representations from the circle of Chaldean mythological ideas.” The Chaldean embassy of 2 Kings 20:12 sq., 2 Chronicles 32:31 (comp. Delitzsch on Isaiah 39), shows that the Chaldeans kept up intercourse with Judah, even when Assyria was still the dominant world-power. May not this embassy have been perpetuated by a painting as the occasion of an alliance with the Chaldeans against Assyria? Ewald supposes: “beautiful idol-pictures, which, as e.g. Mithras, were represented in the human form,” and cites Ezekiel 8:16. Ezekiel 23:15. The flowing turbans are such as may be seen on the monuments of ancient Nineveh, with which the following descriptions correspond throughout. See Layard’s Nineveh and Babylon. [θָ ?αַ ?μ refers not so much to the colour (gay), but rather means originally to twist round. Layard remarks, by the way: “The general was clothed in embroidered robes, and wore on his head a fillet adorned with rosettes, and long tasselled bands.” Probably, waving head-bands. The Kurds, who still preserve the most ancient Eastern customs, wear on their bright-coloured turbans, appendages which hang over their neck and shoulders.]—ωָׁ ?μִ ?ιωׁ in the plural betokens the charioteers, of whom there were three, in each chariot, one driving, one bearing the shield, and a third fighting. (Appearance and likeness; see Ezekiel 1:5.) The emphasizing of: the land of their birth, according to Hengst., is intended to form a contrast to the Assyrians, whom Judah saw in her own land,—to point perhaps to Ur (Genesis 11:28) of the Chaldees (Abraham’s native land), so that the original blood - relationship may have been alluded to in this political intercourse (?). Hδv.: “The Chaldean’s fatherland theirs,” which sarcastically places side by side, the original home of the once fierce and warlike people, and the idolatrous pictures, which resemble them, but not the existing faineant Babylonians. The statement made by the sentence is simpler: that even they were not farther removed than Abraham, the founder of the Jewish people,—“whose fathers served strange gods in Ur of the Chaldees (Joshua 24:2), so that he was called thence,” etc., as Cocc. remarks. Ezekiel 23:16. Apodosio to Ezekiel 23:14 : “And she saw,” resumed by: as soon as her eye saw. The messengers mentioned here can scarcely be those of Jer 29:3. “They were probably,” says Hengst., “the occasion of the embassy sent from the Chaldeans, who were to take a view of the resources of the people proposing an alliance.” This side of the history of Judah is not described elsewhere. Enough that Judah, as is in itself probable, made the first advances (Ezekiel 16:29). Ezekiel 23:17. The political alliance led to religious defilement—was itself, in fact, religious defection; and after the defilement was effected, it led again to political hostility. Judah found that it had only changed its masters. Jehoiakim and Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon, 2 Kings 24.—In πָ ?χַ ?ς (the weaker form is ιָ ?χַ ?ς, from which the fut. is derived) there lies the idea of satiety and loathing; in this sense the meaning of the verb is: to push away any one, to break a relationship, to be alienated from any one. Comp. 1 Corinthians 6:16; Ezekiel 18:6; Ezekiel 18:11. Ezekiel 23:18. Yet the satiety was not absolute. Others take the connection thus: “and when she had discovered,” etc., “then was,” etc. But more is meant to be stated as the ground of Jehovah’s estrangement, for Judah’s alienation from the Chaldeans might also have led her back to Jehovah. More general prostitution, however, was the result, by which is especially meant alliances with the lesser states against Babylon, and at the same time breaches of faith towards men, Ezekiel 17:15. Jehovah’s estrangement from Judah is a suggestive parallel to Judah’s from the Chaldeans. Ezekiel 23:19. Comp. Ezekiel 23:3; Ezekiel 23:8, Ezekiel 16:51. But Judah multiplied, etc. Instead of remembering the misery of her youth, and the grace then shown (Ezekiel 16:22; Ezekiel 16:43), she thought only of renewing quite another “first love” than that of Jehovah. Ezekiel 23:20. ςַ ?μ is unjustifiably pressed by some interpreters (“beyond,” more than the neighbouring people of Egypt, or, “together with,” Ezekiel 16:37), as its construction with ςָ ?βַ ?α in the chapter sufficiently shows. Nor does this single masculine form of τִּ ?μֶּ ?βֶ ?ωׁ, which is elsewhere fem., justify the interpretation of Kimchi, that Judah wished to be the concubine of the Egyptians. It is rather a derision of the Egyptian eunuchs, i.e. courtiers and officers who mediated the alliance with Egypt. (τִּ ?μַּ ?βְ ?ωֵׁ ?ιδֶ ?ν does not mean the men-concubines, which the Egyptians are, nor is it to be taken in the sense of eunuchus imbellis, or puer mollis, or polyandry.) The representation which follows is sufficiently explained by the particularly lecherous character of the animals mentioned, and describes the obscene character of the Egyptians (Ezekiel 16:26). Hengst.: “The falling power of Egypt sought to provide a prop for itself by diplomatic art.” Ezekiel 23:21 sums up. “The sudden transition to the address in Ezekiel 23:21 is explained by this, that the prophet has the actual state of affairs (the union with Egypt) before his eyes” (Hengst.).—αְּ explains ζִ ?ξַּ ?ϊΧ in accordance with Ezekiel 23:3, to which the inexperienced sensuousness and carnality of the youthful people presented the inducement. Ezekiel 23:22-35. Oholibah’s PunishmentEze_23:22. She is punished by those with whom she had wantoned. Comp. Ezekiel 23:9. The following verse shows who are meant. Those from whom she would (Ezekiel 23:17) escape out of loathing, will not allow her to escape punishment. Ezekiel 23:23. The sons, etc., are more definitely personified. Ewald regards the three names as the proper names of three subordinate Chaldee tribes, which are placed together from similarity of sound. As there is no proof of this, nor even of their being nomina propria, modern interpreters for the most part regard them as the titles of Chaldee dignitaries (Hengst.: “Pekod =supremacy; Shoa = the chief; Koa, of uncertain meaning”), or three classes of the people, three branches of the military force, or three ranks in it (Hitz.: “noble and prince and lord”). From the description, the assembly which is to be gathered together to execute punishment, shall be great and imposing. The Assyrians figure as part of it, and are ironically represented in the manner of Eze 23:12 (6).—ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν, therefore the ωָׁ ?μִ ?ωִׁ ?ιν form Ezekiel 23:15 are named. χְ ?ψεּ ?ΰִ ?ιν, Ew.: renowned, which Hitz. questions. For the purpose in hand, the word is either formed after Numbers 1:16; Numbers 16:2 : formally “appointed,” or means generally: “summoned.” Ezekiel 23:24. The assembly was not more conspicuous for its numbers than for the completeness of its equipments, δֹ ?φֶ ?ο (ηφο) ἁπ. λεγ. (something hard, cutting, sharp), signifying indefinitely: weapon, so that a threefold equipment is specified. [Meier: battle-axe. Hengst.: sabre (a Chaldee military word). Ewald: “with shoulder, bridle, and wheel,” as the three modes in which soldiers advance,—shouldering (with bent arm), riding, and driving.] The missing αְּ is easily understood; but it is not required, as the three expressions standing for the concretes, foot, horse, and chariots, could be the subject to εּ ?αָ ?ΰεּ.—εּ ?αּ ?χְ ?δַ ?μΧ (ε explic.), since the assembly of peoples in the manner of the Israelitish congregation (Ezekiel 23:23) supplies the proper element for the judgment which is to be held. To indicate that they (while on Jehovah’s mission) are secured against any anxiety as to the result, three pieces of exclusively defensive armour are now mentioned, which correspond to the above threefold description,—the shield which covered the whole person, the smaller shield of the light-armed soldier, and the helmet. They received from God the right to judge according to their judgments, their ideas of judgment. Thus it was a divine judgment. They were judges in God’s stead. But with a reference, at the same time, to the fact that Judah had been in fellowship with them politically, religiously, and morally. Ezekiel 23:25. The jealousy of God was turned against Israel; in consequence of it the judgments of the heathen were fierce. The mutilation is to be understood in conformity with common Asiatic and Chaldee usages, but, in the present connection, of the “severing of portions of the national body-corporate” (Hitz.), or with Hengst., of the annihilation of their military strength, which is to a people what “nose and ears” are to a woman. The older interpreters understood Judah’s royal splendour, or (Kimchi) kingdom and priesthood. The remnant is defined the first time by “nose” and “ears,” so that there is pronounced, on the one hand, mutilation, and on the other, slaughter; the meaning of the expression in the second instance is defined by the carrying away of the children, so that it can only refer to the empty houses (Ezekiel 16:41). [Henderson: “Ezekiel 23:25-26. Punishment by cutting off the nose and ears was inflicted for adultery, not only among the Chaldeans, but also among the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans. It was therefore most appropriate to represent that which adulterous Judah was to suffer, under the image of such ignominious and cruel treatment. They were also to be stripped of what lewd females set most value upon—their rich dresses and costly jewels, by which they attract the notice of their paramours, Ezekiel 16:39.”—W. F.] Ezekiel 23:26. Ezekiel 16:39; Ezekiel 16:17. The plundering is either symbolical or actual. Ezekiel 23:27. The lewdness is made to cease by God as to subject and object. Ezekiel 23:28. Comp. Ezekiel 16:37.—See Ezekiel 23:17; Ezekiel 23:22. Ezekiel 23:29. Hatred (Ezekiel 23:28) and counter-hatred instead of all the former intimacy. Despoiling by the Chaldeans till she is reduced to her original condition in Egypt (Ezekiel 16:7), from which results the discovery of her guilt and accumulated infamy (Ezekiel 16:37). Ezekiel 23:31 (Ezekiel 23:13). The figure of the cup, to represent the final issue, under the idea of drinking out. Ezekiel 23:32. The cup described as containing much. ϊִּ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ is the 3d, not the 2d pers., and the subject to it, is either the cup or ξִ ?ψְ ?αָ ?δ (amplitude, wideness); but the former is preferable, with the latter as epexegetical. The cup, from its capacity, occasions the derisive laughter of the enemies,—that the person, formerly so wide-mouthed and haughty, now become so insignificant, requires to swallow so much. Ezekiel 23:33. What the cup contains for those who have to empty it, and hence what cup it is. Stupefaction with sorrow and woe, until they are distracted by the wasting and desolation ! (The verse begins with ωִׁ ?λָּ ?ψεֹ ?ο, and ends with ωֹׁ ?ξְ ?ψεֹ ?ο.) Ezekiel 23:34. Not so much an intensification of the figure (Keil), as of the drunkenness, arising from the anguish of thought. In the madness of her pain she licks up the last drops of the cup. Her affliction is her thirst.—The sherds point to an earthen cup—nothing is gilded or splendid in this Nemesis-song—and presuppose a breaking in pieces, which is incidentally set forth in the madness which follows; but the word is especially intended to fit in with ϊְּ ?πָ ?ψֵ ?ξִ ?ι, which expresses the idea of crushing or gnawing the sherds with the teeth, in order to suck out the last drops of moisture left in them. (Hengst. says merely: “Thou shalt break the sherds thereof, as one who, having taken a very disagreeable potion, shatters the vessel in ill-humour.”) The tearing of the breasts is placed beside the breaking of the sherds, as if it were done by means of the sherd-fragments. Or it may even have been done in frenzy by her own nails. See Ezekiel 23:3; Ezekiel 23:8, in reference to the breasts. “We find a historical illustration of this in the treatment they gave Gedaliah, the Chaldean governor, for which they were compelled to suffer, Jeremiah 41.” (Hengst.) Ezekiel 23:35. Ezekiel 22:12.—She followed after the heathen and their gods (Ezekiel 23:30).—Ezekiel 16:43; Ezekiel 16:52; Ezekiel 16:58. Ezekiel 23:36-49. Oholah’s and Oholibah’s Abominations together. Ezekiel 23:36-45. The Abominations. Ezekiel 23:46-49. The JudgmentEze_23:36-45. The AbominationsEze_23:36. Ezekiel 22:2; Ezekiel 20:4. Since the ripeness of both of them for judgment is evident, this refrain is most appropriate.—(Ezekiel 16:2) Ezekiel 23:37. Adultery with the idols, and blood-shedding, as in Ezekiel 22:3, etc. Ezekiel 16:38. The latter illustrated by the bloody sacrificing of children. (Ezekiel 23:4. Ezekiel 16:20; Ezekiel 20:31) Ezekiel 23:38. Ezekiel 20:27.—Ezekiel 5:11. (2 Kings 21:4-5; 2 Kings 21:7) In the same day, makes the shocking contrast more obvious. Desecration of the sanctuary and Sabbath, as in Ezekiel 22:8. Ezekiel 23:39. (Ezekiel 16:21.) To their idols, explains “to them” at the close of Eze 23:37.—The doing of the one and the other,—this was the special affront to Jehovah. Not that children were sacrificed in the temple, but Jehovah was repaired to after Moloch, each in their several places. That which was “defilement” of the sanctuary in Ezekiel 23:38, when the idea of offering to Moloch was included, is here called “profanation,” when both are treated separately. To profane it, however, seems to mean something more, namely: that they came to the temple to profane it also by alien rites of all sorts, as the clause: and lo … in the midst of My house, evinces (Ezekiel 8:3 sq.). The immediately following change from the plural to the singular shows that the background is here supplied, by the period subsequent to the destruction of Israel; Judah appears before the prophet’s eye for Israel, partly on account of the temple, but also in consideration of all Israel’s relations to Judah both before and after (2 Chronicles 15:9; 2 Chronicles 30:11). Ezekiel 23:40. Climax, a non plus.—ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?μַ ?ηְ ?πָ ?δ is not the 2d plur. (address), but is said of both, although it could also be the 3d sing. The signification of the imperf. shows the conduct as continuous; not once and again, but they were wont to do so. Ew.: “They sent repeatedly.” Unless it be merely a repetition of Eze 23:16 from a new point of view? The point of the coming from afar is not in its contrast to the near (Ezekiel 23:5; Ezekiel 23:12), but in the exertions which it presupposes, so that it is expressly added: to whom a messenger was sent, although this was already involved in: they sent. And, lo, they came, seems to say this, that those who were far off were at last moved, and actually came. Which may apply to others besides the Chaldeans. To this correspond the special exertions she makes to prepare herself for those whom she has addressed, as “washing;” then painting the eyes (λָּ ?ηַ ?μ, to make dark)—staining the eyelashes and eyebrows with a powder, so as to make the glance of the eye more brilliant (comp. Winer, Realw.); and finally the attire in general, 2 Kings 9:30; Jeremiah 4:30. Ezekiel 23:41. “Sitting” is the most natural rendering with ξִ ?θָּ ?δ, couch, cushion; with which also the rest harmonizes. The placing of the table betokens the preparation of a meal (according to the prevalent custom). Hengst.: “Eating and drinking play an important part in harlotry, either in the usual or the spiritual sense.” (μ—δָ, to be referred, not to ωֻׁ ?μְ ?ηָ ?ο, which is masc., but to ξִ ?θָּ ?δ.) Every effort was made to fill the heart’s emptiness in relation to Jehovah, by other and remote associations. For this purpose she placed even Jehovah’s holy incense (Exodus 30:1 sq.) and oil beside herself on the couch, so that nothing was any longer sacred to her. Comp. Ezekiel 16:18. [Hengst.: The bed is made fragrant by the incense and oil; whereby are meant the rich gifts by which Judah sought to purchase the favour of the heathen sovereigns, Isaiah 30:6; Isaiah 57:9 (?). Hitz.: The oil is used at table for anointing, and the incense kindled to excite sensuous feeling. Adultery through commercial intercourse is meant, so that it can be the merchant’s table, where oil could be exchanged for incense. Hδv. understands it of the lascivious worship of the Babylonish Mylitta. The wanton Israel is described as preparing herself for one of the high festivals of this goddess, and as abandoning herself to strangers like the young women of Babylon; incense and oil, therefore, for the purposes of a religious ceremony.] Ezekiel 23:42. δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο (δָ ?ξָ ?δ), a humming; hence, from the sound of the noise it makes: a crowd. Loose, in a bad sense. In her, pointing away from the figure to the fact. [Hengst.: “Secure murmur,” arising from the self-confident intercourse of the adulterers with the adulteresses, from the festivals which were held for the sealing of political friendship. Ew.: “While a godless shouting resounded thereat.” Keil: “The loud noise became still” (!?). Hδv. recalls the reckless wantonness which characterized the worship of Aphrodite in the East.] The loud, dominant voice, which is alone heard in Jerusalem, is further explained as loose, from the fact that it is the voice of the great (godless) multitude, rich and poor, high and low, with whom those brought from the wilderness (Ezekiel 23:40, “men coming from afar”) associate themselves (ξεּ ?αָ ?ΰִ ?ιν, Hoph. makes a paronomasia with ρεֹ ?αָ ?ΰִ ?ιν). By this the coalition against Nebuchadnezzar, already frequently referred to, must be meant, not (as Hengst.) “the great anti-Assyrian coalition in the time of Hezekiah,” which can be no element in the ripeness for judgment referred to in this chapter. [According to Hengst., ρεֹ ?αָ ?ΰִ ?ιν is a mixed form that signifies both Sabeans and topers, loose barbarians, besides many others from all the world; and the verse should be referred to political connections with Ethiopia. (Isaiah 37:9; Isaiah 43:3; Isaiah 45:14; 2 Kings 19:9; Isaiah 18)] That the people of the multitude, who are the same as the “men coming from afar” of Ezekiel 23:40, represent the Assyrians (Keil) cannot be evidenced by Isaiah 39:3, since those mentioned there are Babylonians, therefore Chaldeans; nor can the drunkards from the wilderness (here Keil makes ξִ ?ξִּ ?γְ ?αָּ ?ψ correspond to ξִ ?ξֶּ ?ψְ ?ηָ ?χ (!)) be the Chaldeans, who are afterwards called “righteous men.” The addition: “from the wilderness,” does not (as Hδv.) refer to the Arabian-Syrian wilderness, which separated Babylon from Palestine, but must be taken as an antithesis to αָ ?δּ,—from the region outside Jerusalem. Jerusalem accordingly appears as a political harlot-house, in which the counterpart to the native multitude, with their noisy watch-cry, is formed by the foreign dissolute rabble, the political sots of the coalition against Babylon. [Hitz. supposes the Arabians, Dedanites, and Sabeans, who had in their hands the commerce between the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean. But commercial relations are not in question, apart from the fact whether such could be depicted as harlotry. As the commercial highways did not pass through Jerusalem, they must have been induced (according to Hitz.) to go thither by special circumstances. Ew. regards ρεֹ ?αָ ?ΰִ ?ιν as a pathetic repetition of ξεּ ?αָ ?ΰִ ?ιν, since he translates: “And for men … brought from the wilderness, they laid bracelets,” etc.] The giving of the bracelets and the crown suggests how the combination against Nebuchadnezzar, referred to, promised to reunite Judah and Israel as one kingdom (therefore “crown,” in the singular), and generally, as the expressive parallel in Ezekiel 16:11-12 shows, to restore them to their ancient glory. Such was the harlot-reward given to the adulterous women on this side. [According to Hδv., the words betoken the self-adornment of the women with an eye to the crowd (?). Jerome supposes that the women had so adorned their lovers, that even men wore bracelets. Hitz. finds in it that both lands had become not only rich, but also luxurious, through commerce.] Ezekiel 23:43. The judgment-boding sentence of God upon such abominations. If εָ ?ΰֹ ?ξַ ?ψ be taken with μַ ?αָּ ?μָ ?δ, the translation would be. And I said to, or of, etc. The older translators connect the latter word with πִ ?ΰֻ ?τִ ?ιν, and supply αְּ, in adulteries; the more modern take it in the same connection, but accusatively: In relation to, no more capable of, etc. Hitz. as a question: “Does the faded one prosecute adultery?” So also Hengst.: “Are adulteries to the faded? i.e. shall her adulteries still go on to the worn out?” The subject to ιִ ?ζְ ?πֶ ?δ (for which the Qeri reads: ςַ ?ϊָּ ?διִ ?ζְ ?πεּ) is, according to some, the woman in question (?); as Ewald: “Now she also prosecutes her whoredoms,” i.e. Judah is as Samaria; according to others: ϊַ ?ζְ ?πεּ ?ϊֶ ?ιδָ, taken generally as adulterous character and conduct; and εָ ?δִ ?ιΰ personifies her still surviving, indestructible lewdness, although the woman herself has become shrivelled: “Now shall her lewdness itself go a-whoring” (Hitz.). It is less forced to assume a question, which applies the resultant αָּ ?μָ ?δπְ ?ΰֻ ?τִ ?ιν to paramour, adulteries, and adulteress, which expresses what should be the consequence of sin, even before judgment decrees and executes punishment. [Hengst.: “Shall adulteries be still committed even with her?” The Lord cannot possibly suffer this, He must at length make an end (Ezekiel 23:45). Philippson renders εָ ?δִ ?ιΰ: “when she is so (withered)!” Rashi: “Yet she continues to play the wanton.”] Ezekiel 23:44. εַ ?ιָּ ?αεֹ ?ΰ justifies our exposition of ιִ ?ζְ ?πֶ ?δ in the previous verse. On this account, therefore, judgment is influenced to descend upon those who are ripe for it. Jerusalem, as stated, and as is expressly added, represents the whole people. Comp. also Ezekiel 16:30.—ΰִ ?ωֹּׁ ?ϊ, a unique plural. Ezekiel 23:45. The judges and executioners are called righteous—comp. at Ezekiel 23:24—because they carry out God’s judgment conformably to the judgment appropriate to such women (Isaiah 49:24). A moral comparison between the Chaldeans and the Jews is not intended, nor are prophets and righteous men among the people themselves to be imagined.—Comp. Ezekiel 16:38.—Comp. at Ezekiel 23:37. Ezekiel 23:46-49. The JudgmentEze_23:46. According to Hengst. and many others, an address to the prophet: “Bring up” in the might of prophecy. Others suppose the infin, absol to stand either for the indefinite 3d pers. fut., or (Hitz.) the 1st pers. (Ezekiel 21:31).—The company retains the character of the previous description of the Chaldeans as “righteous,” Ezekiel 16:40. The heathen are thus solicitous about that which Israel, as a congregation, had neglected to do (Judges 20).—As in the previous verse, the masc. suffix interchanges with the fem., the reference passing over from the figurative to the actual—the men in question. Comp. besides, Ezekiel 7:21, and at Deuteronomy 28:25. Ezekiel 23:47. The company—the Chaldeans—again made specially prominent. Cleave (comp. at Ezekiel 21:24) is here used in its natural sense.—Comp. Ezekiel 23:25. Ezekiel 23:48. Ezekiel 23:27, Ezekiel 16:41.—εְ ?πִ ?εַּ ?ρְּ ?ψεּ, according to Gesen., for πִ ?ϊְ ?εַ ?ρְּ ?ψεּ, if the Rabbin, punctuation be maintained; otherwise it could be read: πεֹ ?ρְ ?ψεּ, Niph. instead of a mixed Nithpael. Deterrent beacon for all peoples, as Ezekiel 23:10; Ezekiel 5:15. Ezekiel 23:49 εְ ?πָ ?ϊְ ?πεּ, according to some: the women, namely, with their tongues; according to most: the avengers noted in Ezekiel 23:45,—in very deed. [Hitz.: “the heavenly powers.”] In consequence of this recompense, those who are thus judged bear in their punishment the sins of the idols, those occasioned by them, committed with, i.e. by means of them. (Ezekiel 23:7; Ezekiel 23:30; Ezekiel 23:37)—Ezekiel 16:58. [“The closing part of the description represents the two women, and especially the one that personated the people of Judah, as persevering to the last in their wicked and profligate courses. Like persons in the final stages of abandonment, they went on rioting in the ways of evil, unchecked by all the troubles and humiliations they had experienced in the past; and now, therefore, as utterly reprobate and hardened and hopeless, they must be adjudged to the doom appointed against such incorrigible and shameless offenders. So the doleful story ends. The prophet looks only, from first to last, to the course of crime and its deserved recompense; and he allows the curtain to drop without one gleam of hope as to the future. He sees that the hammer of the law in its strongest form is needed to break the hard and stony heart of the people. So urgent was the call for a work of conviction, and so great the danger of that not being effectually wrought, that he would not drop a word which might lighten the impression of guilt upon their minds, or afford the least excuse for delay. His message was, Now or never. Judged by the sense of right and wrong current among men, your conduct toward God calls for judgment without mercy. And if there be not immediately awakened the contrition of sincere repentance, you have nothing to expect but the most unsparing visitations of wrath.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, p. 257.—W. F.] (See Doct. Reflec. on Ezekiel 20 and Ezekiel 16) 1. As contrast is an inherent element in all human development, so through the people κατ̓ἐξοχην, among the peoples, a dualism immediately accompanies the evolution of the triad of the patriarchs to the dodecad, in its relativeness (of the 3 to the 4) to the world as a permeating influence. The two foci of the ellipse illustrate for us the history of the chosen people in their orbit. Even in Genesis 49 (comp. therewith Deuteronomy 33), Joseph, as against Judah, is prominent compared with the others. If the first position in the camp was allotted to Judah, and a signally large extent of territory in Canaan bestowed on it, to Joseph (and Ephraim took precedence of Manasseh, Genesis 48) belonged the distinction of furnishing the nation with Joshua, the leader of the host and conqueror of Canaan, as well as of long retaining the tabernacle in its midst. (For the independence of Ephraim in the time of the judges, comp. Judges 8:12; Psalms 78) The jealousy which obtained between the two appears, after Saul’s death, in the kingdom of Ishbosheth. Only the centralizing personality of a David was capable of unifying the existing dualism. Yet the fire of discord, which continued to smoulder beneath outward harmony, nourished the rebellion of Absalom and the revolt of Sheba. Under Solomon, it is true, the glory of the nation silenced for the time the variance of the two tribes; but Solomon’s polytheistic aberration from the monotheistic path introduced an additional element of division. When sin, including that of Rehoboam and the seceding tribes, had in this way accomplished the division into the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel, this result of sin was at the same time a judgment of God; for which, however, the foundation was laid in that original dualism between Judah and Joseph-Ephraim, and the way paved, in the course of history. The form of the representation in our chapter rests on this view of the subject. 2. One may regard Solomon’s polytheistic aberrations (e.g. 1 Kings 11:5) as a refined pantheism, or a more universal, more cosmical Jehovism; yet his marriage with Pharaoh’s daughter, at the very beginning of his reign, must have exerted some influence on the religious attitude of the kingdom of the ten tribes. And how could the calf-worship of Jeroboam have been introduced without meeting universal opposition, unless previously, during Solomon’s reign, religion and politics had taken a decided outward bias? Note also Solomon’s commercial relations with different countries, Syria, Arabia, Egypt, and especially his alliance with the Ph�nicians. Thus a toleration sprang up under the influence of trade and intercourse, which necessarily became a religious toleration, and which was still farther defined by politics as a doctrine. The example of the king acted on the people, and it is not surprising that Solomon’s connections with the world, and his heathen culture, found their echo in the craving of Ephraim and her associates for a heathen-worldly, revolutionary, anti-theocratic government. Solomon is herein to be compared to the church-father Augustine, to whom Roman Catholicism links itself, as the Reformation also falls back on him; so with Solomon are connected the Song of Songs and the form of the apostasy of the ten tribes. 3. The Egyptian bias of Solomon, which gained national expression in the worship of the calves, was seconded by the policy of Jeroboam, who, imitating the example of Aaron at Sinai, transplanted to Israelitish soil the worship which he ad seen at Memphis and Heliopolis, 1 Kings 12:26 sq., 2. The Egyptian animal symbolism, which was thereby applied to Jehovah, was a new growth from old roots. Comp. Ezekiel 23:8 in our chapter. This corrupt worship of Jehovah moved on the same line as ordinary idolatry (1 Kings 14:9), so that the one was as closely related to the other, as the second commandment to the first. Hengst. remarks very justly: “By the introduction of the worship of images, a breach was made for heathenism, through which it rushed irresistibly.” 4. As Egypt has a very ancient, original significance for the sacred history, so on the Egyptian monuments, even at a very early time, the Assyrians, under the name “Shari,” are represented as in conflict with the Egyptians. The Assyrians, who first broke into the kingdom of Israel under Menahem, are, no doubt, to be considered in historical connection with that ancient kingdom; but their military valour, which they made Israel feel, and which excited its longing for association, appears, however, to point to a recent fresh revival of the ancient Assyrian glory. Pul, to whom Menahem was tributary, was succeeded by Tiglath-Pileser, who led into captivity a portion of the inhabitants of the kingdom of the ten tribes; to him Shalmaneser succeeded, who conducted a still more comprehensive deportation to Assyria, which became complete under his second successor, Esar-haddon, so that the Israelitish kingdom was then made a full end of. 5. The subversion of the kingdom of Israel under its last king, Hosea, whom Shalmaneser had made tributary, took place, besides, on account of the hankering of the people after alliances with Egypt, which one might call the hereditary sin of the whole people (Ezekiel 23:8); the attempted combination with Egypt against Assyria had provoked a new expedition by Shalmaneser. The destruction of Israel was for Judah a “Remember whence thou art fallen,” a memento mori (Ezekiel 23:10). But even before this, Ahaz, the Ahab of the kings of Judah, as he had offered one of his sons to Moloch, so also he regarded the might of the Assyrians as better than the help of Jehovah. Comp. the passage of Isaiah relative to him, and Ezekiel 23:11 of our chapter. “Thy servant and thy son am I,” he had said to Tiglath-Pileser; “come up and deliver me.” 6. The Babylonian-Chaldean power, which, like Judah, was dependent on Assyria, affected the imagination of Jerusalem so seductively in the time of the pious son of the godless Ahaz, that even Hezekiah succumbed to the temptation. The expectations entertained from Egypt had faded away, and the Lord had overwhelmed the Assyrians by His hand before Jerusalem (2 Kings 18:19); yet Hezekiah’s imagination lingers upon his treasures, and upon the embassy which the then vice-king of Babylon had sent to him (perhaps also, as Bunsen conjectures, Ezekiel 23:14, frescoes of Babylonish heroes and warriors). The preponderating world-power seems to incline from Nineveh to Babylon. Perhaps the destruction of the Assyrian army under Sennacherib incited the Babylonians to revolt from Assyria. Niebuhr (The History of Assyria and Babylon) says concerning the relation of Babylon to Assyria: “Assyria was by no means the foremost and most ancient people. The inhabitants of Shinar, the Babylonians, were so. The Ninevites had elevated themselves above them through bravery and good fortune, and the older race, to whom belonged the religious metropolis, the most fertile soil, the origin of history, was compelled to submit to the younger. Their constantly repeated attempts at revolt showed how bitterly the Babylonians felt this disgrace,” etc. Ezekiel confirms what Isaiah had formerly predicted to Hezekiah, to cool his carnal expectations from Babylon. The Chaldeans, after destroying Nineveh in combination with the Medes, “stepped into the place of the Assyrians for Judah as well as generally, and this also on the same arena” (Hitz.). Egypt maintained the same attitude toward Assyria as toward Babylon, and the kingdom of Judah, like that of Israel, was subverted through its political harlotries (Ezekiel 23:19 sq., 27) with Egypt. 7. Through this fatal significance of Egypt for the whole people, that motive of the Decalogue, “Who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage,” acquires a striking political prominence. 8. When the people which had come out of Chaldea in Abraham, in the end returns to Chaldea, the circle of their natural history is completed. The beginning is also the end. “Moreover it is noteworthy,” says Ziegler, “that as the dispersion of mankind into all lands proceeded from Babylon, now the Jewish people, or at least the kingdom of Judah, is carried away to Babylon.” “The whole history, from the exodus till now, was a constant provoking of God; therefore it must at last drink a cup full of indignation.” HINTSEze_23:1 sq. “We are called Christians, children of the one heavenly Father; but do we also bear ourselves worthily of the name?” (Stck.)—The two women, Oholah and Oholibah, in their resemblance and difference.—“Oh that all young women from their youth up would deport themselves modestly and chastely! What honour and peace of conscience it would procure for them in old age ! Job 27:6” (Stck.).—“One can fall from the greatest light into the greatest darkness and folly, if one be faithless to the grace which has been received” (Tόb. Bib.).—“That is spiritual adultery, when souls fall away from the Creator to the creature” (Luther).—“Since body and soul are the temple of the Holy Ghost, He wills that we should preserve both pure and holy, and forbids all unchaste deeds, gestures, words, thoughts, desires, and whatever may excite one thereto” (Heid. Cat., quest. 109).—The youth of a people in its charm and perils.—Harlotry, in all its forms, stains before God, burdens the conscience, and also brings disgrace before men.—The allurements of Egypt for Israel.—The coarseness of apostasy from God amid all the refinement of so-called culture.—For the sake of truth, God’s word speaks of fleshly things as they are, and as men practise them; discloses hidden things, and shows them in their naked deformity.—Plain speaking is not attractive; flowery ambiguities are of the devil.—True religion leads to fellowship with God.—“A Christian congregation is a spiritual mother, which should honour God through its sons and daughters” (Cr.). Ezekiel 23:5 sq. “Under the guise of piety they committed the worst abominations. As adulteresses foist the children which are the fruit of adultery upon their own husbands, so would Jeroboam also serve the true God under the calf-image” (Stck.).—“To yield oneself unreservedly to God is not to throw oneself away” (Hengst.).—“To expect help from men, to rely on them, to depart from God for the sake of profit, honours, etc., is adultery or harlotry in religion” (Stck.).—“To fear God is the true politics.” Ezekiel 23:6. “He who forsakes God is easily carried away by semblances, dress, splendour, honours, and such like” (Stck.).—“How highly the earthly and carnal mind values the friendship and favour of the rich and great!” (B. B.) Ezekiel 23:7. He who holds fellowship with the world must also go after its idols.—The friendship of the world is enmity with God, is idolatry. Ezekiel 23:8. “Behold the power of youthful habit! What has been instilled into one in the years of youth usually remains with one all life through” (Heim.-Hoff.).—[M. Henry: “This corrupt disposition in the children of Israel, when they were first formed into a people, is an emblem of that original corruption which is born with us and is woven into our constitution, a strong bias towards the world and the flesh. This sinful tendency of theirs was bred in the bone with them, and would never out of the flesh, though Egypt had been a house of bondage to them. Thus the corrupt affections and inclinations which we brought into the world with us we have not lost, nor got clear of, but still retain them, though the iniquity we were born in was the source of all the calamities which human life is liable to.”—W. F.] Ezekiel 23:9 sq. “God excites those against us for punishment, to please whom we have sinned” (O.).—Lovers and scourges.—Honour makes a name for one, so also does dishonour. Ezekiel 23:11 sq. Judah must therefore have been more corrupt, since she did not take warning by Israel’s punishment, and since she misused, or at least neglected to use, so much greater grace, which would have enabled her to resist.—“Those who go the same way also reach the same place ” (Stck.).—The dangerous power of the imagination.—“Worldly glory seduces the worldly mind” (Stck.). Ezekiel 23:14 sq. Seeing and longing.—“So men now-a-days are chiefly enamoured of that which is nothing; for what is all our honour, delight, external prosperity, nobility, dignity, and glory, our power and strength, but a picture in which there is no reality!” (B. B.) Ezekiel 23:16. “So it comes to pass, unless one makes a covenant with his eyes not to look on worldly glory, and that which is alien to him, that he is presently absorbed in it, and turns away from God” (B. B.). Ezekiel 23:17. One must not paint the devil on the wall.—Love becomes passion, and passion becomes satiety, yea, hatred.—“Estrangement is the usual end of impure love, of the selfishness concealed under it” (Hengst.).—“Friendship and fellowship in sin are of short duration” (St.). Ezekiel 23:18. He who gives himself up to false friends often loses thereby the true Friend, the Lord. Ezekiel 23:19 sq. It is sad when one goes back to his earlier sins.—“When one lives bestially, he cannot be pictured otherwise than as a beast” (B. B.). Ezekiel 23:21. “The falling back into the old sin is like a visit which is made to her whom one should hate and avoid” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 23:22 sq. The wicked are punished through the wicked.—At a death-bed there is often a great gathering from bygone days. Our sins, and those with whom we have sinned, surround us on every side. Ezekiel 23:25 sq. “The ungodly have no power over God’s people, unless they are given up to them by God” (St.).—Dreadful judgments presuppose dreadful sins.—“We should not wait till God drags us away from sin with violence” (O.). Ezekiel 23:27. “What God’s goodness and patience could not accomplish, that the wickedness and tyranny of men shall bring about” (Stck.).—Every one receives at last his due. Ezekiel 23:28 sq. He who surrenders himself to sin shall be surrendered to punishment. Hate spares not.—What love covers, hate discloses. The unclothing through punishment shows well what the clothing through grace is. Ezekiel 23:30 sq. Yea, he who expects to cleanse himself otherwise than through the blood and Spirit of Christ, pollutes himself still more by idolatry.—“Like sins, like punishments” (Tόb. Bib.).—“Him whom thou hast followed in life, thou shalt also follow in death” (Stck.).—“He who accepts not the cup of salvation, must drink the cup of wrath” (St.). Ezekiel 23:34. It must be drunk out. As we have sided with lust, God sides with punishment.—The dreadful nail-test.—“In righteous judgment God causes sinners to be punished in the members in which they have sinned” (St.). Ezekiel 23:35. “To remember God is the summary of all godliness, as, on the contrary, to forget God is a summary of all ungodliness; therefore God comprehends all in this one, at the close of the catalogue of sins” (Jablonsky).—“The sieve of man’s memory retains only husks—that which is useless” (St.).—[“Men need no more to sink them than the weight of their own sins; and those who will not part with their lewdness and whoredoms must bear them.”—M. Henry.] Ezekiel 23:36 sq. Comp. at Ezekiel 20:4.—God is not silent with His sentence, and even the judgments of God hasten like His grace. That which seems to be delay is long-suffering; but during it, sin ripens all the more quickly for judgment. Ezekiel 23:37. As they literally shed blood, so also in the services of idolatry, fleshly impurity found place.—Judah and Israel as Medea.—He who serves Venus and Bacchus offers to them also his children. Ezekiel 23:38 sq. How largely profanation of the Sabbath is the fashion now-a-days also!—“To run from the harlot-house to God’s house, from murder to the place of prayer, from sin to singing, is not pleasing to God” (Stck.).—“Self-invented, hypocritical worship of God dishonours Him, more than love of the world” (Richt.).—From sin to sin,—thus ruin is reached; that was the way of Oholah and Oholibah.—“What holy thing is there which the sinner does not profane!” (Stck.)—“They considered neither place nor time” (Jerome). Ezekiel 23:40 sq. “The society of the ungodly should not be wished, still less sought for” (Stck.).—“Those who are separate from God go in quest of men” (Stck.).—“The sinner wishes in all things to be pleasing to men; why not to God?” (Stck.)—Washing themselves for men, remaining unclean before God: thus hypocrites act.—How much of the activity of social organizations is here literally described ! Ezekiel 23:43 sq. “The longer a man continues in sin, the more shameless he becomes” (St.). Ezekiel 23:45. God’s righteousness makes even of the Chaldeans “righteous men.” Ezekiel 23:46. “When the judgment-hour strikes, judge and executioner are found so ready that they only require to be called” (Stck.). Ezekiel 23:48 sq. “Even still, although men will not depart from sin, they must depart from life” (L.).—Bad examples, through God’s overruling, may serve a good end. 12. The Marking down of the Event that has taken place (the Symbolical Discourse and the Virtual Sign) (Ezekiel 24.) 1And the word of Jehovah came to me in the ninth year, in the tenth month, on the tenth [day] of the month, saying, 2Son of man, write [register] thee the name of the day, this same day; the king of Babylon has assailed Jerusalem on this same day. 3And utter a parable against the house of rebelliousness, and say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Set on a caldron, 4set it on, and also pour water into it. Gather its pieces into it, every good piece, thigh and shoulder; fill [it] with the choice of the bones. 5Take the choice of the flock, and also a wood-pile under it for the bones; let it boil and boil, 6so that its bones be sodden in the midst of it. Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Woe to the bloody city ! the caldron in [on] which its rust is, and whose rust hath not gone out of it! piece for piece bring it out; no lot has fallen upon it. 7For her blood is in the midst of her; on the bare rock she has put it; she poured it not upon the earth, that it might be covered with 8dust. To make fury to ascend, to execute vengeance, I have put her blood on the bare rock, that it should not be covered. 9Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Woe to the bloody city ! also I will make the pile great. 10Heap on wood, kindle the fire, make ready the flesh, and let the fat be 11melted, and let the bones be burned up. And set it empty upon its coals, that it may be hot, and its brass glow, and its uncleanness in the midst of it 12be melted, and that its rust should cease. It has wearied labours, and its much rust went not forth from it; into the fire its rust ! 13In thy filthiness is lewdness; because I purged thee, and thou wast not purged, thou shalt no 14more be purged from thy filthiness until I cause My fury to rest on thee. I, Jehovah, have spoken; it comes, and I do; I will not slacken, nor spare, nor repent; according to thy ways, and according to thy works, they shall Judges 15 thee: sentence of the Lord Jehovah.—And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 16Son of man, behold, I take away from thee the desire of thine eyes with a stroke; and thou shalt not mourn nor weep, neither shall thy tears 17flow. Groan, be still, make not mourning for the dead, bind the tire of thy head about thee, and put thy shoes upon thy feet, and cover not the beard, 18and eat not the bread of men. And I spake to the people in the morning, and in the evening my wife died; and I did in the morning as I was commanded. 19And the people said to me, Wilt thou not tell us what this [imports] 20to us that thou doest [it] ? And I said to them, The word of Jehovah came 21to me, saying, Say to the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I will profane My sanctuary, the pride of your strength, the desire of your eyes, and the pity of your soul, and your sons and your daughters whom ye have left shall fall by the sword. 22And ye shall do as I have done; ye shall not cover the beard, and the bread of men ye shall not eat. 23And your tires shall be upon your heads, and your shoes on your feet; ye shall not mourn nor weep; and ye shall pine away in your iniquities, and sigh one 24to another. And Ezekiel is unto you for a portent; according to all that he hath done shall ye do; when it cometh, then ye shall know that I am the 25Lord Jehovah. And thou, son of man, shall it not be, in the day when I take from them their stronghold, the delight of their glory, the desire of their 26eyes, and the wish of their souls, their sons and their daughters; That in that day he that is escaped shall come to thee, to cause the ears to hear it? 27On that day thy mouth shall be opened [at the same time] with him that is escaped, and thou shalt speak, and shalt be no more dumb; and thou shalt be to them for a portent; and they shall know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 24:4. Sept.: ... ἐκσεσαρκισμεναἐκτωνὀστεων—Vulg.: … electa et ossibus plena— Ezekiel 24:5. ὑκοκαιεταὀσταὑποκατωαὐτων—compone strues ossium— Ezekiel 24:10. Some codices read: ιηγε, adunentur. Ezekiel 24:12. Vulg.: Multo labore sudalum est … neque per ignem. Ezekiel 24:13. … κ. τιἐσταιἐανμηκαθαρισθηςἐτιἑως—Immunditia tua execrabilis, quia … et non … Sed nec mundaberis prius— Ezekiel 24:14. … Διατουτοἐγωκρινωσεκατατααἱμκτασου, κ. καταταἐνθυμηματασουκρινωσε, ἡἀκαθκθκρτος, ἡὀνομαστπκ. πολλητουπαραπικραινειν. All the ancient versions read: ωτθϊικ. Ezekiel 24:16. ἐνπαραταξει. Ezekiel 24:17. Στεναγμοςαἱματος, ὀσφυοςπενθουςἐσταιαὑτη … ἑντοιςποσινσου· οὐμηπαρακληθηςἐνχειλεσιναὐτων— Ezekiel 24:18. Κ. … τοπρωιὁντροπονἐνετειλατομοι, κ. ἀπεθανεν— Ezekiel 24:19. ειΰξψ, Sept.: κ. εἰπεν … ὁλαος—For ΰωψ ,λι is read. Ezekiel 24:22. … ἀποστοματοςαὐτωνοὐμηπαρακληθησεσθε— Ezekiel 24:23. … κ. παρακαλεσετεἑκαστοςτ. ἀδελφον— REMARKSThe threatened judgment of Jerusalem and Judah is now a fact. The whole previous preparation for it, and therewith the first part of the book—the prophecy of judgment—close with this chapter. Looking back from this point, the detailed division with respect to the symbolism of numbers which was stated in the Introduction justifies itself. 1. Under the divine mission of the prophet (Ezekiel 1:1 to Ezekiel 3:11) there was shown first of all, in the two sections (Ezekiel 1. and Ezekiel 2:1 to Ezekiel 3:11), the mutual opposition between God and the people. 2. The first carrying out of his divine commission (Ezekiel 3:12 to Ezekiel 7:27) fell, through the determining influence of the more special relation to God, into the three sections (Ezekiel 3:12-27; Ezekiel 4:1 to Ezekiel 5:17; Ezekiel 6:7.). 3. The succeeding instances of his fulfilment of his commission (Ezekiel 8-24), on the other hand, in passing over to the subject of the secularized people, made the number four significant in the first section (Ezekiel 8-11.), the two of contrast in the second (Ezekiel 12:1-20), and—as this whole third division, like the second, is also governed by the number three—after prominence had been given to the fact that the people of God had become like the world, and after their opposition to Jehovah had been emphasized afresh, there followed, in the third section of the third division of this first part of the book, twelve sub-sections, according to the number of the tribes of the whole people, with a notification, in the eleventh of these, that Judah and Israel were parted from each other, Ezekiel 12:21 to Ezekiel 24:27. Ezekiel 24:1-2. The Accomplished FactEze_24:1. To the accomplished fact corresponds the date, with which are to be compared the previously-mentioned dates, Ezekiel 1, 8, 20, and therewith 2 Kings 25:1; Jeremiah 52:4; Jeremiah 39:1; Zechariah 8:19. The synagogue still observes the day as a fast. Ezekiel 24:2. After formal prominence has been given to the day by Ezekiel’s being required to write down not only its name, but the day itself (ςֶ ?φֶ ?ν, comp. Ezekiel 2:3), its historical substance, or that which happened in it, is stated as the beginning of the siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. ρָ ?ξַ ?κְ is: to lie hard upon (Psalms 88:7), as λָּ ?αַ ?γ is used in Psalms 32:4 of the hand of God. Ezekiel 24:3-14. The Symbolical DiscourseEze_24:3. As what follows is expressly denoted as a ξָ ?ωָׁ ?μִ (comp. at Ezekiel 12:22; Ezekiel 17:2), and the caldron is merely that of Eze 11:3, of course no external symbolical action is to be supposed here, but thereby the supposition of such action in the other passages is made all the more probable (comp. Ezekiel 12:4-5.). Comp. besides, Ezekiel 2:5, etc.—The repeated demand, expressing urgent haste, set on, is at the same time sarcastic; fetch their caldron (Ezekiel 11:3): Nebuchadnezzar has planted himself before their walls; presently it may become apparent how far their proverb was a true word. The “pouring in” of the water will, as it were, prevent a possible oversight by which the caldron could be injured. Don’t forget the water; the next and chief concernment is with the inhabitants. They are the pieces, Ezekiel 24:4. It is possible that there is an allusion in ΰֱ ?ρֹ ?σ (“to sweep together,” comp. therewith Ezekiel 22:19) to those who fled before the Chaldeans from the country into the city, and in πָ ?ϊַ ?η (“to cut in pieces ”) to the sword which hung threateningly over all. The —ָ ?δ relates to those who come into consideration (Ezekiel 21:17) for the caldron (Jerusalem). They are described as the marrow and strength of the population, as the best who are still in the land, as the choice even of the bones. Many interpreters distinguish the people of quality, the wealthy, the princes, the king, as the bones. It is perhaps more correct to regard the expression as hinting at the high opinion of themselves, entertained by the natives of Jerusalem (Ezekiel 11:15). Ezekiel 24:5 specifies the whole by the choice of the flock, to wit, sheep or goats, of which those pieces are made; and then mentions the fuel, γּ ?εּ ?ψ, a round piled-up heap, composed of wood (like strues), as is evident from the connection, and especially from Ezekiel 24:10, so that the genitive, as is also immediately explained, betokens the destination; for as the bones likewise (which were even brought for the special purpose) are to be sodden, the wood-pile under the caldron (with reference to the investment of the city round about) must therefore be requisite. [Fairbairn translates the clause in Ezekiel 24:5 : “and also pile the bones under it,” and adds in explanation: “What the prophet means is, that the best, the fleshiest parts, full of the strongest bones, representing the most exalted and powerful among the people, were to be put within the pot and boiled; but that the rest, the very poorest, were not to escape: these, the mere bones as it were, were to be thrown as a pile beneath, suffering first, and, by increasing the fire, hastening on the destruction of the others. γּ ?εּ ?ψ is properly a noun, a pile; literally: And also let there be a pile of the bones underneath. The expression cannot signify, with Hδv., a pile of wood for the bones; for γּ ?εּ ?ψ is simply a pile, not a pile of wood, and when coupled with bones can only mean a heap of these.”—W. F.] ψֶ ?ϊַּ ?η, “the boiling,” found here only, and that in a plural form, strengthens the idea of the verb in this interest. αָּ ?ωַׁ ?μ=“to be cooked.” Ezekiel 24:6 introduces with μָ ?λֵ ?ο the explanation, but at the same time a something additional, a new element. In the previous part of the similitude, the fate of the city is symbolized with regard to those who are present in Jerusalem; the actual fact of the commencement of the siege by the Chaldeans (Ezekiel 24:2) is also brought into view—therefore woe, etc. (Ezekiel 16:23)—ch, 22:2. The mention of the blood leads to the new feature in the amplification of the similitude, namely, the rust, ηֶ ?μְ ?ΰָ ?δ, by which can be meant a stain made by burning, or, still better, the rust-stain formed on metal by the influence of damp, whereby it is eaten away; comp. James 5:3; the ruddy colour being well adapted to represent blood. [Homer sometimes nods. Who ever heard before of the “ruddy colour” of verdigris !? Schroeder must have forgotten that “the caldron” is a caldron of brass.—W. F.] Thus judgment is motived by the guilt of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The destruction from without merely completed that which had begun long before, from within. That such rust is not done away, means that the shed blood having remained unavenged (Ezekiel 24:7), punishment must therefore be executed on the inhabitants of Jerusalem as a body (Deuteronomy 21:7-8).—The siege is not a testing which leads to repentance, so that Ezekiel 11:3 sq. could be fulfilled, but, as Ewald also understands the passage: “the pieces as many as there are pieces,” in other words, the inhabitants without distinction or exception shall be fetched out; and as the blood-rust adheres properly to the inhabitants, and only in the figure to the caldron, which however is also employed figuratively in relation to them, so —ָ ?δּ doubtless refers in point of fact to the inhabitants; but it can be referred, so far as the figure is concerned, to the caldron, i.e. the city, although the most natural method would be to refer it to the rust, with which also harmonises the verb, which is twice used in regard to it—ιָ ?φְ ?ΰָ ?δ and δεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰָ ?δּ. The rust thus goes out of the caldron, only when all the inhabitants go out at the same time, which may either be when they are led captive or when they are destroyed. The statement as to there being no lot only confirms this result; comp. 1 Samuel 14:42; John 1:7. Under Jehoiakim and along with Jehoiachin, the choice of the people had been carried away. Ezekiel 24:7 passes from the figure to the reality, namely, to the city, as representing the inhabitants, and states to what extent the rust continues unremoved (Ezekiel 22:13; Ezekiel 23:37). Comp. Lamentations 4:12 sq. Hengst.: Judicial murders perpetrated by the dominant party, e.g. Jeremiah 26:20 sq. φְ ?ηִ ?ιηַ (φָ ?ηַ ?η), from the idea of solidity rather than of dryness, which would have made it drink in that which was poured out; either the smooth and non-porous, or the glancing white rock is meant. [Ew. obscures the simple line of thought by taking the close of Eze 24:6 interrogatively: “Is not the lot fallen upon it, because her blood was in the midst of it?” and still more by reading, with the Sept., the first person: “Upon the sunniest rock have I placed,” etc.] The shed blood is nothing hidden,—nothing which is covered over with dust (Leviticus 17:13), but, Ezekiel 24:8, notorious wickedness, which is made manifest under the rule of Divine Providence, and which calls down the vengeance of God, Genesis 4:10-11; Job 16:18; Isaiah 26:21. “God would make sin manifest, so that His judgment might be recognised as righteous” (Hδv.). Jerusalem was distinguished by the openness and audacity with which it sinned; but the upshot of it all was simply, the bringing near of its judgment. The bold openness of the blood-shedding provoked the fury; the fact of its having remained unpunished provoked the vengeance of God. Ezekiel 24:9, like Ezekiel 24:6, explanation, and a new, third element. As the prophet in the similitude (Ezekiel 24:5), so also Jehovah in fact. Or βַּ ?νΞִ ?ΰπִ ?ι now adds to the permitting of guilt to become ripe, the corresponding execution of punishment (Ezekiel 16:43). As God takes the matter in hand, ξְ ?γεּ ?ψָ ?δ alternates with γּ ?εּ ?ψ (Ezekiel 24:5), Isaiah 30:33. But as the similitude is to be carried still farther, the prophet, Ezekiel 24:10, is enjoined to carry out the divine purpose (Ezekiel 11:6; Ezekiel 21:20). As to the fire, comp. Ezekiel 5:4; Ezekiel 10:2; Ezekiel 15:7.—With δָ ?ϊֵ ?ν, from ϊָּ ?ξַ ?ν, comp. Ezekiel 22:15.—ψָ ?χַ ?η can mean: “to spice;” Hengst.: “put in the spice” (sarcastic), which, however, fits into the connection with difficulty. The word means properly: to make soft. Keil: to thoroughly boil the broth. Others, from its also meaning: “to make ointment,” translate it by: “stir the mixture.” Ezekiel 24:11. The new element. We know from Ezekiel 10:2; Ezekiel 1:13, what its coals are. That the caldron, i.e. the city, is also overtaken by the judgment, is a fact so natural, that Keil, in opposition to Hitzig, required to point for proof merely to Ezekiel 23:25; Ezekiel 16:41. The empty caldron, moreover, points back to Ezekiel 24:6, as Ezekiel 24:9 to Ezekiel 24:5, so that with the renewed reference to the rust, the similitude is rounded to a conclusion. Its uncleanness is its rust,—the blood-guilt, in which are especially included the polluting Moloch-offerings, Ezekiel 22:3-4; Ezekiel 22:15; Ezekiel 22:21-22. As that which is before the inhabitants is not a time of testing, so that which the city is to experience is not the burning out of evil, or purification. Ezekiel 24:12. ϊְּ ?ΰֻ ?πִ ?ινδֶ ?μְ ?ΰָ ?ϊ Gesen. translates: “With hard labour it (the caldron) wearies me.” Many render the close of the verse: “in the fire,” or: “through the fire its rust.” Fruitless efforts (comp. Ezekiel 24:13) at purification are meant. According to Hitz.: “through such extreme heat to remove the rust” (Jeremiah 6:29); so that a pause of expectation requires to be imagined between Ezekiel 24:11-12, which, however, is arbitrarily assumed. J. D. Mich.: “When verdigris has eaten very deeply into it, copper is made red-hot in the fire, and cooled in water, when the rust falls off in scales, etc. It can be partially dissolved by the application of vinegar. Only one must not think of a melting away of the rust by the fire, since in that case the copper would necessarily be melted along with it. Also through the mere heating the greater part can be loosened, so that it can be rubbed off.” Hengst. mentions the severe labour of the true servant of the Lord, Isaiah 49:4. [Dutch Annotations: “She hath wearied (me with) vanities, making such a continual stir by her idolatries, heathenish covenants, intestine oppression, lying, hypocrisy, and all manner of wicked devices, whereby she would underprop her ruinous condition and keep off threatened destruction, instead of repenting and turning unto me, whereunto I exhorted them by my prophet with such patience and forbearance, and admonished them so faithfully and frequently with sore threatenings, that I am even grown weary of it, they being not (in the least) bettered, but grown still more obstinate and hardened thereby.”—W. F.] While the much rust is destined for the fire, so that the caldron, in contrast to it, does not come into account, the fate of the caldron at the same time becomes evident. Ezekiel 24:13, departing from the figure, addresses Jerusalem. Hitz.: “on account of thy unchaste uncleanness.” So also most interpreters. The degeneracy of the people is described as one in which the death-deserving crime of lewdness forms the characteristic element. [Henderson: “The impurity of the inhabitants of Jerusalem was of the most atrocious character. ζִ ?ξָּ ?δ, crime, deliberate wickedness, is a term employed to denote a criminal act, perpetrated on set purpose. Root, ζָ ?ξַ ?ν, to think, devise, purpose; mostly used in a bad sense. Jehovah had used a variety of means, both physical and moral, to restore them to purity, but they had produced no effect. It remained now only for the Chaldeans to do their work. The decree was irrevocable, and the execution inevitable.”—W. F.] Comp. Ezekiel 23:44; Ezekiel 23:48; Ezekiel 16:27; Ezekiel 16:42, etc. (Leviticus 18:20.) While they degenerated to such an extent, both politically and religiously, they withdrew themselves from the influence of the efforts made by Jehovah, who by word (promise and threatening) and deed (chastisements and deliverances) was all the while bent on the purifying of Israel. All promulgation of law was designed to effect the separation of the people from the heathen world, and their purification from innate corruption (2 Chronicles 36:15). The judgment which has overtaken them brings to an end these fruitless efforts for their purification, and every prospect of their being cleansed. Henceforth—that is the immediate future of Israel—the fury of God rests on them. Comp. at Ezekiel 5:13 (Jeremiah 13:27; Isaiah 4:4). Ezekiel 24:14. The close of the symbolical discourse. Comp. Ezekiel 23:34; Ezekiel 5:13.—Ezekiel 21:12.—Ezekiel 17:24.—Ezekiel 7:3; Ezekiel 7:8; Ezekiel 7:27.—τָּ ?ψַ ?ς, either with reference to persons: to let the guilty go free (Gesen.), or in a neuter sense, which is the preciser idea: to depart from My word through a procedure not conformable to it—(Ezekiel 20:44.) Ezekiel 23:24; Ezekiel 23:45.—The words which are here added by the Sept. (were they following a different version?) are inserted by Hitz. and Ew. as conformable to the text. NOTE ON Ezekiel 24:6-14[“After having briefly given the ground of the parabolical description, the prophet proceeds, in Ezekiel 24:6-14, to make special and pointed application of it. His leading object is to show that it was the excessive and inveterate wickedness of the people which provoked, and even rendered necessary, the severe dealing to which they were subjected. “All measures of a less extreme kind had been tried in vain; those were now exhausted: and as the iniquity appeared to be entwined with the whole fabric and constitution of things, nothing remained but to subject all to the crucible of a severe and overwhelming catastrophe. This is represented by keeping the caldron on the fire till its contents were stewed away, and the very bones burnt. And as if even this were not enough, as if something more were necessary to avenge and purge out such scandalous wickedness, the caldron itself must be kept hot and burning till the pollution should be thoroughly consumed out of it. The wicked city must be laid in ruins. It is the very same thought which occurs in Isaiah 4:4, where the filth of the daughters of Zion is said to be washed away, and the blood of Jerusalem to be purged from the midst of it by the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning; only, after the manner of our prophet, the image is extended to many minute and particular details. In plain terms, the Lord was no longer going to deal with them by half-measures; their condition called for the greatest degree of severity compatible with their preservation as a distinct and separate people, and so the indignation of the Lord was to rest on them till a separation was effected between them and sin.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 261, 262.—W. F.] Ezekiel 24:15-27. The Virtual Sign (the Silence of Ezekiel) Ezekiel 24:16. ξַ ?ηְ ?ξַ ?γΧ, what the eyes desire, 1 Kings 20:6, what they rest on with affection.—ξַ ?βֵּ ?τָ ?δ, from πָ ?βַ ?σ, to smite, can be: overthrow, calamity, and means here sudden death. So much the more natural would those gestures and expressions of feeling be which were forbidden to him. ρְ ?τֹּ ?γ is almost always used of lamentation for the dead. Even the tears which were so natural (thy), not to speak of “weeping,” were not allowed to him, 1 Corinthians 7:29. Ezekiel 24:17. The feeling of grief God does not forbid, only its loud, outward expression; the pain felt in regard to a private experience shall be dumb, just as the universal experience symbolized by it must absorb every private sorrow. The opposite of the mourning which was made for the dead (ξֵ ?ϊִ ?ιν is placed expressively at the beginning of the clause) is described in detail. τְּ ?ΰֵ ?ψ is a “head-ornament” (Isaiah 61:3) in general (Ezekiel 24:23), not exclusively that of the priest; people laid it aside in times of mourning, and went bareheaded—comp. however, Deuteronomy 14:1; strewed ashes upon their heads, Lamentations 2:10; went barefooted, 2 Samuel 15:30; covered, as did lepers, the lower part of their face, Micah 3:7—the beard, as man’s adornment; obtained food from other people, as from neighbours, who sent it to the house, in contradistinction to the food prepared by themselves at other times, Jeremiah 16:7. Ezekiel 24:18. As Ezekiel spake to the exiles in the morning, namely, Ezekiel 24:3 sq., and his wife died in the evening, the directions which he received for his behaviour in regard to this event, and which he complied with on the morning after the death, were communicated to him on the same day with the symbolical discourse. [Hengst. refers the “speaking” to the communication of the divine command to the people, and makes the prophet appear before them on the succeeding morning with the intelligence that his wife had died the previous evening, when he acted in the already mentioned symbolical manner.] Ezekiel 24:19 (Ezekiel 12:9) assumes that the death of the prophet’s wife has become known to the people, since their question is occasioned by the inconsistency of his behaviour with that fact. As it is inexplicable when considered in relation to himself, the inquiry as to its bearing on them springs to their lips.—λִּ ?ι either stands for ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, or is to be explained thus: For thou doest it for us; in relation to thyself thou wouldst necessarily have acted otherwise. [The expressions which Hengst. has not hesitated to employ may be quoted on account of their singularity: “The prophet appears merely as a holy actor” (!); “We have to do with a mere figure,” with a “fact of the holy phantasy;” Ezekiel may have had “no wife at all,” etc.] Ezekiel 24:20. The explanation of his conduct follows, as he was divinely commissioned to give it, Ezekiel 24:21—namely, that what had happened to himself, whereby he is placed before them in a more impressive manner as the representative of the house of Israel, as the exiles’ “companion in tribulation,” was a type of that which was about to happen to them. As the expressions show, the wife of Ezekiel must typify the temple; her death represents especially its desecration, when Jehovah allows it to fall into the hands of the heathen (Ezekiel 7:22), whereby the symbol of his marriage-relation to Israel, the dwelling together, disappears. If this relation between the wife and the temple is established—comp. Ezekiel 24:16—by the expression: ξַ ?ηְ ?ξַ ?γςֵ ?ιπֵ ?ιλֶ ?ν, then the temple on its part symbolizes all the possessions and power of Israel. To its existence in their midst they appealed against their brethren, Ezekiel 11:15; and to this they trusted amid all their wickedness and apostasy, Ezekiel 8:6; Jeremiah 7:4. Pride of your strength,—since they took pride in it as their strength. Comp. Leviticus 26:19.—Note the alliteration in ξַ ?ηְ ?ξַ ?μ and ξַ ?ηְ ?ξַ ?γ; according to Hengst.: “the sympathy of your soul,” since the soul that is inwardly united with it suffers with it(?); Gesen.: “what your soul desires, loves.” The following would correspond better with its signification elsewhere (Ezekiel 7:4), namely: that your soul would spare,—pledging life itself for it. (Dutch Trans.: the sparing of your souls.)—In the symbolical significance of Ezekiel’s wife for Israel, next to the special relation to the temple, the people come into consideration,—the sons and daughters; in the symbol, sudden death; as to the people, death by violence. (Hitz.: “On the occasion of the expatriation, many parents may have been obliged to leave their children with relatives, from their being of too tender age to accompany them.” Perhaps also they could be left behind in expectation of better times.) Ezekiel 24:22. In regard to both the relations referred to, the exiles addressed shall imitate Ezekiel; comp. Ezekiel 24:17. Ezekiel 24:23. Ezekiel 24:17; Ezekiel 24:16. The direct application of what has gone before, which is made by the prophet to his companions in exile, gives a symbolical character to what has been said, which becomes all the clearer, as what is exactly meant is immediately expressed, namely: Ye shall pine away in your iniquities, etc. (Ezekiel 4:17), which, describes a state of inward and personal woe which is destitute of all comfort (Isaiah 50:1; Isaiah 59:2).—πָ ?δַ ?ν is the pressing out of the breath in lowing and also in roaring; here it corresponds to what is said of Ezekiel in Ezekiel 24:17,—a sighing with groans, and that of the one to the other, instead of the former mutual interchange of complaints, wishes, and hopes. [Hδv. and others understand it as: pain and sorrow on account of sin, which is said neither here nor in Leviticus 26:39; Eich.: dull indifference at the downfall of Jerusalem in consequence of the misery of banishment; Ew.: a stupified, unrepentant state of mind; many: fear and shame before the Chaldeans among whom they dwelt. Hitz. makes them growl one to another like bears, discontentedly seeking the source of their misfortune in others instead of in themselves; Hengst.: despair.] As, in the prophet’s case, the misfortune of his wife’s death disappears in the deep shadows of the overthrow of Jerusalem and Judah, so all the personal feelings of the exiles shall be absorbed in this destruction of the last remnant of the kingdom and city. One and another shall be benumbed with pain, so that no comfort shall come from any quarter; on the contrary, a desolating feeling of guilt shall be general,—such shall be their knowledge of the Lord. Ezekiel 24:24. Comp. at Ezekiel 12:6. Ezekiel 24:14.—ָ ?δּ is referred by many to Ezekiel 24:26. The introduction of Ezekiel’s name completes the personal type. [“It appears to us almost unaccountable how any person of ordinary discernment should understand the prophet here to mean, that those Jews were to receive the coming catastrophe in a callous and indifferent manner, sullenly yielding to their fate, but without any sensible movement of the springs of sorrow and regret. Yet such is the view taken of the passage by some leading commentators abroad (in particular, by Eichhorn, Ewald, Hitzig), although the express declaration at the close, and the whole character of the representation, plainly lead to an opposite conclusion. In the typical part of the delineation, it was not because the prophet was insensible to the loss he sustained by the death of his wife that he was to abstain from the habiliments and usages of mourning; but because there was another source of grief behind, of which this was but the sign and presage, and in itself so much greater and more appalling, that his spirit, instead of venting itself in expressions of sorrow at the immediate and ostensible calamity, was rather to brood in silent agony and concern over the more distressing evil it foreshadowed. And in like manner with the people, when all their fond hopes and visions were finally exploded—when the destruction of their beautiful temple and the slaughter of their sons and daughters came home to them as dreadful realities, they could only refrain from bewailing the loss of what had so deep a hold on their desires and affections, by having come to discern in this the sign of what was still greatly more dreadful and appalling. And what might that be but the blood-stained guilt of their iniquities, which had brought on the catastrophe? Had it been that portion of the people who dwelt at Jerusalem that the prophet here more immediately referred to, there might have been some room for supposing (with Pradus and others) that he pointed merely to the overawing terror of the enemy, and to the breathless horror and astonishment connected with the capture of the city, when he spake of such an arrest being laid on the common outgoings of grief. But it is the captives at Chebar of whom he more immediately speaks, who, he well knew, would be living in outward quiet, far removed from the scene of uproar and destruction. It could not, in their case, be the presence of a Babylonian host, or the turmoil and consternation caused by the success of the Babylonian arms, which should check the customary expressions of grief; it would be the overwhelming sense that should then break in upon them of the iniquities to which they had clung with such fatal perverseness, absorbing their spirits, and turning their moanings into a new and higher direction. The agonies of bereavement would be in a manner lost under the self-inflicted pains of contrition and remorse (comp. Ezekiel 7:16). “Yet, while this seems obviously the meaning of the prophet’s announcement,—of the not mourning in one way, and still pining away with distress and sorrow in another,—the description must be understood with certain qualifications, and indeed is to be viewed as the somewhat ideal delineation of a state of things that should be found, rather than the exact and literal description of what was actually to take place. The representation would otherwise stand in palpable contrariety, as well with undoubted facts as with statements elsewhere made both by Ezekiel and by his great contemporary in Judea. That many, on the fall of Jerusalem, did really exhibit the usual signs of mourning, and give the fullest vent to their feelings of distress, may be inferred with the utmost certainty from what is written in the Lamentations of Jeremiah, where we read of all the common symptoms and appliances of grief: ‘elders sitting upon the ground, casting dust upon their heads, girding themselves with sackcloth;’ and the prophet himself—though he had been told not to lament or bemoan (Ezekiel 16:5)—weeping till ‘his eyes failed with tears, and his liver was poured on the earth, for the destruction of the daughter of his people.’ Nay, while Ezekiel here speaks as if all the indications of mourning should be restrained at the destruction of Jerusalem, he had previously spoken of the people being so filled with distress on account of it, that ‘they should gird themselves with sackcloth, and have baldness upon their heads’ (Ezekiel 7:18), and had himself also been instructed to howl and cry in contemplation of the approaching troubles (Ezekiel 21:12). There can be no doubt also, on the other side, that the conscience of sin, however powerfully it might work in some bosoms, and absorb other feelings, would be very far from being universally felt as it ought to have been. The prophets were by no means disposed to cherish exaggerated views on the subject. Jeremiah had even spoken of the people carrying their iniquities with them into other lands, and there serving other gods day and night (Ezekiel 16:13). And Ezekiel himself, in Ezekiel 20, represents them as still needing, after they had been all scattered among the nations, to be brought as into the wilderness, that they might there be dealt with for iniquities not yet forsaken, and purged from still remaining abominations. “It is clear, therefore, that the description in the passage before us must not be understood in the absolute sense, as if it were intended to portray what was certainly to be realized among the people at large on the taking of Jerusalem. It is what should have been realized in all; but what, in point of fact, was to have its realization only in part. The people should, on the occurrence of such a fearful catastrophe, have sunk under an overpowering sense of their guilt and folly, and, like the prophet, turned the tide of their grief and mourning rather against the gigantic evil that lay behind, seen only in the chambers of imagery, than what outwardly appeared; they should have bewailed the enormous sins that had provoked the righteous displeasure of God, rather than the present troubles in which that displeasure had taken effect. Their sorrow should have chiefly flowed in this more inward and spiritual direction, for it was here pre-eminently that the evil stood. And such, undoubtedly, was the case with the better and more enlightened portion of the people; but many still cleaved to their idols, and would not receive the instruction given them, either by the prophet’s parabolical example, or by the reality of God’s afflicting dispensations.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 266–268.—W. F.] Ezekiel 24:25. The prominence given to the person of the prophet leads now to the announcement of a sign which is to be given him hereafter, and to the giving of an instruction for his procedure thereupon. And thou, etc. The statement is interrogative in its form, but assumes an affirmative answer. It is equivalent to: I ask thee, shall it, can it be otherwise? The time is expressed as a definite day. A year and a half elapsed before then, Ezekiel 33:21; comp. Jeremiah 52.—The delight of their glory means: that in whose glory they delighted, Ezekiel 24:21.—The wish of their souls, that to which they looked with longing and yearning. According to others: “the burden of their souls,” namely, that which oppresses them. The sons and daughters are named along with the temple, without a connecting word, but as in Ezekiel 24:21. Ezekiel 24:26. The escaped is a definite person. [According to Hengst.: an ideal person, comprehending in himself the whole host of those carried away; others: a fugitive, one of their number.] As an eyewitness of what had been passed through, he will place the fact before the exiles as one which cannot be doubted. Ezekiel 24:27. As he (which is also a virtual sign, namely, for the prophet) opens his mouth, Ezekiel does the same, who consequently has had to keep silence up to that time. The opening of the prophet’s mouth at the same time with that of the fugitive takes place in Ezekiel 33; comp. Ezekiel 24:21-22. The word of Jehovah, however, comes to the prophet in the interval, Ezekiel 25-32. As these prophecies are directed against non-Israelites, the silence of the prophet, which is introduced with Ezekiel 24, must be regarded as relative, and be understood in reference to his discourses to Israel only: to them he will not speak in the present period; he will do so only (Ezekiel 33) when, with the renewal of his divine mission, a “new period for prophetic speech” (Hengst.) shall open, comprehending the second part of his book. Comp. at Ezekiel 29:21. As, now, this second part, containing the prophecies of divine compassion, sets itself over against the first part which contains the prophecies of judgment, and the retrospective reference of Eze 24:27 (Ezekiel 33:22) to Ezekiel 3:26-27 is unmistakeable (comp. there); so Ezekiel’s becoming dumb can be taken in relation to prophesying of mercy as distinguished from prophesying of judgment, so that the meaning would be: Thou shalt then speak of mercy, and no more of judgment, which has become an accomplished fact. But therewith the prophet’s becoming dumb appears as a becoming silent touching mercy, and as a speaking concerning judgment, just as speaking, of this nature, was characteristic of the first part of the book; so that the dumbness of Ezekiel affects, in the first place, the period up to the appearance of the fugitive from Jerusalem with the news of its downfall; but further, on its close, looks back on the whole period of the first part of the book, which it concludes. Thus it is evidently to be understood as a prophetic dumbness, not as silence in a general sense. The prophet speaks of judgment to foreign peoples, during the time which is to be assumed from our chapter, exactly as in the first part of the book,—the time of his silence as to mercy, he spoke to Israel. Thus his becoming silent is here also a virtual sign to Israel, just as it was so at an earlier time, Ezekiel 3:26-27.—Through all this speech and silence (thus many refer it to the whole activity of the prophet), and in other ways, he is shown to have been a significant symbol to his fellow-countrymen. [Dutch Annotations: In that day, etc.; “As if God should say, Thou hast now sufficiently foretold my people of the miseries that are at hand, be now silent for a while till all things be clearly fulfilled and plain before their eyes; then shalt thou speak to them again for their comfort and instruction, that thou mayest thus be unto them and to My whole church in sundry ways a wonderful token of great things to come.”—W. F.] Hengst.: “When the eye-witnesses report that all has happened as announced by him, he will become to them an object of wonder, they will recognise the Lord behind the son of man.” It is more natural, however, to regard it as a simple repetition of Eze 24:24, as Ezekiel’s dull pain (Ezekiel 24:17) prefigured not merely the feeling and behaviour of the exiles, but also God’s pain: it could be regarded, if one might so speak, as a striking symbol of the silence of the Judge in regard to Israel, after the sentence had been passed, which is now being executed,—of His still continued silence towards His people concerning mercy. 1. With the prediction of our chapter, Comp. Doct. Reflec. on Ezekiel 12. No. 4. “This discourse is peculiarly important,” says Hδv., “owing to the definiteness of its prediction.” “The place on the Chebar where the prophet lived was distant from Jerusalem more than a hundred German miles; it was therefore impossible for Ezekiel to know by human means that the siege of Jerusalem had commenced on that very day; and when it was afterwards ascertained that the prediction had exactly corresponded with fact, it would be regarded as an invincible proof of his divine mission” (J. D. Mich.). Ew. makes the prophet act on that day “in an altogether animated way, as if the siege of the distant city had been set in array against himself.” He supposes also that the anticipation of soon losing his wife by a sudden stroke was a “presentiment.” Umbreit interprets the matter in almost the same way, by regarding the wife of the prophet as “prostrated by a severe illness,” so that he foresaw her speedy death. Hitz. admits that “anything fortuitous is not to be imagined; and all the less, from the fact that we have here nothing to do with premonition, since the certainty of the tone, and the definiteness with which Ezekiel speaks of the subject, must rest on a proper knowledge of the fact.” With his decision in favour of a vaticinium post eventum, not only the prophetic, but also the moral character of Ezekiel falls to the ground. 2. “The earth drinks in the blood which is righteously shed, or covers it, so that it is not avenged on him who shed it; on the other hand, it is said of the blood which is to be avenged, that the earth covers it not, or discloses it in its season, Job 16:18; Isaiah 26:21” (Cocc.). 3. [“As to the principle of dealing, there is no essential difference between what God did then with Israel, and what He still does with those who stand in a similar relation to Him, and pursue a similar course. Where there is the profession of a belief in God’s word, and a regard to God’s authority, though intermingled with much that is false in sentiment, or unrighteous in conduct, there must still be dealings of severity and rebuke, to bring the professor, if possible, to a sense of his sinfulness, and lead him to renounce it; but, failing this, to vindicate concerning him the righteousness of God, and leave him without excuse if his iniquity should prove his ruin. In the case of sincere, God-fearing people, the severity exercised will always be attended with salutary results; for they have the root of the matter in them, and are sure to profit by the chastening of the Lord. But with those who have the profession only, without the principle of true godliness, the iniquity is clung to in spite of all the severity that is exercised, until the wrath falls on them to the uttermost. There is enough in New Testament Scripture, and the experience of men under the present dispensation, to warrant us to expect so far a similarity in God’s method of procedure to the representation here given of His conduct toward Israel. But, on the other hand, a difference may also be expected, in so far as His dealings now, in accordance with the genius of the new dispensation, respect men more as individuals, less as public communities, and bear more immediately upon their inward state and spiritual relations. He who would regard aright the operations of the Lord’s hand, and profit by the corrections of His rod of chastisement, must keep a watchful eye upon the things that concern his own experience and history. There may be signs of the divine displeasure sufficient to startle the tender conscience, and call for deep humiliation of spirit, while nothing appears outwardly wrong, and all may even wear a smiling aspect as far as regards social and public relations. Should there be a restraining of divine grace within, an absence of spiritual refreshment, a felt discomfort of mind, or an obvious withdrawal of spiritual privileges, there is beyond doubt the commencement of a work of judgment; and if such marks of God’s displeasure are slighted, others of a more severe and alarming kind may assuredly be looked for. But as men’s tempers and circumstances in life are infinitely varied, so there is a corresponding variety in the methods employed by God to check the risings of sin, and expel its poison from the heart. And it is the part of spiritual wisdom to seek for the wakeful ear and the discerning eye, which may enable one to catch even the earliest intimations of God’s displeasure, and so improve these as to render unnecessary the heavier visitations of wrath.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 262, 263.—W. F.] 4. Hengst., in denying the reality of the death of Ezekiel’s wife, states the proposition that “a moral relation like marriage cannot be degraded to a mere mode of representation;” as if this would less be the case if we had before us “only a vividly drawn figure!” This death is just as little a “mere mode of representation” as anything else which, ordained by God, happens specially to His children and servants. But the moral significance of the event for Ezekiel was altogether subordinate to the prophet’s significance for the people. That which was merely purifying trial to him was to be punishment to them. “He endures,” says Schmieder, “the pain, like other sufferings of his prophetic office, as the servant and instrument of God for Israel, in order to lead the people to saving repentance.” “God by no means spares His servants, and they endure willingly, because they know that the Lord in His own time makes all things work together for good, and because they are always ready to offer up to Him in love and confidence whatever He requires.” We must not forget that Ezekiel was set as a “portent” for the people; comp. at Ezekiel 4 (Doct. Reflec. 4), Ezekiel 12. Thus, according to the individuality of his official position, for which his loving sympathy with his people is the psychological medium, he is a type in virtue of a personal symbolical substitution or representation. Ezekiel prefigures, in a most painful domestic experience, the judicial punishment which is ordained of God for the people, with whom he is joined by personal sympathy, as well as by the fact of being equally an exile. It might be said that a Messianic element here makes itself apparent in the prophet. The symbolism of marriage in relation to Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5:32) harmonizes with this theological explanation of the case. Consider, besides, the reference to Jeremiah 16, on which Hδvernick lays stress. 5. The instructions received by Ezekiel in connection with the death of his wife are very remarkable. They suggest various inferences, both as to his own character as the servant of God, and as to the nature of the prophetic office. While the prophet was frequently one of the most gifted, and always one of the most honoured of men, he was at the same time one of the most severely tried. Like all places of honour in the kingdom of God, the position of a prophet involved the bearing of burdens which were exceptionally heavy. The closeness of his fellowship with God had two sides—a dark as well as a bright. For his high degree in the kingdom of God he had to pay a great price, by being preeminently a cross-bearer. He was taught, and often by painful experiences, that it was necessary to “count all things but loss” for God; “to hate father and mother and wife and children and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also,” in order to fulfil the duties of his high office. Only in so far as he had learned this truth did he attain to the character of the ideal prophet. A perpetual spiritual law was enunciated by our Lord, when He said, at least in effect, to the ambitious sons of Zebedee, that drinking of His cup and being baptized with His baptism, were the conditions of occupying places of honour in His kingdom. This law held in the Old Testament period no less than in the New. The man who was distinguished from his fellows by receiving power to inherit all the ages, to dip into the future and comprehend the near and the remote in a single gaze of his divinely opened eye, to understand and proclaim the eternal moral principles according to which God determines the order of world-history, to be, in short, a prophet, was also distinguished from them by profounder experience of sorrow, suffering, and self-abnegation. The words which were spoken by God in reference to Paul, when he was about to be introduced to the apostolic office, might have been applied, with scarcely a verbal change, to Ezekiel, or to any of the ancient prophets, when they were called to their life-work: “He is a chosen vessel unto Me to bear My name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel; … I will show him how great things he must suffer for My name’s sake.” Self-consecration was an essential condition to the proper fulfilment of the duties of the prophetic ministry. The prophet was required to devote to God the energies of his mind and soul, the treasures of his heart,—all that he prized most; for God regarded them as His own, and might use any, or all of them, as instruments for the carrying on of His work. The tasks which God enjoined presupposed this complete surrender on the part of His servants. Their accomplishment would have been impossible otherwise. The prophet was often asked to do things difficult, disagreeable, or even unnatural, in order that effect might be given to his divine message. For, when the spoken word was not regarded as sufficient, it was supplemented by the acted word or the symbol, in the choosing of which, regard was had, not to the comfort, convenience, or private feelings of him whose duty it was to set the symbol forth, but only to its power to teach and impress. Often, indeed, the symbols chosen were of such a kind that the employment of them did not necessarily involve self-denial; but the case was altered, when acts and experiences of the private life of the prophet which touched his deepest feelings, were regulated and controlled so as to transform him into a personal symbol. Thus, for the sake of perfecting him as a teacher by signs, Hosea was commanded to form peculiar domestic ties, to which natural feeling would have disinclined him. And whatever view be held as to the Divine intention in taking away Ezekiel’s wife by a stroke, her death was used as a symbol of a great public calamity, whose character was further symbolized, by the prophet’s deportment under his affliction, in which he was influenced by a regard to his mission only. When he went forth to the people on the morning after his bereavement, he could have said in a double sense, “The burden of the Lord.” The fact of God imposing upon Ezekiel the command to repress all signs of feeling, and, notwithstanding the suddenness and severity of the stroke, to be calm and self-controlled, proves that the servant of God must lead a life of self-sacrifice, that individual feeling must be merged in the higher claims of duty; while the promptness and perfection of his obedience show how well he had learned to subordinate all things to the fulfilment of his ministry, and how all-absorbing was his desire to arouse his people to a sense of things spiritual and divine. That the affliction which came upon him was most crushing, may be inferred from the nature of the case and from the narrative. To one who could be described as “the desire of thine eyes,” the prophet must have been knit in tenderest love, and he would feel the bereavement all the more because his nature was intense and lonely, his soul, one which dwelt apart. Deep must have been the sense of desolation which filled his heart, when he knew that he was to be for ever deprived of the sympathy which was so grateful because so rare, so helpful because so loving, and so trusted because it had never failed. But the manner in which God communicates His purpose, and the use which He asks the prophet to make of the bereavement, assume his possession of the intensest spirituality of mind and devotion to his prophetic mission. The bereavement is regarded entirely as to its possible bearing on public utility, and not once as to its bearing on private happiness. The prophet’s private feelings are ignored, except in so far as their natural expression is forbidden; God foretells him of his affliction, not so much that he may be prepared to bear, as that he may be prepared to use it for the fulfilment of his ministry. No compensation for the desolation of his human heart is hinted at except this—that he shall enjoy, on account of his affliction, the opportunity of preaching by new symbols of unusual impressiveness—of becoming himself an eloquent symbol. What he suffers as a man may be counterbalanced by what he shall accomplish as a prophet. For the anguish of bereavement, for the pain of self-repression, of abstinence from every expression of grief, from even the sweet solace of tears, he may find some compensation in being enabled, by means of his own circumstances, to place the future before the minds of his people, in a way fitted to make them realize the coming woe, and to arouse them to repentance. His great sorrow hidden in his heart, Ezekiel, the servant of God, proceeds to the work which God gave him to do. The shadows which appeared to rest on his soul proceeded, less from the recollection of his own bereavement, than from foresight of the calamities of his people. His private sorrow seemed to be overlaid by an anticipation of the greater sorrow which was to affect them. His manner seemed to say, “Weep not for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children.” As he was a “portent” to Israel, so, by his beautiful, self-forgetting devotion to prophetic duty, which was made possible to him, not merely by the grace of God which accompanied the command of God, but also by the powerful sympathies of his own sanctified nature, Ezekiel is an example to the servants of God in every age.—W. F.] HINTSEze_24:1 sq. “Ch. 24 is to be regarded as a farewell” (Hengst.).—One goes on speaking till the last moment. “As the hour for bringing help to the pious is fixed, so also is the hour for executing God’s vengeance on the wicked” (Stck.).—“This happened in our month of December” (L.).—That which is carried out at Jerusalem is written down at Babylon.—“He who is condemned to death knows not the day, which his Judge, however, knows well” (Stck.).—Our calendar should be a very different one were the days noted according to God’s bidding. Ezekiel 24:3. “God loves to say to man what He means to say to him by means of intelligible figures; therefore preachers should avoid obscuring His word with ambiguities” (L.).—In the wrath of God, because it is His despised love, as in the love of God, there are intensity and vehemence.—In the time of God’s judgment all the excuses of men will fall to the ground. Ezekiel 24:4. God is already gathering to His judgment-seat those whom He will judge. Ezekiel 24:5. Divine punishment overpowers even the strongest.—Even the best is not too good for God’s chastisements. Ezekiel 24:6 sq. Man’s sentence and God’s sentence upon cities.—A woe follows on shed blood.—The rust on the caldron.—“Sin is the rust which cleaves to us all ” (Stck.). Ezekiel 24:7. “On account of the blood of Christ, shed at Golgotha, Titus at length burned the city” (ΰ Lap.). Ezekiel 24:8. God’s leading and governing apparent amid the sins of men. Ezekiel 24:9 sq. The ascending climax in the judgments of God.—He who will not hear must feel.—“God easily finds wood in abundance” (Stck.).—The ungodly shall not stand in the judgment.—“An evil. conscience is a small caldron above a great fire” (ΰ Lap.).—OEzekiel 24:12. God’s fruitless efforts, what an awful prelude !—The abuse of divine grace.—“Thus also it was not cleansed by Christ, who had wearied Himself in labours for Jerusalem even to hot tears” (Jerome). Ezekiel 24:15 sq. God takes away,—this should never be forgotten in any case of bereavement.—The Lord has taken away,—Job’s words, Ezekiel’s experience. “God wills that we should give up, at His command, all that is dear to us in this world” (Tόb. Bib.).—Not lost, but gone before. “Righteous people are often snatched away from the evil to come” (L.).—The children of God are not therefore insensate stones, but they desire to observe the God-appointed limits in their grief.—The Jews laid great stress on pomp in their mourning; and with how many Christians that is the whole or the principal part of mourning !—“No one should do as Ezekiel did unless commanded by God” (Stck.). Ezekiel 24:18 sq. “In all things, even in what is hard for us, we should obey the divine command” (Tόb. Bib.).—“That which is impossible to our own natural power can become possible through the power of grace. Obey, then, even when it seems impossible to thee, and believe that the needed help will be given thee” (St.). Ezekiel 24:20 sq. “Oh, the punishment, when God Himself profanes His sanctuary, and takes away the light of true religion!” (Tόb. Bib.)—Sorrow without comfort is great sorrow. Ezekiel 24:24. “Preachers of repentance must be signs to the unrepentant, and teach them not only with words, but also with their whole life” (Cr.). Ezekiel 24:26. The lame post from Jerusalem.—“Carnally-secure men believe a human messenger sooner than a messenger of God” (Stck.).—Who believes our preaching?—“Now the thunders of God’s judgment began to speak” (Hengst.). A–B. 25–32_ THE FROM THE OF TO THE OF , OR THE AGAINST THE . _ The prophecies against the heathen nations are put here into one collection, as is the case also in Jeremiah and Isaiah (Introd. pp. 10, 11). The common character of their contents admits of their standing thus together, whilst they are also distinguished from each other by occasional chronological notices. From Ezekiel 29:17, it is probable that the prophet made up at that time the preceding smaller collection, if not the greater one, of his whole book; comp. ch; 40:1. According to most, however, these prophecies actually lie between Ezekiel 24, 33. “The prophecies (Kliefoth remarks) against foreign nations, that is, against heathenism and the heathen world, against the worldly power as opposing the kingdom of God and its development, form continually, since the prophecy of Balaam (Numbers 24:17-24), a separate chapter of prophecy.” So is it first of all in Obadiah, then also in Joel, Amos, etc. The later prophets in this lean upon their predecessors, whose prophecies they partly employ by citation, partly supplement and expand. The thought which dominates the collection of Ezekiel is that of judgment, as seen in the burning of Jerusalem, the flight-fire. Ezekiel, in consequence, limits himself in the survey he takes of the heathen, as that is also still further limited, that no reference is made in it to the Chaldeans. Only the idea of judgment connects exactly with Ezekiel 24. The discourse of judgment as now to go forth upon the adversaries was, as the silence of compassion had been, “an astonishment,” in respect to its being appointed to the prophet for this particular time. If the prophecies are viewed as an appendage to the first main division, the connection can scarcely be conceived of more precisely. The judicial character of these chapters, however, still keeps within the historical position,—the recompense which actually takes place in the world’s history. Among the peoples that here make their appearance, there occur the heathen members of the coalition against Babylon, those who partook in Judah’s breach of oath and fidelity, denounced in Ezekiel 17. The prophets are “the divinely-authorized conscience-preachers,” as Tholuck designates them, “the directors of conscience whether wished for or not,” who stand among the people, “as the wakeful eye of the God of Israel.” The judgment of Judah must go forth from them upon these heathens; for that in human affairs there prevails a holy ordering of retributive righteousness is the general theme of prophecy. The limitation in Ezekiel’s predictions to judgment is not to be regarded as an exclusion of the heathen from Messiah’s salvation. For out of the judgment, as for Israel, so also for the heathen, comes forth the great salvation of the future destined to embrace both. Ezekiel stands in no antagonism to the other prophets as regards their prophetic announcements on the heathen nations. It is enough to compare Ezekiel 16. There is merely a certain difference between him and them in this respect. “But he still holds by the right landmarks; temporal subversion alone, the loss of their political and civil existence, is what he threatens them with; but that a remnant of them should survive, according to the word of the earlier prophets, and that this might spiritually attain to blessing, he leaves open, without contradiction” (Kliefoth). That the idea of judgment specially controls the following collection of Ezekiel has its explanation in his prophetic mission. It is so precisely adapted to this, that, in consequence, we find in this collection no prophetic judgment against Babylon. The explanation which is given, even by Hengstenberg, that “no reason existed for his braving the danger,” can afford little satisfaction; must “the personal relations” have been pleasantly adjusted for an Ezekiel? If Ezekiel 21:30 sq. is not to be understood as directed against Babylon (see, however, at the passage), the silence of Ezekiel generally respecting the judgment upon Babylon, and in particular. the absence of any prediction of judgment in the section Ezekiel 25-32, finds its explanation simply in his position and calling in the exile. That Ammon, Moab, Edom, the Philistines, Tyre, Sidon, Egypt, were accessaries to the judgment upon Judah, to Judah’s faithless breach of oath towards Babylon,—this of itself would have made Babylon’s place in the midst of them fit badly. In that respect alone it would have injured the moral nexus. Still more, however, in another respect was silence upon Babylon’s judgment ordered. It may be enough for this to point to Ezekiel 23:45; for that other decisive respect is the circumstance that Babylon had, in God’s name, to execute judgment as well upon the nations in question as upon Judah-Israel. Ezekiel’s prophetic mission we have recognised to be that of the prophet of Jehovah’s glory in the exile; and likewise, the revelation of the glory of Jehovah meets us immediately in the 1st chapter as primarily taking effect in judgment and through righteousness. Hence it follows that it was also very suitable to the prophetic mission of Ezekiel, since it accords with the glory of Jehovah as now manifesting itself, that Babylon, its instrument, should directly appear only as such, in the light of the divine judgment and the divine righteousness upon Israel, and upon the related heathen nations. The exile in its primary aspect was judgment, the judgment of God, which Babylon inflicted. With this did not suit a prophetic judgment also upon Babylon. [More especially as one of the prevailing tendencies of the time was to overlook the hand of God in the present elevation of Babylon to its high ascendency, and to fret against the dominion which God had for a season given her over the nations.—P. F.] It should necessarily, too, have obscured the more direct impression to be produced. “Whosoever,” says Hengstenberg, “obtained an insight into the whole of God’s judicial acts, must have been powerfully drawn away from politics to repentance.” That the announcement of judgment, and of judgment alone, upon the heathen was done for the sake of consolation, which was implied therein for the exiled,—that such a consoling must here already be regarded as the prophetic mission of Ezekiel, is without warrant, according to Ezekiel 1-24, and is certainly not agreeable to the manner in which Ezekiel 25-32. are connected with that principal portion of our book. It becomes, then, a matter of special importance to justify the position of this collection of predictions here against the heathen after Ezekiel 24, with the contents, design, etc., of these predictions. The question of place goes first; the question of time follows as the second. For as their fulfilment took place later than the downfall of Jerusalem-Judah, so their announcement also took place, and consequently the reading of them, first at the time of the second main division, so that they might also serve as a foil for this. Considered from the point of view of the later publication, we may therefore conjoin with the mode of connecting this collection relatively to the first main division, a transition-character to the idea of the second main division of our book, as scattered and occasional indications of such a transition are to be found in Ezekiel 28:24 sq., 29:21. “These prophecies present themselves as forerunners of cheering intelligence, in so far as the downfall of the heathen powers here announced is throughout total and definitive, whereas hope is still always left to Israel” (Hengst.). This is also to be considered in accordance with the same, that the injury done to Israel is brought prominently forward among the causes of the divine judgment upon the heathen, Ezekiel 25:3; Ezekiel 25:8; Ezekiel 25:12; Ezekiel 25:15. Ewald remarks, besides, that the punishment of Edom was expected from Israel, and for the Philistines immediately from Jehovah Himself, which would connect more closely with the manner in which the prophet, onwards from Ezekiel 33, is going to speak of Israel (comp. also Introd. § 6). In agreement with the general considerations affecting the whole, which serve to justify the position and character of the following collection, there is also to be noticed this and that individual trait in the particular parts, which belong alike to the form and to the substance of these predictions. There are seven separate prophecies; and to this number, says Hitzig, “he very persistently adheres.” With a symbolic tendency, the Philistines are reckoned in the number, who do not appear as members of that coalition in Jeremiah 27; and so, too, Tyre and Sidon are kept quite apart from each other, as in Jeremiah. “The placing together also of four nations immediately at the beginning, while three follow, indicates the clear consciousness with which the author is minded to make out a seven number” (Hitzig). This intentional form should be reckoned as belonging to the transition-character of the portion Ezekiel 25-32 : On the ground of the covenant of the Eternal with Israel, the judgment upon their open and secret enemies goes forth. In these judgments, therefore, Jehovah brings to remembrance His covenant with Israel. Ewald delineates the particulars of the prophetic series geographically as beginning on the north-east from Judah with Ammon, thence turning south wards toward Moab, going down with Edom entirely to the south, thereafter bending in a western direction to the Philistines, then in the west stretching again to Tyre and Sidon, lastly to Egypt. Hδvernick finds a beautiful harmony in the following connection between the individual predictions:—First, peoples that were in open enmity to the theocracy, Ezekiel 25; then, in Tyre and Sidon, haughtiness, fleshly security, Ezekiel 26-28; finally, their combination in Egypt, Ezekiel 29-32. Keil has with good right perceived a distinction between Egypt and the other nations; but to suppose a formal twofold division on that account of six and one, destroys the symbol of the number seven, and is not warranted by that distinction, which lies much deeper than Keil has indicated (comp. Doct. Reflections, 29:32, 3). The idea of the coalition rather appears to have been distributed after this manner: first the four nearer are mentioned, then the two more remote members, whereupon the proper fulcrum of the whole conspiracy discovers itself according to its real significancy. The coalition could as such also historically have been one first against Babylon, and the last Egypt alone (comp. at Jeremiah 27), and so giving play to the sequence in respect to time. With this agrees the just remark of Keil, that, as well in Ezekiel 28:24 sq. as in Ezekiel 29:21, a prospect full of promise for Israel forms a cζsura in the heroic measure of the members. According to the specific chronological statements (see Introd. § 6), there result, as successive series of prophecies against the heathen, since the indeterminate, if special reasons to the contrary do not exist, become determinate through the immediately preceding chronological indication:—1. Ammon, Moab, Edom, the Philistines, Ezekiel 25; Ezekiel 2. Egypt (first and second word), Ezekiel 29:1-16; Ezekiel 30:1-19; Ezekiel 3. Tyre (first, second, third, and fourth word) and Sidon, Ezekiel 26-28; Ezekiel 4. Egypt (third word), Ezekiel 30:20-26; Ezekiel 5. Egypt (fourth word), Ezekiel 31; Ezekiel 6. Egypt (fifth word), Ezekiel 32:1-16; Ezekiel 7. Egypt (sixth word), Ezekiel 32:17-32; Ezekiel 8. Egypt (concluding word), Ezekiel 29:17-21. 1. Ammon, Moab, Edom, and the Philistines (Ch. 25)1And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 2Son of man, direct thy face 3to the sons of Ammon, and prophesy upon them. And say to the sons of Ammon, Hear the word of the Lord Jehovah: Because thou sayest “Aha” to My sanctuary, for it is profaned, and to Israel’s ground, for it is desolate, 4and to the house of Judah, for they have gone into banishment: Therefore, behold! I give thee to the sons of the east for a possession, and they place in thee their enclosures, and make in thee their dwellings: they shall eat thy 5fruit, and they shall drink thy milk! And I have given Rabbah for pasture-ground [stable] of camels, and the sons of Ammon for the lair [resting-places] of flocks; and ye know that I am Jehovah. 6For thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because thou didst strike the hand [in the hand], and with the foot didst stamp, and didst rejoice thyself in all thy despite in the soul upon the ground of 7Israel; Therefore, behold! I have stretched out My hand against thee, and have given thee for food [booty] to the heathen; and I root thee out from among the peoples, and make thee to perish from among the lands: I will destroy thee! and thou dost know that I am Jehovah. 8Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because Moab says, and [as] Seir: Behold, as all the heathen is the house of Judah. 9Therefore, behold, I open the shoulder of Moab, from the cities, from his cities, from his end, the ornament of the land, Beth-Hajesimoth, 10Baal-Meon, and toward Kirjathaim, To the sons of the east, to the sons of Ammon; and I have given it for a possession, that the sons 11of Ammon may not be [any more] a remembrance among the heathen. And on Moab will I do judgment; and they know that I am Jehovah. 12Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because Edom exercises vindictive revenge upon the house of Judah, and they made themselves guilty and guilty, and avenged 13themselves upon them; Therefore, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, And I have (there have I) stretched out My hand upon Edom, and I root out from him man and beast; and I have given it for salvation; from Teman and to Dedan 14shall they fall by the sword. And I have given My vengeance on Edom by the hand of My people Israel; and they do on Edom as My wrath and My fury is; and they know My vengeance—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 15Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because the Philistines act in revenge, and vengefully revenged themselves in disdain, in the soul, for destruction, everlasting enmity; 16Therefore, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I stretch out My hand against the Philistines, and root out the Cherethim, and destroy the remnant 17by the coast of the sea. And I do on them great revenges, in punishments of fury; and they know that I am Jehovah, in that I give on them My revenge. Ezekiel 25:7. αβειν, Sept. Arabs. Ezekiel 25:8. Sept.: ... ὁοἰκοςἸσραηλκαιΙουδα. Ezekiel 25:9. ...ἀποπολεωνἀκρωτηριωναὐτου, ἐκλεκτηνγην, … ἐπανωπηγηςπολεωςπαραθαλασσιας.Ver 12. ... καιἐμνησυκακησανκ. ἐξεδικησανδικην, Ver.13. καιἐκΘαιμανδιωκομενοιἐνῥομφαια— Ezekiel 25:15. Sept.: ... τουἐξαλειψαιἑωςαἰωνος,—implentes inimicitias veteres— Ezekiel 25:16. Vulg.: … et interficiam interfectores. REMARKSEze_25:1-7. The Ammonites.The time is not specified in Ezekiel 25:1. As will be seen from what follows, however, the final execution of judgment on Jerusalem is presupposed. If the actual fact is assumed, the prediction would have its proper place after Ezekiel 333 (Jerome). The presupposition, however, is that only of anticipation, the position of the prophecy being taken from the idea of the connection with Ezekiel 24. As the prophet foretells how it is going to he with Ammon, there is a pointing backwards also to what Ammon has been. It cannot behave itself otherwise than it has been perpetually manifesting itself. See Doct. Reflections, 1:3. Ezekiel 25:2. Comp. Ezekiel 6:2; Ezekiel 21:2; Ezekiel 13:17. With eye and hand.—Comp. for the following prophecy that already pronounced against Ammon in Ezekiel 21:28 sqq. Ezekiel 25:3 Ezekiel 6:3; Ezekiel 13:2. Where parties look merely at results that are pleasing to them, they ought assuredly at the outset to be called upon to hear, and, indeed, what Jehovah says, not what they may themselves think, and approvingly give one another to hear.—The current speech of Ammon (ΰξψκְ)—feminine as a nation, the popular community—significantly places itself directly over against My sanctuary. In the judgment of it His people vanish, as in His compassion their sins vanish; He meets on behalf of this people the Aha, the malignant joy, of their enemies; comp. Ezekiel 24:21. At the same time, the enmity of Ammon is thereby, from the first, marked as blasphemy of the Spirit who ruled over and in Judah-Israel. It is not merely injury to the land and people (Ezekiel 21:28), that their national, human form of existence should be shattered to pieces, although there should be this also, in accordance with what follows. In the latter respect, the neighbourly relation has to be thought of, which, in point of space, was relationship of the nearest kind, to say nothing of what there was of blood-relationship, in consequence of the derivation through Lot.—αβεμδ, Hengst.: “went as exiles;” comp. Ezekiel 12:11. Ezekiel 25:4. The offence draws after it the punishment, wherein Nebuchadnezzar entirely falls into abeyance. Jehovah comes forth, and the sons of the east—according to Grotius and others, undoubtedly the Chaldeans; according to that which is here declared of them, and always elsewhere, the Arabian tribes—descendants of Ishmael, the Bedouin, especially as in the text it is not properly the execution that is assigned to them; but they, after the judgment took effect, only gave conclusive evidence of the completed fact. They are in a sort of way classical for this, since “they always appear where fire and sword have wasted a country” (Hengst.), or generally where a place has become desert. “The old Ammonitis, the ruin of which began in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and continued thenceforward without interruption, is abandoned to the Bedouin Arabs to this day” (Hengst.).—Hitzig translates: “and settled in thee shall be their pens;” but ιωαε is probably Piel, though only here. θιψεη are the enclosures (for cattle) of a nomad village.—The repeated δξδ impressively dismisses the Ammonites from their territory, because others have taken their place.—Besides the fruit of the ground (τψικ). there is mentioned exhaustively the produce from the cattle-tending. Ezekiel 25:5. There is here still an especial signalizing of the old Ammonite capital city, Rabbah, Ezekiel 21:20 (later, Philadelphia). Hengst.: “the name (the populous) in melancholy contrast to what follows, as camel and wilderness go inseparably together;” comp. Amos 1:14; Jeremiah 49:2. The sons of Ammon, parallel for “their other cities” (Zephaniah 2:9). [Surely a somewhat peculiar parallel: the sons of Ammon are just the Ammonites; men, not cities or places. But they were to be given “for the couching of flocks”—flocks for men, and not that merely, but flocks in a state of perfect repose. In plain terms, the agricultural parts of the country were to become pastoral—where men were wont to be seen labouring, there should only be found sheep browsing or resting.—P. F.] In the present day, Rabbah, while it has great ruins, for example, of a theatre belonging to the Roman period, yet it is wholly destitute of inhabitants. Arabians with camels met Seetzen in the neighbourhood, dangerous people for a visit to these ruins. When Buckingham spent a night among the ruins, an Arab was pitching there; and the traveller could not sleep for the bleating of sheep, the neighing of horses, and the barking of dogs.—The transition to the Ammonites themselves is prepared for Ezekiel 25:6 (ειγςϊν). Ezekiel 25:6. Comp. for the gestures, Ezekiel 21:14; Ezekiel 21:17; Ezekiel 6:11. The undoubted import is given by the and thou didst rejoice. The malicious joy is strengthened, marked, and deepened, since, as hand and foot were not wanting in it, nothing failed of despite; it was whole and entire: in the innermost soul. (Hitzig: “So that one is therein with the soul, with passion; therefore with the whole heart’s contempt of which you are capable.”) Ezekiel 25:7. Hand against hand. Instead of μαβ, for food, the Qeri has μαζ, for booty. But “booty” expresses too little, where an “allotment,” a portion had been explicitly assured, and in the comparison at Ezekiel 25:4 is so very suitable. Hitzig only objects that “the book of Daniel is not contemporaneous with Ezekiel;” for in Daniel 1:5; Daniel 1:8, etc., τַּ ?ϊְ ?αַ ?β is used of court-food [this latter word being thought by Hengst., Hδv., and others to countenance the text against the Qeri here.—P. F.] Ezekiel 25:8-11. The Moabites.The association of Edom, by means of the mountain (Seir), with Moab in this affair, implies that the sentiment uttered was one that had a much more extensive prevalence, and already provides a ground for the later judicial sentence upon Edom. What they say amounts to disavowal and blasphemy of the Spirit in Judah. Comp. with Ammon (= where is now their God?). Ezekiel 25:9. The punishment is, as in the case of Ammon, that the land is opened to the nomadic Arabians (Ezekiel 25:10), and primarily, indeed, with an eye to the fortified cities. The portion contemplated therein, because it was the upper north side which leant on Ammon, is called the shoulder of Moab, on account of the position, which is more clearly indicated in what follows, probably not without respect to the gradually ascending or sloping ground; but hardly, with Grotius and Hengst.: “because there blows and sword-strokes are most easily applied,” of which nothing is said. From the cities (the ξο on no account to be taken in a privative sense, with Hitzig: “bare of cities”) commences the opening very intelligibly; then occurs the strongest opposition, and, indeed, from the cities, which are designated as from the end (not: “to the last,” for to how far has not yet been said), that is, as border cities in the extremity of the land, according to the supposed side; so must the rest of the land assuredly lie open, as it is called the ornament of the land, therefore that which is brilliant by its fruitfulness, or perhaps by rich pastures. After some cities, mentioned by way of example, there is expressed in to Kirjathaim the point how far, and the intended compass is marked off.—αιϊδιωιξεϊ, south or south-east from Jericho, on the Dead Sea (Bethsimuth, Besimoth), signifies house of the wastes—might it be Suaime, on the north-east border of the Dead Sea?—Baalmeon, now Mζin, the considerable ruins of which Seetzen saw from a distance, lying on the east of Attarus, where there are said to be springs.—Kirjathaim, west of Medaba, el Teym (?). These cities clearly point to the ancient inheritance of Reuben (Joshua 13); but when the Assyrians led into captivity the transjordanic tribes, the Moabites obtained possession of them. Comp. on Ezekiel 21:36 [28] sq. (Ewald: “Therefore I now loose Moab’s crown from the cities.”) Ezekiel 25:10 ςμΧ, on to, upon Ammon and also Moab (Ezekiel 16:37). Hδvernick: “primarily upon Ammon, then pouring itself forth upon Moab.” The Ammonites still stand forth directly before the Moabites. Comp. on Ezekiel 21:37 [32]. Ezekiel 25:11. When the land of the Ammonites should fall into the enemy’s hand, then would similar divine judgments be executed on Moab, Ezekiel 5:10. (Comp. besides, Isaiah 16:6; Jeremiah 48.) Ezekiel 25:12-14. The Edomites. The charge in respect to sinning mounts up; for as Edom appears in Ezekiel 25:8 as the ringleader against the people of the Lord, so is it as to intellectual supremacy. Ezekiel 25:12. The old spirit of revenge, in which he had acted from the olden time, still keeps by his side. While in the more distant relationship of Ammon and Moab, malignant joy is the expression of hostile feeling, with Edom, in his much nearer relationship, the same feeling vents itself in actions of revenge (ςωεϊΞαπχνπχν): hence the charge of sinful procedure as the incurring of guilt; comp. besides, Genesis 36:31 sq., 27:17 sq.; Obadiah 1:10 sq.; Amos 1:11; Psalms 137. Ezekiel 25:13. In such dealings the stretching out of the hand is plain enough (Ezekiel 25:7). The ε, and, denotes continuation of the foregoing punishments, which form one chain.—Ezekiel 14:13; Ezekiel 14:17.—Ch. 5.14.—From Teman to Dedan designates the land of the Edomites from south to north.—Ezekiel 24:21. Ezekiel 25:14. Revenge for revenge. So also My people Israel is set over against Edom, without, however, thereby referring to the mode of the execution. Since Israel is here so expressly announced as the executor of the divine vengeance, Nebuchadnezzar cannot possibly be thought of in connection with it; but we must think of the times of the Maccabees (John Hyrcanus). The Messianic interest must not be brought, into view. The compulsory reception into Israel, whereby the Edomites ceased as a people, is plainly to be regarded as the proper execution of judgment, as this national annihilation. Ezekiel 25:15-17. The Philistines.The Philistines are in Ezekiel 25:15 joined to Edom on the side of their doing (Ezekiel 25:12 sq.); to Ammon-Moab on account of their contempt of the people of God. The latter was the inmost feeling, hostility the impelling force, wherein the distinction from Edom lay. For destruction, this is the design, the abiding tendency. The everlasting enmity reaches back to the earliest days. A perpetually enduring war is the standing feature of the relation, while fixed hostility was the root of it. Ezekiel 25:16. The outstretched hand, as in Ezekiel 25:13; Ezekiel 25:7.—The effect of the action on the Philistines is the extirpation of the Cherethites, a name manifestly given, not to a part of this people, but to the whole of the Philistines, for the sake of the paronomasia. Hengst.: “The name Philistines probably signifies the emigrants, those from the regions on the Black Sea, from Colchis and the adjacent Pontic Cappadocia, Kaphtor. Of substantially the same import with this name is Kretim (Eng. form: Cherethites), that is, the extirpated, namely, from their native country. These Kretim are now to become a second time Kretim; their name shall verify itself anew.”—The annihilation is announced as total, including the remnant also by the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. To this also corresponds the closing word, Ezekiel 25:17 : in punishments of fury, as at Ezekiel 5:15. “Jehovah Himself, never again ceasing” (Hitzig). 1. Ammon and Moab share together, not merely the incestuous nature of their origin (Genesis 19:30 sq.), but the juxtaposition of their residences, their historical outcome, in particular their hostility toward the people of God, which, having respect to what is said of them in the time of Moses (Deuteronomy 2:9-23), was the more unjustifiable in its manifestations. (See Doctrinal Reflections, 4, at the passage.) There is nothing to be alleged in vindication of it, for its root is to be traced to the strife, in Genesis 13:6 sq., which led to the separation from Israel,—a separation which was kept up by the latter with the utmost care and vigilance. It is therefore the natural contrast of the carnal spirit against the Spirit of God—haughtiness its manifestation on the one side, injurious treatment on the other, blasphemy of the Spirit in all. The prescription in the law (Deuteronomy 23:3) is already a significant one as to the relation which existed between Israel and Ammon-Moab. 2. In the dark contrast, however, between Israel on the one side and Ammon-Moab on the other, the analogy is not to be overlooked; here also the elder (Moab), as there Esau, is the one that falls into the background. The younger (Ammon), on the other hand, bears the sword, and is named before the other. Both, as distinct tribes, disappear wholly at last in the Arabians. 3. Ammon and Moab, the demoniacal counterpart to Judah-Israel. 4. The people of God must undergo the experience which the man of God undergoes. Matthew 10:36; Micah 7:6. Out of his blood-relationships there springs a hostility even to blood. While this revolves around the Spirit that wrought in Israel, it could not but finally array itself against the Messiah, as He has Himself said that we shall be hated for His name’s sake. 5. Edom might be the bad conscience of Israel. Esau himself, however, after Israel’s night-conflict, met him in a gracious spirit, and parted from him in peace (Genesis 33). He who has wrestled with God, and has obtained mercy, has also overcome man. Thus it was only the respect paid to the kin-relationship, which in the case also of Ammon and Moab came into consideration, but was specially made mention of in regard to Edom (Deuteronomy 2:4), that determined the holding aloof on the part of Israel. But the nearer the affinity was in Edom to Israel, so much the more horrible appears the spirit of revenge, which will even avenge, because grace has been shown to the other, because to him on that ground precedence has been granted, in order to compensate for the disadvantage on the territory of nature. The revenge of Edom, which was just a relapse into the feeling of Esau (Genesis 27:41), could not endure that Israel should be a separate, and what was called God’s chosen, people. “Edom holds his ground constantly as the bitterest denier of the right of the first-born, of the divine preference of Israel” (Kliefoth). The vengeance of God could not in a more marked retribution manifest itself upon Edom than by the extirpation of his nationality, and that precisely in the form of an absorption by Israel.—Robinson delineates a scene in the land of Idumζa as it has come to be, Res. 2. p. 502: “We were now upon the plain, or rather the rolling desert, of the ’Arabah; the surface was in general loose gravel and stones, everywhere furrowed and torn with the beds of torrents. A more frightful desert it had hardly been our lot to behold. Now and then a low shrub of the Ghudβh was almost the only trace of vegetation. The mountains beyond presented a most uninviting and hideous aspect: precipices and naked conical peaks of chalky and gravelly formation rising one above another without any sign of life or vegetation.” 6. “The revenge of Edom on account of the precedence granted to Israel by God, his superiority, viewed in respect to its deep religious significance, is nothing else than the constant resistance, the permanent protest raised against the higher dispensation established by God, His method of salvation; and in that is mirrored a fundamental characteristic of heathendom generally” (Hδv.). 7. As in Ammon, Moab, and Edom there appear three degenerations toward heathenism, so the whole picture is fitly closed in by the heathenish Philistines (the Ἀλλοφυλοι of the Septuagint and the Apocrypha). Heathendom was round about Israel; it was the background, the soil from which his relief comes out so much the more distinctly. 8. “The four number (remarks Kliefoth) points to the four regions of the world, and so to mankind at large; it indicates that it will not fare otherwise with collective heathenism throughout the whole earth, alike inimical to the people of God, than it did with those hostile tribes which on all the four sides surrounded that people.” HINTSEze_25:1 sq. “The fall of Jerusalem was in a religious point of view a catastrophe for the world. The subjection of the covenant-people under heathenish ascendancy is therefore no victory of heathendom over the true theocracy. Exactly the reverse: the apparent annihilation of Israel leads to a new resurrection of it. Out of its death-conflict there breaks forth a new glorious life, salvation in its world-overcoming power. Precisely now on this account does the period always more decidedly approach when the worldly power will discover itself as a broken one, when the kingdoms of heathendom, with all the splendour of their earthly glory, shall appear as evanescent powers of the past. Accordingly, the judgment upon the theocracy and the heathen on the one side stands in inseparable connection; on the other side, it is an essentially different one” (Hδv.).—“Judgment indeed begins at the house of God; but if the Father of the household does not spare the sons, how soon must it alight upon the others! This doctrine first of all shines forth from the connection of this chapter with the preceding chapters. Then, also, we see here how, with all the special solicitude wherewith God interested Himself in Israel, He still by no means let the heathen out of His sight, since He must show Himself to be a God also for the heathen” (L.).—“If thou wilt not rightly apply the gifts and loving-kindnesses of God, God can take them from thee and give them to another” (St.). Ezekiel 25:3. Hear: Ah, yes, it depends on the hearing! Give right ears, O God, to hear! He who suffers the damage need not care for the mockery; but sit not where the mockers sit: their seats, however festive they may be, have nothing to make them fast. Ezekiel 25:4 sq. The Arabians, through Mohammed, were executors of punishment of quite another sort. Ezekiel 25:7. “Thou canst think of no man so poor as thou thyself mayest actually become” (Stck.). Ezekiel 25:8 sq. However degenerate Christian people may become, Christian truth can never be as one ring among the well-known three rings.—“But we must watch that we do not cause the adversaries of the Lord to blaspheme” (W.).—What unites the world, separates it from the kingdom of God.—The Almighty God is in possession of a universal passport.—Grace makes friends, but also enemies; God, however, is expert with His enemies.—“It is best to learn to know God from His benefits” (Stck.). Ezekiel 25:12 sq. Edom’s revenge his special hereditary sin.—“Revenge is God’s, and not man’s; whosoever, therefore, anticipates Him in this, on him will He be again avenged. Let no one, then, recompense evil for evil” (Tόb. B.).—“When relatives by affinity or blood become inimical to one another, they are much more embittered against each other than strangers” (O.).—Even the oldest grudge that nations have toward one another must be turned to peace through the power of the gospel; else God will place Himself between them, and finally root out the haters, who will not abandon their hatred.—Disdain and frivolous scorn may stalk on before; so much the more surely will God’s judgment come after. Ezekiel 25:15 sq. “It is an essential part and property belonging to the judicial administration of God, that He exercises vengeance on the ungodly; therefore He will have the same also preserved as an especial royalty, Deuteronomy 32:35” (Cr.). Above all else, survey the old world—where remain those who were enemies to God and His kingdom? Their places know them no more. But God’s word remains, as it has been verified in them.—The depopulated places of the ancient historical world.—“Israel was hated of all those nations, not on account of his sins, but for the sake of his religion. Thus the cause of Israel was God’s cause. Blessed people, whom men cannot hate and slander without hating and slandering God Himself! The malignant contempt was recompensed with the extirpation of the remembrance, the hostile revenge with a divine revenge,” etc. (Keith).—“If these prophecies of judgment only came into complete fulfilment after the lapse of centuries, one still sees their fulfilment to this day before the eyes of travellers” (Richt.).—[It is still to be remembered, however, that, as the prediction had respect not simply to the land of Edom (and the same applies equally to the other predictions of judgment), but to the land as connected with the Edomite race, “these desolations of later times have no direct relation to the Edom of Scripture; and if they are to be taken into account at all, it should only be as affording a collateral (or supplementary) proof of the judgment that was to befal the children of Edom. But it is the desolations of an earlier period, and above all, the utter extinction of Edom as a people, and that by the hand of Jacob, in which the more direct and proper fulfilment of the prophecy is to be sought. … At the present day there are, in certain parts of what was the territory of Edom, ‘wadys full of trees, and shrubs, and flowers, and the eastern and higher parts are extensively cultivated, and yield good crops’ (Robinson). Still the Edom of prophecy—Edom considered as the enemy of God and the rival of Israel—has perished for ever: all, in that respect, is an untrodden wilderness, a hopeless ruin; and therein the veracity of God’s word finds its verification.”—P. F. on Prophecy, p. 219 sq.] HINTSOn Ch.26 Ezekiel 26:1-6. Tyre, the home of the first learned jurist, Ulpian, is the burial-place of the gifted theologian Origen; and the ruins of its once gorgeous cathedral cover the bones of the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa.—“Selfishness is a very great sin, especially when one seeks to become rich through other people’s hurt” (Cr.).—Tyre against Jerusalem: a study for the times.—“The prophet would check the despondency which a sight of the world shining in its glory can so readily evoke in the people of God when sighing under the cross” (Hengst.).—The loud triumph of the world over the Church is still only an apparent triumph.—The Church may be brought down, but the world with all its lust must utterly go down. Ezekiel 26:3. Yes; many nations shall come; God took Tyre at her word, but how?—Against the high wave-stroke of the towering heart, there come the high beating waves of retribution.—“God serves Himself of men in executing punishment, where an angel might rather have done it (Sennacherib), in order that we may become more sensible of our impotence” (Stck.).—The sea, which had been the hope of Tyre, now its terror.—God, the Leader of the enemies of His enemies. Ezekiel 26:4. Walls, towers, all is nothing, if God is not all.—What survives if God falls upon us?—The comforting and the terrible faithfulness of God to His word.—All things and persons are included in the annihilating judgments of God. Ezekiel 26:7-14. Nebuchadnezzar, a servant of God: in Egypt the insects were such.—The world-conqueror and the world-ruler.—The king out of the north is, above all, death; and if he draws up in array, he has a multitude also for his host, and there will be pain for the soul as well as for the body.—No fortress stands so secure and so firmly guarded that God’s judgment cannot reach and enter it.—Every power is broken at last.—“Whosoever does not tremble before the divine law will be only the more affrighted before the divine punishment when it alights” (Stck.). Ezekiel 26:12. The spoiling of our goods is the final end of all upon earth; therefore should we lay up for ourselves treasures in heaven, which remain for ever. Sic transit gloria mundi. Ezekiel 26:13-14. The lust of the world shall be one day suffering; the suffering of the pious eternal glory.—Let not thy heart be so stunned by the noise which the world makes as not to mark the bare rock which lies beneath; be not deceived by the merry songs and lively instruments of music: upon the graves even of the rich and the great all is still.—Here the fishing-net, elsewhere the cobwebs. Ezekiel 26:15 sqq. The interest in the downfall of others, arising from the consideration of the nothingness and perishableness of all earthly things, from the feeling of one’s own impotence and weakness, from the consciousness of sin and guilt.—The echo of misery.—“When God punishes, He does it not merely on account of the ungodly, who must feel such punishment, but also on account of other ungodly persons, that they may become better by such examples” (St.).—Herakles, the strength of Tyre, the might of commerce (comp. the Heb. word rakal).—The fall of Tyre an impressive preaching of repentance.—“The downfall of the ungodly is more readily mourned and bewailed than the tribulation of the righteous” (St.).—“That may be accomplished in a moment which was not expected to take place in years” (Stck.).—The Bible also represents tragedies, in which whole peoples may weep and kings take their place in the dust.—“When earthly well-being departs, the world complains—only its eternal perdition troubles it not” (Stck.).—The fall of the great should make us shy of seeking after such perishable greatness.—The unrighteous grief of the world, and the righteous lamentation of the world.—The terror before Tyre, and the terror upon Tyre.—If thou art frightened at sin in time, thou shalt not need to be frightened at its punishment when it is too late. Ezekiel 26:19-21. “These three verses hang together. The overthrow of the great city, and the glorification of the church. The one is the consequence of the other. There was a time when Rome was desolated, and the peoples covered it like water. At last it also went down to the dead in the Council of Trent, where, by its anathemas, it cut itself off from true believers. God has delivered His church, the land of the living, from Babylon, and adorned her with peace and manifold gifts” (Cocc.).—Tyre in the going down, Zion in the rising up again.—“He who has such hope may well let the scorn of Tyre pass—respice finem” (Hengst.).—“Just as God overthrows the proud antichristianism, so much the higher will He one day raise His church”(Tüb. Bible).—“Even in the hardest threatenings there is an under-current of promise for the children of God” (St.). Ezekiel 26:21. As there is a seeking and not finding, so also shall there be a being sought and not found.—“This is likewise said of every ungodly one who has been prosperous, Psalms 37:36. He is not to be found in heaven for ever, and in hell none cares to seek or to be found” (B. B.). HINTSOn Ch. 27 Ezekiel 27:1-10. “When Tyre rejoices over Jerusalem, then the prophet raises a lamentation over Tyre: this is the recompense of the pious” (Stck.).—If we must not repay evil with evil, there still is with God a recompensing of evil with evil.—“All human and earthly things go out at last in lamentation” (Stck.).—This is the lamentation of the Spirit, that the world sows to the flesh, and of the flesh reaps corruption.—With kettledrums and flutes the world begins, but it ends with wailing and misery.—“We must profoundly know the gloria mundi, if we are to take to heart the sic transit gloria mundi” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 27:3-4. “Let no one boast of his strength or worldly elevation; how soon can the Lord, if His judgments should break forth, bring all to the dust of desolation! Jeremiah 9:23; Jeremiah 9:25” (Tüb. B.).—There is a perfection of beauty which is nothing else than ripeness for judgment.—Beauty is a transient splendour, but the knowledge of the Eternal leads from glory to glory.—“In boasting one sees what things the heart is full of” (Stck.).—The contrast between Tyre and the daughter of the king, Psalms 45, who is all beautiful within.—“The security is very different: one is of faith, since we know that we are reconciled through Christ, and, even if the world should fall in ruin, can remain in peace; the other proceeds from unbelief, which has respect to men, walls, etc., and relies upon these” (L.).—“There are many kinds of beauty, but none perfect without godliliness” (Stck.).—“We shall also have to think of that woman who, Revelation 18., says, I am it” (B. B.).—The buildings of men and the building of God, namely, His church, against which not even the gates of hell can prevail. Ezekiel 27:5-9. Comp. with the splendid ship Tyre the heavenly Jerusalem, Revelation 21—“When people once surrender themselves to pride, pomp, and dissipation, they can hardly lay them aside again; nay, they often know not, from inconsideration and wantonness, what they should do, Deuteronomy 32:15 sq.” (O.)—Trim the lamps !—Every land has its peculiar gift from God, and the gifts of God must thus shamefully minister to the vanity of men!—God forbids the misuse of His gifts as an unprofitable waste.—It is quite right to take into one’s service and pay qualified persons, but woe to him who makes flesh his arm, and whose heart departs from the Lord! Ezekiel 27:10. The best defence is after all another thing than soldiers, Psalms 33:16-17.—The angel of the Lord encamps round about those who fear Him, Psalms 34:8 [7].—God’s camping host for believers, Genesis 32; 2 Kings 6:17.—We must, according to Ephesians 6:10 sqq., put on the divine armour, which protects land and people. Ezekiel 27:12-25. Men run through the wide world for the sake of merchandise, while the word of God, which makes rich without trouble, and imparts treasure which neither moth nor rust corrupts, nor can thieves steal, is so near us!—The one pearl of great price Tyre did not make an article of traffic.—What advantages it to gain the whole world if the soul suffers damage?—“Ezekiel writes as little from the point of view of a minister of commerce, as Isaiah in Ezekiel 3 does from that of a milliner” (Hengst.).—Covetousness must serve all.—“O how many gifts of God are in the service of sin!” (Right.)—“Great merchant-cities, great cities of sin” (Tüb. B.). Ezekiel 27:13. How often and in how many ways are men’s souls the object of buying and selling! Ezekiel 27:24. “With things perfectly beautiful man was certainly to occupy himself. But where are they to be found in the earthly sphere? Colossians 3:2 ” (B. B.). Ezekiel 27:25. “That Tyre was so full and honoured, while Zion became always poorer and poorer, and sunk miserable—this formed a stumbling-block to the people of God. But what has become of all the fulness and glory of Tyre? Zion, on the other hand, has gloriously blossomed anew” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 27:26-36. “The glory of the earth shall become dust and ashes.”—The higher we reach, so much the more precipitous, and so much the deeper will be the fall.—The element of our security can so easily become the element of our misery: here the sea, elsewhere gold, one’s position, etc.—A person of high estate when cast down is lower than one who has always been in a humble position.—The wind does not always fill our sails; it often also, and suddenly, tears them short and small.—In prosperity men so rarely consider how vain it is, that in adversity they cry out the more loudly; but, alas! only upon the vanity of earthly things, and not upon the vanity of their earthly hearts.—It is with that which men build for themselves, such that if one stone should fall out of the wall, all the other stones will follow it.—Remember that thou art dust, and bethink thyself that thou hast a soul!—Fear is salutary, but there is also a fear which we again shake off, and which we do not suffer to warn us.—The loss of earthly things gives such trouble and for the loss of heavenly goods men will laugh!—A Christian should not so mourn, but should smite his breast alike in prosperity and in adversity. Ezekiel 27:32. Michael and Tyre.—Who is as thou? This it is proper to say only of God in reference to glory. In respect to nothingness, on the other hand, one of us is as another.—Mournful times should be times of repentance.—The holy sense of the nil mirari. Ezekiel 27:33. Our striving should be to become rich in the knowledge of the truth, and to make rich in regard to such knowledge should be our purpose in life. Ezekiel 27:34. The end of earthly things, their scale, value, and true estimation.—All this world is nothing; how surely must there be what is something!—But faith cries out of the depths to God.—The glory of the children of God, and the world’s glory.—Formerly and now, two resting-points for the consideration of Tyre. Ezekiel 27:35-36. Fear and shame have their limit only at a throne, that is, where the king reigns, who represents us.—“So one at length becomes an object of the world’s mockery with his pride and his sins” (Tüb. B.). HINTSOn Ch. 28 Ezekiel 28:2-11. “The prophet had the more reason to bring forward the king of Tyre in his fall, as he thus obtains a counterpart to the glorious rise of the kingdom of Israel in Christ” (Hengst.).—“God resisteth the proud, 1 Peter 5:5. Whoever, therefore, is proud has God for his enemy” (Stck.). “I am God—many, indeed, will not speak plainly out; but they bear themselves so as if no one had the right to say anything to them. God may well enough call governors gods, but they are not themselves to assume anything on that account, else their divinity will soon come to a disgraceful end with Dagon, 1. Sam. 5:3, 4” (B. B.).—“The new wisdom teaches, man is God, and there is no God except in man—which points to the man of sin, 2 Thessalonians 2:4, whose typical foreshadowing the king of Tyre was” (Schmieder).—“It belongs to the nature of God to be and have everything out of Himself; to the nature of man, to derive all from the fulness of God” (Hengst.).—“Nothing is more foolish than when a man forgets his human condition” (Stck.).—Thou sayest, I am rich, etc., see Revelation 3:17. Ezekiel 28:3. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of true wisdom.—“Our wisdom puffs us up, when love fails” (H. H.).—“Imaginary wisdom hinders prayer for the true wisdom” (St.).—The worldly wisdom of Daniel, as compared with that of the prince of Tyre. Ezekiel 28:4. The husbandman, also, gathered much into his granary; yet he was a fool, whose soul was that night to be required of him, Luke 12. Ezekiel 28:5. God demands the heart; mammon lifts it up, that it may not betake itself to God.—No one can become happy by means of riches. Ezekiel 28:6. The king of Tyre and the king of Babylon, Daniel 4:27.—“The punishment for pride is humiliation” (H. H.).—“To come from a pit to a high position is an agreeable change, as with Joseph and David; but the coming for the ungodly is in the opposite direction” (Stck.).—God must bring us to the height, and keep us in the height, if we are not to fall from all real and imaginary heights into the depths of the abyss. Ezekiel 28:9. “In the day of trouble men employ quite another language than in prosperity, nay, learn then what they would not learn throughout their whole life” (Stck.). Ezekiel 28:10. “Balaam desired to die the death of the righteous” (Stck.).—The death of the ungodly is death manifold—bodily, spiritual, eternal. Ezekiel 28:11-19. Even this lamentation shows that God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked.—“Impress of the original, therefore the image of God, Hebrews 1:2. More exactly: he who not only in himself, but also in all his works, expresses the prototype. This Jesus testifies of Himself, John v.19, 36” (Schmieder). Ezekiel 28:13 sq. To whom much is given, of him also shall much be required.—The great spirits, who think the law was not given for them, in the judgment.—“So also we must regard as precious stones Christ and His name, the Holy Spirit, faith, the prophets, God’s word, the sacraments, the virtues, the patience of the saints, the forgiveness of sins, etc.—with which a false Christ seeks to bedeck and to adorn himself, Revelation 17:4” (B. B.).—“Ungodly people have their Eden in this world, but believers seek it in heaven” (St.). Ezekiel 28:15. “On the common ground of hereditary corruption, there still are in the life of individuals and of whole nations differences, times of comparative innocence as well as of deep declension, provoking the judgments of God. As a rule, youth is the better time; the older the worse. Sin, when not combated, is continually on the increase,” etc. (Hengst.)—“It does not always happen that they who promise well in youth shall be the same in advanced life, for many change their habits” (St.).—“Every man flatters himself, and every king is flattered by his Tyre” (Schmieder). Ezekiel 28:16. The perils of merchandise for entire peoples, and for individuals.—“They who aim at being rich fall into dangerous snares” (Stck.). Ezekiel 28:17. “The foundation of wisdom is humility, which sees things as they are, has an open eye for one’s own weaknesses and the excellences of others, and is on its guard against dangerous undertakings, Psalms 131:1. The ‘brightness’ received into the heart blinds the eye, so that one regards himself alone as great, everything else as little, and rushes wantonly into dangers for which he is not prepared, adventures upon paths which lead to perdition—as the combat (of Tyre) with the flourishing Chaldean monarchy. But haughtiness itself works its own ruin. This is the rock on which all the heathen powers of the old world were wrecked” (Hengst.).—“But God-fearing kings will thence derive the instruction that the king, not less than the meanest subject, has to pray daily to God on his knees for a wise and humble heart” (Schmieder).—The dust of kings appears and is treated exactly as the dust of the very poorest. Sursum corda, but in the right sense!—Our heart should be a sanctuary of God. Ezekiel 28:18-19. “The fire of lust and covetous desire draws after it the other fire of judgment” B. B.).—“A destruction like that of Sodom in the olden time, in which the sin-root of Canaan first came to full development, while the judgment upon Tyre forms the close of the long series of judgments upon the Canaanites” (Hengst.).—“On the other hand, he who does the will of God abides for ever, 1 John 2:17” (Stck.).—“Where thou wilt not be for ever, there seek for thyself no fixed abode” (B. B.). Ezekiel 28:20. “In the judgments of God shines forth His glory, so that men are obliged to confess that He is righteous, and that His judgments are righteous” (Stck.). Ezekiel 28:24. “God’s judgment on the ungodly tends to the good of His church” (Cr.).—God sets His own free at length.—“How easily is a thorn drawn out!” (Stck.)—“How well is it to be under the protection of the Lord Messiah, and under His gracious wings to dwell securely!” (Tüb. B.)—“Hence has it been fully made good through Christ, as Zacharias says (Luke 1:74 sq.), that we are redeemed from the hand of our enemies to serve Him without fear,” etc. (H. H.)—“Then do believers first come to their true and perfect rest, when all their bodily and spiritual enemies have been rooted out” (O.).—“This prophecy is fulfilled in the Christian Church, which is the true seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Those born under the Old Covenant were in bondage, while believers under the New Testament are free” (Cocceius). 3. Egypt (Ch. 29–32)Ezekiel 29:1. In the tenth year, in the tenth [month], on the twelfth of the month, came the word of Jehovah to me, saying, 2Son of man, Set thy face upon [against] 3Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and prophesy upon him, and upon all Egypt! Speak and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I [come] upon thee, Pharaoh, king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his streams, who saith, To 4me [belongs] my stream, and I, I have made myself. And I give rings in thy jaws, and hang the fish of thy streams, on thy scales, and draw thee out of the midst of thy streams, and every fish of thy streams [which] hangs on thy scales; 5And I set thee free [drive thee] into the wilderness, thee and every fish of thy streams; upon the plains of the field shalt thou fall, thou shalt not be picked up, and not gathered; to the beast [living creatures] of the earth and to the fowl of the heaven I have given thee for food. 6And all the inhabitants of Egypt shall know that I am Jehovah! Because they were a staff of reed to the house of Israel,—7When they take hold of thee by thy hand, thou art broken, and splittest to them every shoulder [the whole shoulder]; and when they lean upon thee, thou art shattered, and lamest for them all loins,—8Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I bring upon thee a sword, and root out of thee man and beast. 9And the land of Egypt is [shall be] for desolation and a waste, and they know that I am Jehovah! 10Because He said, The stream [belongs] to me, and I, I have made it, Therefore, behold, I am against thee, and against thy streams, and I give the land of Egypt for deserts of waste of desolation, from Migdol to Syene [seveneh], and even to 11the borders of Cush. Foot of man shall not pass through it, and foot of beast 12shall not pass through it, and it shall not be inhabited forty years. And I have given the land of Egypt [for] desolation in the midst of desolate lands, and its cities shall be desolate forty years in the midst of desolate cities, and I disperse 13Egypt among the heathen and scatter them in the lands. For thus saith the Lord Jehovah, At the end of forty years will I gather Egypt out of the peoples 14whither they were dispersed: And I turn the misery of Egypt, and bring them back to the land of Pathros, to the land of their birth; and they are there a low 15kingdom. Lower than the kingdoms shall it be, and it shall not lift itself up any more above the heathen; and I diminish them, so that they do not rule among the heathen [have dominion over them]. 16And it shall no more be for confidence to the house of Israel, a remembrancer of iniquity, when they turn after them; and they know that I am the Lord Jehovah. 17And it came to pass in the seven and twentieth year, in the first [month], on the first of the month, the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 18Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon has caused his army to serve a great service against Tyre: every head became bald, and every shoulder peeled; and there was not reward for him and his host out of Tyre for the work, which he has wrought against it [the city]. 19Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I give Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon the land of Egypt, and he takes away its tumult, and plunders its spoil, and seizes its prey; and it is a reward to his host. As his hire for which he has wrought against it [Tyre], 20I have given him the land of Egypt, because they did 21[it] for Me—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. In that day will I make a horn to bud forth to the house of Israel, and I will give thee the opening of the mouth in the midst of them; and they know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 29:1. Sept.: ... μιατ.μηνος— Ezekiel 29:2. ... μιατ.μηνος— Ezekiel 29:3. ... στηρισοντ. προσωπον. Ezekiel 29:4. ... ταςπαγιδας … ταιςλετισινσουτροσξολληθησονται. Ezekiel 29:5. καικαταβαλωσεἐνταχεικ. ταντας— Ezekiel 29:7. Sept.: ... … τῃχειριαὐτων, ἐθλασθης, κ. ὁτεἐπεκροτησενἐπ’ αὐτουςπασαχειρκ. ὁτεἐπανεπαυσαυτοἐπισε,συνετριβηςκ. συνεκλασαςαὐτων—Vulg.: … te manu … et lacerasti … et dissolvisti omnes renes eorum. Ezekiel 29:10. ... χαιἐτιτανταςτ.ποταμουςσου … εἰςἐρημουχ.ῥομφαιανχ.ἀπωλειανἀποΜ. χ.Συηνης—Vulg.: … in solitudines, gladio dissipatam a turre Syenes— Ezekiel 29:12. ... εἰςἀπωλειανἐνμεσω̣τ. ἐρηωου, … ἀφανισμοςἐσται— Ezekiel 29:14. Sept.: ... χαιχατοιχιωαὐτους, … ὁθενὲληφθησαν—in terra nativitatis suζ— Ezekiel 29:15. παραπασαςτ. ἀρχας. Οὐμη … τουμηεἰναιαὐτουςπλειοναςἐν— Ezekiel 29:16 ... εἰςἐλτιδααʹ ?ναμιμνησχουσανἁμαρτιανἐγτω̣αὐτουςἀχολουθησαιὀτισωτ. χαρδιωναὐτων—docentes iniquitatem. ut fugiant et sequantur eos;— Ezekiel 29:17. ... μιατ. μηνοςτ.πρωτου— Ezekiel 29:19. ... τ.πληθοςαὐτης— Ezekiel 29:20. Ἀντιτ.λειτουργε;αςαὐτουἡςἐδουλευσεν—19 … exercitui illius (20) et operi quo servivit— Ezekiel 29:21. ... ἀγατελειχεραςπαντιτ.οἰχω̣ ?—pullulabit cornu. REMARKSIn reference to the anti - Chaldean coalition, Egypt, as the mainstay of the undertaking, justly forms the conclusion of those prophecies toward such as were without. But even apart from this, the significance of Egypt, as well in its antagonistic position to the Chaldean monarchy as in its relation to the people of God, and therewith to the world in general, demanded an adequate treatment at the close. Ezekiel 29:1-16. Outline of the Prophecy as a whole. Ezekiel 29:1-2. As to time (b. c. 588?), this first prophecy upon Egypt goes before Ezekiel 26 (two months, eighteen days, Schmieder). That notwithstanding it is placed later, shows the position of Egypt at the close is to be regarded as an intentional one; comp. also Ezekiel 29:18-19. Hengst. remarks: “The prophecy, as appears from Ezekiel 24:1, was delivered during the siege of Jerusalem. The occasion is the hope of recovery through Pharaoh.” (Schmieder: six months, except three days, before the taking of the city (Jeremiah 39:2), one year and two days after the prophet’s mouth had been shut for his people.) Ezekiel 29:2. ωׂ ?ιντπικςμ, elsewhere with ΰμ; for example, at Ezekiel 6:2.—τψςδ, the title of all the native kings of Egypt down to the Persian times; according to Josephus and the Coptic, as much as king (comp. τֶּ ?ψַ ?ς, prince); Jeremiah 44:30, Hophra. The prophecy, in accordance with its general character, stretches over king and people, or more precisely, the land. Ezekiel 29:3-6 a. This portion has respect to the king of Egypt.—ϊπιν, only here, according to Gesen. a mere corruption for ϊπιο; according to Hengst. intentionally the plur. majestatis from ϊπιο=ϊο: “since this dragon blows himself up so much, sets himself forth as the ideal of all dragons.” What is meant by it is no great sea-fish or great serpent, but what was so distinctive of Egypt, as also suitable for the description in Ezekiel 29:4, the crocodile; Job 40; Job 41:25-26. For a farther symbolical application of the idea, comp. Isaiah 27.; Psalms 74:13-14; Revelation 12. (ϊπδ–ϊπο—τεινω, to stretch, of the long-stretching body; also of the long-protracted sound, the jackal.)—The consciousness of power on the part of the Pharaohs, their pride of sway, is visibly expressed by ψαυ (Ezekiel 19:2), the secure rest, the undisturbed comfortable lair, after the manner of the crocodile, and by the nearer designation: in the midst of his streams. ιְ ?ΰֹ ?ψ (ιΰεψ) Gesen.: an Egyptian word, on the Rosetta inscription, jor—here of the (seven) arms of the Nile (Isaiah 7:18), elsewhere of its canals, when those are called πδψεϊ The Nile is “the heart of Egypt”, on account of which divine honours were of old paid to it, in particular by the kings, with devout regard, “as the vivifying father of all that exists” (Champollion). As he already says my stream (Ezekiel 28:2), the μι may not merely import that it belongs to him, is his property, but: it belongs to me of right, or so that it cannot be taken from me—therefore lawfully and inalienably. It gives expression to the loud boast on the ground of natural might as from primeval time and for ever; in which lies the heathenish contrast to Jehovah, who alone is unchangeable, eternal, gives and takes according to His will.—ςωιϊπι, either (εΰπι, nom. absol.), that he had made himself, which, apart from the fact that the Egyptians boasted of being the oldest men (Herod. Ezekiel 2:2; Diodor. 1:10, 50; Plato in Tim.), accords well with the Egyptian deification of the kingdom. So upon the monuments the priests ever are represented as kneeling in the dust before the kings. The Pharaohs—and this is peculiarly Egyptian—were not merely sprung from the gods, but were themselves gods of the land (Duncker, Hist. of Antiquity, 1:150). Therefore, as the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2) with his gods’ seat asserts his divinity, so does the king of Egypt with his stream at least his independence of any other origin = what I am, that am I of myself. Or, we may take the suffix as equivalent to μι, for which, however, Ezekiel 29:9 cannot be adduced, and which cannot be understood with Hδv. as meaning: “I have secured for myself its blessings,” or, as still more strongly put by Hitzig: “I have made it for me in a right condition,” with its canals, embankments, sluices, etc., as the Dutch also have been named the creators of their land. [Targum Jonathan: meum est regnum, et ego subjugavi illud.] Jerome: He trusts in the peculiar overflowings of the Nile, which belongs to him; the rain of heaven is of no moment for him. Thus also the old expositors of Homer understood the διιπετεος of the “Aigyptos,” i.e. the Nile, of the annual overflowings (Odys. iv. 477). In its application to Pharaoh Hophra (Apries), the notice of Herodotus is characteristic, that he thought neither the power of men nor of gods could destroy his kingdom (2:100:169). Ezekiel 29:4. The sin referred to is followed by a corresponding punishment, as the threatening is given forth, that from both king and people the ground of their pride and prosperity should be taken away.—The “behold I am against thee” of Ezekiel 29:3 explicates itself.—ηְַ ?ηִ ?ιִּ ?ιν, Qeri ηַ ?ηִ ?ιν, from ηָ ?η, ring, such as is put into the nose of beasts, or about the most tender and susceptible parts of the head, for taming them. Hengst.: “a double ring,” in the Dual, like μηιιν, so that both halves join together in the mouth (comp. Ezekiel 19:4). Rosenm. understands it of the hooks, by which, according to Herodotus, the crocodiles were taken (Job 41:2).—The fish, of the arms of the Nile signify the living and well-conditioned Egyptians in general, who had felt themselves like fish in the water, but were now to be placed upon dry ground. Hitzig: specially Pharaoh’s men of war; Jonathan: the princes and nobles.—δγαχϊι, Ezekiel 3:26.—For ϊγαχ, supply ΰְַ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ.—As to what historical signification is to be put upon the image, which is of a quite general kind, no indication whatever is given. But see the Doctrinal Reflections, No. 2. Ezekiel 29:5. The wilderness forms, as to the sense, the contrast to might and pomp and all sort of abundance; as to the figure, it is a contrast to the Nile, which formed an oasis in the midst of the wilderness, being secured by the heights on the west against the quicksands and storms of the great desert, and separated by the mountains on the east from the rocky cliffs, the desolate plains, and sand downs. The irrigation of the ground in consequence of the abundant waters of the Nile, especially at the season of the yearly overflowing, the cooling of the atmosphere precisely at the time when the heat is greatest, are the more important, since the blue and shining heaven is never troubled by rain-clouds, the heat is strong, and the south-west gales sometimes drive the sand and dust of the Sahara over the Libyan mountains as far as the Nile. (“Egypt is a land without rain, without springs, without refreshing winds, without alternating seasons. Instead of these, however, it possesses a fertile stream, which has not its like upon earth. In the far-reaching expanse one sees only the dead wilderness; but on approaching the Nile, all is life and prosperity. The camel of the desert scents the fresh Nile air at the distance of half a day’s journey. The Arabs call it Bachr, the sea; it is, however, one of the greatest and longest rivers of the earth, to be compared with the Amazon, Mississippi, and Yenisei.”—Sepp.) Hence, for the very reason that it reckons itself distinguished, as forming a green oasis of luxuriant fertility and coolness in the midst of a boundless waste, Jehovah brings it into that wilderness condition. A deeper parallel, however, also lies in this relegation to the wilderness, in respect to the divine guiding of Israel into the wilderness when Israel came out of Egypt.—“Upon the face of the field” means the same as “the wilderness;” according to Hengst.: “the open field as contrasted with the splendid mausoleums in which the Egyptian Pharaohs were buried in the times of their glory.” Not even an honourable burial would be given him (Targum). At all events, in the place where he falls, there he remains lying; and, indeed, what previously were separate from each other, thee and every fish, now come to be united in the representative person of the king. “Every one of his deceased subjects was, as it were, a part of Pharaoh, as in the retreat from Moscow Napoleon was seen in every dead Frenchman” (Hengst.). They are simply abandoned to the wilderness; hence there is found no gathering up and carrying away (ΰρσ), no bringing together (χαυ).—Comp. Matthew 13:47 sq. Ezekiel 29:6 a. A knowledge which is the very reverse of what was distinctively Egyptian, according to which the Pharaohs were honoured, on the monuments, as “the dispensers of life,” the “ever-living,” and such like. (Comp. the Rosetta inscription.) Ezekiel 29:6 b–12. This section has respect to the land. The words: all the inhabitants of Egypt, mediate the transition from the king to the land.—The ιςοֹ can scarcely be the reason for the fact of the Egyptians knowing God; but this sentence properly breaks off here, and a new sentence begins, to which Ezekiel 29:8 forms the conclusion; so that Ezekiel 29:7 comes in parenthetically (Kl.).—The image of the reed-staff is derived from Isaiah 36:6, the more suitably as it is there found in the mouth of the Assyrian king, whose heritage passed over to the Chaldeans; and to repeat with the fact the addition of broken, used there by him, was, as a judgment already openly pronounced upon Egypt, so much the more a ground of shame for Israel. What had discovered itself even in the Assyrian time should have needed no fresh proof. Ezekiel 29:7. It means that a reed-staff is not only no support, but a hurtful support; it carries with it a show and deceit of a dangerous kind. It is not, however, to be forgotten, that there is a characteristic allusion involved in the figure to the prolificness of Egypt in reeds and bulrushes (Isaiah 19:6).—Instead of αְ ?λַ ?τְּ ?κָ, the Qeri has αַ ?λַּ ?σ, as if the personified Egypt, or this as addressed in its king, could have no hand! In order to hold fast by the image of the reed, which is certainly continued by the ψφυ (Isaiah 36:6), Kliefoth translates: “by thy twig” but who would lay hold thus of a reed if he means to support himself upon it?—That Israel promised himself support from Egypt is evident from the result of the breaking of this reed-staff; while the wounded, torn shoulder leant upon it, the splinters of the reed ran thereinto.—Klief.: “the staff of reed pierced through the hand and arm, up even to the shoulder.” The ωׁ ?ςο expressly says this, at the same time strengthening the “laying hold of” to a resting thereon with the whole body.—εδςξγϊΧ, Gesen.: only the Hiphil, transposed for εְ ?δִ ?ξְ ?ςַ ?γְ ?ϊָ (Psalms 69:24 [23]), “and makest shake.” Hengst.: sarcastically, “a pretty staying, which was, in fact, a casting down.” If the root-meaning of ςξγ is to draw together, it might stand here as = laming: “and drawest together for them the whole loins” (Meier). “To make to totter,” or shake, certainly says very little, and “to make to stand,” so that they must use their own loins, without any stay, can hardly be the right explanation. Klief.: it pierced through their shoulders, and made these, by injuring their muscles, ligaments, and joints, stiff and rigid, so that they could but stand, and move no more. (“So fared it with the kingdom of the ten tribes under Hosea in connection with Egypt, and likewise with the kingdom of Judah under Zedekiah.”—J. D. Michaelis.) Ezekiel 29:8. Solemn conclusion, with feminine suffixes, on account of the reference to the land. The sword indicates war; Ezekiel 14:17. Ezekiel 29:9. The consequence of this desolation of the land.—ιςο, as in Ezekiel 29:6.—Comp. at Ezekiel 29:3. Because Pharaoh, regarding himself as all Egypt, in his lordly spirit asserts for himself the right and power of all,—εΰπι points back to λιΰπι; ςωׁ ?ιϊι, not so properly the Nile as generally what is to be made (Isaiah 10:13), always, however, with reference to the arms of the Nile,—therefore, in Ezekiel 29:10, Jehovah falls upon this pompous “I,” as well as its supports, the streams which it calls its own, and gives the land of Egypt, with which this “I” had identified itself, to a state of most complete desolation. The heaping together of the synonyms, and the double genitive, express a superlative. Here, as at Ezekiel 29:5, the wilderness in contrast to the Nile. [Hitzig points μָ ?ηְָ ?ψָ ?αεֹ ?ϊ, “for deserts, desolation of the waste.” Schmieder remarks on it, that definite pre-intimations of inevitable chastisements are commonly milder, and draws attention to an unmistakeable softening in what follows (Ezekiel 29:12-16), which might be still more lightened in the execution of the punishment.] From Migdol, a similar bounding to that in Ezekiel 25:13 (Sept.: ἀπὸΜαγδώλου); placed over against Syene (Aswan), the most southerly boundary, on the cataracts of the Nile, and to be taken as the boundary on the north. It was, as the name imports, a “fortress,” perhaps the border-watch toward Syria; on account of which Jerome: a turre Syenes. ρεπδ, according to Champollion, from ouen, to open, and sa, through which it acquires the sense of “the opener,” the key (of Egypt). Here rise the mighty terraces of reddish granite (Syenite), which formed the building material of the Egyptian kings. The determining expression εςγΧ does not go beyond, but fixes Syene as the boundary on the Ethiopian side. Ezekiel 29:11 paints the desolation (Ezekiel 29:9-10), corresponding to Ezekiel 29:8. Neither traffic nor travel.—εμΰϊωα, Hengst.: “and it shall not sit” (!); therefore it shall lie down. The forty years are (according to him) historical, to be branched off from the seventy of Jeremiah, Ezekiel 25, 29, which began in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, when, with the slaughter at Circesium on the Euphrates, the power of Egypt was for ever broken. Thirty years had it continued, till the war passed over to the proper head of the anti-Chaldean coalition, and Egypt was laid waste. Hitzig takes the number for a found one (1 Samuel 17:16; Exodus 24:18, etc.), after the analogy of Eze 4:6 (but see there). The parallel already indicated at Ezekiel 29:5, as well as the general character of the prophecy, Nebuchadnezzar not being named here, recommend the symbolical import of the number: Israel, when delivered from Egypt, forty years in the wilderness; Egypt, with respect to Israel, forty years a wilderness; there a proving, here a judgment, punishment. [Tholuck is of opinion that the number is indeed a round one, but still of an approximate nature as regards the probable reckoning, about 36 or 37.—On ϊωׁ ?α, comp. Ezekiel 26:20. ιωׁ ?α signifies: “to be master of something,” to possess, therefore: to tarry somewhere, and so here: to occupy house, be at home. We are not to regard it as a poetical phrase for being inhabited (Klief.), but rather to consider it as spoken with reference to the scattering, etc., of the inhabitants in Ezekiel 29:12. Ezekiel 29:12. As an absolute contrast to Israel in the wilderness, corresponds in a symbolical respect the repeated delineation of the like total desolation of Egypt (Ezekiel 12:20; Ezekiel 14:15). In reality, this can only be understood relatively, as compared with Egypt’s former flourishing condition as a land.—The twice repeated αϊεκ points to the neighbouring lands, with their cities, or to the provinces of Egypt, or to the members of the coalition against Babylon (Hengst.). Hδv. regards it as purely ideal, since otherwise the article must have stood before ΰψφεϊ. According to Hengst.: “the desolation is not so precise a fact as the supremacy, which was decided by a single battle. It is sufficient if the beginning of the desolation took place within the fourth decennium from its end (?). The end of the forty years, at all events, coincides with that of the seventy years in Jeremiah, of which the first seventeen had elapsed at the time our prophecy was published—seven under Jehoiakim, ten under Zedekiah. Therefore there still were thirteen years to expire before the beginning of the forty years. In Ezekiel 29:17 the prophet has himself expressly determined the beginning of the four decenniums.”—By the scattering of the Egyptians is meant the deportation of the young and the noble, as such was then associated with every hostile occupation, Nahum 3:10 (Tholuck). Also those scattered through terror are not to be forgotten. Hδv.: “Almost the same expressions here of Egypt, which elsewhere are used only of the dispersion and gathering again of Israel.” “Egypt the caricature of Israel.” Ezekiel 29:13-16. The end. Ezekiel 29:13. The λι assigns a reason for the forty years, by pointing to what is to take place thereafter. But that by the end of this period respect is had to the end of the Chaldean supremacy, as in Jeremiah, is not indicated in the text, nor would it have been according to Ezekiel’s style (comp. Introd. to Ezekiel 25 sq.; comp. also Jeremiah 46:26).—The promised gathering of Egypt, in Ezekiel 29:14, is restitution (comp. at Ezekiel 16:53), indeed, to their original condition, but not to the height which it had then reached.—Pathros is what belongs to the south; South or Upper Egypt, Thebes, which (as Ewald remarks) “was not, according to the Manethonian dynasties, precisely the oldest seat of royalty, yet still a Southern Egypt older than Memphis; but after the time of the Hyksos, all the power of Egypt departed from Thebes.”—Comp. Herod. 2:4, 15; Diodor. 1:50.—ξλεψϊν, see at Ezekiel 16:3 (Ezekiel 21:35 [Ezekiel 21:30]).—On the expression: a low kingdom, comp. at Ezekiel 17:14. Hengst.: “This is no mere prediction, but an indirect practical advice (Isaiah 41:28), to dissuade from a foolish confidence in Egypt.” The parallel, besides, with Israel has already been noticed. Ezekiel 29:15. Comparison with other kingdoms. Such it had often made, and therein gone to excess. Now God makes the comparison, and certainly with another result. Ezekiel 29:16. μξαθη, compare therewith the repeated μαθη, Ezekiel 28:26.—ιδιδ, masc., while formerly ϊδιδ, a kingdom being thought of, but here it is conceived of as a people, or as king.—That the Egyptian people (as the ΰηψιδν might indicate) could inspire Israel with confidence, so that the latter should lean upon them, support itself on them, especially as against Babylon—in that respect they were a remembrancer of iniquity (comp. on Ezekiel 21:28 [23]). This is what is plainly expressed by τπδ with ΰηψι, namely, “to turn oneself to any one, in order to follow him”—on which comp. Ezekiel 17:6-7; Psalms 40:5 [4]. (Hengst.: “Whosoever beguiles into iniquity brings iniquity to remembrance, or to the knowledge of him under whose cognizance it falls. For the iniquity which is committed cannot remain unmarked by ‘the Judge of the whole earth,’ nor unpunished.” Hδv.: “Now Egypt comes forth as an accuser of the covenant-people before God, as a witness in respect to their want of confidence in Him, their idolatrous admiration of worldly, external power, therefore of their falling away from God.” Ewald translates: “Still further the house of Israel had a Satan for their confidence.”) The knowledge of Jehovah as Lord and Ruler, as in judgment, so in compassion, is the perpetual refrain; it is for Israel and for the heathen the end of the ways of God. Ezekiel 29:17-21. The appended key for understanding the prophecies concerning Egypt.—Not merely the relation to what went before, but the relation also to what follows, calls for consideration. In the former respect, the section is an appendix; in the latter respect, and generally, it is a key for the understanding of the prophecies respecting Egypt. We have to regard it as a sort of parenthesis, since the announcement of time in Ezekiel 29:17 expressly shows it was above 16 years later than Ezekiel 29:1, later even than Ezekiel 40. [Schmieder: exactly 16 years, 2 months, 17 days after the preceding prophecy; not quite 17 years after the destruction of Jerusalem, two years after Ezekiel’s vision of the new temple. Hitzig: the new-moon day of April 572 b. c.] It consequently stands quite apart from the preceding prophecy, but so does it also from the one that follows, Ezekiel 30:1-19, by its closing verse. Ezekiel 30:1-19 stands related to Ezekiel 29:1-16, as Ezekiel 26:7-14 to Ezekiel 26:2-6; so that the indication of time in Ezekiel 29:1 holds good also for Ezekiel 30:1. Hengst. denies the number seven for the prophecies upon Egypt, because the necessary chronological specification is wanting at Ezekiel 30:1. This reason cannot avail against the consideration that the significant number, which rules the whole, in a way that perfectly accords with its symbolical import as well as with the relation of the close (of Egypt), reverts with this close to the whole, and thereby connects the whole together. The chronological specification has been omitted at Ezekiel 30:1, because it would have been the same as that at Ezekiel 29:1; and the verses 17–21 are interjected here precisely on this account, that Ezekiel 30:1-19, being contemporaneous with Ezekiel 29:1-16, might form a separate prediction, and so complete the seven number of prophecies upon Egypt. Ezekiel 29:18. The thirteen years’ siege of Tyre furnishes the key for the more immediate understanding of the prophecy upon Egypt; the breaking off of the siege in question rendered possible the approaching fulfilment of the anti-Egyptian predictions.—Ezekiel 26:7.—The work against Tyre, consequently the siege of the city, is designated great, and this not without respect to the consequences which it involved for the host of the king of Babylon. Of the bearing upon the head and shoulder, with reference to helmet and burdens, χψη and ξψθ are used, which presuppose long and heavy toil. According to Hengst. the works had to do with the erecting of besieging towers, and especially the casting up a rampart (Ezekiel 26:8); but they suit decidedly better when viewed with respect to the mound running over to insular Tyre, as indicated by Ewald (Ezekiel 26:10). Hitzig makes the ingenious remark, that the shallowness of the sea-strait in Alexander’s time, mentioned by Arrian, may have been occasioned by the efforts of Nebuchadnezzar to construct this mound. However, it is not in such respect, therefore, as to what concerns the greatness of the work, that εωλψμΰΧ is to be understood of a like great reward corresponding to it. ωׂ ?λψ, according to its root-meaning, is “a something made fast,”—either subjectively, what any one held fast by himself or had made fast with another, or objectively, what for material considerations must be held fast. It is in a general way denied that Nebuchadnezzar and his host had received from Tyre hire or reward for their work. As the siege was the work, the hire must mean the booty, especially with respect to the host. The separate mention of him and his host seems to point to a distinction between Nebuchadnezzar and his host in reference to the hire. Jerome affirms simply, though he does not say on what grounds, that the nobles and rich men of Tyre made away from it in ships, carrying with them their treasures over the sea, and Nebuchadnezzar’s host could find no spoil. Ewald accepts this; and Hδv. cites in support of it Isaiah 23:6, and what happened at the siege of Tyre under Alexander (Diodor. xvii. 41; Curt. Ezekiel 4:3). Probable, at all events more probable than the supposition of Hitzig that the money of the Tyrians was spent in the war, must be the consideration that the besiegers of Tyre also had an interest in sparing the city, and refraining from plundering it. Only the prophet does not say this, but makes the Chaldee host come to Egypt to its hurt. With the conquest of the city, however, whether it was or was not effected, our verse has nothing really to do, as Movers justly remarks. Ezekiel 29:19 rather suggests another reference. For Nebuchadnezzar, at least, the consequence of the siege of Tyre, “his hire,” could only be Egypt, if the great work was not to remain without reward. First with the punishment of Egypt did the recompense become complete which must strike the anti-Chaldean coalition. Egypt also would otherwise have remained the spark which was ever ready to inflame a new Ph�nicia and Syria. If the overthrow of Tyre was to yield profit to Nebuchadnezzar, not merely must Jerusalem be laid prostrate, but Egypt also, the pillar of all opposition, as against Assyria so against Babylon, be brought down. It is from such points of view in Babylonian policy that we are to understand what is meant by his hire not having been given him. But what naturally mediates the result, what forms the consequence of the evil, this is in truth, spiritually considered, the divine punishment; and hence the therefore, etc., in Ezekiel 29:19. The policy of the divine recompense as against Egypt (the prop of Israel’s unfaithfulness and treachery to the covenant), so for Nebuchadnezzar’s work (“which they did for Me,” Ezekiel 29:20), in the service of Jehovah, is primarily the key of the prophecies touching Egypt.—δξεο is noise, and from that “a noisy multitude;” here, on account of the connection, and because πωׂ ?ΰ merely is used: the great mass of things, therefore: the riches. [Ewald: “its noisy pomp.”]—As Herodotus and Diodorus report, certainly after the quite untrustworthy tradition of Egyptian vanity, Hophra had besieged the Ph�nicians and Cyprians by land and sea, and returned with rich booty to Egypt. There were assuredly no lasting results of such a thing; for after the defeat at Carchemish, and the miscarrying of the relief of Jerusalem, the position of Egypt was not adequate to that; although still, as also Duncker thinks, the Egyptians might have brought home spoil and trophies. There was a glimmering of Egypt’s early splendour in the Circumstance of its being given for a reward to Nebuchadnezzar.—Hitzig takes as the subject to εδιϊδ the land of Egypt (Ezekiel 29:20). Ezekiel 29:20. τְּ ?ςֻ ?μָּ ?δ, as in Psalms 109:20, that which is wrought for, the fruit of labour. Ewald: “as his pay.”—αδ is perhaps, after the expression in Ezekiel 29:18, ΰωψςαγςμιδ, to he understood of the city of Tyre. It is commonly rendered: for which he wrought. Hitzig justly remarks: “that Nebuchadnezzar had besieged Tyre in the service of Jehovah could have been declared by the prophet only then, if the city had been conquered;” but since, according to Hitzig, this could not be, he applies ςωε to the Egyptians (!), as was already done in the Targum of Jonathan, and necessarily imposes on ΰωψ the signification: in regard to that which; that is, for that which. Ezekiel 29:21. This verse vividly represents the character of the whole section. It is a close which corresponds to the subsidiary character of the section, Ezekiel 29:17-20, in relation to the general prophecy upon Egypt, by the generalness of the style in which it is given, as thereby also it accords with the design that this section should serve as a key to the Egyptian prophecies generally. Comp. the analogous Ezekiel 28:25-26. In the latter respect it is indicated to us in Ezekiel 29:21, that although the immediate fulfilment of that which concerned Egypt should be accomplished through Nebuchadnezzar, yet Egypt opens a farther prospect still, since it is to be regarded, in these prophecies of Ezekiel upon foreign peoples, as heathendom generally in its close coming into regard for Israel’s destruction. From this point of view, the αιενδδεΰ certainly connects itself with the moment of the fulfilment through Nebuchadnezzar; but it at the same time conducts farther, expands this day to “an ideal day” (Hengst.)—the day of the Lord (Ezekiel 30:3)—to the Messianic time, as Ewald has properly recognised. [Schmieder: “every annihilation of a national power, which bent itself against the Lord, is to the prophet a type of all human power which rises against God—a type of the world’s judgment. Therefore also the promises, which were given Israel for the last time, connect themselves therewith, and now revive again.”] According to Hitzig, the attack upon Egypt was to Ezekiel the pledge of the then also beginning salvation announced in Ezekiel 20:40 sq., Ezekiel 17:22, Ezekiel 16:60.—φξη, used of gradual growth out of small beginnings and constant burstings forth again, new shoots, with reference to the φֶ ?ξַ ?η in Jeremiah and Zechariah.—The horn, as very commonly derived from horned beasts, in particular the bull, a biblical expression for strength, and the courage resting thereon; not so properly with reference to pushing (Hengst.), for which the context affords no occasion; as in contrast to the impotence of Egypt (heathendom), the power and pomp of the flesh—therefore another sense of power, the consciousness of the victory which overcomes the world. Psalms 75:5; Psalms 132:17; Lamentations 2:3; Luke 1:69; comp. also 1 Samuel 2:1 with respect to the following τϊηεοΞτδ.—The opening, of the mouth points expressly to Ezekiel 24:26. (See there.) What was said in that place upon the symbolical import of the dumbness of the prophet determines also his speaking here in the midst of Israel as a prophetical one. Only, “the house of Israel” must not be resolved into the community of the Lord, and the mouth of Ezekiel into the word of prophecy, agreeably to Joel 3, as Theodoret already explained the matter; but we have to cleave to the second chief part of the predictions of our prophet, for which the opening of his mouth to Israel is, according to Ezekiel 24:26 sq., the characteristic, in contradistinction to the first main portion of his book. But in so far will such opening of Ezekiel’s mouth have place as his prophecy of the compassions of God shall then have found their confirmation. 1. Although the prophecy in Ezekiel 29 is of a general character, yet by the reference to Nebuchadnezzar, and especially from Ezekiel 29:17 onwards, it gets a more specific character. We have therefore to hold by a fulfilment through the Chaldeans, and, indeed, in connection with what is said respecting Tyre. Apart from the circumstance that we have here to do with a prophet of God, we could not judge otherwise simply on this account, that a little reflection upon the inevitable disgrace of such a self-deception as would have been the case in respect to Tyre must alone have kept Ezekiel—instead of merely suppressing the prophecy in question while the book was still in his own hand—from wishing now to compensate for the mistake by awakening like inconsiderate and rash expectations concerning Nebuchadnezzar in regard to Egypt. For one to whom the prophet is nothing but a writer must still at least credit him with this much of worldly prudence in respect to his literary honour. And if Ezekiel must needs prophesy ex eventu (as Hitzig, for example, conceives), then prophecies like those contained in Ezekiel 26 and some following ones are purely unthinkable, so far as they remained unfulfilled; since it cannot but be supposed, that when our prophet closed his book, matters must have stood before him widely different from what they are presented in his prophecy. The “dogmatic criticism,” however, cannot once admit now that a prophecy has been fulfilled,—a limitation of the standpoint which is not improved by the circumstance that the truth of the divine word (2 Peter 1:21) is made dependent on the statements or the silence of profane writers, and even of such as have given notoriously imperfect reports. The false prophet, he whose word did not come to pass, has by God’s word (Deuteronomy 18:22) been as clearly as possible excluded from the canon. 2. The reward for work, which, as Hitzig rightly enough says, had still to be given to Nebuchadnezzar, raises no question as to the conquest and, as could not fail to happen after a thirteen years’ siege, the destruction of Tyre. If the booty might have been thought of for the army, for Nebuchadnezzar it is necessary to think of Egypt. The song of triumph demanded by Hitzig for the fulfilment of the prophecy against Tyre is the double lamentation which we find in Ezekiel 27, 28. Every one has his peculiar manner. But as regards the so-called “historical witnesses,” who should speak the decisive word on the fulfilment or non-fulfilment particularly of the prophecy of Ezekiel in respect to Egypt, they are “the Greek historians, at the head of whom stands Herodotus, and they know absolutely nothing of a Chaldean invasion of Egypt—nay, their narration is opposed to anything of the kind” (Hitzig). This is imposing; let us reflect, however, that Herodotus had also learned nothing from his Egyptian informants of the defeat at Carchemish. We need only mention farther, that this Greek historian himself reproaches the priests of Egypt, and precisely in regard to this particular time, with embellishing the history of their country. Now, according to Herodotus, Pharaoh Hophra—in consequence of the defeat which his army sustained from the Cyrenians, against whom it was to have rendered help to the Libyans, and of the revolt which in consequence thereof, and of the foreign mercenary troops retained in Egypt, broke forth on the part of the Egyptian warrior-class against Amasis, who, instead of bringing back the rebels to obedience, suffered himself to be proclaimed king by them—lost freedom and his throne, and by the infuriated people was even murdered. Tholuck, who, “if the cattle with the ark of the Lord should once turn aside, would not obstinately drive forward,” remarks that as a witness Herodotus alone comes into consideration; before whom, however, the testimony of Ezekiel, himself a contemporary of the events, has no need to be abashed. “If Herodotus readily received intelligence of the prosperous battle fought by Necho at Megiddo, but none respecting the much more important defeat sustained by him on the Euphrates from the Chaldeans, should it be thought strange if the priests observed silence also regarding the irruption of the Chaldeans into their own land? yea, if the miserable end which Hophra suffered through the foreign conqueror should have been rather represented by them as the deed of his own people?” (So also Rawlinson’s Herod. B. ii. appen. c. 8.) With a fair appreciation of the historical representation of Herodotus, the cause there assigned, especially the revolution among the warrior-class of Egypt, might suffice for the overthrow of Hophra. Yet the hatred of the Egyptian people, not only expressed in Herodotus, but confirmed by monumental evidence (Rossellini points in this connection to a by-name of Hophra on the monuments: “Remesto”)—such a hatred as is described in Herodotus toward Hophra (ii. 161–169), manifested in respect to a native ruler, is scarcely to be explained from what is stated, if it did not come into some sort of connection with a Chaldean invasion of Egypt, whereby the haughtiness of Hophra might well appear all the more hateful to the Egyptian people, as the misery of the land and the inhabitants, occasioned by him, stood in sharpest contrast to the previous prosperity and splendour. The grudge of the Egyptian warrior-class against the foreign mercenaries could not be of such moment as some have supposed, since even Amasis, who thereafter held possession of the throne till his death (forty-four years), and was succeeded in it by his son, took lonians for his bodyguard, and generally granted to the Greeks still greater favour and privileges than his predecessor. Besides, as generally held, there is also the outline of the prophecy against Egypt in Ezekiel 29, which exhibits a distinction between Ezekiel 29:6 sq. and Ezekiel 29:4 sq.—in the one, the sword constitutes the figure (Ezekiel 29:8); in the other, overthrow with reference to the wilderness. Especially if Hitzig’s interpretation of “the fish” (Ezekiel 29:4) as denoting Pharaoh’s men of war is accepted, and under “the wilderness” there is couched an allusion to Libya, what is said in Ezekiel 29:4 sq. might be explained by the narration which is reproduced by Herodotus, and Ezekiel 29:6 sq. would, with the sword of Nebuchadnezzar, be such a supplementing as the conquest of Tyre to the siege of that city, also given elsewhere. Out of the miserable condition in which Hophra perished, Amasis would then have raised Egypt. Anyhow, as Tholuck brings out, the death of Hophra falls exactly into the time in which the occupation of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar must have occurred; and thus the position of matters approaches to that which is wont to be extracted from Josephus in confirmation of our prophecy—contr. Ap. i. 19. It is there stated that Berosus reports of the Babylonian (Nebuchadnezzar) that he “conquered Egypt, Syria, Ph�nicia,” etc. Again, in Ezekiel 20, he states that Megasthenes placed Nebuchadnezzar above Hercules, since he had subjected to himself a great part of Libya and Iberia (comp. Antiq. x. 11. 1, and Strabo xv. 1. 6; see also Hδv. Comm. p. 435, against Hitzig’s remarks). In the 10th book of the Antiq. Ezekiel 9:7, Josephus expresses himself to this effect, that “in the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, he made an expedition against C�lesyria; and when he had got possession of it, he made war against the Ammonites and Moabites; and when he had brought these nations into subjection, he fell upon Egypt in order to overthrow it, and did indeed slay the king who then reigned, but set up another; after which he took those Jews that were there captive, and brought them to Babylon,” etc. The ten years’ time, which Hitzig doubts as the period of the earlier warlike expeditions, is maintained by Tholuck. The fifth year after the taking of Jerusalem would be 581; the thirteen years’ siege of Tyre would fall into the period 586–572 or 573. For the different actions which were in part parallel as to time, we have only to suppose various divisions of the army employed, so that the whole might of Nebuchadnezzar did not at the same time lie before Tyre. The forty years of the Egyptian oppression, Tholuck, like Niebuhr, extends over the entire space that lies between the disaster at Carchemish and the overthrow of Hophra (thirty-six years), “during which Egypt, through the continued and in great part unfortunate warlike enterprises of Hophra, must have been much depopulated and extremely weakened, till at length the inroad of the Chaldeans consummated the oppression.” Tholuck thinks that, “as the prophets in the beginning of the fulfilment comprehended the future (Jeremiah 13:18; Ezekiel 30:24), in the last and completed fulfilment they also comprehended the earlier incomplete ones.” The symbolical explanation of the forty years is not thereby denied (see the exposition). The worth of the statements of Josephus may be questioned, as is done by Hitzig; but for the relation of profane history to our prophecy, it suffices that Hophra miserably perished (Ezekiel 29:4 sq.; Jeremiah 44:30 sq.), and that Egypt again revived, as took place under Amasis, although as a kingdom it was fit to be compared neither with its ancient glory nor with other great monarchies (Ezekiel 29:13 sq.). As regards the resuscitation of Egypt, Duncker mentions that, according to a return of the priests, it then reckoned 20,000 country towns and cities (Herzog’s Realencyc. 1 p. 150), though it was “the last period of Egypt’s glory;” and Lepsius says of the same, that Egypt succumbed to the first pressure of the Persian power, and remained from 525 to 504 a Persian province; that afterwards it became again for a short time independent, until in 340 it was reconquered by the Persians, and in 332 fell under Alexander the Great, etc. 3. Upon the importance of Egypt for the revenge of Nebuchadnezzar, see the exposition of Eze 29:18. Also generally for the Chaldean policy the transition to Egypt is rendered plain to us from Ezekiel 29:17 sq. (Hδv.: “if Nebuchadnezzar would make the possession of Ph�nicia once for all sure, Egypt must be completely broken.”) Of the importance of Egypt by itself, its characteristic importance, some notice has already been taken, toward the close of the introductory remarks to Ezekiel 25; as also of the distinction, indicated with correct feeling by Keil, between Egypt and the other nations mentioned by Ezekiel. But what Egypt signifies in its connection here, this must be discerned from its relation to Israel. It is quite true that the charge laid against Ammon, Moab, etc., also against Tyre, for spiteful joy, hostility, envy toward Israel, is not mentioned in respect to Pharaoh and Egypt. It may be said that Egypt’s guilt in regard to Israel was that rather of a false, treacherous friendship. If, on the other hand, the excess of proud self-sufficiency must be regarded as the characteristic of Egypt, the same sort of self-elation meets us in the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28); and in this respect Tyre formed a fitting transition-point to Egypt. The distinction between Tyre and Egypt might perhaps be found in this, that while in particular the kingdom of Tyre had had its time of sacred splendour and past greatness, as we have seen, in its former connection with the kingdom of David, Egypt on its part acquired importance on account of the sojournings of the pilgrim-fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and still more on account of the formation of their descendants into a people. Above all, the idea of redemption was associated with the land of Egypt. Here, therefore, the inverse relation holds good: Tyre has gone with Israel to school; Israel, on the other hand, was at school in Egypt, as was evidenced in manifold agreements and contrasts exhibited in their peculiarity as a people, without our needing on that account to ride off on the Spencerian principle [namely, of a servile borrowing from the institutions of Egypt]. More than from anything else, may be understood from Israel’s reminiscences as a people, and the impress of Egyptian style and manner even upon their sacred things, their abiding sympathetic turning back toward Egypt. That Israel could not let Egypt go out of sight had its root in human nature; we must learn even from the children of this world (Luke 2:6). But it had also its dangerous side. It was Israel’s worldliness, relapse, since Israel had been delivered by Jehovah from this world, and Jehovah had through Moses threatened them in connection with Egypt with the greatest evils (Deuteronomy 28:68). We have tribulation in the world, and we may have fear before the world; such fear, however, may be salutary in its operation. But dangerous is the stay that is sought in Egypt, trust and confidence therein. In this respect Egypt is designated a remembrancer of iniquity (Ezekiel 29:16), since for Israel it had, and not as of yesterday, but from of old (comp. also Ezekiel 16:26; Ezekiel 23:8; Ezekiel 23:19), the fatal significance of a pride which resists Jehovah and leads away from Him, of a consciousness of worldly power, which amid the characteristic Pharaonic arrogance expressed itself just as distinctly (Ezekiel 29:3; Ezekiel 29:9) as in Exodus 5:2, and had this the more seductively, as a self-conscious abiding worldly power is in fact fitted to impose on people. Friendship with Egypt is the most contemptuous relation in which Israel can be thought of, on account of the indifference which it necessarily implied on the part of the Israelitish people not only in regard to their former house of bondage, but also to the mighty deliverance obtained from it, and generally in what concerned their relation to Jehovah, on whom, as their own and their fathers’ God, they had been thrown from their state of childhood. To make account of this specific historical position in respect to each other, according to which the growth, bloom, and decay of Israel were closely interwoven with Egypt, the prophecy of Ezekiel “dwells at greater length on Egypt than on the other nations” (Hδv.). Still more, however, it serves to explain the representation of the judgment upon Egypt as strikingly parallel with that on Israel, and to the last carried out (comp. Ezekiel 29:5; Ezekiel 29:9 sq., 12, 13, etc.). Not less remarkable, because singular, is the prospect and declaration in regard to the resuscitation of Egypt, and of it alone, which have been introduced into the prediction of our prophet; by this also is Egypt quite expressly kept parallel with Israel. The reminiscence which brings up Egypt so distinctly is not simply that of the house of bondage, or of iniquity, but it is Joseph’s post of honour, and the corn granaries of Jacob, together with his family. Comp. also Deuteronomy 23:7. 4. The interpretation of Neteler strikes out what is certainly a quite different path, strikingly reminding one of Cocceius, only with a specially Catholic tendency. According to him, the prophecies against the foreign nations constitute four groups, each of which contains four pieces: the first, Ezekiel 25; the second, the overthrow of the Canaanitish culture - development, standing in contrast to the higher calling of Jerusalem, and reaching its culmination in Tyre. The prophecy against Sidon he severs from Tyre, in the interest of this fourfold division; it belongs to the Egyptian group, inasmuch as “Sidon’s bloom falls into the time in which Egypt was the bearer of the Hamitic power and culture,” and “the Sidonian development was a shoot of the Hamitic-Egyptian.” The promises for Israel in this third section (Ezekiel 28:20 to Ezekiel 30:19) must stand parallel with those of the same kind in the first group, wherein punishment is threatened to the four nations with reference to Israel; as the first group, “through Ezekiel 21 (Ammon), is placed in connection with the first destruction of Jerusalem,” so “the third stands, through the opening of the mouth which occurs in it, in closer relation to the symbol of the second destruction of Jerusalem.” The four last prophecies against Egypt are “mere symbols,” according to Neteler. As Ammon “drove the surviving remnant, after the destruction of Jerusalem, out of Judea,” so had “Moab decoyed Israel into gross idolatry before their entrance into Canaan;” and so, in the prophecies against Ammon and Moab, the beginning and end of Israel in regard to Canaan are connected together. The punishment of Edom and the Philistines must point to the “re-establishment of the house of David.” In regard to Tyre Neteler expresses himself thus: “The command given to Israel to root out the Canaanites, but by them neglected to their destruction, God will execute on Tyre through Nebuchadnezzar;” and this command must stand in a noteworthy relation to the historical development of the last period of 800 years before Christ, in which “those to the west (Carthaginians, Greeks, Romans) brought a real advance, while those to the east (the Hamitic kingdoms of Ethiopia and Egypt, the Semitic kingdoms of Assyria and Chaldea, the Japhetic Medians and Persians) repeat the development of the two earlier periods in smaller measure, yet as if thereby the problem of the western circle should be solved.” He says: “If Israel, through the extirpation of the Canaanites, according to Numbers 36:6-9 (!), had entered into the place of the Ph�nicians, it would have formed the first member in the development of this period, and would have shown the right path to the Greek culture which came forth in the second third of it.” To retrieve as much as possible that which was neglected (! ?), “Nebuchadnezzar must subject the Hamitic Tyre, even to the pillars of Hercules, and unite the eastern circle to the monstrous Chaldean kingdom, so that the externally insignificant Israel might be set in the centre of this gigantic Semitic power, which extended its sway even over the Turanian tribes in the high north.” This contrast between the Semitic and Hamitic races (already occurring in the prophecy of Noah) must be of great importance for the understanding of the symbolical representation of Ezekiel in the prophecies relating to Tyre and Egypt. Upon the third group which Neteler distributes, and which reaches to Ezekiel 30:19, we learn that, first of all, in the prophecy against Sidon, “the second possession of the land is associated with the first, as in Ezekiel 20 the first deliverance from Egypt is made parallel with a deliverance in a higher sense.” “As Israel did not fully carry out the extirpation of the Canaanites, whose place, according to Numbers 33:54, it was their part to occupy, these were turned for them into thorns and briers. With the second possession, on the other hand, the servitude of Canaan, which was announced even by Noah, was after a sort realized, since the Canaanitish history becomes extinct. The second piece in this section, namely Ezekiel 29:1-16, connects the end of the first Israelitish sojourn in Canaan, brought about by Egypt’s iniquity, with the end of Egypt; and the humiliation of Egypt is such an elevation of Israel, that Christianity will not be under temptation to lean upon a decaying heathenism.” The forty years occurring at Ezekiel 29:11 sq. must not be distinguished from the forty years of Judah, for which the prophet had to lie forty days upon his right side; that is, as Neteler remarks on Ezekiel 4, “a symbolical designation of the time, reaching from the destruction of the temple to the return from exile, derived from the sojourn in Kadesh.” “The two first pieces, Ezekiel 28:20 to Ezekiel 29:16, set forth the world-historical ideas, which were to be realized by the introduction of Christianity, but give, as to the way and manner in which the realization should be prepared for, begun, and carried forward, no information—this being first introduced by the prophet in the third piece (Ezekiel 29:17-21). The might of Shem, through which God conquered Canaan in the world’s history, must also carry forward the work in regard to Egypt. In the interest of Israel, whose service to God stands in contrast to Canaanitish industry, God will turn the Semitic world-power against Egypt, by which Israel was compelled to do Canaanitish work, and establish for them, on account of their labour in respect to Canaan, claims for compensation, which God would render valid because of the bondage laid by Egypt on the Israelites. The booty which God took from Egypt after the conflict, on occasion of the first deliverance, was only a type of a later plundering, which in a preparatory manner was begun by Nebuchadnezzar, and after the second deliverance from Egypt, that is, after the redemption achieved by the sufferings of the Servant of God was realized, when all power in heaven and on earth was committed to the episcopate of the Church (!!). The consequence of this victory over Egypt (Ezekiel 30:1-19) is given in the form of a judgment upon Egypt, in which is delineated its desolation and the annihilation of its idols and yokes; but the sons also of the covenant - land are smitten by the judgment, which points to a fall that should take place among them.” The continuation of this Catholic-theological-historical explanation and interpretation of Ezekiel will be given in No. 9. 5. Cocceius remarks on Ezekiel 29:21 : “Evil Merodach gave Jehoiachin freedom, and the first place of honour among the kings. Farther, Daniel was great in the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar, and under the Persian dominion. Cyrus was called by God to give command to lead the people back, that they might rebuild the temple. Still higher grew the horn of Israel when they became free, and their priests assumed the diadem, as a sign of the freedom of the people, and the Israelites had become greater than their fathers, as announced in Deuteronomy 30:5. But most especially was it so, when out of David’s house the horn grew, which set the people free from all slavery, which subdued their enemies, and rendered the Gentiles subject to Israel, Psalms 132:13-18.” 6. The day of Jehovah, Kliefoth remarks, “is not judgment in one point of time and destruction over the whole heathen world;” and then he continues: “The day of Jehovah is a period of indefinite duration, in the course of which God will punish with judgment and destruction all heathen nations in succession, just as they have shown their hostility to the people of God, and He sees that their time has come. From this point of view, also, is the announcement always to be understood, that this day of Jehovah is at hand. The day continues so long, that it lasts till, in the final judgment, the whole world, in so far as hostile to God, shall be destroyed; but it constantly begins anew, when any particular people, on account of their malevolence manifested to the people of God, falls under the righteous doom of perdition. Hence the day of Jehovah upon the heathen nations has, in the several prophecies, a different terminus a quo, according as they refer to this or that kind of relations.” Only it must not be overlooked, that in Ezekiel 30:1 sq. not indeed Egypt alone is contemplated, but Egypt in its connection with heathen nations; and yet, that it is not the day of judgment upon all anti-theocratic powers that is to be understood, as already Hδvernick makes the prophet see this general idea obtaining realization; but as the time of Jerusalem was come, the time when judgment had begun at the house of God, so the time must now be near when this judgment of God shall go forth upon the heathen. Hengstenberg finds here the fundamental passage for Luke 21:24, and points to the overthrow of the Roman Empire,—the “mountain” which was to be cast into the sea after the fig-tree of the Jewish people was withered (Matthew 21.), the “mulberry-tree” which was to be plucked up and removed into the sea (Luke 2:7.). 7. As in the kingdom of Tyre, Ezekiel 28, allusion was made to a time of sacredness upon the holy mount of God, so there was also found there, by way of similitude, a bringing to remembrance of Eden, and especially of the garden of God. This retrospect of paradise furnishes the beau-ideal, the standard for the Old Testament world generally; hence with Assyria, and in connection therewith in reference to Egypt, which had not the same historical position as Tyre, it appropriately comes back again in Ezekiel 31. As in the New Testament all is measured with heaven, so in the Old Testament what is or was glorious upon earth is made to hold of Eden and paradise. 8. On the derivation of the word “Sheol” there confessedly prevails a great diversity of opinion. For the biblical idea, especially the signification of the word in the Old Testament, this only is to be learned from this matter of etymological controversy, that as well the derivation from ωָׁ ?ςַ ?μ, to be hollow (therefore for ωְׁ ?ςֹ ?μ), since it points to “hollowing,” and in so far to the grave, as the derivation which Hupfeld adopts from: “to sink down,” and: “to go apart from one another,” therefore: sinking down, depth, abyss, and: cleft, hollow, empty space—since the burying and the being in the sepulchre can be thereby expressed—both alike avail for the affirmation, that Sheol and the grave more or less run together. The derivation, on the other hand, from ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?μ to demand, expresses as to Sheol only what constitutes generally the power and manner of death to demand for itself with insatiable desire all living beings (comp. Isaiah 5:14; Habakkuk 2:5; Proverbs 27:20; Proverbs 30:16). As to form an infinitive verbal substantive, the use of the word belongs predominantly to the poetic language of the Old Testament, whence also is to be explained the circumstance that it never stands with the article. Sheol appears as the aggregate of all graves. Who could venture to deny this aspect of the matter, at least for the 31st and 32d chapters of Ezekiel? It is the universal grave, which calls down to itself all earthly life, how high soever it may have reached, however magnificent it may have been, however valiantly it may have fought. But much, also, as Sheol and the grave (αεψ) sometimes appear to approach (comp. also Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 14:15), to cover one another, it must still not be overlooked that the grave, more exactly considered, is only the entrance into Sheol (Psalms 16:10), which certainly, as it is commonly represented, keeps the hue of the grave, in generals as well as in particulars (ιψλϊιαεψ, Ezekiel 32:23); it is the carrying over of the grave to the future state (while the grave as such is still always something here). It is quite reconcilable with this representation when Sheol is conceived of as a locality, and indeed as a deep abyss, just as the standing form of speech: “to go down,” “to be thrown down,” is thence explained as equivalent to being consigned to the dead. The occasional poetic delineation of this future must only not be formally dogmatized into an actual under-world with gates, rivers, etc. (Job 38:17; Psalms 18:5 sq.) The going down of the company of Korah (Numbers 16:30) is often what is floating before the writer’s mind; and not so much the locality of Palestine, which was rich in grottoes and caverns, or the darkness of the Hebrew family tomb-vaults, the stillness of the Egyptian catacomb-world. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 30 1And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 2Son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Howl! alas 3for the day! For near is the day, and [indeed] near is the day of Jehovah, a day of cloud; a time of the heathen nations shall it be. 4And the sword comes into Egypt, and there is anguish in Cush at the fall of the pierced-through in Egypt; and they take 5his tumult, and his foundations are pulled down. Cush, and Phut, and Lud, and all the strange people, and Kub, and the sons of the covenant-land, 6shall fall with them by the sword. Thus saith Jehovah, And they that uphold Egypt fall; and the pride of his strength comes down: from Migdol to Syene shall they fall in him by the sword, sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 7And they shall be desolate in the midst of the desolate lands, and his cities 8shall be in the midst of the wasted cities. And they know that I am Jehovah, when I give a fire in Egypt, and all his helpers shall be shattered. 9In that day shall messengers go forth from before Me in ships, to frighten Cush the secure, and there is anguish among them, as in the day of Egypt; for, behold, it comes. 10Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, And I make the tumult of Egypt to cease through the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. 11He and his people with him, the violent of the heathen, are brought to destroy the land, and they draw their swords upon Egypt, and fill the land with the 12pierced-through. And I give [make] the streams for drought, and sell the land into the hand of the wicked, and lay the land and its fulness waste by the hand of strangers: I, Jehovah, have spoken. 13Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, And I destroy the foul idols, and make the idols to cease out of Noph; and there shall be no more a prince out of the land of Egypt: and I give fear in the 14land of Egypt. And I make Pathros desolate, and give fire in Zoan, and do 15judgment in [on] No. And I pour out My fury upon Sin, the stronghold of 16Egypt; and cut off the tumult of No. And I give fire in Egypt: Sin shall writhe [for pain], and No shall be for conquest [broken], and Noph—besiegers 17[have] by day. The young men of Aven and Pi-beseth shall fall by the sword, 18and they [these cities] shall go into captivity. And in Tehaphnehes the day shall be dark, in that [when] I break there the yokes of Egypt, and the pride of its strength ceases in it: a cloud shall cover it, and its daughters shall go 19into captivity. And I do judgment in Egypt, and they know that I am Jehovah. 20    And it came to pass in the eleventh year, in the first [month], on the seventh of the month, the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 21Son of man, the arm of Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, I have broken; and, behold, it is not bound up, that one might apply healings [means of healing], that one might lay on a fillet to bind it, that it may become strong, that it may take hold of the sword. 22Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I [come] on Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, and I break his arms, the strong and the broken, and make 23the sword fall out of his hand. And I scatter Egypt among the heathen, and 24disperse them in the lands. And I strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, and give My sword into his hand, and shatter the army of Pharaoh, 25and he groans the groans of the pierced-through before him. And [yea] I take firm hold of [hold strong] the arms of the king of Babylon, and the arms of Pharaoh shall fall; and they know that I am Jehovah, in that I give My sword into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he stretches it out against 26the land of Egypt. And I scatter Egypt among the heathen, and disperse them in the lands; and they know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 30:2. Sept.: ... … ὠὠἠἡμερα, (3) ὁτι—Vulg.: … vζ, vζ diei!Ezekiel 30:4. … καιπεσουνται … τοπληθοςαὐτηςκ. συμπεσειταιτα— Ezekiel 30:5. Sept.: Περσαικ. Κρητεςκ. Δυδοικ. Διβυεςκ. παντεςοἱἐτιμικτοιἐπʼ ? αὐτην … διαθηκςμουἐναὐτημαχαιρᾳ ?— Vulg.: Aethiopia et Libya et Lydi et omne reliquum vulgus(Another read: ελπεα; Arab: Nubienses.) Ezekiel 30:6. Vulg.: superbia imperii ejus: a turre Syenes— Ezekiel 30:9. ... ἀγγελοισπευδοντεςἀφανισαι … ἐντῃἡμερᾳ ?— (Another read.: αιεν, Syr., Ar., Targ., Vulg.) Ezekiel 30:11. αὐτουκ. τουλαουαὐτου. Δοιμοιἀποἐθνων—Vulg.: … fortissimi— Ezekiel 30:13. … κ. καταπαυσωμεγισταναςἀποΜεμφεωςκ. ἀρκονταςΤανεωςἐκγηςΑἰγυπ. κ. οὐκἐσονταιοὐκετι— Ezekiel 30:14. Sept.: ... ἐκδικησινἐνΔιοσπολει Vulg.: … in Alexandria. Ezekiel 30:15. … ἐπιΣαϊν … τοπληθοςΜεμφεως … Pelusium … multitudinem Alexandriζ. Ezekiel 30:16. Συηνη … κ. ἐνΔιοσπολειἐκρηγμακ. διαχυθησεταιὑδατα Vulg.: … quasi parturiens dolebit Pelusium et Alexandria erit dissipata et in Memphis angustiζ quotidianζ. Ezekiel 30:17. … ̔Ηλιουπολεως … κ. αἱγυναικες … et ipsζ captivζ— Ezekiel 30:18. …ἐνΤαφναις … τασκηπτραΑιγ— Ezekiel 30:21. Vulg.: … non est obvolutum ut restitueretur ei sanitas— Ezekiel 30:22. Sept.: ... κ. τουςτεταμενουςκ. τ.συντριβομενους—Ezekiel 30:24. ... καιἐπαξειαὐτηνἐπ̓Αἰγ.κ. προνομευσειτηντρονονηναὐτηςκ. σκυλευσειτασκυλααὐτπς. Ezekiel 30:26. ... ἐπιγνωσονταιπαντεςοἱΑι̇γυπτιοι— REMARKSEze_30:1-19. The Day of Judgment.As this section is without any chronological preface, this may be understood if it justifies its place by the fit position of its contents. Thus the day in Ezekiel 30:2 appears as the time of the heathen nations in Ezekiel 30:3; hence it is quite suitable as an appendix to the outline of the prophecy taken as a whole (Ezekiel 29:1 sq.). So, too, the sword coming upon Egypt (Ezekiel 30:4) is more definitely indicated in Ezekiel 30:10 sq., as through the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, and so Ezekiel 30:20 sq. is prepared for. Not that “the naked thought expressed in the introduction to the prophecy (Ezekiel 29:17-21), of the great catastrophe hanging over Egypt, assumes flesh and blood in the main body of the prophecy (Ezekiel 30:1-19),” as Hengst. expresses himself; but the prophecy upon Egypt in Ezekiel 29:1-16, primarily coloured by its reference to Israel, is now again coloured by the respect had to the heathen, in particular to the Egyptian covenant-associates. Ezekiel 30:2. Howl, Isaiah 13:6 (ιμμ, to sound). The sound is expressed by δָ ?δּ,—like ΰְַ ?ηַ ?δּ (Ezekiel 4:14), especially with μιεν,—in the word-sound. The day, therefore the time, when that takes place which is contained in Ezekiel 30:4 sq., gives the reference (μ) of the mournful howl. The persons addressed will presently become plain. Ezekiel 30:3. Why they were called to howling had its ground in the nearness (Ezekiel 7:7), which, however, has no chronological determination, except in the very near approach of the day. This is primarily designated as μιδεδιεν, i.e. the one proper to the Lord, His day in particular, not only determined, fixed by Him; also not that alone which comes from Him; but, as the standing formula: “And they know that I am Jehovah,” readily suggests, the day of the manifestation of Jehovah. It is, as the comparison with Obadiah 1:15, Joe 1:15, Isaiah 13:6-9, Zephaniah 1:7; Zephaniah 1:14, shows, the becoming manifest in judgment. (Klief.: judgment, punishment, slaughter-day.) With this also agrees the designation of it as “a day of cloud;” comp. Ezekiel 1:4. The symbolical import is obvious, since, when the clear light of day comes to be veiled, there is a threatening of storm (Ezekiel 30:18, Ezekiel 34:12; Joe 1:15; Joe 2:2; Zephaniah 1:15); therefore one has to think of the wrath of God, and, in consequence thereof, a calamity which will break forth. Accordingly, ςϊβεινιδιδ (without article) is self-determined, as meaning the time when heathen nations—they, consequently, are the parties addressed in Ezekiel 30:2, spoken of generally as contradistinguished merely from Israel, but more definitely indicated in what follows—shall experience their judgment; not precisely “their end” (as Hitzig), but Jehovah’s manifestation in the judgment of wrath pregnant with calamity to them. Comp. besides, Ezekiel 22:3; Isaiah 2:12. [Not “identical with the day of Egypt, Ezekiel 30:9,” as Hengst. thinks, however similar, for the heathen were not simply the Egyptians. But still less, with Vatabl., Mόnst., and others, are we to think of the Chaldeans as executors of the judgment.] Ezekiel 30:4. The way and manner of the predicted judgment is here represented: the sword comes; and the heathen peoples, who are addressed in Ezekiel 30:2, are now named, viz. Egypt, in which war or bloody uproar so frightfully raged, that in Ethiopia the impression made by it was ημημδ, the corporeal state of convulsive writhing, for: anguish, terror, and woe. Nahum 2:11 [10]; Isaiah 21:3.—Upon λεω, see the Lexicons.—Hitzig: ημμ alludes to ημημδ.—The subject to: and they take, is naturally: the enemies, considered indefinitely.—δξεπδ, see at Ezekiel 29:19. Hengst.: “this is here the prosperity of Egypt bringing with it active life.”—ιργεϊ, the foundations, figuratively of the state as a house, not to be understood literally of the Egyptian chief cities. The figure, however, must not be limited (as ωָׁ ?ϊεֹ ?ϊ in Isaiah 19:10) to the higher classes, who bear immediately the state-building; nor must it (as Hitzig) be understood of the mercenaries, who only support Egypt (Ezekiel 30:5-6), and could hardly be represented as the foundations of its existence as a state. The representation must undoubtedly be (as well remarked by Hupfeld on Psalms 11:3) of that which bears the civic society and holds it up—ordinances and laws; so that, if formerly it was the well-being of Egypt which was concerned, it is now the being, the very existence of it. Ezekiel 30:5. Ethiopia, as already at Ezekiel 30:4, instar omnium, named as the neighbour and political associate of Egypt, opens the array of Egypt’s supporters (Ezekiel 30:6). Upon Phut and Lud, see at Ezekiel 27:10.—ςψα is: “joining-in,” “mixing,” “immigration,” therefore: strange people; scarcely (as the Syrian translates) could “all Arabia” be meant. Exodus 12:38; 1 Kings 10:15; Jer. 25:20; 24:1, 37; Nehemiah 13:3. Hδv. distinguishes these from the covenant-associates of Egypt. But what else could Cush be?—Kub, only here, is by some regarded as written instead of μεα, which Ewald reads, though he translates Nubia; while Kliefoth thinks of the Lubim in Nahum 3:9, 2 Chronicles 16:8, the Libyζgyptii of the ancients; or taken instead of πεα, so Gesenius and the Arab. translation, “Nubians;” and Hitzig also supposes μεα to have been the older Heb. form for Nubia (?);—by others it has been understood (Hδv.) of a people Kufa frequently occurring on the monuments of Egypt—according to Wilkinson, an important Asiatic people lying farther north than Palestine, with long hair, richly clothed, and with parti-coloured sandals; the tribute which they are represented as bringing bespeaks not a little of wealth, civilisation, and skill. Hengst. combines Kub with Ezekiel 27:10, and makes it correspond to the Persians, who had entered in consequence of the coalition into the service of Tyre, and whose appearance here cannot be thought strange; everywhere where there was a struggle against the tyrants, mercenaries were to be found of this powerful aspiring people. The name was a domestic one—“Kufa” in old Persian = mountain; the particular region, as appears to Hitzig, to be sought in Kohistan.—The sons of the covenant-land are understood by Jerome, Theodoret, the Sept., the Arab, trans., also by Hitzig, of the Jews who had taken refuge in Egypt (Jeremiah 42-44.); the covenant-land (with the article), that promised to Abraham and his seed according to God’s covenant, is Canaan. The Syriac translation, on the other hand, points to the associates in the league, which the expression certainly does not clearly justify. Hence Hengst., understanding by the covenant-land Cush, makes the beginning turn hack to the close; while Schmieder, with whom Kliefoth agrees, conjectures a tract of land unknown to us, but near to Egypt, and in a state of league with it (!). Ezekiel 30:6. επτμερξλιΧ, either as Ewald: “there fall Egypt’s supporters” or, after it has been said in Ezekiel 30:5 that the anguish in Cush shall become a falling with Egypt, there is in Ezekiel 30:6 a more comprehensive general statement: as well as, etc. [Hengst.: “a new break, new touches to be given to the picture.”] Comp. Psalms 37:17; Psalms 54:6 [4]. When the one party falls, the other sees itself necessitated to go down from its self-conscious height. On pride, etc., see at Ezekiel 24:21; comp. besides, Ezekiel 29:10. They who shall fall in him, or it, are those who would support it. Too far removed are the idols and princes of Eze 30:13, which are brought in by Schmieder as the supporters; also the fortified cities in Ezekiel 30:15, and the warriors in Ezekiel 30:17. Ezekiel 30:7. Comp. Ezekiel 29:12. Where Egypt is the principal subject, there can be no question of its being so also here. Ezekiel 30:8. The practical knowledge of experience is made in the fire, which Jehovah causes in Egypt, that is, at the breaking forth of His anger, with which also most fitly suits: and they shall be shattered, etc., so that they must know the judgment of God to be upon them. According to others, the war-fire; according to the Chald. paraph., a people violent as fire; according to Cocceius, it must mean the consuming, desolating result of the war.—All the helpers of Egypt are those who give support in Ezekiel 30:6, both those who are named (Ezekiel 30:5), and those who are not named. Ezekiel 30:9. With manifest allusion to Isaiah 18, messengers in ships are made to announce to Ethiopia the fate of Egypt. (In Isa. it is papyrus-skiffs, which people were wont to roll together when they passed the cataracts of the Nile, and then open out again. The φι here, from φεδ, to set up, according to Hδv. certainly with reference to the existing sea-force of Egypt: warships, which suits neither with fugitives nor with messengers.) The business-mart and commerce on the boundaries of Upper Egypt and Ethiopia readily provide the image of such messengers at command,—represented as going forth from before Jehovah sitting in judgment upon Egypt,—so that one does not need to think either of the Chaldeans, or of Egyptian messengers formally sent by the Egyptians, or of Egyptian fugitives.—Since there is ημημδαλεω, according to Ezekiel 30:4, so this is only explained here by μδηψιγΰϊΞλΧ; hence also εδιϊδημημδ is repeated; therefore not a joyful message, as in Isaiah 18. with reference to Assyria.—λιεν, either, a definite fixing of time (Isaiah 23:5), as also αιεν is read, but which would plainly be a repetition of αιενδδεΰ; or, better perhaps, with Hδv., pointing to that old period of punishment in the history of Egypt which filled neighbouring regions with dread of Jehovah (Exodus 15:14 sq.).—Ezekiel 7:5-6; Ezekiel 7:10; Ezekiel 21:12. The coming is that which had been threatened, to be supplied from the context. Ezekiel 30:10. Comp. Ezekiel 26:13.—Ezekiel 29:19.—The tumult comprehends as well the dense population characteristic of Egypt, as the moving of goods and chattels hither and thither. Kliefoth; “the turmoil of the people in the possession and enjoyment of their goods.”—The hand of the Judge. His instrument and executioner, is to be Nebuchadnezzar (comp. at Ezekiel 26:7). Ezekiel 30:11. Ezekiel 28:7.—23.42. Hengst.: “they come not of themselves, but the Almighty brings them, hence they are irresistible,” etc.—The destruction of the land by the sword is more nearly given, since it is represented as being filled with the slain. Comp. Ezekiel 12:14; Ezekiel 11:6. Ezekiel 30:12. Ezekiel 25:5; Ezekiel 29:10; Ezekiel 29:3. The destruction of its prosperity, since its natural springs and the land become the property of others, like a slave that has been sold by his master. Hitzig: “God assists the instruments of His will, taking an immediate part in the work of destruction, and, at the same time, displacing a hindrance to their advance and a bulwark of the Egyptians.”—Since ψςιν is parallel with ζψιν, the wicked can only be interpreted from the feeling of the Egyptians, and in accordance with the hurtful action of the strangers, as ψςς is to beat down, to destroy. The general wickedness of mankind (Matthew 7:11) lies here as far out of the way as a special application to the Chaldeans, as being also not better than the Egyptians. Comp. however, Ezekiel 7:24; Ezekiel 28:7. Ezekiel 30:13. A carrying out of the judgment by special traits, which for Egypt especially are characteristic. Thus, as regards the βμεμιν (see at Ezekiel 6:4), the ΰμιμιν (chiming with the “nothings”), Leviticus 19:4; Leviticus 26:1, and often (1 Corinthians 8:4), so that there is no need for supplying from Isaiah 19:1; they are neither the images of the gods, nor the worshippers of them (as the Chald. paraph.): it is simply the idol-gods.—From Noph (ξπσ, sometimes also ξֹ ?σ), that is, from Memphis; to-day, unimportant ruins on the western side of the Nile. The name in Plutarch is explained as ὁρμονἀγαθων, and as ταφον̓Οσιρδος; in hieroglyphics, “Mam-Phtah” that is, the place of Vulcan. The lower valley of the river honoured as the highest god Phtah (fire-god), the oldest and first of the gods, according to Manetho, ruling 9000 years before the others, as he is named in the inscriptions: “the father of the fathers of the gods,” “the heavenly ruler,” “the lord of the gracious countenance,” “the king of both worlds,” “the lord (the father) of truth.” As god of the beginning, he has the form of a naked child, of a dwarf; at other times wrapped round mummy-like, standing by a rod, with a flagellum and mace and the Nilometer in his hand. As he was called Tatamen (the former), as world-creator, so he commonly has before him an egg upon a potter’s wheel (“the weaver of the beginnings moving the egg of the sun and moon”). The Egyptian scarabζus (beetle) was sacred to him, which was sometimes shown upon his shoulders in the place of a head. His great sanctuary at Memphis, which was said to have been as old as Egypt itself, was adorned and extended by the Pharaohs down to the overthrow of the kingdom. Cambyses, when admitted into this temple, exhibited his disdain toward the image of the god.—Since Memphis was at the same time the old royal city, the transition from the service of idols to the πָ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ was natural, especially as the connection of the gods and kings is genuinely Egyptian. Comp. on Ezekiel 29. The history of Egypt is that of its gods, and the names and deeds of its kings, as they are painted upon the walls of its temples.—That there was to be no more a native prince is not necessarily said, with ξΰψΧ, but only that as prince there should no more be one like the old Pharaohs and the Egyptian gods, out of Egypt, as contradistinguished from other lands, whose princely power would, as hitherto has been the case, obtain legitimation. Therewith also agrees the fear, which seems to point to a foreign ascendency that was to carry it over all. Ezekiel 30:14. From Lower to Upper Egypt, the description gives prominence especially to the mother-land (see on Ezekiel 29:14), the brrth-land of the people.—Comp. Ezekiel 30:8.—Zoan, however, is, again, in Lower Egypt, the old Tanis, on the branch of the Nile which bears that name (“Dschane,” Egyptian: low ground),—a chief city, Numbers 13:22; Psalms 78:12; Psalms 78:43.—Ezekiel 5:10.—No (πΰ) leads back to Upper Egypt; when fully read No-Amon, it is Thebes (Vulg., anticipating, Alexandria), the very ancient Upper Egyptian chief city, with the Greeks Diospolis. (“Noh,” Egyp.: surveyor’s chain; hence: inheritance; therefore: seat of Amon—see Gesen. Lex.) In the Upper land there reigned as divinity Amun (Amen), probably = “the concealed,” the reigning god in the height, whose colour is blue on the monuments. He was for Upper Egypt what Phtah was for Lower Egypt. He is represented as standing, or sitting enthroned, with two high feathers upon his kingly head-dress. According to Manetho, the union of Egypt under a great dominion was effected by Menes from This, below Thebes, therefore proceeding from the Upper land—although this state-life had its centre in Memphis, in the Lower land; and during its flourishing period, another dominion, the territory of which stretched beyond the cataracts of Syene, had been founded at Thebes. Princes of Thebes afterwards ruled over all Egypt, took their seat at Memphis, and the kings of Egypt were now called “Lords of both Lands” in the inscriptions. Upon the monuments the red higher crown is that of Upper Egypt, the lower white one that of Lower Egypt. So that the prophetic representation takes into view the whole of Egypt, repeats Thebes for Upper Egypt, yet knows, at the same time, to mention names mostly from the more extensive, as well as more important and more powerful, Lower country. Ezekiel 30:15. Ezekiel 14:19, 21:36 [Ezekiel 21:31], Ezekiel 9:8, Ezekiel 7:8.—ρִ ?ιο, the “mud-city,” Pelusium (πηλος), a border city on the east, in a swampy region, which the sea now overflows. Egypt, according to Strabo, was here difficult to be attacked, and Suidas designates Pelusium the key of Egypt for ingress and egress.—ξָ ?ςεֹ ?ο, ch.Ezekiel 24:25.—εְ ?δִ ?λψַ ?ϊּ ?ι Ezekiel 29:8.—ΰֶ ?ϊΞδֵַ ?ξεֹ ?οπֹ ?ΰ (Ezekiel 30:10), comp. Ezekiel 30:14. An allusion undoubtedly to Amon, whence No derived its surname (Jeremiah 46:25). Amon is incapable of preserving to the city its Hamon (tumult), Hengst. The mention of the multitude of people in No Hitzig finds to be suitable, since the population of the Thebaid crowded principally into the farextending chief city. (Comp. Iliad, ix. 381 sq.) Ezekiel 30:16, Ezekiel 30:8; Ezekiel 30:14.—Instead of: ϊָּ ?ηִ ?ιμ, the Qeri has:ϊָּ ?ηεּ ?μ, from ηεμ, whence ηַ ?μְ ?ηָ ?μָ ?δ in vers.4, 9.—The repeated mention of Sin, No, and Noph gives emphasis to the boundaries, Upper and Lower Egypt.—ϊִּ ?αָּ ?χς = ϊδιδμδαχς, in Ezekiel 26:10.—φָ ?ψֵ ?ιιεֹ ?ξָ ?ν is clear so far, as φεψ is plainly to be understood of a pressing, closing in siege; on the other hand, ιεξν may signify by day, as in the well-known juxtaposition with εμιμδ, but also what this juxtaposition paraphrastically expresses, namely: always, unceasingly, therefore: daily = λμΞιεν, or “the day over”, also “the whole day long” = λμΞδιεν (comp. Psalms 13:3 [2]). [Michlal Zophi interprets: “and against Noph come the enemies of day,” that is, openly, not as thieves of the night. Similarly Hitzig: “enemies will be in broad daylight,” meaning that it will be filled by them. Kliefoth: of the enemy not fearing an open assault. Also Hengst., who, from Jeremiah 15:8 and Zephaniah 2:4, understands it of a state of deep humiliation, in which the enemy disdains, in the consciousness of his absolute superiority, to surprise by night (Obadiah 1:5). “Enemies (besiegers) by day, a concise expression for: such an one as has to deal with enemies by day.”]—It might be also an affecting exclamation. [Abendana (after Job 3:5) = their day will be distress (Vulg.). The Chaldee paraphrase: enemies compass her daily. Peculiar are the renderings of the Sept. and of the Arabic, which understand it of a breaking down of the Nile dams, and a rushing in of the waters; the Syriac: “will give way into fragments.” Ewald: Memphis will be for perpetual rust (φְ ?γִ ?ι)! Hδv.: Memphis shall become a constant splitting, that is, shall be for ever shattered; it shall now be, in a manner, called φψιιεξν, in allusion to the local name of Memphis, ξφεψ!] Ezekiel 30:17. αַּ ?ηְ ?εּ ?ψֵ ?ι, the choice young men of war (Mark 14:51); rightly Hitzig: the garrison warrior-caste), as contradistinguished from the inhabitants.—Aven (ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο), the purpose in the change of the name ΰֹ ?ο ,ΰεֹ ?ο, must, according to Hengst., point to the cause of the divine judgments which were coming on it (comp. Hosea 4:15; Hosea 10:5). Aven is nothingness, vanity, with respect to the worship of idols. [Hengst.: “vileness”, that people serve the creature more than the Creator.] It was the Greek Heliopolis, Jeremiah 43:13, “House of the Sun;” Kopt. On; Egyptian, Anu,—a city in Lower Egypt on the east bank of the Nile, and was from of old the proper seat of the Egyptian sun-worship; a centre of idolatry, with a numerous learned priesthood; the principal city in this respect, and that where Plato and Herodotus received instruction; mentioned in Genesis 41:45; Genesis 41:50. Now there are only some ruins beside a village, with an obelisk seventy feet high of red granite. Here, in a famous temple, was Ra, the god of the solar disc, worshipped (“the father of the gods”), the second ruler of the world. His symbol was the sun’s disc borne by two wings; the beasts sacred to him were the sparrow-hawk, the light-coloured bull, and the cat. From Ra, their original and type, the Pharaohs derived their power over Egypt, as “sons of Ra”, the name given to them. See, besides, in Duncker, 1. p. 39 sq.—Pi-beseth, only here; at present existing merely as ruins; Kopt.: Poubast, “the cat,” on account of the goddess Pacht (Basht, Pascht), commonly represented with a cat’s head, who was worshipped at Bubastis, in Lower Egypt, on the Pelusian branch of the Nile. (She was also named “the Mistress of Memphis,” and also “Mother.”) To her joyous service, according to Herodotus, was devoted the most pleasant of Egyptian temples. At her festival, to which men and women came in boats from all places, amid song, playing of flutes, clapping of hands, and striking of rattles, more wine was drunk than in all the rest of the year.—If the guardians, the protectors of the sanctuaries, fall by the sword, then also by the same must the gods themselves fall. Herodotus designates the Bubastic Nome as the region where especially resided the Calastrians, that is, the young recruits of the army. Comp. also Ezekiel 30:5-6, Ezekiel 6:11-12. The εְ ?δֵ ?πָּ ?δ are not the women (Sept.), but the cities named, their inhabitants (comp. Ezekiel 30:18); see also Ezekiel 12:11. Ezekiel 30:18. Not far from Sin comes the border city (toward Syria) ϊְּ ?ηַ ?τְ ?πְ ?ηֵ ?ν, Tehaphnehes, in Jeremiah (Jer. 63:9) ϊַּ ?ηְ ?τַּ ?πְ ?ηֵ ?ν, Tahpanhes, where, as we there learn, was a royal palace, Daphnoi (Taphne); the name, according to Jablonski, Egyptian: Taphe-eneh, as much as, Land’s End.—ηωκδιεν, Hengst.: “the day spares, withholds as a miser.” Therefore, from ηָ ?ωַׂ ?κ, which in substance, however, is the same as: darkens itself; from ηָ ?ωַׁ ?κ, to be darkened. There, for those of Israel who had fled thither (Jeremiah 43:7 sq., Ezekiel 44:1 sq.), the pre-intimations of the day of judgment begin (Kl.); or generally: there changes the prosperity and splendour of Egypt; according to others: there will be mourning. Hδv.: “here had Jeremiah spoken his powerful word of threatening against Egypt; here, through the settling down of the Jews at that time, the idea of Egyptian oppression toward Israel springs up afresh; and hence a calling to remembrance of Lev 26:13.” Hengst. compares with “the breaking of the yokes of Egypt” Ezekiel 29:15; Ezekiel 30:13, “no prince,” etc.; the yoke formerly lying upon Israel, latterly also upon other nations, was now to be for ever broken.—ωָׁ ?ν refers to the border-place, with which the land opens, and with the broken land “the yokes” which Egypt had imposed, consequently its dominion (comp. Ezekiel 30:21-22; Ezekiel 30:24), should be broken. (Umbr.: “All order and discipline shall be dissolved in the ruled and strongly-curbed land: an end shall be made to its old renown and pride.”)—αָּ ?δּ, like βְּ ?ΰεֹ ?οςֻ ?εָּ ?δּ, is to be understood of the whole land. [Cocceius thinks of the death of the king with reference to the king’s seat at Taphne (Jer. 63:9). Rosenm. reads ξַ ?θּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, also Ewald and the Sept.; while Hitzig supposes to be meant, not the spears indeed (Habakkuk 3:14; 2 Samuel 18:14), but the supporting staffs, Ezekiel 30:6, which in Ezekiel 30:8 are also represented as going to be broken.]—διΰ, not Daphnai, but Egypt, on which account it precedes emphatically; as also her daughters, namely, the cities, could only be referred to Egypt; if referred to Daphnai, too much would be said for it (Ezekiel 16:27; Ezekiel 16:31; Ezekiel 16:46; Ezekiel 26:6).—ςָ ?πָ ?ο (Ezekiel 30:3). The Chaldee Paraphrast makes the cloud mean the host of the king of Babylon. Ezekiel 30:19 concludes with Egypt generally. Ezekiel 30:14. Ezekiel 30:20-26. Pharaoh and the King of Babylon. Ezekiel 30:20. As to the time, almost a quarter of a year later than Ezekiel 29:1 sq.; Kliefoth: “in the second year of the siege of Jerusalem,” as is clear also from Ezekiel 30:21, after that Hophra had been defeated by the Chaldeans (Jeremiah 37:5; Jeremiah 37:7). (That Ezekiel 29. should contain no notice or allusion to the attempt of Pharaoh to bring help to Jerusalem, etc., may be controverted from what is said there in Ezekiel 30:6.) Hengst.: about three months later followed the conquest of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 39:2). As at Ezekiel 29, so also here, the look of the exiled toward Egypt is to be turned back from it. Ezekiel 30:21. ζְ ?ψεֹ ?ςַ is certainly for the most part the forearm, as here also the expression “to hold the sword” proves, and so help, too, assistance, is expressed by it; so that, with Hδv., Ewald, and others, one might think of the Egyptian attempt for the relief of Jerusalem: on the other hand, however, Hengst. is right when he explains the breaking of the arm of Pharaoh of a “great overthrow,” such as was only to be found in the well-known disaster at Carchemish, seventeen years before our prophecy, as this battle, in fact, destroyed the power of Pharaoh to make war, struck his might with a blow (comp. Jeremiah 46.); while what respects the retreat of the Egyptians from Jerusalem, which became a matter of necessity to them, is nowhere reported. So that, as Hitzig in particular recognises, from the manifest contrariety of Eze 30:22, which announces the future, ωαψϊι is a full preterite, and presupposes a longer interval in connection with the indication of time in Ezekiel 30:20 than could be the case with that retreat before Nebuchadnezzar, if this should have to be thought of generally as a thing already accomplished. Hengst. remarks: “After it (i.e., the retreat of the Egyptians from Carchemish) our prophecy would have been unnecessary; it must have been delivered at a time when, humanly speaking, there was hope from the Egyptians.”—εְ ?δִ ?πֵּ ?δ, having respect to the existing state of Egypt since the battle of Carchemish, introduces the following description, in which “the binding” forms the principal statement on which the infinitives are dependent. Bound up is the first, the most immediate thing which has to be done after wounding, and the intention or aim thereof is to apply the means of healing (cures); in particular, since the chief means consist in the band which holds together the broken parts, that a bandage be applied (μηαωδ resumes ηαωδ again) so that the arm be strengthened, and, as the consequence, be again rendered capable of “taking hold of the sword.” Ezekiel 30:22. Therefore refers to the foregoing principal announcement, that Pharaoh’s might is broken without the prospect of restoration, and accordingly what is farther impending can only be a complete overthrow; and this is introduced by δππι, a parallel to Ezekiel 30:21, and then summarily pronounced (ζψςϊιε).—The strong (δηζχδ, with a reference to μηζχδ in Ezekiel 30:21) signifies: what still existed unbroken as to power in Egypt, particularly in the land itself; the broken (Ezekiel 30:21), that which must still be broken, with allusion to the shattering at Carchemish; especially the impotent attempt to turn aside to the help of Jerusalem, which must therefore be thought of as still in immediate prospect. [Cocc. explains the two arms of Hophra, and the small Egyptian kingdom which followed. They have been also explained of the supremacy over Syria and that over Egypt.]—The might, power, and dominion of Pharaoh are to become incapable of attack and resistance. Ezekiel 30:23. Comp. Ezekiel 30:26, Ezekiel 29:12; Ezekiel 22:15. Ezekiel 30:24. εְ ?ηִ ?εַּ ?χְ ?ϊִ ?ι, Piel (strengthening; anyhow, still another ηζχ than is to be supposed in the μηζχδ of Ezekiel 30:21), for the sword also is not that which has fallen out of the hand of Pharaoh, but Jehovah’s, whence the following explains itself, and at the same time what is said in Ezekiel 30:22.—μְ ?τָ ?πָ ?ιε, before the king of Babylon, who and his arms, here and in Ezekiel 30:25 placed in opposition to Pharaoh and his arms, are the antithesis which forms the substance of this section. Ezekiel 30:25. εְ ?δַ ?ηְַ ?ζַ ?χְ ?ϊִ ?ι, Hiphil, for distinction in respect to the Piel in Ezekiel 30:24, which, on account of the failings, ιָ ?γ, is explained by Hitzig, not through “seizing,” but with a reference to Exodus 17:11-12, and by way of contrast to ϊִּ ?τֹּ ?μְ ?πָ ?δ through “holding upright,” “holding above,” so that he retains the upper hand. But the slight difference between “holding strong” and “strengthening,” endowing with power, is of itself enough. Hengst. compares Genesis 49:24, in respect that the arms of the king of Egypt, left to his own impotence, sank down powerless.—Since the arms of both are named, the words: and they know, etc., may easily be referred thereto, but principally to the king of Babylon; yet also to the land of Egypt, against which the sword of judgment in the hand of that king was stretched out. ΰεϊָ ?δּ may be referred to ιγ, also to ηψα. Ezekiel 30:26. Repetition of Eze 30:23 at the close. 1. Although the prophecy in Ezekiel 29 is of a general character, yet by the reference to Nebuchadnezzar, and especially from Ezekiel 29:17 onwards, it gets a more specific character. We have therefore to hold by a fulfilment through the Chaldeans, and, indeed, in connection with what is said respecting Tyre. Apart from the circumstance that we have here to do with a prophet of God, we could not judge otherwise simply on this account, that a little reflection upon the inevitable disgrace of such a self-deception as would have been the case in respect to Tyre must alone have kept Ezekiel—instead of merely suppressing the prophecy in question while the book was still in his own hand—from wishing now to compensate for the mistake by awakening like inconsiderate and rash expectations concerning Nebuchadnezzar in regard to Egypt. For one to whom the prophet is nothing but a writer must still at least credit him with this much of worldly prudence in respect to his literary honour. And if Ezekiel must needs prophesy ex eventu (as Hitzig, for example, conceives), then prophecies like those contained in Ezekiel 26 and some following ones are purely unthinkable, so far as they remained unfulfilled; since it cannot but be supposed, that when our prophet closed his book, matters must have stood before him widely different from what they are presented in his prophecy. The “dogmatic criticism,” however, cannot once admit now that a prophecy has been fulfilled,—a limitation of the standpoint which is not improved by the circumstance that the truth of the divine word (2 Peter 1:21) is made dependent on the statements or the silence of profane writers, and even of such as have given notoriously imperfect reports. The false prophet, he whose word did not come to pass, has by God’s word (Deuteronomy 18:22) been as clearly as possible excluded from the canon. 2. The reward for work, which, as Hitzig rightly enough says, had still to be given to Nebuchadnezzar, raises no question as to the conquest and, as could not fail to happen after a thirteen years’ siege, the destruction of Tyre. If the booty might have been thought of for the army, for Nebuchadnezzar it is necessary to think of Egypt. The song of triumph demanded by Hitzig for the fulfilment of the prophecy against Tyre is the double lamentation which we find in Ezekiel 27, 28. Every one has his peculiar manner. But as regards the so-called “historical witnesses,” who should speak the decisive word on the fulfilment or non-fulfilment particularly of the prophecy of Ezekiel in respect to Egypt, they are “the Greek historians, at the head of whom stands Herodotus, and they know absolutely nothing of a Chaldean invasion of Egypt—nay, their narration is opposed to anything of the kind” (Hitzig). This is imposing; let us reflect, however, that Herodotus had also learned nothing from his Egyptian informants of the defeat at Carchemish. We need only mention farther, that this Greek historian himself reproaches the priests of Egypt, and precisely in regard to this particular time, with embellishing the history of their country. Now, according to Herodotus, Pharaoh Hophra—in consequence of the defeat which his army sustained from the Cyrenians, against whom it was to have rendered help to the Libyans, and of the revolt which in consequence thereof, and of the foreign mercenary troops retained in Egypt, broke forth on the part of the Egyptian warrior-class against Amasis, who, instead of bringing back the rebels to obedience, suffered himself to be proclaimed king by them—lost freedom and his throne, and by the infuriated people was even murdered. Tholuck, who, “if the cattle with the ark of the Lord should once turn aside, would not obstinately drive forward,” remarks that as a witness Herodotus alone comes into consideration; before whom, however, the testimony of Ezekiel, himself a contemporary of the events, has no need to be abashed. “If Herodotus readily received intelligence of the prosperous battle fought by Necho at Megiddo, but none respecting the much more important defeat sustained by him on the Euphrates from the Chaldeans, should it be thought strange if the priests observed silence also regarding the irruption of the Chaldeans into their own land? yea, if the miserable end which Hophra suffered through the foreign conqueror should have been rather represented by them as the deed of his own people?” (So also Rawlinson’s Herod. B. ii. appen. c. 8.) With a fair appreciation of the historical representation of Herodotus, the cause there assigned, especially the revolution among the warrior-class of Egypt, might suffice for the overthrow of Hophra. Yet the hatred of the Egyptian people, not only expressed in Herodotus, but confirmed by monumental evidence (Rossellini points in this connection to a by-name of Hophra on the monuments: “Remesto”)—such a hatred as is described in Herodotus toward Hophra (ii. 161–169), manifested in respect to a native ruler, is scarcely to be explained from what is stated, if it did not come into some sort of connection with a Chaldean invasion of Egypt, whereby the haughtiness of Hophra might well appear all the more hateful to the Egyptian people, as the misery of the land and the inhabitants, occasioned by him, stood in sharpest contrast to the previous prosperity and splendour. The grudge of the Egyptian warrior-class against the foreign mercenaries could not be of such moment as some have supposed, since even Amasis, who thereafter held possession of the throne till his death (forty-four years), and was succeeded in it by his son, took lonians for his bodyguard, and generally granted to the Greeks still greater favour and privileges than his predecessor. Besides, as generally held, there is also the outline of the prophecy against Egypt in Ezekiel 29, which exhibits a distinction between Ezekiel 29:6 sq. and Ezekiel 29:4 sq.—in the one, the sword constitutes the figure (Ezekiel 29:8); in the other, overthrow with reference to the wilderness. Especially if Hitzig’s interpretation of “the fish” (Ezekiel 29:4) as denoting Pharaoh’s men of war is accepted, and under “the wilderness” there is couched an allusion to Libya, what is said in Ezekiel 29:4 sq. might be explained by the narration which is reproduced by Herodotus, and Ezekiel 29:6 sq. would, with the sword of Nebuchadnezzar, be such a supplementing as the conquest of Tyre to the siege of that city, also given elsewhere. Out of the miserable condition in which Hophra perished, Amasis would then have raised Egypt. Anyhow, as Tholuck brings out, the death of Hophra falls exactly into the time in which the occupation of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar must have occurred; and thus the position of matters approaches to that which is wont to be extracted from Josephus in confirmation of our prophecy—contr. Ap. i. 19. It is there stated that Berosus reports of the Babylonian (Nebuchadnezzar) that he “conquered Egypt, Syria, Ph�nicia,” etc. Again, in Ezekiel 20, he states that Megasthenes placed Nebuchadnezzar above Hercules, since he had subjected to himself a great part of Libya and Iberia (comp. Antiq. x. 11. 1, and Strabo xv. 1. 6; see also Hδv. Comm. p. 435, against Hitzig’s remarks). In the 10th book of the Antiq. Ezekiel 9:7, Josephus expresses himself to this effect, that “in the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, he made an expedition against C�lesyria; and when he had got possession of it, he made war against the Ammonites and Moabites; and when he had brought these nations into subjection, he fell upon Egypt in order to overthrow it, and did indeed slay the king who then reigned, but set up another; after which he took those Jews that were there captive, and brought them to Babylon,” etc. The ten years’ time, which Hitzig doubts as the period of the earlier warlike expeditions, is maintained by Tholuck. The fifth year after the taking of Jerusalem would be 581; the thirteen years’ siege of Tyre would fall into the period 586–572 or 573. For the different actions which were in part parallel as to time, we have only to suppose various divisions of the army employed, so that the whole might of Nebuchadnezzar did not at the same time lie before Tyre. The forty years of the Egyptian oppression, Tholuck, like Niebuhr, extends over the entire space that lies between the disaster at Carchemish and the overthrow of Hophra (thirty-six years), “during which Egypt, through the continued and in great part unfortunate warlike enterprises of Hophra, must have been much depopulated and extremely weakened, till at length the inroad of the Chaldeans consummated the oppression.” Tholuck thinks that, “as the prophets in the beginning of the fulfilment comprehended the future (Jeremiah 13:18; Ezekiel 30:24), in the last and completed fulfilment they also comprehended the earlier incomplete ones.” The symbolical explanation of the forty years is not thereby denied (see the exposition). The worth of the statements of Josephus may be questioned, as is done by Hitzig; but for the relation of profane history to our prophecy, it suffices that Hophra miserably perished (Ezekiel 29:4 sq.; Jeremiah 44:30 sq.), and that Egypt again revived, as took place under Amasis, although as a kingdom it was fit to be compared neither with its ancient glory nor with other great monarchies (Ezekiel 29:13 sq.). As regards the resuscitation of Egypt, Duncker mentions that, according to a return of the priests, it then reckoned 20,000 country towns and cities (Herzog’s Realencyc. 1 p. 150), though it was “the last period of Egypt’s glory;” and Lepsius says of the same, that Egypt succumbed to the first pressure of the Persian power, and remained from 525 to 504 a Persian province; that afterwards it became again for a short time independent, until in 340 it was reconquered by the Persians, and in 332 fell under Alexander the Great, etc. 3. Upon the importance of Egypt for the revenge of Nebuchadnezzar, see the exposition of Eze 29:18. Also generally for the Chaldean policy the transition to Egypt is rendered plain to us from Ezekiel 29:17 sq. (Hδv.: “if Nebuchadnezzar would make the possession of Ph�nicia once for all sure, Egypt must be completely broken.”) Of the importance of Egypt by itself, its characteristic importance, some notice has already been taken, toward the close of the introductory remarks to Ezekiel 25; as also of the distinction, indicated with correct feeling by Keil, between Egypt and the other nations mentioned by Ezekiel. But what Egypt signifies in its connection here, this must be discerned from its relation to Israel. It is quite true that the charge laid against Ammon, Moab, etc., also against Tyre, for spiteful joy, hostility, envy toward Israel, is not mentioned in respect to Pharaoh and Egypt. It may be said that Egypt’s guilt in regard to Israel was that rather of a false, treacherous friendship. If, on the other hand, the excess of proud self-sufficiency must be regarded as the characteristic of Egypt, the same sort of self-elation meets us in the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28); and in this respect Tyre formed a fitting transition-point to Egypt. The distinction between Tyre and Egypt might perhaps be found in this, that while in particular the kingdom of Tyre had had its time of sacred splendour and past greatness, as we have seen, in its former connection with the kingdom of David, Egypt on its part acquired importance on account of the sojournings of the pilgrim-fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and still more on account of the formation of their descendants into a people. Above all, the idea of redemption was associated with the land of Egypt. Here, therefore, the inverse relation holds good: Tyre has gone with Israel to school; Israel, on the other hand, was at school in Egypt, as was evidenced in manifold agreements and contrasts exhibited in their peculiarity as a people, without our needing on that account to ride off on the Spencerian principle [namely, of a servile borrowing from the institutions of Egypt]. More than from anything else, may be understood from Israel’s reminiscences as a people, and the impress of Egyptian style and manner even upon their sacred things, their abiding sympathetic turning back toward Egypt. That Israel could not let Egypt go out of sight had its root in human nature; we must learn even from the children of this world (Luke 2:6). But it had also its dangerous side. It was Israel’s worldliness, relapse, since Israel had been delivered by Jehovah from this world, and Jehovah had through Moses threatened them in connection with Egypt with the greatest evils (Deuteronomy 28:68). We have tribulation in the world, and we may have fear before the world; such fear, however, may be salutary in its operation. But dangerous is the stay that is sought in Egypt, trust and confidence therein. In this respect Egypt is designated a remembrancer of iniquity (Ezekiel 29:16), since for Israel it had, and not as of yesterday, but from of old (comp. also Ezekiel 16:26; Ezekiel 23:8; Ezekiel 23:19), the fatal significance of a pride which resists Jehovah and leads away from Him, of a consciousness of worldly power, which amid the characteristic Pharaonic arrogance expressed itself just as distinctly (Ezekiel 29:3; Ezekiel 29:9) as in Exodus 5:2, and had this the more seductively, as a self-conscious abiding worldly power is in fact fitted to impose on people. Friendship with Egypt is the most contemptuous relation in which Israel can be thought of, on account of the indifference which it necessarily implied on the part of the Israelitish people not only in regard to their former house of bondage, but also to the mighty deliverance obtained from it, and generally in what concerned their relation to Jehovah, on whom, as their own and their fathers’ God, they had been thrown from their state of childhood. To make account of this specific historical position in respect to each other, according to which the growth, bloom, and decay of Israel were closely interwoven with Egypt, the prophecy of Ezekiel “dwells at greater length on Egypt than on the other nations” (Hδv.). Still more, however, it serves to explain the representation of the judgment upon Egypt as strikingly parallel with that on Israel, and to the last carried out (comp. Ezekiel 29:5; Ezekiel 29:9 sq., 12, 13, etc.). Not less remarkable, because singular, is the prospect and declaration in regard to the resuscitation of Egypt, and of it alone, which have been introduced into the prediction of our prophet; by this also is Egypt quite expressly kept parallel with Israel. The reminiscence which brings up Egypt so distinctly is not simply that of the house of bondage, or of iniquity, but it is Joseph’s post of honour, and the corn granaries of Jacob, together with his family. Comp. also Deuteronomy 23:7. 4. The interpretation of Neteler strikes out what is certainly a quite different path, strikingly reminding one of Cocceius, only with a specially Catholic tendency. According to him, the prophecies against the foreign nations constitute four groups, each of which contains four pieces: the first, Ezekiel 25; the second, the overthrow of the Canaanitish culture - development, standing in contrast to the higher calling of Jerusalem, and reaching its culmination in Tyre. The prophecy against Sidon he severs from Tyre, in the interest of this fourfold division; it belongs to the Egyptian group, inasmuch as “Sidon’s bloom falls into the time in which Egypt was the bearer of the Hamitic power and culture,” and “the Sidonian development was a shoot of the Hamitic-Egyptian.” The promises for Israel in this third section (Ezekiel 28:20 to Ezekiel 30:19) must stand parallel with those of the same kind in the first group, wherein punishment is threatened to the four nations with reference to Israel; as the first group, “through Ezekiel 21 (Ammon), is placed in connection with the first destruction of Jerusalem,” so “the third stands, through the opening of the mouth which occurs in it, in closer relation to the symbol of the second destruction of Jerusalem.” The four last prophecies against Egypt are “mere symbols,” according to Neteler. As Ammon “drove the surviving remnant, after the destruction of Jerusalem, out of Judea,” so had “Moab decoyed Israel into gross idolatry before their entrance into Canaan;” and so, in the prophecies against Ammon and Moab, the beginning and end of Israel in regard to Canaan are connected together. The punishment of Edom and the Philistines must point to the “re-establishment of the house of David.” In regard to Tyre Neteler expresses himself thus: “The command given to Israel to root out the Canaanites, but by them neglected to their destruction, God will execute on Tyre through Nebuchadnezzar;” and this command must stand in a noteworthy relation to the historical development of the last period of 800 years before Christ, in which “those to the west (Carthaginians, Greeks, Romans) brought a real advance, while those to the east (the Hamitic kingdoms of Ethiopia and Egypt, the Semitic kingdoms of Assyria and Chaldea, the Japhetic Medians and Persians) repeat the development of the two earlier periods in smaller measure, yet as if thereby the problem of the western circle should be solved.” He says: “If Israel, through the extirpation of the Canaanites, according to Numbers 36:6-9 (!), had entered into the place of the Ph�nicians, it would have formed the first member in the development of this period, and would have shown the right path to the Greek culture which came forth in the second third of it.” To retrieve as much as possible that which was neglected (! ?), “Nebuchadnezzar must subject the Hamitic Tyre, even to the pillars of Hercules, and unite the eastern circle to the monstrous Chaldean kingdom, so that the externally insignificant Israel might be set in the centre of this gigantic Semitic power, which extended its sway even over the Turanian tribes in the high north.” This contrast between the Semitic and Hamitic races (already occurring in the prophecy of Noah) must be of great importance for the understanding of the symbolical representation of Ezekiel in the prophecies relating to Tyre and Egypt. Upon the third group which Neteler distributes, and which reaches to Ezekiel 30:19, we learn that, first of all, in the prophecy against Sidon, “the second possession of the land is associated with the first, as in Ezekiel 20 the first deliverance from Egypt is made parallel with a deliverance in a higher sense.” “As Israel did not fully carry out the extirpation of the Canaanites, whose place, according to Numbers 33:54, it was their part to occupy, these were turned for them into thorns and briers. With the second possession, on the other hand, the servitude of Canaan, which was announced even by Noah, was after a sort realized, since the Canaanitish history becomes extinct. The second piece in this section, namely Ezekiel 29:1-16, connects the end of the first Israelitish sojourn in Canaan, brought about by Egypt’s iniquity, with the end of Egypt; and the humiliation of Egypt is such an elevation of Israel, that Christianity will not be under temptation to lean upon a decaying heathenism.” The forty years occurring at Ezekiel 29:11 sq. must not be distinguished from the forty years of Judah, for which the prophet had to lie forty days upon his right side; that is, as Neteler remarks on Ezekiel 4, “a symbolical designation of the time, reaching from the destruction of the temple to the return from exile, derived from the sojourn in Kadesh.” “The two first pieces, Ezekiel 28:20 to Ezekiel 29:16, set forth the world-historical ideas, which were to be realized by the introduction of Christianity, but give, as to the way and manner in which the realization should be prepared for, begun, and carried forward, no information—this being first introduced by the prophet in the third piece (Ezekiel 29:17-21). The might of Shem, through which God conquered Canaan in the world’s history, must also carry forward the work in regard to Egypt. In the interest of Israel, whose service to God stands in contrast to Canaanitish industry, God will turn the Semitic world-power against Egypt, by which Israel was compelled to do Canaanitish work, and establish for them, on account of their labour in respect to Canaan, claims for compensation, which God would render valid because of the bondage laid by Egypt on the Israelites. The booty which God took from Egypt after the conflict, on occasion of the first deliverance, was only a type of a later plundering, which in a preparatory manner was begun by Nebuchadnezzar, and after the second deliverance from Egypt, that is, after the redemption achieved by the sufferings of the Servant of God was realized, when all power in heaven and on earth was committed to the episcopate of the Church (!!). The consequence of this victory over Egypt (Ezekiel 30:1-19) is given in the form of a judgment upon Egypt, in which is delineated its desolation and the annihilation of its idols and yokes; but the sons also of the covenant - land are smitten by the judgment, which points to a fall that should take place among them.” The continuation of this Catholic-theological-historical explanation and interpretation of Ezekiel will be given in No. 9. 5. Cocceius remarks on Ezekiel 29:21 : “Evil Merodach gave Jehoiachin freedom, and the first place of honour among the kings. Farther, Daniel was great in the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar, and under the Persian dominion. Cyrus was called by God to give command to lead the people back, that they might rebuild the temple. Still higher grew the horn of Israel when they became free, and their priests assumed the diadem, as a sign of the freedom of the people, and the Israelites had become greater than their fathers, as announced in Deuteronomy 30:5. But most especially was it so, when out of David’s house the horn grew, which set the people free from all slavery, which subdued their enemies, and rendered the Gentiles subject to Israel, Psalms 132:13-18.” 6. The day of Jehovah, Kliefoth remarks, “is not judgment in one point of time and destruction over the whole heathen world;” and then he continues: “The day of Jehovah is a period of indefinite duration, in the course of which God will punish with judgment and destruction all heathen nations in succession, just as they have shown their hostility to the people of God, and He sees that their time has come. From this point of view, also, is the announcement always to be understood, that this day of Jehovah is at hand. The day continues so long, that it lasts till, in the final judgment, the whole world, in so far as hostile to God, shall be destroyed; but it constantly begins anew, when any particular people, on account of their malevolence manifested to the people of God, falls under the righteous doom of perdition. Hence the day of Jehovah upon the heathen nations has, in the several prophecies, a different terminus a quo, according as they refer to this or that kind of relations.” Only it must not be overlooked, that in Ezekiel 30:1 sq. not indeed Egypt alone is contemplated, but Egypt in its connection with heathen nations; and yet, that it is not the day of judgment upon all anti-theocratic powers that is to be understood, as already Hδvernick makes the prophet see this general idea obtaining realization; but as the time of Jerusalem was come, the time when judgment had begun at the house of God, so the time must now be near when this judgment of God shall go forth upon the heathen. Hengstenberg finds here the fundamental passage for Luke 21:24, and points to the overthrow of the Roman Empire,—the “mountain” which was to be cast into the sea after the fig-tree of the Jewish people was withered (Matthew 21.), the “mulberry-tree” which was to be plucked up and removed into the sea (Luke 2:7.). 7. As in the kingdom of Tyre, Ezekiel 28, allusion was made to a time of sacredness upon the holy mount of God, so there was also found there, by way of similitude, a bringing to remembrance of Eden, and especially of the garden of God. This retrospect of paradise furnishes the beau-ideal, the standard for the Old Testament world generally; hence with Assyria, and in connection therewith in reference to Egypt, which had not the same historical position as Tyre, it appropriately comes back again in Ezekiel 31. As in the New Testament all is measured with heaven, so in the Old Testament what is or was glorious upon earth is made to hold of Eden and paradise. 8. On the derivation of the word “Sheol” there confessedly prevails a great diversity of opinion. For the biblical idea, especially the signification of the word in the Old Testament, this only is to be learned from this matter of etymological controversy, that as well the derivation from ωָׁ ?ςַ ?μ, to be hollow (therefore for ωְׁ ?ςֹ ?μ), since it points to “hollowing,” and in so far to the grave, as the derivation which Hupfeld adopts from: “to sink down,” and: “to go apart from one another,” therefore: sinking down, depth, abyss, and: cleft, hollow, empty space—since the burying and the being in the sepulchre can be thereby expressed—both alike avail for the affirmation, that Sheol and the grave more or less run together. The derivation, on the other hand, from ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?μ to demand, expresses as to Sheol only what constitutes generally the power and manner of death to demand for itself with insatiable desire all living beings (comp. Isaiah 5:14; Habakkuk 2:5; Proverbs 27:20; Proverbs 30:16). As to form an infinitive verbal substantive, the use of the word belongs predominantly to the poetic language of the Old Testament, whence also is to be explained the circumstance that it never stands with the article. Sheol appears as the aggregate of all graves. Who could venture to deny this aspect of the matter, at least for the 31st and 32d chapters of Ezekiel? It is the universal grave, which calls down to itself all earthly life, how high soever it may have reached, however magnificent it may have been, however valiantly it may have fought. But much, also, as Sheol and the grave (αεψ) sometimes appear to approach (comp. also Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 14:15), to cover one another, it must still not be overlooked that the grave, more exactly considered, is only the entrance into Sheol (Psalms 16:10), which certainly, as it is commonly represented, keeps the hue of the grave, in generals as well as in particulars (ιψλϊιαεψ, Ezekiel 32:23); it is the carrying over of the grave to the future state (while the grave as such is still always something here). It is quite reconcilable with this representation when Sheol is conceived of as a locality, and indeed as a deep abyss, just as the standing form of speech: “to go down,” “to be thrown down,” is thence explained as equivalent to being consigned to the dead. The occasional poetic delineation of this future must only not be formally dogmatized into an actual under-world with gates, rivers, etc. (Job 38:17; Psalms 18:5 sq.) The going down of the company of Korah (Numbers 16:30) is often what is floating before the writer’s mind; and not so much the locality of Palestine, which was rich in grottoes and caverns, or the darkness of the Hebrew family tomb-vaults, the stillness of the Egyptian catacomb-world. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 31 1And it came to pass in the eleventh year, in the third [month], on the first of the month, that the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 2Son of man, say to Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, and to his tumult, To whom art thou like in thy 3greatness? Behold, Asshur [was] a cedar tree upon Lebanon, beautiful of foliage, and a shadowing thicket, and high of stature, and between the clouds was his 4top. Waters made him become great, the flood made him high, with its streams it went round about its planting, and it sent forth its canals to all the trees of 5the field. Therefore his stature became higher than all the trees of the field, and his branches became many [great], and his foliage-branches [boughs] became long, from many waters in his spreading himself forth. In his branches nested 6all the fowls of heaven, and under his boughs every living thing of the field 7brought forth, and in his shadow dwelt all the many nations. And he became beautiful in his greatness, in the length of his twigs [shoots], for his root was on 8many waters. Cedars darkened him not in the garden of God; cypresses were not like his branches, and plane trees were not like his foliage-branches [boughs]; 9all wood in the garden of God was not like him in his beauty. Beautiful had I made him in the multitude of his shoots; and all the trees of Eden, which were 10in the garden of God, envied him.—Therefore, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because thou becamest high in stature, and he gave his top even to between the 11clouds, and his heart raised itself in his height; Therefore will I give him into the hand of the mighty one of the heathen; he will do, do to him: in [on account of] 12his wickedness I drove him out. And strangers hewed him down, the violent ones of the heathen, and left him upon the mountains; and in all the valleys his shoots fell, and his foliage-branches [boughs] were broken in all hollows of the earth; and all the nations of the earth went down out of his shadow and left 13him. On his ruins all the fowls of heaven alight, and on his boughs is every living creature of the field. 14To the end that none of the trees of the waters become lofty in their stature, nor give their top up between the clouds, and that no drinkers of water should remain standing by themselves in their height; for they are all given to death, to the underground, among the children of men, to those who go down to the grave. 15Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, In the day of his going down to hell [sheol] I caused to mourn [I made a mourning]; I veiled on account of him the flood, and stayed its streams, and there were many waters held back; and I made Lebanon dark over him, and all the trees of the field sank in weakness over him. At the sound of his fall 16I made the heathen quake, in that I made him go down to hell with those that go down to the grave; and all the trees of Eden, the choice and good of Lebanon, all drinkers of water, comforted themselves in the underground. 17They also went down with him to hell, to be pierced through with the sword, namely, those who, his arm, dwelt in his shadow among the heathen 18nations. To whom, then, art thou like in glory and in greatness among the trees of Eden? And thou art cast down with the trees of Eden to the underground; in the midst of the uncircumcised shalt thou lie with those pierced through by the sword. This is Pharaoh and all his tumult. Sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 31:1. Sept.: μικτουμηνος— Ezekiel 31:2. … ὡμοιωσαςσεαυτον … ὑψεισου; Vulg. … similis factωs es— Ezekiel 31:3. ... κυπαρισσος … ἑγενετοἡἀρχηαὐτου Vulg. … et inter condensas frondes— Ezekiel 31:4. ... κυκλω̣τωνφυτωναὐτου—flumina ejus manabant in circuitu radicum ejus … ligna regionis.Ezekiel 31:5. Other readings βαδ ,βαδδ. Ezekiel 31:6. Vulg.: Cumque extendisset umbram suam, in … (Anoth. read.: ιָ ?ωְׁ ?αεּ) Ezekiel 31:7. Sept.; ... ἐντ.ὑψειαὑτουδιατοπλθος— Ezekiel 31:8. Κυπαρισσοιτοιαυταιοὐκἐγενηθησανἐντ. παραδεισωτ.Φεουκ. πιτυες—Vulg.: Cedrinon … altiores … abietes non adζquaverunt summitatem ejus—(Another read.: λτΰψϊιε or with α.) Ezekiel 31:9. Sept.: διατ.πληθοςτ.κλαδωναὐτου.Κ. ἐζηλωσαν … τηςτρυφηςτ. Θεου. Vulg.: quoniam speciosum feci … et multis condensisque frondibus … omnia ligna voluptatis— Ezekiel 31:10. ... ἐδωκκςτ.ἀρχηνσου … κ.εἰδονἐντω̣ὑψωθηναιαὐτον Vulg.: … sublimatus est … summitatem suam virentem atque condensam.Ezekiel 31:11. κ. παρεδωκααὐτον … ἀρχοντοςἐθνων, κ.ἐποιησεντ.ἀπωλειαναὐτου. (Other read: λψωςεΰιμ.) Ezekiel 31:14. Vulg.: Quam ob rem non elevabuntur … inter nemorosa atque frondosa. (Other read.: ΰֵ ?μιδν fortes eorum: sibi, super se, ςμιδν. For ΰμιεψγι, there is a reading ΰϊιΧ.) Ezekiel 31:15. Sept.: ... ἁδου,ἐπεστησαἐπʼ ? αὐτοντ.ἀβυσσν—induxi luctum, operui eum abysso—(Anoth. read.: ελμηιϊ.) Ezekiel 31:16. εἰςλακκονΚ.παρεχαλουναὐτον … τ.ξυλατηςτρυφηςκ.τ.ἐκλεκτα—qui descendebant in locum. Et consolata sunt … ligna voluptatis egregia et prζlara— Ezekiel 31:17. … ἐντραυματιαιςμαχαιρας, κ.τοσπερμααὐτουπαντεςοἱ … ἐνμεσωτ. ζωηςαὐτωνἀπωλοντο. Nam et … descendent … et brachium uniuscvjusque sedebit sub—(Another read.: ιֵ ?ωαε ,ιֵ ?ψγε.) Ezekiel 31:18. ὡμοιωθης; Καταβηθικ.καταβιβασθητι … ξυλωντηςτρυφης … κπαντ. πληφοςτηςἰσχυοςαὐτου—Cui assimilatus es, O inclyte atque sublimis inter ligna voluptatis? Ecce … cum lignis voluptatis— REMARKSEgypt (Pharaoh) and Assyria.The whole chapter is taken up with this prophetical allegory, which the indication of time in Ezekiel 31:1 places not quite two months later than Ezekiel 30:20 sq. (Schmieder: therefore one month and eight days before the conquest of Jerusalem). In accordance with the antithesis there, a highly poetical parallel now follows, which might work in a more powerful manner upon hearers and readers, as it was taken from the still fresh experience of his contemporaries; for in 606 Nineveh had been laid prostrate by the combined attack of the Babylonians and Medes, and the kingdom which had domineered in Asia above five centuries had reached its end. The year after that was the year of the battle at Carchemish; and thus had the fate of Assyria become palpable shortly before the calamity which was threatening Egypt. Comp. besides the juxtaposition of Assyria and Egypt elsewhere, Isaiah 7:18; Isaiah 27:13; Jeremiah 2:36; Hosea 12:2 [1]; Zechariah 10:10. Ezekiel 31:2. The commencement is made properly by the question which is addressed to Pharaoh and his tumult (δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο, see at Ezekiel 30:10; Ezekiel 29:19), in the answer to which the prophet sets forth a prognostication for himself and his people. Hengst.: “The matter has respect not to an opinion, but to a real resemblance.” Hitzig limits the reference to the “official Egypt,” being that “which made tumultuous noise in the land, which had something to say and to order; the governing classes and ranks (Isaiah 3:2-3), in contrast to the quiet people in the land (Psalms 35:20), who keep silence and obey.” According to Schmieder, the question calls for the answer: No one! “Thou art incomparable, alone of thy kind. This was also the feeling of Pharaoh Hophra. But Ezekiel,” etc.—πּ ?εֹ ?γֶ ?μ (along with λαεγ in Ezekiel 31:18), not = “strength,” but also not precisely: fancied greatness huge self-elation (Raschi), as at Isaiah 10:12 of Assyria, for Egypt’s very ancient culture already gave him still a real precedence, and in other respects also placed him before Assyria. Ezekiel 31:3-9. Assyria’s GloryEze_31:3. Behold, a call to attention, introducing the answer which the divine word has to give. Hengst.: “the future in a historical dress, as at Ezekiel 19 the history of Jehoahaz and Jehoiachim.”—ΰַ ?ωּׁ ?εּ ?ψ (comp. Ezekiel 27:6) is taken by Ewald for a definite kind of cedar, the highest of its kind; against which compare the convincing proof of Hitzig. Hδv. also justly remarks against the construction of the word, as an adjective, that the most distinguished characteristic for a cedar tree is the accompanying designation: upon Lebanon; comp. besides, Ezekiel 17:3. It is a common image for people of great might, princes. The Sept. renders ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?ζ by κυπαρισσος.—Because ηֹ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ, “thickness,” may signify a forest, Hengst. translates here (taking ξφμ as partic. Hiphil from φμμ), “shading the forest” or wood. The representation is carried out farther ςָ ?πָ ?σ, as well as by between the clouds, etc.; also by χεֹ ?ξָ ?δ (from χεν, “stature”) βְ ?αַ ?δּ.—Upon ςַ ?αֹ ?ϊִ ?ιν, see at Ezekiel 19:11; on φַ ?ξֶּ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, comp. Ezekiel 17:3. Ezekiel 31:4. Explanation of such growth.—What is said of the waters, that they made him become great, fits too well to the image of the cedar for one to be able to get something still better by a reference to the description of paradise (as Hδv.), or by bringing into account the situation of Nineveh, which was important for the history of Assyria, with the Tigris on the west, the Zabatos (Lykos) on the south, with its neighbouring stream Bumodus on the east, and the brook Khosr on the north.—Still more, the flood (not the rain: comp. Isaiah 44:14) contributed to the prosperity. The designation, therefore, previously, of the Lebanon was epitheton ornans. ϊְּ ?δεֹ ?ν is the water-treasure in the depths pouring itself forth in springs, etc. Hitzig: image of the multitude of men flowing together into Assyria, on the basis of which the political power rose. More correctly Hengst.: “the water and the flood denote what the world calls good fortune, the divine blessing.”—ΰֶ ?ϊΞ, either: with, or taken accusatively: what concerns.—Hence ϊδεν is here kept feminine; the streams are those of the flood, and the masculine δֹ ?μְ ?κְ, which is likewise to be referred to the flood, is justified after this manner, that ϊδεν can also be used as a masculine; and the masculine in the present case, as Hengst. remarks, is the more suitable, being preceded by ξιν.—The planting (Ezekiel 17:7) can scarcely be referred, with Hengst., through the fem. ξθςָ ?δּ, to Assyria as a tree; but is conceived of with reference to the flood, whether it might be because this had a share in the prosperity spoken of, or, which the ραιαϊδμκ recommends, because it streams around this cedar-planting, the place on which it grows. The ϊְּ ?ςָ ?μεֹ ?ϊ, first coming into consideration in the second line, are to be understood of the overflowings of the water-fulness that rises up (ςμδ), just as the all trees of the field are distinguished from the cedar tree described; and this, in Ezekiel 31:5, is raised into prominence over against them. Hengst. takes the subjects to be designated by the expression; Hitzig applies it to other lands and princes. Of the inhabitants of Egypt we are as little to think as, with Rosenmόller, of the Nile. Ezekiel 31:5. ςַ ?μΞλֵּ ?ο, from his overflow of water his greater height than all the trees finds its explanation, Ezekiel 19:11 (βαδΰ, Aram, for βαδδ)—(ρψςτδ, Aram. for ρςτδ, with ψ inserted).—τְ ?ΰψֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε, under which must here especially be understood the fruit-bearing ones, Ezekiel 17:6.—αְּ ?ωַׁ ?μְּ ?ηεֹ, Hengst.: “because in his time of shooting he had many waters.” [Hδv.: “at his sending forth, namely, the twigs on all sides.” Tautology. Vulg. connects it with Ezekiel 31:6. Ezekiel 31:6. Ezekiel 17:23. The closing words give the signification of the figure (Daniel 4:9). “Bird” and “living thing,” in contrast to domestic creatures, the Assyrians themselves. The imperfect ιֵ ?ωׁ ?αεּ expresses, in contradistinction to the preceding perfects, the incomplete, the continuous, the progressive. [Ewald: “sat gladly all the many,” etc.]—λμΞβειρψαιν, Bunsen: all great peoples (?); Keil: all sorts of great nations; Rosenm.: the entirety of many peoples. Ezekiel 31:7. α, through, on account of.—Ezekiel 17:6. Ezekiel 31:8 carries still higher the pre-eminent glory brought prominently out in Ezekiel 31:5, through the diversified comparison and the designation “in the garden of God,” on which comp. Ezekiel 28:12. That μֹ ?ΰΞςְַ ?ξָ ?ξֻ ?ηεּ (to “darken” = excel) separates this nearer designation from ΰψζιν, is very impressive (Hδv.): even such as were found in paradise. Hitzig: “in an eminent sense, planted by God, Genesis 2:9; Numbers 24:6.” What still has not been expressed is more distinctly indicated in Ezekiel 31:9, that what God had done to Assyria even transcended the trees of paradise, therefore the eminent divine planting was even more marked in the case of Assyria. The paradise-creation was, after all, only nature, symbolizing grace, consequently might be the similitude for a state-creation, without, however, being like the latter, as little as also the most glorious trees themselves. Every tree, namely in this, in a natural respect, so that the tree of life and the tree of knowledge (Genesis 2.), as being of a spiritual nature, are exempted, and the simply parabolical allusion to Eden and to the garden of paradise is clear. [Hengst. makes the totality of the great men of the earth as stately trees in the garden of God as a counterpart of paradise, since all human greatness has its origin in God. Klief. (Raschi) regards the garden of God directly as “the world-planting,” since all peoples and kingdoms of the world have been planted as trees by God. Grot.: in Babylonia, where formerly paradise stood. Osiander: no king of the people of God was like him!]—[“This parabolical representation, as formerly in the case of Tyre, Ezekiel 28 combines the historical with the figurative. While the cedar that represents the king of Babylon is called a cedar of Lebanon, it is presently transferred in the prophet’s imagination to the land of primeval beauty and perfection, the Eden in which was the garden that God had planted. There this cedar is described as growing and flourishing, till it overtopped in magnificence and beauty all the trees around it. … But it was only that it might afford another specimen of that instability and transitoriness which belong to all on earth, when the good bestowed by Heaven is abused to purposes of selfishness, and the creature begins to thrust himself into the place of his Creator.”—P. F.] Ezekiel 31:9. This “beauty” is here explained as having been made by God, as a historical creation act (ςωιϊιε), and expresses, while at the same time bringing the similitude to a close, the impression which the striking elevation of the Assyrian grandeur was fitted to produce.—That the trees of Eden, as in the larger sense they are called (in respect to local position), should be designated as those which belonged to the garden of God, distinguishes them still more; it is an ascension. Kliefoth takes “trees of Eden” freely, as equivalent to “trees of beauty,” lovely trees. That more is meant by the expression, while still paradise is thought of merely in the way of similitude, appears from Ezekiel 31:16. Ezekiel 31:10-14. The Judgment executed on Assyria. Ezekiel 31:10. This verse transfers us into the midst of the things already in fact brought to pass. We might render λδΰξψ: thus said to him, etc.—μλο: He who made the Assyrian so beautiful, even He, announced to him the overthrow that should take place, because of what he made out of himself.—The whole passage expresses the cause of the judgment of Jehovah upon Assyria, namely, that with such a glory from God (Ezekiel 31:5; Ezekiel 31:3) the position of the heart was not in correspondence; there was not humility in all the greatness, but high-mindedness on account of it. The commencing address, Thou, in the life-like character of the representation, becomes changed into a declaration respecting him—and he.—εְ ?ψָ ?νΧ, Deuteronomy 8:14. Only in conformity with the gift, not in accordance with the grace. Comp. Ezekiel 31:14. Ezekiel 31:11. Here the sentence of judgment, as just going to be pronounced for the first time, is, by the use of the imperfect, placed more distinctly before us. Hengst: “which was the more suitable, as the like in Egypt was shortly to be repeated.”—ΰֵ ?μπּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν is Nebuchadnezzar, “the mighty” (ΰεּ ?μ), not God. [Hitzig: ΰַ ?ιִ ?μ, ram, for prince, champion, under which Cyaxares is to be thought of.]—What he will do to him discovers itself in what follows; it will be nothing but doing; for Asshur it remained merely to suffer.—βֵּ ?ψַ ?ωְׁ ?ϊִּ ?ιδεּ Piel, with reference to his paradisiacal glory (Genesis 3:24). The perfect agrees with the quieter mode of speech. Ezekiel 31:12. As what was said last has taken place, there is now by means of the historical tenses a narration; consequently the execution of the pronounced judgment carried out. (Others make it future, with application now to Egypt, now to Assyria.)—Ezekiel 30:12; Ezekiel 30:11.—πָ ?θַ ?ωׁ is: “to let go,” therefore either: to let him lie (Hengst.), or: to push away, to throw down (Ezekiel 29:5). Throwing down is already indicated in the hewing, and is expressed through the “falling;” and on the other hand, “the leaving” is again resumed at the close, while it is extended to “all peoples.” The “mountains” prepare for the “valleys,” and the “falling,” the “being broken” in all hollows (Ezekiel 6:3). Still, in its overthrow, the greatness as well as lofty elevation of this cedar tree is vividly displayed.—εַ ?ιֵ ?ψְ ?γεּ abides closely by the image, according to Ezekiel 31:6, partly of birds which had nested in its branches, partly also of beasts which had brought forth under its boughs, which, according to Ezekiel 31:12, had its place on the mountains, so that in both respects the “going down out of his shadow” is clear, and there is no need, with Hitzig, to read εַ ?ιִּ ?γְּ ?γεּ, from πγγ, to fly, for which ςַ ?ξִּ ?ιν would otherwise present no obstacle; but here, as at Ezekiel 31:6, the reality at the close breaks through the figure. Ezekiel 31:13. If ξִ ?χּ ?εֹ ?μξַ ?τַּ ?μְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ in Ezekiel 31:16 refers to ςַ ?μΞξַ ?τַּ ?μְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ here (Ezekiel 26:15; Ezekiel 26:18; Ezekiel 27:27), there is no necessity, with Raschi, Kimchi, and later expositors, to think of the substitution of the image of a corpse (carcase, Judges 14:8), and of eagles, ravens, and other beasts of prey which rend and gnaw the members of Assyria, signified by his boughs (Hitzig); but ξַ ?τֶּ ?μֶ ?ϊ, from πτμ, is with Gesen. simply: the fallen or hewed-down stem, which is, as it were, a living ruin (Hengst.).—ιִ ?ωְׁ ?λְּ ?πεּ, otherwise than at Ezekiel 17:23, as is shown also by the immediately following and on his boughs is; since those who had nested and brought forth there (Ezekiel 31:6) now betook themselves away from him, taking, perhaps, whatever they could of his fruit, reaping the greatest possible advantage from the mighty catastrophe. Ezekiel 31:14, by way of conclusion, expresses the divine intention, the practical aim, the moral, and that with respect to Egypt. To the end that (since Ezekiel 31:12-13 may be regarded as parenthetical expansions) can be connected with Ezekiel 31:11.—ςֲ ?φֵ ?ιΞξַ ?ιִ ?ν signifies primarily: those standing on the waters, what afterwards is more nearly indicated by ωֹׁ ?ϊֵ ?ιξַ ?ιִ ?ν (ωϊδ, just as Sanscr. “padapa,” designating the tree as drinking with its foot, through its root): those which attain to height and glory from the position granted to them by God—of which description was Egypt, from its relation to the Nile (Ezekiel 29). Hengst.: “the great of the earth, to whom God gives joyful prosperity.”—Comp. on Ezekiel 31:10. As there: “and his heart raised itself,” etc., so it is said here: εְ ?μֹ ?ΰΞιַ ?ςֲ ?ξְ ?γεּ ΰֵ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν, therefore to be understood of self-assumption, as in Sept. ΰֵ ?μιδν instead of ΰֲ ?μιδιν is no hindrance; as is also Keil’s ultimate conclusion, since ΰֵ ?μֵ ?ιπεּ is common, and ΰֵ ?μֵ ?ιξεֹ poetic, Psalms 2:5.—[Other expositions: “and their strong ones do not continue in their high-mindedness all water-drinkers”; or, “and their oaks (terebinths, Isaiah 61:3) do not stand there (remain standing) in their elevation, all,” etc. Rosenmόller: “and stand not to them, that is, allied to them in their height, where they had grown so high, all, namely, the other water-drinkers, that is, powerful and rich princes.” Klief.: “and that henceforth among all their strong trees that drink water no one may remain in his height.” Ewald: “and no water-drinkers assail (! !) their gods in their pride” (!), which he afterwards more particularly explains: So that trees, beings who might raise themselves ever so high, are still always dependent on their nourishment, and cannot live of themselves in a spirit of contempt toward their Creator, nor, again, arrogantly war with their superior (their Creators, gods), since they still are all destined to go down as common men to the lower world.] Comp. Ezekiel 26:20. They could give themselves nothing, since they themselves were given away, as such were already appointed; therefore also could not remain standing where they were standing, and assumed the airs of continuing to stand, but must go down to the lower world, therefore be brought low, be humiliated, though not before humble, come to stand on a footing with the children of men. The expression: among the children of men, is to be regarded as parallel with: given to death; and: to those who go down to the grave, with: to the underground. Those that go down, men continually dying, even the highest; or, “those that have gone down,” as Ewald: those sunk into the grave. Ezekiel 31:15-18. The Impression and Close. As at Ezekiel 26:15 sq. Ezekiel 31:15. (ψֶ ?γֶ ?ϊ, inf. constr. of ιִ ?ψγ) The connection is made with what immediately precedes, so that the reference is not (as Hitzig) to Ezekiel 31:13. Upon ωְׁ ?ΰֹ ?μ, see Doct. Reflect.—The “mourning” is immediately defined more nearly without λִּ ?ρֵּ ?ϊִ ?ι being asyndetically joined to it, as Hδv., Ewald, Hengst.: “to cover with mourning,” “to veil in mourning,” “I made it veil itself for mourning.” The mourning which Jehovah effects through His judgment upon Assyria touches primarily the flood, in thorough accord with Ezekiel 31:4, as that which in the first line contributed to the cedar its increase. Therefore ςָ ?μָ ?ιε, “on his account.” That the flood was covered upon him, as the Syriac, Arab., and Vulg., is at least not indicated in what precedes (Ezekiel 31:12). Comp. on the contrary, Ezekiel 26:19. We must (it was thought) suppose a historical reference, since the siege of Nineveh was protracted to two years, while in the spring of the third year, in consequence of a sudden swell in the Tigris, raised by excessive falls of rain, the mighty flood in one night tore down the wall next the stream, and so laid open a wide breach to the enemy (Duncker, 1. p. 806; Nahum 1:8; Nahum 2:7 [6]). However, in this passage the discourse is not properly of the overthrow of Assyria in process of accomplishment, Ezekiel 31:15 giving no representation of the judgment itself, as Hδv. maintains,—but of the impression of the same as one already accomplished; and λρδ as “to veil” is, even without ωַׂ ?χ, perfectly intelligible, but how it is meant in respect to the flood is made sufficiently plain by the εָ ?ΰֶ ?ξְ ?πַ ?ςΧ (not future). Hitzig: “In mourning, people commonly draw themselves in and hold back, the loose garment is changed into the narrow ωχ; and so the flood also withdraws its waters into itself, which it had hitherto joyfully poured forth and spread abroad”—which Hitzig applies to the influx of people come to a standstill. Theodoret: to the refusal of tribute. Comp. on the figure, Ezekiel 31:4. ξַ ?ιִ ?ρψַ ?αִּ ?ιν points back to Ezekiel 31:5-7.—The mourning produced by Jehovah next affects Lebanon (comp. Ezekiel 31:3), therefore the height as well as the depth. ΰַ ?χְ ?γִ ?ψςָ ?μָ ?ιε, parallel with λρϊιςμιε, Hiphil from: to be “dark,” “black,” therefore: to darken, as much as: to make sad, to cause to mourn. Lebanon is otherwise the white mountain. [According to Hitzig, the other princes must be indicated by this; according to Hengst., the kingdoms of the heathen.]—The trees of the field (Ezekiel 31:4) are the third party whom the mourning affects, which is therefore also represented as far and near, ςָ ?μָ ?σ, in Pual, “to be covered;” transferred to the consciousness: to become powerless. ςֻ ?μְ ?τֶּ ?δ has been explained as a verbal from Pual with derivative ֶ ?—δ, “languishing,” or instead of ςֻ ?μְּ ?τָ ?δ, fem. of the preterite Pual, since from the connection a perfect seems to be required (Ewald), the plural construed with the feminine singular.—Keil, as Umbreit, makes all nature (?) be painfully moved by Assyria’s fall, whereas the impression of this fall is merely kept in the figurative style of Eze 31:3-4. Ezekiel 31:16. Ezekiel 26:15. Since that is the same expression (ξτμϊε) as in Ezekiel 31:13, and in Ezekiel 31:15 his going down was spoken of, so we are carried back to Ezekiel 31:12. The “going down of the peoples out of his shadow” in that passage is explained; at the same time, however, the εִ ?γְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ of Ezekiel 31:15 is comprised in the αְּ ?δεֹ ?ψִ ?γִ ?ε, and referred to the Sheol.—Now, according as εַ ?ιִ ?πָּ ?ηְ ?ξεּ is translated “comforted themselves,” as reflexive of Piel, since here still another feeling than in Ezekiel 31:15 may be expressed, or the Niphal “and they sighed” is what is to be understood (Ewald, Hengst.), we have either a distinction between the lower world and the trembling people of the upper world, or the two are parallel the one to the other. For the first interpretation speaks the comparison of Isaiah 14. Hitzig understands by the trees of Eden princes carried down with Assyria; in particular the Assyrian war-princes, who feel themselves comforted because the much more powerful one for whose cause they have fallen, their murderer, shares their fate; while Hengst. more correctly understands by them the former great ones of the earth, those who resembled the trees of paradise in glory. As paradise was itself a thing of the past, those who were likened to the trees of its region were contemplated as now existing in the realms of the dead. The allegorical character of the expression is proved by the exegesis: the choice and good. Besides, comp. at Ezekiel 31:14. Ezekiel 31:17. They also are not those last named in Ezekiel 31:16, but the parties presently going to be described more closely—already, indeed, indicated in Ezekiel 31:16 as those with whom Jehovah made Assyria go down to hell (ΰϊ, not ΰμ, as in Ezekiel 31:14). “And his arm” defines more exactly the “they also” as the subject of “the going down,”—his help, his assistant, the vassals, subject-kings, commanders, and such like, to whom the words: who dwelt in his shadow among the heathen, very well suit, and not less that they are associated with those pierced through with the sword. Assyria was not only a political, but also a military power among the nations. [If δֵ ?ν must apply to “all the trees of Eden” in Ezekiel 31:16, so must “with him” be made equal to “not less than he,” just as Hengst., looking away from simultaneousness, views them as already in Sheol when Assyria arrives there. Therefore: they also, like him, went down before, etc. Ewald reads with the Sept.: ζַ ?ψְ ?ςεֹ, “and his seed” (!).] >Ezekiel 31:18. This verse gives the conclusion, pointing back to Ezekiel 31:2; it makes the application to Pharaoh, who is the party addressed.—λָּ ?λָ ?δ, Hitzig: “in such a fashion, in circumstances of such a kind,” when this cedar after such a manner went down. The reference among the trees belongs to the to whom—Comp. at Ezekiel 28:10. From this passage, also, there appears to emerge the opposite of what is commonly found in it, viz. that the Egyptians appear as uncircumcised with our prophet. According to Herodotus, the practice of circumcision was actually of Egyptian origin. Origen confines it to the priesthood among the Egyptians. The kings certainly were not uncircumcised; so the vis of our passage shines clearly out: This is Pharaoh, sq. Hitzig: so shall it happen to Pharaoh. δεΰ is the predicate. 1. Although the prophecy in Ezekiel 29 is of a general character, yet by the reference to Nebuchadnezzar, and especially from Ezekiel 29:17 onwards, it gets a more specific character. We have therefore to hold by a fulfilment through the Chaldeans, and, indeed, in connection with what is said respecting Tyre. Apart from the circumstance that we have here to do with a prophet of God, we could not judge otherwise simply on this account, that a little reflection upon the inevitable disgrace of such a self-deception as would have been the case in respect to Tyre must alone have kept Ezekiel—instead of merely suppressing the prophecy in question while the book was still in his own hand—from wishing now to compensate for the mistake by awakening like inconsiderate and rash expectations concerning Nebuchadnezzar in regard to Egypt. For one to whom the prophet is nothing but a writer must still at least credit him with this much of worldly prudence in respect to his literary honour. And if Ezekiel must needs prophesy ex eventu (as Hitzig, for example, conceives), then prophecies like those contained in Ezekiel 26 and some following ones are purely unthinkable, so far as they remained unfulfilled; since it cannot but be supposed, that when our prophet closed his book, matters must have stood before him widely different from what they are presented in his prophecy. The “dogmatic criticism,” however, cannot once admit now that a prophecy has been fulfilled,—a limitation of the standpoint which is not improved by the circumstance that the truth of the divine word (2 Peter 1:21) is made dependent on the statements or the silence of profane writers, and even of such as have given notoriously imperfect reports. The false prophet, he whose word did not come to pass, has by God’s word (Deuteronomy 18:22) been as clearly as possible excluded from the canon. 2. The reward for work, which, as Hitzig rightly enough says, had still to be given to Nebuchadnezzar, raises no question as to the conquest and, as could not fail to happen after a thirteen years’ siege, the destruction of Tyre. If the booty might have been thought of for the army, for Nebuchadnezzar it is necessary to think of Egypt. The song of triumph demanded by Hitzig for the fulfilment of the prophecy against Tyre is the double lamentation which we find in Ezekiel 27, 28. Every one has his peculiar manner. But as regards the so-called “historical witnesses,” who should speak the decisive word on the fulfilment or non-fulfilment particularly of the prophecy of Ezekiel in respect to Egypt, they are “the Greek historians, at the head of whom stands Herodotus, and they know absolutely nothing of a Chaldean invasion of Egypt—nay, their narration is opposed to anything of the kind” (Hitzig). This is imposing; let us reflect, however, that Herodotus had also learned nothing from his Egyptian informants of the defeat at Carchemish. We need only mention farther, that this Greek historian himself reproaches the priests of Egypt, and precisely in regard to this particular time, with embellishing the history of their country. Now, according to Herodotus, Pharaoh Hophra—in consequence of the defeat which his army sustained from the Cyrenians, against whom it was to have rendered help to the Libyans, and of the revolt which in consequence thereof, and of the foreign mercenary troops retained in Egypt, broke forth on the part of the Egyptian warrior-class against Amasis, who, instead of bringing back the rebels to obedience, suffered himself to be proclaimed king by them—lost freedom and his throne, and by the infuriated people was even murdered. Tholuck, who, “if the cattle with the ark of the Lord should once turn aside, would not obstinately drive forward,” remarks that as a witness Herodotus alone comes into consideration; before whom, however, the testimony of Ezekiel, himself a contemporary of the events, has no need to be abashed. “If Herodotus readily received intelligence of the prosperous battle fought by Necho at Megiddo, but none respecting the much more important defeat sustained by him on the Euphrates from the Chaldeans, should it be thought strange if the priests observed silence also regarding the irruption of the Chaldeans into their own land? yea, if the miserable end which Hophra suffered through the foreign conqueror should have been rather represented by them as the deed of his own people?” (So also Rawlinson’s Herod. B. ii. appen. c. 8.) With a fair appreciation of the historical representation of Herodotus, the cause there assigned, especially the revolution among the warrior-class of Egypt, might suffice for the overthrow of Hophra. Yet the hatred of the Egyptian people, not only expressed in Herodotus, but confirmed by monumental evidence (Rossellini points in this connection to a by-name of Hophra on the monuments: “Remesto”)—such a hatred as is described in Herodotus toward Hophra (ii. 161–169), manifested in respect to a native ruler, is scarcely to be explained from what is stated, if it did not come into some sort of connection with a Chaldean invasion of Egypt, whereby the haughtiness of Hophra might well appear all the more hateful to the Egyptian people, as the misery of the land and the inhabitants, occasioned by him, stood in sharpest contrast to the previous prosperity and splendour. The grudge of the Egyptian warrior-class against the foreign mercenaries could not be of such moment as some have supposed, since even Amasis, who thereafter held possession of the throne till his death (forty-four years), and was succeeded in it by his son, took lonians for his bodyguard, and generally granted to the Greeks still greater favour and privileges than his predecessor. Besides, as generally held, there is also the outline of the prophecy against Egypt in Ezekiel 29, which exhibits a distinction between Ezekiel 29:6 sq. and Ezekiel 29:4 sq.—in the one, the sword constitutes the figure (Ezekiel 29:8); in the other, overthrow with reference to the wilderness. Especially if Hitzig’s interpretation of “the fish” (Ezekiel 29:4) as denoting Pharaoh’s men of war is accepted, and under “the wilderness” there is couched an allusion to Libya, what is said in Ezekiel 29:4 sq. might be explained by the narration which is reproduced by Herodotus, and Ezekiel 29:6 sq. would, with the sword of Nebuchadnezzar, be such a supplementing as the conquest of Tyre to the siege of that city, also given elsewhere. Out of the miserable condition in which Hophra perished, Amasis would then have raised Egypt. Anyhow, as Tholuck brings out, the death of Hophra falls exactly into the time in which the occupation of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar must have occurred; and thus the position of matters approaches to that which is wont to be extracted from Josephus in confirmation of our prophecy—contr. Ap. i. 19. It is there stated that Berosus reports of the Babylonian (Nebuchadnezzar) that he “conquered Egypt, Syria, Ph�nicia,” etc. Again, in Ezekiel 20, he states that Megasthenes placed Nebuchadnezzar above Hercules, since he had subjected to himself a great part of Libya and Iberia (comp. Antiq. x. 11. 1, and Strabo xv. 1. 6; see also Hδv. Comm. p. 435, against Hitzig’s remarks). In the 10th book of the Antiq. Ezekiel 9:7, Josephus expresses himself to this effect, that “in the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, he made an expedition against C�lesyria; and when he had got possession of it, he made war against the Ammonites and Moabites; and when he had brought these nations into subjection, he fell upon Egypt in order to overthrow it, and did indeed slay the king who then reigned, but set up another; after which he took those Jews that were there captive, and brought them to Babylon,” etc. The ten years’ time, which Hitzig doubts as the period of the earlier warlike expeditions, is maintained by Tholuck. The fifth year after the taking of Jerusalem would be 581; the thirteen years’ siege of Tyre would fall into the period 586–572 or 573. For the different actions which were in part parallel as to time, we have only to suppose various divisions of the army employed, so that the whole might of Nebuchadnezzar did not at the same time lie before Tyre. The forty years of the Egyptian oppression, Tholuck, like Niebuhr, extends over the entire space that lies between the disaster at Carchemish and the overthrow of Hophra (thirty-six years), “during which Egypt, through the continued and in great part unfortunate warlike enterprises of Hophra, must have been much depopulated and extremely weakened, till at length the inroad of the Chaldeans consummated the oppression.” Tholuck thinks that, “as the prophets in the beginning of the fulfilment comprehended the future (Jeremiah 13:18; Ezekiel 30:24), in the last and completed fulfilment they also comprehended the earlier incomplete ones.” The symbolical explanation of the forty years is not thereby denied (see the exposition). The worth of the statements of Josephus may be questioned, as is done by Hitzig; but for the relation of profane history to our prophecy, it suffices that Hophra miserably perished (Ezekiel 29:4 sq.; Jeremiah 44:30 sq.), and that Egypt again revived, as took place under Amasis, although as a kingdom it was fit to be compared neither with its ancient glory nor with other great monarchies (Ezekiel 29:13 sq.). As regards the resuscitation of Egypt, Duncker mentions that, according to a return of the priests, it then reckoned 20,000 country towns and cities (Herzog’s Realencyc. 1 p. 150), though it was “the last period of Egypt’s glory;” and Lepsius says of the same, that Egypt succumbed to the first pressure of the Persian power, and remained from 525 to 504 a Persian province; that afterwards it became again for a short time independent, until in 340 it was reconquered by the Persians, and in 332 fell under Alexander the Great, etc. 3. Upon the importance of Egypt for the revenge of Nebuchadnezzar, see the exposition of Eze 29:18. Also generally for the Chaldean policy the transition to Egypt is rendered plain to us from Ezekiel 29:17 sq. (Hδv.: “if Nebuchadnezzar would make the possession of Ph�nicia once for all sure, Egypt must be completely broken.”) Of the importance of Egypt by itself, its characteristic importance, some notice has already been taken, toward the close of the introductory remarks to Ezekiel 25; as also of the distinction, indicated with correct feeling by Keil, between Egypt and the other nations mentioned by Ezekiel. But what Egypt signifies in its connection here, this must be discerned from its relation to Israel. It is quite true that the charge laid against Ammon, Moab, etc., also against Tyre, for spiteful joy, hostility, envy toward Israel, is not mentioned in respect to Pharaoh and Egypt. It may be said that Egypt’s guilt in regard to Israel was that rather of a false, treacherous friendship. If, on the other hand, the excess of proud self-sufficiency must be regarded as the characteristic of Egypt, the same sort of self-elation meets us in the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28); and in this respect Tyre formed a fitting transition-point to Egypt. The distinction between Tyre and Egypt might perhaps be found in this, that while in particular the kingdom of Tyre had had its time of sacred splendour and past greatness, as we have seen, in its former connection with the kingdom of David, Egypt on its part acquired importance on account of the sojournings of the pilgrim-fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and still more on account of the formation of their descendants into a people. Above all, the idea of redemption was associated with the land of Egypt. Here, therefore, the inverse relation holds good: Tyre has gone with Israel to school; Israel, on the other hand, was at school in Egypt, as was evidenced in manifold agreements and contrasts exhibited in their peculiarity as a people, without our needing on that account to ride off on the Spencerian principle [namely, of a servile borrowing from the institutions of Egypt]. More than from anything else, may be understood from Israel’s reminiscences as a people, and the impress of Egyptian style and manner even upon their sacred things, their abiding sympathetic turning back toward Egypt. That Israel could not let Egypt go out of sight had its root in human nature; we must learn even from the children of this world (Luke 2:6). But it had also its dangerous side. It was Israel’s worldliness, relapse, since Israel had been delivered by Jehovah from this world, and Jehovah had through Moses threatened them in connection with Egypt with the greatest evils (Deuteronomy 28:68). We have tribulation in the world, and we may have fear before the world; such fear, however, may be salutary in its operation. But dangerous is the stay that is sought in Egypt, trust and confidence therein. In this respect Egypt is designated a remembrancer of iniquity (Ezekiel 29:16), since for Israel it had, and not as of yesterday, but from of old (comp. also Ezekiel 16:26; Ezekiel 23:8; Ezekiel 23:19), the fatal significance of a pride which resists Jehovah and leads away from Him, of a consciousness of worldly power, which amid the characteristic Pharaonic arrogance expressed itself just as distinctly (Ezekiel 29:3; Ezekiel 29:9) as in Exodus 5:2, and had this the more seductively, as a self-conscious abiding worldly power is in fact fitted to impose on people. Friendship with Egypt is the most contemptuous relation in which Israel can be thought of, on account of the indifference which it necessarily implied on the part of the Israelitish people not only in regard to their former house of bondage, but also to the mighty deliverance obtained from it, and generally in what concerned their relation to Jehovah, on whom, as their own and their fathers’ God, they had been thrown from their state of childhood. To make account of this specific historical position in respect to each other, according to which the growth, bloom, and decay of Israel were closely interwoven with Egypt, the prophecy of Ezekiel “dwells at greater length on Egypt than on the other nations” (Hδv.). Still more, however, it serves to explain the representation of the judgment upon Egypt as strikingly parallel with that on Israel, and to the last carried out (comp. Ezekiel 29:5; Ezekiel 29:9 sq., 12, 13, etc.). Not less remarkable, because singular, is the prospect and declaration in regard to the resuscitation of Egypt, and of it alone, which have been introduced into the prediction of our prophet; by this also is Egypt quite expressly kept parallel with Israel. The reminiscence which brings up Egypt so distinctly is not simply that of the house of bondage, or of iniquity, but it is Joseph’s post of honour, and the corn granaries of Jacob, together with his family. Comp. also Deuteronomy 23:7. 4. The interpretation of Neteler strikes out what is certainly a quite different path, strikingly reminding one of Cocceius, only with a specially Catholic tendency. According to him, the prophecies against the foreign nations constitute four groups, each of which contains four pieces: the first, Ezekiel 25; the second, the overthrow of the Canaanitish culture - development, standing in contrast to the higher calling of Jerusalem, and reaching its culmination in Tyre. The prophecy against Sidon he severs from Tyre, in the interest of this fourfold division; it belongs to the Egyptian group, inasmuch as “Sidon’s bloom falls into the time in which Egypt was the bearer of the Hamitic power and culture,” and “the Sidonian development was a shoot of the Hamitic-Egyptian.” The promises for Israel in this third section (Ezekiel 28:20 to Ezekiel 30:19) must stand parallel with those of the same kind in the first group, wherein punishment is threatened to the four nations with reference to Israel; as the first group, “through Ezekiel 21 (Ammon), is placed in connection with the first destruction of Jerusalem,” so “the third stands, through the opening of the mouth which occurs in it, in closer relation to the symbol of the second destruction of Jerusalem.” The four last prophecies against Egypt are “mere symbols,” according to Neteler. As Ammon “drove the surviving remnant, after the destruction of Jerusalem, out of Judea,” so had “Moab decoyed Israel into gross idolatry before their entrance into Canaan;” and so, in the prophecies against Ammon and Moab, the beginning and end of Israel in regard to Canaan are connected together. The punishment of Edom and the Philistines must point to the “re-establishment of the house of David.” In regard to Tyre Neteler expresses himself thus: “The command given to Israel to root out the Canaanites, but by them neglected to their destruction, God will execute on Tyre through Nebuchadnezzar;” and this command must stand in a noteworthy relation to the historical development of the last period of 800 years before Christ, in which “those to the west (Carthaginians, Greeks, Romans) brought a real advance, while those to the east (the Hamitic kingdoms of Ethiopia and Egypt, the Semitic kingdoms of Assyria and Chaldea, the Japhetic Medians and Persians) repeat the development of the two earlier periods in smaller measure, yet as if thereby the problem of the western circle should be solved.” He says: “If Israel, through the extirpation of the Canaanites, according to Numbers 36:6-9 (!), had entered into the place of the Ph�nicians, it would have formed the first member in the development of this period, and would have shown the right path to the Greek culture which came forth in the second third of it.” To retrieve as much as possible that which was neglected (! ?), “Nebuchadnezzar must subject the Hamitic Tyre, even to the pillars of Hercules, and unite the eastern circle to the monstrous Chaldean kingdom, so that the externally insignificant Israel might be set in the centre of this gigantic Semitic power, which extended its sway even over the Turanian tribes in the high north.” This contrast between the Semitic and Hamitic races (already occurring in the prophecy of Noah) must be of great importance for the understanding of the symbolical representation of Ezekiel in the prophecies relating to Tyre and Egypt. Upon the third group which Neteler distributes, and which reaches to Ezekiel 30:19, we learn that, first of all, in the prophecy against Sidon, “the second possession of the land is associated with the first, as in Ezekiel 20 the first deliverance from Egypt is made parallel with a deliverance in a higher sense.” “As Israel did not fully carry out the extirpation of the Canaanites, whose place, according to Numbers 33:54, it was their part to occupy, these were turned for them into thorns and briers. With the second possession, on the other hand, the servitude of Canaan, which was announced even by Noah, was after a sort realized, since the Canaanitish history becomes extinct. The second piece in this section, namely Ezekiel 29:1-16, connects the end of the first Israelitish sojourn in Canaan, brought about by Egypt’s iniquity, with the end of Egypt; and the humiliation of Egypt is such an elevation of Israel, that Christianity will not be under temptation to lean upon a decaying heathenism.” The forty years occurring at Ezekiel 29:11 sq. must not be distinguished from the forty years of Judah, for which the prophet had to lie forty days upon his right side; that is, as Neteler remarks on Ezekiel 4, “a symbolical designation of the time, reaching from the destruction of the temple to the return from exile, derived from the sojourn in Kadesh.” “The two first pieces, Ezekiel 28:20 to Ezekiel 29:16, set forth the world-historical ideas, which were to be realized by the introduction of Christianity, but give, as to the way and manner in which the realization should be prepared for, begun, and carried forward, no information—this being first introduced by the prophet in the third piece (Ezekiel 29:17-21). The might of Shem, through which God conquered Canaan in the world’s history, must also carry forward the work in regard to Egypt. In the interest of Israel, whose service to God stands in contrast to Canaanitish industry, God will turn the Semitic world-power against Egypt, by which Israel was compelled to do Canaanitish work, and establish for them, on account of their labour in respect to Canaan, claims for compensation, which God would render valid because of the bondage laid by Egypt on the Israelites. The booty which God took from Egypt after the conflict, on occasion of the first deliverance, was only a type of a later plundering, which in a preparatory manner was begun by Nebuchadnezzar, and after the second deliverance from Egypt, that is, after the redemption achieved by the sufferings of the Servant of God was realized, when all power in heaven and on earth was committed to the episcopate of the Church (!!). The consequence of this victory over Egypt (Ezekiel 30:1-19) is given in the form of a judgment upon Egypt, in which is delineated its desolation and the annihilation of its idols and yokes; but the sons also of the covenant - land are smitten by the judgment, which points to a fall that should take place among them.” The continuation of this Catholic-theological-historical explanation and interpretation of Ezekiel will be given in No. 9. 5. Cocceius remarks on Ezekiel 29:21 : “Evil Merodach gave Jehoiachin freedom, and the first place of honour among the kings. Farther, Daniel was great in the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar, and under the Persian dominion. Cyrus was called by God to give command to lead the people back, that they might rebuild the temple. Still higher grew the horn of Israel when they became free, and their priests assumed the diadem, as a sign of the freedom of the people, and the Israelites had become greater than their fathers, as announced in Deuteronomy 30:5. But most especially was it so, when out of David’s house the horn grew, which set the people free from all slavery, which subdued their enemies, and rendered the Gentiles subject to Israel, Psalms 132:13-18.” 6. The day of Jehovah, Kliefoth remarks, “is not judgment in one point of time and destruction over the whole heathen world;” and then he continues: “The day of Jehovah is a period of indefinite duration, in the course of which God will punish with judgment and destruction all heathen nations in succession, just as they have shown their hostility to the people of God, and He sees that their time has come. From this point of view, also, is the announcement always to be understood, that this day of Jehovah is at hand. The day continues so long, that it lasts till, in the final judgment, the whole world, in so far as hostile to God, shall be destroyed; but it constantly begins anew, when any particular people, on account of their malevolence manifested to the people of God, falls under the righteous doom of perdition. Hence the day of Jehovah upon the heathen nations has, in the several prophecies, a different terminus a quo, according as they refer to this or that kind of relations.” Only it must not be overlooked, that in Ezekiel 30:1 sq. not indeed Egypt alone is contemplated, but Egypt in its connection with heathen nations; and yet, that it is not the day of judgment upon all anti-theocratic powers that is to be understood, as already Hδvernick makes the prophet see this general idea obtaining realization; but as the time of Jerusalem was come, the time when judgment had begun at the house of God, so the time must now be near when this judgment of God shall go forth upon the heathen. Hengstenberg finds here the fundamental passage for Luke 21:24, and points to the overthrow of the Roman Empire,—the “mountain” which was to be cast into the sea after the fig-tree of the Jewish people was withered (Matthew 21.), the “mulberry-tree” which was to be plucked up and removed into the sea (Luke 2:7.). 7. As in the kingdom of Tyre, Ezekiel 28, allusion was made to a time of sacredness upon the holy mount of God, so there was also found there, by way of similitude, a bringing to remembrance of Eden, and especially of the garden of God. This retrospect of paradise furnishes the beau-ideal, the standard for the Old Testament world generally; hence with Assyria, and in connection therewith in reference to Egypt, which had not the same historical position as Tyre, it appropriately comes back again in Ezekiel 31. As in the New Testament all is measured with heaven, so in the Old Testament what is or was glorious upon earth is made to hold of Eden and paradise. 8. On the derivation of the word “Sheol” there confessedly prevails a great diversity of opinion. For the biblical idea, especially the signification of the word in the Old Testament, this only is to be learned from this matter of etymological controversy, that as well the derivation from ωָׁ ?ςַ ?μ, to be hollow (therefore for ωְׁ ?ςֹ ?μ), since it points to “hollowing,” and in so far to the grave, as the derivation which Hupfeld adopts from: “to sink down,” and: “to go apart from one another,” therefore: sinking down, depth, abyss, and: cleft, hollow, empty space—since the burying and the being in the sepulchre can be thereby expressed—both alike avail for the affirmation, that Sheol and the grave more or less run together. The derivation, on the other hand, from ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?μ to demand, expresses as to Sheol only what constitutes generally the power and manner of death to demand for itself with insatiable desire all living beings (comp. Isaiah 5:14; Habakkuk 2:5; Proverbs 27:20; Proverbs 30:16). As to form an infinitive verbal substantive, the use of the word belongs predominantly to the poetic language of the Old Testament, whence also is to be explained the circumstance that it never stands with the article. Sheol appears as the aggregate of all graves. Who could venture to deny this aspect of the matter, at least for the 31st and 32d chapters of Ezekiel? It is the universal grave, which calls down to itself all earthly life, how high soever it may have reached, however magnificent it may have been, however valiantly it may have fought. But much, also, as Sheol and the grave (αεψ) sometimes appear to approach (comp. also Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 14:15), to cover one another, it must still not be overlooked that the grave, more exactly considered, is only the entrance into Sheol (Psalms 16:10), which certainly, as it is commonly represented, keeps the hue of the grave, in generals as well as in particulars (ιψλϊιαεψ, Ezekiel 32:23); it is the carrying over of the grave to the future state (while the grave as such is still always something here). It is quite reconcilable with this representation when Sheol is conceived of as a locality, and indeed as a deep abyss, just as the standing form of speech: “to go down,” “to be thrown down,” is thence explained as equivalent to being consigned to the dead. The occasional poetic delineation of this future must only not be formally dogmatized into an actual under-world with gates, rivers, etc. (Job 38:17; Psalms 18:5 sq.) The going down of the company of Korah (Numbers 16:30) is often what is floating before the writer’s mind; and not so much the locality of Palestine, which was rich in grottoes and caverns, or the darkness of the Hebrew family tomb-vaults, the stillness of the Egyptian catacomb-world. The interior and inmost part of the earth (Ezekiel 26:20; Ezekiel 32:18), however, is not the earth’s inner region as such, but ωְׁ ?ΰεֹ ?μϊַּ ?λְ ?ϊִ ?ιָּ ?δ is the Sheol “beneath” (the underground, Ezekiel 31:14); that is, partly the contrast to heaven as the region of the divine life, partly the distinction from the surface turned toward heaven, the face of the earth. Out of that contrast, in which, however, the earth also and its life have their place, and still more in accordance with this distinction from the earthly life, must Sheol and what is connected therewith be understood. The death to which one is surrendered (Ezekiel 31:14) is not simply a going down, not annihilation, but as punishment for sin, the necessary consequence of the negation of God. Considered as a state, it is the contrast in respect to God, as curse, as judgment upon the sinner; hence the contrast in respect to life as divine, as salvation and blessedness, even to eternal perdition; and so Sheol posits a concrete, individual prolongation of life: the dead are represented in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 31.) as living on individually and in space. Passages such as Psalms 104:29; Psalms 146:4, and others, certainly have respect to the earthly life in the body, with its purposes and undertakings, doing and thinking, knowledge and wisdom together, Ecclesiastes 9:10 (so our Lord Himself in John 9:4 makes account of it for His diligence in working while in the flesh). As life on earth in a mortal body is for all men a troublesome, poor, and sorrowful thing, so certainly the advancing decay of the powers of life, with the dissolution of the union between soul and body, necessarily becomes quiescence, impotence, and withdrawal of their life-energy in regard to the appointed sphere of action. But passages like Job 26:5 sq., Ezekiel 38:17, Proverbs 15:11, Psalms 139:8, testify to the presence of the living God, through whom the subsisting and passing away of all beings is conditioned, as is said also in the ΰֲ ?αַ ?γּ ?εֹ ?ο made parallel with Sheol (comp. Mark 12:27; Luke 20:38). The contrast, therefore, to the heavenly upper world as the proper region of the divine life is not that of not-being and being; and just as little is the continued existence in Sheol an unconscious shade-existence, at least not according to Ezekiel’s representation: the heroes in Sheol speak and know themselves as such over against others, feel, etc. As the designation of shades (γτΰιν) for the dead in the Old Testament times cannot be proved, so the appearance, for example, of Samuel (1 Samuel 28.), so entirely accordant with the spirit and address of Samuel as he actually lived, is not at all brought forward as an exception, somewhat after the manner of the Theban seer Tiresias (Odyss. x. 492 sq.). In the Old Testament, also, we read nothing of an instinctive repetition and continuation of the past life connected with the possession of blood. The representation of Sheol, into which there has often been greatly too much imported of heathen elements, is in no respect the localizing of the image, which, as Meier says, “remains like a blanched, bloodless, shadowy form, in the spirit of the living, of their dead and buried fellow-men.” Life in Sheol cannot, indeed, run counter to the conditions that prevail in respect to human life. Man is soul, but he has spirit, which for him constitutes the power wherein the life of the individual consists; while the soul is plainly the seat of that, as the body is its organ. If the life connected with the body appears as life in the flesh, when separated therefrom it will become an existence of the spirit, and departed men will necessarily have to be thought of as spirits, and can only in so far be termed “souls” as a retrospective sense of the earlier corporeal life has place. On this side the description of Sheol is certainly, and especially as contradistinguished from the earthly upperground life, kept in due regard to the state of things existing there. With the going down into the grave, the bright joyful sunlight vanishes for men; hence Sheol is the land of darkness and of the shadow of death (Job 10:21). While the world of light is an organized one, the midnight region of Sheol appears as a confused intermingling of substances, chaotic (Job 10:22). Busy life, so repeatedly designated “tumult” in this chapter of Ezekiel, becomes motionless in the grave; so in Psalms 115:17 the dead go down to silence, to stillness (comp. Psalms 104:17; Psalms 31:18). The expression, however, of “land of forgetfulness,” Psalms 88:12, must not be overstretched, though the reference is to be held fast in which it is said that, as God has given the earth to the children of men (Psalms 115:16), so the manifestation of His wonder-working power and righteousness is promised to them on the earth while they are in the flesh. Not in the heathen materialistic sense, but Christologically, however still on the temporal side, the thought as to its form was presented in the Old Covenant. And thence are such passages as Psalms 6:5; Psalms 30:10 [Psalms 30:9], Psalms 88:10-11, Psalms 115:17, Isaiah 38:18, to be understood. The dead, accordingly, are done (Psalms 88:5); their state, Sheol, is without a history (on the other hand, comp. 1 Corinthians 15:19). But to complete our knowledge of the Old Testament Sheol, the ethical side is not to be overlooked, that is, the idea of recompense comes therein likewise into consideration (comp. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 32 1And it came to pass in the twelfth year, in the twelfth month, on the first 2[day] of the month, the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: Son of man, take up a lamentation over Pharaoh the king of Egypt, and say to him: Young lion of the heathen peoples thou didst imagine thyself [thou didst compare thyself to such an one], and thou [wast] as the dragon in the sea [in the seas], and brakest forth in thy streams, and didst trouble the water with thy feet, and didst trample their streams! 3Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, And I spread forth My net over thee in the 4assembly of many peoples, and they pull thee up in My draw-net. And I set thee free into the land [push thee away thither], upon the plains of the field will I sling thee; and I make all the birds of heaven to sit down on thee, and let the 5living creatures of the whole earth satisfy themselves with thee. And I give thy 6flesh upon the mountains, and fill the valleys with thy high heap [thy height]. And I cause the land of thy overflowing to drink out of thy blood, even to the mountains: 7and the hollows shall be full of thee. And I cover [veil], while I extinguish thee, the heaven, and darken its stars; the sun will I cover with a cloud, and the 8moon will not make her light to shine. All luminaries of light in the heaven, I will make them dark over thee; and I give darkness upon thy land: sentence of 9the Lord Jehovah. And I vex the heart of many peoples, when I bring thy breach [destruction] among the heathen peoples, to lands which thou knowest not. 10And I make many peoples astonished over thee, and their kings shall shudder shudderings over thee, when I brandish My sword before their face; and they tremble every moment, each one for his soul [life], on the day of thy downfall. 11For thus saith the Lord Jehovah: The sword of the king of Babylon will come to thee. 12By the swords of heroes will I make thy tumult to fall; the violent of the heathen [are] they all, and they lay waste the pride of Egypt, and all its 13tumult is destroyed. And I extirpate all the beasts thereof from many [the great] waters, and foot of man shall not trouble them any more, nor shall the hoofs of beasts trouble them. 14Then will I make their waters to sink, and make their 15streams go as the oil: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. When I give [to] desolation the land of Egypt, and the land is wasted away from its fulness, when I 16smite all that dwell in it, then they know that I am Jehovah. This is lamentation, and as lamentation they intone it, the daughters of the heathen peoples will intone it as a lamentation; upon Egypt and upon all its tumult shall they intone it as a lamentation: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And 17it came to pass in the twelfth year, on the fifteenth [day] of the month, the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 18Son of man, wail for the tumult of Egypt, and cast it down, it and [as] the daughters of the glorious heathen peoples, to the land of the depths, with those that go down to the pit. 19Whom dost thou surpass in being lovely? Go 20down, and lie with the uncircumcised! In the midst of those pierced through with the sword shall they fall; sword is given; they drag it [Egypt] and all its 21tumults away. The strong of the heroes from the midst of hell [sheol] shall speak of [to] him with his helpers: they go down, they lie, the uncircumcised, pierced 22through with the sword! There is Asshur and his whole company; round about 23him his [their] graves; they all pierced through, fallen by the sword: Whose graves were [are] given in the innermost of the pit, and his company was [is] round about his grave; they all pierced through, fallen by the sword, who gave 24terror in the land of the living. There [is] Elam and all his tumult round about his grave: they all pierced through, fallen by the sword, who are gone down, uncircumcised, to the land of depths, who gave their terror in the land of the 25living, and henceforth bear their shame with them that go down to the pit. Amid the pierced through they gave him a couch with all his tumult; round about him his graves; they all uncircumcised, pierced through with the sword; for their terror was given [spread] in the land of the living, and they henceforth bear their shame with those that go down to the pit; among the pierced through is he 26given [laid]. There [is] Meshech, Tubal, and all his tumult; round about him his [their] graves; they all uncircumcised, pierced through with the sword; for they 27gave their terror in the land of the living. And they do not [they shall not] henceforth lie with the heroes, the fallen of the uncircumcised, who went down to hell in [with] their weapons of war; and they gave their swords under their heads, and their iniquities were upon their bones, for terror of heroes [were they] in the land of 28the living. And [also] thou among the uncircumcised, thou shalt be broken, and 29shalt lie with the pierced through by the sword. There [is] Edom, his kings and all his princes, who have been given in [with, in spite of] their strength with the pierced through by the sword; they lie henceforth with the uncircumcised, and 30with those that go down to the pit. There are the princes of the North, they all and all the Zidonians, who went down with the pierced through, in their terror [the terror before them] from their strength [proceeding from their strength] come to shame; and they lie henceforth uncircumcised with the pierced through by the sword, and bear from this time onwards their shame with those that go down to the 31pit. Them will Pharaoh see, and will comfort himself over all his tumult; pierced 32through are Pharaoh and all his host: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. For I gave his terror [that which is before him] in the land of the living, and Pharaoh and all his tumult is laid [now] among the uncircumcised with the pierced through by the sword: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 32:1. Sept.: ... μιατ. μηνος—(Anoth. read.: αςωϊιςωψδ, undecimo anno.) Ezekiel 32:2. … Λεοντι … ὁμοιωθης … κ. ὲκερατιζεςτοιςποταμοις … τ. ποταμουςσου. Vulg.: Leoni assimilatus es et draconi … et ventilabas cornu in—(Other readings: εϊψτξ and απδψϊַ ?ιִ ?κ.) Ezekiel 32:3. ... καιἀνκξωσεἐντ.ἀγκιστρω̣μου; so too the Vulg. Ezekiel 32:4. ... Πεδιαπλησθησεταισου—(Anoth. read.: λμηιδδΰψυ, Syr.) Ezekiel 32:5. ... ἀποτ.αἱματοςσουτασανγην Vulg.: … colles tuos sanie tua. Anoth. read.: ψξεϊικְ, excelsa tua; ψξϊικּ, projectionibus tuis (Targ.), v. vermibus tuis (Syr.). Ezekiel 32:6. ... ποτισθησετκιἡγηἀποτ. χωρηματονσουκ. ἀποτ. πληθουςσου … φκραγγαςἐμπλησωκ̓ποσου. Vulg.: f�tore sanguinis tui— Ezekiel 32:8. Vulg.: m�rere faciam super te— Ezekiel 32:9. Sept.: ... ἡνιχαἀν … αἰχμαλωσιανσου … εἰςγηνἡν—Vlug.: irritabo contritionem tuam— Ezekiel 32:10. Sept.: ... προσδεχομενοιτηνπτωσιναὐτωνἀφʼ ? ἡμεραςπτωσεωςσου. Ezekiel 32:12. ἐνμαχαιραιςγιγαντων, κ. καταβαλωτ.ἰσχυνσουΛοιμοιἀποἐθνων—Ezekiel 32:14. Οὑτωςτοτεἡσυχασει—Vulg.: Tunc pϊrissimas reddams … adducam— Ezekiel 32:15. cum dedero … deseretur autem—(Anoth. read.: εξωξδ in Hophal.) Ezekiel 32:17. Anoth. read.: αςωϊιςωψδ, Syr. and interlined Bible. Sept.: ... ἐντ. πρωτω̣μηνι— Ezekiel 32:18. Sept.: ... κκικαταβιβασουσιναὐτηςταςθυγατεραςτκἐθνςνεκραςεἰςτοβαθοςτ. γηςπροςτους … (Ezekiel 32:19 :Ενμεσω̣τραυματιωνμακαιραπεσουνταιμετʼ ? αὐτου,κ. κοιμηθησεταιπασαἡἰσκυς. κ. ἐρουσινσοιοἱγιγαντεςἘνβαθειβοθρουγινουτινοςχρειττωνεἱ; κ. καταβηθικ. κοιμηθητι. Vulg.: gentium robustarum ad terram ultimam (Other read.: εδεψιγε, and ΰμΰψυϊηϊιϊ, and ΰμιεψγι, Sept.) Ezekiel 32:19. ʼ ?Εξὑδατωνεὑπρεπουςχαταβηθι, κ. κοιμηθητιμεταEzekiel 32:20. πεσουνταιμετʼ ?αὐτου, κ. κοιμηθησεταιπασαἡἰσχυςαὐτου. (Other read.: δξεπδ.) Ezekiel 32:21. Sept.: ... σοιοἱγιγαντες. ʼ ?Ενβαθειβοθρονγινου,τινοςχρειττωνει; Καταβηθικ.κοιμηθητιμετα—Vlug.: qui cum auxiliatoribus ejus descenderunt et dormierunt— Ezekiel 32:22. … συναγωγηαὐτου, πχντεςτραυματιαιἐχειἐδοθησανἡταφηαὐτωνἐνβαθειβαθρουχἐγενηθηἡσυνχγωγηαὐτουπεριχυχλω̣τ. μνηατοςαὐτου,παντες— Ezekiel 32:23. οἱἐδωχαντ. ταφχςαὐτηςἐνμηροιςλαχχου— Ezekiel 32:25. The words λιΞπϊοΧ are not represented in the Sept. Ezekiel 32:26. Sept.: ʼ ?Εχειἐδοθησαν … κ. Θοβελ … περιχυχλωτ. μνηματοςαὐτου, παντεςτραυματιαιαὐτου, παντεςἀπεριτμητοιτραυματιαιἀπομαχαιρας, οἱδεδωχοτες—Vulg,; … interfectique et cadentes gladio— Ezekiel 32:27. Καιἐχοιμηθχσανμετατ. γιγαντων … ἀπ’ αἰονος, οι … ὁτιἐξεφοβησανγιγαντας—Vulg.: … et incircumcisis—(Anoth. read.: ςεπν, Syr.) Ezekiel 32:29. Sept.: κ. οἱβασιλειςαὐτηςκ … οἱἁρχοντεςἈσσουροἱδοντεςτ. ἰσχυναὐτωνεἰςτρκυμαμαχαιρας, κὐτοιἐκοιμηθησανμετατραυματιωνμαχαιρας, ἐκοιμηθησανμετα—Ezekiel 32:30. παντεςστρατηγοι "Ασσουρ, οἱ … τραυματιαισοντ. φοβω̣χὑτωνχ. τ. ἰσχυιαὐτων—Vulg.: … et universi venatores, qui … paventes et in … confusi—(Anoth. read.: ελμφγεπιν, Chald., Syr.; or they read ρψπֵ ?ι, satraps. Instead of ΰωψ, Sept. read ΰωεψ.) Ezekiel 32:31. Vulg.: Vidit eos et consolatus est— Ezekiel 32:32. Quia dedi terrorem meum … et dormivit— REMARKSEze_32:1-16. The Lamentation over Pharaoh. Hitzig justly finds the date, as also the place of this section, quite correctly given. He likewise abides, for the more exact determination of the time, by the Hebrew text of Eze 32:1; while the old translations read, some the tenth, others the eleventh year, some the tenth, others the twelfth month. It was twenty-one months after Ezekiel 31:1, almost two months after that the prophet had received intimation of the destruction of Jerusalem; and to this time also belongs the flight of the remnant of Judah to Egypt, which was prohibited through the mouth of Jeremiah. [Schmieder: “The first of these two death-songs (Ezekiel 32:1-32) is dated on the day of the new moon, the second on the day of the full moon.” Hengst.: “The occasion of this lamentation was probably the circulation of the Lamentations of Jeremiah among the exiles. Ezekiel delights generally to follow that prophet as his leader. The double lamentation-song of this chapter accompanies, by way of consolation, the lamentation-songs among the people of God.”] Ezekiel 32:2. Comp. Ezekiel 19:1.—As Ezekiel 27:2 upon Tyre, and Ezekiel 28:12 upon the prince of Tyre, so here it is first upon Pharaoh, and afterwards, Ezekiel 32:17 sq., upon Egypt.—The designation as young lion (Ezekiel 19:2) of the heathen nations (meaning of them not in the sense of being among them, but in that of showing himself to be such toward them), λְּ ?τִ ?ιψβּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν, as in Ezekiel 31:11 ΰμβειν, an antithetical reference, very fitly applies to the personality of Hophra. The youthful, rapacious, conquest-loving spirit of this prince may have been characterized.—πִ ?γְ ?ξֵ ?ιָ ?ϊ, Niph. (from γξδ), “to make one’s self like” (the subjective of Pharaoh’s to the objective of Jehovah’s, Ezekiel 31:2; Ezekiel 31:18).—ΰֶ ?μ dropt, perhaps, on account of the immediately preceding ΰֵ ?μָ ?ιε, or to be construed accusatively; anyhow, perfectly plain as to the meaning, since λַּ ?ϊπιν immediately follows. That Pharaoh could not be found “like a lion and also a dragon,” as Hitzig alleges, has this only as a ground of offence, that it overlooks the distinction, the contrast, between the two resemblances. As a young lion Pharaoh is conscious of what belonged to him out of himself, whereas the other image rather represents the customary, perhaps also the limits to be kept by the Pharaohs of Egypt. (“With the third Ramses,” says Duncker, “Egypt had ceased to be the first power of the old world. About the same time, when the warlike ambition of Assyria began to display itself, Egypt returned to a peaceful mode of life, and remained quiet within its old natural boundaries.”) Philippson: “Pharaoh, who belonged only to Egypt as crocodile, would also as a lion seize upon other lands.” So also Raschi. [Hitzig translates πγξιϊ: “thou art a dead man” (Cocceius); Hengst.: “thou art undone; πγξδ never means: to be made like, always: to be silent, undone.” According to him, Ezekiel 32:2 is a short outline which must be afterwards filled up.]—The representation generally is not that of the glory of the fallen king (Keil), and the image of the dragon in particular will not explain that of the lion (Hengst.); though it is right to say that the bearing of Pharaoh is meant to be set forth, only not so properly among the peoples as in his own relation. For in the sea is neither the sea of the peoples (Hengst.), nor to be taken along with what precedes = on land and in water (Rosenm.), but a reproduction of the Nile-situation (Ezekiel 29:3, “in the midst of his streams”) corresponding to the self-elation implied in the “young lion of the heathen,” as (comp. Isaiah 19:5) in Homer the Nile is called ὠκεανος, and the native designation speaks of the white, blue seas. The counter-position (εְ ?ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ) is this: To the heathen nations thou wouldst show thyself as a young lion, and thine own people thou didst destroy, didst ruin—as is presently brought out in the prophet’s delineation. To the ιַ ?ξִּ ?ιν correspond the πַ ?δֲ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ ;εַ ?ϊָּ ?βַ ?η. from βּ ?εֹ ?ηַ (βִּ ?ιηַ ??), is, according to Kimchi, the Kal; who, however, allows it also as Hiphil, which Fόrst takes to be the form, wishing, however, to understand it transitively: “and broughtest forth thy waters through thy streams;” but of Hiphil, as of Kal, is only the intransitive signification known. [Hitzig, who holds that the breaking forth of the crocodile is not meant to be expressed, would fain make it: “thou causest thy streams, namely, out of thy nostrils, to break forth;” but the streams and αְּ are against him, and he hence reads with Ewald: πְ ?ηִ ?ψϊικ, who translates: “since thou art as the crocodile in the waters, and with thy nostrils dost splutter (Job 41:20).” Hengst. cites, for the mischief which Pharaoh did among the nations, the North American crocodiles (“thou brakest forth with thy rivers”)—how, while breathing with the most frightful noise, they spurt forth streams of smoke and water, like a torrent in a hurricane, through their jaws and blowholes.] The sense, however, is much simpler: while in Ezekiel 29:3, Pharaoh, the great dragon, lies in the midst of his streams at his ease, he is now represented as breaking forth in the same (“thine,” as he there pretends); that is, not precisely with his hosts, but in this, his national-Egyptian pride of power, rising up, elevating himself—which elevation of Pharaoh (as indicated by Jerome, Vulg., and Sept.) troubled the waters of Egypt (γμη, comp. Ezekiel 32:13), while he with his feet trampled their streams or caused a muddy jumbling. [Schmieder: “With his restless ambition for war he stirred up the slumbering passions (the mire) among his peoples.”] Very good Philippson: “brought his people into agitation, guilt, and danger;” while the heterogeneous intermingling of the figure of the dragon with that of the lion, and in consequence thereof the explanation with reference to the nations, occasions misunderstanding and needless attempts at interpretation—as when Ewald, who is followed by Hδvernick, speaks of the crocodile foully wallowing with mouth and feet in the fresh waters and life-sources of the nations—as troubling all that was pure. Ezekiel 32:3. See Ezekiel 12:13; Ezekiel 17:20.—αִּ ?χְ ?δַ ?μΧ, on comparison with Ezekiel 23:24, can scarcely be understood of mere spectators, since they pull up, therefore, as helpers, associates, servants, carry the matter into effect. The peoples punish the sin of Pharaoh committed on his own people. Under the many we may think of the Chaldean army as composed of many races (Dereser), or also of the diverse peoples that followed the Chaldeans in making war upon Egypt.—Comp. Ezekiel 26:5; Ezekiel 26:14; Ezekiel 29:4. In Siam, people often spread nets upon the river to catch the crocodile. Comp. Ζlian, Var. Hist. Ezekiel 10:21. Ezekiel 32:4. Comp. Ezekiel 29:5.—αָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ, land, in contrast to the water; while in Ezekiel 29 it is the “wilderness.”—θεּ ?μ, “to throw down,” Hiphil, strengthens πָ ?θַ ?ωׁ, as αָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ is pictured out by ςַ ?μτְּ ?πֵ ?ιΧ, “on the plains (face) of the field.”—Ezekiel 31:13. It is acutely remarked by Bunsen, that in the description, as it passes over into the monstrous, the prophet comes to do with the matter, touches less upon the image. Ezekiel 32:5. As the guilt, so the punishment takes place within the land, which is represented by mountains and valleys (Ezekiel 31:12). Pharaoh is laid there as to his flesh, together with his warriors.—ψָ ?ξεּ ?ϊ, Gesen. from ψεּ ?ν, “a high heap of corpses.” Hengst.: “with thy height,” in contrast to the valleys as low ground, “with the proud corpse.” It were better to read ψִ ?ξָּ ?ϊֶ ?κָ, from ψִ ?ξָּ ?δ, collective, “worms.” Hitzig thinks of the blood which should flow down from the mountains into the valleys. Others take it, after the plural reading, of the hosts of which Pharaoh was proud, their corpses; Raschi, from ψξδ, “to throw away:” thy thrown away, that is: thy fallen. Ezekiel 32:6. Here φָ ?τָ ?δ (from φεּ ?σ, “to overflow,” “to inundate”) with ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ is not “the land of thy swimming” (Gesen.), in which thou as crocodile hast swimmed, but Egypt—only not as Hengst.: “the land which thou formerly didst overflow with thy rivers.” At least Ezekiel 32:2 cannot be adduced for this sense, except in so far as the Nile, which Pharaoh in Ezekiel 29 had in a manner claimed for himself, overflows Egypt, and thereby provides the ground of prosperity and strength to Pharaoh. That God “causes the land to drink” (Genesis 2:10) is placed over against the boasted overflowing of it through Pharaoh’s Nile; besides, however, the closer determination of the meaning by “out of (with) thy blood” (Exodus 7:17 sq.), which Hitzig explains as a gloss of ψָ ?ξεּ ?ϊֶ ?κָ in Ezekiel 32:5. (Keil takes φָ ?τָ ?δ as the “outflowing,” and construes δִ ?ωְׁ ?χֵּ ?ιϊִ ?ι with two objects, so that ξִ ?γָּ ?ξְ ?κָ announces whence the outflowing comes, and wherein it consists. Schmieder: “Pharaoh’s life-juice, which flows with his blood from his wounds, the most precious, most peculiar possessions of his home-power.” Hδv.: “I saturate the earth with thy current, on occasion of thy blood covering the mountains.” Hitzig: “the soil of the earth with thy outflow.” Kimchi takes φτδ as a fem. part.: “thy land over which the waters swam.” Others: the land which from thee was overflowed, namely, by thy blood. Attention has been called by Kimchi also to φָ ?τָ ?δ, “to spy out”—the land of thy spying out—so that the high places thereof might be meant.)—Even to the mountains signifies: to as far as the overflowing of the Nile usually extends. Ezekiel 32:7 (Ezekiel 30:18). The covering of the heaven, in its symbolic character, fitly enough regarded as analogous to the judgment-day of God (Ezekiel 30:3; Joe 2:4), need not, however, be conceived of from this point of view, but may remind us of Exo 10:21 sq., while still it is expressly thought of in connection with Pharaoh’s extinction, who in his glory must not be contemplated merely as a bright shining light (Hengst.), but, according to the Egyptian style of thought, as the light of the world for his subjects, beaming forth upon the land and imparting prosperity and blessing (comp. at Ezekiel 29:6 a, Ezekiel 30:17; see also Duncker, i. p. 150). It is unnecessary, therefore, for Hitzig to fall back upon Dereser, who, under the expression: “when thou art extinguished,” makes the constellation of a dragon follow here upon the image of a sea-dragon, as then the zodiac might be of Egyptian origin. Keil regards Ezekiel as leaning upon Isaiah 14:12; but the discourse is not at all of Pharaoh as a star of the first magnitude (Dereser), but with his extinction the heaven (the heaven, namely, of Egypt), the higher, the governing supremacy and glory, one may say, is veiled, which in what follows is more nearly defined and expressed. Comp. Ezekiel 31:15. The heaven comes into consideration as to its stars, and as such are specified (in place of all) sun and moon, which, again, appear in Ezekiel 32:8 as ξְ ?ΰεֹ ?ψִ ?ιν,—the sun, with λָּ ?ρָ ?δ pointing back to λִּ ?ρֵּ ?ιϊִ ?ι; the moon, with negative reproduction of the δִ ?χְ ?γַּ ?ψְ ?ϊִ ?ι. That with what is said, mourning, condolence should be expressed (as at Ezekiel 31:15), does not lie in the words; and just on that account Ezekiel 32:9-10 do not give, as Hitzig would have it, the import of the figurative speech here in Ezekiel 32:7-8. Finally, neither kingdoms, nor peoples, nor individual men of distinction are indicated by the stars. Ezekiel 32:8. Genesis 1:14.—ςָ ?μֶ ?ικָ, agreeably to Ezekiel 32:7 (αְ ?λַ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ): on account of thee, or as upon thy land.—All the luminaries resume the “stars” in Ezekiel 32:7; ΰַ ?χְ ?γִ ?ιψֵ ?ν repeats δִ ?χְ ?γַּ ?ψְ ?ϊִ ?ι there, and the darkness, sq., combines what is said of sun and moon together in the effect. Through “thy land” light falls upon the “land of thy overflowing,” in Ezekiel 32:6. Ezekiel 32:9. The vexing of the heart is to be understood according to Ezekiel 32:10. Sorrow; not sympathy, but, in consideration of themselves, and of that which might still also be done to them, grief. It is not hard words only which vex us, but there are also hard fates which cause us vexation, especially the more we would live and would let live. ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?ψ (and with Segol twice), probably: the report (but not necessarily to be read, as Ewald, with an Aramaic signification, ωׂ ?αψκ)of the destruction; that such a world-power was broken could not but cause many heart-breakings in the world. The addition: which thou knowest not, however, points to more than simple knowledge, namely, to persons who become acquainted with that of which they had hitherto been entirely ignorant, regions utterly unknown to them. (Targum of Jonathan: those broken through the war; Hδv., with a reference to the Sept.: the prisoners, who, as ruins of the old glory of Egypt, are themselves the heralds of the misfortune among the nations.) Comp. Ezekiel 30:9. Ezekiel 32:10. See Ezekiel 27:35; Ezekiel 28:19.—ωָׂ ?ςψ, so that the hair stands on end.—ςεֹ ?τֵ ?σ, Pilel from ςεּ ?σ, to make to fly. The sword, while they see how it flies to and fro over Pharaoh, is swung before their face, that they may with shuddering take a warning from it to themselves.—On εְ ?ηָ ?ψְ ?γεּ μִ ?ψְ ?βָ ?ςִ ?ιν, comp. Ezekiel 26:16.—Ezekiel 31:16. Ezekiel 32:11. Since Jehovah’s sword which is brandished is that of the king of Babylon, the coming of this king can now be fitly spoken of. ϊְּ ?αεֹ ?ΰֶ ?κָ for ϊָּ ?αεֹ ?ΰμְ ?κָ. Comp. also. Ezekiel 30:10. There is a similar break in the discourse. Ezekiel 32:12. Comp. on Ezekiel 31:2; Ezekiel 31:12; Ezekiel 28:7.—λֻּ ?μָּ ?ν, in their collective character; ςָ ?ψιφֵ ?ι, from ςָ ?ψַ ?υ, properly: spreading terror.—On ΰֶ ?ϊΞβְּ ?ΰεֹ ?οΧ Hitzig remarks: “not that of which Egypt is proud, but what is proud in Egypt, what raises itself up, pushes into the height.” Comp. Ezekiel 30:6; Ezekiel 30:18. Ezekiel 32:13. The extirpation of the beasts is explained by Schmieder figuratively of the potentates of Egypt, beside the crocodile Pharaoh, who stir up the population. As to the reality, Hitzig thinks of the grassy banks of the Nile, whither large herds of cattle were driven to get drink and to pasture (Genesis 47:6; Genesis 41:2 sq.; Exodus 9:3). Rosenm. brings also to remembrance the Egyptian horse - training. The beasts, however, appear rather as embellishment, for the Nile with its waters forms the chief feature, as it also had led the inhabitants of the land of Egypt at an early period from shepherd life to agriculture, and had consequently given rise to the prosperity of the country. The desolation of the greatness and glory of Egypt, the annihilation of all its tumult (Ezekiel 32:12), is represented by the extirpation of the beasts; in which the not unintentionally repeated μֹ ?ΰϊִ ?γְ ?μָ ?ηֵ ?ν, in the transition to the ψַ ?αִּ ?ιρξַ ?ιִ ?ν, points back with a certain irony to ξιρΧεַ ?ϊִּ ?γְ ?μַ ?ηΞ in Ezekiel 32:2, while such a ruinous result for the land through the punishment of Pharaoh is rendered still more remarkable. The not any more does not import that it should no more at all happen, but only in comparison with the earlier—no more in such a sense, that the earlier ascendency of power should again have place. Foreign dominion, inflicting mischief, causing man and beast to disappear (Ezekiel 32:12), should bring to a stand the native pernicious rule of Pharaoh. [According to the interpretation of others, it is to be understood with respect to other nations—as Hengst.: “in part also of the seductive glitter of Egypt”—of the ambitious military expeditious of Pharaoh (Cocc., Grotius), or generally of the pushing character of Egypt as a worldly power (Keil).] Ezekiel 32:14. ΰζ, when this takes place. What follows is explained by Hitzig to mean, that the Nile’s fulness of water, which hitherto had overflowed the land and made it fruitful, should no longer have any aim (Ezekiel 30:12); Kliefoth: that God Himself would change the nature of these streams. But this would imply too much, while the words—though not to be understood as Hδvernick thinks, who applies Ezekiel 32:13 improperly to troubling through hostile armies—would still express nothing more than the reference back to Ezekiel 32:2 already indicated in Ezekiel 32:13; namely thus: that instead of “the breaking forth in thy streams” there, now a depression takes place, their waters sink, that is, those waters which in the former state of prosperity man and beast troubled, but which in particular Pharaoh’s haughtiness rendered turbid; i.e., the well-being of Egypt, as this is represented by its Nile, is now gone, and shall no longer give occasion for abuse. The position of Egypt as to power must henceforth be of another description. εְ ?πַ ?δֲ ?ψεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν (Ezekiel 32:2), “their,” of the “waters,” which through Pharaoh go in a confused manner—λַּ ?ωֶּׁ ?ξֶ ?ο, Hitzig: flowing softly and slowly, keeping within the prescribed path. The latter does not lie in the comparison, after the manner of oil; and that they do not as hitherto rush forth in impetuous volumes of water is not the contrast; although the citation in Hitzig from Isaiah 8:6 corresponds, for, as with Asshur there, so was the case here with Pharaoh. Hengst. rightly: that the comparison with oil has respect to the soft flowing. Comp. Ezekiel 29:14. There needs only the sentence of the Lord, and then the proud waves subside, and that which fancies itself so high becomes low. (Now, inasmuch as such a state can be taken as a contrast to the ruin of Eze 32:13, some modern expositors, after the example of earlier ones, have found a promise here in relation to other peoples; Targum, Grotius: that they should be left in peace; Hδv., Keil: that for Egypt a time of divine blessing shall follow, the Nile shall flow with oil; Ewald even: “then first might the Messianic times come also upon Egypt, where the waterfloods should no longer be desolating and troubled, by reason, namely, of the true knowledge to which the chastisement conducts.”) Ezekiel 32:15. Here is combined together, through a double parallel, αְְּ the divine judgment and its result,—the giving up of the land of Egypt to desolation, and the realization of what this implied instead of its former fulness (Ezekiel 12:19).—Rosenm., Hengst., translate εּ ?πְ ?ωַׁ ?ξָּ ?δ: “and the land wasted.” It might also mean: when I give, etc., then the land is wasted.—The killing of all the inhabitants, and the knowing of Jehovah. According to Hitzig, αְּ ?δַ ?λּ ?εֹ ?ϊִ ?ι must be subordinated to the declaration. Ezekiel 32:16. Comp. Ezekiel 19:14. The lamentation (Ezekiel 32:2) comes here to a close. Its female singers, as this was laid upon women (Jeremiah 9:16 [17]), will be the heathen nations themselves represented as such (daughters), or the mourning women of those nations mentioned in Ezekiel 32:9. So certain is the matter. Ezekiel 32:17-32. Dirge upon Egypt. Ezekiel 32:17. The indication of the month is wanting here; according to Hitzig and others, from oversight. Comp. on Ezekiel 26:1. Hengst, and many derive it from Ezekiel 32:1, therefore the twelfth month, so that what here follows falls only fourteen days later. It is the last word upon Egypt, save one after the conquest of Jerusalem, for Ezekiel 29:17 sq. is absolutely the last; consequently a conclusion with respect to Egypt, and indeed in the manner of a d’outre tombe. Ezekiel 32:18. Here we have a πְ ?δִ ?ι, distinguished from the χִ ?ιπָ ?δ going before, in particular, through its character (“gloomy, sorrowful grave-song,” Ewald), and its six windings, its strophe-form.—What is meant by the tumult has been already said in Ezekiel 32:15-16 : it is those who dwelt in Egypt, and are now slain. Besides, in what follows there is a leaning on Ezekiel 31:16 sq.—To wail over any one after the manner of our section is as much as to throw him down with the word. By such a juxtaposition, also, we prevent a false explanation of the πְ ?δֵ ?δ, confounding the prophet with hired howling women, after the manner of Egyptian funerals, when as such even the daughters of mighty nations should figure. (Ewald: while the same are let down; as a grave-song, therefore, at the interment. Hδv.: identity of the divine will with the prophetic announcement.)—The fem. ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?δּ does not resume again the regular masc. δָ ?ξεֹ ?ο, nor is it shown from the question in Ezekiel 32:19 that we are to take it as ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ (Hitzig, Ewald); but it is very simple, grammatically correct, and logical,—an impressive ranking of Egypt, as a land, beside the daughters, etc. What Hitzig says to the contrary is not worthy of consideration. Egypt, as the party referred to, is the more natural, as it also was what in the preceding context determined the δξεο.—The daughters of the glorious heathen peoples must, according to Dereser, Ewald, Hitzig, be those meant in Ezekiel 32:16—a view that will scarcely commend itself; according to Rosenm.: the populations subject to the Egyptians, or in league with them—of whom there has been no discourse here; according to most: those specified in Ezekiel 32:22 sq. If these last are already in Sheol, as in reality is the case, then is εּ ?αְ ?πεֹ ?ϊΧ to be understood as if it stood thus: like those, etc., who have gone down conformably to the prophetic word. The process must in no way, as Hengst. expresses himself, be repeated anew; for, according to Ezekiel 32:21 sq., the parties concerned speak out of hell to the Egyptians, therefore are not sent down with these “as it were a second time.” The representation on occasion of the throwing down, which plainly has respect to Egypt, includes those already thrown down (“the daughters,” etc.) in order to render the certainty of the fate of Egypt the more indubitable by patent facts, with which also the immediately following question in Ezekiel 32:19 accords. The designation of the peoples as daughters is the more appropriate, as adornment and attractiveness, splendour and grace, would shine forth in them. For the rest, comp. at Ezekiel 26:20; Ezekiel 31:14. Ezekiel 32:19. The question with which our dirge begins—to supply μֵ ?ΰξֹ ?ψ or πְ ?δֵ ?δ is superfluous, the address is more energetic without such an addition—is spoken either to the tumult of Egypt (Ezekiel 32:18), or to Pharaoh and all his tumult (Ezekiel 32:32). The πָ ?ςַ ?ν, “to be lovely,” is indeed conceded, but it is held from the first to be a vain conceit that it was beyond any other, namely, the glorious heathen peoples, more lovely, therefore, than one of them. Ewald translates: “before whom wert thou more prosperous?” Which would not be so suitable as his allusion to the meaning of “uncircumcised” for Egyptians, and even also for Tyrians (Ezekiel 31:18; Ezekiel 28:10). (Hitzig declares himself in favour of the Sept. on the weakest grounds.)—Hence, as they, so also thou, “go down”—in which remembrance is made of the “cast down” of the prophet in Ezekiel 32:18, as also of those “going down” with whom Egypt must go down. Besides, comp. Ezekiel 28:10; Ezekiel 31:18. Ezekiel 32:20. Of the sword it was already spoken, Ezekiel 32:11. They who should fall are the Egyptians, Pharaoh and his tumult. Targum Jon. takes πִ ?ϊָּ ?πָ ?δ as ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?δּ of Egypt, but understands that it is given up to the sword.—ξָ ?ωְׁ ?λεּ, either 3 pret. or imperat. for ξִ ?ωְׁ ?λּ ?εּ. Of whom it speaks or to whom it is addressed is clear from ηֶ ?ψֶ ?απִ ?ϊּ ?Χ; they are those to whom the sword is already given. And since they must fall, must fall in the midst of the pierced through, the seizing and dragging away is not to be regarded as of evil-doers to the judgment-seat; but if the death-blow is to be considered, and if there is a carrying out of the falling among the pierced through, still, there remains as that to which they are to be dragged, indirectly as well as directly, if not precisely, Sheol, at least the grave. Ezekiel 32:21. To the question above corresponds the speaking below. What they speak is not said, and confessedly with γָּ ?αַ ?ψ does not need to be said. If μεֹ is “to him,” as Hengst. thinks, then the speaking is as much as: they greet him (Hδv., with malignant welcome) as a colleague (comp. Isaiah 14:10-11); and “his helpers” is to be viewed as connected with “to him”—together with his helpers. Rosenm. connects “his helpers” with “the strong of the heroes,” so that also his helpers address him. If μεֹ is to be translated “of him,” then the discourse takes place with the helpers, who, besides, are the parties that remained to the last with him—ch. Ezekiel 30:8; Ezekiel 30:5 sq.—βִ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ινΰֵ ?μֵ ?ι—comp. Ezekiel 31:11—which Gesen. renders: “the strongest of the heroes.” Ewald calls to remembrance in how high consideration a quiet natural death stood, with a correspondingly quiet burial, accompanied by the proper solemnities.—The words: “they go down,” etc., might serve less as a closer description of the strong heroes (Hengst.), than as a ground for their being in the midst of Sheol. But if they are taken as the address of the strong heroes, for which also the tone of the words speaks, treating scornfully the Egyptians like other heathens, then “the uncircumcised” must be applied to the Egyptians; and it will hence be understood that they fall in the midst of the uncircumcised (their helpers), appear like these. By Ezekiel 32:19 we are not obliged to take the speakers from hell as the uncircumcised. In Ezekiel 32:22 follows their mention by name. Asshur, primarily on account of the comparison in Ezekiel 31, but especially on account of its so great, still recent experience, which also gave occasion to the beginning of the Chaldean ascendency, ever in Ezekiel appearing as the foil of the other, and, finally, on this more general account, from its importance as compared with the other nations to be named, opens the dark muster-roll.—In respect to gender, the kingdom, which is feminine, interchanges with the king, masculine, because in point of fact the one runs into the other.—The ruler, or his grave, is surrounded by the graves which might be called his, because they are those of members of his people; or χִ ?αְ ?ψֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε refers to χָ ?δֵ ?μ. This will import: Asshur is only a field of graves, and thereby indicate that the sword which threatens Egypt has already fallen upon it. Ezekiel 32:23. In order, however, to bridge still more completely the contrast between this hereafter and the preceding here, the graves of Asshur (ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, perhaps a play upon ΰַ ?ωּׁ ?εּ ?ψ; anyhow, not: because) are still more particularly characterized. ψְַ ?λָ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?ν, dual, the two divergent sides, therefore the extreme part, here by means of αּ ?εֹ ?ψ determined to be the innermost—the point, namely, to which the pit turns off with its two walls. (Gesen.: the hindermost, farthest.) As much as: buried in the deepest place.—The graves are in Sheol; the latter, therefore, comprehensive of the former. The distinction is a fluctuating one.—Again ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, certainly a play of words.—πָ ?ϊְ ?πεּ, antithesis to πִ ?ϊְּ ?πεּ, for that which was given to them, that which they previously had given! The land of the living, as at Ezekiel 26:20, contrast to their deepest graves. Ezekiel 32:24. Elam appears in the earliest times among the inhabited countries lying on the farther side of the Tigris, to the east of Babylonia—a Semitic people, nearly related to the Assyrians. On this account alone it might here be made to follow immediately after Asshur; comp. Genesis 10:22; Genesis 14:1 sq. From the commencement warlike, ambitious of conquest, the Elamites continued to the last true to this character. Strabo makes mention of their expeditions against Susiana and Babylonia. Originally settled in the valleys between the Zagrus range and the mountains which bound the Assyrian plains on the east, they are mentioned along with other marauding tribes. The Assyrians subdued Elam, so that its dreaded bowmen (Jeremiah 49:35) figure in the Assyrian army (Isaiah 22:6). This explains Elam’s position immediately after Asshur. And agreeably to such a relation to Asshur, the utterance concerning Elam is almost, entirely similar.—The designation “their terror” makes it more expressive: the terror before them. With such a past their future laden with shame contrasts quite as expressively, just as the description: “those that go down to the pit,” stands related to: “in the land of the depths.” Ezekiel 32:25. The “couch in the midst of the pierced-through” is an ignominious one, because implying their conquest, their fall by the sword. And after all the tumult this idle lying now!—πָ ?ϊְ ?πεּ, the subject undetermined; or if any one is to be thought of, then Asshur lies not less near than Nebuchadnezzar, by whom Hengst. maintains that Elam was vanquished (comp. at Ezekiel 8:16; Ezekiel 30:5).—αְּ ?αָ ?μΧ, in company with.—Round about the king (him) the graves of Elam (δָ as in μָ ?δּ previously).—For, wild lovers of the sword, a terror to the living, their end consequently becomes associated with terror, their state in death takes the form of like to like.—πִ ?ϊּ ?ο against πִ ?ϊַּ ?ο. Elam himself now, not: his couch. He is laid by the sword with the dead, while formerly the terror before him and his would not be allayed among the living. Ezekiel 32:26. For similar reasons, probably, as in the case of Elam, the Moschi and Tibareni now follow—comp. at Ezekiel 27:13—linked as by a hyphen into one power. According to Hitzig, these represent the Scythians, whose numbers had recently been much reduced. Ewald takes the Chaldeans to be meant by the Scythians (!); Keil, here as in Ezekiel 38, understands by them a northern power, that should succumb, and here prophetically represented as having already succumbed.—The description as formerly, only λִּ ?ιΞπָ ?ϊְ ?πεּ ?Χ instead of previously λִּ ?ιΞπִ ?ϊַּ ?οΧ, which Hitzig refers to God. The ground of procedure here turns more expressly on the guilt of the parties. Ezekiel 32:27. Corresponding to such a presentation of the matter is εμֹ ?ΰΧ, which by many expositors is taken for a question indicated merely by the tone, as often in lively discourse: “and should they not,” etc.; that is, they especially could expect no better fate, among whom the significant custom prevailed of burying their fallen warriors with their slaughter-weapons, so that guilt and punishment are still combined together in the grave! (Hengst.: to the dead is ascribed what took place by their order, since they, like the race of Cain, placed therein their honour, saw in the murder of their brother a piece of bravery.) Others take it differently, as indicating that they were not to participate in the honour of resting with those for whom, because they had fallen gloriously, their armour was deposited in the grave. With the interrogatory mode of explanation the affirmative rendering of the Sept. seems to agree; but the other mode has this decidedly in its favour, that manifestly there is meant to be expressed, only in a different way, what was expressed in Ezekiel 32:23 respecting Asshur by the humiliating words: “whose graves were given in the innermost of the pit,” and in Ezekiel 32:24-25 regarding Elam, through the repeated: “and they bear their shame ”—namely, that they are the conquered, pierced through by the sword, ignominiously fallen under the victor’s hand, as was always again declared. With this agrees the mention of the heroes (comp. Ezekiel 32:12; Ezekiel 32:21), in particular the latter passage, where these in a manner boast themselves over the Egyptians. The meaning therefore is: that their hereafter is not that of heroes, though these also have fallen from among the uncircumcised, and hence were likewise guilty.—ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΧ, therefore not the Moschi and Tibareni, as Hengst. thinks, “they who,” etc., but a description of the “heroes.”—αִּ ?λְ ?μֵ ?ι, in their weapons of war, in armour of defence, and offence, that is, as conquerors of whom one can win no triumph, such as is done by those who carry forth in triumph the equipments of the vanquished.—And they gave, etc., as much as: “and men gave”; the survivors honoured their heroes after such a manner.—And their iniquities were, etc., is undoubtedly a continuation of the immediately preceding context, since to the marks of honour and judgment given on the part of men, there is very fitly added the judgment of God,—that “their iniquities were upon their bones,” or “came upon their bones,” though their swords were no longer on but under them, as also is presently said. To suppose, with Keil, that there is here a continuation to ιִ ?ωְׁ ?λְּ ?αεּ will scarcely do, as they were not to lie down with the heroes, nor could they be named “terror of heroes.” Hengst. translates: “heroes of terror.” Ewald, with a threatening reference to the Chaldeans: “because the terror of tyrants reigns in the land,” etc. (?). Hδv. makes Genesis 6:4; Genesis 10:9 sq. swim before the eyes of the prophet. Hitzig accepts simpliciter the translation of the Sept. But it may be regarded as a question whether Ezekiel did not think of the mode of burial among the Scythian princes, which has been similarly described by Herodotus. Ezekiel 32:28. An address to Egypt (Hitzig: the tumult of Egypt); but certainly without an underlying word of threatening to the Chaldean king, as Ewald supposes. (Hengst.: “thou art broken and liest down,” etc.)—ϊִ ?ωָּׁ ?αַ ?ψ for ϊִ ?ωָּׁ ?αֵ ?ψ Ezekiel 32:29. ωָׁ ?ξָּ ?δ either = ωָׁ ?ν, as a sort of variation, or “thither,” which Hδv. takes prophetically (“in like manner belong”) of such as it stands before. Hengst. on the other hand, as he makes Meshech and Tubal to have been probably conquered with the Assyrians, supposes that the Chaldean storm had swept over Edom immediately after the downfall of Judah, certainly as to the beginning only.—The kings, who were elective, are distinguished from all his princes (comp. Genesis 36:15 sq., 40 sq., 31 sq.), the tribal heads or chiefs of the greater race-stems, who according to Keil probably chose the kings.—αִ ?βְ ?αεּ ?ψָ ?ϊָ ?ν, “corporeal strength,” “bravery;” very suitable where “heroes” had just been spoken of. We might understand: in proof and trial of the same, or: notwithstanding it. Hitzig points to the olden time (Numbers 20:14 sq.; Genesis 36:35), and the wars with David. Ezekiel 32:30. πָ ?ρִ ?ικְ, from πָ ?νκְ, to pour out, scarcely to be understood as = anoint, hence: “anointed,” as ξָ ?ωִׁ ?ιηַ, but, according to a derived signification: to inaugurate, or to place forth, the former in the sacrificial libation (drink-offering), the latter through a casting of metal.—The princes of the north, who are conjoined with λָ ?μΞφִ ?γֹ ?πִ ?ι, a collective singular, are thereby, according to Hδvernick, more exactly defined as the many rulers of the biblical Aram (Damascenes, Syrians). In Jeremiah 25:26 we have: “all the kings of the north, near and afar off.” Comp. Ezekiel 28:20 sq. The Zidonians, therefore, may have already fallen. Tyre is not mentioned, so (Hengst. thinks) it still stood, although the siege had commenced. The mention of the Zidonians appears obviously designed to suggest that by “the north” is meant not the high far north, but that in relation to Palestine, therefore distinguishing them from Meshech and Tubal, formerly noticed. Perhaps also the significant number of seven must be made out for the peoples.—In their terror, etc., merely as much as, notwithstanding the terror before them, which their strength produced.—αּ ?εֹ ?ωִׁ ?ιν, so that they bear their shame (Ezekiel 32:24-25). Ezekiel 32:31. There is now the express application to Pharaoh. Hitzig gives εְ ?πִ ?ηַ ?νςַ ?μΧ: “and will make himself be sorry for all his host,” namely, that those in Ezekiel 32:27-30 still have on their clothing and equipment, as contrasted with those who had gone down with himself naked !! Hengst.: “he sighs.” It is here the case of Eze 31:16. Hav. thinks it is spoken ironically. Ezekiel 32:32. The reason assigned has respect to the overthrow of the military force of Pharaoh, in so far as he could inspire terror only after God’s will. He was not by reason of his own power an object of dread for a time on earth, but through the operation of God’s providence, which made use of him as its instrument. In conclusion Kliefoth remarks very well: “People are wont to visit the pyramids of Egypt or its catacombs for the purpose merely of seeing that the glory of the Pharaohs is one that has its abode in Sheol; even to the new Ptolemaic Egypt, the old Egyptian existence was a complete riddle, a thing forgotten and incapable of being understood.” 1. Although the prophecy in Ezekiel 29 is of a general character, yet by the reference to Nebuchadnezzar, and especially from Ezekiel 29:17 onwards, it gets a more specific character. We have therefore to hold by a fulfilment through the Chaldeans, and, indeed, in connection with what is said respecting Tyre. Apart from the circumstance that we have here to do with a prophet of God, we could not judge otherwise simply on this account, that a little reflection upon the inevitable disgrace of such a self-deception as would have been the case in respect to Tyre must alone have kept Ezekiel—instead of merely suppressing the prophecy in question while the book was still in his own hand—from wishing now to compensate for the mistake by awakening like inconsiderate and rash expectations concerning Nebuchadnezzar in regard to Egypt. For one to whom the prophet is nothing but a writer must still at least credit him with this much of worldly prudence in respect to his literary honour. And if Ezekiel must needs prophesy ex eventu (as Hitzig, for example, conceives), then prophecies like those contained in Ezekiel 26 and some following ones are purely unthinkable, so far as they remained unfulfilled; since it cannot but be supposed, that when our prophet closed his book, matters must have stood before him widely different from what they are presented in his prophecy. The “dogmatic criticism,” however, cannot once admit now that a prophecy has been fulfilled,—a limitation of the standpoint which is not improved by the circumstance that the truth of the divine word (2 Peter 1:21) is made dependent on the statements or the silence of profane writers, and even of such as have given notoriously imperfect reports. The false prophet, he whose word did not come to pass, has by God’s word (Deuteronomy 18:22) been as clearly as possible excluded from the canon. 2. The reward for work, which, as Hitzig rightly enough says, had still to be given to Nebuchadnezzar, raises no question as to the conquest and, as could not fail to happen after a thirteen years’ siege, the destruction of Tyre. If the booty might have been thought of for the army, for Nebuchadnezzar it is necessary to think of Egypt. The song of triumph demanded by Hitzig for the fulfilment of the prophecy against Tyre is the double lamentation which we find in Ezekiel 27, 28. Every one has his peculiar manner. But as regards the so-called “historical witnesses,” who should speak the decisive word on the fulfilment or non-fulfilment particularly of the prophecy of Ezekiel in respect to Egypt, they are “the Greek historians, at the head of whom stands Herodotus, and they know absolutely nothing of a Chaldean invasion of Egypt—nay, their narration is opposed to anything of the kind” (Hitzig). This is imposing; let us reflect, however, that Herodotus had also learned nothing from his Egyptian informants of the defeat at Carchemish. We need only mention farther, that this Greek historian himself reproaches the priests of Egypt, and precisely in regard to this particular time, with embellishing the history of their country. Now, according to Herodotus, Pharaoh Hophra—in consequence of the defeat which his army sustained from the Cyrenians, against whom it was to have rendered help to the Libyans, and of the revolt which in consequence thereof, and of the foreign mercenary troops retained in Egypt, broke forth on the part of the Egyptian warrior-class against Amasis, who, instead of bringing back the rebels to obedience, suffered himself to be proclaimed king by them—lost freedom and his throne, and by the infuriated people was even murdered. Tholuck, who, “if the cattle with the ark of the Lord should once turn aside, would not obstinately drive forward,” remarks that as a witness Herodotus alone comes into consideration; before whom, however, the testimony of Ezekiel, himself a contemporary of the events, has no need to be abashed. “If Herodotus readily received intelligence of the prosperous battle fought by Necho at Megiddo, but none respecting the much more important defeat sustained by him on the Euphrates from the Chaldeans, should it be thought strange if the priests observed silence also regarding the irruption of the Chaldeans into their own land? yea, if the miserable end which Hophra suffered through the foreign conqueror should have been rather represented by them as the deed of his own people?” (So also Rawlinson’s Herod. B. ii. appen. c. 8.) With a fair appreciation of the historical representation of Herodotus, the cause there assigned, especially the revolution among the warrior-class of Egypt, might suffice for the overthrow of Hophra. Yet the hatred of the Egyptian people, not only expressed in Herodotus, but confirmed by monumental evidence (Rossellini points in this connection to a by-name of Hophra on the monuments: “Remesto”)—such a hatred as is described in Herodotus toward Hophra (ii. 161–169), manifested in respect to a native ruler, is scarcely to be explained from what is stated, if it did not come into some sort of connection with a Chaldean invasion of Egypt, whereby the haughtiness of Hophra might well appear all the more hateful to the Egyptian people, as the misery of the land and the inhabitants, occasioned by him, stood in sharpest contrast to the previous prosperity and splendour. The grudge of the Egyptian warrior-class against the foreign mercenaries could not be of such moment as some have supposed, since even Amasis, who thereafter held possession of the throne till his death (forty-four years), and was succeeded in it by his son, took lonians for his bodyguard, and generally granted to the Greeks still greater favour and privileges than his predecessor. Besides, as generally held, there is also the outline of the prophecy against Egypt in Ezekiel 29, which exhibits a distinction between Ezekiel 29:6 sq. and Ezekiel 29:4 sq.—in the one, the sword constitutes the figure (Ezekiel 29:8); in the other, overthrow with reference to the wilderness. Especially if Hitzig’s interpretation of “the fish” (Ezekiel 29:4) as denoting Pharaoh’s men of war is accepted, and under “the wilderness” there is couched an allusion to Libya, what is said in Ezekiel 29:4 sq. might be explained by the narration which is reproduced by Herodotus, and Ezekiel 29:6 sq. would, with the sword of Nebuchadnezzar, be such a supplementing as the conquest of Tyre to the siege of that city, also given elsewhere. Out of the miserable condition in which Hophra perished, Amasis would then have raised Egypt. Anyhow, as Tholuck brings out, the death of Hophra falls exactly into the time in which the occupation of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar must have occurred; and thus the position of matters approaches to that which is wont to be extracted from Josephus in confirmation of our prophecy—contr. Ap. i. 19. It is there stated that Berosus reports of the Babylonian (Nebuchadnezzar) that he “conquered Egypt, Syria, Ph�nicia,” etc. Again, in Ezekiel 20, he states that Megasthenes placed Nebuchadnezzar above Hercules, since he had subjected to himself a great part of Libya and Iberia (comp. Antiq. x. 11. 1, and Strabo xv. 1. 6; see also Hδv. Comm. p. 435, against Hitzig’s remarks). In the 10th book of the Antiq. Ezekiel 9:7, Josephus expresses himself to this effect, that “in the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, he made an expedition against C�lesyria; and when he had got possession of it, he made war against the Ammonites and Moabites; and when he had brought these nations into subjection, he fell upon Egypt in order to overthrow it, and did indeed slay the king who then reigned, but set up another; after which he took those Jews that were there captive, and brought them to Babylon,” etc. The ten years’ time, which Hitzig doubts as the period of the earlier warlike expeditions, is maintained by Tholuck. The fifth year after the taking of Jerusalem would be 581; the thirteen years’ siege of Tyre would fall into the period 586–572 or 573. For the different actions which were in part parallel as to time, we have only to suppose various divisions of the army employed, so that the whole might of Nebuchadnezzar did not at the same time lie before Tyre. The forty years of the Egyptian oppression, Tholuck, like Niebuhr, extends over the entire space that lies between the disaster at Carchemish and the overthrow of Hophra (thirty-six years), “during which Egypt, through the continued and in great part unfortunate warlike enterprises of Hophra, must have been much depopulated and extremely weakened, till at length the inroad of the Chaldeans consummated the oppression.” Tholuck thinks that, “as the prophets in the beginning of the fulfilment comprehended the future (Jeremiah 13:18; Ezekiel 30:24), in the last and completed fulfilment they also comprehended the earlier incomplete ones.” The symbolical explanation of the forty years is not thereby denied (see the exposition). The worth of the statements of Josephus may be questioned, as is done by Hitzig; but for the relation of profane history to our prophecy, it suffices that Hophra miserably perished (Ezekiel 29:4 sq.; Jeremiah 44:30 sq.), and that Egypt again revived, as took place under Amasis, although as a kingdom it was fit to be compared neither with its ancient glory nor with other great monarchies (Ezekiel 29:13 sq.). As regards the resuscitation of Egypt, Duncker mentions that, according to a return of the priests, it then reckoned 20,000 country towns and cities (Herzog’s Realencyc. 1 p. 150), though it was “the last period of Egypt’s glory;” and Lepsius says of the same, that Egypt succumbed to the first pressure of the Persian power, and remained from 525 to 504 a Persian province; that afterwards it became again for a short time independent, until in 340 it was reconquered by the Persians, and in 332 fell under Alexander the Great, etc. 3. Upon the importance of Egypt for the revenge of Nebuchadnezzar, see the exposition of Eze 29:18. Also generally for the Chaldean policy the transition to Egypt is rendered plain to us from Ezekiel 29:17 sq. (Hδv.: “if Nebuchadnezzar would make the possession of Ph�nicia once for all sure, Egypt must be completely broken.”) Of the importance of Egypt by itself, its characteristic importance, some notice has already been taken, toward the close of the introductory remarks to Ezekiel 25; as also of the distinction, indicated with correct feeling by Keil, between Egypt and the other nations mentioned by Ezekiel. But what Egypt signifies in its connection here, this must be discerned from its relation to Israel. It is quite true that the charge laid against Ammon, Moab, etc., also against Tyre, for spiteful joy, hostility, envy toward Israel, is not mentioned in respect to Pharaoh and Egypt. It may be said that Egypt’s guilt in regard to Israel was that rather of a false, treacherous friendship. If, on the other hand, the excess of proud self-sufficiency must be regarded as the characteristic of Egypt, the same sort of self-elation meets us in the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28); and in this respect Tyre formed a fitting transition-point to Egypt. The distinction between Tyre and Egypt might perhaps be found in this, that while in particular the kingdom of Tyre had had its time of sacred splendour and past greatness, as we have seen, in its former connection with the kingdom of David, Egypt on its part acquired importance on account of the sojournings of the pilgrim-fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and still more on account of the formation of their descendants into a people. Above all, the idea of redemption was associated with the land of Egypt. Here, therefore, the inverse relation holds good: Tyre has gone with Israel to school; Israel, on the other hand, was at school in Egypt, as was evidenced in manifold agreements and contrasts exhibited in their peculiarity as a people, without our needing on that account to ride off on the Spencerian principle [namely, of a servile borrowing from the institutions of Egypt]. More than from anything else, may be understood from Israel’s reminiscences as a people, and the impress of Egyptian style and manner even upon their sacred things, their abiding sympathetic turning back toward Egypt. That Israel could not let Egypt go out of sight had its root in human nature; we must learn even from the children of this world (Luke 2:6). But it had also its dangerous side. It was Israel’s worldliness, relapse, since Israel had been delivered by Jehovah from this world, and Jehovah had through Moses threatened them in connection with Egypt with the greatest evils (Deuteronomy 28:68). We have tribulation in the world, and we may have fear before the world; such fear, however, may be salutary in its operation. But dangerous is the stay that is sought in Egypt, trust and confidence therein. In this respect Egypt is designated a remembrancer of iniquity (Ezekiel 29:16), since for Israel it had, and not as of yesterday, but from of old (comp. also Ezekiel 16:26; Ezekiel 23:8; Ezekiel 23:19), the fatal significance of a pride which resists Jehovah and leads away from Him, of a consciousness of worldly power, which amid the characteristic Pharaonic arrogance expressed itself just as distinctly (Ezekiel 29:3; Ezekiel 29:9) as in Exodus 5:2, and had this the more seductively, as a self-conscious abiding worldly power is in fact fitted to impose on people. Friendship with Egypt is the most contemptuous relation in which Israel can be thought of, on account of the indifference which it necessarily implied on the part of the Israelitish people not only in regard to their former house of bondage, but also to the mighty deliverance obtained from it, and generally in what concerned their relation to Jehovah, on whom, as their own and their fathers’ God, they had been thrown from their state of childhood. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ B. SECOND PART.—Ezekiel 33-48THE OF GOD’S MERCIES TOWARD HIS PEOPLE IN THE WORLD_______________ I. THE RENEWAL OF EZEKIEL’S DIVINE MISSION.—Ch 33. 1And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 2Son of man, speak to the sons of thy people, and say to them, When I bring a sword upon a land, and the people of the land take a man from their borders, and set him for3their watchman; And he sees the sword coming upon the land, and blows4the trumpet, and warns the people; And any one hears the sound of the trumpet, and does not take warning, and the sword comes and takes himaway, his blood shall be upon his own head. 5He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him, since, letting6himself be warned, he would make his soul [his life] escape [would deliver it]. And the watchman, when he sees the sword coming, and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and the sword shall come and take away a soul [a man] from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity, but his blood7will I require at the watchman’s hand. And thou, son of man, [as a] watch man have I given thee to the house of Israel, and [so] thou hearest the word8out of My mouth, and thou warnest them from Me. If I say to the wicked, Wicked man, thou shalt surely die, and thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, he, the wicked man, in [on account of] his iniquity shall9die, but his blood will I require at thy hand. But if thou dost warn a wicked man of his way, that he turn from it, and he does not turn from his way, he shall die in [on account of] his iniquity, but thou hast delivered thy soul.10And thou, son of man, say to the house of Israel: Thus ye say, saying, If our transgressions and our sins are upon us, and we pine in [on account of] them,11how shall [can] we then live? Say to them, As I live, saith [sentence of] the Lord Jehovah, if I should have pleasure in the death of the wicked! but in the turning of a wicked man from his way, that he may live. Turn ye, turn ye12from your evil ways; and why will ye die, O house of Israel? And thou, son of man, say to the sons of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression, and through [in the] wickedness of the wicked shall he [the wicked] not stumble [fall] in the day of his turning from his wickedness; and a righteous man shall not be able to13live thereby [namely, because he is a righteous man] in the day of his sin. When I say of the [to the] righteous, He shall surely live, and he trusts in his righteousness and commits iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered, and in14his iniquity which he does, in it shall he die. And when I say to the wicked, Thou shalt surely die, and he turns from his sin, and does judgment andrighteousness: 15If the wicked shall restore a pledge, shall repay what he had robbed, if he walks in the statutes of life, that he do no iniquity—he shall16surely live, he shall not die! All his sins which he sinned, they shall not be remembered to him; he does judgment and righteousness; he shall surely17live! And the sons of thy people are saying, The way of the Lord is not18right—but they, their way is not right! When a righteous man turns from his19righteousness and commits iniquity, then he shall die thereby: And when a wicked man turns from his wickedness, and does judgment and righteousness,20thereby shall he live. And ye say: The way of the Lord is not right? Everyone as his ways [are] will I judge you, O house of Israel.—21And it came to pass, in the twelfth year, in the tenth [month], on the fifth of the month of our captivity,22the escaped from Jerusalem came to me, saying, The city is taken. And the hand of Jehovah was upon me [came upon me] in the evening before the coming of the escaped, and He opened my mouth, until he came to me in23the morning; and my mouth was opened, and I was no longer dumb. Andthe word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 24Son of man, the inhabitants of those ruins on the ground of Israel are saying, Abraham was one, and he got the land for a possession, and we [are] many, and the land is given us for a possession25Therefore say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Ye eat upon [with] the blood, and ye lift your eyes [continually] to your abominable idols, and shedblood, and shall ye possess the land? 26Ye stand upon your sword, ye do abomination, and pollute every one his neighbour’s wife, and shall ye possess27the land? Say thus unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, As I live, if they who are in the ruins shall not fall by the sword! And him that is in the field will I give to the beasts to be eaten, and they that are in the forts28and in the caves shall die of the pestilence. And I give the land to waste and desolation, and the pride of its strength ceases; and the mountains of29Israel are waste, that no one passes over them. And they know that I [am] Jehovah, when I give the land to waste and desolation, because of all their30abominations which they have done.—And thou, son of man, the sons of thy people talk of thee beside the walls and in the doors of the houses, and speak one with another, each with his brother, saying, Come now, and hear 31what the word is which proceedeth from Jehovah! And they will come to thee as a people comes, and will be before thee [as] My people, and they hear thy words, and they will not do them; for [but] in their mouth they are prating loves [ever making love-songs, have wanton pieces in their mouth]; their heart goes after32their gain. And lo! thou art to them as a wanton song, beautiful of sound [voice], and one striking the chords well; and they hear thy words, and do33them not. And when it comes—lo! it comes, then they know that a prophet was in the midst of them. Ezekiel 33:2. Vulg.: de novissimis suis—(licet ex infimis suis, Rosenm, vel de excellentioribus, Lyra). Ezekiel 33:3. Sept.: ... καὶσημανητ.λαῶ, Ezekiel 33:4. ... καιμηφυλαξητχι—et non se observaverit— Ezekiel 33:12. Sept. ... ἀνομιαἀνομουοὐμηκακωσηαὐτον … δυνησεταισωθηναι— Ezekiel 33:16. ... ἐναὐτοιςζησεταιEzekiel 33:21. Sept. ... ἐντ. δωδεκατωμηνι—Vulg.: vastata est civitas! (Another read.: αςωϊιςωψη, Syr.) Ezekiel 33:22. ... κ. συνεκλεισθηἐτι. Ezekiel 33:25. Another read.: ψςιπιλν, fully. Ezekiel 33:26. ... καιἀνηζτονπλησιοναὐτουἐμιανατε—(Another read.: ςωιϊν.) Ezekiel 33:28. Sept.: ... διατομηεἰναιδιαποζευομενον. Ezekiel 33:31. ... ὁτιΨευδοςἐντ.στοματιαὐτωνκ. ὀπισωτ. μιασματωναὐτων—Vulg.: quia in canticum oris sui vertunt illos et avaritiam suam— Ezekiel 33:32. ΚαιγινμαυψοιςὡςφωνηΨαλτηςιουἡδυφωνουεὐαςμοστου—Vulg.: quasi carmen musicum, quod suavi dulcique sono canitur;— Ezekiel 33:33. ... ἐςουσιν ’Ιδουἡκει— REMARKSIt is a question whether the last division of our book opens with this chapter. Kliefoth denies it from the contents, which point back to what precedes, Ezekiel 3:17 sq., Ezekiel 18:20 sq. The third part must begin with Ezekiel 33:21. In contrast to the foreign nations, Ezekiel 33:2 associates this word of threatening against Israel with the words of threatening against foreign nations previously given, as is done also in Isaiah and Jeremiah. Ezekiel 25:1 to Ezekiel 32:32 numbers thirteen words of God; thereto belongs Ezekiel 33:1-20 as a fourteenth, in order to make out the number 2 Χ 7. The contents, threatenings and warnings, are not suited as an introduction to the promises of the third part; while, on the contrary, they are quite proper as a conclusion to the preceding portions. Hengstenberg also regards Ezekiel 33:1-20 as the author’s conclusion, but to the whole of what precedes, namely, Ezekiel 1-32. The text does not show the impossibility of Ezekiel having delivered a prophecy to his people before the arrival of the escaped; but the admitted rιsumι out of the preceding is no argument against the supposition of an introduction to the following, as we shall see, just as little as the want of a specification of time. For with reference to the latter point, Hitzig justly points to the historical notice standing in the middle, Ezekiel 33:21-22. Its importance for the present chapter, in fact, makes any farther indication of time superfluous; as was remarked by Hδv., who in this only goes too far, that he makes the revelations on to Ezekiel 39 to have been imparted to the prophet in one night—the portion Ezekiel 33:1-20 forming the somewhat earlier introduction revealed to him, and Ezekiel 33:21-33 attaching itself to the other very closely as a new introduction. This chapter has first of all its relation to the transition portion, Ezekiel 25-32. In this respect it likewise has a transition character, which on one side gives indication of itself in this, that it, as also Ezekiel 25-27, points back to the earlier part. For as the predictions of judgment upon those without are in some sense an appendage to the repeated, always increasingly definite prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, so Ezekiel 33:2 sq., in what it says of the watchman-agency of Ezekiel, attaches an admonition for Israel to try themselves, in presence of this activity of the prophet, whether Ezekiel had not dealt faithfully with his obligation, or Israel with his warning; but especially as regards the exiled, the verses 10 sq. render conspicuous, in contrast with the despair of these, God’s will and procedure, and verses 17 sq. set forth these as being the right way. If people will not renounce every kind of a connection, for which there is no foundation, they will find—where now what was announced in Ezekiel 24-26 sq. begins to enter—the supposition of a close to the past prophetic activity of Ezekiel, the prophecy of judgment, quite deserving of acceptation. It was a close proceeding out of as well as with that which had preceded. But by reason of the relation of this chapter, as now indicated, primarily to Ezekiel 25-32., is farther expressed its relation to the first main division, Eze_1:-24. On the other side, however, the transition character of the section Ezekiel 25-32. (pp. 11, 12) is proved by that which is contained in these chapters of a preparatory, introductory nature to the second main division of the book. This is the case also with our present chapter. It might already be regarded as a preparation for something new, that at the close with what precedes the call of Ezekiel is formulated out of it, and Israel is challenged to self-examination, as also to an acquittal of the prophet and a justification of God. The in part verbal reference of this chapter to Ezekiel 3, 18, in Ezekiel 33:2-20, certainly does not (as Keil supposes) set forth the call of Ezekiel for the future, but it contains a renewal of his divine mission. The connecting together of the two halves of the chapter is on no account to be regarded as “merely accidental.” “The two verses 25 and 26, just as Ezekiel 33:15, alike point back to Ezekiel 18; and on the other hand, that Ezekiel 33:10 b is in accord with Ezekiel 24:23, cannot be overlooked” (Hitz.). The full-toned charge in Ezekiel 33:2 : “Speak to the sons of Israel, and say to them,” suits well as a commencement, while Ezekiel 33:24 looks only like a continuation. What Ezekiel must say to the sons of his people (Ezekiel 33:2) prepares for the opening of his mouth (Ezekiel 33:22), and so introduces what is to be said in Ezekiel 33:25. There can be no doubt that what is stated in Ezekiel 33:21-22 is the fulfilment of Eze 24:26-27; so that the new, to which the verses 2–20 form the preparation and introduction,—the prophecy of God’s mercies toward His people in the world,—is the second main division of the book. The passage, also, Ezekiel 33:10 sq. explicitly directs the despairing to grace, while in the parallel passage, Ezekiel 33:24 sq., the stout-hearted are, on the contrary, pointed to the judgment; so that the section Ezekiel 33:23 sq. speaks just as much of threatening as of the opposite. Ezekiel 33:1-20. What kind of a sending of Ezekiel that was which is now renewed. Ezekiel 33:1. On what occurred in the twelfth year, after the taking of Jerusalem, on the evening or during the night before the escaped made his appearance, comp. at Ezekiel 33:22. The address being to the sons of thy people (Ezekiel 33:2), shows that he was now to turn from foreign nations to Israel again—although ςַ ?ξְּ ?κָ is still used, not ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι, as at Ezekiel 33:31 for the first time. There is already a preparation made for the great turn which divides the book.—If an application to the fellow-exiles of the prophet is primarily to be understood, there is still a more general one indicated in what follows,—that to the Israel of the captivity the Israel at home were to be added, that Israel generally were to be contemplated. For with this also agrees “the house of Israel” in the application of the similitude (Ezekiel 33:7), according to which the children of the people of the prophet were thought of in common, as those who were entering into one and the same condition(αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ), just as in the similitude itself “land” is spoken of, and ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ placed quite absolutely (comp. Ezekiel 14:13).—The idea is first expressed figuratively, Ezekiel 33:2-6, before Israel is put into the frame and hung on the wall (Ezekiel 33:7-9).—ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υλִּ ?ιΞΰָ ?αִ ?ιΰ, spoken generally, but not altogether hypothetically; so, however, that the hearers should think of a case before them which had either actually occurred or was in the act of doing so. The enemy was on the way (Hitz., Grot.), was standing at the cross-way (Ezekiel 21:26 [21], Ezekiel 24:2). The turning of the matter into a similitude is peculiar to our passage, as distinguished from Ezekiel 3:16-21. Peculiar, also, is the trait in a manner necessitating a certain experience on the part of the hearers, that the people of the land in question, the men, were themselves to appoint the watchmen, whence, in case they did not give heed to him, they withstood and strove against themselves, and so should be the more convicted of their guilt and folly.—ξִ ?χְ ?φֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν, singular, but in a plural sense: from the end on all sides, the entire territory of the land; according to the suffix, to be understood of the whole community, with reference to μָ ?χְ ?ϊεּ and πָ ?ϊְ ?πεּ ?Χμָ ?δֶ ?ν(Genesis 19:4; 1 Kings 12:31). Hδv., Tuch decide for an ellipsis εְ ?ςַ ?γχָ ?φֶ ?δ.—On φֹ ?τֶ ?δ, comp. on Ezekiel 3:17. Ezekiel 33:3. Corresponding to the fundamental idea ofεְ ?ψָ ?ΰָ ?δ, φֹ ?τֶ ?δ.—ωׁ ?εֹ ?τָ ?ψ of the clear resounding tone. That we are to think of a horny sort of instrument, if not one simply of horn, is evident from its being exchanged with χֶ ?ψֶ ?υ, in Joshua 6. for example. ϊָּ ?χַ ?ςωׁ ?εֹ ?τָ ?ψ is distinguished as a signal for the calling together of the people, in Numbers 10:6-7, from the sounding of an alarm at a breaking up. Here it is manifestly applied to the announcement of the enemy, for a warning or advertisement to the people (comp. Ezekiel 3:17, and pp. 72, 73). Ezekiel 33:4. εְ ?ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ςδַ ?ωֹּׁ ?ξֵ ?ςַ, who hath ears to hear (Revelation 2:7; Revelation 2:11, etc.).—αִ ?ζְ ?ηָ ?ψ for πִ ?ζְ ?ηַ ?ψ.—And the sword comes, when the sword is a-coming, and what is to be feared cannot be a matter of doubt. Ewald: “so that the sword came and carried him away, then his blood,” etc. According to Hengst.: because people are wont to carry on their heads; according to others, the image is derived from sacrifice, in which the offerer transferred his guilt to his victim by the laying on of his hand (Leviticus 1:4; Leviticus 24:14; Matthew 27:25). Ezekiel 33:5. The alone self-guiltiness of the individual is here made still more manifest. An explication without any need of the αִּ ?ι, for.—αּ ?εֹ, as much as αְּ ?ψֹ ?ΰωׁ ?εֹ, Ezekiel 33:4.—Hitzig: “Because he let himself be warned, he has delivered his soul.” πִ ?ζְ ?ηָ ?ψ is here the participle. Ezekiel 33:6. The similitude has hitherto proceeded on the supposition that the watchman does his duty, because this is really the case in hand. But now the other supposition is made, that he has neglected what belonged to his calling.—δεּ ?ΰ, masculine, referring to πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ.—Since only the soul which continues in sin is liable to death (Ezekiel 18:4, etc.), a wicked person is presupposed (as at Ezekiel 3:18) as the one that should be carried away; it should be through his guilt, on account of it and in it. But while previously the guilt of his blood was simply his own, the blood-guilt of his disobedience in respect to the intended warning is now, without regard to his guilt otherwise and generally, sought at the hand of the watchman. It is to be observed that for this γָּ ?ψַ ?ωׁ is used here, while we have αָּ ?χַ ?ωׁ at Ezekiel 3:18; Ezekiel 3:20.—That the case supposed is only a possible, by no means a real one, appears from the application made of it at Ezekiel 33:7 to Ezekiel—for the προτασις the ἀποδοσις(comp. Hebrews 13:17). At the same time is his installation as watchman to the house of Israel taken out of human hands,—in that case, when men appoint for themselves a watchman, the last-named possibility (Ezekiel 33:6) might all the more readily take place,—and Jehovah carries back the watchman-office of Ezekiel expressly to Himself (I have given thee).—εְ ?ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ςְ ?ϊָּ ?Χ, such literally was the expression used of the call given in Ezekiel 3:17, so that we must think of supplying to the words marks of quotation; therefore not importing that the prophet must thereby be instructed with respect to the future. Ezekiel 33:8. The same as before, only with a still more emphatic address than at Ezekiel 3:18. Ezekiel 33:9. So here again; comp. at Ezekiel 3:19 (Acts 20:25-26). Ezekiel 33:10. Since nothing of the neglect of duty which had taken place is charged upon the prophet, only the original direction given him is again literally repeated: the guilt must be sought among the people, as was really the case, and indeed is clear from their own lips, as stated here.—μֵ ?ΰξֹ ?ψ, their saying is set over against that which had been said to the prophet in divine direction, according to which he must speak; their doing also in regard to the Lord, as they had known it from the prophet’s behaviour toward them, set over against his doing and acting.—Of what nature the divine mission of Ezekiel was from the first has been repeated (Ezekiel 33:2-9) in the similitude and its explanation, and now (hence ΰְֶ ?ξֹ ?ψΧ repeated in Ezekiel 33:11) there follows in what manner this mission of his is renewed to the prophet. A reference is made back to Ezekiel 18, but the difference between what is said there and here must not be overlooked. While there no consciousness of guilt, no confession of sin, appears (Ezekiel 18:2), the predominantly recriminative work of Ezekiel has still produced so much effect that they now say: Our transgressions and our sins are upon us. But this consciousness and this confession tinges in the darkest manner the feeling of despair in regard to life. It is by no means for the purpose of excusing themselves that the people appeal to the passage Leviticus 26:39. Consequently, the upon us is not to be understood as meaning: “testify against us” (Rosenm.), but as of a burden under which they are sinking (εּ ?αָ ?νΧπְ ?πַ ?χִּ ?ιν, comp. on Ezekiel 24:23; Ezekiel 4:17). Those who represented themselves in Ezekiel 18 as expiatory sufferers for their ancestors, here are pining away under their own burden, and that with reference to the prospect of life, likewise repeatedly opened up in Ezekiel 18. (Ezekiel 33:23; Ezekiel 33:32). We must, therefore, take into account the pressure, were it only of the evil forebodings, the foreshadows of the event mentioned in Ezekiel 33:21, if not the actual knowledge of the taking of Jerusalem; so that in this also may be seen preparation, an introduction to what was to follow. Ezekiel 33:11. What for this despair in respect to life (i.e. deliverance, salvation, favour) was the declared mind and will of Jehovah in Ezekiel 18:23; Ezekiel 18:32, the same is here emphasized in the peculiar protestation: As I live, while there it is only: “Have I any pleasure?” or: “for I have no pleasure”—see there also Ezekiel 18:30-31. Ezekiel 33:12. We learn, however, that the question is about conversion: “He combats despair only in so far as it is a hindrance to repentance. To afford mere tranquillity is not the aim of the prophet” (Hengst.). Comp. on Ezekiel 18:20, where in like manner with reference to conversion we have this antithesis: “righteousness of the righteous,” and: “wickedness of the wicked.” Through this antithesis to μֹ ?ΰϊַּ ?φִּ ?ιμֶ ?πּ ?εּ, the expression μֹ ?ΰιִ ?λָּ ?ωֶׁ ?μ becomes clear (Niphal); Gesen.: “he shall not be unfortunate.” His own righteousness no means of deliverance, so soon as he falls into transgression; and wickedness, again, no necessary destruction, so soon as a change to the better comes. (τִּ ?ωׁ ?ςεֹ is likewise infinitive.) Because presently the case of the righteous was to be spoken of, it is said by way of introduction thereto: And a righteous man, etc. αָּ ?δּ, in, through, on account of his righteousness. Ezekiel 33:13. To the righteous man who continues such, assurance of life is promised. Confidence in one’s own righteousness (singular, as an actual quality), when one does unrighteousness (Ezekiel 3:20), may be on the one side, but on the other side there will be no remembrance of the earlier righteousnesses. Comp. Ezekiel 18:24; Ezekiel 18:26. Ezekiel 33:14. The contrast with the wicked. Here an address to such, because this is what is wished for; comp. Ezekiel 18:21. Ezekiel 33:15. A lively form of speech, hence without the copula, an exemplification. Comp. in reference to it, Ezekiel 18:7; Ezekiel 18:12; Ezekiel 18:16; Ezekiel 18:21; Ezekiel 18:28; Ezekiel 20:11. Ezekiel 33:16. Comp. Ezekiel 18:22. Ezekiel 33:17. Comp. on Ezekiel 18:24 sq. The immediate occasion for blame is formed here by such a representation of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:14 sq.) who repented, over the righteous who does unrighteousness. The fact alone that “a righteous man” could be spoken of before them in such a manner, more especially that turning, turning, is what they are called to, while they had placed their confidence upon “the righteousness of the righteous” (Ezekiel 33:12)—if not their own, yet that which belonged to them, descended to them as the people of God from their pious forefathers—that is the stone in the way of the Lord which the divine address takes away, in order to throw it to the quarter to which it belongs, namely, to the false way of Israel, which they had chosen for themselves with their outward carnal self-righteousness in such and such religious observances. Ezekiel 33:18-19, however, do not simply repeat Ezekiel 33:13-14, but the two cases of the righteous and the wicked return again in the form which is the most appropriate for setting forth clearly and distinctly the way of the Lord, and in which it strikes at first sight, and at the same time with reference to the command given: “Return, return.” Hence not εְ ?δεּ ?ΰΞαָ ?θַ ?ηςַ ?μΞφִ ?γΧ, as at Ezekiel 33:13, but αְ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?αΞφַ ?γּ ?ιχξִ ?φִּ ?γְ ?Χ (Ezekiel 3:20), and with nothing farther εּ ?ξֵ ?ϊαָּ ?δֶ ?ν, namely, by these two parts: turning from his righteousness, which is left unnoticed, and doing unrighteousness. (Rosenm.: ςָ ?εֶ ?μ, collective.) Comp. Ezekiel 18:24; Ezekiel 18:26. The wicked throws light on this caricature of turning—a turning it also is, indeed, only to what is evil—by his, on the contrary, turning from his wickedness (in Ezekiel 33:14 it is from “his sin”). Ezekiel 33:20, as also Ezekiel 18:29, repeats the charge for the purpose of making a suitable close. Comp. Ezekiel 18:30 (Ezekiel 7:27). Ezekiel 33:21-22. The fresh turn.The fact is now an accomplished one—Jerusalem is taken (Ezekiel 24:25); and therewith we have, as had been foretold at the close of Ezekiel 24, not only the arrival of the escaped, but as the main thing the opening of Ezekiel’s mouth, that he might no more be dumb. This historical notice in the middle of the chapter is therefore the kernel of the whole: the renewal of the divine mission of the prophet, over against the completed acts of judgment, now gives to his prophecy the expression of God’s compassions toward His people in the world, with which the second main division of the book is occupied. The indication of time which was to mark the turning-point for the prophet (for Jerusalem was overcome on the 9th of the 4th month of the 11th year) teaches us to understand the expressions: “in the day,” inch. Ezekiel 24:25, or: “in that day,” Ezekiel 33:26-27, of what was to take place more than sixteen months afterwards. Hitzig regards it as “very improbable that Ezekiel should first have received in January 586 the report of what had happened to Jerusalem in July 588;” and in place of considering that the text could not mean to speak of the report, he makes the prophet over and above “contradict himself,” inasmuch as, according to Ezekiel 26:1-2, he had already in the eleventh year heard the report of the matter—which, however, is not necessarily rendered clear by Ezekiel 26.—and then at the close he changes the twelfth year into the eleventh, which is supported by the Syrian translation alone. Hengst. justly remarks that the notice does not refer to the first report concerning the taking of Jerusalem, and then proceeds: “The news of such events spread with amazing rapidity. The intelligence, doubtless, arrived in eight, or at the most fourteen days at the abode of Ezekiel; so that the difficulty is not removed by assuming most arbitrarily an error in the text, and putting the eleventh in place of the twelfth year.” The meaning of what was announced beforehand in Ezekiel 24, and according to our verse had now actually occurred, is that in place of all reports—so fitted to awaken hope, yet traversing the way of the Lord with His people, always again paralysing their necessary conversion—which up to the last had arrived, a certain fugitive shall now speak, and, as an eye-witness, place beyond all dispute what had actually happened. The matter-of-fact voucher given into the hand of the exiled with this escaped one must have removed out of the path of safety what at least the strong walls of Jerusalem threw in the way of their turning to the Lord. For the meaning ascribed to ηַ ?τָּ ?μִ ?ιθ, to make one’s escape, get off through flight (Genesis 14:13), it is not necessary, with Hengstenberg, to suppose an ideal person, a collective, that is, “a band of exiles,” as Ezekiel had already intimated, Ezekiel 14:22-23, that a whole host of such fugitives would come to the exiles, “so that these by their miserable plight should be a living proclamation of the frightful catastrophe through which they had passed.” Hitzig thinks that “the fugitive may have escaped immediately after the bloodshed at Mizpah from the band of Ishmael (Jeremiah 41:10); if not, which is improbable, only after the flight which ensued into Egypt.” J. D. Michaelis explains out of the remoteness of Ezekiel’s place of residence the so late arrival of the fugitive, especially considering the frightful disorder that took place. Ezekiel 33:22. And the hand of Jehovah, etc.; comp. Ezekiel 37:1; Ezekiel 1:3. The effect of it was the opening of the mouth. But this latter can be virtually and actually distinguished. In that respect the opening of the mouth of Ezekiel took place when it was commanded him that he should speak to the sons of his people, in respect to whom he had been dumb from the time indicated in Ezekiel 24. He began to do so at Ezekiel 33:1 of this chapter, to which, therefore, the expression concerning “the hand of Jehovah” brings us back—namely, that this hand had now removed from him his previous dumbness, so that he might henceforth again speak to Israel, and should do so. J. D. Michaelis remarks quite correctly: “the prophet fell into ecstasy,” and the word contained in Ezekiel 33:2-20 was imparted to him. In regard to the time, it is more precisely stated that the divine cause comes into operation on the evening before the coming of the escaped; and parallel therewith was the effect, the opening of the prophet’s mouth, ςַ ?γΞαֹּ ?ΰΰֵ ?μַ ?ιΧ, therefore in the interval between the evening and the morning. It was hence independently of the escaped that the prophet got a renewal of his commission, and, indeed, while there was combined with the removal of his previously enforced silence a direct positive revelation and communication. Through a divine movement and working, everything was thus prepared and introduced for that which was going to take place on the fugitive’s arrival. For the circumstance that on his actual arrival Ezekiel’s mouth was opened (εַ ?ιִּ ?τָּ ?ϊַ ?ητִּ ?ι is not to be regarded as an emphatic repetition for the purpose of connection with what follows, but in contradistinction to εַ ?ιִּ ?τְ ?ϊַּ ?ηΰֶ ?ϊΞτִּ ?ι), adds to what was done potentia, as it now also took place actu, so that the divine word, Ezekiel 33:2-20, given with this aim, for this particular moment destined, was now also spoken to the people by the prophet; and in proof that he was no more dumb, he immediately proceeded to give the continuation of it (Ezekiel 33:23 sq.). In Ezekiel 24:27 it was said Ezekiel’s mouth should be opened “with” the escaped. In the wider sense, namely, at the same time, about the time, when the escaped should come, it took place in the evening; literally, it took place with him in the morning, and the renewed prophetical mission of Ezekiel began then in fact. [“One may designate the following prophecies as the prophetically represented victorious history of Israel, of the kingdom of God among men. The wonderful, truly great, and divine is set forth here as a contrast to the present. In the presence of death only resurrection and life! The deepest humiliation of the covenant-people, their apparent annihilation is the path to their true greatness, nay, to their eternal glory.”—Hδv.] Hengst. remarks: “On the night before the arrival of the exile-band, which was doubtless announced the day before, took place the opening of the prophet’s mouth, the removal of the seal as it were from it. The impulse to speak to the people again asserted itself. The prophetic activity itself first commenced after the exile-band appeared, the arrival of which was to form the ground for the receiving of the new disclosures. Only after the complete death exhibited before their eyes, the annihilation of all earthly hopes, could the announcement of the joyful resurrection be made.” Comp. besides on Ezekiel 3:26-27; Ezekiel 29:21. Ezekiel 33:23-33. The Renewed Mission of Ezekiel in view of the State of Heart of those in Canaan (Ezekiel 33:23-29), and then of those in the Captivity (Ezekiel 33:30-33). What sort of a mission that of Ezekiel’s was which was renewed to him, namely, to do the part of a watchman, to warn the people, we have already seen in Ezekiel 33:2-9. Hence in the connection of the following section with Ezekiel 33:1-20 things stand in their proper order, and it entirely corresponds with a continuation of the divine discourse, that such a position of the prophet at the renewal of his divine mission first of all comes to an explanation with those who are still to be warned, to be threatened. The beginning of the divine word made known to Ezekiel corresponds very closely with that contained in Ezekiel 33:8-9. It is a complete misunderstanding on the part of Kliefoth, when he would not find “the inhabitants of these waste places,” as he renders, in the desolated Jerusalem, or in the desolated cities of Judah, or in the desolated land of Canaan, i.e. in the remnants of the people who still remained there, but drags into the text the exiles in “the certainly not too well cultivated regions on the Chaboras.” ηְ ?ψָ ?αεֹ ?ϊ with the article implies demolition, ruins of cities and houses. Hitzig: “these wastes,” less Jerusalem itself than the other cities which had been stript of their inhabitants (Jeremiah 33:13; Jeremiah 33:10), in which those who were without possessions (Jeremiah 39:10) shared with the returned fugitives (Jeremiah 40:12), having all at once come to great wealth of land, and were puffed up. Things were lying in a comfortless state; how do the hearts adjust themselves to the comfortless position of things? “That there were people who still, ever giving themselves up to illusions, thought that the judgment would not inexorably run its course, was proved by the revolt in which Gedaliah, the Chaldean governor, was slain” (Hengst.). Comp. also the representation in Nehemiah 1. of the desolate condition of things, though an interval of upwards of a century had meanwhile elapsed!—As even in the time of Jesus they were always throwing themselves back on Abraham (for example, John 8, Matthew 3:9), so was it the case here. An argumentum a minori. Since to Abraham, an individual man, in his posterity the land was given for a heritage, the less they conceive could it possibly fail to them—namely, to keep the land; not so properly with Hengst. to receive it again, for they do not give it up as lost—when in point of number they were many, and still more in the feeling of their souls they were without the knowledge of sin and the sense of guilt. In the words of Hengst: “they held themselves to be the true continuation of Abraham’s being, the bearers of the promise given to him” (Genesis 15:7)—the posterity in whom Abraham inherited it, to whom therefore it “was given.” “They overlooked the wide gulf that stood between them and him; if they were Abraham’s children, they would have done his works.” (Comp. at Ezekiel 11:15.) Ezekiel 33:25. To eat upon the blood is explained by Keil as eating of flesh which has not been cleansed of the blood; comp. Leviticus 19:26. “A fundamental law of the theocracy” (Hδv.). The prohibition was given so early as at Genesis 9:4. There with respect to the shedding of blood, as the infliction of death, murder; so that it was aimed against the spirit of murder (Hengst.). Targum: “You eat upon innocent blood.” From the blood a transition is made to the eating. In Leviticus 19. it appears in connection with the service of idolatry, as also here.—Leviticus 18:6; Leviticus 18:15, Leviticus 22:3; Leviticus 4:27.—The question is repeated in Ezekiel 33:26. To stand or place one’s self is=to support one’s self, therefore to place his confidence thereon, which carries farther the shedding of blood.—ςֲ ?ωִׁ ?ιϊֶ ?οϊּ ?εֹ ?ςֵ ?αָ ?δ feminine; hence it has been understood of the women, with reference to immodest idolatrous worship. Hengst. points to Ezekiel 13:17 sq. (“The feminine character of the sinner is already indicated in Genesis 4:7, where it appears unmanly to let sin conquer, instead of ruling over it,”) Hitzig: οstands for ν on account of the ϊ following. Ezekiel 18:12; Ezekiel 16:50; Ezekiel 5:11. The abomination must, according to Hengst., be adultery; Ezekiel 18:6; Ezekiel 18:11.—In Ezekiel 33:27, three punishments are placed over against 2 Χ 3 sins. The parallel to Ezekiel 33:10—here referring to presumption, there to despair—is confirmed by: “As I live” (Ezekiel 33:11).—αֶּ ?ηְ ?ψָ ?αεֹ ?ϊ (Ezekiel 33:24)αַּ ?ηֶ ?ψֶ ?α, a play of words.—Ch. 5.17, Ezekiel 14:15; Ezekiel 14:21; 2 Kings 17:25.—ξְ ?φָ ?γεֹ ?ϊ, the mountain-tops, difficult of access; hence asylums, mountain-fastnesses, to which (as deeps to heights) the caves correspond on the other side, and which come into consideration as refuges from the sword and ravenous wild beasts, but not from the pestilence. (1 Samuel 13:6; Jos. Bell. Jud. 1:16. 4) Ezekiel 5:17; Ezekiel 14:21. Ezekiel 33:28. Ezekiel 6:14.—(Niph.) Ezekiel 30:18; Ezekiel 7:24.—ξֵ ?ΰֵ ?ιοςεֹ ?αֵ ?ψ, Ezekiel 14:15. Cleared of men, even of passing travellers. Ezekiel 33:29. Ezekiel 32:15. Ezekiel 33:30-33. The reference in the preceding verses to the accomplished fact of Jerusalem’s overthrow is followed in Ezekiel 33:30 by a glance into the immediate surroundings of the prophet, as they stood related to his fresh mission. The position of matters was here full of consolation; the consolatory work of Ezekiel must begin, the announcement of salvation is going to proceed. How do the hearts of the exiles feel in regard to this? The prophet cannot speak comfort by means of Abraham, after the manner in which they comforted themselves in Canaan (Ezekiel 33:24). He is “no servant of sin, but of the living God” (Hδv.). A putting of the prophet right, therefore, with respect to the men, such as that which fell to his lot at the outset of his mission, is entirely suitable also here for the new beginning and for the continuation even to the end.—And thou corresponds to the application, Ezekiel 33:7.—δַ ?πִּ ?γְ ?αָּ ?ψִ ?ιν (“who talk among themselves;” they are presented to the prophet, as it were, with a: See there!—Hengst.). Hitzig makes the matter too pointed when he expounds: “Not who confer together upon thee, but who converse about thee as about a matter that is of no great interest to them.” On the contrary,αְּ ?κָ indicates a continuation of the discourse and a sense of interest, which Hδv. thinks cannot be understood otherwise than with a hostile feeling. Still less, however, accords with such an interpretation the regular assembling of the people about the prophet, and above all, the impression which the fulfilment of his predictions will probably have made upon them. He hence forms the beloved standing object of their plaudits—must have done so, we may rather say. ΰֵ ?φֶ ?μΧ, sitting down by the walls(“upon the divan,” Hengst.)—as much as: in secret, or within their houses. (Scarcely, as Hδv.: “the sons, etc., who speak against thee in the house, are thy opponents secretly, and in the doors of the houses, in public, there every one acknowledges thee.”) αְּ ?τִ ?ϊְ ?ηֵ ?ι, without, namely, standing under the gates or doors of the house. And speak; this continues the action of the previous clause. The full form of expression likewise imports more than Hitzig will concede to them.—The words: Come now, etc., appear also to intimate that they must now expect something new, different from what they had been hitherto always hearing. But is it as at Hosea 6:1? Would they only hear, as they say, and not also obey? not return to the Lord?—The prophet must not deceive himself on this account, that his person is their daily theme within and without, nay, that they come in a manner to the word of the Eternal, as is described in Ezekiel 33:31, namely, “as the coining of people,” that is, like streaming multitudes, in vast crowds (“as on great solemnities,” Hδv.)—to which is parallel ςַ ?ξִּ ?ι, in an emphatic manner designating either: “My people” ironically, those who should be Mine—hear, but do not; or: “as My people,” that is, as if they would be My people, and still are not. Ewald: “as if they were the true community.” Or may it not be as Hengst.: “so respectful, attentive, and apparently earnest and willing”? What they will not do is clear from Ezekiel 33:11; the words of the prophet aim at the heart’s conversion.—λִּ ?ιΞςֲ ?πָ ?αִ ?ιν, Hitzig: “for the lovely is according to their taste;” but δֵ ?ξָּ ?δςωִֹׁ ?ιν? and ςωִֹׁ ?ιν is certainly suggested by μֹ ?ΰιַ ?ςֲ ?ωֹׁ ?εּ. “Lovely things” were such as they liked, desired, longed for; hence they are only about the doing of that which is pleasant in their mouth, smacks agreeably to them. Gesenius, however, puts it: “For with the mouth they do what is well-pleasing (to God), but their heart goes after their unrighteous gain.” Hengst. declares the meanings of “loveliness” and “well-pleasing” to be without foundation, and renders: “they deal tenderly with their mouth,” properly: “they show ardour, affect in words an ardent love to God and His word, while the real inclination of their heart goes quite another way, is turned to mammon, the god of the Jewish old man.” Hδv.: “for lewdness they follow with their mouth.” ςָ ?πַ ?α with Ezekiel (comp. at ch.23.) and Jeremiah unquestionably denotes impure love, passionate desire, especially unchaste fleshly desire, whether as akin to ἀγαπάω, or to “gaping after” (gaffen), looking after, or to “snatching at” (Germ. happen), hoping for, earnestly expecting. So much is clear as to the meaning of the word; all besides is imported, or arbitrarily connected with it. ςֲ ?πָ ?αִ ?ιν (only in the plural), however, occurs not merely in Ezekiel 33:31, but also in Ezekiel 33:32 connected with ωִׁ ?ιψ, song. What else, then, can it signify but “love-songs” (songs of impure love)? To the fact that they do not the words of the prophet, which according to their own confession proceed from Jehovah (Ezekiel 33:30), the ςֲ ?βָ ?αִ ?ιναְּ ?τִ ?ιδֶ ?νδֵ ?ξָּ ?δςωִֹׁ ?ιν form a restriction: certainly they also do, they are at the doing in their mouth: as much as, with words, with the tongue. What is received by the ear, this in the mouth becomes love-songs; the “doing” of that they make out of the words of God spoken by the prophet. Hence, after that in Ezekiel 33:31 the expression ςֲ ?πָ ?αִ ?ιν has been explained, or more exactly defined, the statement: “and they hear thy words,” etc., is again resumed. So that their doing remains in the mouth; the heart does not participate in it, as is presently indicated when it is said that their heart goes after its covetous, fraudulent gain (αֶּ ?φַ ?ς from αָּ ?φַ ?ς, to make a cut; Ezekiel 22:27; Ezekiel 22:12). Nay, they take such advantage of the words of God, which Ezekiel announces to them, that they turn them to their own account; whence it is not so much their warm regard for Jehovah, as Jehovah’s for them, which here comes into consideration. In some such way they treat the divine promises as loving declarations of a hot paramour. We are not, however, on this account obliged to interpret ςֲ ?βָ ?αִ ?ιν by: “frivolous jokes,” “words of mockery” (with the Targum), or: “falsehood,” “deceit,” with the older translations. Not that they would “only amuse themselves,” but more, they turn grace into wantonness (Judges 4). With them also, therefore, the matter concerns the substance of things, not so much “the lovely form;” and they were perverting it to excess according to their heart’s lust. Ezekiel 33:32. According to Hitzig, ωִׁ ?ιψ must signify not song, but “lovely singer.” ιְ ?τֵ ?δχεֹ ?μ does not necessitate that, for it may be referred to the fine tones of the song. But if it applies to the fine voice of the prophet, then it is to be understood that, after he has in ωִׁ ?ιψ been coupled with his prophecy (to which, however, the reference according to the connection must chiefly be made), he is thought of apart, and ξֵ ?θִ ?απַ ?πֵּ ?ο continues the reference to the prophet, without therefore constraining us by this personal reference to understand ωִׁ ?ιψ also directly and simply of him. δֵ ?ιθִ ?ια (Hiph. of ιָ ?θַ ?α), with πַ ?πֵּ ?ο, signifies either to play well, beautifully, or to do so vigorously, bravely. Junius refers what is said to the prophecies of doom upon those who are without (Ezekiel 25-32). Hengst., in a manifestly modern fashion: “they rejoice amid the national impoverishment at the admirable rhetorical gifts of the new classic” (!). Ezekiel 33:33. This verse joins to the repetition of their not doing the prediction of their unfailing and so different knowledge of the prophet.—And when it comes, in a general sense, what he speaks; not the more special utterance in Ezekiel 33:27-29, which at least does not sound like a song of loves, rather the prophecies which were now going to follow. Thus the tone with which this second main division of the book commences is different; not: they shall know that I am Jehovah, but as at Ezekiel 2:5, where the language employed was still of a general kind. (See there.)—The: behold it comes, points back to the circumstance that the judgment on the people has actually come; and as such a thing has come, so certain also shall the following discourses be seen to be as to their fulfilment. (Hitz.: the matter shall certainly come to pass which is the object of thine address. Hδv.: “And lo! it is already fulfilled; this must signify, Jerusalem is fallen, and the truth of the predictions perfectly established.”) The experience is, however, a painful one, because the people’s impenitence will exclude them from the future salvation. What far-reaching and, at the same time, true prospective vision, even to the days of the Son of man! It had already been declared to them through the prophets in the midst of them; so much the more, when He Himself actually came and spoke to them, did every pretext for their sin fall away, John 15:22. Compare the Reflections at pp. 72, 73, and on ch 18 1. “Woe is me,” exclaimed the apostle, “if I preach not the gospel!” (1 Corinthians 9:16.) This is a lesson which belongs to all those who have had the care or oversight of others committed to them. With that is not to be confounded the circumstance, that each individual has his particular gift from God, by means of which he can be profitable to his neighbour. The general love demands that we should seek the salvation of each other, Jude 21–23 (Cocceius). 2. In the office, calling, service which belongs to preachers, two things unite,—namely, the appointment through men, that is, in the present case, through the Church, as is implied in the similitude Ezekiel 33:2 sq.; and that the Lord gives preachers to Jerusalem, as is said at Ezekiel 33:7. Where this latter is not regarded, there the other also cannot be considered. If the civil magistrate, hence the State, or private individuals to whom the patronage belongs, will assert for themselves the vocatio ministrorum, they thereby ignore the Christian rights of the Church, just because they do not acknowledge the supreme right of God over His people. For it belongs to the Church to choose and ordain her servants, according to the order of Christ and His apostles; and a particular community, although it may be locally formed, does not at all stand related to the whole Church after the manner that a single commune, as a section of the civic commonwealth, stands related to the State; but it is in respect to constitution the Church itself, which has its representation in the community as regards its full possession of life. Not otherwise appear to us the communities of the Acts of the Apostles and of the apostolic epistles. Hereditary relations might well enough beget a temporary legal right of a historical kind, but really destitute of foundation, in so far as it is at variance with the fundamental rights of the Church, and can be proved to be the remnant of an antagonistic claim of rights, an unjust usurpation. We are not to speak with the Remonstrants of rights conferred upon the Church by the State in the matter of the vocatio ministrorum, since the State has no right to confer, because possessing none. And so the Reformation, if it found itself very much in the position, could not have the right, to erect a throne for the Cζsareo-papal government of the Church, since the Church, having the right to govern itself, renounces itself when it gives up to the State, or to the persons in whom the civil power concentrates itself, rights which are absolutely the Church’s own, which therefore the civil power cannot possess, unless these rights are to be turned to foolishness. In every tyranny exercised on the conscience, foolishness plays its part. But the claim of right, which, since the Reformation, has crept in for the conferring of rights which are against right, is of a piece with that of summus episcopus—whence the Papistical leaven of this title clearly appears. For it is Papistical doctrine in the general to ascribe the right of vocation to the bishops, if the Roman chair should not have granted special exceptions in regard to the election of pastors. When the limits of State-power have been formulated in this way, that it has to do with things circa sacra, but not in sacris, it certainly does look odd enough that “a supreme bishop” should indeed inspect the walls of the sanctuary, but must not tread upon them. The experience of upwards of 300 years, however, has shown much else than the absurdity of the formula in question—has proved the neglected, though oft-repeated and powerfully expressed, warnings of Luther and of the symbolical books, against the intermingling of the spiritual and civil jurisdictions, to have been only too well grounded. And when the Reformed theologian Heidegger, in his Medulla Theologi�, with the view of smoothing over the folly of that formula, would not have the oversight and power of the State limited to the circa religionem et ecclesiam, but apostrophises the magistrate as ὁμοπιττος et ecclesi� membrum excellens, thereby giving him to participate in the power which belongs to the Church, and then ascribing to him the obligation of serving Christ and His kingdom, and of advancing this kingdom with the authority lent him by God;—or when Burmann, also a Reformed theologian, enumerates the offices of the magistrate circa sacra, and among these reckons not merely the appointment and ordering of the acts of public worship, so as to secure that all be done according to the word of God, and the providing a safeguard against ecclesiastical arbitrariness, and the interposition on behalf of oppressed fellow-believers, and so forth, but also the suppression of errors, of heretics and heterodox, the reformation of the Church when it has become corrupt, etc.;—in all this we have a glance afforded us into a state of things which has actually existed, but which, and along therewith the alleged ground for such civil interferences, in spite of the so-called “Christian State,” has long since passed away. But what is to be matter of controversy with the State will, above all, have reference to the so-called church patrons, for patronage is really of Romish heathenish origin, and has never at all, in conformity with its proper sense, been Christianized as a juridical advocateship; at least a good part of the Germanic feudal lordship has infused itself into this assumption of a right of private domination. Now if, in opposition to all of this nature that is at variance with the self-government of the Church by means of the organization peculiar to her, a stand is to be made, and, in particular, the choice and calling of pastors are effected in this way through men, there still is, as the other factor, the Lord, whose body the Church of God is, and the right of the Church in its last source is the constitution granted by her sole Head, Christ. In consequence of this regimen principale, all are brethren who serve one another, the Lord alone has the supreme authority (theocracy or Christocracy); so that the Church, in respect to its inner spiritual form, is no democracy, neither is it an aristocracy any more than a hierarchy, but a monarchy in the highest sense of the word. Through the Holy Spirit, and by dint of such supreme invisible sovereignty, was Ezekiel sent to Israel, just as in ordinary circumstances the humblest village pastor is sent from the same quarter, whether it may be for grace or for judgment. For it is God’s good pleasure that through such service on the part of men the divine will in respect to men should be accomplished (Ephesians 4:11 sq.); and the calling of a minister in any particular case will be perfect, where the internal through the Spirit corresponds with the external through the Church or its organs. 3. Ewald maintains that “the ultimate ground of all possibility of a true conversion stands in this, that in connection with the divine grace, which is ever working for good, a genuine prophet never fails, who, in perilous times announcing the pure truth, informs and warns all with dauntless, clear words.” Against enthusiasts and Schwenkfeldians it has not, indeed, been denied by the teachers of the Church, that God, if such had been His will, could also immediately as from Himself have converted and saved men; yet still the Church has always held fast the conviction, that the public ministry and vocation to it in the Church is requisite by a hypothetical necessity, namely, with reference to the good pleasure and purpose of God. 4. The prophets are to be reckoned among the “extraordinary ministers.” In the old Reformed theology, the extraordinary vocation was represented as threefold:—(1) When God effect it directly through His voice, as in the case of Abraham, Moses, the prophets under the Law, John the Baptist, and the apostles; (2) when it takes place by announcement through a human instrumentality, as in the case of Aaron and the tribe of Levi, by means of Moses as the mediating agency; (3) when the internal impulse of the Spirit drives in one direction or another, as was the case, for example, with the deacon Philip. 5. Death is the wages of sin, and sin is the destruction of people; and so, by reason of the universal sinfulness, quite apart from particular charges of guilt, an absolutely sinless extinction of life is not to be thought of; only relatively heavier or lighter will the guilt weigh in particular cases. But beside one’s own guilt, that of each individual man, there stands upon the tablet of the Judge, as fellow-partakers thereof, human society in the general (through education, instruction, customs, etc.), and in particular its chiefs, as governors, princes, lords, teachers, etc., who should serve not merely as possessors of the dignity and of office, but also as examples to be looked up to in whatever place they may be. 6. “This is, however, the brightest and most glorious distinction of the prophetic calling, to proclaim the joy of the Creator in connection with the life of the converted sinner” (Umbreit). 7. We have not on this account to despair of life, because knowing that we are in the midst of death. For this knowledge of death excludes only the thought of life, as that which might still be in ourselves, and could proceed out of us; but such knowledge by no means takes from us, it rather brings nearer, the prospect of life out of ourselves, namely, in the living God. The conversion version from sin to God, as also from all dead works of a simply legal nature, or of self-righteousness, is hence a burying in regard to the life which is merely man’s, while in reality it is the way of that life which God gives, and which He Himself is. 8. “Conversion, internally considered, is the change of a man’s state of mind into conformity with the will of God—a change, therefore, in which his internal feeling cannot be alone operative, but in which that effects his transformation in the power of God, which is the moving impulse from a higher power in respect to what he is going to be. But outwardly it appears as the complete reformation of his behaviour, since he turns from a direction toward the world into a direction toward God. The change which takes place in his state of mind in all the elements conditioning it becomes manifest in the transformation of his life. This change of mind is as to its nature a single decisive and deeply conscious act—the act of the whole inner life; but precisely on this account not the isolated occurrence of a single hour, of a particular frame or deed, though it frequently also comes to its highest manifestation in a particular hour, frame, or deed. It is not an abstract single change, but a revolution resting on a concrete single change, on a definite turning-point, an always renewed and always more deeply penetrating and pervading revolution, which is quite fitly designated by the term conversion. It is the everlasting deed of the man in the power of his God with reference to the old life” (Lange, Pos. Dogmatik). 9. “Evil ways are not only the bad ways of wicked works, but also the false ways of righteousness. Nay, it is above all important, that whoever will live should turn from his own wisdom and fancied power, as if he could sanctify himself to God, and give Him the glory, and receive from Him justification by grace” (Cocc.). 10. Because conversion of heart, sincere conversion, can at any moment savingly interrupt the course of development of sin, which would otherwise run on to its consummation in the judgment of death, so the disobedience of unbelief toward the alluring word of grace must be regarded as the sin unto death. 11. “When it is said that God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, it must be understood after this manner, as if He were not inclined to give pardon to the penitent. God does not delight in judgment in such a way as not to delight in the justification of him who repents; as if repentance in faith on the word which promises grace to the sinner were of no account with God, or as if there were no righteousness of God available through which the penitent might obtain salvation. This word very clearly shows that there was no necessity for Israel pining away in their own sins, or in those of others, if they were but themselves in the right way. For whenever they turned from their evil way, life was thenceforth prepared for them. Whence it follows, that for that life neither a temple nor a state was requisite, so that those only should pine away of worldly sorrow who have their glory in these carnal and earthly things; whereas for such as would bend their hearts to believe in God, there should be no wasting away in their own or their fathers’ sins, or in those of the people, but they should have life in hope, and should not feel the want of state-support or temple or priesthood, and carnal things of that sort, but should find all laid up for them in God, who would be mindful of His covenant with Abraham, and provide the Seed in which the Gentiles were to be blessed” (Cocc.). 12. “The greatest danger that can arise out of suffering is that a man should misunderstand his Maker; one of the hardest problems for the servants of God is to bring reason into the suffering” (Hengst.). 13. The law in the Old Covenant directed its chief attention upon sin. The knowledge of sin must be for men the result that came out of all those imperatives, “Thou shalt not,” and “Thou shalt.” Hence the prophets in their relation to the law could, in the first instance, pursue no other aim than to set forth men as sinners. Sin remains as the mark of interrogation behind the righteousness of the righteous. As the conflict between the law and the carnality of man is not closed by the law, the doing of what is right according to the law may acquire for any one the predicate of a righteous person, but it will always only in particular cases be done aright according to the law; the righteousness out of the law must be “righteousnesses,” specific ἔργανόμου—such as, for example, are mentioned in Ezekiel 33:14 sq. (and in contrast therewith Ezekiel 33:25 sq.). So that there is a righteousness of the righteous, Ezekiel 33:12-13; Ezekiel 33:18, while still man does not see himself placed through the law in the position of a perfectly happy relation to God, freed from guilt and the curse of the law. It is not, however, knowledge alone of his sins and knowledge of himself as a sinner which the law gives to man, but along therewith the knowledge that the righteousness, the reality of which corresponds to God, which is the righteousness of God, must come as a revelation outside the law from God Himself through grace. 14. That with the completed fact of the overthrow of Jerusalem the silence of Ezekiel should be brought to an end, and he should be no more dumb—this circumstance lent to the fact in question a special character, caused it to appear so much the more in a peculiar light, as a parallel must be provided for it. Accordingly, it not merely seems as if Jerusalem must have fallen, so that salvation might with open mouth be prophesied, as the starry orbs of night disappear before the rising sun, but it was in reality so; and parallel with this first destruction, the last destruction of the Holy City, and the total dispersion of the people throughout the Roman world, on the one hand, made room for the fulness of the Gentiles at the table of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and on the other, caused the gospel salvation to be preached to every creature. Jerusalem became then thoroughly desolate; but John saw a new Jerusalem coming down out of heaven. The Jews have been scattered abroad everywhere, but the Israel of God are being gathered meanwhile from all the ends of the earth, on the ground of the prophetic word, rendered more certain through the fulfilment certified by the apostles. 15. “Neither danger, or, more correctly, the anxious concern and dread about danger, such as we can well imagine to ourselves, nor any other hindrance, must be permitted to throw itself like an insuperable wall in the way of a servant of God. This is no apology worthy of a prophet, ‘I labour in vain; I preach to deaf ears;’ but in season and out of season is the work to be carried on, and sinners to be admonished. No one must bury his talent (Matthew 25.). And this holds equally with respect to magistrates and heads of families” (Lavater). HINTSEze_33:1. “We men are daily and always anew to be reminded of our obligations, for individually and collectively we are slothful and negligent men” (Stck.). Ezekiel 33:2-3. “How profitable in dangerous times is the guardian care of watchmen! They must not, however, betray the confidence of the community, and must have open eyes, in order that the people of the Lord may not be taken by surprise. But when the Lord does not keep the city, the watchman waketh in vain, even though he does not fall into sleep” (Luther).—“The sword is the judgment, but the trumpet the holy gospel; the man who spies and watches is the bishop, whose part it is to preach and testify of the future judgment” (Clement).—Sollicitudo officium pr�lati est, non celsitudo (Bernard).—“The calling to the office of preacher is twofold—one immediate, the other mediate; the former is from God, the latter from man, Acts 26:15-16; Acts 6:5” (Cr.).—“Who would choose a blind man to be the watchman of a city? How could he see the danger and give warning of it? How unreasonable is it, therefore, to appoint a spiritually blind or unconverted man to be a teacher ! He does not at all see the danger, and how can he give warning? This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ II. THE DIVINE 1. Against the Shepherds of Israel, of the Shepherd Kindness of Jehovah toward His Flock, and of His Servant David (Ch. 34)1And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 2Son of man, prophesy upon the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say to them, to the shepherds, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Woe to the shepherds of Israel, that were 3feeding themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the flock? Ye ate the fat, and clothed yourselves with the wool; ye killed what was fed; ye fed not 4the flock. Those which became weak ye have not strengthened, and the sick ye have not healed, and the wounded [broken] have ye not bound up, and the driven away have ye not brought back, nor looked after that which was lost [perishing], and with rigour have ye ruled them, and with oppression. 5And they were scattered, because [there was] no shepherd, and were for food to all living creatures 6[for meat to all beasts] of the field, and they were scattered. They wander, My flock, upon all mountains, and upon every high hill; and upon the whole face of the earth have they been scattered, My flock, and there is none that 7seeks after, and none that looks after. Therefore, shepherds, hear the word of Jehovah. 8As I live—sentence of the Lord Jehovah—Because My flock has become for a prey [for booty], and they have become, My flock, for food to all living creatures of the field, because [there was] not a shepherd, and My shepherds have not sought after My flock, and the shepherds fed themselves, 9and fed not My flock: Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of Jehovah; 10Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Behold, I [am] against the shepherds, and demand My flock from their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; and the shepherds shall no more feed themselves; and I deliver [snatch] My flock out of their mouth, and they shall not henceforth be for food to them. 11For thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Behold, I, I [am there], and seek for My flock, and inspect [scrutinize] them. 12As a shepherd inspects his flock, in the day that he is amongst his flock, the scattered [sheep], so will I inspect My flock, and deliver [rescue] them out of all the places whither they were scattered 13in the day of cloud and darkness. And I lead them forth from among the peoples, and gather them from the lands, and bring them to their ground, and feed them upon the mountains of Israel, in the valleys, and in all 14the dwellings of the land [the earth]. On good pasture will I feed them, and in [on] the high mountains of Israel shall their walk be: there shall they lie down in a good walk, and on a fat pasture shall they feed upon the mountains of Israel. 15I will feed My flock, and I will make them lie down: sentence 16of the Lord Jehovah. I will look after the perishing, and the driven away will I bring back, and the broken will I bind up, and will strengthen the sick, and the fat and the strong I will destroy; I will feed it with judgment. 17And ye, My flock, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I Judges 18 between sheep and sheep, the rams and the he-goats. Is it too little for you that ye feed on the good [best] pasture, and ye tread down the rest of your pasture with your feet, and drink the sunk water, and with your feet trouble 19the residue? And My flock, must they feed on what your feet have trodden, 20and of what your feet have troubled must they drink? Therefore, thus saith the Lord Jehovah to them: Behold, I, I [am there] and judge between 21fat sheep and lean [impoverished] sheep. Because ye push with side and with shoulder, and thrust with your horns all those which have become weak, till 22ye have scattered them abroad: Therefore I help My flock, and they shall no longer be for a prey, 23and I will judge between sheep and sheep. And I appoint [raise up] over them one shepherd, and he feeds them, My servant David; he 24will feed them, and he will be to them a shepherd. And I, Jehovah, will be to them a God, and My servant David prince in their midst. I, Jehovah, have 25spoken. And I conclude for them a covenant of peace, and cause the evil beasts to cease out of the land, and they dwell securely in the wilderness, 26and sleep in the woods. And I give them and the environs of My hill [for a] blessing, and cause the rain to come down in its season—showers of blessing there shall be. 27And the tree of the field gives its fruit, and the land shall give its increase; and they are safe upon their ground, and they know that I am Jehovah, when I break the bars of their yoke, and I deliver [rescue] them from the hand of those whom they served [who wrought through them]. 28And they shall no more be a prey to the heathen, and the beasts of the field shall not devour them, and they dwell secure, and there is none to make them afraid 29And I raise up for them a plantation for a name, and they shall no more be swept away from hunger in the land, and no more bear the reproach of the 30heathen. And they know that I, Jehovah, their God, [am] with them, and they [are] My people, the house of Israel: sentence of the Lord Jehovah 31And ye My flock, flock of My pasture, men [are] ye; I [am] your God: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 34:2. Sept.: ... Ωποιμενες ... μηοἱποινενεςβοσκουσινἑαυτους;— Ezekiel 34:3. ʼ ?Ιδουτογαλακατεσθιετε—Ezekiel 34:4. ... καιτοἰσχυρουκατειργασθεμοχθω. (Anoth. read.: δΰαγεϊ.) Ezekiel 34:5. ... τουἀγρουκ. τοιςπετεινοιςτουον̓ρανου. Ezekiel 34:6. Καιδιεπαζμσανταπροβαταμον … (παντι) προσωπω (πασης) κ. γμς … οὐδεὁἀποστζεφων (Anoth. read.: εςμτπιλμ.) Vulg.: et non erat qui requireret, non erat, inquam, qui requireret.Ezekiel 34:8. Sept.: ... εἰμηνἀντιτουγενεσθκι … εἰςκρονομηνκ. γενεσθαιτ. πζοβαταμου— Ezekiel 34:10. ... τουμηκοιμαινειντ. προβαταμου … ἐτ. ποιμενεςαν̓τα— Ezekiel 34:12. ... ἐνἡμεραγνοφουκ. νεφεληςἐνμεσω–Ezekiel 34:14. Sept.: ... ἐντ. ὀζειτωὑψηλω, ἐντ. ὀρει ʼ ?Ισραηλ. Καιἐσονταιαἱμανδραιαὐτωνἐκεικ. κοιμηθηονται, κ. ἐκειαναπασονταιἐντρυφη— Ezekiel 34:15. ... .καιἐπιγνωσονται, δοιτιεἰμικυριοκ. Ταδελεγε–Ezekiel 34:16. ... ἰσχνρονφνλαξω. κ … αἰταμετακριματος.. For ΰωξιγ all read ΰωξιψ) except Chald. Ezekiel 34:21. Sept.: ... τ. κερασινὑμωνἐκερατιζετε, κ. παντοἐκλειπονἐξεθλβετε. Ezekiel 34:22. Κ. σωτω … κριονπροςκριον. Ezekiel 34:25. ... τωΔαυιδδιαθηκμν … κ. κατοικησουσινἐντηἐρημω— Ezekiel 34:26. ... αν̓τουςκυκλωτ.ὀρουςμου, κ … τ. ὑετον, ὑετονεὐλογιαςαὐτοις. Ezekiel 34:27. ... ἑνἐλπιδιεἰρηνης … τ. ζυγοντονκλοιουαὐτων— Ezekiel 34:28. Sept.: ... ἐνἐλπιδι— Ezekiel 34:29. ... φυτονεἰρηνηςEzekiel 34:30. Sept. Syr. Arab. add δπεϊν, and omit ΰϊν. Ezekiel 34:31. Κ. ὑμειςπροβαταμουκ. προβατατ. ποιμνιουμουἐστε, κ. ἰγω– REMARKSEze_34:1-10. The Shepherds of IsraelEze_34:1. Hengstenberg regards the prophet with this word of Jehovah as meeting the trouble which arises from the loss of civil government: the seeming loss, he contends, is real gain, since the existing government was so bad. Keil excellently designates the turning against the bad shepherds as a foil for the ensuing promise. What the relation to the first part of the book, the natural sequel to the same already suggests, namely, a vivid representation of the past,—this will now show itself to be the more appropriate, since in the second part of the book the promise of God is what gives the prevailing tone. The future salvation cannot be better set off and characterized than upon the past distress; just as upon the dark background of our misery, redemption generally appears the brighter, and also so much the more a necessity; and John 8:10 (“Woman, where are those thine accusers?”) conveys an import of a similar kind with reference to a still more distant time than what is here referred to. Ezekiel 34:2.ςַ ?μ (comp. ΰֶ ?μ, Ezekiel 13:2), agreeably to the tenor of what follows, as much as: against; but as the controversy has respect to positions of eminence, it carries a certain reference to that. Kliefoth undoubtedly views the shepherds rightly, when he understands thereby generally the entire body of officials who had committed to them the leadership of the people. At least the following description, bearing as it does the shepherd form, is capable of comprehending all, and admits of application to all. Hence some have taken it with reference to the kings, and also to the priests; others have thought merely of the kings, or of the collective order then holding the reins of government (as Hengst.); others, again, have found here the false prophets and teachers of the people. The reference to Jeremiah 23., which has been leant upon, decides nothing; it only shows how, in the second part also of his book of prophecy, Ezekiel kept himself in unison of sentiment with his predecessor and companion. Nothing can be proved here by the “biblical idea of the shepherd” (Keil), since it is just the image of a shepherd which is set before us; and the fact that in Ezekiel 34:23 sq. David forms the antithesis, and that in the character of prince, finds its explanation in the Messianic idea, thereby symbolized and historically exhibited, which, as in our prophet, is viewed pre-eminently in its kingly aspect (pp. 23, 24). So, on the other hand, by means of the contrast with the anointed, it leaves, under the image of the shepherd, the complex of official life to be understood. All the offices—hence He is called Christ—and princes also (comp. on Ezekiel 12:10) must, the more they had been guilty, culminate in him. In order to retain the king and the great (ωָׂ ?ψιν, the magnates, Hitzig), Hengst. notices the circumstance that Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, and likewise many of the chiefs, were still in life; that the announcement therefore might extend into the future. But he holds that what the prophet here announces as having as to its main part already taken place, must be simply an explanation of the judgment in the form of an announcement of it!—μָ ?ψֹ ?ςִ ?ιν, the address repeated, pleonasmus emphaticus, whereby the shepherd-idea at the same time is prominently brought out, while, on the other hand, the threatening attached and description of the reality comes thus into more marked contrast.—That were feeding themselves; this already indicates all (ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν, reflexive, Ewald, Gr. p. 788), the selfishness that merely seeks its own, instead of what belongs to the flock. (φֹ ?ΰο, small cattle; especially sheep, but also goats.) Comp. Philippians 2:21; 2 Corinthians 12:14; Judges 5-12; Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2. Ezekiel 34:3. Here a detailed description is given of the “not feeding,” to which the “feeding,” the obligation involved in the relation of shepherd to flock (“should not the shepherd,” etc., Ezekiel 34:2), stands opposed; and the picture is drawn so as to make enjoyment merely take the primary place on the side of the shepherds. Such was their habitual acting. Instead of fat, Hitzig reads with the Sept. ηָ ?μָ ?α, milk, as also Rosenmόller, so as thereby to avoid the anticipating and repeating as regards the killing in the third clause. Certainly the milk Would suit well with the “wool,” and the “eating” (1 Corinthians 9:7) should occasion no difficulty. There must not, however, be supposed the lawful use of the flock, but from the first the greed which appropriates to itself the best of the animal; at length the best animal itself is what appears in the representation—from which, however, nothing arises for determining more closely what office is meant, since it is applicable to each office [“but manifestly most strictly applicable to the kingly or ruling office,” P. F.].—To the greedy misappropriation for one’s own use, there is a companion picture in Ezekiel 34:4; the words: “ye fed not the flock,” farther declaring, on the one hand, the want of care for the flock, the contemptuous neglect of them, nay, on the other hand, the merciless energy with which what should have been protection had turned into simple domination. πַ ?ηְ ?μεֹ ?ϊ, partic. Niphal from ηָ ?μָ ?δ, are those which had become weak, wretched, whether it may have been through sickness or overdriving. ηεֹ ?μָ ?δ is the sick itself. The Niph. pass. of ωָׁ ?αַ ?ψ denotes what is wounded, what has been somewhat broken—corresponding to which is: “to bind up,” to wrap up firmly. Comp. Matthew 12:20.—πִ ?γַּ ?ηָ ?δ is the driven away, the exiled, in consequence of harsh treatment (comp. 1 Peter 2:25). ΰָ ?αַ ?γ, to lose one’s self, to be lost, to perish (comp. Matthew 10:6; Matthew 15:24; Matthew 18:11; Luke 15:4; Luke 15:6; Luke 19:10). The two last expressions prepare the way for the ψָ ?γַ ?δ (to domineer, to trample on) with ηָ ?ζְ ?χָ ?δ, and with τֶּ ?ψֶ ?κ (tyranny). Comp. Exodus 1:13-14; Leviticus 25:43; Leviticus 25:46; Leviticus 25:53; Judges 4:3 : 1 Samuel 2:16; 1 Peter 5:3. Ezekiel 34:5. There is here, finally, given the closing feature, as it is likewise involved in the verb γָ ?ςָ ?δ, the keeping together; while they did not discharge the shepherd-obligation, did not feed the flock, they also failed to keep them together, which is expressed by the Niphal of τּ ?εּ ?υ in respect to the sheep, which also had already been prepared for by δַ ?λִּ ?γַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ and δָ ?ΰֹ ?αֶ ?γֶ ?ϊ (Ezekiel 34:4). The description now applies to the flock, not to single sheep merely. The first ϊְּ ?τεּ ?φֶ ?ιπָ ?δ Hengst. understands of the internal dissolution of the people, in consequence of which the power of resisting was lost in regard to those without; the second he understands of the exile. Both expressions, however, are fundamentally the same. When Israel was not held together in the name of Jehovah through the theocratic offices, the scattering, the self-abandonment, and surrender to the worldly powers was the natural, necessary consequence.—ξִ ?αְּ ?μִ ?ιψֹ ?φֶ ?δ, from the want, the non-existence of a shepherd; because no shepherd who had discharged his duty according to his office was there; comp. Jeremiah 10:21; Zechariah 10:2; Matthew 9:36. In consequence of the scattering of the flock—this first of all—they became food to the nations round about; the other—and on this account is εַ ?ϊְּ ?τεּ ?φֶ ?ιπָ ?δ repeated—overtook them to the full in their state of exile—as previously in the ten tribes, so now also in Judah, as set forth in Ezekiel 34:6. (Numbers 27:17; 1 Kings 22:17; John 10:12.) The representation in the image should plainly be understood as a pictorial delineation; so that: upon the whole face of the earth, by which the preceding: upon all mountains, and: upon every high hill, may be regarded as thrown together, must be taken to mean not their own land, as some have thought (Theodoret), viewing it in connection with the heathen worship practised there, but also the earth, without reference to heathen lands. The ιִ ?ωׁ ?βεּ, however, should be distinguished from πָ ?τֹ ?φεּ [that is, the “wandering” from the “scattering”], and possibly, therefore, the heathenizing tendency and the punishment borne among the heathen may be indicated. The repeated and emphasized My flock prepares for the resolutions of Jehovah that follow. There being none to search is explained by the preceding: “because there was no shepherd.” Upon γָּ ?ψַ ?ω and αָּ ?χַ ?ωׁ, see at Ezekiel 3:18. According to Hδv., γָּ ?ψַ ?ωׁ signifies to inquire farther, to search for, to concern one’s self about, while αָּ ?χַ ?ωׁ signifies the seeking for the lost. Ezekiel 34:7. There is now, on the ground of such unfaithfulness to duty, pronounced the “woe” of Ezekiel 34:2, under the form of hearing the word of Jehovah. Ezekiel 34:8. The manner of proceeding, however, as commonly with Ezekiel, is first of all again to rehearse the guilt of the shepherds, and so to resume the charge that the flock, which Jehovah had committed to these shepherds as His own, had been taken away by the stranger, given up to the stranger, turned into a “booty,”—a contrast of such a kind that all, in a manner, was said by it. A prey is more exactly defined by: for food, agreeably to Ezekiel 34:5; and the expression: because there was no shepherd, after Ezekiel 34:6, is explained by: have not sought after My flock.Ezekiel 34:9. This verse, with the therefore, renews the demand on the shepherds (Ezekiel 34:7). Ezekiel 34:10. Instead of ηַ ?ϊΞΰָ ?πִ ?ιΧ we have here αֹ ?δΞΰָ ?ξΞψΧ, and δִ ?πְ ?πִ ?ι instead of ΰִ ?νμֹ ?ΰּ ?—Ezekiel 13:20; Ezekiel 13:8.—εְ ?γָ ?ψַ ?ωְׁ ?ϊִ ?ι, antithesis to ,εְ ?μֹ ?ΰΞξִ ?τּ ?ιδֶ ?ν. Comp. Ezekiel 33:8; Zechariah 9:16.—The flock must be demanded of the officials, and these made to cease—which was fulfilled up to the time of Christ. With reference to the flock, such a seeking is a deliverance (δִ ?φִ ?ιμ), considering the character of the shepherds; and because the circumstance of their feeding themselves goes immediately before, which points back to Ezekiel 34:3, ξִ ?τִּ ?ιδֶ ?ρ is put instead of ξִ ?ιָּ ?γָ ?ν, and μֹ ?Ξϊִ ?διֶ ?ιο forms the parallel to εμֹ ?ΰΞιִ ?ψְ ?ςεּ ςεֹ ?γ, previously used (Ezekiel 13:21). Ezekiel 34:11-22. Jehovah in His Shepherd Tenderness toward His FlockEze_34:11. This verse grounds (For) the ceasing of the past relation of shepherd and flock through the all-expressive personal addition: δִ ?πְ ?πִ ?ιΞΰָ ?πִ ?ι, which the Targum Jona. renders by: “Behold, I will manifest Myself.” As it is said in John 1:10 sq.: “He was in the world,” and: “He came unto His own.”—I seek for My flock, a contrast to: “there is none that seeketh for,” in Ezekiel 34:6, and to: “they have not sought for,” in Ezekiel 34:8. Instead of αָּ ?χַ ?ωׁ, however, there stands the more inward αָּ ?χַ ?ψ, inspect, consider, by means of which the following expansion is introduced, which has respect exclusively to the flock,—“the community, on whose preservation everything depends” (Ewald). Ezekiel 34:12. There must be the inspection (Gesen.: properly, Aram. inf. Poλl) of a shepherd; Jehovah will therefore discover Himself not only as proprietor, whose proprietorship is of another kind, but specially as shepherd, which He really is, in contrast to the merely titular officials, nay, as if He alone were shepherd (Psalms 23.). Hence also ςֵ ?γֶ ?ψ, where formerly there was φֹ ?ΰο; comp. Jeremiah 13:17 (Isaiah 40:11; Jeremiah 31:10; Luke 15:4).—In the day that he is amongst his flock describes more fully what is implied in the brief though energetic and significant: “Behold, I, I,” of Ezekiel 34:11. The epithet πִ ?τְ ?ψָ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ϊ to φֹ ?ΰπεֹ indicates the assumed condition, however much, as a characteristic apposition, it is at variance with the meaning and nature of a flock. One has to think of the day that succeeds a nocturnal storm and tempest, and all the dangers arising from wild beasts, etc., when, after that the selfish shepherds had in a body proved faithless to their calling, now at length the true shepherd of the flock presents himself. So that: “in the day that he is amongst his flock,” evidently forms a contrast to: the day of cloud and darkness, at the close of the verse; which words are, therefore, improperly connected by Hitzig (Klief.), with an ahusion to Ezekiel 30:3; Ezekiel 29:21, and especially to Joe 2:2, with: and deliver them (εְ ?δִ ?φַּ ?μְ ?ϊִ ?ι). For the day “of cloud and darkness” (ςֲ ?ψָ ?τֶ ?μ, combination of “cloud” and darkness, yet not by a throwing together of ςָ ?ψִ ?ισ and ΰֹ ?τֶ ?μ, but an extended form, like λַּ ?ψְ ?ξֶ ?μ, from λֶּ ?ψֶ ?ν), as also the derivation of the formula from the lawgiving on Sinai (Deuteronomy 4:11; Hebrews 12:18) might indicate, is not the day of God’s judgment upon all the heathen—also, not “the dark showers of the birth of a better time,” as Ewald puts it, connecting the expression with Ezekiel 34:13, but the day of the dispersion of His people,—the punishment which, according to the law of God from Sinai, befell them by the instrumentality of the heathen. Accordingly, αְּ ?ιεֹ ?νςָ ?πָ ?οΧ belongs to the immediately preceding relative clause ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΞπָ ?τֹ ?φεּ ?Χ, a connection which is usual.—The rescuing, delivering out of, whereby the inspection of the flock accomplishes the kind of salvation indicated, presupposes in the general: a dangerous position,—in particular: imprisonment, servitude, oppression, tyranny, etc. That it was to be out of all the places, etc., besides being in accordance with the preceding figure (Ezekiel 34:6), arises from the form of the salvation, which is represented as primarily a gathering (Ezekiel 28:25), especially a bringing back out of exile to the land of their home, as is shown in Ezekiel 34:13 (Exodus 6:6; Exodus 7:4-5; Acts 2:9-11). Comp. also Ezekiel 11:17; John 11:52. But at the same time, as Hengst. has said, “other glorious gifts and benefits, which, however, all pointed forward to the true fulfilment, and called forth desire for it,” are indicated by: and feed them (εּ ?γְ ?ςִ ?ιϊִ ?ιν)—Ezekiel 6:2-3.—And in all the dwellings of the land are, primarily, all the parts adapted for occupation, for inhabiting; might not δָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ, however, have a farther reference? Ezekiel 34:14. An explanation is here given of the “feeding” by Jehovah with regard to the fodder (ξִ ?ψְ ?ςֶ ?δ), to which also πִ ?εֵ ?δֶ ?ν corresponds, but, at the same time, with reference to lairs, reposing, resting, dwelling. It lies, besides, in the thing itself that the pasture-ground was, at the same time, a lair and resting-place, fold, Psalms 23; Son 1:7.—εּ ?πְ ?δָ ?ψֵ ?ιξְ ?ψεֹ ?νΧ, Philippson: “upon the mountains of the height of Israel;” comp. at Ezekiel 17:23; Ezekiel 20:40. Ezekiel 34:15. A bringing together of what has been said in both respects; comp. on γָ ?αַ ?υ, Ezekiel 29:3; Psalms 23. Ezekiel 34:16. An explanation is here given, and in contrast to the denounced faithlessness (Ezekiel 34:4) of those who had hitherto held the shepherd-office, of the “feeding” as that is understood by Jehovah, of a much more internal nature, and indeed with an eye to right and righteousness. As the contrast in strong and strengthen (comp. for that Luke 22:32) may of itself indicate, but as the words: I will feed it with judgment, put beyond doubt, and the sequel shows, the feeding by Jehovah is also a judging, which does not mean simply a right dealing, or treatment according to right and equity, but involves, as we shall see, a separation. With judgment is sufficiently explained by the: I will destroy (ΰַ ?ωְׁ ?ξִ ?ιγ)—Psalms 37:38; comp. also Ezekiel 14:9; Luke 1:51-52. The ironical turn given to the ΰֶ ?ψְ ?ςֶ ?πָּ ?δ (the suffix does not relate to the flock) may easily be understood from the visible antithesis to the: “and with rigor have ye ruled them, and with oppression,” in Ezekiel 34:4; comp. also the distinction between ηַ ?ωְּׁ ?ξֵ ?πָ ?δ and δַ ?ηֲ ?ζָ ?χָ ?δ in the comparison with δַ ?αְּ ?ψִ ?ιΰָ ?δ in Ezekiel 34:3. The Chaldee paraphrase interprets: “godless and sinners,” while the Vulg. translates: custodiam, as does Luther also, as if it had stood ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψ. Comp. also Revelation 2:27; Psalms 2:9. Ezekiel 34:17. As a confirmation of the sense put upon the last part of Eze 34:16, this verse introduces by way of contrast the (remaining) flock: And ye, My flock. The officials are with Ezekiel 34:10 discharged and gone; the persons concerned can therefore only come into consideration according to their personal qualities, not according to their official rank; consequently, as one sheep merely with another, in other words, as “fat” and “strong,” or such like (Deuteronomy 32:15). Hence the: Behold, I judge between sheep and sheep, explains the: “in judgment,” of Ezekiel 34:16 as a judgment between one kind of sheep and another, individual members of the flock; therefore, that μָ ?ωֶׂ ?δ expresses the judicial separation in regard to those previously named fat and strong, and εְ ?μָ ?ςַ ?ϊּ ?εּ ?ψִ ?ιν (ςָ ?ϊַ ?γ, to urge, push; the he-goat ςַ ?ϊּ ?εּ ?γ, properly: “pusher”) μָ ?ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν an enlarging apposition. Hitzig: “against the rams and the he-goats.” Beside the pushing and pressing (Ezekiel 34:21) there sounds distinctly forth the leading and guiding of the flock; so that the older expositors were right in thinking of the shepherds in Ezekiel 34:2, yet not in that character, but simply as individuals. (As, in another respect certainly, the Servant of Jehovah, the Deliverer, is represented as a sheep, as a lamb (Isaiah 53:7), so in Ezekiel are the destroyers.) The fat and the strong among the sheep are therefore regarded as like the rams and he-goats, and placed on the one side—the situation, therefore, not at all so dissimilar to that in Matthew 25:32, as Keil repeats after Hitzig, who merely gives this explanation: “The separation of the sheep from the goats in Matthew 25:32 has nothing to do here.” As belonging to the sheep-flock, he-goats and rams are also, in the general sense, sheep (small cattle), and they are expressly so called in the words: “between sheep and sheep” but undoubtedly sheep and sheep (Ezekiel 34:20) forms a distinction, namely, that those which Jehovah designates His are not like the he-goats and rams, from which He sets them apart. They are certainly not, as excellently remarked by Kliefoth, “represented as the righteous and innocent, but they are called the strayed, the driven away, the wounded, the weak: but they are the penitent, who hear the voice of God; therefore will He first seek them, and bring them back, and heal and strengthen them, but afterwards also will redeem them from the oppressions which the others, the he-goats, have exercised upon them.” According to Hitzig, these latter are with the fat and the strong “the rich and noble, who in manifold ways wrest from the humble by force and rigour their worldly goods.” But Kliefoth quite rightly: “a poor man can just as well be a he-goat as a rich man a sheep.” Only with the poor man the sphere is very limited; while for the rich and noble, power and the right to exercise it sit upon the very rim of their cradle. The “robber-knights,” as Hengst. calls them, are born in castles. The haughtiness, however, engendered by fatness and the misuse of their resources is to be taken into account. “David, even upon the throne, designates himself poor and needy” (Hengst.). The thing referred to, therefore, in the case of the rams and he-goats, is the wickedness which exhibits itself as violent procedure in superior positions of life. “God procures for the suffering sheep justice against the malicious” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 34:18. The unjust behaviour of the one portion toward the other is here exposed. Hengst.: “The address extends to the tyrants of the future”—that is, to the Scribes and Pharisees of our Lord’s time, whom it exactly suits.—Comp. on δַ ?ξְ ?ςַ ?θξִ ?αֶּ ?ν, Ezekiel 16:20. Are ye not content with your own enjoyment, but must ye also disturb that of others? Thus fatness and strength might have enjoyed themselves at smaller cost. (Revelation 3:17?) But now, as they left over to no one what they would not or could not use as pasture, but wantonly trampled it under foot, so did they also with respect to drink. ξִ ?ωְׁ ?χָ ?ς, from ωָׁ ?χַ ?ς, Ezekiel 32:14, “sinking of water,” is commonly interpreted as: “water clarified through sinking,” so that the clarifying is rather the main thing, the impurities have gone to the bottom. Hengst.: water of sinking, settled water; interpreted by Hitzig as: water on the ground, to be found at the bottom—that is, the coolest water. But as ψָ ?τַ ?ωׂ (promiscuously ψָ ?τַ ?ρ Ezekiel 32:2)—by treading with the feet to make confused and troubled—shows, what perhaps most readily suggests itself is, that the water which was sunk, which had become little, and so threatened want, they in their wickedness had made undrinkable. (Luke 11:52?) Ezekiel 34:19. εְ ?φΰֹ ?πִ ?ι, with Athnach! Is this right? Ezekiel 34:18. Ezekiel 34:20. To them according to Ezekiel 34:17, to the last mentioned, the flock of Jehovah, and not to the evil and good together,—to the one for terror, and to the other for comfort (Rosenm.). Ezekiel 34:11.—αִ ?ψְ ?ιָ ?δ only here, with the view probably of distinguishing from Ezekiel 34:3 (comp. at Ezekiel 34:16). Usually αְ ?ψִ ?ιָּ ?δ is read for it, also ψָ ?ζָ ?δ —αְ ?ψִ ?ιΰָ ?δ., to be thin, impoverished (comp. Mark 2:17; Mark 14:38; 1 Corinthians 9:22). Ezekiel 34:21. Here follows an address to the others, as Ezekiel 34:18 does on Ezekiel 34:17. The point of view is not, with Hitzig, to be confined to the pressing of a flock to the fountain. Comp. at Ezekiel 34:4-5 (Jeremiah 23:1-2). Ezekiel 34:22. εְ ?δεֹ ?ωַׁ ?ϊְ ?ςִ ?ι, more general and comprehensive than εְ ?δִ ?φַּ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, Ezekiel 34:10; Ezekiel 34:12. Ezekiel 34:8; Ezekiel 34:17; Ezekiel 34:20. Ezekiel 34:23-31. The Servant DavidThe and here gives the immediate sequence, without indicating anything remarkable in what was coming, as this indeed formed the abiding anticipation of the religious thought of Israel; so that since here the removal of the offices and the judgment upon the persons has been effected, he who was now to be looked for must at length come,—the course of events has plainly reached him as the last member in the series, according to which the: “I raise up” (δֲ ?χִ ?ιξֹ ?ϊִ ?ι), will have to be understood. No special forthcoming effected by God for the good of Israel, as in Deuteronomy 18:15 ιָ ?χִ ?ινμְ ?κָ, in the more peculiar might and grace of the Spirit, but simply the official (mediately divine) appointment of the shepherd in question is announced, although with a reference to 2 Samuel 7. But what is said there at Ezekiel 34:12, εַ ?δֲ ?χִ ?ιξֹ ?ϊִ ?ιΧ (“I will set up thy seed”), was in Ezekiel 34:11 illustrated beforehand by the: “I commanded to be over My people” (φִ ?εִּ ?ιϊִ ?ι), said with respect to the judges. These, therefore, appear as only provisional arrangements, as temporary, through God’s command interjected into the disorder for putting an arrest on the same, while for the seed, of which Ezekiel 34:12 speaks, a permanent introduction and settlement was to be made. In spite of this diversity in the use of φִ ?εִּ ?ιϊִ ?ι, however, there lies nothing in εַ ?δֲ ?χִ ?ιξֹ ?ϊִ ?ι to suggest the fable of the Gilgul, as was done already by particular Rabbins, and recently has been resumed by Strauss, Hitzig, and others. At all events, Ezekiel would have expressed himself otherwise, if we were here scientifically to find the exegetical idiosyncrasy of a corporeal return of the historical David, by a resurrection from the dead. It is a desperate consolation, such as could have been imagined by no good exegetical conscience, to feel obliged to refer for such like fancies to Rosenmόller—even to the Zoroastrian doctrine of the return of the Paschutan.—On ψֹ ?ςֶ ?δ, see the Doctrinal Reflections to our chapter.—ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ signifies here certainly not “one,” one generally; also it can scarcely mean “only,” and has nothing immediately to do with the union of the two kingdoms under his sceptre, because there was nothing said of this previously; but the contrast is with the former shepherds and the sheep of the flock scattered through their guilt—this manifoldness on the one side, on the other has set over against it the oneness of this shepherd, who is the complex embodiment of shepherd watchfulness, as of all the duties of the shepherd office,—the divine realization of the idea of all that is involved generally in the nature of the office, as service toward the community for the sake of God, as sacred service in behalf of God’s people. [Kliefoth: “This shoot of David comprehends in his one person the whole shepherd-offices of Israel, and fulfils them; they are to be done away with him, but no other king over the people of God shall relieve him.”]—On account of the com. gen. of the “flock,” the fem. alternates with the masc. in the suffix.—He comes to his destination as a shepherd through the: and he feeds; the name is realized in his doing, with a reference to David’s former life and procedure; see Psalms 78:70-71.—My servant David, who, on account of his attitude of obedience as Jehovah’s servant, showed himself to be one peculiarly fitted for serving the community, over which he was placed officially for the performance of such service, namely, as His servant not only chosen by Jehovah (objectively), but also called, but also anointed, but also in every way confirmed. As David “after the flesh,” so My servant “after the Spirit” points back genealogically in connection with the dynasty. There will be a Davidic person, and he will be in accord with the kingly pattern of David, so that Jehovah’s servant David will revive in him to the consciousness of every one. Therefore, in fact, a return of David, and indeed in the seed of David (Jeremiah 23:5); therefore also different from the return of Elias in John the Baptist. Application is to be made to Christ, but to derive the exposition of the words from this presently fails, as when Kliefoth interprets “My servant” thus: “because, he, as God’s instrument, will accomplish what is written in Ezekiel 34:11-22.” One must be at home in the style of representation which is given throughout Scripture of David, but more especially in the prophetic style of representation concerning him, in accord also with the pregnant prophetic self-consciousness which discovers itself in his own psalms, in order rightly to understand these and similar descriptions of the Messiah. See the Doctrinal Reflections on the chapter, and comp. Hosea 3:5; Jeremiah 30:9; Jeremiah 23:5; Luke 1:32-33. Besides, the respect had to the fundamental passage 2 Samuel 7. itself leaves no doubt as to the proper understanding.—How much the comprehensive ideal, just because figurative, notion of the shepherd preponderates, is clear from the expressly and intentionally repeated: He will feed, etc. (Revelation 7:17). Ezekiel 34:24. When it is said in 2 Samuel 7:14, in reference to the immediate posterity of David: “I will be a father to him,” there is here what corresponds to it in the words: And I, Jehovah, will be to them a God. Comp. Ezekiel 11:20. “Father” to him, “God” to them, as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is our God. In like manner: and My servant David points back to 2 Samuel 7:8, where this appears in the form of an address, along with the promise there given; πָ ?βִ ?ιγ is there, while here πָ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ is used. That through the government of David Jehovah was going to be in truth the God of His people Israel, etc. (Keil), is not expressly said, but the grand ideal, the eternity of the Davidic elevation and loftiness, is certainly set forth (2 Samuel 7:13; 2 Samuel 7:16; comp. Ephesians 1:22). But that Jehovah is He who thus speaks must dispose of all opposition from the present aspect of things. As the whole service of David the prince in their midst is appointed for the salvation of the people, there is expressed in Ezekiel 34:25 the establishing for them the covenant—that which always, when so peculiarly said in the technical phraseology, proceeds from the Highest in relation to the lower, that is, from Jehovah (Jeremiah 31:31 sq.). The reason is, that the in itself ambiguous notion, yet corresponding to the covenant-relation originally in like manner established by God, manifests itself for the people as a revelation of such relationship, namely, as an attestation of offered grace, presenting itself, and giving assurance of God’s readiness to enter into fellowship with men. Comp. at Isaiah 55:3 (Hebrews 8:10; Acts 3:25).—Covenant of peace (Isaiah 54:10), since in consequence of the covenant relationship of God there is guaranteed to the people this security, happy condition, salvation (Romans 14:17), of which the “ceasing of evil beasts” symbolizes the negative, and “the dwelling securely” the positive side. Comp. Leviticus 26:6 (Hosea 2:20 [18]). According to Hδv. and Hengst., the evil beasts are the hostile human potencies (Ezekiel 34:5), and the driving of the heathen world from its hitherto domineering position must be meant. According to Hitzig, the public security in the land is pledged. But security (μָ ?αֶ ?θַ ?η, Ezekiel 28:26) the wilderness itself must have offered to those dwelling in it, which is sufficiently explained by the parallel αַּ ?ιְּ ?ςεֹ ?ψִ ?ιν (Qeri: αַּ ?ιְּ ?ςָ ?ψִ ?ιν), surrendering themselves carelessly to sleep in the thicket of the woods. [Hδv. finds an allusion to Solomon’s time of peace and blessing; but Kliefoth a literal return of the paradisiacal state after a materialistic manner.] Ezekiel 34:26. To the personelle (them) are annexed, in a local form of expression, the environs, by which, therefore, could not be meant men, with reference to the image of sheep, or the adjacent places for the persons inhabiting them. But the prominence given to My hill, that is, the temple-mount, or, with reference thereto, Jerusalem (Isaiah 31:4; Isaiah 10:32), carries over the representation of the people’s associates to the land. Comp. also Ezekiel 34:14 : “And on the mountains of the height of Israel.” The words: And I give … for a blessing, chiming in with Genesis 12:2, could not possibly (as Cocc. and Hengst. suppose) allow of our interpreting “the environs” as meaning the heathen joining themselves in the time of salvation to the old covenant-people (Ezekiel 17:23; Ezekiel 16:61; Ezekiel 47:8), which is quite remote from the connection here. “And thou shalt be a blessing,” in Genesis 12:2, is certainly explained thus in Ezekiel 34:3; but here the expression: to “give for a blessing,” as the immediately following explanation of “rain in its season” shows us (Deuteronomy 11:14; Joe 2:23), adhering to the preceding reference to the land, will mean probably more than to bless. Yet still nothing essentially different, though giving utterance to it in a very marked manner.—The people shall be bodily a blessing through their land, to which Jehovah’s hand of blessing will mightily testify; hence showers of blessing (which mediate the blessing, in distinction from Ezekiel 13:13; Proverbs 28:3; comp. also Deuteronomy 32:2; Isaiah 55:10-11; Romans 15:29; Ephesians 1:3)—shall be so primarily on no other account, but simply for their own experience and their own personal enjoyment. But comp. Ezekiel 34:29. [Rosenm. brings to remembrance how far superior Palestine was to Egypt in regard to such blessings of the material heavens.] Accordingly, Ezekiel 34:27 continues and portrays (comp. Leviticus 26:4) the fruitfulness thence arising in the field and land, in order presently to come back to the inhabitants settled again upon their home-soil—on which comp. Ezekiel 34:25, Ezekiel 28:25-26.—ςֹ ?μ (from ςָ ?μַ ?μ, to join, make fast, bind) is generally the yoke of draught-cattle, in order to fasten them together or to the plough. ξֹ ?θּ ?εֹ ?ϊ are the two ends of the cross-piece of wood which forms the chief strength of the yoke; hence in Ezekiel 30:18 = yoke. The cross-piece of wood laid upon the neck of the animal was fastened by a cord or thong to the pole of the plough, and passing under the neck of the animal (see Delitzsch on Isaiah 58). As the allusion to Leviticus 26:13 and what follows here will show, it is to be understood figuratively—not in general of the endurance of sufferings, but specially of slavery, as in Egypt formerly, which should be broken. For parallel with αְּ ?ωִׁ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ι stands εְ ?δִ ?φַּ ?μְ ?ϊִ ?ινΧ and δָ ?ςֹ ?αְ ?γִ ?ιναָּ ?δֶ ?ν (Exodus 1:14), of the laying on of slave labour. ςָ ?αַ ?γ with αְּ is to work with or through any one, so that the working stands out in him, he appears purely as an instrument (Matthew 11:28; Matthew 23:4; John 8:36; Acts 15:10; Romans 8:2; 2 Corinthians 11:20; Galatians 2:4). Ezekiel 34:28. Comp. Ezekiel 34:22; Ezekiel 34:8. Ezekiel 34:25; Ezekiel 34:8 (Ezekiel 29:5).—Leviticus 26:6; also Micah 4:4. Those whom they are said, in the preceding verse, to have served, are therefore the heathen, and the two other promises resume again the same two sides as Ezekiel 34:25, while the words: and there is none to make them afraid, portray still farther the secure peaceful rest, almost reminding us of the opposite picture at the close of Eze 34:6. Ezekiel 34:29. And I raise up for them is parallel to Ezekiel 34:23; the promise there begun in these terms reaches here its conclusion, for the whole of what has gone before relates to one and the same Messianic character.—According to Hitzig, ξַ ?θָּ ?ς can only mean a plant-place or ground; the plant-land should become to them for renown; what they planted should grow and prosper so as to be a glory for them. According to the older style of exposition it is the “plant,” Isaiah 11:1 : the Sept. and others read with it ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν. Simpler, certainly, is the rendering plantation (agreeably to Ezekiel 34:26 sq., and as at Ezekiel 17:7), and it is also explained by the: “no more sweeping away by hunger,” etc., by reason of the fruitfulness of the country, and in contrast to the state of destitution mentioned elsewhere (Ezekiel 5:12; Ezekiel 5:16; Ezekiel 6:11-12). So, too, μων (for a name) has its explanation in their having no more “to bear reproach from the heathen.” [The exposition which, by a reference to Genesis 2:8-9, would understand it of “a renewal of the paradisiacal plantation” (Hengst.), is far-fetched, there being nothing in the connection for it; nor can it be understood how such a renewal, under comparison of Eze 36:29 sq., would consist “in the rich distribution of harvest blessings.” According to Kliefoth, the plantation, like that of the first paradise, must be the suitable thing for holy men.] Instead of the contempt with which the heathen scoffed at the fallen, prostrate, ruined condition of the people, those same heathen should now be convinced, from the blessing upon Israel, that the children of Israel, those who really were such, were also in reality the blessed of the Lord. Hitzig merely: it should no longer be said among the heathen, “The Israelites are hunger-bitten, they have nothing to bite and chew.” Comp. on the other hand, Matthew 5:6; John 6:27; John 6:35; Revelation 7:16-17; Matthew 13:43. Ezekiel 34:30. Jehovah will be their God, and as such will be with them, will show Himself to be such toward them (Revelation 21:3). To this corresponds the other side of such a relationship, indicated by: My people, as also by: the house of Israel (2 Corinthians 6:16). Ezekiel 34:31. This verse does not, of course, mean that what was said of the flock has its application to men; but rather is it God’s design to testify that His promise in respect to both sides, as well what He is to them to whom He gives it—therefore against doubt and feeble faith—as what they are taken for by Him, and so equally against all undue self-exaltation, keeps in view Adam, the man, or: men, which also fits in exactly with the immediately preceding designation of the people as: “the house of Israel.”—εְ ?ΰַ ?ϊֵּ ?ο, comp. Ezekiel 34:17.—Flock of My pasture (Jeremiah 23:1; Psalms 74:1); not: “which I tend” (Ges.), but because Jehovah had given Israel the fruitful land of promise for a pasture-ground. The exposition of My people by men, and still more the repetition, notwithstanding that, of: I am your God, entirely corresponds to the character of the second main division of our book, to the prophecies respecting God’s compassions toward His people in the world (Psalms 36:8 [7]), and the rather so, if, with Hδvernick, the fundamental prophecy in relation to what follows is to be seen here.—That the Sept. should have omitted ΰָ ?γָ ?ν is not to be commended, although the Targum and the Arab. translation have done the same. The Syriac, however, has retained it, and it is scarcely to be explained how it should have been brought in, where (after Ezekiel 34:30) the solemn remark, that not real sheep and goats were meant, would have to be called more than superfluous and flat. Hengst. translates: “And ye are My flock, My pasture-sheep are ye men,” etc.; Keil: “And ye are My flock, etc., ye are men” Hδv. explains: “Indeed ye, who are called to what is so great, are weak creatures; but where the Lord acknowledges to men that He is their God, He is strong in their weakness; no glory is too great that it might not come to be manifested in them.” Kliefoth, who finds the translation of Hengst. against grammar, and calls Hδvernick’s exposition a superimposed one, carries forward his misunderstanding of the paradisiacal reference: those belonging to the people of God would, through the Branch of the house of David, be as Adam was when he received from God this name after creation. J. F. Starck, with an emphasis on the general grace: “And ye, etc., ye men, I am your God.” [“And ye, My flock, My pasture-flock, men are ye, I am your God.” There is evidently an emphasis on men: “men are ye, remember your place, you are merely human; but remember, at the same time, that I am your God; so that without Me nothing, but with Me all.”—P. F.] 1. We should admit, on the one side, that the term “shepherd,” as is also so natural from the fulness of the references which the image includes, has application to the guiding of the people in general, consequently to every, office of that nature; yet we should not deny, on the other side, that “shepherds” especially and primarily signified “kings.” Only the rendering of the word by “overseer,” and in particular when the overseers or elders of the exile come into consideration, is very wide of the mark. However, the notion also of civil magistracy, which Hengstenberg attributes to the shepherds as kings, is an abstraction which is not appropriate to the image. In relation to the theocratic people primarily, in which relation we must seek for the more immediate reference of the biblical expression “shepherd,” the feature of leading will naturally assume the more prominent place, as it does in John 10:3 sq., which gives us an interpretation from the fulfilment of what is contained in this chapter. That the shepherd is the leader finds, then, its culmination in the protection, which the giving of his life for the flock provides for it, John 10:11. The other features in the image do not therefore fail; they only fall behind the one more peculiarly brought out, such as discipline, tender care, which belong to the spiritual import of the image (comp. John 10:9-10). The prophetic or teaching office is therein expressed, as in the self-surrender of the shepherd for the flock the priestly office is indicated. The notion of the “shepherd,” accordingly, comprises generally the official form and representation of the Old Testament theocratic life, and likewise pre-eminently the kingly office, giving prominence to the kingly government (pp. 23, 24), as is the case with the Messianic idea under the Old Covenant, with that of “Christ” under the New Testament, so that “shepherd” and the “anointed” come near and mutually supplement each other. In the Messianic character of the shepherd, there comes out, along with the relation to the theocratic people, the other relation, that, namely, to Jehovah, the Lord of the theocracy, according to which the shepherd appears as the representative of Jehovah among His people. If in this respect Messiah is the term for the relation in question as regards equipment, or internal power of the Spirit, so in that of “shepherd” there is given, we might say, the fulfilment, the realization of the same relation by means of a corresponding government. On account of what they had not done, the shepherds of Israel are manifestly the unrighteous, the wicked ones. On account of that which He does who makes Himself known in John 10, He proves Himself to be the Good Shepherd. But as there the Jews (John 10:20) supposed Him to be actuated not by the Spirit of the God-anointed, the Messiah, but to have in him an evil spirit (δαιμόνιονἔχει), so they misunderstood also His unbosoming of Himself on that occasion as the Shepherd, and turned away from Him. 2. “In this chapter” (says Cocceius) “the office of shepherd is taken from the shepherds of Israel, and promise is made of the kingdom of Christ, the Chief Shepherd. The shepherds of Israel are of a threefold order, Zechariah 11:3; Zechariah 11:8. The three shepherds there are vigil, et respondens, et offerens munus (Malachi 2:12); that is, elder, prophet or doctor, and priest. They are called ‘gods,’ but in Psalms 82:6 sq. their abolition is pronounced. Therefore the apostle, 1 Corinthians 2:6, says of the princes of this world, that they are come to nought.” 3. “The prophecy in Ezekiel 34 is kept very general, and does not connect itself closely with specific occasions and circumstances, hence admits (apart from its typical bearing on the experiences of Israel, outward and spiritual) of manifold applications to all states, churches, families; and with justice, for it is really designed for all that could be named figuratively shepherd and flock, like a mathematical formula which expresses a law that may be applied to innumerable cases” (Schmieder). 4. From the second verse of this chapter the Lord Jesus appears to have quoted the repeated “woe” against the Scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 23). The application to these throws light specially on the days of Christ, but generally on the period subsequent to the exile. The hierarchy, as it appears in its antagonism to Christ, is the final degradation of the theocratic officialism of Israel. Prophecy ceased with Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. In its place, as the characteristic appearance of Ezra shows, and as fabled also by the Jewish traditions of the “Great Sanhedrim” and the “Great Synagogue,” came the learning of the Scribes. As it was already with the three last prophets in relation to the earlier prophetic office, so also did the princely dignity of Zerubbabel stand related to the Davidic kingdom of former times. Zerubbabel was leader to the returning captives, and was appointed royal governor over the new colony, in which his character as a born prince of Judah was lost sight of. Although he stood as governor directly under the Persian kings, still the Persian governors in Samaria were instructed to keep their eye upon his administration. What, however, in his appointment by Cyrus, carried, according to the Jewish mode of contemplation, a specially royal, that is, Davidic aspect, presently again fell into abeyance with the person of Zerubbabel. On this account alone the application by some of Eze 34:23 to Zerubbabel is shown to be untenable. None of Zerubbabel’s sons succeeded him as governor. If from the time of Nehemiah’s death the post of provincial governor gradually disappeared, as is with much probability supposed, then, for the purpose of taking the oversight of civic affairs (and of any other kind of oversight we know nothing), only the office of the high-priesthood remained, the history of which henceforth became a very worldly one, full of ambition and crime. The Maccabees united with it the dignity of military general; afterwards, as conferred upon them by the people, a hereditary princedom, over against which the Sanhedrim, which had meanwhile been constituted, and was under pharisaical-priestly influence, strove to maintain its position; and then at last the title of king. That the dignity of high priest as combined with princely rank, especially when the prince was a Sadducee, formed a kind of caricature of Psa 110:4, does not hinder on the other side the noting of an important feature therein with regard to Christ; just as in the resolutions of the people and their counsellors there is apprehended, with a clear consciousness, the future appearance of a faithful prophet (1Ma 14:41). The dissolution-process now indicated of the theocratic offices in Israel after the exile suffices for the chapter of Ezekiel before us. 5. Israel, as remarked by Beck, “should, amid the tumult of desolation and the luxurious forms of development of the God-forgetting worldly nationalities, have stood forth as a strictly separate sanctuary of God, to which not the present, indeed, but so much the more certainly the future belonged; and even the falling away from this simple isolation of the whole state-economy justified its real wisdom by means of the desolating results that ensued.” “A many-membered organism of law, like a comprehensive ring, encompassed the whole individual and commercial life, woven into the elements of the world’s fellowship, while the more determinative arrangements of the outward natural life, of the reckoning of time, of the physical and social human life, were consecrated as serviceable organs for the establishment of a pious fellowship with God, of a righteous ordering and wholesome direction of the life.” It was “an externality,” but “no hollow-surface existence ending in itself; rather a vessel and framework of a spiritual inwardness of being, destined to future development, and bearing this in itself in a manner pregnant with promise.” The proof of this is specially furnished by prophecy, whose foundation was already laid among the fathers of the Israelitish people, which came forth into peculiar external activity under the constitution of the Mosaic economy, and at last assumed formally the place of an order in the State. Hence its cessation was pre-eminently a mark of the time, as being that of the approaching advent of Him whose Spirit was in the prophets ! Were but the whole people of Jehovah prophets! was the wish of Moses (Numbers 11:29); expressing as regards Israel the design of prophecy, and at the same time with an eye toward the Pentecostal future. Still more, however, was this import involved in the priesthood, which was no caste foreign to the people, but rooted in a brotherly stem of the same, giving promise of a priestly position to the whole of Israel, with corresponding fulness of obligation to duties of service. So close and inward, because a service rendered to the whole, and springing out of its innermost idea, was the relation of these offices in Israel to Israel itself, that their unfolding and Israel’s unfolding overlap each other, are congenial. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ 2. Against Edom, with respect to the Mountains of Israel, in consequence of Jehovah’s Sanctification of His own Name (Ch 35–36)1 Ch. 35 And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 2Son of man, set thy face towards [against] the Mount [the mountain range of] Seir, and prophesy concerning 3[against] it; And say to it, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I am against thee, Mount Seir, and I stretch out My hand over thee, and I 4make thee a waste and a desolation. Thy cities will I make ruins, and thou shalt be a waste, and dost know that I am Jehovah. 5Because thou hast enmity for ever, and deliveredst the children of Israel into the hands of the sword, in the time of their calamity, in the time of the guilt of the end; 6Therefore, as I live,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—blood will I make thee, and blood shall pursue thee; where thou hatedst not blood, there shall blood 7pursue thee. And I make Mount Seir a desolation and a waste, and I cut off 8from it him that passes over, and him that returns. And I fill his mountains with his slain; thy hills, and thy valleys, and all thy ravines, the slain with 9the sword shall fall in them. I will give thee up to perpetual desolations, and thy cities shall not be inhabited, and ye know that I am Jehovah 10Because thou saidst, The two nations (haggoiim) and the two lands, mine 11shall they be, and we possess it (Jerusalem?), and Jehovah was there: Therefore, as I live,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—so do I according to thy anger and according to thy envy, which thou out of thy hatred hast shown towards them; and I make Myself known among them as Him who shall 12judge thee. And thou knowest that I Jehovah have heard all thy scornful speeches which thou utteredst against the mountains of Israel, saying, Lay 13waste, to us they are given for food. And ye magnified yourselves against Me with your mouth, and heaped up your words against Me; I have heard 14Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, as [when] the whole land [the whole earth] rejoices, 15I will make thee a desolation. According to thy rejoicing for the inheritance of the house of Israel because it was made desolate, so will I do to thee; a desolation shalt thou be, Mount Seir, and all Edom, the whole of it, and they know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 35:3. Sept.: ... δωσωσεἐρημονκ. ἐρημωθηση. Vulg.: … desolatum atque desertum.Ezekiel 35:5. ... γενεσθαισεἐχθραναἰωνιονκ. ἐνεκαθισαςτωοἰκω ʼ ?Ισρ. δολωἐνκαιρωἐχθιρωανἐνχειριμαχαιραςἐνκαιρωἀδικαςἐπ’ ἐσχατων, Ezekiel 35:6. ... ἐιμηνεἰςαἱμαἡμαρτιεςκ. αιμασεδιωξεται. Vulg: et cum sanguinem oderis— Ezekiel 35:7. ... ἀνθρωπονςκ. κτηνη. (Anoth. read.: εξωξδ, et stuporem.) Ezekiel 35:9. Anoth. read.: ϊωεαπδ, revertentur. Ezekiel 35:11. Sept.: ... γνωσθησομαισοι—(Anoth. read.: αΰτκ, as also ιαχπΰϊκ.) Ezekiel 35:15. ... κ.παδαἡ ʼ ?Ιδονμαιαἐξολεθρενθησεται—(Anoth. read.: λμδ, totus ipse.) REMARKSIn looking forward to the restoration of Israel, Ezekiel 34, the false shepherds chiefly furnished the connection; in what follows regarding Israel as a nation, Edom and its hatred form the connecting link. Comp. also what is said in p. 245, and Doct. Reflection 5, p. 246. Hδvernick aptly points out the “glaring contrast” to the preceding. “The light of Israel is set in relief by the shadow of Edom” (Hengst.). After the “marvellous blessings of the theocracy,” comes “the curse which overtakes Edom.” Now since, as regards the blessings, the true Israel in Christ, that is, redeemed humanity, has ultimately to be looked to, so the curse here is attached not so much to the heathen world (Hδv.) as to the heathenish, that is, the Antichristian world. Hengstenberg thinks that the reference is not to the heathen world “at large,” but “only to the small neighbouring nations, which stand in a similar relation as Edom, and resemble it in intensity of hatred”! Yet, as he says, Edom appears here “as a radically corrupt people, that is to have no share in the Messianic salvation.” Our prophecy has nothing to do with Ezekiel 34:29 (against Keil). Cocceius maintains that, as the dismissal of the shepherds formed the subject in ch.34, so the subject here is the dissolution, by the coming of Christ, as foretold in Numbers 24:18-19, of the Jewish nation, represented here by Edom and Seir. The Jewish nation is called Seir per synecdochen partis, “because Edom was included in the Jewish community; the Idumζa, formed a part of the nation, and the kings were of Edomite descent; just as the land of Palestine is called Idumζa, whence Christ comes, Isaiah 63.” The signification of Edom is here, however, mainly symbolical and not literal, as in Ezekiel 25:12 sq. Hengstenberg makes the prophecy there against Edom to be resumed here on the “report given by the fugitive of the injustice committed at the destruction of Jerusalem,” etc. (??). [“Superficial readers will be disposed to ask, what has Edom to do here? The Lord’s judgment has already been pronounced against Edom (Ezekiel 25:12-14), among the enemies of the covenant-people; and this fresh denunciation against it is inserted among predictions which, both before and after, have immediate respect to the covenant-people themselves. It is, however, in its proper place; and brings out another element in the prosperity which the Lord promises to His Church and people. It gives body and prominence to the thought expressed in 35:28 of the preceding chapter, that ‘they should no more be a prey to the heathen.’ So far from it, the prophet now declares that the worst and bitterest of all the heathen shall be utterly destroyed and made desolate; and that those who were then rejoicing over Israel’s calamities must themselves become a spoil, without any prospect of recovery”.—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, p. 381.—W. F.] Ezekiel 35:2-9. Against Edom, i.e. his Bloodthirsty Enmity to IsraelEze_35:2. Ezekiel 6:2 (Ezekiel 25:2; Ezekiel 28:21; Ezekiel 19:2).—Genesis 36:9.—δַ ?ψωֵׂ ?ςִ ?ιγ, the woody mountain region in the south of that part of Palestine which lies to the east of Jordan, from the Dead Sea to the Ζlanitic Gulf; the land for the people, corresponding antithetically to the prominence given to the land in the foregoing (Ezekiel 34:25 sq.). Ezekiel 35:3. Ezekiel 34:10; Ezekiel 13:8; Ezekiel 13:20; Ezekiel 26:3, et passim.—Ezekiel 25:7; Ezekiel 25:13; Ezekiel 6:14.—Ezekiel 33:28-29. Ezekiel 35:4. Exemplification. Thy cities and ηָ ?ψְ ?αָּ ?δ ranked together; the latter not exactly: “destruction,” but rather: “destroyed,” heaps of ruins.—Ezekiel 12:20; Ezekiel 14:15-16. Ezekiel 35:5. Enmity for ever, as in Ezekiel 25:15, but more expressive here on account of the kinship between Edom and Israel (comp. Psalms 137:7). Infinitive construction passing over to the verb fin. The enmity is an abiding one; the next word, πָ ?βַ ?ψ (Hiphil, imperf. ap.), is an expression of that enmity. Besides, in this as well as in the expression αְ ?πֵ ?ιΞιִ ?ωְׂ ?Χ, the people already come distinctly out from the land. ΰֵ ?ιγ is: oppression; hence: burden, calamity, misfortune, farther and sufficiently defined by what immediately follows (comp. Ezekiel 21:30, 34 [ Ezekiel 21:25; Ezekiel 21:29]). Oppression of brethren calls at once for the exercise of compassion, which is best manifested where no one is innocent; when guilt makes the end, ancient enmity should not be let loose (Obadiah 1:13). Ezekiel 35:6. μְ ?γָ ?ν, is there an allusion here to ΰֱ ?γֹ ?ν? a suggesting, although not an express naming of Edom? In this case could there be also an antithetic allusion to “Adam” (men) in Ezekiel 34:31, and at the same time an allusion to Genesis 25:30!? At all events, the fourfold repetition of γָ ?ν has some significance. Edom shall, as it were, become entirely blood (Ezekiel 16:38), and still farther, blood shall follow him, which might mean that he will leave behind him a track of blood, or, the effusion of blood will follow him; so that by this phrase, which is again repeated at the end of the verse, the words: blood will I make thee, are explained to mean: the effusion of blood, namely, of thy own blood, shall cleave fast to thy footsteps (comp. Ezekiel 35:8). [Hδvern.: I will make the event authenticate thy name, and blood-guiltiness shall pursue thee everywhere as a murderer, to cry for vengeance and to give thee up to punishment. Ewald, who reads ξַ ?ςַ ?ωְׂ ?κָ instead of ΰֶ ?ςֶ ?ωְׂ ?κָ: “because thy inclination is after blood, blood shall,” etc.] ΰִ ?νΞμֹ ?ΰγָ ?νΧ scarcely implies an oath; affirmative, as Hengst.: “forsooth thou hast hated blood,” inasmuch as the murderer hates the blood which he sheds, in which is the hated life of the murdered man; and although the significant play upon the word γָ ?ν might include a reference to the blood-relationship of Edom and Israel (Theodoret), had not the Hebrew word for that been αָּ ?ωָׂ ?ψ, it is simpler to adhere to the negation that Edom thus hated not bloodshed. [“The most peculiar part of the verse is the clause ΰִ ?νΞμֹ ?ΰγָ ?νωָׂ ?πֵ ?ΰϊָ, which not only our version, but also nearly all commentators, render: ‘since thou hast not hated blood.’ But no examples can be produced to justify such a rendering, and the remark of Hitzig, that as the words stand, they must be regarded as an affirmative protestation, is quite correct. Taking blood in the usual sense, I do not see why, in a passage so strongly epigrammatic and alliteral as this, the hatred of it might not be affirmed of Edom; for the grand point on which the desires of the Edomites were centred was life, life in themselves, as opposed to the bloody extermination they sought for Israel; the shedding of their blood was what they would on no account think of. I take the meaning to be, therefore: The preservation of thy life is what thou art intent on securing; the thought of blood being shed among thee is what thou art putting far from thee as an object of aversion; but God’s purposes are contrary to thine, and what thou hatest He will send—blood shall pursue thee.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel.—W. F.] Ezekiel 35:7. ωִׁ ?ξֲ ?ξָ ?δ instead of ωִׁ ?ξְּ ?ξָ ?δ, the same as ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δ. The land is made so because the people fill it only as slain (Ezekiel 35:8). There is no going to and fro, no traffic, Ezekiel 33:28. [Sept. according to Ezekiel 25:13. Ezekiel 35:8. Ezekiel 32:5 sq., 31:12. Hence the desolation of death. Ezekiel 35:9. ωִׁ ?ξΧςεֹ ?μָ ?ν, a rejoinder to ςεֹ ?μָ ?νΰֵ ?ιαַ ?ϊ, ver 5. Instead of ϊֵּ ?ιωַׁ ?αְ ?πָ ?δ, from ιָ ?ωַׁ ?α (Keil), to be read with ι quiescent, the Qeri has ϊָ ?ωֹׁ ?αְ ?πָ ?δ, from ωεּ ?α, “not to return” to its original condition. Hengst.: “thy cities shall not sit,” but lie prostrate (Ezekiel 26:20). Ezekiel 35:10-15. Against Edom, his Covetousness towards IsraelEze_35:10. ιַ ?ςַ ?κ, parallel to Ezekiel 35:5. The other side of Edom’s guilt in respect to Israel. With significant allusion to their separation, Israel and Judah are called ωְׁ ?πֵ ?ιδַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν. In speaking thus, Edom considered them as heathen nations, and not the people of Jehovah; or this is the prophet’s representation. Hence ωְׁ ?ϊֵּ ?ιδָ ?ΰֲ ?ψָ ?φεֹ ?ϊ can mean nothing else than the land of Israel and the land of Judah, not Idumζa and the land of Judah (Jerome). Grotius sees here a reference to the Assyrian and also the Babylonian captivity. εִ ?ιψַ ?ωְׁ ?πεּ ?δָ, neuter (Keil): the one land as well as the other (Rosenm.); Hitzig: referring to the plur. fem. If we understand the clause εַ ?ιδεָֹ ?δωָׁ ?νΧ of Jehovah’s presence in the temple, then for believers ideally, as it also in reality was in the kingdom of Israel, it comes into consideration for both kingdoms, and we may, with other expositors, make the suffix refer to Jerusalem. On this comp. Ezekiel 9:3; Ezekiel 11:23. But certainly the divine presence in the temple was only the sensible symbol of Jehovah’s governing agency among His people generally; hence, finally, the disregarding of Israel’s divine election, the ignoring of this, was the mistake in the reckoning which Edom made. Better thus than to say that Edom insulted Jehovah by coveting His possession (Hitzig); or (as Keil): “as if Jehovah were a feeble and unreal God, unable to protect His people;” but that which had been said in Israel, Ezekiel 8:12 (Ezekiel 9:9), in excuse for heathen superstition, the heathen unbelief of Edom repeats here with respect to Israel’s eternal destiny, which rests on the ground of Jehovah’s covenant revelation. It was practical atheism in both cases,—childish neglect of God in Israel, but active hostility to Him in Edom. Edom’s reckoning took sin into account, calling to remembrance the injury done by Jacob, the father of Israel, to Esau, their ancestor; but took no account of grace, and never thought that “Jehovah” should come into consideration. [From Ezekiel 35:12 ωָׁ ?ν has been also interpreted as referring to Idumζa.] Ezekiel 35:11. μָ ?λֵ ?κΧ, as in Ezekiel 35:6. From the hating (infinitive) come anger and envy, expressing themselves not only in word (Ezekiel 35:10), but also in deed (ςָ ?ωִׂ ?ιϊָ ?δ). Jehovah acts according to Edom’s doings.—The making known αָּ ?ν, not, as Hengst., among “the children of Israel,” which is too remote (Ezekiel 35:5), but among the two πּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν (Ezekiel 35:10), just as ϊδְ ?ιֶ ?ιπָ ?δ there refers to the two lands coveted by Edom. The making known among Israel shall happen as well as the judgment on Edom—comp. Ezekiel 28:25 (Ezekiel 26:20); not, however, as if both had like proportion (Hengst.), but because the making known is effected by the judgment. λַּ ?ΰְ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, as Him who, etc. Ezekiel 35:12. Thus Edom shall know by experience that Jehovah does not leave unpunished such a saying as Edom has said. After speaking of doings in Ezekiel 35:11, there is now a return to the sayings (Ezekiel 35:10). He has heard all. The mountains of Israel, preparing for Ezekiel 36:1, come forth in antithesis to the mountain range of Seir. Qeri ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ξεּ, simplifying, but needlessly, for the abrupt and significant ωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ξָ ?δ (Ezekiel 35:15), 3 perf. fem. sing., may refer to the land or be understood of what is meant; or we may with Rosenm. read: ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δ, “a waste,” Ezekiel 33:28. The following plural brings in the people.—Ezekiel 34:5; Ezekiel 34:8; Ezekiel 34:10. Ezekiel 35:13. Thus their sayings were not only insults to Israel (ςַ ?μΞδָ ?ψֵ ?ιιִ ?ωׂ ?Χ), land and people, but at the same time boastings with their mouth heaped up against Jehovah (ςָ ?μַ ?ι), who was there (Ezekiel 35:10), wherewith they already, as it were, took joyful possession of the land. They exulted over Jehovah with haughty words and much speaking. But now Ezekiel 35:14—He who hitherto has heard all these boastings speaks and acts (ΰֱ ?ςֶ ?ωֶׂ ?δΧ).According as the one happens, so shall the other happen to thee. [Ewald: “I will make thee a sport (a comedy) to the whole earth,” etc. Hitzig: While all the world rejoices even over thy desolation (?).] However natural it is at λָּ ?μΞδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ to think of the “whole earth,” such a thought is very foreign to the connection. Hδvernick, on the other hand, insists on the necessary harmony with the following verse, according to which the interpretation must be: as all Edom exulted, so also should all Edom be subjected to punishment. The curious explanation, to take λְּ here as an adverb of time (so also Hitzig), and in Ezekiel 35:15 as a word of comparison, readily suggests itself. But better (Kimchi), the one λְּ illustrates the other; hence λֵּ ?ο expressly in Ezekiel 35:15, as also the infinitive ωְׂ ?ξֹ ?ηַ here points to ωִׂ ?ξְ ?ηָ ?ϊְ ?κָ Ezekiel 35:15. To rejoice and desolation must correspond to one another, while the latter, however, must be the punishment. For and instead of joy of the whole land, desolation now. The μָּ ?κְ at the end of the verse already intimates what land is meant. There is not a word said in the whole chapter of the “earth”; it is always land as opposed to land, the mountain range of Seir to the mountains of Israel (Ezekiel 35:12). Hengst. best shows what the “whole earth” introduces into the clear text: “The glorious salvation which comes to Zion is a subject of rejoicing for the whole earth, because it gives testimony to the glory of God, who can only bless His people, so that in them all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, Deuteronomy 32:43 sq.; Isaiah 42:10 sq.; Psalms 97:1; Psalms 48:3; Lamentations 2:15.” [Klief.: “But when all that bears the name of Edom shall, through the judgment of God, be subjected to devastation, then the whole earth shall rejoice, as Edom rejoiced when Jerusalem fell.” Where is such an extravagant idea even hinted at in the text? Ezekiel 36:2; Ezekiel 36:5 speaks only of Edom’s exultation. Hence Keil thus applies λִּ ?ωְׂ ?ξֹ ?ηַ: “When joy shall be prepared for all the world (all mankind!), then shall,” etc.] Ezekiel 35:15. That the rejoicing of Edom, which is to be requited to him, had respect to the inheritance, etc., that is, the land given to the family of Israel as distinguished from Esau-Edom (Genesis 27; Genesis 28:4), is now brought in at the close; and as thereby λִּ ?ωְׂ ?ξֹ ?ηַ in Ezekiel 35:14 is explained, so the motive for ωְׂ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δ is given by ςַ ?μΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΞωָׁ ?ξֵ ?ξָ ?δ. In accordance with this, λֵּ ?οΰֶ ?ςֱ ?ωֶׂ ?δΞμָּ ?κְ ?Χ repeats ΰֶ ?ςֱ ?ωֶׂ ?δΞμָּ ?κְ ωְׂ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δ (Ezekiel 35:14), and consequently is not to be interpreted, with Hitzig: so will I make others rejoice over thy desolation. ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δϊִ ?ηְ ?ιֶ ?δ, which forms the complement to λֵּ ?οΰֶ ?ςֱ ?Χ, is the second, not the third person. The following feminine suffix indicates the land, so that with λָּ ?μΞΰֱ ?γεֹ ?νλֻּ ?μָּ ?δּ the meaning also of λָּ ?μΞδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ (Ezekiel 35:14) is quite clear. Mount Seir, and all Edom, the whole of it, is set in contrast to the inheritance of the house of Israel. 1. As the ideas by which the national life of Israel was upheld express themselves in a great variety and fulness of forms of worship, as to places, times, materials, and persons, so also in the course of the divine history of Israel, individuals and whole tribes and nations became symbolized into spiritual, and also unspiritual, very expressive types of character, which may serve as studies for the minister of the gospel. 2. The symbolical or typical signification of Esau-Edom, while treated more historically in Ezekiel 25. (p. 246), comes out with perfect clearness when we take also Hebrews 12 into consideration. Whether he is called (Hebrews 12:16) πόρνος in the literal sense, with reference to Genesis 26:34 sq., or in a figurative and spiritual sense, so that the expression is synonymous with βέβηλος, at all events the picture given of Edom in Ezekiel corresponds to the latter sense of the word. To Edom, Judah and Israel (divide et impera in his thoughts) are merely nations and lands. Anything higher, as that Jehovah was there, enters not into his thoughts. It is the ordinary profane kind of a materialism, which takes its stand on natural rights, and does not want to know of grace and election, and so repays Jacob’s sin with abiding enmity, and actually carries out as Edom (Ezekiel 35:5) what Esau only threatened (Genesis 27:41); as, on the other hand, the carnal appetite (βρώσεωςμιᾶς) is still exhibited in Ezekiel 35:12 of our chapter (μְ ?ΰָ ?λְ ?μָ ?δ). 3. In this sense the elder son Esau forms the Sadducean parallel to the Pharisaic elder son, Luke 15:25 sq. 4. There is also in Ezekiel an ἀπεδοκιμάσθη, namely, rejection which is complete desolation. As Esau receives not the blessing which he wished to inherit, so the inheritance of the house of Israel does not fall to Edom to devour, however often and widely he opened his mouth to snatch it (Ezekiel 35:13). The anger and jealousy of Edom are as vain (Ezekiel 35:11) as the tears of Esau (Hebrews 12:17). Instead of μετανοια, Edom exhibits perpetual enmity and his hatred. 5. Israel has now, on the contrary, eaten up Edom, incorporated it into itself by circumcision. Thus the two who were separated, finally come together. But the contest, which began even in their mother’s, womb, continues to the end. Jacob-Israel subdued the elder brother, but in this way the family of the Idumζan Herod obtained the Jewish sovereignty, and the persecution of the true Israel (Matthew 2:13 sq.) was carried out to the full by the Edomite spirit of murder which took possession of the people (Matthew 27:25). Because the Herodians favoured and imported Roman heathenism, the circus, wild-beast fights, etc., the conceptions of Edom and Rome run into each other in the later Jewish writers. HINTSEze_35:1 sq. After the blessing upon His people, and their revival and prosperity, comes now the contrast, namely, the curse upon the ungodly, and their desolation and miserable end.—“For who else are the Idumζans but Esau, who always persecutes Israel (Galatians 4:20)? That raises up our hope when we are tried in the present. For if Christ is our Redeemer, He has redeemed us completely, and we have not to fear the ungodly. If suffering is a means to conduct us to the height of salvation, then the temporal prosperity of the wicked only increases the cause of their destruction; and one day there comes a change of affairs, when we experience the goodness of God, and they His deserved wrath” (Heim-Hoffmann).—“He who has God against him has also God’s word against him” (Richt.).—“The word of the Lord is a veritable treasury, out of which continually come forth things new and old. It leads into the past and the future, and would gladly have all applied to the present” (Berl. Bib.). Ezekiel 35:3 sq. The hand of God is the solemn mark of interrogation over every earthly height to which we look up, whether things or persons.—“When punishments break in and are already taking their course, in this God as it were stretches out His hand. Now, since His hand is not shortened to help His children, so also it is not too weak to punish His enemies, Isaiah 59:1” (Starke).—Desolateness is the lot of the wicked, for the world passes away with all its pleasure for man; but this comes in all its force only to him who was at home there, and set his confidence thereon. Ezekiel 35:4. “When godliness goes out of cities, confusion and devastation enter in” (Starck).—We can never sufficiently recognise that God alone is the Eternal. Ezekiel 35:5. Where enmity leads to: it perpetuates itself by degrees in the heart, it is not afraid even to use the sword; first the malice of the tongue, and then the violence of malice.—Therefore always become reconciled at once and completely, that no roots may remain in the heart which may shoot up afterwards.—The prayer of an implacable man is certain not to be heard.—Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.—“Woe unto you who are glad at evil to your neighbour and rejoice over his misfortune, Matthew 5:25” (Tόb. Bib.). “God makes finally an end of sin even when the sinner will not cease, and thus many a one has been hurried away by death in the midst of a course of sin. Hence all are not godly who cease to sin. When one has no longer the power, then he must cease, when otherwise he would be still very willing. In old age, in sickness, in imprisonment, in poverty, much must be dispensed with because hands and feet are bound, when in other circumstances there would be no want of will; in the will, however, above all consists the sin” (Berl. Bib.). Ezekiel 35:6. God’s judgment for blood over Edom an instructive example, a disclosure for warning.—Blood a peculiar sap.—The Lord an avenger of blood.—The track of blood behind so many celebrated figures in history, behind so many socalled great exploits.—The shedding of blood a characteristic symptom of the world, a mark of the spirit that rules in the world, and of the wickedness in which it lies. Ezekiel 35:7 sq. Trade and intercourse cease where God sends His judgments.—“The Lord destroys nations that delight in war” (Tόb. Bib.). Ezekiel 35:9. “Sin is not to become eternalized, therefore eternal punishment” (Starck).—“God’s aim is the acknowledgment in all things of His sole and supreme dominion” (Starke).—Where sinners have dwelt, there punishment finally bears sway; not only Edom, but also Judζa serves as a visible example of this. Ezekiel 35:10. Bear always in mind that God still is there!—Every sin against man is always at the same time sinning against God; unbelief, practical blasphemy.—Bloodthirstiness and covetousness two satanic sisters.—Disdain of others a non-recognition of God, who has bestowed something on every one.—The world’s delight in blood, and also its contempt of believers, a proof how little the world knows what still holds together the earth under their feet.—The meek, however, shall, according to Matthew , 5, inherit the land.—“Most men speak and act as if God could neither hear nor see” (Starck). Ezekiel 35:11 sq. Wrath and jealousy, when proceeding from hatred, do not escape the divine judgment.—God beholds Himself in His people.—The revelation of God to His own is also at last the judgment over the world.—The omniscient and omnipresent, the incorruptible eye-and ear-witness.—Thirst for fresh territory an Edomitish characteristic.—The hatred against the sacred things of humanity now become the fashion. Ezekiel 35:14 sq. Only the children of God shall inherit, although it doth not yet appear what we shall be, etc.—“The acceptable year of Jehovah is inseparably and necessarily connected with a day of vengeance of our God, Isaiah 61:2. No true grace without justice. The theocracy must, accordingly, pass through the fire of affliction and become purified (Ezekiel 34.); for the same reason the heathenism whose iniquity is full must show that it has fallen under the divine justice. For grace is not toleration of the bad” (Hδvernick). CHAPTER 36 1And thou, son of man, prophesy to the mountains of Israel, and say, Mountains of Israel, hear the word of Jehovah. 2Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because the enemy says over you, Aha! and the everlasting heights have become a possession for us; 3Therefore prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because, because “make desolate” [is said to you], and they snap after you round about, that ye may be [become] a possession to the remnant of the heathen, and ye are lifted up on the lip of the tongue and 4are become a people’s talk [a calumny]; Therefore, mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord Jehovah. Thus saith the Lord Jehovah to the mountains and to the hills, to the ravines and to the, valleys, to the desolate ruins and to the forsaken cities, which have become a prey [booty] and a derision to 5the remnant of the heathen who are round about; Therefore, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Surely in the fire of My jealousy I have spoken regarding the remnant of the heathen and regarding the whole of Edom, who gave themselves My land for a possession, in joy of the whole heart, in contempt of 6soul, on account of its pasturage, for a prey. Therefore prophesy concerning the land of Israel, and say to the mountains and to the hills, to the ravines and to the valleys, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I, I have spoken in My jealousy and in My fury, because ye have borne the reproach of the heathen; 7Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, I, I have lifted up My hand; surely the heathen that are round about you, they shall bear their 8shame. And ye mountains of Israel shall give your foliage and bear your fruit to My people Israel; for they draw near to come. 9For, behold, I come 10to you, and turn Myself to you, and ye are tilled and down. And I multiply upon you men, the whole house of Israel, all of it; and the cities are 11inhabited and the ruins built. And I multiply upon you man and beast, and they multiply themselves and are fruitful, and I settle you [make you inhabited] as at your origin, yea, I do you good more than in your beginnings, 12and ye know that I am Jehovah. And I make men walk over you, My people Israel, and they shall possess thee, and thou art to them for an inheritance, and thou shalt no more make them childless. 13Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because they say to you, A devourer of men art thou, and hast made 14thy people childless; Therefore shalt thou no more devour men, and no more 15make thy people stumble,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And I will no more let be heard against [over] thee the reproach of the heathen, and thou shalt no more bear the contumely [mockery, scorn] of the nations, and shalt no 16more make thy people stumble,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 17Son of man, the house of Israel were dwelling on their land, and they defiled it by their way and by their works, as the uncleanness of the monthly separation was their way before Me. 18And I poured out My fury upon them on account of the blood which they 19shed upon the land, and by their foul idols defiled they it. And I dispersed them among the heathen, and they were scattered in the lands; according to 20their way and according to their works have I judged them. And it came to the heathen whither they came, and they profaned the name of My holiness, since it was said of them, Jehovah’s people are these, and out of His land 21have they gone forth. And I felt pity for the name of My holiness, which they, the house of Israel, profaned among the heathen whither they came. 22Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Not for your sakes act I, O house of Israel, but on account of the name of My 23holiness, which ye profaned among the heathen whither ye came. And I sanctify My name, the great, the profaned among the heathen, which ye profaned in their midst, and the heathen know that I am Jehovah,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—when I sanctify Myself on [in] you before their [your] eyes 24And I take you out of the heathen, and gather you out of all lands, and 25bring you into your land. And I sprinkle upon you clean water, and ye become clean from all your defilements [uncleannesses, Ezekiel 36:17 sq.], and from all your foul idols will I cleanse you. And I give you 26a new heart, and a new spirit will I put within you, and I take away the heart of stone out of your 27flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And My Spirit will I put within you, and cause that ye shall walk in My statutes, and keep and do My judgments. 28And ye dwell in the land which I have given to your fathers, and are to Me 29a people, and I will be to you a God. And [yea] I help you from all your defilements, and I call to the corn and multiply it, and will not send upon 30you hunger. And I multiply the fruit of the tree, and the produce of the field, that ye may no longer have to bear the reproach of hunger among the 31heathen. And ye remember your evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and loathe your own faces, for your iniquities and for your abominations 32Not for your sakes act I,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—be it known to you; be ashamed, yea, shame yourselves away from your ways, O house of Israel. 33Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, In the day of My cleansing you from all your iniquities, I make the cities inhabited, and the ruins shall be built. 34And the desolated [devastated] land shall be cultivated, instead of being 35a waste in the eyes of every passer-by. And they say, This land, the desolated, is become as the garden of Eden, and the ruined and desolated and 36demolished cities are securely inhabited. And the heathen that are left round about you know that I, Jehovah, built the demolished [cities], and planted the desolated [land]; I, Jehovah, spoke and did. 37Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, I will still in regard to this let Myself be inquired of by the house of Israel to do it for them; I will multiply them in men as a flock. 38As a flock of sacred rites, as the flock of Jerusalem in her festal seasons, so shall the ruined cities be full of flocks of men, and they know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 36:2. Sept: ... εἰπεν … ἐρημκαἰωνια— Ezekiel 36:3. ... ʼ ?Αντιτουἀτιμκασθηναιὑμαςκ. μισηθηναιὑμαςὑποτ. ἐθνων—Vulg.: quod desolati estis et conculcati per circuitum—(Another reading: αδιεϊλν.) Ezekiel 36:4. ... κ. τ. ναπαιςτ. ἑρημωμεναιςκ. ἠφανισμεναις, κ. τ. πολεσιντ. καταλελειμμεναις … κ. εἰςκαταπατημα— Ezekiel 36:5. Another reading: λμδ c. δ and λπτω, Sept.: ... ἀτιμασντεςψυχαςτουἀφανισαςἐνπρονομη. Vulg.: … et ex animo, et ejecerunt eam ut vastarent. Ezekiel 36:8. Sept.: ... τμνσταφυληνκ. τονκαρπονὐμωνφκγεταιὁλαοςμον, ὁτιἑλπιζουσιντουἐλθειν. Ezekiel 36:10. ... πανοἰκον ʼ ?Ισρ. εἰςτελοςEzekiel 36:12. ... ἐτιἀτεκνωθναιἀπ’ αὐτων. Vulg.: et non addes ultra, ut absque eis sis. Ezekiel 36:13. ... κ. ἠτεκνωμενηὑποτουἐθνους, Vulg.: … et suffocans gentem tuam. Ezekiel 36:14. Vulg.: … Gentem tuam non necabis ultra— Ezekiel 36:17. Sept.: ... ὁδω . . κ. ἐντ. εἰδωλοις … κ. ἐντ. ἀκαθαρσικιςαὠτοων. Ezekiel 36:19. ... κ. ἐλικμησααὐτους— Ezekiel 36:20. Another reading: ειαΰε, so the old translations. Ezekiel 36:21. Κ. ἐφεισαμηναὐτων—Et peperci nomini— Ezekiel 36:23. Another reading: αδν and μςιπιδν (so also the Masora). Ezekiel 36:31. Sept.: ... κ. προςοχθιειτεκαταπροςωποναὐτωνἐνταις— Ezekiel 36:32. Sept.: ... κ. ἐντραπητεἐκτ. ὁδων— Ezekiel 36:35. ... ὡςκηποςτρυφης … ὀχυραιἐκαθισαν. Ezekiel 36:37. ... ζητηθησομαιτω—Vulg.: … invenient me—Another reading: ΰֶ ?γψωׁ, active (Syr. Arabs.) Ezekiel 36:38. ... ὡςπροβαταἁγια— [“In this chapter we have a continuation of the present great theme of the prophet—Israel’s prospective revival and prosperity as the Lord’s covenant-people. But it treats of this under different aspects. In the first section (Ezekiel 36:1-15) the prophet unfolds the essential distinction between Israel and Edom with the other nations of heathendom, in that the former had, what the others had not, an interest in the power and faithfulness of God, in consequence of which Israel’s heritage must revive and flourish, and the hopes of the heathen concerning it must be disappointed. In the next section (Ezekiel 36:16-21) the reason is given why the Lord had for a time acted toward His land and people as if their connection with Him was an evil rather than a blessing; it is traced up to the incorrigible wickedness of the people, and the necessity of God’s vindicating the cause of His holiness by exercising upon them the severity of His displeasure. Then in another section (Ezekiel 36:22-33) the purpose of the Lord for their future good is unfolded—His purpose for His own name’s sake to revive His cause among His people, and that in the most effectual manner, by first renewing their hearts to holiness, and then by restoring them to a flourishing condition outwardly. And in a short concluding section (Ezekiel 36:34-38) the general result is summed up, and the impressions noticed which the whole was fitted to produce upon the minds of others.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, p. 386.—W. F.] REMARKSEze_36:1-15.The Mountains of Israel.After that Ezekiel 35, which is connected with the one that follows as antithesis and thesis, has already (Ezekiel 36:12) introduced the mountains of Israel, parallel to Mount Seir (again Ezekiel 35:15 for the last time), and reminding us of Ezekiel 6 (comp. also Ezekiel 33:28), as that to which the prophecy before us is directly addressed, they now form the immediate theme of the divine sayings. Ezekiel 36:1. ΰֶ ?μ, see on Ezekiel 6:2. Here, too, by the mountains of Israel it is not the land that is characterized after its most prominent part, but, as Ezekiel 36:2 will immediately show, the mountains come into consideration according to their religious signification for Israel. Ezekiel 36:2. The phrase: thus saith the Lord Jehovah, which, when one cannot put one’s self in the position of those concerned, is repeated to weariness in our chapter, belongs to its peculiarities. It is intended not only to contradict the saying of the adversary, but still more to contravene what the poor doubting heart itself says, when looking at that which the eyes see; at the same time the divine comfort appears in presence of this visibility as a comfort solely in word, as correspondingly in the closing part of the chapter the name of the Lord will come forth above all.—The enemy is, as the word implies, he who turns himself against any one, in the connection here Edom (Ezekiel 35:10), but in the signification developed Ezekiel 35; hence, as we go on farther, illustrated also by the heathen round about (Ezekiel 36:5; Ezekiel 25:3; Ezekiel 25:8; Ezekiel 25:12).—Comp. on Ezekiel 25:3. That the everlasting heights refer primarily to the temple is clear; at the same time, however, Zion will have to be viewed as the seat of the everlasting royal dominion. “An allusion to the inmost and most tender feelings of Israel” (Schmieder). [Hδvernick refers to Genesis 49:26 (Deuteronomy 33:15), according to which the mountains are held to stand in relation to the promises of Israel as imperishable memorials of the patriarch’s blessing. Hengst: The natural mountains as a figure of the unchangeable grandeur of which Israel boasted, because it had in the Eternal its protector and the guarantee of its own perpetuity (Psalms 125:2).]—Ezekiel 35:10. Ezekiel 36:3. Ewald directs attention to the first five repetitions of therefore, because the grounds against these enemies always press on anew before the discourse becomes calmer, and will have it observed that, as in Ezekiel 5:12 sq., sacred numbers (Ezekiel 3:5) fit into one another, and that in various ways, as for most certain assurance; there is a threefold address to the mountains; and the assignment of reasons has five steps in its process.—Ezekiel 21:14, 33.—ιַ ?ςַ ?οαְּ ?ιַ ?ςַ ?ο, see Ezekiel 13:10.—ωַׁ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ϊ (Ewald, Ausf.-Lehrb. 8th ed. p. 611), according to Gesenius, properly nom. verbale, but here only for the inf. Kal of ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ν transitive: “to devastate.” [Ewald: “they snap and puff at you round about.” Hitzig: “they puff and snap after you,” under a mistaken comparison of Isa 42:14 from πָ ?ωַׁ ?ν] Now if it cannot be rendered: “they devastate you” (Keil), and will scarcely be rendered, with Hengst.: “ye are devastated,” then perhaps the most obvious thing is, in accordance with Ezekiel 35:12; Ezekiel 35:14 sq., to think of the standing: “make desolate,” “desolation”! They appear to the enemy round about as a morsel ready for swallowing, that they are already a possession for the remnant of the heathen, as ξִ ?νָּ ?αִ ?ια is more definitely explained to he. The presupposition in ωְׁ ?ΰֵ ?γִ ?ιϊ (what remains after defeat) is the judgment inflicted by the Chaldeans. As with a little brotherly love the injury received would have kept them back, so with their enmity against Israel it goaded them on to commit still farther injury to indemnify themselves on Israel.—εַ ?ϊֵּ ?ςֲ ?μεּ, according to Rosenm., imperf. Niph. from ςָ ?μַ ?δ (to be lifted or taken up); according to Ewald, intransitive imperf. Kal from ςָ ?μμ (Aramaic, “to press in,” “to go in”); according to Hitzig, 2d plur. Kal from ςָ ?μַ ?δ, for εַ ?ϊַּ ?ςֲ ?μεּ (“ye are gone up”). The lip as instrument, the tongue as originator; the former having as its parallel calumny, and the latter, people; so that ωָׂ ?τָ ?δ is not = talk, and μָּ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ο not a personification for talkers, as Klief. thinks, yet it need not be tautology (Gesen.), or μָ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ο=; speech, people (Hδvern.). Ezekiel 36:4. Ezekiel 6:3. (“The mountains are for the land what the heads of the tribes are for the people, as it were the elders, the venerable fathers of the land, to whom the word of the Lord which is applicable to the whole land is announced,” Schmieder.) The mention of particulars is meant to point to the eye which observes all, the divine care which beholds each and all, over which only a human eye weeps, or on the contrary rejoices. As a prey points back to the beginning of Eze 36:3, so a derision points to its close. Ezekiel 36:5.The fire of my jealousy reminds of Eze 35:11.—Ezekiel 35:15.—Ch. 25 and 35 also testify that Jehovah has spoken in this manner.—Comp. Ezekiel 25:6; Ezekiel 25:5, although the application here is somewhat different. Ewald: “in mortal contempt.” Hitzig: “contempt from the soul” (?).—ξִ ?βְ ?ψָ ?ωָׁ ?δּ, according to Gesenius, an Aramaic infinitive from πָּ ?γַ ?ωׁ, “in order to empty it (the uninhabited land) for a prey.” But what would be still there to empty? Ewald’s translation: “in order to drive it out for pillage,” is quite as unsuitable. Hitzig does better, taking, it as a substantive, but wrongly in the sense of ‘produce,’ and according to a peculiar construction translating: “in order to plunder (μָ ?αֹ ?ζ) its produce.” Hengst. (Cocc.): “that its environs should be a prey to them.” But which environs? of the land? Hence he is obliged to substitute the capital as the centre! The signification pasturage would at least be simpler; and the emptied land is in keeping with this, and is consequently a desirable prey. [Many interpret also: “on account of the expulsion of the land” (land for people), Ezekiel 31:11, whereby it (now again the land) has become a prey.] Ezekiel 36:6. ςַ ?μΞΰַ ?γְ ?ξַ ?ϊ, hence as the native home of Israel, with precursory reference to the return of the people, Ezekiel 36:8 sq., 28 sq.—Partly a repetition of Eze 36:4. Ezekiel 36:5. The reproach is to be understood of words (invectives, Ezekiel 36:3-4) as well as of deeds. Ezekiel 36:7. Ezekiel 20:5. The attitude of swearing, yet not that alone, but also a sign of the intended action.—The roles shall change. Ezekiel 36:6, Ezekiel 16:52. Upon the heathen the reproach shall abide, but not upon the land which they have thus reproached to its inhabitants ! Ezekiel 36:8. The honour to be restored to the land is represented as the causing of it to yield leaves and fruit; Hengst. thinks: leaves and branches as food for cattle, while the fruit is for man.—χֵ ?ψְ ?αεּ μָ ?αεֹ ?ΰ can only be individuals concerned of the people. “Of the seventy years of Jeremiah, twenty had already elapsed (Ezekiel 33:21)” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 36:9. Because hitherto (as late as Ezekiel 34:10) employed in a hostile sense, an explanation follows the δִ ?πְ ?πִ ?ιִ ΰֲ ?μΧ (Deuteronomy 11:12). The sowing shows that the work of cultivation is the subject spoken of, hence already with reference to men. Ezekiel 36:10. Then farther in correspondence with the cultivation of the land is the peopling of it.—λָּ ?μΞαֵּ ?ιϊΧλֻּ ?μִּ ?δ, antithesis to Ezekiel 35:15. Ezekiel 36:4. Ezekiel 36:11. To the men also cattle.—Genesis 1:28. “A new creation-blessing, as it were” (Hδvern.). The more than indicates the figurative in the manner of expression (Deuteronomy 30:5), as does also the fact that the mountains are addressed. Ezekiel 36:12 rounds off as commerce (εְ ?δεֹ ?μַ ?αְ ?ϊִּ ?ι) what has been said of the peopling, after there has previously been a rural population with tilling of fields and rearing of cattle, and a town population with building of ruins; and the mention is made of the abiding, enduring possession of the land (μְ ?πַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?δ, as inheritance).—Ξκָ, what must be meant is the land, mountains and all; masc., which ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ (Ezekiel 36:5) may be also, as afterwards fem. gen.—The make childless, said of the land, may also be referred to the wild beasts introduced in consequence of its desolation (Ezekiel 5:17; Ezekiel 14:15). Ezekiel 36:13. What is here said has in reality as little to do with Numbers 13:32 (observe, however, the statement of motive there) as with 2 Kings 2:24 (a mere particular case). The promised land was neither in itself of such a kind (Deuteronomy 8:7 sq., Ezekiel 11:10 sq.), nor, without giving a forced meaning, can we, with Hengst., understand a reference to its position between Asiatic and African powers; but what is here said to the mountains of Israel (as previously, Ezekiel 36:12, of the land) is directed against the reproach, the scorn of the heathen (Ezekiel 36:15), who would draw an inference from the desolation of the capital against its holy character as this land of divine promise. The reference here made to Numbers 13. can only be this, that what the adversaries say appears as a repetition of the unbelieving speech of those spies (ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υΰִ ?λֶ ?μֶ ?ϊιεֹ ?ωְׁ ?αֶ ?ιδָ), with which they brought out γִּ ?αַּ ?ϊδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ (comp. here Ezekiel 36:3); hence here somewhat in the sense of: Israel should have stayed away from it, not have come into the land, not have trod on the trap (birdlime) of the promise. [Ewald: “an exterminator of men art thou, and an unnatural mother of thy people wast thou.” Hδvern.: “a swallower of men,” and “making nations (Israel and Judah) childless.” Hitzig observes: ωִׁ ?λֵּ ?μ is said of a mother—to bring children dead into the world, or to kill them afterwards. But is it, then, the children of the land, and not rather of the inhabitants, that are here spoken of?] The land is desolation, fit now only for pasture (Ezekiel 36:5), thinks and says the surrounding heathen world. In opposition to this there was forcibly set forth the cultivation of the land already and the peopling of it with men, to whom the cattle (Ezekiel 36:11) were only an adjunct; also the rebuilding of the ruins, in view, however, of the cities being again inhabited (Ezekiel 36:10). But the sight of the desolation of the land took this general form in the mind and the mouth of the heathen, that this promised land consumes those who receive it, and especially that it can be no possession for their children, and consequently no inheritance. Comp. on this what was said in reference to the wilderness, Numbers 14:16; Deuteronomy 9:28; Exodus 32:12 sq. (Ezekiel 20). To this repeated reproaching, which is at the same time a reproaching of the name of Jehovah as the promiser of the land,—especially, however, to the second part of it (Ezekiel 36:12-13), the making childless, a statement immediately, Ezekiel 36:12, explained perfectly by: and thou art to them for an inheritance, Ezekiel 36:14 forms a parallel, with repetition only of the phrase: to devour men. The alliterative (λִּ ?ωֵּׁ ?μ, Piel instead ofωִׁ ?λֵּ ?μ), “making to stumble (to fall),” of the Kethib is significant, for thus is brought to view what the heathen standpoint of reproach so entirely overlooked, what, when the promised land had to be spoken of, should have been said of its abundance and beauty, namely, that thereby, by the misuse of its resources, it had been the occasion of Israel’s sin and downfall; and thus also a preparation is already made for speaking of, first, the profaning, and then the sanctifying of the name of Jehovah treated of in the course of the chapter. (Keil: “if the consuming of the population stands connected with the stumbling, then the people are devoured by the consequences of their sins, that is, by judicial punishments, sterility, pestilence, and war,” etc.) And inasmuch as Israel is now to possess the land abidingly, hence in his descendants, ωִׁ ?λֵּ ?μ, “to make childless,” is accordingly not repeated. This decides as completely as possible against the Qeri ϊְ ?ωַׁ ?λְּ ?μι (also against Hitzig); while, moreover, λωμ is repeated in Ezekiel 36:15 without Qeri in the Hiphil. [Hengst. understands the stumbling in the sense of the Qeri, and evidently under the influence of Hitzig’s absurd objection, as signifying “to make unfortunate”!] Ezekiel 36:15. According to another translation: “and I will no longer make thee hear” (Keil). Ezekiel 36:6; Ezekiel 36:3-4. Ezekiel 36:16-38. Profanation of the Name of Jehovah by Israel (Ezekiel 36:16-21), and Sanctification of it by Jehovah Himself (Ezekiel 36:22-38). Ezekiel 36:16. A new word of God, but, as we have seen, prepared for by what has preceded (Ezekiel 36:14-15). Ezekiel 36:17 begins with a retrospect into the moral history of the house of Israel, for which comp. Leviticus 18:28; Numbers 35:34; Jeremiah 2:7.—Their way, their walk, as the expression their works explains (Ezekiel 14:22-23), and λְּ ?θֻ ?ξְ ?ΰַ ?ϊΧ renders still more clear. πִ ?γָּ ?δ (from πָ ?γַ ?γ) is: “rejection” = abhorrence, abomination, Ezekiel 7:19 sq.; then: separation= purification, especially the monthly purification of a woman by separation, issue of blood (Leviticus 15). Gesen., on the other hand, explains the word by “uncleanness,” i.e., an unclean issue of blood. Comp. besides Isaiah 64:5 [6]. Yet not, however, as the “most loathsome uncleanness” (Keil)—it is in reality the natural peculiarity of woman—but the comparison appears to be used on account of the blood, as Ezekiel 36:18 makes obvious. Concerning the tenses comp. Hitzig. In Ezekiel 36:17 a habitual state in the past, on which the action in Ezekiel 36:18 breaks in. Ezekiel 7:8.—Ezekiel 22:3; Ezekiel 22:6; Ezekiel 33:25.—Comp. on Ezekiel 6:4 (Ezekiel 8:10). “Murder and idolatry, with reference to the first commandment of the first table and the first of the second” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 36:19. Ezekiel 22:15.—Ezekiel 7:3; Ezekiel 7:8. Ezekiel 36:20. The singular is interpreted by Hengst. of the fate spoken of in Ezekiel 36:19, namely, the news (!) of it, although he goes on giving the following turn: the news came at the same time with themselves; they were the embodied intelligence. Keil understands it more simply as meaning the house of Israel. Hitzig, like the ancient versions, reads the plural, which, however, should be doubly avoided. That they themselves came to the heathen is repeatedly expressed in what follows, and that for the very purpose of explaining the fact therewith connected, the actual profanation of the name of the Lord by Israel’s presence there. As in their own land, so also outside of it. The name of My holiness is not simply: the holy name of Jehovah, but the name in which His holiness is manifest, so that by it man names His holiness, and hence the Holy God Himself. The profanation is traced home to the Jews as originators, as occasion of the saying which follows; and hence it is said indefinitely αֶּ ?ΰֱ ?ξֹ ?ψμָ ?δֶ ?ν, so that the heathen, who certainly also desecrated the name of Jehovah in their mouth, are yet not looked upon as the desecrators of the name of His holiness, but the Jews [Hengst.: “not by their doing, Romans 2:24, but by their suffering, because they had brought on the fate by their active desecration”], who, moreover, unrepentingly remained silent concerning their sin and guilt. They just came where they came; and with their impenitence gave there the impression merely of wretched, unfortunate, deceived, betrayed beings, in whom the blame was not to be sought, but in their God, who was powerless in comparison with the gods of the heathen, or unfaithful to His chosen people.—ςַ ?νΧ has also been interpreted interrogatively by various expositors.—ιָ ?φָ ?ΰεּ is as much as to say: and they have run away out of Jehovah’s land which He had promised to them, where He dwelt among them; so that their having gone might be ironically held as a voluntary departure. Ezekiel 36:21. ηָ ?ξַ ?μ is: to draw one’s self together, to bend over (ςμ) any one, to incline one’s self to him; hence: to compassionate him. [Hδvern, wrongly: “and I spared for My holy name’s sake” (Sept.). The Vulgate is confused. Rosenm.: “I will take care for it, so that it shall not come to harm.” In this striking expression also lies something more active than: “to have compassion” (Klief.), or as Hengst.: “I had pity for My,” sq.] What follows shows what is contained in this prophetic preterite. Ezekiel 36:22. There is first the announcement, which is at the same time an explanation of the divine pity, as His pitying of Himself in harmony with His holiness, in short, as a holy love,—an explanation which cuts off everything possible with men. The self-existent majesty of the Holy One of Israel, who stands in need of no one, says: μֹ ?ΰμְ ?ξַ ?ςַ ?πְ ?λֶ ?ν(Deuteronomy 9:6). Neither in Israel’s virtue, nor yet in his misery, is there now any ground for Jehovah to act. Israel has no qualification whatever.—ΰֲ ?πִ ?ιςωֶֹׁ ?δ, namely, what I do,—thus spoken absolutely, denoting the pure action, just as is specially suitable here. He does it, however, for glory and honour to ( μ, dat. comm.) His name. Ezekiel 36:23. The “acting” of Jehovah is expressed and here announced as a sanctifying, i.e. of My holiness as expressed in My name, securing due weight to it, so that it shall not simply be named as name, but evidently experienced as fact. In its being the name of His holiness lies the necessity, when the people who can thus name God do not sanctify it, but on the contrary only contribute everywhere to its profanation, that then Jehovah should take in hand the sanctification of His name and thereby of Himself (αְּ ?δִ ?χָּ ?γְ ?ωִׁ ?ι).—δַ ?βָּ ?γεֹ ?μ, together with the following δַ ?ξְ ?ηֻ ?μָּ ?μ, makes observable the infinite grandeur as well as the omnipotence which are able to secure due regard for themselves (Joshua 7:9; Malachi 1:11). That we might well expect: “before their (instead of: before your) eyes,” which reading is almost universally preferred, Hengst. also acknowledges, but finds, however, the thought of the manifest salvation better expressed in those immediately concerned. These, however, are not the Jews, because they have beheld the misery (Job 19:27), but the heathen as spectators of the profanation of the divine name by the Jews (Ezekiel 20:41; Ezekiel 28:25). The Jews’ part in the matter is sufficiently expressed by αָ ?λֶ ?ν (in your persons). [“The expression: ‘when I sanctify Myself in you before your eyes,’ for which many critical authorities, both ancient and modern, would substitute ‘before their eyes,’ namely, those of the heathen—this expression creates no difficulty to a person who enters thoroughly into the import of the passage. For it points to the fact that Israel, as well as the heathen, needed the manifestation in question of Jehovah’s righteousness. It must be done first before the eyes of the people, who by their depravity had lost sight of God’s real character; and then what was seen by them experimentally would also be seen reflectively by the heathen who dwelt around. This twofold perception of God’s character is also brought out in other passages of our prophet; as in Ezekiel 20:41-42 : ‘And I will be sanctified in you before the eyes of the heathen, and ye shall know that I am Jehovah. ’ ”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel.—W. F.] Ezekiel 36:24. The first thing in this self-sanctification of Jehovah is an act of power, which puts an end to the outward occasion for the saying in Ezekiel 36:20, and to the actual profanation of the name of His holiness among the heathen (Ezekiel 11:17; Ezekiel 20:34; Ezekiel 20:41). Ezekiel 36:25. The next thing, to which the first only subserves, is the raising up of Israel inwardly to a holy nation, so that αָ ?λֶ ?ν (Ezekiel 36:23) signifies: in them, as well as: on them; this, too, is a forth-putting, yea, the most mighty forth-putting of power, because wrought in the core of the national life. In Ezekiel 36:24, Israel’s justification before the heathen; in Ezekiel 36:25, Israel’s sanctification in himself as also among the heathen.—The “sprinkling,” as it will be in respect to a nation the only imaginable method of lustration, so, moreover, from the clean water(ξַ ?εִ ?ινθְ ?δεֹ ?ψִ ?ιν cannot be = ξֵ ?ιπִ ?γָּ ?δ) it cannot in the least point to the rite with the ashes, Numbers 19 (Hengst.); it would be preferable, with Hδvern., to think of Num 8:7 sq., but ξֵ ?ιηַ ?θָּ ?ΰϊ there also is something different from what clean water expresses here. The latter is meant expressly to symbolize the idea of purification, and specially from all etc., the θֻּ ?ξְ ?εֹ ?ϊֵ ?ιαֶ ?ν of the people, which, if not directly explained, is yet illustrated by εִּ ?μεּ ?μֵ ?ιλֶ ?ν; the “sprinkling,” again (comp. Exodus 25.), is doubtless meant to signify an act of consecration. Because sacrificial blood is not mentioned here, but such emphasis is laid on clean water, the best known means of purification, and also the most suitable for stains which show outwardly, we are as little at liberty to import without farther mediation—as Hengst. attempts under citation of Isa 53:11; Isaiah 52:15—New Testament ideas into our chapter as into Ezekiel 11:19 sq. (see Comm. there). Neither does Psalms 51 coincide with our passage. The immediate sense of our verse is: That Jehovah leads back Israel from exile into their own land, and consecrates them there to be a people, since the punishment, so characteristic for the sin that occasioned it, is shown to be removed by the bringing of them again into their own land; the forgiveness of sin thereby already proclaimed at once evinces and manifests itself as purification of the people, and the people (as in point of fact took place after the exile) put from them their old life, especially their idolatry (Ezekiel 11:18; Ezekiel 18:31). Certainly not without some ground has Abarbanel referred back to the comparison of the issue of blood used in Ezekiel 36:17.—As to how Ezekiel 36:26 is to be understood, comp. on Ezekiel 11:19. Instead of the new heart here, μֵ ?αΰֶ ?ηָ ?ψ is mentioned there, and only the “new spirit” is spoken of; while here both heart and spirit (as Ezekiel 18:31) appear as new, whereby the religious moral regeneration of the nation, a national restoration, is placed in prospect. “It is very consonant to the priestly character to portray the new community as a truly spiritually purified band of Levites or priests, Isaiah 61:6” (Hδvern. ?). Ezekiel 36:27. Since Jehovah’s Spirit is put αְּ ?χִ ?ψְ ?αְּ ?λֶ ?ν, and thus is brought to pass that Israel’s conformity to law in walk and honesty of dealing return again, therefore the “new spirit” of Ezekiel 36:26 is primarily to be understood as a divine spiritual impulse back to the law of Jehovah (Ezekiel 11:20). Ezekiel 36:28. By the dwelling in the land, etc. (the “renewal of old gifts”), we are reminded of the close of Ezekiel 35. [Kliefoth here looks forward as far as the “last times,” since God will gather out of the whole world His people, who are still scattered in a quite different manner and far wider in the world, and will place them in the heavenly Canaan, free them absolutely from sin (Ezekiel 36:25), and as absolutely renew them inwardly (Ezekiel 36:26), and by both acts as absolutely sanctify them (Ezekiel 36:27).] Comp. Leviticus 25:18; Leviticus 26:12. Ezekiel 36:29. εְ ?δεֹ ?ωַׁ ?ςְ ?ϊִּ ?ι is by anticipation understood Messianically (Matthew 1:21) by those resolved to find the New Testament ordo salutis in Ezekiel, interpreted of the divine protection (Ezekiel 34:22), or, by way of distinction from Ezekiel 36:25, referred to the consequences of the defilements of Israel. The expression rather sums up the foregoing, which regarded the people, while now, subjoined to Ezekiel 36:28, a transition is made to the land. Idolatry disappears, and the promises concerning the land are fulfilled, Ezekiel 34:29. (The opposite, although in the same figure, we find in 2 Kings 8:1.) Ezekiel 36:30. Ezekiel 34:27; Ezekiel 34:29. Ezekiel 36:31. Ezekiel 20:43; comp. on Ezekiel 6:9. The anti-heathen abhorrence and loathing became national, and still speaks out of its distorted pietism in Pharisaism. If the gospel order of salvation were to be sought in Ezekiel 36:25 sq., then we would rather expect to find here joy in the Holy Ghost (Leviticus 26:40). Ezekiel 36:32. Comp. on Ezekiel 36:22.—That this acting of Jehovah, irrespective of them, is still so particularly placed before and inculcated on them, is, however, by no means designed to leave the Jews undisturbed, as if they might simply wait for the things which would come upon them and happen to them; but as the love of God, without worthiness deserving it, certainly excludes any merit on the part of man, yet should so much the more awaken to reception and love in return, so there is attached to the promise here the imperative, repeated with additional emphasis, in relation to the family, the household of Israel. Ezekiel 36:33. Ezekiel 36:25.—Hitzig translates εְ ?δεֹ ?ωַׁ ?αְ ?ϊִּ ?ι: “then I again erect the cities,” make them to sit instead of lying, since he denies that it ever (Isaiah 54:3) signifies: “to make inhabited.” So also Hengstenberg always: “sit,” in contrast to: lie prostrate, and here: “cause to sit.” Gesenius, Ewald, etc., on the other hand, support the causative signification, as: to cause that one sit, dwell therein, to make inhabited. Keil: make stocked with inhabitants. Ezekiel 36:34. Ezekiel 36:9.—Ezekiel 35:3; Ezekiel 6:14.—Ezekiel 5:14. Ezekiel 36:35. εְ ?ΰָ ?ξְ ?γεּ are those individualized from λָּ ?μΞςεֹ ?αֵ ?ψ Ezekiel 36:34. (δַ ?μָּ ?ζֶ ?εּ only here,= δַ ?μָּ ?ζֶ ?δ, but probably fem.) Observe the antithesis to Ezekiel 35:12; Ezekiel 35:9, and the probable allusion in Eden to Edom (Ezekiel 31:8-9; Genesis 13:10; Isaiah 51:3; Joe 2:3). From this allegorical way of speaking, Hengstenberg justly rejects the idea of “the restoration of Canaan to a really paradisaic glory.”—Ewald: “flourish, well fortified.” Hengst.: “sit fortified;” whereas a city whose wall is broken lies on the ground. According to another translation, said of the inhabitants, who feel themselves secure, protected therein as in fortresses. (Comp. on Ezekiel 38:11.) Ezekiel 36:36. The heathen brought in as left (“the remnant of the heathen,” Ezekiel 36:3) are, on the contrary, made known only by the judgments that have passed over them, but by no restitution. Comp. Ezekiel 17:24. Ezekiel 36:37. Ezekiel 14:3 (1 Samuel 28:6-7). On μַ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?Χμָ ?δֶ ?ν, comp. on the opposite, the μֹ ?ΰΧΰֲ ?πִ ?ιΞςωֶֹׁ ?δ (Ezekiel 36:32; Ezekiel 36:22).—The land—well, we are again in it, but where are the people? This question Jehovah will answer by actual (μַ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ϊ) increase (Ezekiel 36:10 sq.), in that He will show them as a flock (Ezekiel 34; Micah 2:12). [While Hitzig takes ΰָ ?γָ ?ν as in apposition to ΰֹ ?ϊָ ?ν (them, the men, as a flock), Kliefoth translates incorrectly: “that they became the flock of mankind.”] Hδvernick cites Bochart for the particularly great increase of flocks of sheep. (Comp. also Ezekiel 34:31.) But what Ezekiel 36:38 says on this is more significant. According to Hengstenberg, formal mention is made of the festivals in general, but the connection (as Mark 15:6) points to the great accumulation of sheep at the passover (2 Chronicles 35:7), with which the abundance in men of restored Israel is compared. (Thus the Chaldee.) Hengstenberg translates: “as consecrated flocks of sheep” (the people of the saints of the Lord), and seeks the fulfilment in the Church of Christ rather than in the times between the exile and Christ.—χָ ?γָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν that is, of hallowed ones, in this sense: of sacrificial beasts (Romans 12:1); whereby the reference to the consecration of the people (Ezekiel 36:25) gains confirmation. The people is embraced in its chief points of worship, Deuteronomy 16:16. 1. The comparison of our chapter with Ezekiel 6 indicates that, in considering the “mountains of Israel,” especially when they are by the best interpreter, the “enemy,” sneeringly termed the “everlasting heights,” we are not to direct our attention to the mountainous character of the Holy Land. Palestine is a hilly country, which leans upon the towering heights of Lebanon and Hermon; but this conformation did not so much qualify it for its significance in the Old World, so that we might at once recur to that, as its position on the boundaries of Asia, Africa, and Europe, and again its peculiar isolation, while occupying such a position in the centre of the Old World. In considering this position of the land, its littleness, ridiculed as is well known by Cicero, and from which the Roman statesman would infer the little god of the Jews, has as little, or rather as much, to say as the grain of mustard seed in the parable, Matthew 13. The focus of the concave mirror is, in like manner, merely a point. The outward littleness of the Holy Land only compels us to one thing, and that is, to keep always in view its spiritual significance. As, then, for such a view, its separation from the other countries, and again, at the same time, its position in the midst of them (Ezekiel 5:5) (the former, that amid the universal blowing of the world and the nations there might be a protecting hand before the light; the latter, that when the light burst forth, its brilliancy might easily shine in all directions), claim our attention much more than its mountainous character,—so under the “everlasting heights,” the “mountains of Israel,” Zion, as seat of the Davidic-Messianic kingdom (Psalms 2), and the temple-mountain, in so far as Israel worshipped what it knew (John 4), and the σωτηρικἑκτων ʼ ?Ιουδαιωνἐστιν, must come into consideration (Ezekiel 34:26; Isaiah 2:2; Micah 4:1); however beautifully that reads which has been said by Schmieder, accordant, no doubt, with “natural human feeling,” while citing Psalms 90:2 and Job 15:7, and referring to the “ways and manners of mountaineers,” and the thread of “remembrances,” especially Israel’s (Genesis 22; 1 Kings 18). 2. The antithesis of Seir places before our eyes the rugged mountain height and the rude mountain strength, that is, exactly the things which have no value for enduring victory, for abiding blessing in the higher order of things. 3. The combating of the allegorizing method of explanation—for example, by J. A. Crusius, from whom Rosenmόller quotes when commenting on our chapter—is unquestionably in the right against the arbitrary extravagances and exaggerations of Cocceius and his followers; but where the Bible language in general is symbolical, with the prophets, above all, a symbolical way of speaking will be conceded. A natural or historical sub-stratum on which the symbolical is based is supposed with the symbolical itself. Consequently, all that is here said in Ezekiel has a fulfilment in the time after the exile. On the other hand, modern apocalypticism, by its converting the letter of prophecy into future revelations of any and every kind, sets itself against the apocalyptic mode of expression, the characteristic of which is certainly not literality. The national physiognomy of Israel, as Genesis traces it back to Adam, the father of all men, indicates a reference to humanity as a whole. This reference prevails in Noah’s prophetic discourse, Genesis 9, when Japhet is destined to dwell in the tents of Shem, and Canaan, the son of Ham, to be a servant in the house. The Holy Land fits in with Abraham to this symbolism of the nation, and Abraham is to be a blessing (as is said in Genesis 12 : “to all the families of the earth, Adamah”), through his seed, which is Christ, as the apostle says in Galatians 3 Hence humanity in Christ will also be the theological point of view in the case of the land of Israel. So long as He who is τέλοςνόμου (Romans 10:4) was not born in the land of promise, the land remained, in respect to the realization of the blessing of Abraham to the race of Adam, a prophetic symbol of the earth, just as the nation was symbolico-prophetic for the nations of mankind. The land of Israel is also νομός (from νέμω), and, like the legal nationality of Israel, has its final fulfilment in Christ. As His beatitudes (Matthew 5) assign to His people the kingdom of heaven, so also do they the inheritance of the land. Hitherto out of Israel shines humanity, and representatively for it the Son of man, the true Israel. The Christian interpretation of the people of Israel as the Church, the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, embraces now also the Holy Land in the signification of the land of glory, paradise, and Eden. From the standpoint of the fulfilling of Israel as to its universal human signification by Christ, the Old Testament outward expression of the letter, that is, what is said propζdeutically and pζdagogically in accordance with the economy of the Old Covenant, in the style of the people and the land, may remain in its full force; but what is given with the idea of Israel, namely, that the promises in question are to be fulfilled in a very different sense from the outward literal sense, that they are to be fulfilled “in spirit and in truth,”—this even the literal expression itself demands from its unmistakable depth of meaning, which often makes plainly ridiculous a merely literal interpretation, whether looking to the time after the exile, or to the very last time. All the prophets and the law prophesied until John, the baptizer of Christ (Matthew 11:13; Luke 16:16). And what Christ said (John 4) of worshipping at Jerusalem: “the hour cometh, and now is,” bears witness to the Messianic (Christological) and in general the spiritual sense of the Old Testament letter; as the setting of it free from every temporary limitation as to place or nation bears witness to its sense for eternity, and to the spiritual interpretation as that which is at the same time interpretation “in truth,” the true understanding, so that the Christian truth of the prophecies is also to be regarded as their true and full reality. The Jewish Christianity of individual expositors (e.g. of Baumgarten) is not the Old Testament Christianity of the prophets. 4. On Ezekiel 3:17 the characteristic individualization was noted as a mark of the time; but that which is peculiar to the Christological utterances of our prophet (Introd. § 9), his putting of the Christological thought, as Ezekiel 40 sq., in the form of Palestinian worship, and so generally in the manner of the people and land of Israel, is always to be adhered to. Fundamentally, the latter form was only that of the law as early as Exodus 20:12. But when the Son of man, of the seed of David according to the flesh, realized the kingdom of Israel as eternal—when, by the outpouring of the Holy Ghost, His gift of prophecy became the common property of mankind, then, as with the worshipping in spirit and in truth, the peculiar localization of the sanctuary and the priestly service, always accomplished for the time, ceased; Israel also could, in whatever part of the earth, consider themselves as in their own land, and so much the more as their true King had (John 18) witnessed the good confession of the supra-mundane nature of His kingdom before the representative of the Roman earthly world-power. For the Israel of fulfilment Canaan lay, in the first instance, in the world above with Christ, as the apostle Paul says in Philippians 1:23, where also paradise is (Luke 23:43; 2 Corinthians 12:4); and in this world only, in the renewal of heaven and earth according to the Christian hope. So, likewise, the true, the fulfilled nationality of Israel is to be sought for in the Christian world, in humanity, according to the Spirit of Christ; now in measure, in fulness only hereafter, Revelation 21:3. 5. Schmieder sums up the moral guilt of Edom as threefold: (1) taking possession at his own hand; (2) doing this in a bad frame of mind, with malignant joy and scornful laughter; (3) doing this not to keep and cultivate the land (for which man was ordained of God in paradise), but to devastate and plunder it. 6. It belongs to the local colour of the land, that, when it is spoken of distinctively, its fruitfulness also is spoken of. Comp. for climate and nature of the soil, the well-known passages of Scripture. Writers in the first century still bear witness to what heathens and Jews of former times celebrated with one accord, the immense population of the land, corresponding to its great fertility. At present, indeed, Jerusalem, the largest city of Palestine, has scarcely more inhabitants than the smaller towns of Galilee had in the time of Josephus. 7. On the parallel minatory prophecy in Ezekiel 6 it was observed (p. 94) how Israel’s idolatrous self-righteousness is broken in pieces in every way by God’s judgment. A parallel observation will correspond to the kernel and inmost contents of our chapter, namely, that divine grace alone will restore Israel, land and people—the latter especially, in the way of Jehovah’s sanctifying His own name. In this, Israel’s misery is as little the motive as any righteousness on the side of Israel. What befalls the heathen, indeed, with respect to Israel, happens to them because they have insulted in His people the name of Jehovah revealed in Israel. Hence the fundamental reference which Jehovah takes is finally Himself. Israel, as has been repeatedly said, four times in succession (in the cosmic number, Ezekiel 36:20-23), gave by their exile, and hence by their misery, occasion for the profanation of the name of Jehovah. Their misery made the heathen sin against Jehovah; thus it was viewed, but by no means as cause of the divine pity. What is said of pity is Jehovah’s pity for His own name, Ezekiel 36:21. The divine love appears not as compassion in relation to misery, but the misery itself appears as sin, so that the reference is taken simply to sin; the divine love appears purely as grace. 8. Hδvernick emphasizes this, that “the holiness of God forms the centre of the discourse before us;” but he makes too little account of the holiness of Jehovah, when he makes no more of it than “the relation therein established of God to the evil,” So also it is not acutely thought, when, in explanation of Eze 36:1-15, that “the punitive judgment threatened against the heathen must have its ultimate explanation ” from the holiness of God, Hδvernick places the essence of heathenism in assailing the holiness of God. It must be observed, however, that heathenism knows nothing of God’s holiness. The name of Jehovah’s holiness, as the expression, chosen three times in succession (according to the number of the godhead, Ezekiel 36:20-22), and which is not to be resolved into the “holy name of Jehovah,” significantly runs, is even as “name” (as Beck justly observes) “the expression with living power of the divine presence in revelation,” so that by the name of Jehovah’s holiness this revelation of God as adapted exclusively to Israel is set forth; hence, as to the “transgressions of the heathen,” no direct relation of them to the holiness of God is expressed, but a misapprehension of the revelation of the holy in Israel, consequently a relation to Israel as the people of Jehovah. The holiness of God has, however, so much the more significance in our chapter, as the setting of it forth in Israel is thoroughly in accordance with what is thus emphasized, that what Jehovah does (Ezekiel 36:22; Ezekiel 36:32) He does for His own sake. For God’s holiness is “the real intrinsic ideality of God, His harmoniousness of essence, as it manifests itself also in this, that He makes Himself known in a church of His pure divine consciousness, and preserves and perfects this church in the ideality of its pure essence, until by it the world is restored to perfection in the real ideality, the personal harmoniousness of essence” (P. Lange, Pos. Dogm. p. 95). By setting forth the holiness of God, as is done in our chapter, Ezekiel puts himself in harmony with Isaiah (p. 41). 9. Lange observes on the holiness of God, that the concept of it is “mediated to us through the Old Testament almost more than any other concept;” “the leading thought of the Hebrew view of the world is holiness; the χָ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ, or χְ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ ιִ ?ωׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ, is He who is pure in essence, true to Himself, corresponding to His name.” Lange finds the “mythologico-typical reflection” of holiness in ideality, the “leading thought of the Hellenic view of the world,” just as he calls “the Greek culture the mythologico-typical counterpart of the theocracy.” 10. Because love, which is God, is holy, breaking of the law, and still more the dishonouring of divine benefits, as in Ezekiel 36:16 sq., can expect no support or indulgence in Him, the righteous God, the “Founder and Guardian of right” (Lange). Since He as the “Holy One,” who is the absolute opposite of the evil, can originate nothing evil, so contrariety to Him as such, and especially misuse of His gifts, here of the land, can find no encouragement with the “Holy One of Israel,” the Giver of righteous recompense. Since the native land of a people, especially like Israel, may be misused as the δοςμοιπουστω in relation to heaven or higher interests than the earth, the corresponding righteous opposition and reaction of the holiness of God will be either deterioration of such a land (failure of crops and the like), or expulsion of the people from it, or both. So, too, the earth must finally pass away for mankind, although for the people of God there is hope of a “new earth.” The latter gives proof of God’s truth and faithfulness, which, keeping promise, provides for the need of finite spirits not only a corporeity, but also a locality in harmony therewith, according to the purpose of His wise and holy will; and perhaps this is typified also in Israel’s possession of the land in the signification of their native land. But with God not only is goodness accompanied by justice, as that according to which God gave Israel scope and opportunity to expel (exile) themselves from their land among the heathen—just as man can procure hell for himself—and thus left as well as gave their right to Israel, but divine justice as revelation of God’s holiness is more than mere retribution; it becomes on and in the sinner self-sanctification of God. 11. As the Holy One, Jehovah is the God of Israel (Leviticus 11:44 sq.); and it is only in keeping with this relation that Israel, His people, have to appear before Him, not merely in symbolical but still more in legal moral purity of life, above all in that they keep themselves religiously pure from idols. It is not only this mutual relation that results to Israel from the fact that their God is the Holy One, but also that, so long as the relation of the Holy One to Israel has not ceased, in like manner the holiness of this people is not to be surrendered; hence that, as on them by exile and by restoration, so in them Jehovah will sanctify His name or Himself. “The command: Be ye holy, for I am holy, contains (says Hδvernick) at the same time the promise of the realization of a holy kingdom of God as surely as God Himself is holy. But God reveals Himself as the Holy One not merely in condemning evil and destroying the offender, but also in the extirpation of evil and the transformation and renewal of the sinner by virtue of a new divine breath of life, the spiritual creation of God in man.” 12. Sanctification implies in general that something is removed from its common worldly relations. Since this does not usually take place without reference to sinful concomitants, the symbolical act of washing readily connects itself with sanctification; but it is by no means to have a merely negative interpretation, as “annulling of the false profane world-relation of the object” (Lange), especially when, as here in Ezekiel, no mention is made of the positive symbol of anointing; which, moreover, does not symbolize induction into the service of the Lord, the “restoration of the true religious world-relation,” but the divine equipment for the service of the Lord. Even in itself, and still more from its thus standing alone, washing will represent purification, which is consecration. 13. Jehovah sanctifies Himself on Israel before the eyes of the rest of the world (Ezekiel 36:23), in that by taking and gathering Israel out of all nations and countries He actually places them again as His people in the land of promise (Ezekiel 36:24). Jehovah sanctifies Himself in Israel, hence in Israel’s own consciousness, by making them experience, as a fresh national dedication, a moral and religious purification. The expressions employed are to be interpreted as referring to the nation as such, and not to single individuals; we have not so much to understand spiritual states of mind as to think of national regeneration. But if what has been already remarked on Ezekiel 9 suffices as to the letter for our chapter also and Ezekiel 18, the sprinkling of the clean water in Ezekiel 36:25 symbolizes the national moral and religious cleansing of Israel, and the “new heart” in Ezekiel 36:26 is nothing else than a “heart of flesh” instead of a “heart of stone” in the flesh; yet in Ezekiel 36:27 the Spirit of Jehovah (ψεּ ?ηִ ?ι), which the “new spirit” within Israel is interpreted to mean, points beyond Ezekiel 11:19 (Ezekiel 18:31); the Holy One of Israel appears as the spirit of Israel, just as “God as Spirit of the Church and indweller in the human heart is preeminently the Holy One” (Nitzsch). And although Ezekiel 36:25 sq. in relation to Ezekiel 36:8 sq. may be taken as complement of the promise given there, or even as the condition for the promised inheritance continuing to the children, and hence parallel thereto (Ezekiel 36:24 carrying out the declaration: “for they draw near to come,” Ezekiel 36:8), yet we are not hindered from making the Messianic salvation of the people, as the true and full sanctification of Jehovah in as well as on them, shine forth behind all this (p. 24), and the “clean water” of Ezekiel 36:25 approximates to the Holy Ghost (Joe 2:28 sq.). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ 3. The Vision of the Resurrection and Re-quickening of the Dead Bones, and the Symbolical Action with the One Stick out of the Two Sticks, along with the Interpretation (Ch. 37)1The hand of Jehovah was upon me, and [as] Jehovah took me out in the Spirit and made me rest [brought me, set me down] in the midst of the 2valley, and it was full of bones. And He led me over by them round about, and behold, [there were] very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, 3[they were] very dry. And He said to me, Son of man, will these bones 4live [become alive]? And I said, Lord Jehovah, Thou knowest. And He said to me, Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, Ye dry bones, hear the 5 word of Jehovah, 5Thus saith the Lord Jehovah to these bones, Behold, I 6bring spirit into you, and ye live. And I give sinews on you, and make flesh to come up over you, and cover you with skin, and give breath in you, and 7ye live, and know that I am Jehovah. And I prophesied as I was commanded; and there came a voice as I prophesied, and behold, a rustling, and 8the bones drew near, bone to his bone. And I looked, and behold, sinews and flesh came up on them, and skin covered them from above, yet breath 9[was] not in them. And He said to me, Prophesy to the Spirit; prophesy, son of man, and say to the Spirit, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Come from the four winds, thou Spirit, and breathe into these slain, that they may live 10[become alive]. And I prophesied as He commanded me, and the Spirit came into them, and they lived [became alive], and stood upon their feet a very great 11army. And He said to me, Son of man, these bones [are] the whole house of Israel; Behold, they say, our bones were dried and our hope perished, for us, 12we are undone. Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I open your graves, and lead you up out of your graves, 13My people, and bring you to the land of Israel. And ye know that I am Jehovah, when I open your graves and lead you up out of your graves, My 14people; And I give My Spirit in you, and ye live, and I bring you to rest upon your land, and ye know that I, Jehovah, spoke and did—sentence of 15,16Jehovah. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, And thou, son of man, take to thee a stick, and write on it, For Judah and for the sons of Israel, his associates; and take another stick, and write on it, For Joseph, the 17stick of Ephraim, and of the whole house of Israel, his associates. And bring them near the one to the other for thee into one stick, that they may be 18[become] one in thy hand. And when the sons of thy people shall speak to 19thee, saying, Wilt thou not show us what these [sticks] are to thee? Then say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his associates, and put them on it, that is, the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, that they may be one in My hand. 20And the sticks on which thou shalt write are 21in thy hand before their eyes. And say to them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I take the sons of Israel out from among the heathen, whither they went, and gather them from round about, and bring them to 22their land. And I make them one people in the land, on the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be king to them all; and they [there] shall no more be two peoples, and they shall never again be divided into two kingdoms. 23And they shall no more defile themselves with their foul idols, and with their detestable things, and with all their transgressions; and I help them from all their dwelling-places where they have sinned, and cleanse them, and they 24shall be My people, and I will be their God. And My servant David shall be king over them, and one shepherd shall be to them all; and they shall 25walk in My judgments, and shall keep My statutes, and do them. And they dwell upon the land which I gave to My servant Jacob, in which your fathers dwelt, and they dwell on it, they and their sons, and their sons’ sons, for ever, 26and David My servant [is] prince to them for ever. And I make for them a covenant of peace, an everlasting covenant [covenant of eternity] shall be with them; and I give them and multiply them, and give My sanctuary in their 27midst for ever. And My dwelling is over them, and I am their God and they shall be My people. 28And the heathen know that I, Jehovah, sanctify Israel, in that My sanctuary is in their midst for ever. Ezekiel 37:1. Vulg.: … in spiritu domini— Ezekiel 37:5. Sept.: ... εἰςὑμαςπνευμαζωης. Ezekiel 37:6. ... νευρα … πνευμαμουἐφ̓ὑμας— Ezekiel 37:7. κκθωςἐνετειλατομοικυριος—(Another reading: λΰωψφεπι, Syr., Vulg., Arabs.) Ezekiel 37:9. ... κ. ἐμφυσησονεἰςτ. νεκρουςτουτουςκ. ζησατωσαν. Ezekiel 37:10. … συναγωγημεγαλησφοδρα. Ezekiel 37:11. … διαπεφωνκαμεν. Ezekiel 37:14. … κ. θησομαιὑμαςἐξιτ. γηνὑμων— Ezekiel 37:16. … ῥαβδον … τουςπροσχειμενουςπροςαὐτον. Ezekiel 37:17. ... εἰςῥ. μιαςτουδησαιαὐτχςχ. ἐσονταιἐντ. χειρισου. (Another reading: plur. αιγικ.) Ezekiel 37:19. Sept.: ... τηνφυληνἸωσηφτηνδιακειροςἘφραιμ … ἐκιτ. φυληντουἸουδα … ἐντ. κειριἸουδα. Vulg.: … et dabo eas pariter cum ligno J. … in manu ejus. (Anoth. reading: αιγε.) Ezekiel 37:21. Sept.: ... λαμβανωκανταοἰχονἸ … γηνἸ. Ezekiel 37:22. αὐτοςεἰςἐθνοςἐντ. γημου— Ezekiel 37:23. ... ἱναμη … ενοἱςἡμαρτοσανἐναὐτοις, χ. ἐντ. χροσοχθισμασιναὐτωνκ. … ἀποπασωντ. ἀνομιωνὡνἠμαρτοσανἐναὐταις—(Another reading: τωςιδν et Arabs.) Ezekiel 37:24. ἀρχωνἐνμεσωαὐτων … ὁτιἐν— Ezekiel 37:25. … οἱπατερεςαὐτων— Ezekiel 37:28. Sept.: ... ὁἁγιαζωναὐτους— REMARKSThe two sections of the chapter, Ezekiel 37:1-14 and Ezekiel 37:15-28, are already distinguished by the introductory formula (Ezekiel 37:1; Ezekiel 37:15); still more decidedly by their difference of form,—first a vision, and then a symbolic action; as also by their contents, which, however, with all their diversity, show the most intimate connection—what in the first section is prophesied of the whole of Israel is in the second ratified by promise in relation to the parts. [Hengst.: “the restoration of Israel as a covenant-people, and the restoration of Israel as a brotherhood.”] The re-quickening and reunion of Israel. The interpretation is connected with both prophetic sections of our chapter, appended (Ezekiel 37:11-14) to the first, while in the second it is given along with the prophecy. The connection with Ezekiel 30. is apparent from the close of that chapter, Ezekiel 37:24 sq. Ezekiel 37:1-10. The Quickening of the Bones in the Valley. Ezekiel 37:1. δָ ?ιְ ?ηָ ?δ, comp. Ezekiel 1:3 (εַ ?δְּ ?δִ ?ιςָ ?μָ ?ιε) and Ezekiel 33:22 (δָ ?ιְ ?ϊָ ?δΰֵ ?μַ ?ι). Although not the stronger introductory formula (as in Ezekiel 8:1), yet the description given of Ezekiel’s condition is sufficient simply to set aside a mere “product of poetical intuition” (Hitzig). “The abrupt commencement without and” is, according to Hengstenberg, meant to point out that “the fact here related is extraordinary, and out of connection with the usual prophetic activity.” [“As the subject itself is a quite unusual one, so also the description is such as Ezekiel never elsewhere draws. Such a never-seen sight is seen by itself in a moment of higher inspiration, or never,” Ewald.] As the Vulgate, so also Hitzig, against the accent: “in the Spirit of Jehovah;” but ιְ ?δεָֹ ?δ is subject, and αְ ?ψεּ ?ηַ simply: ἐντνευματι (Matthew 22:43), in contrast to ἐνσωματι (2 Corinthians 12:2), to which it is easy to supply ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν (Ezekiel 11:24), which (as Keil justly observes) was omitted because of the ιְ ?ηεָֹ ?δ (comp. Ezekiel 8:3). Ecstatic state in which he was inwardly transported from the things around him.—The valley can only be the one mentioned in Ezekiel 3:22, when we consider that those who speak in Ezekiel 37:11 were settled there in the neighbourhood, and consequently could be represented as the bones in the valley. At all events, it is not a valley in general, but a certain valley; and if nothing else, that (εְ ?δִ ?ιΰ) which was full of bones. Hengstenberg points out the contrast to the mountain (Ezekiel 17:22), the “lowness of condition”! Hitzig: “The valley is fitted to represent a huge grave;” but the thought is less of graves than of their opposite (ςַ ?μΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ι, Ezekiel 37:2), namely, that the slain (Ezekiel 37:9) have remained unburied, their bones bleach and dry there.—The bones are men’s bones (Isaiah 66:14); in the connection here: the remains of the slain, abundance of which might be in the disturbed districts of Judah; according to the Talmudists: slain Ephraimites, 1 Chronicles 7:20 sq. Looking from the midst of the valley, he could warrant that it was full of bones. Ezekiel 37:2. ςֲ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν, over by them, or “over past them;” hence not: “over,” to tread them with the feet, or to hover over them, but: round about, so that he might be able to view them exactly, as the repeated εְ ?δִ ?πֵּ ?δ, as the result of such inspection, brings to view the very many and their being very dry, neither sap nor strength in them. Comp. moreover, Ezekiel 6. [Ewald refers for “the rapid narration, with its constant fall into the present,” to his Grammar, § 342 b.] The question in Ezekiel 37:3 is fitted to bring the prophet, and, through him, his hearers and readers, to the consciousness of the impossibility presented to human eyes (son of man); and considering the words uttered by Israel (Ezekiel 37:11), its intention doubtless is to bring out the despair of the people, in order to make room in their hearts for the prophecy of salvation (Ezekiel 37:12). Ezekiel’s answer refers the matter to God (Revelation 7:14), for with God there is no impossibility, unless He wills it, and that God alone can know. Comp. on this point Isaiah 26:19. Ezekiel 37:4. When Ezekiel is summoned to prophesy over the bones, their future, asked (Ezekiel 37:3) by Jehovah in relation to them, comes to view as an affair of Jehovah’s, of His counsel, will, and purpose; they may therefore be addressed (εְ ?ΰָ ?ξΧΰֲ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν), however dry they are. Grotius observes: so much the more as the prisoners in the exile are to be understood.—The word of Jehovah (Ezekiel 36:1; Ezekiel 36:4) mediates the salvation, the life to be prophesied. Hence not see, for then death, and nothing but death, will come to view. In Ezekiel’s vision all depends on “hearing;” recognise God’s word, and trust to it (John 4:48; John 20:19). This, at the same time, legitimates as divine the word of Ezekiel’s prophetic announcement. The tenor, however, of the divine word—Jehovah announces what will take place, what He purposes to do (Amos 3:7)—follows in Ezekiel 37:5. What is said to them is, from the certainty of its being accomplished, in reality said of them, as δִ ?πֵּ ?δ already formally points to the accomplishment.—ψεּ ?ηַ, although followed by εִ ?ηְ ?ιִ ?ιϊֶ ?ν of the effect generally on the whole, is yet not exactly ψΧηַ ?ιִ ?ιν of Genesis 6:17, or πִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?ηΞϊΧηΧ of Genesis 7:22, “breath”; for it is just that which is in a living being that is here left out of view, and, in contrast to that which is dried up, above all, simply the creative divine power, hence spirit quite objectively and generally is contemplated. (“The Spirit of God is the principle of all real life in the creaturely existence,” Hδv.) That we have here another order (Hengst.) than in the execution (Ezekiel 37:7 sq.) is not the case, for the more detailed description which follows immediately in Ezekiel 37:6 presents the same order as the execution follows. The Spirit also does not press forward at the beginning as the (Hitzig) chief thing, without which the rest, the merely bodily resurrection, is of no importance (Hengst.), but as εִ ?ηְ ?ιִ ?ιϊֶ ?ν implies: “to live” in genera], without separation for the present into political and spiritual, so ΰֲ ?πִ ?ιξֵ ?αִ ?ιΰαָ ?λֶ ?νψΧ introduces the divine causality simply as first, as conditio sine qua non. The more special is expressed Ezekiel 37:6—by a parallel εְ ?πָ ?ϊַ ?ϊִּ ?ι; and afterwards by πִּ ?ιγִ ?ιν, the “binding matter,” the sinews, and by the making of “flesh to come up,” and by the χψν (a word only found in Ezekiel), with skin, the outward form of life is completed, from which the spirit which enlivens the flesh is distinguished, but is as yet to be considered as natural, now as breath, the individual life, in consequence of which it certainly can be said: εִ ?ιγַ ?ςְ ?ϊֶּ ?νΧ. But the spiritual element, although intimated in this, is first expressly stated in the interpretation (Ezekiel 37:14), with reference back to Ezekiel 36:27. The prophecy, in accordance with the command given to Ezekiel (Ezekiel 37:4), is not limited (as Hengst.) in Ezekiel 37:7 to the summons to the bones to “hear,” sq., but comprehends also what Jehovah says to these bones in Ezekiel 37:5-6; for that He is the speaker makes the saying a prophecy, although to prophesy in general may be said to mean the same as: “to speak in the Spirit.”—The voice which came was audible; its simplest interpretation is in accordance with Ezekiel 1:25. The prophet was to prophesy; what Jehovah purposed to say to the bones (Ezekiel 37:4-6), the prophet now prophesies; and since he prophesies according to the command, Thus saith Jehovah, that which was prophesied to the bones is from God, and the voice is to be understood as Jehovah’s, from which the New Testament representation is perhaps coloured (John 5:28), and neither a “noise” nor “sound” in general-anything like a thunder-clap would be out of place in this sublime and orderly connection—nor in particular: “the sound of a trumpet.” Keil’s position, that it cannot be supposed that God should bind His voice of power to the prophecy of the prophet, has in reality no significance. On the other hand, he is right in referring ψַ ?ςַ ?ωׁ (Ezekiel 3:12; Ezekiel 12:18) to the noise by which the effect of the word of Jehovah announced itself to the bones, now coming together in consequence thereof. [Hδvernick makes the “sound” pass into a “mighty peal.” Hitzig, in order to have the “fitting impulse” from the ground, translates: “earthquake” (Matthew 27:51), under reference to Ezekiel 38:19. God’s voice of power is followed by a rustling, caused by the bones coming rustling up from the surface of the valley. Thereafter (εְ consecutive) “the bones come together,” which may be thus distinguished from what follows, that it refers to whatever belongs to one body, while ςֶ ?φֶ ?νΰֶ ?μΞςַ ?φΧ specializes a single bone in relation to another, e.g. the upper to the lower part of the arm (on the form ηִּ ?χְ ?ψְ ?αεּ, see Ewald, Gr. p. 505). [“This may also be interpreted of the first movements of the scattered Israelites in the various settlements in Chaldea, and their assembling for quiet consultation, where the members of the people met again in secret,” Schmieder.] Ezekiel 37:8, as was promised in Ezekiel 37:6. [“May be interpreted of Israel’s first growth in hope, conscious strength, and vigour,” Schmieder.] The remark that yet breath was not in them may serve formally for the dramatic colouring of the event in the representation; as to actual fact, it sets forth the creative power of God in the action, which is in this way twofold. That thereby is shown that “the restoration is first pre-eminently an external, political one” (Hengst.), is not of necessity contained in the text, but the original creation of man, as related in Genesis 2:7, forms a pattern for the text. (John 7:39 makes the deepest application of the εְ ?ψεּ ?ηַ ?Χ.)—Correspondingly, therefore, Ezekiel has in Ezekiel 37:9 to prophesy once more,—this time to the Spirit (Ezekiel 37:5), that is, not to the “breath,” for that is ψεּ ?ηַ only in a living person, as we have already said, and still less to the “wind,” which is the sensuous natural symbol of the Spirit. And from what follows it is still clearer that the “outpouring of the Spirit” cannot be spoken of here, but what is spoken of is the universal spirituality which pervades all creation. Hence the Spirit is to come from the four winds; not without reference, moreover, to Ezekiel 5:10; Ezekiel 5:12; Ezekiel 12:14; Ezekiel 17:21 (Matthew 24:31; Revelation 7:1). ξֵ ?ΰַ ?ψְ ?αַּ ?ςΧ makes clear the distinction between ψεּ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ and δָ ?ψεּ ?ηַ. Our passage has nothing to do with the “breathing on” in John 20:22, and just as little is “the fulness and force of the Spirit’s operations, Acts 2:2” (Hengst.), indicated by the “wind from the four winds.” εּ ?τְ ?ηִ ?ι makes a very plain allusion to Genesis 2:7. [“The quickening Spirit of God awakens the resolution to return to God’s covenant and to the land of their fathers,” Schmieder.]—Slain: killed, not deceased (Doct. Reflect. 5). The colouring is taken from those condemned and executed by the Chaldeans (Ezekiel 37:11). Regarding εְ ?ιִ ?ηְ ?ιεּ, comp. on Ezekiel 37:5. Ezekiel 37:10. Exchanging Hithp. εְ ?δִ ?πַּ ?αְּ ?ΰϊִ ?ι (Ewald, Gr. p. 331) for Niphal of Eze 37:7, and φִ ?εָּ ?πִ ?ι Piel in place of Pual in Ezekiel 37:7. Ezekiel 37:9; Ezekiel 37:5. The Spirit, in order to become the breath of life in them (comp. Ezekiel 2:2; Ezekiel 3:24).—2 Kings 13:21; Revelation 11:11. Ezekiel 37:11-14.The Divine Interpretation of the VisionThe process in the vision Ezekiel 37:1-10 is symbolical, as shown by the phrase in Ezekiel 37:11 : these bones are, etc., which refers to the whole vision as it treated of the bones. Hence the bones, which lay there very dry, but at Jehovah’s word became alive, which were very many (Ezekiel 37:2), a very great army (Ezekiel 37:10), bear the sense of and signify the whole house of Israel; and this already prepares for the second section of our chapter. According to Hitzig, Judah and Israel combined denote the State broken up by the war, and also the generation cut off by it; against which view we observe that the dead cannot be “saying” here any more than the bones, but, as in Ezekiel 11:15 sq., the Israel in exile must be contemplated, who now indeed compared themselves to the dead, but to whom, on the contrary, life is immediately (Ezekiel 37:12) to be proclaimed and promised. In what they say (comp. Ezekiel 33:10) is contained the so frequently overlooked tertium comparationis, and the cause for the vision in Ezekiel 37:1-10. Hence the divine interpretation does not primarily start from the outward condition of the people in general, and still less from that of a part of them, the dead of Israel, but from what the despair of those in exile says, hence from the frame of mind which thus found voice: our bones are dried, etc. The relation of ιָ ?αְ ?ωׁ ?εּ and ιְ ?αֵ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ϊ (Ezekiel 37:2) to each other is evident.—πִ ?βְ ?ζַ ?ψְ ?πεּ, properly: “cut off,” separated, shut out from God’s help (Psalms 88:6 [5], 31:23 [22]; Isaiah 53:8).—μָ ?πεּ, according to Gesenius, a superfluous pronominal dative, as much as to say: We are undone. Hitzig: Reduced to ourselves. [Delitzsch: It is over with us. Hengst.: We are cut off for us, referring the “for us” to the sadness of the fact for those concerned.] The language which they employ corresponds thoroughly to the question in Ezekiel 37:3. That which, believing themselves abandoned, without any hope (Ezekiel 19:5) of again rising up to be a nation, they say of themselves, Ezekiel beheld in the valley,—merely very dry bones. So much the more, and the more literally, can what was done with these bones, a procedure which the prophet had to prophesy, and was afterwards permitted to behold, avail as a promise to them. Ezekiel 37:12 therefore parallel to Ezekiel 37:4 sq., but still keeping primarily in view the despairing speech of the exiles: δִ ?πָּ ?αֵ ?ΰεְ ?ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ, not yet, however, δπֵּ ?δΰֲ ?πִ ?ιξֵ ?αִ ?ιΰαָ ?λֶ ?νψεּ ?ηַ ?Χ (Ezekiel 37:5), as Ezekiel 37:14 hereafter, but first: behold, I open your graves, meaning thereby the abodes of the exile, since the Jews who were in exile considered themselves like dead men. The accommodating interpretation changes the valley with the many bones on its surface into many graves, which have “to be opened,” etc. My people, here and in the following a very comforting title. Israel, however, ought always to be so, and therefore also to have constantly been so. Consequently we have at the same time prominence given to the contrast between Israel’s destiny and its deadly despair, and hence a notification of its unbelief and offences in general.—What in the vision the clothing with sinews, flesh, and skin was in relation to the bones (Ezekiel 37:6 sq.), could in the interpretation applying to the living be regarded as political restoration, as this has to begin with leading out of Babylon and bringing back to Canaan. Ezekiel 37:13. εִ ?ιγַ ?ςְ ?ϊֶּ ?ν reminds of εִ ?ιγַ ?ςְ ?ϊֶּ ?ν in Ezekiel 37:6. Ezekiel 37:14 takes up εְ ?πָ ?ϊַ ?ϊִּ ?ιαָ ?λֶ ?νψεּ ?ηַ of Ezekiel 37:6 and the rest of the vision, pointing, however, by ψεּ ?ηִ ?ι to Ezekiel 36:27, as by εְ ?δִ ?πַּ ?ηְ ?ϊִּ ?ι to μְ ?ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν in the following, for which comp. Ezekiel 28:26, 34. The inspiriting and quickening for a home system which is to have permanence, and especially in the case of a people like Israel, will of necessity be spiritual and religious.—Isaiah 14:1.—Ezekiel 17:24; Ezekiel 22:14; Ezekiel 36:36. Ezekiel 37:15-18. The Reunion of Israel and JudahAfter the vision thus interpreted, there follows in Ezekiel 37:16—accompanied by an interpretation—a symbolic action, the outward reality of which there is no difficulty in admitting. Both the contents (comp. Ezekiel 37:11) and the transition with εְ connect what follows with the first section of the chapter, of which it forms the continuation and completion. Israel again become a nation, must, overcoming the separation which had taken place, also again become one nation. What follows draws the consequence from what has preceded.—ςֵ ?υ, “board” (tablet), or “staff,” or simply “wood,” stick.—For the “writing,” comp. Numbers 17.—The sons of Israel, his associates (while the text reads the singular for “association”), are, according to Hengstenberg, a “small” part of Benjamin, Simeon, and Levi, and the members of the kingdom of the ten tribes who had attached themselves to Judah; according to Keil: the “greater” part of Benjamin and Simeon, the tribe of Levi, and the pious Israelites who had at various times immigrated into Judah from the kingdom of the ten tribes, 2 Chronicles 11:13 sq., 15:9, 30:11, 18, 31:1.—Joseph is placed first, as Hengstenberg says, because Ephraim’s equality with Judah rests upon him in consequence of the blessing of Jacob; more simply, because it is the genealogical title of the patriarch. That the stick of Ephraim (comp. Ezekiel 37:19), which has been looked on as a later interpolation, is subjoined, is an addition taken from historical reality, for Ephraim was the head of the kingdom of the ten tribes. Ezekiel 37:17. εְ ?χָ ?ψַ ?αΰֹ ?ϊָ ?νΰֶ ?ηָ ?γΰֶ ?μΞΰִ ?ηָ ?γ reminds of εַ ?ϊִּ ?χְ ?ψְ ?αεּ ςֲ ?φָ ?ξεֹ ?ϊςֶ ?φֶ ?νΰֶ ?μΞςַ ?φְ ?ξεֹ in Ezekiel 37:7.—αְּ ?ιָ ?γֶ ?κָ illustrates μְ ?κָ, corresponding to the symbolic action—here in the hand of Ezekiel, as hereafter in his word. In order to make them appear as one stick, they must hare been adapted for that, and could scarcely have been “staves.” Ezekiel 37:18. Comp. Ezekiel 24:19. The purpose of the symbolic action, what it was meant to incite, on which account it is to be conceived of as externally real (Ezekiel 37:20).—What (are) these sticks to thee? that is: what is their signification? Ezekiel 37:19, the interpretation. Where Ezekiel 37:16 has the stick of Ephraim, we have now the stick of Joseph, which first of all implies exactly the same as the stick described “for Joseph.” In what respect it is designated the stick of Ephraim is then made plain by the Words: which is in the hand of Ephraim (the expression αְּ ?ιַ ?γ doubtless suggested by αְּ ?ιָ ?γֶ ?κָ, Ezekiel 37:17); and thereby, at the same time, the transition is made from the sign to the thing signified, for to be in the hand = to be in the possession, in the power, hence it denotes the supremacy of this tribe. Hence, too, instead of εְ ?λָ ?μΞαֵּ ?ιϊιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ, more expressly ιְ ?ωִׁ ?αְ ?θֵ ?ιιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ (“staves,” “sticks,” as “tribes”).—If the noun is anticipated by ςָ ?μָ ?ιִ ?ε, it would certainly be better to read, with Hitzig, ΰֶ ?μ, than ΰֶ ?ϊ: “to it, to the stick of Judah.” It lies away, however, from μֹ ?χֵ ?ηַ, as Keil connects, to combine ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν, namely, the tribes, after they have been put on the stick of Joseph (ςָ ?μָ ?ιε), by ΰֶ ?ϊ with the stick of Judah; besides, one does not see why the tribes already joined to Joseph should still have to be united with him. The “taking” is ended with the tribes of Israel, his associates; the “giving” relates to those (ΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν) taken together (εְ), that is, Joseph-Ephraim and his tribes, for the purpose of union (ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γεַ ?ςֲ ?ωִׂ ?ιϊִ ?νμְ ?ςִ ?υ) with Judah, and it is only to this that ςָ ?μָ ?ιε can refer. Hengstenberg explains ΰֶ ?ϊ: “the stick of Judah, I mean,” “to indicate that Judah is the proper stem of the people of God.” The interpretation still keeps a firm hold of the symbolic action (μְ ?ςֵ ?υΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ), and ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γαְּ ?ιָ ?γִ ?ι evidently expresses an antithesis to Ephraim’s hand,—the union by and in God, as opposed to the separation by and in Ephraim (comp. Isaiah 11:13). Ezekiel 37:20. The symbolic sign which the prophet is to perform (Ezekiel 37:16) is expressly designed for the eyes of those concerned, and, with the repetition of the thing to be done, at the same time mediates the connection with what follows. Ezekiel 37:21 sq. treats of the effecting of the reunion of the nation, after first glancing back to Ezekiel 37:12 sq. Comp. Ezekiel 36:24; Ezekiel 11:17; Ezekiel 20:34; Ezekiel 20:41; Ezekiel 34:13. Ezekiel 37:22. εְ ?ςָ ?ωִׂ ?ιδִ ?ιΰεֹ ?ϊָ ?νμְ ?βεֹ ?ιΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ is the εַ ?ςֲ ?ωִׂ ?ιϊִ ?νμְ ?ςֵ ?υΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ of Ezekiel 37:19. The now plainly expressed signification of the stick.—Ezekiel 34:13-14.—The one nation will be one kingdom. Comp. Ezekiel 37:24-25; comp. Hosea 3:5. [According to Hδvernick, the unity of the kingdom testifies to its truth, that it represents Jehovah.] Qeri ιִ ?δְ ?ιεּ, but βּ ?εֹ ?ι might also serve as subject to ιִ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ. Strong and effective negation of the old, that has passed away for ever.—Since sin, and especially idolatry, had contributed to the separation spoken of, the discourse turns to that, Ezekiel 37:23. Comp. Ezekiel 14:11; Ezekiel 36:25; Ezekiel 5:11.—ξεֹ ?ωְׁ ?αֹ ?ϊֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν ought not, after Ezekiel 6:6; Ezekiel 6:14, to cause so much difficulty to expositors. The worship of idols, which is the subject of discourse, is just localized “transgression.” The relief consists in this, that idolatry disappears, Ezekiel 36:29. To think with Hengstenberg of the places of abode in the exile, so that the earlier sins in Canaan did not come into account—that they, as it were, left their sins behind them in the foreign land, etc., neither suits the present connection,—is a thought here postponed, as Hitzig justly observes,—nor harmonizes with Ezekiel 37:12 sq., according to which the exile, on the contrary, localizes the wages of sin, i.e. death. Alteration of the text is equally unnecessary, just as Keil’s “preserving from,” and Kliefoth’s idea of leading out into the glorified Canaan, are imported into the text. Comp. besides, Ezekiel 34:13.—Ezekiel 36:25; Ezekiel 33:28; Ezekiel 34:24. The closing statement, recurring in Ezekiel 37:27, only in reverse order, seems to interrupt the consecution of the verses, so that the prophecy forms itself into two sections Ezekiel 37:21-23 and Ezekiel 37:24-27—with one conclusion. What the first section contains more as to the thing done and generally, is given in the second Messianically and as to the individual, for the full completion of the thought. Ezekiel 37:24. See on Ezekiel 34:23. Ezekiel 37:22.—Ezekiel 11:20; Ezekiel 36:27. Ezekiel 37:25. Ezekiel 36:28; Ezekiel 28:25; Ezekiel 34:24.—ςַ ?γΞςεֹ ?μָ ?ν, so that the terminus ad quem is “concealed,” cannot be seen; hence for an interminable future, is to be understood Messianically, that is, in Christ, as shown by the immediately following μְ ?ςεֹ ?μν, and all that comes after. As we find expressed here without interruption (this is the peculiarity of the whole prophecy here, in distinction to that repeated from Ezekiel 34, 36) the unity of the nation, its continued possession of Canaan, and that very plainly of the earthly Canaan, so just as plainly is all conceived of under the dominion of the King Messiah. Israel’s nationality in Canaan is bound up (Ezekiel 37:22) with this one kingdom. As to the moral and spiritual condition of the people, their position towards God (Ezekiel 37:23), Ezekiel 37:24 connects likewise with the one shepherd, the King David = Messiah, the “walking in, sq.,” “keeping,” and “doing.” And in the same connection occurs Ezekiel 37:26 (likewise μְ ?ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν, and also αְּ ?ψִ ?ιϊςεֹ ?μָ ?ν), for which comp. Ezekiel 34:25 (Isaiah 55:3; Jeremiah 32:40). As shown by comparing Ezekiel 34:25, and confirmed by the connection with Ezekiel 37:21-23, especially Ezekiel 37:23, as that is the peculiar, the leading idea of the divine covenant, to which the μָ ?δֶ ?ν corresponds, and by the whole mode of expression here, including the repeated “giving,” the making of the covenant proceeds from God in the most manifest exhibition of grace. The fact that αְּ ?ψִ ?ιϊωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν is alike explained and completed by αְּ ?ψִ ?ιϊςεֹ ?μָ ?ν, expresses the Messianic character of this covenant; for the terminus ad quem (ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν) of Israel, still hid to appearance, is just the Messiah. In the “salvation” (ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν), when it embraces time and eternity, eternity in time, alongside of the ideal reference in the whole, the real side in the particular cannot be wanting; hence what is the daily bread for a nation, namely, putting them in the position of increase, cannot be wanting; therefore: And I give them [Keil: to be a nation] and multiply them, Ezekiel 36:10-11; Ezekiel 36:37. But with the giving of the sanctuary of Jehovah in their midst for ever, another Messianic type, now in close preparation for Ezekiel 40 sq., is presented to us in the text, in addition to the one king and shepherd for all, the servant of Jehovah, David. Comp. on Ezekiel 11:16. The reference to Leviticus 26:9; Leviticus 26:11 is shown by the harmony of the prophecy with the promise given by Moses. And although the ξִ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?ο there in Ezekiel 37:11 (as ωָׁ ?λַ ?ο is said of the symbol of Jehovah’s presence in the wilderness) does not so much signify the outward building, and in Ezekiel too (Ezekiel 37:27) it is regarded as ςֲ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν, yet αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λָ ?ν, which stands beside ξִ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωׁ, points to the midst of the people; comp. Exodus 25:8. Hitzig is right in this, and also as to what distinguishes this passage from Ezekiel 11:16. But he overlooks the express reference to each other of ξִ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωִׁ ?ιαְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λָ ?νμְ ?ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν and ξְ ?χַ ?γֵּ ?ωׁ ΰֶ ?ϊΞιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?ι, Ezekiel 37:28. There is, at all events, expressed a visible national unity in Canaan as formerly, one political government, which, however, as mediated by the one King Messiah, exhibits itself as a national life purified from idolatry and conformed to law, hence moral, so also an outward serving of God by Israel is here prophesied, the sanctuary of Jehovah in the midst of Israel—that this cannot be Zerubbabel’s temple is triumphantly proved to the Jews by Keil, from the fact conceded by themselves, that the Shechinah was wanting to it;—but the heathen see therein (αִּ ?δְ ?ιεֹ ?ϊ, Ezekiel 37:28) something yet different, namely, the continuing (particip.) sanctification of Israel by God, hence religious-moral conditions. [Not merely gratiosa Dei habitatio in cordibus eorum, as Piscator.] We remember here, where what is prophesied of the sanctuary is so evidently connected with the promised servant David as king and prince, that the kingship is specially prominent in Ezekiel’s figure of the Messiah (Introd. § 9); and besides this, the passage here shows that, as likewise observed in the Introduction, § 9, with Ezekiel the main point of view continues to be the Messianic nation, the Messianic salvation of the nation. And so the phrase: My sanctuary in their midst for ever, μְ ?ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν explaining itself in ξְ ?χַ ?γֵּ ?ωׁ (Ezekiel 37:28), appears essentially as prophesied of the future church of salvation, the realized kingdom of priests (Introd. § 9). (Comp. Zech. 2:14 [Zechariah 2:10]; John 1:14; Revelation 21:3; Revelation 7:15; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16.) [“This promise has, at all events, come to be gloriously fulfilled in the election which forms the stem of the Christian Church. It is again taken up in the saying of Christ: ‘Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world,’ ” Hengst.] At this point of the understanding of our prophecy—and herein its most important advance, in distinction to Ezekiel 11:16, is perhaps announced—the certainly not unintentional exchange of: My sanctuary in their midst, of Ezekiel 37:26, for: My dwelling over them, in Ezekiel 37:27, must decidedly be taken more spiritually than is done when Hengstenberg refers it to the “protecting power” which is afforded in the house of God (Psalms 68:29 [30]), or Keil, to the “position of the temple towering up over the city.” Hitzig comes nearer the truth when he directs attention to God’s dwelling in heaven, directly (?) over the temple of Jerusalem (Isaiah 33:5; Psalms 29:9; Psalms 104:3; 1 Kings 8:33-34; Genesis 28:17; Psalms 7:7 [8]). The sanctification of Israel before the world, as connected with the Kingship of the Messiah, and the establishing of the eternal sanctuary of God in Israel’s midst, as effected by the founding of the Church of Christ, serve for illustration and fulfilment of the ςֲ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν in Ezekiel here, as is very clear from Acts Ezekiel 2, to which is prefixed a repeated (comp. Luke 24:50 sq.) and circumstantial account of the exaltation of the Son of man, Ezekiel 1 Eze 37:23. Ezekiel 11:20; Genesis 17:7.—Ezekiel 34:30. Ezekiel 37:28 (Ezekiel 36:23; Ezekiel 36:36). Although the mention of the heathen is still confined to the “knowing” of the sanctification of Israel, yet such knowledge cannot remain without result, without fruit; comp. Isaiah 44:5.—“Indication of the participation of the heathen in the promised salvation” (Hengst.).—Ezekiel 20:12. “To sanctify” is to purge from sin as well as to consecrate, hence embracing forgiveness of sin, and quickening. The former must become clear to the heathen from the latter, and so much the clearer as they have seen the judgment of God executed on His people—have even executed it themselves. Comp. for the harmony with the promises in the Pentateuch, Exodus 31:13; Leviticus 22:32. NOTE ON Ezekiel 37 [“In closing this section, we present a brief outline of the view that has been taken of the prophecies contained in the three closely related chapters, 34, 36, 37, and which in substance applies equally to many other portions of the prophetical Scriptures. 1. They were originally given to revive and animate the hearts of God’s covenant-people, by holding out to them the assured prospect of a reversion from the present evil, and their still certain destination in God’s purpose to the highest and most honourable place on the earth. 2. It was the duty of those to whom such prophecies were delivered at once to believe the word spoken to them, and apply themselves in earnest to do what was needed to secure its accomplishment; and had they only done this, a far larger measure of the promised good would have been reaped than they actually experienced: this later prospect of blessing, like the earlier, given before entering Canaan, greatly failed through their own sinful unbelief. 3. But there being manifestly ideal features introduced into the delineation, especially the good spoken of being so peculiarly connected with the rule and presidency of David, clearly betokens a kind and degree of blessing which could not have been completely fulfilled under the Old Covenant, nor intended to be altogether fulfilled any time according to the letter. It shows the prophecies in question to be, like several of an earlier kind in Ezekiel, descriptions of the future under the form and image of the past—not as if the past were actually to return again, but that its general spirit and character were to revive. 4. The new things thus to be looked for in the future could only meet with their full and adequate accomplishment in Christ, who is certainly the David of the promise. They are consequently of a higher and more comprehensive nature than any that could be enjoyed under the Old Covenant, when the kingdom of God was so straitened in its dimensions, and so outward and earthly in its visible constitution. But still they were of necessity described under the hue and aspect of the things belonging to the Old Covenant—as if it were these only returning again, or these with certain alterations and improvements, such as might give the future a pre-eminence in glory over the past. For only by means of what belonged to existing or previous dispensations of God could the prophet have given any detailed exhibition of what might be expected under another and higher dispensation. The details of the future must have been cast into the mould of things already perceived or known. 5. Therefore, in forming one’s conceptions now of the real import of such prophecies—now that the transition has been made into the new and higher dispensation—we must throw ourselves back upon the narrower and more imperfect relations amid which they were written, and thence judge of what is still to come. Thus, as the David of the promise is Christ, so the covenant-people are no longer the Jews distinctively, but the faithful in Christ; and the territory of blessing no longer Canaan, but the region of which Christ is king and lord. What was spoken immediately of the one class of personages and relations, may most fully be applied to the other; and by such a method of interpretation alone do we get a uniform and consistent principle to carry us through the whole. While those, on the other hand, who would find a literal Israel, and a non-literal David, or a literal restoration in Christian times, and a non-literal tabernacle and ritual of worship, arbitrarily confound together things dissimilar and incongruous, and render certainty of interpretation absolutely impossible. 6. Sixthly, the view thus given is confirmed by the reproduction of some of these prophecies in the field of the New Testament Church, set free, as was to be expected, from the outward distinctions and limits of the Old. Thus, in particular, the resurrection-scene of this 37th chapter substantially recurs in the 20th chapter of Revelation, and is followed precisely as here by the attack from the embattled forces of Gog and Magog; while not a word is said which would confine the things spoken to the land of Canaan, or the literal Israel; it is the Church and people of Christ at large that are discoursed of. We say nothing respecting the probable time and nature of the events there referred to, but simply point to the identity in character of what is written with the prophecies before us. In those visions of the Apocalypse, the inspired evangelist stretches out the hand to Ezekiel, and shows how the word spoken so long before by that servant of God, freed from the peculiarities of its Jewish form, is to find its application to the Christian Church. The shell has gone, but the substance remains. 7. We may add, lastly, that the common interpretation, which understands Christ by David, and takes all the rest literally, must inevitably tend to justify the Jew in his unbelief. For he naturally says, Your Messiah has not done the thing you yourselves hold must be done—to fulfil the prophecy; He has not set up His throne in Canaan, and gathered Israel there, and re-established the old worship in its purity; this was the very purpose for which He was to appear, and we must wait till He comes to do it. On the basis of the literal interpretation, there seems no satisfactory answer to this; and it is well known that since it has become prevalent, many Jews believe that Christians are coming over to their view of the matter. We are not surprised to hear, as we have heard, of converted Jews declaring that such a mode of interpretation would carry them back to Judaism.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 412–414.—W. F.] 1. What has Jehovah caused, Ezekiel 37:1-10, to be prophesied for comfort to His people (Ezekiel 37:12-13)? The resurrection of the dead in the literal sense Kliefoth still maintains, a view which is the older ecclesiastical one, shared by Jews and Christians, so that Jerome, when expressing a different opinion regarding famosam hanc visionen, omnium ecclesiarum Christi lectione celebratam, thought it necessary to state that he did not therefore by any means wish to deny the doctrine of the resurrection. How little the connection in Ezekiel says in favour of the dogma of the general resurrection of the dead is best seen from the artificial way in which Ezekiel 37:11 sq. is disposed of. Kliefoth interprets the prophesied bringing of Israel into their own land (as already, Ezekiel 36:28) of the “final introduction of the people of God into the eternal Canaan,” and the quickening in Ezekiel 37:14, of “inward renewal by the Spirit of God;” an interpretation which he has also put upon Ezekiel 36:25 sq. From similar perplexity, Ezekiel 37:11 has been combined with the “first resurrection” of Revelation 20, and the bringing of Israel into their own land understood in accordance with Matthew 5:5. Hengstenberg, holding that “all the other comforting words of the prophet relate to things of this world,” insists upon this connection in general, and singles out in particular Ezekiel 36:8, “which was soon to take its beginning,” and the connection of Eze 37:15 sq. and the vision. If the relation is this, that the house of Israel of the vision, reanimated by the Spirit of God, is “the whole” (Ezekiel 37:11), and hence is to experience the reunion symbolized (Ezekiel 37:15 sq.), then this union, which cannot be sought for among “the last things,” will also not suppose the re-quickening of Israel past. But in addition to the contradiction between the wider and the narrower connection, comes also the contrariety of the picture drawn here to the doctrine laid down in 1 Corinthians 15; those who rise again in Ezekiel’s vision simply return into earthly existence, with skin and flesh and bones. If the doctrine of the general resurrection is maintained in Ezekiel 37:1 sq., then Ezekiel 37:11 sq. must more or less, as also Kliefoth gives to understand, he denied to be “in the proper sense an interpretation and explanation of the significant occurence:” we must content ourselves with an application for an express purpose, namely, in order to comfort and raise up the hope of Israel with the prospect in question (see above, Ezekiel 37:1). Against this Hengstenberg, appealing at the same, time to analogies in Daniel, Zechariah, and Ezekiel himself, justly observes: “Whosoever feels himself constrained to take Ezekiel 37:11-14 not as an interpretation, even thereby expresses judgment concerning his view of Eze 37:1-10.” Ezekiel 37:11 begins expressly with an explanation of the signification of “these bones,” which formed the subject of discourse, Ezekiel 37:1-10. 2. A question which, unless one dismisses entirely the doctrine of the resurrectio mortuorum from the text before us, comes into consideration is, whether this dogma already existed in the time of Ezekiel? Hengstenberg, for example, denies indeed the express application of the doctrine to our passage, but makes the dogma serve as “figure.” Hence he must answer the question put in the affirmative. It is a necessary supposition, not only—as already Tertullian, de resurr. carnis, points out to the Gnostics, and Jerome expresses himself—that the typical application of the resurrection of the dead by Ezekiel implies the actual taking place of that resurrection, and consequently its truth must be beyond doubt, but also that the doctrine of the resurrection was already at that time a common property of religious popular knowledge in Israel, if it could thus be figuratively applied in Ezekiel. Hengstenberg (Christology, vol. 3 p. 51, Clark’s trans.) cites Pareau’s Comment. de Immortal. p. 109, and refers to Isaiah 25:8; Isaiah 26:19; Daniel 12:2. The raising of the dead (1 Kings 17:22; 2 Kings 4:35; 2 Kings 13:21) can, as isolated cases, prove nothing in its behalf; and passages like Deuteronomy 32:39, 1 Samuel 2:6, attest only the omnipotence of the living God. Comp. Hδvern. Vorles. όber die Theol. des A. T. p. 109, and his Comment, p. 581; Oehler, V. T. sententia de rebus p. mort. fut. p. 37 sq., 42 sq. Furthermore, Ezekiel 37:3 of our vision, where the prophet leaves to the Lord the answering of the question put to him, says nothing in favour of the consciousness of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. If there was such a consciousness, we should certainly expect a corresponding answer from the prophet. Comp. John 11:23-24. (Hδvernick: “If the prophet could have supposed such a general belief, he would necessarily (?) have appealed to it in order to establish thereon the restoration of the people, etc. But in such a hopeless case as Ezekiel 37:11 the prophet cannot make suppositions, nor will he; he will just build anew—establish firmly anew hope in the heart.”) 3. Hengstenberg says: “The prophet, however, does not merely set out from this doctrine and use it as a means of representation; his primarily figurative representation, and the historical confirmation which it received, must also have served to awaken powerfully the belief in the resurrection. If God proves Himself the master of death in the figurative sense, if He redeems His people from outward and the spiritual misery into which they had fallen during the exile, how should the death of the body set a limit to His grace?” And again: “The salvation announced here under the figure of the resurrection is completed in the resurrection; comp. 1 Corinthians 15:19.” 4. But the text protests also against this merely typical acceptation of the doctrine of the resurrection. There are indeed (Ezekiel 37:2) “very many,” according to Ezekiel 37:10 “a very great army,” sufficient to suggest all the dead, at any rate sufficient for the interpretation in Ezekiel 37:11 of the “whole” house of Israel. They are, however, not the bones of deceased men, but of slain men, as expressly stated in Ezekiel 37:9. The open surface of the valley, moreover, hardly corresponds to the situation of the resurrection of the dead; the graves in the interpretation, still closed and yet to be opened, would be more suitable. Finally, the twofold transaction in regard to the re-quickening in the vision (Ezekiel 37:7 sq., Ezekiel 37:9 sq.) can hardly set before the eye the representation of the awakening of the dead; but as the direct design of the vision is to make prominent the creative in what is prophesied, the thing that is possible with God alone (Ezekiel 37:3), so the first and the second act, especially the observation after the first in Ezekiel 37:8, that “yet breath was not in them,” serves from the outset to make prominent the point of the interpretation, namely, God’s putting His Spirit in them, Ezekiel 37:14. 5. Hitzig’s view of the vision takes more account of the noteworthy circumstance that it treats of slain men. But how? He makes (as already in Ezekiel 34, King David) the Israelites slain in the destruction of the two kingdoms be called upon by the prophet to rise again. Thus the vision is a vision of a partial resurrection. There was already a similar opinion among the Talmudists (Sanhedr. xcii. 2)—comp. on Ezekiel 37:1; and it is also maintained that such a resurrection did actually take place, and even that those who rose again begot offspring in Canaan; thus one Talmudist expressly declares his descent from one of them. To say nothing of the strangeness of such a view,—for which certainly the “supernatural character of the Hebrew system” offers, as Hitzig must grant, no sufficient support,—“the idea itself of the resurrection” proves nothing, but it must be maintained in Ezekiel 34:23-24; Ezekiel 37:24-25, in order that it may be referred to for the vision before us; moreover, as to the context, such a resurrection prophecy does not fit in excellently before and after, as Hitzig supposes. For the multiplication of the people promised in Ezekiel 36:37-38 (comp. Ezekiel 36:10) surely points to something else than specially a multiplication by resurrection of the slain; and the combination of the vision in the chapter here with Ezekiel 38, however ingenious and plausible, is by no means the necessary combination imperatively required by the text. Comp. the exegesis in loc. 6. Thus the dogma of the resurrection of the dead, as well as the announcement of a “first resurrection” of Israel, or of his slain, literally understood, must be dismissed from our chapter. So also the parabolical application of that dogma is not the sense of the text. If the view is put forward that the whole is figurative, then a mere poetical figure excogitated by Ezekiel cannot certainly be harmonized with the express character of Eze 37:1-10; comp. on Ezekiel 37:1. We have before us a divine vision, which the Lord in express revelation gave His prophet to behold. Hence there must be more to find in this vision than the clothing of an idea, “well conceived and carried out with dramatic effect” (Philipps.). The objection raised by Hδvernick against the view of only outward liberation of the people and the flourishing of the State anew already under Zerubbabel (Grotius, Vatablus, Ammon’s Bibl. Theol.), and also against Ewald’s deeper penetration into the matter, the objection, namely, that it is not permissible to repeat this idea from Ezekiel 36, cannot be maintained. But we have first to deal with the form, and then we will have to remember that the conformation of the thought as contained in the vision cannot be suggested by what is known and suitable for restoration of any kind, as is coming to life again out of a state of death, but on the contrary will have to be accounted for on other grounds. The vision—and this is the reason why it proceeds in the form before us—is intended to afford to Israel a strong ground for what is already prophesied to him, a specially strong encouragement against his hopelessness. The ground on which what is promised to the people is based is the creative power of God (comp. on Ezekiel 37:5; Ezekiel 37:8). “God Himself appears to the prophet as the quickener of the bones,” as Hδvernick justly observes. “A thoroughly real relation is treated of, namely, the relation of God to death.” Then, as regards the encouragement to Israel on this ground, it must speak so much the more powerfully to their hearts, when, taking them at their word, it borrows from their despairing words the answer against all doubts. The vision (Ezekiel 37:1-10) is such a thorough answer in a matter-of-fact form, because He who answers, the Promiser, is the Almighty God of Israel, who “speaks and does,” Ezekiel 37:14. Comp. how very near Calvin (Inst. ii. 10) came to this understanding. Only because Kliefoth is so confused in the exposition of our chapter does it appear that he could gather nothing from Hδvernick’s remarks, which so often hit the sense, and who refers with far better right than the expositors of the literal resurrection of the dead to Deuteronomy 32:39; 1 Samuel 2:6; Hosea 13:14, etc. 7. The vision of Ezekiel in our chapter takes, as has been said, the discouraged of the Israelites at their word. Already in Ezekiel 37:3, where the question put to the prophet tends in this direction, the way is opened up for the after interpretation. At the very outset in Ezekiel 37:2, where the bones filling the valley (Ezekiel 37:1), which are very many, are described as “very dry,” the whole house of Israel lies before us, namely, those who say, “Our bones were dried,” as the interpretation (Ezekiel 37:11) puts beyond all doubt. By their speaking thus—since their “perished hope” was Jerusalem and the people in the land of Judah—the exiles in their despondency compare themselves to those who had perished in their native land; and this explains the designation “slain” given in the vision, which takes them for what they give themselves out to be, as, on the other hand, from the close interweaving of Eze 37:1-10 and Ezekiel 37:11-14, the interpretation speaks of their places of residence in exile as their “graves.” At the same time, by the bones which He places before the prophet in the valley, the judgment formerly (comp. Ezekiel 6) threatened by Jehovah is conceded to have taken place. Since this judgment was executed as killing, to which death what of Israel still exists has given itself up (Ezekiel 37:11) with full sympathy, if there is still prospect of salvation after the judgment and arising out of the judgment, this salvation can only be life, God’s act of salvation, and consequently nothing but re-quickening. And because the slain, to whom Israel in exile compare themselves, are to be supposed in Canaan, the bringing back of Israel to their own land is connected repeatedly (Ezekiel 37:12 sq.) with the re-quickening of the nation. Thus the salvation to be prophesied is externally restoration of the nation—Israel is again in his own land. There is one element which the vision could not set forth (unless, perhaps, it is hinted at by the expression: “and stood upon their feet,” Ezekiel 37:10), but which the interpretation brings in felicitously through the dead bones of the vision, by the bringing of them “out of the graves.” The vision has chiefly in view the inward side, namely, the quickening by the Spirit, in general the national life as such, although, as is clear from the interpretation (Ezekiel 37:14), not without spiritual reference back to Ezekiel 36; comp. the exposition. 8. “The faith of Israel in his redemption was to rest not so much on the belief in a resurrection of the dead, as on belief in God the Creator, who brings being out of nothing, who awakens life out of death, even in its most fearful form, the annihilation of all existence” (Hδvern.). It may be said more generally regarding the significance of hope for faith, that hope demonstrates the blessedness of faith, yet is not the ground of its knowledge or certainty, but as certainly as I believe, so certainly shall I also behold—the future, which hope expectantly anticipates. 9. As has been above remarked, Revelation 20 was early introduced into the discussion. Kliefoth recently, while making “the resurrection of the dead generally, limited, however, to a single definitely bounded field of dead” (αִּ ?χְ ?ςָ ?δ), be shown to the prophet (Ezekiel 37:1-10), “because it is afterwards to be referred to the appointed resurrection of the people of God,” borrows from Revelation 22 a very peculiar confirmation of this exposition of his. The ἀναστασιςἡπρωτη in Ezekiel 37:5 there, namely, is based on our passage, and the proof of this he makes to be that the souls of the πεπελεχισμενων there (who are the δֲ ?ψεּ ?βִ ?ιν here) are seen, and that both here and there Gog and Magog follow on the resurrection. He who is constrained to recognise in the first section of our chapter the re-quickening of Israel as a nation, will not be thereby hindered from conceding that it will be followed by the re-quickening of all Israel, that is, as Paul expresses it in 1 Corinthians 15:23, of οἱχριστουἐντηπαρουσιααὐτου. If this ζωοποιησις is likewise meant in Revelation 20:4 (ἐζησαν), then the reference of our passage to it can as little be denied as that the βασιλευεινμεταχριστου may be prefigured in Ezekiel 37:23 sq., the repeated μְ ?ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν here can be interpreted by χιλιαἑτη there, the ἱνκμηπλανησηταἐθνηἑτι in Revelation 20:3 compared with Ezekiel 37:28 here, and that the κριμα, Revelation 20:4, refers to Ezekiel 38. But the beheaded witnesses of the Apocalypse of John by no means harmonize with the slain of Ezekiel; and although Gog and Magog make their appearance in Revelation 20:8 sq., as here in Ezekiel 38, yet already Revelation 19:17 sq. makes reference to Ezekiel 39, 38 in Ezekiel. Moreover, Revelation 20:6 also can be compared to the so often used μְ ?ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν of our chapter. 10. “Since God as the self-existent life in itself is Spirit, all life in its various grades and forms originates and subsists only through the Spirit, which proceeds from God; the possession of spirit forms the universal ground of life, connecting the whole creation with God” (Beck.). 11. We have here ἐγειρειν and ζωοποιειν together, the full and entire conception of the sovereignty of the Father and of the working of the Son in the Holy Ghost; comp. John 5:21 sq. 12. In regard to the religious spirit which animated the returned exiles, reference has been rightly made to the prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah, and also to the psalms belonging to this period. 13. The truth of the section Ezekiel 37:1-14 is not so well expressed by saying with Ewald, “that the individual or the nation that does not despair of the Divine Spirit is never in any situation forsaken by that Spirit, but is always borne onward to new life,” as by saying that it has its expression in the eternity of the Church of God. “We need not,” says Hengstenberg, “extend our prophecy to the unbelieving Jewish people and their future conversion. As expressly stated in Ezekiel 37:12-13, it applies only to Israel as the people of God, and the dispensation of grace grows out of this relation.” 14. “It is doubtless the power of his people which the prophet sees in this vision rising up to new life; it is the sons of Israel, held in captivity and scattered, who are destined to return to the soil of their beloved heritage. But on the ground of the deep word of typical representation we read the joyous announcement: I live, and ye shall live also” (Umbreit). 15. The reunion of Israel and Judah has, in consequence of the pronounced heathenizing character (still continuing in the Samaritans) or the former (Doct. Reflec. 4 on Ezekiel 20.), a co-reference to the heathen; and this is more to be thought of than “the separation between believers and unbelievers,” which Hengstenberg makes ensue “after the coming of Christ,” as “a still worse” separation. Yea, the less Israel-Judah has become one in the Messiah, who is Christ, the more has the heathen world come into consideration for the fulfilling of the prophesied union, Romans 11:26 : κ. οὑτωπαςἸσραηλ. 16. As the exile of the Jews ceases in Christ, so the alienship of the heathen ends in Christ, Ephesians 2. 17. “A continued separate existence of the ten tribes in some unknown region is a fable” . 18. Why could not the Jews, like other nations of the sinking world-dominion of Rome, preserve their nationality in a distinct state? Think of the Maccabees. Not only their exclusive national habits, but still more the Messianic hope in the heart of the nation, fitted the Jews for this above other nations. From within and from without everything was here conjoined for building up a strong and important nationality among the fluctuating nations and gods of the Old World. In both respects there was given with the return from exile a new tone to their history. (On the characteristic peculiarities of Israel, their particular national disposition, comp. the Doct. Reflec. on Ezekiel 34) Their greater zeal for the law of Jehovah, the more decided antithesis of the national life to the heathen world-form after the exile, has been often remarked on; and also that a more definite expectation of the Messiah is clear consciousness of the pious of the land, and not of the prophetic circle alone. The Jewish people have, in the great part of them scattered through all nations, served to prepare the heathen for Christianity. Consider the importance of Jewish Hellenism; think of the net of the proselytism “of the gate” drawn through the heathen world; and do not overlook the Septuagint. How much might their gathering together in Christ into a Christian people and state have contributed to the ingathering of the heathen! When the kingdom of priests which Israel should have been became contracted to the number twelve of the apostles (Matthew 19:28), still the effect of this mission into the world is the fulness of the Gentiles. What the emphasizing of Judah (Ezekiel 37:19) already signifies, is expressly uttered in a Messianic sense by the repeated naming of the “one king” (Ezekiel 37:22) as David the servant of Jehovah (Ezekiel 37:24-25). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ 4. Against Gog and Magog for the Glorification of Jehovah in the World (Ch. 38 and 39)Chap. 38 1. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 2Son of man, set thy face towards [against] Gog, of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, and prophesy concerning him. 3And say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I am against thee, Gog, prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. 4And I lead thee back, and give rings in thy jaws, and bring thee forth, and thy whole army, horses and riders, all of them perfectly clothed, a numerous assemblage, 5with long shield and short shield, all handling swords: Persia, Cush, and 6Phut with them, all of them with shield and helmet: Gomer and all his squadrons; the house of Togarmah, the farthest north, and all his squadrons; many 7nations with thee. Be prepared and hold prepared for thyself, thou and all thy assemblages which assemble around thee, and be a guard unto them. 8After many days thou art visited; at the end of the years thou shalt come to a land recovered from the sword, gathered from many nations, upon the mountains of Israel, which were perpetually for devastation; and it was brought forth out 9of the nations, and all of them dwell securely. And thou ascendest, as a tempest shalt thou come, like a cloud to cover the land shalt thou be, thou and all thy squadrons, and many nations with thee. 10Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: And it comes to pass on that day, words shall ascend upon thy heart, and 11thou devisest an evil device; And sayest, I will go up to a plain country, I will come upon those who are at rest [quiet], who dwell securely, all of them dwelling 12where there is no wall, and they have no bars and gates, To take spoil and to seize prey, to draw back thy hand over (re-) inhabited ruins, and to a people gathered from the heathen, who acquire cattle and goods, dwelling upon 13the navel of the earth. Sheba and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, and all his [her] young lions, will say to thee, Comest thou to take spoil ? hast thou assembled thy assemblages to seize prey ? to lift silver and gold ? to take cattle 14and goods ? to take great spoil ?—Therefore prophesy, son of man, and say to Gog: Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, In that day when My people Israel dwell 15securely, shalt thou not know [experience] it? And [yet] thou comest out of thy place, from the farthest north, thou and many nations with thee, all of them 16riding upon horses, a great assemblage [community], and a numerous army; And goest up upon My people Israel, like a cloud to cover the land; in the end of the days it shall be, and [yet] I make thee come upon My land, that the heathen may know Me when I sanctify Myself on thee before their eyes, O Gog. 17Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Art thou he of whom I spoke in former days by the hand of My servants, the prophets of Israel, who in those days 18prophesied for years that I would bring thee upon them? And it comes to pass on that day, on the day of the coming of Gog upon the land of Israel—19sentence of the Lord Jehovah—My fury shall come up in My nose. And in My jealousy, in the fire of My wrath, do I speak, if there shall not be on that 20day a great shaking over the land of Israel! And the fishes of the sea, and the fowl of heaven, and the beast of the field, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the ground, and every man that is on the face of the earth shall tremble before My face; and the mountains are thrown down, and the cliffs 21fall, and every wall shall fall to the earth. And I call the sword upon him at all My mountains—sentence of the Lord Jehovah—the sword of every one 22shall be against his brother. And I carry on My plea with him in pestilence and in blood; and overflowing [gushing] rain and hailstones, fire and brimstone, will I rain upon him and upon his squadrons, and upon the many nations that 23are with him. And I show Myself great, and sanctify Myself, and make Myself known before the eyes of many heathen nations, and they know that I am Jehovah. Ezekiel 38:2. Sept.: ... κ. τηνγηντ.. M. Vulg.: terram M., principem capitis … de eo. (Another read.:ςμβΧ.) Ezekiel 38:3. ... Ὶωγκαιἀρχοντα. Ezekiel 38:4. Κ. περιστρεψωσε … κ. συναξωσε … ἐνδεδυμενουςθωρακαςπανταςπελταιχ. περιχεφαλαιαιχ. μαχαιραι. Vulg.: Et circumagam te— Ezekiel 38:6. Another read.: ϊεψβξδ. Ezekiel 38:7. Sept.: ... κ. ἐσημοιεἰςπροφυλαχην. Vulg.: … eis in prζceptum. Ezekiel 38:8. ἑτοιμασθησεται … ἐπιτ. γηντ. Ἰσρ. Ezekiel 38:11. Sept.: ... ἐπιγηνἀπεριμμενην— Ezekiel 38:12. ... τουἐπιστρεψαιτηνχειρανμου … πεποιηχοταςχτησεις,— Ezekiel 38:13. ... κ. οἱμποροιΚαρχηδονιοικ. πασαιαἱχωμαιαὐτων— Ezekiel 38:14. ... ἐξεγερθηση— Ezekiel 38:16. ... παντατ. ἐθνη—βεβ is omitted, or they transfer it to following verse. Ezekiel 38:19. ... σεισμος—Vulg.: … commotio— Ezekiel 38:20. ... κ. ῥαγησονταιτ. ὀρηκ. πεσουνταιαἱφαραγγες—Vulg.: … et cadent sepes et. Ezekiel 38:21. ... ἐπ’ αὐτοπανφαβονμαχαιρας— Ezekiel 38:22. Κ. χρινωαὐτον— Ezekiel 38:24. Sept. ... κ. ἐνδοξασθηασομαι— REMARKSEze_38:2. See Ezekiel 6:2 Magog is known from Genesis 10:2 (1 Chronicles 1:5); he is one of the Japhetites. The article pointing to what is known, δַ ?ξָּ ?βεֹ ?π, shows that he, or rather the people denoted by him, is meant. Already Josephus, and doubtless in accordance with generally received tradition, recognises in them the Scythians. Comp. Hδv. p. 599 sq., and also Gesen. Lex. When ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ is expressly added, it is not necessary, with Hitzig, to seek in the syllable Ma from the Coptic and the Sanscrit the idea of land. Even if the translation is not to be “Gog, prince of the land of Magog,” yet it does not need to be translated, with Hδvernick and Ewald, as dependent on ωִׂ ?ιντָּ ?πֶ ?ικָ: “against Gog, towards the land of Magog;” but ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υδַ ?ξָּ ?βεֹ ?β is a brief expression for: in or of the land of Magog. As he is immediately entitled πְ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ, it lies on the surface to see in πּ ?εֹ ?β the king of the land of the people of Magog. A Reubenite “Gog” is named in 1 Chronicles 5:4.—It appears that we have before us rather an official than a personal name. A comparison of the word (in full ιְ ?βεֹ ?β, like the Arab, “yagug”) with πָּ ?β, “roof,” the “top” of the altar, would countenance this, if the latter is to be derived from βֵּ ?ΰֶ ?δ, βֵּ ?ΰ, “to be high;” hence: the high, sublime, supreme. The Tartaric and Turkish “kak,” “chakan,” “khan,” has been thought of (a traveller calls a Tartaric chief of the 13th century “Gog Khan”). [Cocc.: “Gog denotes him who sets himself like the roof in the midst between heaven and earth, between God and men” (Ezekiel 28:14; Ezekiel 28:16).] The very probable formation of the name from “Magog” would confirm the interpretation and derivation which it implies, since the national character (for this people is to be conceived of as on the Caucasus, which Herodotus calls the greatest mountain range of the earth), and thus their nature and residence in the high north, might be very suitably outlined in the official name of their leader and representative. In form it would be as if we said, instead of the Chinese Emperor: the Chin of China. Revelation 20:8 takes “Gog and Magog” from Ezekiel as title for “the nations which are in the four corners of the earth.” That Gog represents Magog is the less surprising, because Magog on its side represents a whole complex of nations: Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. For the two latter see on Ezekiel 27:13; Ezekiel 32:26; the former between the sources of the Phasis and Cyrus, below Colchis, the latter on the coast of the Euxine, west of Trapezus. It is not exactly said that “they dwelt in the neighbourhood of Magog” (Keil), but that they are in a state of subjection, as vassals, to Gog; and this Hengstenberg, like Ewald, and ancient translators and expositors before them, find expressed by πְ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰψֹ ?ΰωׁ, which they render: “chief prince” (king of kings)—a combination which would be allowable (ξμκψΰω on coins) if it were meant to be the translation of βּ ?εֹ ?β, whence also it might be repeated unabbreviated in Ezekiel 38:3; Ezekiel 39:1. (It cannot be translated appositionally: “the prince, the head of Meshech and Tubal.”) But some who are of this opinion appeal more to the non-occurrence elsewhere (in Scripture or in Josephus) of a people Rosh; while on the other side, reference has been made to the Byzantines of the tenth century, who mention οἱῬῶς, a barbarous people about the north of Taurus. An Arabian writer of the same age knew of the heathen nation “Rus,” on the Wolga itself. (Whether the inhabitants of “Rass,” Koran 25:50, are to be cited, is very questionable.) Gesenius observes that it can scarcely be doubtful that the first trace of the Russians is here given. Comp. Hδvernick, p. 604. It is curious that Hengstenberg cannot bear to see the “poor Russians” ranged among the enemies of the kingdom of God. Hitzig points out that also in Genesis 10. there is subjoined to Meshech and Tubal a third nation, Tiras, which von Hammer brings into connection with Rosh, conjecturing their original abode to have been on the Araxes. The name (Ross, horse) seems to indicate an equestrian people, like the Scythians, under which name the Greeks very early comprehended all the nations of the north; especially as living from mare’s milk, they are described (Iliad, xiii. 5, 6) as “mare-milkers.” In the name Roxolani (Rhoxalani), whom Bochart combines, “ala” means the same as horse (Hitzig). Ezekiel 38:3. Comp. 26:3, 28:22, 29:3, 10. Ezekiel 38:4. Hitzig translates the Pilel ωׁ ?εֹ ?αֵ ?α, “allure,” just as the Targ.: “decoy.” [Keil: in the sense of: to a dangerous undertaking. Hδvern.: with force, as a will-less beast out of his land, away from his former path, and on to the way of destruction.] Hitzig: “The Scythian is in the outset thought of as a wild beast, which rushes aside from the path, and must first be brought back.” But ωׁ ?εֹ ?αֵ ?α means properly: to cause one to return (a repeating and strengthening form), a meaning which Hengstenberg justly retains as the simplest and most natural. He interprets thus: in Gog, the earlier enemies of God’s people, namely, the Chaldeans, reappear. For the signification of the word adopted by him he appeals to Ezekiel 38:8 and Ezekiel 39:27, and compares also Ezekiel 38:12, remarking at the same time, that in the appearance of Gog, Ezekiel 38:17 and Ezekiel 39:8, the fulfilment of earlier prophecies is recognised in which Gog is not expressly contemplated. The giving of special prominence to the Chaldeans is not in accordance with Ezekiel’s manner (see Introd. to Ezekiel 25:32, and on Ezekiel 21:28 sq.). It is at all events more obvious, and permits us to retain exactly the proper signification of ωׁ ?εֹ ?αֵ ?α, to assume a reference to the inroad of the Scythians (b.c. 633) related by Herodotus (I. 103–6), the news of which induced Cyaxares to raise the siege of Nineveh. This effect, and still more the fact that the Scythians were a powerful army (as Herodotus says), which under the command of their king Madyas defeated the Medes, who thereby lost the dominion over Asia, of which the Scythians took entire possession, fitted these latter to be a serviceable form for our prophecy. It was a kind of collision of nations, like the later barbarian migrations. The polemic of Delitzsch (comp. Strauss on Zephaniah) against the “Scythian hypothesis,” which Winer also calls most uncertain, is well founded as regards Zephaniah, Jeremiah, and Habakkuk. But if the Scythians, whose equestrian hordes, marching south through Syria in b.c. 626, overran Judea, neither plundered nor laid waste Palestine, etc. (Delitzsch, Habakkuk, p. 18.), but “quietly went up again along the coast of the Mediterranean as they had come down as far as Philistia” (?), at any rate left behind them pre-eminently the impression of a quite sudden (that is the Apocalyptic feature, comp. Luke 17:24) and unexpected irruption, and not that of a definite judgment of God on Israel, like the Assyrians and Babylonians,—then the silence of the sacred record regarding this inroad of the Scythians, who (according to Herodotus) let themselves be turned away from Egypt by Psammetichus through means of presents and entreaties, is comprehensible, the question of Eze 38:17 made intelligible, and the compulsory bringing back in our verse explained. As they disappeared after they had shown themselves, to people’s great surprise, so would they also have remained out of sight; but Jehovah will bring them back, according to His purpose and by His power, otherwise than they came the first time, and in a still different manner of appearing. For Kliefoth’s observation regarding nations hitherto unhistoric, more properly nations not yet come into consideration for the kingdom of God, is applicable to the matter in hand. The prophecy points, as we shall see, far beyond the immediate historic present and its nations; and a complex of nations coming thus from the far north, such as the generic name “Scythians” (for: uncultivated barbarians) suggested, after the above-mentioned inroad into Media, etc., was excellently adapted for that purpose. Moreover, what is here said in order to give due prominence to the divine direction, and above all to the higher intention and guidance: And give, etc., and bring thee forth, is accounted for in Ezekiel 38:10 sq. from the natural will of the people in these respects. Their wild ungovernableness is evident from the figurative expression: give rings in thy jaws (for which comp. Ezekiel 29:4), coming between ωׁ ?εֹ ?αַ ?αְ ?ϊִּ ?ικָ and δεֹ ?φֵ ?ΰϊִ ?ι, and explaining both; even to the shambles (Ewald). The force which makes Gog return takes him from his own land.—νεּ ?νִ ?ινεּ ?τָ ?ψωִׁ ?ιν, comp. Ezekiel 27:14. Here, at all events, horses and riders is a decidedly Scythian trait, for the richness in horses of these hordes, mostly equestrian tribes, was already known to Herodotus; while with the expression: all of them perfectly clothed (see Ezekiel 23:12), an Assyrian element is introduced, thus the figure of Gog is enlarged.—χָ ?δָ ?μψָ ?α (Ezekiel 17:17) resumes λָּ ?μΞηֵ ?ιμֶ ?κָ, in order by the description of the armour (comp. Ezekiel 23:24) to suggest doubtless the Chaldeans. Hitzig rightly considers the large shield as respecting only an army of cavalry. We may suppose infantry, but it is better to suppose a description embracing all and sundry kinds (handling swords, etc.), for the Scythians are only the nucleus (φִ ?πָּ ?δεּ ?ξָ ?βֵ ?ο, loosely combined). To such a description correspond also Ezekiel 38:5—Persia (Ezekiel 27:10), representing the far East, Cush (Ezekiel 30:4 sq.), the remote south, and Phut (Ezekiel 30:5; Ezekiel 27:10), the south-west; thus, especially as the farthest north is expressely added in Ezekiel 38:6, altogether (like Revelation 20:8) ταἐθνηταἐνταιςτεσσαρσιγωνιαιςτηςγης.—(Shield and helmet, as in Ezekiel 27:10.)—Gomer, Genesis 10:2 (1 Chronicles 1:5), the Cimmerians, already mentioned by Homer (Odyss. 11:14 sq.), dwelling at the end of the earth and Okeanos, where the entrance to the lower world is,—wretched men, enveloped in cloud, darkness, and night, and never shone upon by Helios; afterwards placed on the west coast of Lower Italy, near Cumζ, and still later supposed to be on the northern shores of the Euxine, so that the entrance into the Palus Mζotis was called the Cimmerian Bosporus; after this they were removed to the Rhipζan Mountains, into the neighbourhood of the Hyperboreans, and finally became identified with the German Cimbri and the Celtic Cymry. “The old sound of their name is still retained in the mouth of the inhabitants of Wales, who call themselves Cumri or Cymry, and their land Cymru” (Delitzsch), May not the name be derived from χειμεριοι, corresponding to the cloudy, wintry nature of their territory? (Hesychius interprets χεμμεροςἀχλυςὁμιχλη.) See Duncker, Gesch. d. Alterth. 1. p. 739 sq.—On εְ ?λָ ?μΞΰֲ ?βַ ?τֶּ ?ιδָ, comp. on Ezekiel 12:14.—The house of Togarmah (Ezekiel 27:14), as Knobel thinks, including the Phrygians; just as the Armenians still to this day call themselves “house of Torgom” (Torkomatsi)—on Assyrian monuments “Tarkheler,” from “Tagoma.”—A pictorial and manifestly symbolical grouping of nations. Ezekiel 38:7 announces from the decree concerning Gog the demand made upon him. δִ ?λֹּ ?ο, inf. abs. Niph. pro imperativo, very energetic, and the more so as imperat. Hiph. εְ ?δָ ?λֵ ?ο (Ezekiel 7:14) follows: he himself is to be ready, and to make everything ready for leading out; or, the former referring to ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ and the latter to εְ ?λָ ?μΞχְ ?δָ ?μֶ ?ικָ ?Χ, recapitulated and combined by εְ ?δָ ?ιִ ?ιϊָ μָ ?δֶ ?νμִ ?ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ψ, abstract for concrete, that is, he who takes care of them. [Hengst.: Thou art authority to them = they are obedient to thee. Hδvern.: And thou art a law to them, as leader and commander-in-chief. Ewald: And thou servest as ensign to them. Hitzig (Sept.): And thou shalt be to Me a reserve, which I hold in readiness for the coming day (Ezekiel 38:8), etc., or: and stand thou at My order.] Half ironical, for it will be seen immediately how the matter turns out. Ezekiel 38:8. The time when and the direction in which this preparation and equipment shall take place. ξַ ?ιָּ ?ξִ ?ινψַ ?αִּ ?ινΧ, comp. Isaiah 24:22, according to which parallel, ϊִּ ?τָּ ?χֵ ?γ seems to signify: to “visit,” and that in wrath, as the word (according to Delitzsch) does not occur in the sense of gracious visitation. Hitzig replies that it is not yet time to speak in the connection here of the infliction of punishment, and denies that τָּ ?χַ ?γ with accus. of the person signifies to visit in a bad sense. But the ambiguous expression only says even here that the judgment upon Gog will begin to be prepared, hence it is not immediate infliction of punishment; the sallying forth from his land, to which he will be moved, is his visitation referred to in the connection—ϊִּ ?τָּ ?χֵ ?γ equivalent to ωׁ ?εֹ ?αַ ?αְ ?ϊִּ ?ικָ ?Χ, Ezekiel 38:4. The radical signification of the word in the Hebrew is: to seek = to examine, to inspect, to survey, from which “to visit” easily follows; hardly, however, as Hitzig: “thou shalt receive command,” or as Hδvern.: “thou art missed,” that is, considered as a nation that has disappeared and perished; “then, however, thou burstest forth unexpectedly with so much the more formidable forces into the land of promise.” Hδvern. according to this takes αְּ ?ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψִ ?ιϊδַ ?ωָּׁ ?πִ ?ιν as antithetical to ξִ ?ιָ ?ξִ ?ινψַ ?αִּ ?ιν, whereas the expiration of a long time is expressly supposed to be in the last time, which is the consummation not only of the kingdom of God, but of the world generally. Days and years interchange harmoniously; that which appears in the single event as many days is, for the Apocalyptic eye, which ranges over the whole, the summation for that which is still outstanding, that is, still in arrears, in years or time generally. Of the future in general, and hence of an indefinite time, nothing is accordingly said. Hengst.: the catastrophe belongs to a quite new order of things; both phrases denote the Messianic epoch. (But as to its final terminus), Revelation 20:7 sq.—That now the land comes to view is for the purpose of joining on to Ezekiel 37, as the mountains of Israel point to Ezekiel 36. What is said of the land, ξְ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?αֶ ?αֶ ?ϊΧ (part. p. Pil., comp. ωׁ ?εֹ ?αַ ?αְ ?ϊִּ ?ικָ, Ezekiel 38:4), “made to return from the sword,” that is, after war had raged over it (Ezekiel 6:5), applies in substance to the people of the land, as also ξְ ?χֻ ?αֶּ ?φֶ ?ϊΧ (Pu. pass.)—comp. Ezekiel 11:17; Ezekiel 20:34; Ezekiel 20:41; Ezekiel 36:24; Ezekiel 37:21—shows, and still more clearly εְ ?ιָ ?ωְׁ ?αεּ ?Χ, as conclusion. [Hitzig: the turned away from the sword, not in the sense of: which has desisted from war, but: which expects no war, in careless security.] Keil connects ςַ ?μδָ ?ψִ ?ιΧ with ηָּ ?αεֹ ?ΰ Comp. Ezekiel 37:22. The closer designation of them as perpetually, that is, continuing a long time for devastation (Ezekiel 5:14), rather connects the mountains of Israel with the people assembled upon them, who possess and inhabit them. The time referred to during which they were laid waste is to be considered as previous to what was prophesied in Ezekiel 36:37; moreover, the phrase: from many nations, does not necessarily point beyond the Babylonian exile, although the spiritual sense: that “the Son of God gathers, protects, and upholds for Himself an elect church, etc., out of the whole human race,” readily results from it. Comp. on μָ ?αֶ ?θַ ?η, Ezekiel 28:26; Ezekiel 34:25; Ezekiel 34:27. Ezekiel 38:9. εְ ?ςָ ?μִ ?ιϊָ, not a mere vox militaris (Isaiah 7:1; comp. Revelation 20:9), but coloured by αַּ ?ωּׁ ?εֹ ?ΰָ ?δ, which signifies “subversion,” destruction, as well the state (waste, desolation), as the cause which produces it; storm, as it may also denote the moment of devastation, the crash (ωָׁ ?ΰָ ?δ,ωׁ ?εֹ ?ΰ, “to come smashing down”). The continuation of the comparison by λֶּ ?ςָ ?πָ ?ο (Ezekiel 30:18) makes the translation given too obvious for its needing to be interpreted, with Hengstenberg, “like ruin.” (“Gog is, as it were, desolation incarnate.”) [“The cavalry of the Tanjou frequently consisted of two or three hundred thousand men, formidable by the matchless dexterity with which they managed their bows and their horses, by their hardy patience in supporting the inclemency of the weather: unchecked by torrents or by precipices, by the deepest rivers or by the most lofty mountains, they spread themselves over the face of the country, and overthrew all who opposed them.”—Gibbon.]—But that, notwithstanding this, only the “covering” is held up to view, limits essentially the evil significance of this expedition; it is in the first instance merely threatening. Ezekiel 38:10 completes, through means of subjective morality, the representation given theocratically in principle from the divine purpose in Ezekiel 38:4. For although a host not only so numerous, but also so tumultuous, wild, and disorderly, is a temptation, yet Gog too is put in the position with respect to the people and land of peace on the mountains of Israel, to settle down in this peace with his nations and participate in it, as the salvation from the Jews is announced to all the world, even to its remotest corners and ends. If, therefore, Gog’s impetuosity and urgency to depart from his abodes is not thence explained, then behind the thoughts of his heart we will have to assume in addition (Revelation 20:7 sq.) ὁσατανας and his πλανησαιταἐθνη, and to conceive of the relation to Ezekiel 38:4 as of that of 1 Chronicles 21:1 to 2 Samuel 24:1, and generally to direct our view to the world of nations, which has remained unreceptive, notwithstanding that the gospel has been preached in the whole world πασῃτῃκτισει. On the expression: on that day, comp. Ezekiel 29:21.——ιַ ?ςֲ ?μεּ illustrates εְ ?ςָ ?μִ ?ιϊָ in Ezekiel 38:9.—γְ ?αָ ?ψִ ?ιν are not: “things,” but (as and sayest, Ezekiel 38:11, immediately proves) in the first instance: words, which ascend upon the heart, after they were thoughts in the heart (and so proceed out of the heart, Mark 7:21), ηָ ?ωַׁ ?α, to settle something inwardly, to conceive in thought, to devise, especially in a bad sense, denotes the inward process which precedes and accompanies. Ezekiel 38:11. The evil purpose is well characterized by the contrast to ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υτְּ ?ψָ ?ζεֹ ?ϊ, a plain country, which has no mountain fortresses, no walled cities; whereby is intended, not so much: which lies open on all sides (Hitzig), as: which offers no incentive for conquest; comp. Esther 9:19; Zechariah 2:4. In accordance with this, αְּ ?φεּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ, in Ezekiel 36:35, is to be understood of a high secure position. The whole description, and particularly what follows, is an idyl, which, rather than matter for dogmatism, has a symbolic character, and is especially designed to bring out the guilt of Gog through his device against such peace of God. Comp. in addition, Judges 18:7; Jeremiah 49:31; Micah 5:10 sq. Ezekiel 38:12. As such an attack is an evil device, so also is the intention of plundering. [Hengst. makes “the community of God to be depicted in its want of earthly defence or help, in this its disadvantage against the world, while God has reserved to Himself to be its defence.” It is not, however, “the perception of this defenceless state which presents the occasion for the undertaking of the enemy;” this proceeds rather from the wanton self-sufficiency of carnal power and might.] μְ ?δָ ?ωִׁ ?ιαιָ ?γְ ?κָ, a fresh instance of what the heathen had done before, connects itself with the “and sayest” in Ezekiel 38:11. In ξִ ?χְ ?πֶ ?δ (see Ges. Lex.) here, while in other passages the sense of the word is otherwise defined (Genesis 31:18; Genesis 36:6; Genesis 34:23), the possession of flocks by the patriarchs is referred to, and the synonym χּ ?πְ ?ιָ ?ο is to be defined in accordance therewith; comp. on Ezekiel 38:13. “Very beautifully does the Archaic expression delineate the revival of the patriarchal state, the resemblance which the future bears to the past” (Hδvern.). [Hitzig: “attending to productive labour and commerce.” Ewald: “who possess land and goods.” Both translations obliterate the idyllic character of the description.] As θַ ?αּ ?εּ ?ψ can be said of any height, curved elevation (Mount Tabor!), so it here signifies the same as τοπλατοςτηςγης (Revelation 20:9), the symbolical elevated plateau of the earth, in contradistinction to the four corners of the earth,—a position thus of prominent centrality (see Hitzig)—“the highlands of the Spirit,” as Lange expresses it. Comp. on Ezekiel 5:5. “The designation applies so much the more closely, because the land itself lies high, and, sloping both to the east and the west, exposes a navel to view” (Hitzig). Israel’s peacefulness and significance—the Israel of the fulfilment in Christ—are meant to be counter-types to the restless and the essentially mean, to the rapacious, materialistic disposition of the Christless heathen world. ωָׁ ?μָ ?μ and αַּ ?ζ show what alone Gog wants with the Lord’s people. Hδvernick rightly remarks that “the inward significance” of the conflict is meant to be portrayed. “The heathen power has assembled its forces, as if about to fight with one of the greatest world-kingdoms. According to mere human opinion, and in view of such disparity of outward power, the evil appears here to march to certain victory.” Ought we not also to be able to infer from the representation given, that the community of God has at the time ceased to appear in “dominant churches,” and has also dispensed with the support of the temporal arm in the way of state churches? It looks here quite like τομικρονποιμνιον, Luke 12:32, which possesses nothing except the εὐδοκησεν of the Father and the δουναιτηνβασιλειαν. Hδvernick mentions in this connection the “true destination of the theocracy, as it is already set before us in the law,” and then adds: “Israel was not intended to stand out among other nations as a politically great people in the outward sense; its weapons and honour were, in direct contrast to the powers of this world, to belong to an incomparably higher sphere.” He nevertheless makes “the theocracy be an object of allurement for covetousness and plunder,” in that he makes “the new nation rich in flocks and possessions,” as already the Chaldee Paraphrast does,—an idea, however, which the text does not express, and which is not contained in ςωֶֹׁ ?δΧ. In that case one could not but choose to hear in Ezekiel 38:13 the “similar interest of avarice,” the “participation in joy over such a robbing expedition;” against which Hitzig “but why are traders named, and not rather arch-enemies, like Edom and Moab?” Sheba; see Ezekiel 27:22-23. Dedan; Ezekiel 27:15; Ezekiel 27:20. The merchants of Tarshish; Ezekiel 27:21; Ezekiel 27:36; Ezekiel 27:12; Ezekiel 27:25. First of all, traffic which crosses sea and land presents a contrast to the settled system and peaceful procedure, Ezekiel 38:11-12. Then further, those named by means of the clause: εְ ?λָ ?μΞλְּ ?τִ ?ιψֶ ?ιδָ (Hitzig: “its,” the land of Tarshish’s, “authorities;” Keil: “the rapacious rulers of these commercial nations;” Grotius: “sea pirates”),—comp. Ezekiel 19:2-3 (Ezekiel 32:2),—are placed alongside of the greedy and rapacious Gog. (“The magnates of Tarshish are designated as fierce lions on account of the heartless cruelty which goes hand in hand with the spirit of trade,” Hengst.) The meaning, however, is not: “where there is spoil the traders gather,” so that “the question, in the case of affirmation, implies a prospect of joyful participation” (Hengst.), for finally they figure as connoisseurs, as men skilled in robbery and plunder; and this not merely “for bringing out the evident desire of Gog’s hordes” (Keil)—for if it is “evident,” what need is there of the “bringing out”?—but rather to place an almost ironical point of interrogation after the greed and rapacity of Gog in respect to the patriarchal possessions and goods mentioned in Ezekiel 38:12; somewhat thus: what wilt thou get then? as if even for them who delight to rob and plunder for their living, the greatness of the attack bore no proportion to the smallness of the object! Moreover, what is put into their mouth is in keeping with this. In the first place, they simply take up Gog’s intention (Ezekiel 38:12), asking in his own words, Comest thou with this intention? are thine assemblages for this? Then, however, very characteristically, the merchants, the connoisseurs, immediately speak of “silver and gold” as that above all which should reward such an expedition as Gog’s. This, however, is not mentioned in the description in Ezekiel 38:12, so that the naming again of the ξִ ?χְ ?πֶ ?δεְ ?χִ ?πְ ?ιָ ?ο looks antithetical, and this the more as the questioners conclude: to take great spoil. To take cattle and goods of that kind must recommend itself poorly to hordes which have come from such a distance. After those skilled in pillage have given their dictum by their question, Jehovah now says, Ezekiel 38:14, that Gog will find it just as those of kindred spirit to him have already said.—Therefore, because in fact it is as those say, the prophet also shall, on God’s part, confirm it (δִ ?πָּ ?αֵ ?ΰ). The interrogatory: And say to Gog, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, In that day … shalt thou not know it? is parallel to the interrogating speakers in Ezekiel 38:13 (ιֹ ?ΰξְ ?ψεּ μְ ?κָ). It is so, and therefore will also be so when Gog shall be in a position to know it. [ϊֵּ ?γςָ has been most commonly, as already by the Chaldee Paraphrast, understood of knowing through punishment. Hδvernick regards at least “the whole foregoing leading forth” as that “of the truth” of which “Gog shall have living experience.” Ewald and Hitzig read ϊֵּ ?ςֹ ?ψ (Sept.): “wilt thou set thyself in motion?”]—On that day, Ezekiel 38:10. Ezekiel 38:11. Ezekiel 38:15. Although thou comest to this knowledge, nevertheless thou comest, etc., because (Ezekiel 38:16) I make thee come according to My intention.—Comp. Ezekiel 38:8; Ezekiel 38:6; Ezekiel 38:9.—Riding horses, etc., comp. Ezekiel 23:6. It is related of the Scythians that they eat, drink, and sleep in the saddle. Duncker remarks on Herodotus’ expedition of the Scythians: “Only on the west shore of the Caspian Sea, only through the pass of Denbend was it possible that the numerous bands of cavalry (he supposes the Sarmatian tribes, which pressed forward towards the Caucasus, and that neighbouring hordes of the Scolots, from the Tanais (Don) to the Tyras (Dniester), joined in this movement) could take and open up for themselves the way to the south. It led into the heart of the Median territory.”—Ezekiel 26:7. Ezekiel 38:16. Comp. Ezekiel 38:9.—αְּ ?ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψִ ?ιϊδַ ?ιָּ ?ξִ ?ιν combining the two designations of Eze 38:8.—μְ ?ξַ ?ςַ ?οΧ, the divine purpose at Ezekiel 38:4, in distinction to Gog’s purposes, Ezekiel 38:12. That which was meant to end in a plundering expedition issues in the knowledge of Jehovah; while by the expression: when I sanctify Myself on thee, Gog is exhibited as a parallel and at the same time an antithesis to Israel,—a parallel as Jehovah has sanctified Himself in judgment, an antithesis as He has sanctified Himself in mercy in His people. [“Known as the Holy One, whose honour and estate no one is permitted to touch, even in His weak protegιes,” Schmieder.] Comp. Ezekiel 20:41; Ezekiel 28:22; Ezekiel 36:23. The vocative βּ ?εֹ ?β, Ezekiel 38:16, prepares for δַ ?ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δΞδεּ ?ΰ, Ezekiel 38:17. The interrogative form is not so much intended to make a stronger affirmation, as to call special attention to the former prophetic announcement. The affirmation to the question also does not lie in the last clause of the verse (Keil), for this clause rather expresses the immediate contents of the earlier prophecy referred to,—what will come upon the community of God as end and consummation. That the prophets of Israel had already named Gog is directly excluded by the interrogation. If they mentioned names, these were rather other national forms, but behind all these there remained a point of interrogation; and for this reason, that especially accompanying all the prospects of grace for Israel, there remained in prospect a final judgment over his and God’s enemies, over the world that withstands the kingdom of God (over the heathen world). This interrogative realizes itself here in Ezekiel by this Gog. Hence it is not only difficult to point out distinct sayings of the older prophets (Ewald: Isaiah 10:6; Isaiah 17:14; Hengst.: Joe 3:3 [Joe 2:30] sq.; Isaiah 24-27, 34; Deuteronomy 32; Keil: Joe 3:2; Joe 3:11 sq.: Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 25:10 sq., Isaiah 26:21; Isaiah 30:23; Isaiah 30:25), but also superfluous to do so, and above all to imagine “lost” passages (Ewald). The judgment of the world shall, according to the word of the prophets of Israel, be the transforming of the Church militant into the Church triumphant. [“The predictions of the earlier prophets are in so far alluded to as the victory of the kingdom of God over the heathen world, and the judgment of the Lord on it, are announced in them. It is only thus that the reference to the prophecies accords with the other contents of the section. The special announcements regarding the invasion and overthrow of Assyria and Babylon may also be included,” Hengst.]—χַ ?γְ ?ξֹ ?πִ ?ιν,χַ ?γְ ?ξֹ ?πִ ?ι, what in relation to the speaker, or some one else referred to, belongs to ancient times.—αְּ ?ιַ ?γΧ, Daniel 9:10.—αַּ ?ιָ ?ξִ ?ινδָ ?δֵ ?ν reproduces αְּ ?ιָ ?ξִ ?ινχַ ?γְ ?ξεֹ ?πִ ?ιν, in order to designate by the accusative of duration, ωָׁ ?πִ ?ιν, “during years,” the prophecy as one “going through the whole course of the times” (Hengst.). [Others, e.g. Hδvernick, take it as an asyndeton. Ewald: “who prophesied in those days of years.”] Ezekiel 38:18 is, according to Hitzig, a quotation from the former prophecy, of which we do not see the necessity. Our verse brings to actual fulfilment what was prophesied by: that I would bring thee upon them (Ezekiel 38:17).—On that day, more definitely: on the day of the coming of Gog, etc., upon the land of Israel, explains upon them (Ezekiel 38:17).—Comp. moreover, Psalms 18:9; Psalms 18:16 (8, 15). αְּ ?ΰַ ?τִּ ?ι, not: “in my wrath,” but the short breathing of the nose, anthropopathically as the gesture indicative of an angry man, or poetically, as in general also of the horse, lion, crocodile, etc. (ΰσ, from ΰָ ?πַ ?σ, i.e. to breathe through the nose, to puff, correl. πָ ?τַ ?ωׁ,πָ ?ωַׁ ?σ, through the mouth). Comp. Ezekiel 24:8. Ezekiel 38:19. (Ezekiel 5:13; Ezekiel 36:6.) Comp. Ezekiel 21:31; Ezekiel 22:21.—γִּ ?αַּ ?ψְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, prophetic perfect, not, as Hitzig, = γִּ ?αַּ ?ψְ ?ϊִּ ?ι in Ezekiel 38:17, as repetition before introducing the expression left out in Ezekiel 38:18, so that Ezekiel 38:18 continues itself with Ezekiel 38:19 b. Forced and artificial.—By γִּ ?αַּ ?ψְ ?ϊִּ ?ι,ΰִ ?νΞμֹ ?ΰ becomes an oath: surely. The “shaking” is not merely a shaking of the earth, because the land of Israel is immediately mentioned. For this reference is made obvious by the locality of the judgment, and besides, ψַ ?ςַ ?ωׁ takes place over (ςַ ?μ) the ground and soil of Israel, just as Hupf. on Psalms 18 directs attention to the shaking of the earth by thunder, and the violence of Eastern tempests. What is meant by ψַ ?ςַ ?ωׁ is explained in Ezekiel 38:20; and at the same time the “greatness” of the shaking: εְ ?ψָ ?ςֲ ?ωׁ ?εּ ξִ ?τָּ ?πַ ?ιΧ. That the mountains, etc., are thrown down (Ezekiel 30:4), is only one element in the whole, which, as a whole, is described as a cosmic catastrophe, sympathized in by every κτισις (comp. Zephaniah 1:3; Jeremiah 4:25; Genesis 7:21), like a world’s overthrow. δַ ?ξַּ ?γְ ?ψֵ ?βεֹ ?ϊ, according to Gesenius, particularly: “stair-like rocks” (like κλιμαξ), from γָּ ?ψַ ?β, from which Miter deduces the signification: rift, fissure. Proceeding from the Arabic, ξַ ?γְ ?ψֵ ?βָ ?δ might denote something to be ascended, a height.—Every wall that is to fall includes natural walls, as well as those made by man. Ezekiel 38:21. ςָ ?μָ ?ιε, because the judgment of the fury and jealousy of Jehovah is aimed at Gog and his bands.—The sword, thus his own weapon (Ezekiel 38:4 μְ ?λָ ?μ, etc., Hitzig distributive: on all, sq.; Keil: towards all, sq., indicating the direction. This, which is certainly not “forced into the connection” (Hitzig), is explained from Ezekiel 38:9 (16) from the cloud covering the land. Gog’s bands are in all directions, therefore also the sword is in all directions (Ezekiel 39:4).—My mountains, the Lord says, casting a glance at His people there (Ezekiel 38:8). [Hitzig grounds it on Zechariah 14:4 sq. (?).] For what purpose the sword is called for is indeed self-evident; but here one assails the other therewith in discord (contrast to the assembling at first, Ezekiel 38:7), probably as usual at the dividing of the booty made. Comp. Zechariah 14:13. Previous types, Judges 7:22; 2 Chronicles 20:23. In the first instance Jehovah merely “calls.” Ezekiel 38:22. He grasps it still more personally as a judge: πִ ?ωְׁ ?τַּ ?θְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, Ezekiel 17:20. The colouring for the farther description reminds us of the plagues of Egypt, whence Hengstenberg makes them be “partly taken, and from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah,” Genesis 19:24. Comp. also Ezekiel 28:23, and on Ezekiel 13:11; Ezekiel 13:13 (Joshua 10:11). Ezekiel 38:23 proves that it is an intervention of Jehovah Himself, His fighting for His people, who are small compared with the greatness of Gog (Ezekiel 38:15).—δִ ?ϊְ ?βִּ ?γִּ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ι is to be understood from the contrast to the greatness of Gog. Comp. on Ezekiel 36:23. On δִ ?ϊְ ?χַ ?γִּ ?ωְׁ ?ϊִּ ?ι, comp. on Ezekiel 38:16.—πεֹ ?γςַ ?ϊּ ?ι, comp. Ezekiel 35:11 (Ezekiel 39:7; Ezekiel 20:5; Ezekiel 20:9).—The many heathen nations, corresponding antithetically to the repeatedly-mentioned “many nations” (according to Ezekiel 38:22).—Comp. Ezekiel 38:16. Additional Note on Ezekiel 38, 39 [Ezekiel’s object in the chapters before us was, “through the Spirit, to present a picture of what might be expected in the last scenes of the world’s history; and according to the native bent and constitution of his mind, the picture must be lifelike. Not only must it be formed of the materials of existing relations, but it must be formed into a perspective with manifold and intricate details; yet so constructed and arranged, that while nothing but the most superficial eye could look for a literal realization, the great truths and prospects embodied in it should be patent to the view of all. What, then, are these? Let it be remembered at what point it is in Ezekiel’s prospective exhibitions that this prophecy is brought in. He has already represented the covenant-people as recovered from all their existing troubles, and made victorious over all their surrounding enemies. The best in the past has again revived in their experience, freed even from its former imperfections, and secured against its ever-recurring evils. For the new David, the all-perfect and continually-abiding Shepherd, presides over them, and at once prevents the out-breaking of internal disorders, and shields them from the attacks of hostile neighbours. All around, therefore, is peace and quietness; the old enemies vanish from the field; Israel dwells securely in his habitation. But let it not be supposed that the conflict is over, and that the victory is finally won. It is a world-wide dominion which this David is destined to wield, and the kingdom of righteousness and peace established at the centre must expand and grow till it embrace the entire circumference of the globe. But will Satan yield his empire without a struggle? Will he not rather, when he sees the kingdom of God taking firmer root and rising to a higher elevation, seek to effect its dismemberment or its downfall, by stirring up in hostile array against it the multitudinous and gigantic forces that lie scattered in the extremities of the earth? Assuredly he will do so; and God also will direct events into this channel, in order to break effectually the power of the adversary, and secure the diffusion of Jehovah’s truth and the glory of His name to the remotest regions. A conflict, therefore, must ensue between the embattled forces of heathenism, gathered out of their far-distant territories, and the nation that holds the truth of God. But the issue is certain. For God’s people being now holiness to Him, He cannot but fight with them and give success to their endeavours. So that the arm of heathenism shall be completely broken. Its mightiest efforts only end in the more signal display of its own weakness, as compared with the truth and cause of God; and the name of God as the Holy One of Israel is magnified and feared to the utmost bounds of the earth. “Such is the general course and issue of things as marked out in this prophecy, under the form and aspect of what belonged to the Old Covenant, and its relation to the world as then existing. But stripping the vision of this merely temporary and imperfect exterior, since now the higher objects and relations of the New Covenant have come, we find in the prophecy the following series of important and salutary truths. 1. In the first place, while the appearance of the new David to take the rule and presidency over God’s heritage would have the effect of setting His people free from the old troubles and dangers which had hitherto assailed them, and laying sure and broad the foundations of their peace, it should be very far from securing them against all future conflicts with evil. It would rather tend to call up other adversaries, and enlarge the field of conflict, so as to make it embrace the most distant and barbarous regions of the earth. For the whole earth is Christ’s heritage, and sooner or later it must come to an issue between the adherents of His cause and the children of error and corruption. Though the latter might have no thought of interfering with the affairs of Christ’s kingdom, and would rather wish to pursue their own courses undisturbed (see on Ezekiel 38:4), yet the Lord will not permit them to do so. He must bring the light of heaven into contact with their darkness; so as to necessitate a trial of strength between the powers of evil working in them, and the truth and grace of God as displayed in the kingdom of Christ. 2. From the very nature of the case, this trial would fall to be made on a very large scale, and with most gigantic resources; for the battlefield now is the world to its farthest extremities, and the question to be practically determined is, whether God’s truth or man’s sin is to have possession of the field. So that all preceding contests should appear small, and vanish out of sight, in comparison of this last great struggle, in which the world’s destiny was to be decided for good or evil. Hence it seemed, in the distance, as if not thousands, as formerly, but myriads upon myriads, numbers without number, were to stand here in battle array. 3. Though the odds in this conflict could not but appear beforehand very great against the people and cause of Christ, yet the result should be entirely on their side; and simply because with them is the truth and the might of Jehovah. Had it been only carnal resources that were to be brought into play on either side, victory must inevitably have been with those whose numbers were so overwhelmingly great. But these being only flesh, and not spirit; they must fall before the omnipotent energy of the living God, who can make His people more than conquerors over all that is against them. And so in this mighty conflict, in which all that the powers of darkness could muster from the world was to stand, as it were, front to front with the people of God, there were to be found remaining only, on the part of the adversaries, the signs of defeat and ruin. 4. Lastly, as all originated in the claim of Messiah and His truth to the entire possession of the world, so the whole is represented as ending in the complete establishment of the claim. The kingdom through every region of the earth becomes the Lord’s. He is now universally known and sanctified as the God of truth and holiness. It is understood at last, that it was His zeal for the interests of righteousness which led Him to chastise in former times His own professing people; and that the same now has induced Him to render them triumphant over every form and agency of evil. And now, all counter rule and authority being put down, all disturbing elements finally hushed to rest, the prospect stretches out before the Church of eternal peace and blessedness, in what have at length become the new heavens and the new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. “It may still, perhaps, seem strange to some, if this be the real meaning and import of the vision, that the prophet should have presented it under the aspect of a single individual gathering immense forces from particular regions, and at the head of these fighting in single conflict, and falling on the land of Israel. They may feel it difficult to believe that a form so concrete and fully developed should have been adopted, if nothing more local and specific had been intended. But let such persons look back to other portions of this book, especially to what is written of the king of Tyre in Ezekiel 28. (which in form, perhaps, most nearly resembles the prophecy before us), and judge from the shape and aspect there given to the past, whether it is not in perfect accordance with the ascertained characteristics of Ezekiel’s style to find him giving here such a detailed and fleshly appearance to the future. There Tyre is not only viewed as personified in her political head, but that head is represented as passing through all the experiences of the best and highest of humanity. It is, as we showed, a historical parable, in which every feature is admirably chosen, and pregnant with meaning, but all of an ideal and not a literal or prosaic kind. And what is the present vision, as now explained, but a prophetical parable, in which, again, every trait in the delineation is full of important meaning, only couched in the language of a symbolical representation? Surely we must concede to the prophet, what we would never think of withholding from a mere literary author, that he has a right to employ his own method; and that the surest way of ascertaining this is to compare one part of his writings with another, so as to make the better known reflect light upon the less known—the delineations of the past upon the visions of the future. “At the same time, let us not be understood as declaring for certain that the delineation in this prophecy must have nothing to do with any particular crisis or decisive moment in the Church’s history. It is perfectly possible that in this case, as in most others, there may be a culminating point, at which the spiritual controversy is to rise to a gigantic magnitude, and virtually range on either side all that is good and all that is evil in the world. It may be so; I see nothing against such a supposition in the nature of the prophecy; but I must add, I see nothing conclusively for it. For when we look back to the other prophecy just referred to, we find the work of judgment represented as taking effect upon Tyre, precisely as if it were one individual that was concerned, and one brief period of his history; while still we know blow after blow was required, and even age after age, to carry forward and consummate the process. Perfectly similar, too, was the case of Babylon, as described in the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Isaiah; it seems as if almost one act were to do the whole, yet how many instruments had a hand in it, and over how many centuries was the work of destruction spread! We see no necessity in the form of the representation, or in the nature of things, why it should be otherwise here; none, at least, why a different mode of reaching the result should be expected as certain. We believe that as the judgment of Tyre began when the first breach was made in the walls by Nebuchadnezzar, and as the judgment of Babylon began when the Medes and Persians entered her two-leaved gates, so the controversy with Gog and his heathenish forces has been proceeding since Christ, the new David, came to lay the everlasting foundations of His kingdom, and asserted His claim to the dominion of the earth as His purchased possession. Every stroke that has been dealt since against the idolatry and corruption of the world is a part of that great conflict which the prophet in vision saw collected as into a single locality, and accomplished in a moment of time. He would thus more clearly assure us of the certainty of the result. And though, from the vast extent of the field, and the many imperfections that still cleave to the Church, there may be much delay and many partial reverses experienced in the process; though there may, too, at particular times, be more desperate struggles than usual between the powers of evil in the world and the confessors of the truth, when the controversy assumes a gigantic aspect, yet the prophecy is at all times proceeding onwards in its accomplishment. Let the Church therefore do her part, and be faithful to her calling. Let her grasp with a firm hand the banner of truth, and in all lands display it in the name of her risen Lord. And whichever way He may choose to finish and consummate the process,—whether by giving fresh impulses to the hearts of His people, and more signally blessing the work of their hands, or by shining forth in visible manifestations of His power and glory, such as may at once and for ever shame into confusion the adversaries of His cause and kingdom,—leaving this to Himself, to whom it properly belongs, let the blessed hope of a triumphant issue animate every Christian bosom, and nerve every Christian arm to maintain the conflict, and do all that zeal and love can accomplish to hasten forward the final result.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 425–430.—W. F.] 1. With our two chapters the prophecy of Ezekiel passes over to the apocalyptic (comp. Introd. pp. 19, 20. Comp. in general what is said by Lange in the introduction to the Revelation of St. John, p. 2 sq.). Characteristic apocalyptic features as to form and contents are perceptible, just as the very circumstance that the New Testament Apocalypse begins with the transition of Ezekiel 37 to Ezekiel 38, to borrow important (eschatological) elements for its closing visions, must suggest something apocalyptic. The prophetic element, the element of doctrine and of application, still pervades Ezekiel 38, 39, but this element will subside, Ezekiel 40 sq.; and our chapters, too, present to us and delineate a tableau of unity,—the impressive picture of a national expedition, a migration of nations, a battle of nations, and still more of God. Although contained in the word of prophecy (“Thus saith the Lord”), yet the description of the march of the army (Ezekiel 38.), and of its fearful over-throw in Israel (Ezekiel 39), assumes, as elsewhere, the appearance of a vision. Scene succeeds scene. The style is typical to such a degree, that what of historical from the past or present may here form the basis, assumes at once the form of pure symbols, whose idea stretches far beyond the Old Testament theocracy, and on to the end of time. The consummation of Israel shows itself as the consummation of the world. The contrast of the world to Israel is in our chapters not so much the traditional one of the heathen as opposed to the people of God, as coarse callousness, resembling insensibility, in relation to the peace in which the royal priesthood, the people of the possession of an eternal covenant of Jehovah (Ezekiel 37:26), delight themselves. Compare the impressions and utterances of Balaam in Numbers 23:9-10, so very different from Ezekiel 38:11 sq.! On the other hand, the impelling force to the savage irruption into the quietness of such a people in the land is appropriately conceived, viz. on the one part, as divine compulsion of the Judge overruling to the end in view, it is high as heaven (but comp. Ezekiel 38:4 with Ezekiel 38:10 sq.); on the other part, as demoniac selfishness and worldly-mindedness, it is deep as hell. Considering the apocalyptic character of our two chapters, with which the remainder of the book of Ezekiel announces itself, the suddenness of Gog’s appearance on the scene and also of his overthrow is worthy of observation, reminding us of the ἐνταχει (Luke 18:8), and of the oft-repeated ταχυ of the Revelation of St. John, and also of the final completeness of the judgment and its execution. 2. Hengstenberg has very justly observed: “We have here a good preparation for the exposition of the vision of the new temple.” But what he pronounces a specialty of Ezekiel,—how “wide a space” is given by him to “painting,” how “attentive” he is “to fill the imagination with holy figures,”—depends rather on the apocalyptic character of the prophecy regarding Gog. Moreover, to confront the imagination of timidity with the imagination of faith, to pour forth light and comfort in opposition to thoughts despairing of the future, is precisely a mark of all apocalypse proper. Lange says beautifully and strikingly of apocalypses in this respect: “As they have proceeded from the divine quieting and comforting of a longing of the hearts of elect prophets, which flamed aloft in times of great oppression of the kingdom of God, so they are also designed to direct and guide, to comfort and calm, in the first place, the servants of God, and through them the Church, in times of similar and fresh oppression in the future—nay, even to change for them all tokens of terror into tokens of hope and promise.” 3. In Hengstenberg’s interpretation, at all events, not only does the “so-called biblical realism” entirely disappear, to which, as he says, it so often happens to take the garb for the man, but, as the exposition has already incidentally indicated, the nations named in Ezekiel 38 although in themselves historical, appear in the connection here as elements of an idea which is summed up in the symbolic Gog of the land of Magog, namely, as the last outbreak of enmity against the kingdom of God. This symbolized idea is at all events also historical—nay, even world-historical in the highest sense, or pertaining to the universal judgment. The world’s history is theocratically determined by it, determined by the kingdom of God finally developing itself into the consummation of humanity and the world. But Magog, Gomer, Meshech, Tubal, Sheba, Dedan, and Phut are as such no longer historically to be found. Of Cush Hengstenberg asserts: that it is “a Christian people, and such a one as, according to recent experience, will scarcely again attain to world-wide influence.” 4. As Grotius and others, e.g. Jahn (Introd. 2), interpret of the days of the Maccabees and Antiochus Epiphanes, so Luther found in our chapters the Turk, who, even in the hymns and prayers of the Church, was for a long time firmly held to be, together with the Pope, the chief enemy of German Christianity. While individual Jewish expositors apply what is said sometimes to Rome, and sometimes interpret it of the Crusades, yet we find also in Shabb. 118:1; Berach. Ezekiel 7:2; the Jerusalem Targum on Numbers 11:25; Deuteronomy 34:2, Gog shifted into the times previous to the Messiah, and the battle, in which the Messiah annihilates Gog, discoursed of. Likewise, in reference to the Messianic kingdom, the Sibylline books speak of Gog and Magog, placing him in the farthest south of Egypt (see Hδvernick, p. 602). In the notices which the Koran makes of Dzu-Ikarnayn, i.e. Alexander the Great and his adventurous warlike expeditions (Sur. 18 and 21), Yagug and Magug are designated as mischief-makers on earth, and enclosed by an iron wall; which, however, will be at last turned to dust, whereupon Gog and Magog break forth, and the universal judgment ensues. (Sprenger: Das Leben und die Lehre des Mohammad, ii. p. 474 sq.) “The fear of these northern nations,” says W. Menzel, “is very ancient, and has been justified by the Scythian, and afterwards by the Hunnish-Mongolian warlike expeditions, which have already often overrun both Europe and Asia; and this Oriental popular tradition coincides (?) with the widespread German tradition of the armies of Charlemagne or Barbarossa sleeping in the mountain, which will burst forth at the end of the world, and conquer a new golden age.” 5. Hδvernick adduces the following reasons for the interpretation of the time as the time of the completion of the kingdom of God. (1) The names, which do not so much indicate single nations then existing, as that we have to do with a “view of future new relations only starting from the present.” “Whatever far remote, more or less known, national names can be named, the prophet collects here; and specially important is the free formation of the name Gog.” (2) The connection with Ezekiel 36, 37 represents the way prepared for the glorification and completion of the theocracy; the judgment over Edom (Ezekiel 35) is regarded as having taken place, in which old hereditary enemy, the enemies hitherto of the covenant-people appear judged in their immediate neighbourhood. It still remains, however, “to marshal the entire (?) world-power in its sinful insurrection against God (?), and thus to perfect the salvation,” just as this idea lies at the foundation of the fourth, the Roman empire, prophesied by Daniel, the contemporary of Ezekiel (Euseb. Demonstr. Ev. Ezekiel 9:3). (3) The prophetic denunciation of heathen nations always regards them as representatives and supporters of definite ideas,—in Edom the hitherto antitheocratic tendency, in our prophecy the idea of future enmity as experienced by Israel in the completion of its salvation. (4) The fulfilment is, in Ezekiel 38:8; Ezekiel 38:16, expressly placed in the latter days. (5) The announcements of former prophets, referred to in Ezekiel 38:17, point to the judgment of the last day, just as also the prophet’s picture is made to conform with those models. (6) Lastly, the resumption of the subject in Revelation 20.—It tells particularly for the apocalyptic character of the representation given by Gog, that it is pervaded not only by reminiscences of Assyrians and Chaldeans—of Edom only locally, indeed (“on the mountains of Israel,” comp. on this point Ezekiel 35. with Ezekiel 36.)—but also by presentiments of much later heathen powers. For it is quite in the apocalyptic way and manner always to present to us types stamped anew from history as it gravitates towards the end of the world. 6. In the Introduction, p. 19, the importance of Ezekiel’s position in the midst of the Babylonian world, and with that his acquaintance with foreign nations and their relations, have been adverted to. In Babylon, if anywhere, there was a standing-place for surveying the rolling waves of the sea of nations. The prediction regarding Gog, peculiar to our prophet, will have to be conceived of as to its human side from his peculiar abode on such a watch-tower in the midst of the heathen-. Philippson justly observes: “We must remember that Ezekiel was placed in the midst of the inner-Asiatic world, and hence had opportunity of observing the great movements therein. Here, in the bosom of the national movements of Asia, it must have been clear to the prophet that these movements were far from having reached their end, that the dynasties would still change often, and that these concussions could not fail to affect also the countries on the Mediterranean.” At all events, although our prophecy is not the result of the incidental observations, the far-sighted political reflections, etc., of a gifted man, yet, as the magnificent architecture of Nebuchadnezzar might furnish Ezekiel with views for Ezekiel 40. sq., so the fluctuating sea of nations, which he saw and heard of in Babylonia, may perhaps have furnished him with the colours in which he paints the figure of Gog and his bands. 7. Our prophecy has been explained from the very natural question after Ezekiel 37.—will this peace of Israel continue always undisturbed? will the relations of the rest of the world take such a shape that Israel can remain in peace? So Philippson. “The dogmatic idea of the prophecy,” says Hengstenberg, “is very simple: the community of God, renewed by His grace, will victoriously resist all the assaults of the world. This idea the prophet has here clothed with flesh and blood,” etc. The prophecy, then, is more or less a parable. We come back to this. “The starting-point,” continues Hengstenberg, “is the fear which penetrates the sick heart. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 39 1And thou, Son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I am against thee, Gog, prince of Rosh, Meshech, and 2Tubal; And I lead thee back, and drive thee on, and make thee come up from 3the farthest north, and make thee come to the mountains of Israel. And I dash thy bow out of thy left hand, and will make thy arrows fall out of thy right hand. 4On the mountains of Israel shalt thou fall, thou and all thy squadrons, and the nations that are with thee; to birds of prey of every kind, and to the beasts 5of the field I give thee for food. Upon the face [flat] of the field shalt thou 6fall, for I have spoken it: sentence of the Lord Jehovah.—And I send fire into Magog and into [among] those that dwell securely in the isles, and they 7know that I am Jehovah. And the name of My holiness will I make known in the midst of My people Israel, and I will not let the name of My holiness be profaned any more; and the heathen nations know that I am Jehovah, 8holy in Israel. Behold it came and was done,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah, 9—this is the day of which I spoke. And the inhabitants of the cities of Israel go out and set on fire and burn the armour, short shield and long shield, the bow and the arrows, and the hand-cane and the spear, and they 10keep a fire burning with them seven years. And they shall not carry [fetch] wood from the field, nor cut it out of the forests, for they shall keep a fire burning with the armour; and they spoil their spoilers and plunder their 11plunderers: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And it comes to pass on that day, that I will give to Gog a place of burial in Israel, the valley of the passers-through east of the sea, and it stops the passers-through; and there they bury Gog and all his tumult, and they call it the valley of the tumult of 12Gog. And the house of Israel are seven months burying them, in order to 13cleanse the land. And the whole people of the land bury them, and it is to them for a name, on the day of My glorifying Myself: sentence of the Lord Jehovah.—14And they shall sever out [appoint] set men, who pass through in the land, who bury with the passers-through those that remain on the face of the land, to cleanse it; after the end of seven months they shall hold a search. 15And the passers-through in the land pass through, and he [one of them] sees a human skeleton, and sets up by it a mark, until the buriers bury it [theskeleton] in the valley of the tumult of Gog. 16And also the name of a city 17[is, shall be] “Hamonah” [tumult]. And they cleanse the land. And thou, Son of man, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Say to birds of every kind, and to every beast of the field, Assemble and come, gather around over My sacrifice which I kill for you, a great sacrifice on the mountains of Israel, and ye 18eat flesh and drink blood! Flesh of mighty men [heroes] shall ye eat, and blood of princes of the earth shall ye drink; rams, lambs, and he-goats, bullocks, 19fatlings of Bashan all of them. And ye eat fat to the full, and drink 20blood to drunkenness from My sacrifice which I have killed for you. And ye become full at My table, with horse and chariot, mighty man and every 21kind of soldier: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. And I give My glory [honour] among the heathen, and all the heathen see My judgment [justice] which 221 have executed, and My hand which I have laid upon them. And the house of Israel know that I am Jehovah, their God, from this day and henceforth. 23And the heathen know that the house of Israel wandered out [were carried away captive] for their iniquity, because they were unfaithful to Me; and I hid My face from them, and gave them into the hand of their oppressors, and they all fell by the sword. 24According to their uncleanness and according to their transgressions have I done unto them, and I hid My face from them. 25Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Now will I turn the calamity of Jacob, and I have mercy on the whole house of Israel, and I am jealous for the name 26of My holiness. And they bear their reproach, and all their unfaithfulness which they have unfaithfully done towards Me, when they dwell securely 27upon their land, and there is none that makes them afraid; When I bring them back from the nations, and gather them out of the lands of their enemies, and sanctify Myself on them before the eyes of many heathen. 28And they know that I, Jehovah, am their God, in that I led them captive to the heathen, and have gathered [gather] them to their own land, and I will 29leave no more of them there; And I will no more hide My face from them, because I poured out My Spirit upon the house of Israel: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 39:2. Sept.: Κ. συνκξωσεκ. καθοδηγησωκ. ἀναβιβασωσε … κ. συναξωσεἐπι—Vulg.: Et circumagam te et educam—(Another reading: ΰμδψι.) Ezekiel 39:3 Κ. ἀπολω … κ. … τηςδεξιαςκ. καταβαλωσε (4) ἐπιταὀρη … Κ. πεση … εἰςπληθηὀρνεων. ΙΙαντιπετεινωκ. παστ. θηριοις—Vulg.: Feris avibus omnique volatili. (Another reading: ελμηιϊ,εςξινψαιν.) Ezekiel 39:6. Sept.: ... κ. κατοικισθησονταιαἱνησοιἐπ’ εἰρηνης. Ezekiel 39:7. ... παντατ. ἐθνη— Ezekiel 39:8. ... κ. γνωσηὁτιἐσται— Ezekiel 39:11. ... τοπονὀνομαστον, μνημειον … τοπολυανδριοντωνἑπελθοντωνπροςτ. θαλασσαν· κ. περιοικοδομησουσιντοπεριστομιοντηςφαραγγοςκ. κατορυξουσινἐκει … κ. κληθησεταιτοΤαί̈τοπολυανδριοντουΤωγ. Vulg.: … vallem viatorum … quζ obstupescere faciet prζtereuntes,— Ezekiel 39:13. Sept.: ... εἱςὀνομαστον. Ezekiel 39:14. ... πασαντ. γην, θαψαιτ. καταλελειμμενουςἐπι … καθαρισαι … μετατηνἑπταμηνον.—Vulg.: qui sepeliant et requirant— Ezekiel 39:15. ... Κ. ἐσται, πασὁδιαπορευομενοςπασαντ. γηνκ. ἰδων— Ezekiel 39:16. ... τηνπολεωςΙΙολυανδριον. Vulg.: Amona. Ezekiel 39:18. ... κριουςκ. μοσχουςκ. τραγουςοἱμοσχοιἐστεατωμενοιπαντες. Vulg.: … et altilium et pinguium omnium. Ezekiel 39:21. ... ἐνὑμιν— Ezekiel 39:23. Sept.: ... πκντατ. ἐθνη. Ezekiel 39:25. ... κ. ἐλεησωτ. οἰκονΙ. Ezekiel 39:26. Vulg.: … neminem formidantes. (Another reading: επωΰε.) Ezekiel 39:27. Sept.: ... ἐκτ. χωρωντ. ἐθνων— Ezekiel 39:28. ... ἑντωἐπιφανκναιμεαὐτοιςἐντ. ἐθνεσιν. (Another reading: ςμΰγ, etc.) Ezekiel 39:29. ... ἐξεχεατονθυμονμου. REMARKSThe further execution of the divine judgment, already announced at the close of Ezekiel 38, begins in Ezekiel 39:1 with a repetition from Ezekiel 38:2-3, of the most formal address to Gog. Ezekiel 39:2, comp. on Ezekiel 38:4. If εְ ?δַ ?ςֲ ?μִ ?ιϊִ ?ικָ, etc., did not immediately follow,—and it could not follow after the execution of the judgment on Gog,—and if εְ ?ωִׁ ?ωֵׁ ?ΰϊִ ?ικָ did not stand between εְ ?ωְׂ ?αַּ ?αְ ?ϊִּ ?ικָ and εְ ?δַ ?ςֲ ?μִ ?ιϊִ ?ικָ, whereby a signification not so very far removed from this connection is suggested, then we might listen to Hengstenberg’s translation (J. Kimchi): “and I six thee,”—by which he understands the infliction on Gog of the six plagues of Eze 38:22. Others, too, appealing to Ezekiel 45:13 (ωִׁ ?ωִּׁ ?ιϊֶ ?ν), have interpreted from ωֵׁ ?ωׁ: I leave a sixth part of thee. But the position of the word (which is Ezekiel’s own) here assigns to it most fittingly an intensifying sense, such as: drive, or the like (see Hδvern. in loc.). Meier holds the Piel ωִׁ ?ωֵּׁ ?ΰ to be an abbreviated form = ωִׁ ?ΰωֵׁ ?ΰ. Gesenius (ωִׁ ?ωָּׁ ?ΰ) translates: “and lead thee forth.” It is said that the signification: “to walk along,” “to march,” is admissible from the Ethiopic, hence here conjugated only transitively. Following the Chaldee (“I lead thee astray”), Ewald renders it: “and entice thee away and keep thee in leading-strings,” which Hitzig finds good (!). Rashi: “deceive thee.”—Ezekiel 38:9; Ezekiel 38:16.—Ezekiel 38:6; Ezekiel 38:15.—Ezekiel 38:16; Ezekiel 38:8. Ezekiel 39:3. The left hand holds the bow, the right bends it and fits on the arrow. It does not even come to an attack, because, Ezekiel 38:21 sq., a sword, etc. consumes Gog. Ezekiel 39:4. ΰַ ?τִּ ?ιμ of Ezekiel 39:3 leads to ϊִּ ?τּ ?εֹ ?μ here.—On ςַ ?μδָ ?ψֵ ?ιΧ, comp. Ezekiel 38:6; Ezekiel 38:9; Ezekiel 38:22.—[ςַ ?ιִ ?θ is: “animal of prey,” therefore more exactly described here by φִ ?τּ ?εֹ ?ψ, “bird generally.”—Comp. Ezekiel 17:23. Hengst.: “as many as have wings.”—Ezekiel 29:5. Ezekiel 39:5. On account of the previous “beast of the field,” the “mountains of Israel” are changed for the face of the field.—Ezekiel 23:34; Ezekiel 26:5. Ezekiel 39:6. If we are not to extend the judgment “also over the land of Gog and all (?) the heathen who dwell securely” (Keil), which, however, is plainly expressed both by αְּ ?ξָ ?βεֹ ?β and by εּ ?αְ ?ιωִׁ ?αֵ ?ιδָ ?ΰִ ?ιִּ ?ινμαֶ ?θַ ?η, then we must, with Hensgt., take δָ ?ΰִ ?ιִּ ?ιν for “states and countries in general,” “islands in the sea of the world,” and understand the “security” to be such as “induces them to the expedition against the people of God” (!!); or we must, with Rosenm. at εּ ?αְ ?ιωְׁ ?αֵ ?ι, etc., think of Eze 38:13. But the fire does not necessarily compel us to agree with either of these, for it does not stand here as in Ezekiel 38:22, but apart by itself, so that we have to compare here, e.g. Ezekiel 5:4, and the many similar passages in which it occurs as a symbol of the divine vengeance. Our chapter, while it carries into further detail, also supplements the picture given in Ezekiel 38. Thus the judgment extends from the mountains of Israel, as also ωִׁ ?μַּ ?ηְ ?ϊִּ ?ι expresses, “to Magog,” the people concerned, in among them at home; while their collective character (comp. Ezekiel 38:2) is then again depicted by the expression: those that dwell securely in the isles. Gog’s expedition is made by land, but has its sympathisers in islands and coast lands as well as at home—in fact, over sea and land (μָ ?αֶ ?θַ ?η appears to be retaliation, with a reference to Ezekiel 38:8; Ezekiel 38:11; Ezekiel 38:14). The return to the point of departure of this extension of judgment, as indicated in Ezekiel 39:7, by the expression: in the midst of my people Israel, forms no argument against the so plain contents of Eze 39:6; for not only has the purposed knowledge of Jehovah (Ezekiel 39:6) to be more closely defined, but preparation has also to be made for the execution, Ezekiel 39:9 sq.—Comp. on Ezekiel 36:20 sq. (Ezekiel 38:23). Hengst. translates thus: “and I will not any more profane,” etc. ΰַ ?ηֵ ?μ is Hiphil. The revelation of holiness in Israel precludes further profanation of Jehovah in reference to Israel among the heathen; comp. in addition, Ezekiel 37:28. Ezekiel 39:8. The fulfilment is assured to the prophet with as much certainty as if it were already an accomplished fact. That which came and was done is made abundantly plain by the day, etc., for which comp. Ezekiel 38:18-19 (not Ezekiel 39:17). Ezekiel 39:9. Israel, for whom the Lord has put an end to the fearful assault in a manner still more fearful, now takes a walk, as it were, out to the place of judgment. Everything by which the enemy could terrify,—in general: armour, properly: what is joined together (πֶ ?ωֶׁ ?χ), as distinguished from specialties which follow—wooden helmet and breastplate, probably covered with leather; then (comp. Ezekiel 38:4) short shield, etc., and ξַ ?χֵּ ?μ, of uncertain derivation, “twig,” “cane,” “staff”—with ιָ ?γ certainly not: “handstaff,” or “cudgel” (Numbers 22:27), or “baton of the commander,” but the riding-switch so suitable for bands of riders as here,—all these have so lost their terrors, that they now come into consideration only as firewood—for useful appliance, in direct contrast to the terror and injury they were meant to produce. For the weapons of the enemy are not here, as often elsewhere, burnt at once after the battle; and with this Hδvernick connects Isaiah 9:4, and recognises in the destruction of the most diverse kinds of weapons, and the cleansing of the land in this (?) respect, the character of the Messianic times; while Hitzig brings out simply the thought that Israel under his protecting God, who has just now fought for His people, needs no weapons, but the inhabitants of the cities of Israel (ιωְׁ ?αֵ ?ιςָ ?ψֵ ?ι, etc., antithetic to ιωְׁ ?αֵ ?ιδָ ?ΰιּ ?ιν, Ezekiel 39:6) make fires of and burn the wood in question seven years long. Hitzig makes αִּ ?ςֲ ?ψεּ inchoative (“to set on fire”), and δִ ?ωִּׂ ?ιχεּ “to make a fire.” The undoubtedly symbolic character of the number seven (symbol of the divine covenant) illustrates at the same time the very dramatic character of the whole of the rest of the account. Hengst.: “the word on which faith has to live puts on, as it were, flesh and blood, to gain an influence over the fancy, in which frightful forms so readily take their seat. It would be against the evidence to attribute a real import to the specialties, which are so obviously only means of representation.” “He who has seen the battle of nations at Leipzig,” observes Schmieder, “has a weak copy of Ezekiel’s sublime description of the days after the battle.” Ezekiel 39:10 strengthens what has been said positively by a corresponding negative description, and subjoins ωָׁ ?μְ ?μεּ and αָּ ?ζְ ?ζεּ ?—not, however, in order to make the riches now, as the heaps of wood formerly, to fall into the hands of Israel, but simply to make manifest the retaliation (comp. Ezekiel 38:12), and perhaps also to bring to remembrance the question (Ezekiel 38:13), but how differently now over the dead bodies. For what the weapons as firewood for Israel, as well as the spoiling and robbing, declare is this, which consequently is meant as preparation for Ezekiel 39:11, namely, that Gog and his bands are all dead corpses (Isaiah 37:36); comp. besides, Jeremiah 30:16. Ezekiel 39:11. What Jehovah gives to Gog in Israel, how different from that which he intended to take to himself in Israel! ξְ ?χεֹ ?νΞωָׁ ?νχֶ ?αֶ ?ψ, not so much: “a spot where he may be buried in Israel” (Hitzig), as: “a place where there is a grave in Israel,” to wit, nothing else is for him in Israel; Hδvernick: “namely, a quite special one, like no other in Israel.” Thus will God settle accounts with the predatory and rapacious Gog. [The Sept. doubtless read ωֵׁ ?ν.]—βֵּ ?ιδָ ?ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν Hitzig translates: “the valley of the opposite heights,” formed by mountains standing over against one another (1 Samuel 17:3); he reads βֵ ?ιΞδָ ?ςֲ ?αָ ?ιִ ?ν, and makes a very far-fetched reference to Zechariah 14:4-5! According to Hδvernick, the passage reminds of Joel 3. (the valley of Jehoshaphat), but the name belongs purely to the idea, to which it entirely corresponds, for a “valley of the passers-through” is not found elsewhere in the Old Testament; but the prophet himself gives a threefold explanation of the name—in Ezekiel 39:11, as an annoyance, an object of horror for the passers-by; in Ezekiel 39:14 reminding of the men that pass through the land to cleanse it; and thirdly, of the hostile bands that formerly passed through here. Only the latter reference can come into consideration if the traditional punctuation is to be retained, and the appellation: “valley of the passers-through,” is, like the “valley of the multitude of Gog,” to be considered as given as a memorial of what had taken place. The text, however, seems rather to suppose a valley which can be designated as that “of the passers-through,” and, because it can be a valley for the passers-through, is fitted to be a burial-place for Gog and his followers; moreover, βֵּ ?ι, “low ground,” may remind us of ιַ ?ςֲ ?μεּ, etc. in Ezekiel 38:10, ΰֶ ?ςֱ ?μֶ ?δ in Ezekiel 39:11, etc., as a contrast thereto. Gog and his bands can be beheld in their Scythian prototypes (as described by Herodotus), as well as with reference to “passing through” (passing by), because their whole appearance was to be merely that of a passing thunder-cloud (Ezekiel 38:9; Ezekiel 38:16); nothing was abiding except their grave. That which Jehovah will give to Gog as ξְ ?χεֹ ?νΞωָׁ ?νχֶ ?αֶ ?ψ, is more exactly described by βֶּ ?ιδָ ?ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν; and “the valley of the passers-through,” again, is the one fitted to be “the valley of the tumult of Gog.” The situation of this is more exactly fixed, and consequently conceived of as an actual locality, by χִ ?γְ ?ξַ ?ϊδַ ?ιָּ ?ν, which (χִ ?γְ ?ξַ ?ϊ, stat. constr. prefixed as a preposition) can yield no other meaning than: east of the sea. But the context tells nothing about what sea is spoken of, although in other instances it always fixes the particular sea, and indicates when it does not expressly mention the nearest. Hence, and so also with βֵּ ?ιδָ ?ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν, we are referred to the idea which upholds and animates the whole with its symbolic character. αְּ ?ιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ excludes only the Red Sea. Ewald translates thus: “as a place where a grave in Israel is possible (!), the valley of the devourers opposite the sea, and which confines the breath of travellers;” and he understands thereby “the frightful, unhealthy valley opposite the Dead Sea (Ezekiel 47:8), which covers the proud of old, the Sodomites, and still has its name from them, and the smell of which, even far off, stops up the nose of travellers (Revelation 20:10; comp. with Ezekiel 14:10).” There can be no doubt that when expositors understand here the Dead Sea, its designation as δַ ?ιָּ ?νδַ ?χַּ ?γְ ?ξֹ ?πִ ?ι is floating in their mind. Hitzig’s objection, that the valley did not as yet, and never did, generally bear the name, is of no weight, when the only thing that comes into consideration is, whether Jehovah in the prophet can say of it ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν. The introduction of “proud” is far-fetched, unfounded. Keil, who makes the valley to be “without a doubt the valley of the Jordan above the Dead Sea” [so also Schmieder: “the valley of salt, on the extreme border of the land of Israel, near Mount Seir (comp. Ezekiel 35:2), reminds us of a defeat of the Edomites (comp. Psalms 60, David’s psalm of victory), and of Chedorlaomer, Lot, and Abraham (Genesis 14); and the adjacent Dead Sea is the abiding type of all divine judgments”], denies, under appeal to Genesis 2:14, that χִ ?γְ ?ξַ ?ϊδַ ?ιָּ ?ν can (?) mean “east of the sea,” and translates thus: “facing the sea.” But the Mediterranean Sea is by no means excluded by the fact that “the whole land of Israel lay east of the Mediterranean,” for χִ ?γְ ?ξַ ?ϊδַ ?ιָּ ?ν can very well be made parallel with αְּ ?ιִ ?ωׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ, just to qualify the description, especially if we would reflect on the apocalyptic signification of the sea as the fluctuating life of nations! Keil’s exposition of the δָ ?ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν, as referring to the “travellers (?) who pass through the land, or more particularly those who pass over from Perζa to Canaan,” has no significance for the explanation from the type of the Scythians, or from Ezekiel’s description of Gog’s expedition (see above), and also very little significance in itself, as it is supported by no other passage of the Old Testament. What is affirmed by the expression regarding the valley: εְ ?ηֹ ?νֶ ?ξֶ ?ϊ, etc., is made quite clear by the following phrase: εְ ?χָ ?αְ ?ψεּ ωָׁ ?ν, etc., whether we assume a reference to Ezekiel 39:14 sq., or infer from Ezekiel 39:12 sq. who are the buriers as also the callers (εְ ?χָ ?ψְ ?ΰεּ), or simply render it: they bury and they call it. The ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν are of course the same as those alluded to in βֵּ ?ιδָ ?ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν. By the valley in question they (Gog and his bands) are hemmed, shut up, enclosed, bridled in, which is the meaning of δָ ?νַ ?ν (Deuteronomy 25:4); it is, as it were, their muzzle (ξַ ?δְ ?νεֹ ?ν, Psalms 39:2 [1]), after all their “words” which rose up, Ezekiel 38:10. It cannot be a “blocking up of the way” that is spoken of, when it is plainly said: “the passers - through.” Their grave in the valley is the stopping and finishing of them and their going up. A blocking up of the way for travellers can hardly be thought of, since—and perhaps not without significance, as we shall see—the following representation in Ezekiel 39:14 sq. supposes an unhindered passing through in the land. [The Sept. dreamt of a walling round of the unclean place. Hitzig, indeed, does the same.] Hengstenberg, too, removes the valley, on account of its name, to “the great commercial and military road,”—the one, namely, “between Egypt and the Euphrates,”—and seeks to show from Hergt (Pal�stina, p. 77) that it is the valley of Megiddo, famed as a battlefield; the expression: “east of the sea,” implies that “a well-known and celebrated valley pretty near the sea” must be meant, such as Megiddo, a narrow pass or region abounding in ravines, which hinder the passers - through. Such passes, he observes, are found there. In this “dangerous locality the prophet makes Gog be overtaken by the divine judgment.” But where is that said in the text which simply makes Gog be buried there? In all probability, says Hengstenberg, Lejun (Legio), the later name of Megiddo, is derived from our passage, corresponding to the multitude here (tumult); and this is the more probable, as in Ezekiel 39:16 the adjacent city also will receive the name “great multitude.” Since the prophecy regarding Gog (he goes on to say) was during the Roman rule certainly applied pre-eminently to it, men eagerly anticipated the time when the great heathen grave at Megiddo should receive the Roman legions. Hengstenberg further observes: “From βֵּ ?ιΰδֲ ?ξεֹ ?ο (Ezekiel 39:11) is formed the Κυαμων of Jdt 7:3, to which the camp of Holofernes extends; and so also Καμμωνα is, according to the Onom. of Eusebius, six Roman miles from Legio.” Rashi, following the Chaldee paraphrase, places the valley to the east of the Sea of Tiberias (Lake of Gennesaret), and Βαιθσαν (αֵּ ?ιϊωְׁ ?ΰָ ?ο, “house of rest”), as named by the Greeks Σκυθοπολις, has been said to favour this. This latter name is certainly inconceivable from “Succothpolis” (as Grimm on 1Ma 5:52 still maintains), yet it requires no settlement of Scythians in the seventh century b.c.; but from the population, in great part heathen, which settled there during the Babylonian exile, the name may have become current in the post-Maccabζan age, while the exposition or application of our prophecy, particularly Ezekiel 39:16, may also have had some influence in the matter (see Hδv. p. 599 sq.). Comp. besides, Ezekiel 31:18; Ezekiel 32:31; on δֲ ?ξεֹ ?ο, Ezekiel 23:42. A kind of pendant to this, Ezekiel 26:13! Ezekiel 39:12. Since χֶ ?αֶ ?ψαְּ ?ιωׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ (Ezekiel 39:11) is the main element in the description, this χֶ ?αֶ ?ψ is repeated immediately, and again in Ezekiel 39:13. First, the house of Israel is mentioned, and then the whole people of the land; neither of these have needed to fight. Their enemies fell by Jehovah, who has left nothing for them to do but to bury.—According to this parallelism of the two verses, the clause: in order to cleanse the land (the number seven, as in Ezekiel 39:9), will have to be illustrated by the statement: and it is to them for a name; hence, that the cleansing of the land from the dead bodies, and the zeal displayed therein (Ezekiel 39:14 sq.), will cause the people of the land to be named, to wit, a holy people, or will thereby make them a name. [Hδv.: “As the people thoroughly separated from heathenism.” Hengst.: “That the house of Israel should bury the foe, not the reverse, serves them for fame; which, however, has its root not in themselves, but in their God, who can deliver from death, and send destruction on their enemies.”] Comp. moreover, Ezekiel 34:29. As there: blessing instead of reproach, so here: holiness instead of the former uncleannesses of Israel. Those now cleanse the land with all diligence who formerly defiled it with all manner of abominations, etc. Perhaps there is also an allusion to the name Israel (αֵּ ?ιϊιִ ?ωְׂ ?ψָ ?ΰֵ ?μ, Ezekiel 39:12), intimating that this people wrestles with God, and therefore prevails! ιεֹ ?ν, on the day, accusative of the time of Jehovah’s glorification of Himself by the over throw of Gog, and, finally, by his grave in Israel. Ezekiel 39:14. To be understood in the sacred interest of the cleansing of the land.—“Men of constant continuance” (ϊָ ?ξִ ?ιγ) are appointed to the office permanently, or at least for a lengthened period. There are two kinds of them: “the passers-through in the land” (antithetical to Gog’s “passing through”), and those who bury with the “passers-through,” i.e., as Ezekiel 39:15 explains, with their help, and following the marks they set up.—δַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ψִ ?ιν (Niphal particip. from ιָ ?ϊַ ?ψ) are those who, notwithstanding the seven months’ burying, still remain on the face of the land, forgotten, neglected corpses or skeletons. Therefore, after the expiration of the seven months, the appointed men that have been spoken of enter on their office. Ezekiel 39:15. It can hardly be without intention that the ςָ ?αַ ?ψ is thus repeated, and so strongly emphasized: εְ ?ςָ ?αְ ?ψεּ δַ ?ςֹ ?αְ ?ψִ ?ιν. These “passers-through” for the purpose of burying are set in characteristic contrast to the “passers-through” who passed through the land.—εְ ?ψָ ?ΰָ ?δ, etc. explains, by way of example, the task of the “passers-through.” After seven months it must indeed be ςֶ ?φֶ ?ν.—φִ ?ιּ ?εּ ?ο is a guide-post of stone—here as a mark for the buriers proper. But all comes finally into the one great grave of Gog. Ezekiel 39:16. The great burying still perpetuates itself in the name of a city: δֲ ?ξεֹ ?πָ ?δ, an echo of δֲ ?ξεֹ ?ο. Thus what has taken place lives on with posterity. Comp. besides on Ezekiel 39:11. [Schmieder: “There could not be an inhabited city in this valley of the dead; it must be a city which consists not of houses but of graves.”] The cleansing of the land, however, remains the chief thing; hence it is again added by way of conclusion. Ezekiel 39:17, linking on to Ezekiel 39:4, does not bring forward a parallel to the burying of Gog and his bands. We have rather to think of something that came in immediately after Gog’s fall on the mountains of Israel. A further carrying out of the statement: “to birds of prey,” etc. in Ezekiel 39:4. But Gog’s grave in Israel is the divine monument, the actual token, that Jehovah is the Holy One in Israel (Ezekiel 39:7); and this result, this old truth, Israel at the same time proves on his part with all zeal, through the repeated and finally emphasized burying in order to cleanse the land. Now, as the skeletons are buried in that valley, so, on the other hand, the flesh of them is immediately devoured on the mountains of Israel by the birds and beasts of prey. Not only is Israel to prove itself a holy nation, a nation of priests, but Jehovah will forthwith, on the fall of Gog, make known His holiness in the land, in the midst of Israel (Ezekiel 37:26 sq.); and ζִ ?αְ ?ηִ ?ι, etc., the likewise repeatedly-mentioned “sacrifice,” will have to be taken in connection with this. It has been commonly observed that Ezekiel had in view only Jeremiah 46:10; Isaiah 34:6; but comp. also Zephaniah 1:7. Jehovah as Sacrificer. That “the Lord takes for Himself the sacrifice refused to Him,” whereby the idea of the cherem, the contrast of the sacrifice, is introduced, has been dragged into the text by Hengstenberg. The sacrifice (ζֶ ?αַ ?η) is, however, expressly declared to be the “sacrifice which I have killed for you” (Ezekiel 39:19). In this way the idea of sacrifice is essentially resolved into that of the sacrificial feast connected with the ζֶ ?αַ ?η (Ezekiel 29:5; Ezekiel 31:13; Ezekiel 32:4 sq.; Revelation 19:17). Jehovah as Host, who sends forth the invitation by the prophets. There is no want of food or of drink. Ezekiel 39:18 makes prominent, in this respect, βִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ψִ ?ιν (Ezekiel 32:12; Ezekiel 32:27), captains, and πְ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰֵ ?ιδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ (princes of the earth); comp. Revelation 19:18; and also in the following figurative expression: τָּ ?ψֵ ?ιν (bullocks), strengthened by ξְ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?ιαָ ?ωָׁ ?ολֻּ ?μָּ ?ν, fatlings of Bashan all of them (since Bashan, renowned for its fat meadows, is often applied in the prophets to proud, despotic, wanton enemies of God and His people; comp. also Psalms 22:13 [12]), enlarges upon those set forth at the beginning. There is, besides, a comparison with the small cattle fit for sacrifice, on which Schmieder observes: “for food to the beasts, as the flesh of the sacrificial animals for the priests.” Ezekiel 39:19 (Ezekiel 16:28; Ezekiel 23:33) describes a lavish sacrificial banquet. μְ ?ωָׂ ?αְ ?ςָ ?δ, continued still more definitely by εּ ?ωְׂ ?αַ ?ςְ ?ϊֶּ ?ν, etc., in Ezekiel 39:20.—Jehovah’s table is the battlefield.—If ψֶ ?λֶ ?α alongside of νεּ ?ν “chariot,” then, of course, the fighters in chariots are meant. Hitzig will not admit the supposition of chariots of war in respect to the Scythians. Hence others think of “cavalry” (Gesen.) or “cart-horses.”—βִּ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ψ, from Ezekiel 39:18, whoever has proved himself brave, like the captains, as distinguished from whom ΰִ ?ιωׁ ξִ ?μְ ?ηָ ?ξָ ?δִ, the equipped and practised men of war individually. Ezekiel 39:21. On λְּ ?αεֹ ?γִ ?ι (My glory), comp. pp. 40, 52. Even until the final judgment over the world—yea, how significantly here!—does the leading thought of Ezekiel’s prophecy sound forth perceptibly; in respect to the heathen, explained by the clause: and all the heathen see, etc., it lies before their eyes (Ezekiel 38:23); comp. Revelation 16:7. ιָ ?γִ ?ι is inferred from ςָ ?ωִׂ ?ιϊִ ?ι. Ezekiel 39:22. The converse relation, to wit, to Israel. In this relation the text notes the knowledge of Jehovah as Israel’s God, the God of them who belong to Israel (ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν ,εְ ?ιָ ?γְ ?ςεּ), and that by His having manifested Himself as such in the final judgment and thenceforth; hence an abiding relation that can no more be disturbed. The ιָ ?γְ ?ςεּ (Ezekiel 39:22) now leads over in Ezekiel 39:23 to a corresponding knowledge, in addition to the εְ ?ψָ ?ΰεּ, Ezekiel 39:21, on the part of the heathen also. From the end Jehovah directs their regard back to their oppression of Israel, by carrying them away captive. The heathen now know that their power over Israel was Israel’s guilt, defined more particularly as ξָ ?ςֲ ?μεּ, etc. (comp. on Ezekiel 14:13), their unfaithfulness to Jehovah, in consequence of which Jehovah hid His face from them (Deuteronomy 31:17), and abandoned them (comp. Ezekiel 16:27). λֻּ ?μָּ ?ν, in general, exceptis excipiendis. Ezekiel 39:24 (Ezekiel 36:17 sq., Ezekiel 14:11). Comp. Ezekiel 7:27. Hengstenberg sees in Ezekiel 39:25-29 a “close of the whole system of prophecies of a predominantly comforting character, from Ezekiel 33:21 (?) onward, as the prophet had already closed complete sections with a like finale.” After the heathen are pointed back to the past, the application is made with μָ ?λֵ ?ο, therefore (because Jehovah has dealt with them as in Ezekiel 39:24), to the present (ςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ) of Israel.—Comp. on Ezekiel 16:53.—Jacob corresponding as much to “misery” as Israel to “pity;” a significant alternation. Comp. Ezekiel 36:5-6; Ezekiel 36:21 sq.; comp. first on Ezekiel 39:7. Ezekiel 39:26. εְ ?πָ ?ωׂ ?εּ, etc. [Hengst.: “they take upon them, sq.”] is to be read: πָ ?ωְׂ ?ΰεּ. Comp. Ezekiel 16:54. Jehovah’s jealousy for His holy name (Ezekiel 39:25) shows itself among Israel subjectively in, as well as objectively on them. Because their guilt against Jehovah (Ezekiel 39:23 sq.) shall be known, as by the heathen so by themselves, and fully only by themselves, they bear their misery as their reproach (λְּ ?μִ ?ξָּ ?ϊָ ?ν); hence to reproach is added unfaithfulness, etc. (Ezekiel 39:23). Only they appear miserable (Ezekiel 39:21); only Jehovah appears glorious. Where deserved punishment comes over them, righteousness appears before Jehovah: they exhibit themselves as worthy of reproach, obliged to reproach themselves because of their faithlessness; Jehovah manifests Himself as holy, but, at the same time, as their God (Ezekiel 39:22), faithful in pity as in judgment, who will turn aside their misery (Ezekiel 39:25). Their reproach and all their unfaithfulness must burden them so much the more from the very fact that they dwell securely, etc. Comp. on Ezekiel 28:25-26; Ezekiel 34:28. This humbling grace is the objective practical proof of Jehovah’s jealousy over them, which Ezekiel 39:27, stretching back beyond Ezekiel 39:26 b, and casting a glance at their desire during the present state of exile, follows out farther. [Hitzig, who reads εּ ?πָ ?ωׁ ?εּ, translates: “and they shall forget their reproach,” which they have hitherto borne. It has also been proposed to translate: they shall “take away,” i.e. expiate, etc. Ewald would admit the rendering: “they bear,” if we were to read ξִ ?λֹּ ?μ for εְ ?ΰֶ ?ϊλָּ ?μ; and so he too translates: “that they may forget their shame,” etc., and assumes a play of words, because “in fact the whole is a play of words upon the Chaldeans.”—αְּ ?ωִׁ ?αְ ?ϊָּ ?ν has been understood by others, e.g. Grotius: “when they dwelt.”] For the rest, comp. as to Ezekiel 39:27, Ezekiel 38:8; Ezekiel 37:21; Ezekiel 36:23 sq., Ezekiel 20:41. Ezekiel 39:28 (Ezekiel 39:22).—Ewald wrests αְּ ?δַ ?βְ ?μεֹ ?ϊִ ?ι, etc. into its direct opposite, for, reading ξִ ?ο instead of ξֶ ?μ, he now finds the sense to be: “in that I caused them to return from among the heathen.” The context certainly does not compel him to this. On the contrary, it suggests the significant parallel: ΰֶ ?μ ,ΰֶ ?μ.—Ezekiel 22:21.—ΰεֹ ?ϊִ ?ιψ, comp. Ezekiel 6:8; Ezekiel 12:16. Hengstenberg observes on this: “after the fall of the Chaldean monarchy, access to their native land was free to all Israel, and those who voluntarily remained yet had in Canaan their home, and in the temple at Jerusalem their spiritual dwelling-place.” Ezekiel 39:29. Comp. Ezekiel 39:23-24. A promise of never-failing grace on account of (ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, “because”) God’s having poured out His Spirit, where formerly His “fury,” e.g. Ezekiel 14:19; Ezekiel 22:22; comp. on Ezekiel 36:27; but here more significant, as perhaps ωָׁ ?τַ ?κְ indicates. Ewald remarks on the “ebullient language,” although he expounds the outpouring of the Spirit to this effect: that Israel, “just because including in it from of old the Divine Spirit, is the indefeasible foundation of the true Church.” Comp. Isaiah 32:15-16; Isaiah 44:3; Joe 2:28 (Ezekiel 3:1 sq.). Schmieder: “Spoken in anticipation of the time which the Lord promises. And the Lord, through Jesus after His glorification, actually poured out the Spirit in Jerusalem, according to His promise. But the house of Israel would not; and is the spiritual Israel of Christendom more thankful to God?” Additional Note on Ezekiel 38, 39 [Ezekiel’s object in the chapters before us was, “through the Spirit, to present a picture of what might be expected in the last scenes of the world’s history; and according to the native bent and constitution of his mind, the picture must be lifelike. Not only must it be formed of the materials of existing relations, but it must be formed into a perspective with manifold and intricate details; yet so constructed and arranged, that while nothing but the most superficial eye could look for a literal realization, the great truths and prospects embodied in it should be patent to the view of all. What, then, are these? Let it be remembered at what point it is in Ezekiel’s prospective exhibitions that this prophecy is brought in. He has already represented the covenant-people as recovered from all their existing troubles, and made victorious over all their surrounding enemies. The best in the past has again revived in their experience, freed even from its former imperfections, and secured against its ever-recurring evils. For the new David, the all-perfect and continually-abiding Shepherd, presides over them, and at once prevents the out-breaking of internal disorders, and shields them from the attacks of hostile neighbours. All around, therefore, is peace and quietness; the old enemies vanish from the field; Israel dwells securely in his habitation. But let it not be supposed that the conflict is over, and that the victory is finally won. It is a world-wide dominion which this David is destined to wield, and the kingdom of righteousness and peace established at the centre must expand and grow till it embrace the entire circumference of the globe. But will Satan yield his empire without a struggle? Will he not rather, when he sees the kingdom of God taking firmer root and rising to a higher elevation, seek to effect its dismemberment or its downfall, by stirring up in hostile array against it the multitudinous and gigantic forces that lie scattered in the extremities of the earth? Assuredly he will do so; and God also will direct events into this channel, in order to break effectually the power of the adversary, and secure the diffusion of Jehovah’s truth and the glory of His name to the remotest regions. A conflict, therefore, must ensue between the embattled forces of heathenism, gathered out of their far-distant territories, and the nation that holds the truth of God. But the issue is certain. For God’s people being now holiness to Him, He cannot but fight with them and give success to their endeavours. So that the arm of heathenism shall be completely broken. Its mightiest efforts only end in the more signal display of its own weakness, as compared with the truth and cause of God; and the name of God as the Holy One of Israel is magnified and feared to the utmost bounds of the earth. “Such is the general course and issue of things as marked out in this prophecy, under the form and aspect of what belonged to the Old Covenant, and its relation to the world as then existing. But stripping the vision of this merely temporary and imperfect exterior, since now the higher objects and relations of the New Covenant have come, we find in the prophecy the following series of important and salutary truths. 1. In the first place, while the appearance of the new David to take the rule and presidency over God’s heritage would have the effect of setting His people free from the old troubles and dangers which had hitherto assailed them, and laying sure and broad the foundations of their peace, it should be very far from securing them against all future conflicts with evil. It would rather tend to call up other adversaries, and enlarge the field of conflict, so as to make it embrace the most distant and barbarous regions of the earth. For the whole earth is Christ’s heritage, and sooner or later it must come to an issue between the adherents of His cause and the children of error and corruption. Though the latter might have no thought of interfering with the affairs of Christ’s kingdom, and would rather wish to pursue their own courses undisturbed (see on Ezekiel 38:4), yet the Lord will not permit them to do so. He must bring the light of heaven into contact with their darkness; so as to necessitate a trial of strength between the powers of evil working in them, and the truth and grace of God as displayed in the kingdom of Christ. 2. From the very nature of the case, this trial would fall to be made on a very large scale, and with most gigantic resources; for the battlefield now is the world to its farthest extremities, and the question to be practically determined is, whether God’s truth or man’s sin is to have possession of the field. So that all preceding contests should appear small, and vanish out of sight, in comparison of this last great struggle, in which the world’s destiny was to be decided for good or evil. Hence it seemed, in the distance, as if not thousands, as formerly, but myriads upon myriads, numbers without number, were to stand here in battle array. 3. Though the odds in this conflict could not but appear beforehand very great against the people and cause of Christ, yet the result should be entirely on their side; and simply because with them is the truth and the might of Jehovah. Had it been only carnal resources that were to be brought into play on either side, victory must inevitably have been with those whose numbers were so overwhelmingly great. But these being only flesh, and not spirit; they must fall before the omnipotent energy of the living God, who can make His people more than conquerors over all that is against them. And so in this mighty conflict, in which all that the powers of darkness could muster from the world was to stand, as it were, front to front with the people of God, there were to be found remaining only, on the part of the adversaries, the signs of defeat and ruin. 4. Lastly, as all originated in the claim of Messiah and His truth to the entire possession of the world, so the whole is represented as ending in the complete establishment of the claim. The kingdom through every region of the earth becomes the Lord’s. He is now universally known and sanctified as the God of truth and holiness. It is understood at last, that it was His zeal for the interests of righteousness which led Him to chastise in former times His own professing people; and that the same now has induced Him to render them triumphant over every form and agency of evil. And now, all counter rule and authority being put down, all disturbing elements finally hushed to rest, the prospect stretches out before the Church of eternal peace and blessedness, in what have at length become the new heavens and the new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. “It may still, perhaps, seem strange to some, if this be the real meaning and import of the vision, that the prophet should have presented it under the aspect of a single individual gathering immense forces from particular regions, and at the head of these fighting in single conflict, and falling on the land of Israel. They may feel it difficult to believe that a form so concrete and fully developed should have been adopted, if nothing more local and specific had been intended. But let such persons look back to other portions of this book, especially to what is written of the king of Tyre in Ezekiel 28. (which in form, perhaps, most nearly resembles the prophecy before us), and judge from the shape and aspect there given to the past, whether it is not in perfect accordance with the ascertained characteristics of Ezekiel’s style to find him giving here such a detailed and fleshly appearance to the future. There Tyre is not only viewed as personified in her political head, but that head is represented as passing through all the experiences of the best and highest of humanity. It is, as we showed, a historical parable, in which every feature is admirably chosen, and pregnant with meaning, but all of an ideal and not a literal or prosaic kind. And what is the present vision, as now explained, but a prophetical parable, in which, again, every trait in the delineation is full of important meaning, only couched in the language of a symbolical representation? Surely we must concede to the prophet, what we would never think of withholding from a mere literary author, that he has a right to employ his own method; and that the surest way of ascertaining this is to compare one part of his writings with another, so as to make the better known reflect light upon the less known—the delineations of the past upon the visions of the future. “At the same time, let us not be understood as declaring for certain that the delineation in this prophecy must have nothing to do with any particular crisis or decisive moment in the Church’s history. It is perfectly possible that in this case, as in most others, there may be a culminating point, at which the spiritual controversy is to rise to a gigantic magnitude, and virtually range on either side all that is good and all that is evil in the world. It may be so; I see nothing against such a supposition in the nature of the prophecy; but I must add, I see nothing conclusively for it. For when we look back to the other prophecy just referred to, we find the work of judgment represented as taking effect upon Tyre, precisely as if it were one individual that was concerned, and one brief period of his history; while still we know blow after blow was required, and even age after age, to carry forward and consummate the process. Perfectly similar, too, was the case of Babylon, as described in the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Isaiah; it seems as if almost one act were to do the whole, yet how many instruments had a hand in it, and over how many centuries was the work of destruction spread! We see no necessity in the form of the representation, or in the nature of things, why it should be otherwise here; none, at least, why a different mode of reaching the result should be expected as certain. We believe that as the judgment of Tyre began when the first breach was made in the walls by Nebuchadnezzar, and as the judgment of Babylon began when the Medes and Persians entered her two-leaved gates, so the controversy with Gog and his heathenish forces has been proceeding since Christ, the new David, came to lay the everlasting foundations of His kingdom, and asserted His claim to the dominion of the earth as His purchased possession. Every stroke that has been dealt since against the idolatry and corruption of the world is a part of that great conflict which the prophet in vision saw collected as into a single locality, and accomplished in a moment of time. He would thus more clearly assure us of the certainty of the result. And though, from the vast extent of the field, and the many imperfections that still cleave to the Church, there may be much delay and many partial reverses experienced in the process; though there may, too, at particular times, be more desperate struggles than usual between the powers of evil in the world and the confessors of the truth, when the controversy assumes a gigantic aspect, yet the prophecy is at all times proceeding onwards in its accomplishment. Let the Church therefore do her part, and be faithful to her calling. Let her grasp with a firm hand the banner of truth, and in all lands display it in the name of her risen Lord. And whichever way He may choose to finish and consummate the process,—whether by giving fresh impulses to the hearts of His people, and more signally blessing the work of their hands, or by shining forth in visible manifestations of His power and glory, such as may at once and for ever shame into confusion the adversaries of His cause and kingdom,—leaving this to Himself, to whom it properly belongs, let the blessed hope of a triumphant issue animate every Christian bosom, and nerve every Christian arm to maintain the conflict, and do all that zeal and love can accomplish to hasten forward the final result.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 425–430.—W. F.] 1. With our two chapters the prophecy of Ezekiel passes over to the apocalyptic (comp. Introd. pp. 19, 20. Comp. in general what is said by Lange in the introduction to the Revelation of St. John, p. 2 sq.). Characteristic apocalyptic features as to form and contents are perceptible, just as the very circumstance that the New Testament Apocalypse begins with the transition of Ezekiel 37 to Ezekiel 38, to borrow important (eschatological) elements for its closing visions, must suggest something apocalyptic. The prophetic element, the element of doctrine and of application, still pervades Ezekiel 38, 39, but this element will subside, Ezekiel 40 sq.; and our chapters, too, present to us and delineate a tableau of unity,—the impressive picture of a national expedition, a migration of nations, a battle of nations, and still more of God. Although contained in the word of prophecy (“Thus saith the Lord”), yet the description of the march of the army (Ezekiel 38.), and of its fearful over-throw in Israel (Ezekiel 39), assumes, as elsewhere, the appearance of a vision. Scene succeeds scene. The style is typical to such a degree, that what of historical from the past or present may here form the basis, assumes at once the form of pure symbols, whose idea stretches far beyond the Old Testament theocracy, and on to the end of time. The consummation of Israel shows itself as the consummation of the world. The contrast of the world to Israel is in our chapters not so much the traditional one of the heathen as opposed to the people of God, as coarse callousness, resembling insensibility, in relation to the peace in which the royal priesthood, the people of the possession of an eternal covenant of Jehovah (Ezekiel 37:26), delight themselves. Compare the impressions and utterances of Balaam in Numbers 23:9-10, so very different from Ezekiel 38:11 sq.! On the other hand, the impelling force to the savage irruption into the quietness of such a people in the land is appropriately conceived, viz. on the one part, as divine compulsion of the Judge overruling to the end in view, it is high as heaven (but comp. Ezekiel 38:4 with Ezekiel 38:10 sq.); on the other part, as demoniac selfishness and worldly-mindedness, it is deep as hell. Considering the apocalyptic character of our two chapters, with which the remainder of the book of Ezekiel announces itself, the suddenness of Gog’s appearance on the scene and also of his overthrow is worthy of observation, reminding us of the ἐνταχει (Luke 18:8), and of the oft-repeated ταχυ of the Revelation of St. John, and also of the final completeness of the judgment and its execution. 2. Hengstenberg has very justly observed: “We have here a good preparation for the exposition of the vision of the new temple.” But what he pronounces a specialty of Ezekiel,—how “wide a space” is given by him to “painting,” how “attentive” he is “to fill the imagination with holy figures,”—depends rather on the apocalyptic character of the prophecy regarding Gog. Moreover, to confront the imagination of timidity with the imagination of faith, to pour forth light and comfort in opposition to thoughts despairing of the future, is precisely a mark of all apocalypse proper. Lange says beautifully and strikingly of apocalypses in this respect: “As they have proceeded from the divine quieting and comforting of a longing of the hearts of elect prophets, which flamed aloft in times of great oppression of the kingdom of God, so they are also designed to direct and guide, to comfort and calm, in the first place, the servants of God, and through them the Church, in times of similar and fresh oppression in the future—nay, even to change for them all tokens of terror into tokens of hope and promise.” 3. In Hengstenberg’s interpretation, at all events, not only does the “so-called biblical realism” entirely disappear, to which, as he says, it so often happens to take the garb for the man, but, as the exposition has already incidentally indicated, the nations named in Ezekiel 38 although in themselves historical, appear in the connection here as elements of an idea which is summed up in the symbolic Gog of the land of Magog, namely, as the last outbreak of enmity against the kingdom of God. This symbolized idea is at all events also historical—nay, even world-historical in the highest sense, or pertaining to the universal judgment. The world’s history is theocratically determined by it, determined by the kingdom of God finally developing itself into the consummation of humanity and the world. But Magog, Gomer, Meshech, Tubal, Sheba, Dedan, and Phut are as such no longer historically to be found. Of Cush Hengstenberg asserts: that it is “a Christian people, and such a one as, according to recent experience, will scarcely again attain to world-wide influence.” 4. As Grotius and others, e.g. Jahn (Introd. 2), interpret of the days of the Maccabees and Antiochus Epiphanes, so Luther found in our chapters the Turk, who, even in the hymns and prayers of the Church, was for a long time firmly held to be, together with the Pope, the chief enemy of German Christianity. While individual Jewish expositors apply what is said sometimes to Rome, and sometimes interpret it of the Crusades, yet we find also in Shabb. 118:1; Berach. Ezekiel 7:2; the Jerusalem Targum on Numbers 11:25; Deuteronomy 34:2, Gog shifted into the times previous to the Messiah, and the battle, in which the Messiah annihilates Gog, discoursed of. Likewise, in reference to the Messianic kingdom, the Sibylline books speak of Gog and Magog, placing him in the farthest south of Egypt (see Hδvernick, p. 602). In the notices which the Koran makes of Dzu-Ikarnayn, i.e. Alexander the Great and his adventurous warlike expeditions (Sur. 18 and 21), Yagug and Magug are designated as mischief-makers on earth, and enclosed by an iron wall; which, however, will be at last turned to dust, whereupon Gog and Magog break forth, and the universal judgment ensues. (Sprenger: Das Leben und die Lehre des Mohammad, ii. p. 474 sq.) “The fear of these northern nations,” says W. Menzel, “is very ancient, and has been justified by the Scythian, and afterwards by the Hunnish-Mongolian warlike expeditions, which have already often overrun both Europe and Asia; and this Oriental popular tradition coincides (?) with the widespread German tradition of the armies of Charlemagne or Barbarossa sleeping in the mountain, which will burst forth at the end of the world, and conquer a new golden age.” 5. Hδvernick adduces the following reasons for the interpretation of the time as the time of the completion of the kingdom of God. (1) The names, which do not so much indicate single nations then existing, as that we have to do with a “view of future new relations only starting from the present.” “Whatever far remote, more or less known, national names can be named, the prophet collects here; and specially important is the free formation of the name Gog.” (2) The connection with Ezekiel 36, 37 represents the way prepared for the glorification and completion of the theocracy; the judgment over Edom (Ezekiel 35) is regarded as having taken place, in which old hereditary enemy, the enemies hitherto of the covenant-people appear judged in their immediate neighbourhood. It still remains, however, “to marshal the entire (?) world-power in its sinful insurrection against God (?), and thus to perfect the salvation,” just as this idea lies at the foundation of the fourth, the Roman empire, prophesied by Daniel, the contemporary of Ezekiel (Euseb. Demonstr. Ev. Ezekiel 9:3). (3) The prophetic denunciation of heathen nations always regards them as representatives and supporters of definite ideas,—in Edom the hitherto antitheocratic tendency, in our prophecy the idea of future enmity as experienced by Israel in the completion of its salvation. (4) The fulfilment is, in Ezekiel 38:8; Ezekiel 38:16, expressly placed in the latter days. (5) The announcements of former prophets, referred to in Ezekiel 38:17, point to the judgment of the last day, just as also the prophet’s picture is made to conform with those models. (6) Lastly, the resumption of the subject in Revelation 20.—It tells particularly for the apocalyptic character of the representation given by Gog, that it is pervaded not only by reminiscences of Assyrians and Chaldeans—of Edom only locally, indeed (“on the mountains of Israel,” comp. on this point Ezekiel 35. with Ezekiel 36.)—but also by presentiments of much later heathen powers. For it is quite in the apocalyptic way and manner always to present to us types stamped anew from history as it gravitates towards the end of the world. 6. In the Introduction, p. 19, the importance of Ezekiel’s position in the midst of the Babylonian world, and with that his acquaintance with foreign nations and their relations, have been adverted to. In Babylon, if anywhere, there was a standing-place for surveying the rolling waves of the sea of nations. The prediction regarding Gog, peculiar to our prophet, will have to be conceived of as to its human side from his peculiar abode on such a watch-tower in the midst of the heathen-. Philippson justly observes: “We must remember that Ezekiel was placed in the midst of the inner-Asiatic world, and hence had opportunity of observing the great movements therein. Here, in the bosom of the national movements of Asia, it must have been clear to the prophet that these movements were far from having reached their end, that the dynasties would still change often, and that these concussions could not fail to affect also the countries on the Mediterranean.” At all events, although our prophecy is not the result of the incidental observations, the far-sighted political reflections, etc., of a gifted man, yet, as the magnificent architecture of Nebuchadnezzar might furnish Ezekiel with views for Ezekiel 40. sq., so the fluctuating sea of nations, which he saw and heard of in Babylonia, may perhaps have furnished him with the colours in which he paints the figure of Gog and his bands. 7. Our prophecy has been explained from the very natural question after Ezekiel 37.—will this peace of Israel continue always undisturbed? will the relations of the rest of the world take such a shape that Israel can remain in peace? So Philippson. “The dogmatic idea of the prophecy,” says Hengstenberg, “is very simple: the community of God, renewed by His grace, will victoriously resist all the assaults of the world. This idea the prophet has here clothed with flesh and blood,” etc. The prophecy, then, is more or less a parable. We come back to this. “The starting-point,” continues Hengstenberg, “is the fear which penetrates the sick heart. What avails it, is the question that met the prophet, even if we recover, according to thy announcement, from the present catastrophe? The predominance of the heathen still remains. Soon shall we sink under another attack into permanent ruin. Against such desponding thoughts the prophet here offers comfort. He unites all the battles which the restored community has in future still to endure into one great battle, and makes this be decided by one glorious victory of the Lord and His people.” The latter is as arbitrary as what has been said regarding the idea of the prophecy is general and superficial. Hδvernick, connecting with Ezekiel 37, says: “How powerful that protection is which the Lord accords to the new glorified theocracy, is shown by its new relation to the heathen world and its power. The holy people are truly an unassailable, inviolable possession of their God. As such, Israel in its glory is the grandest, the most thorough victory over the heathen world. Hence the future of Israel stands in the most striking contrast to its present. While heathendom is now an instrument in the hand of Jehovah for the chastisement and purification of Israel, then comes the time when Israel’s destiny is fulfilled, namely, to execute the final judgment on heathendom. In it is then revealed the completion of the victory of the kingdom of God over the heathen world-power.” However much of what has been said is right and proper, yet the reason assigned by Hδvernick for “this fundamental idea” is not quite satisfactory as he puts it, namely, that “God Himself occasions the battle (the last rallying of the power of heathendom to annihilate the king of God), that His judgment may in it be revealed.” God, however, will judge only that which, whether in self-righteousness (Pharisaism), or in worldliness (Sadducism), has, by the rejection of His counsel of salvation in Christ, shown itself ripe for judgment. In. connection with this subjective ripeness for judgment, we are reminded of the deceiving by Satan, Revelation 20. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ 5. The Closing Vision: of the Glory of Jehovah’s Kingdom (Ch. 40–48) (1) The Temple and its Service (Ch. 40–46) Ezekiel 40:1. In the five and twentieth year of our captivity, in the beginning of the year, on the tenth of the month, in the fourteenth year after the city was smitten, in the selfsame day, the hand of Jehovah was upon me [came over me], 2and He brought me thither: In visions of God brought He me to the land of Israel, and made me rest [set me down] beside [on] a very high mountain, and on [over] it [was, rose up] a city-like building to the south. 3And He brought me thither, and, behold, a man whose appearance was as the appearance of brass, and a line of flax in his hand, and a measuring rod; and he stood in the gate. 4And the man said to me, Son of man, behold with thine eyes, and hear with thine ears, and apply thine heart to all that I show thee, for in order to let thee see it wert [art] thou brought hither; declare all that thou seest to the house of Israel. 5And behold a wall outside the house round about, and in the man’s hand the measuring rod of six cubits by [measured by] the cubit and an handbreadth; and he measured the breadth of the building one rod, and the 6height one rod. And he came to the gate which looketh towards the east, and went up on its steps, and measured the threshold of the gate—one rod 7broad, even one threshold one rod broad: And the chamber [the guardroom] one rod long and one rod broad; and between the chambers five cubits; and 8the threshold of the gate beside the porch of the gate within, one rod. And 9he measured the porch of the gate within, one rod. And he measured the porch of the gate, eight cubits; and its pillars [literally, its pillar, i.e. one by one], two 10cubits; and the porch of the gate [was, or, thus was the porch of the gate] within. And the chambers of the gate towards the east [literally, the way of the east] were three on this side, and three on that; the three of them of one measure; and the pillars on this side and on that were of one measure. 11And he measured the breadth of the opening of the gate, ten cubits; the length [height] of the gate, 12thirteen cubits. And a barrier was before the chambers [guardrooms], one cubit [on this side], and one cubit the barrier on that side; and the chamber six cubits 13on this side, and six cubits on that. And he measured the gate from the roof of the chamber to its roof, the breadth five and twenty cubits, opening against 14opening [door against door]. And he made the pillars (Ezekiel 40:9) sixty cubits, and at the pillars [literally, at the pillar] was the court round and round the gate. 15And from the front of the entrance-gate to the front of the porch of the inner gate, fifty cubits. And closed windows were in the chambers [guardrooms] and in their pillars within the gate round and round, and likewise in the wall-projections, 16and there were windows round and round inward; and on the pillars [literally, the pillar], 17palms. And he brought me to the outer court, and behold apartments [cells] and a stone pavement [Mosaic], made for the court round about; thirty apartments by the pavement. 18And the pavement was by the side of the gates, 19exactly the length of the gates, [namely] the lower pavement. And he measured the breadth from the front of the gate of the lower [pavement] to the front of the inner court from without, a hundred cubits; the east and the north. 20And the gate which was towards the north on the outer court he measured 21in its length and its breadth. And its chambers [guardrooms], three on this side and three on that, and its pillars and its wall-projections; it was after the measure of the first [former] gate, fifty cubits its length, and the breadth five 22and twenty cubits. And its windows and its wall-projections and its palms were after the measure of the gate that is towards the east, and they shall ascend [one goes up on them] by seven steps, and its wall-projections are before them. 23And [there was] a gate to the inner court opposite that to the north and to the 24east; and he measured from gate to gate a hundred cubits. And he brought me towards the south, and behold a gate towards the south, and he measured its pillars and its wall-projections by those measures. 25And there were windows to it and to its wall-projections round about, like those windows; fifty cubits the length, and the breadth five and twenty cubits. And its ascent had seven steps, and its wall-projections before them; 26and there were palms to it, one on this side and one on that at its pillars. 27And there was a gate to the inner court towards the south, and he measured from that gate to the gate towards the south, a hundred cubits. 28And he brought me to the inner court into the south gate [through the south gate], and he measured the south gate after 29those measures; And its chambers and its pillars and its wall-projections after those measures. And its windows [were] to it and to its wall-projections round about; fifty cubits the length, and the breadth five and twenty cubits. 30And wall-projections round about, the length five and twenty cubits, and the 31breadth five cubits. And its wall-projections were towards the outer court; and palms on its pillars, and eight steps [were] its steps. 32And he brought me to the inner court towards the east, and measured the gate after those measures; 33And its chambers and its pillars and its wall-projections after those measures. And [there were] windows to it and to its wall-projections round 34about; fifty cubits the length, and the breadth five and twenty cubits. And its wall-projections [were] towards the outer court, and palms on its pillars on this side and on that, and its steps eight steps. 35And he brought me to the 36north gate, and measured after those measures; Its chambers, its pillars, and its wall-projections and windows [were] round about, fifty cubits the length, 37and the breadth five and twenty cubits. And its pillars were towards the outer court, and palms on its pillars on this side and on that, and its steps 38eight steps. And a cell and its opening was by the pillars at the gates; there shall they wash the burnt-offering. 39And in the porch of the gate were two tables on this side and two tables on that side, to slay in relation to them [or, on them] the burnt-offering and the sin-offering and the trespass-offering. 40And at the side without for him that goeth up, at the extreme of the gate towards the north, were two tables; and at the other side, which [belongeth] to 41the porch of the gate, two tables. Four tables on this side and four tables on that, by the side of the gate; eight tables, on them will they slaughter. 42And four tables at the ascent [for the burnt-offering] of hewn stone, the length a cubit and a half, and the breadth a cubit and a half, and the height one cubit; on them will they lay the instruments with which they will slay the burnt-offering 43and the slain-offering. And the double staples of a handbreadth were fastened on the house round and round [on the wails around the temple]; and on the 44tables is the flesh of the offering. And outside at the inner gate were cells for the singers in the inner court which was at the side of the north gate, and their front towards the south; a part at the side of the east gate, fronting towards the north. 45And he said to me, This cell, whose front is towards the south, Isaiah 46 for the priests that wait upon the charge [service] of the house; And the cell whose front is towards the north, for the priests that wait upon the charge of the altars; these are the sons of Zadok, who of the sons of Levi draw near to 47Jehovah to minister to Him. And he measured the court; the length a hundred cubits and the breadth a hundred cubits, forming a square; and the altar was before the house. 48And he brought me to the porch of the house, and measured the pillar of the porch, five cubits on this side and five cubits on that; and the breadth of the gate, three cubits on this side and three cubits on that. 49The length of the porch was twenty cubits, and the breadth eleven cubits, and [that] at the steps by which they will go up to it; and there were posts by the pillars, one on this side and one on that. Ezekiel 40:1. Sept.: Κ. ἐγενετο … ἐντ. πρωτωμηνι omittunt ωָׁ ?ξָּ ?δ et Ezekiel 5:2 δֱ ?αִ ?ιΰַ ?πִ ?ι. Ezekiel 40:2. ἐνὁρασειθ. … ἀπεναντι. Ezekiel 40:3. ... χαλκουστιλβοντος … σπαρτιονοἱκοδομωνκ.—Sept., Vulg.: leg. bis ἐντηχειριαὐτου. Ezekiel 40:4. Sept.: interrogativθἑωρακαςσυ; ἰδε ... κ. ταξονεἰςτ. καρδιανσ. παντα … καιδειξειςπαντα— Ezekiel 40:5. ... περιβολος … διεμετρησεντοπροτειχισμα—Vulg.: … sex cubitorum et palmo— Ezekiel 40:6. … εἰσηλθενεἰς … ἐνἑπτκἀναβαθμοις.. διεμετρησενθεεἑξἐνθενκ. τοαἰλαμτ. πυληςἰσοντωκαλαμω. Ezekiel 40:7. … κ. τοαἰλαμἀναμεσοντονθεηλαθκηχωνἑξκ. τοθεετοδευτερονἰσοντ. καλαμωτοπλκτοςκ. ἰσοντ. καλαμωμηκκος; κ. τοαἰλαμπηχεωνπεντεκ. τ. θεετ. τριτονἰσοντ. καλαμωτ. μηκοςκ. ἰσοςτ. καλ. τ. πλατος, κ. τ. αἱλαμτ. συλωνος (8) πλησιοντουαἰλαμτπυληςἐσωθενἰσοντ. καλαμω. Vulg.: … portζ juxta vestibulum. Ezekiel 40:8. Vulg.: portζ intrinsecus calamo uno. (The verse is wanting in the Sept., in the Vulg., in the Syriac version, and in many manuscripts.) Ezekiel 40:9. ... Κ. τοαἰλευ … κ. τ. αἰλαμτ. πυληςἐσωθεν, Vulg.: … et frontem ejus duobus cubitis, vestibulum autem portζ erat intrinsecus. Ezekiel 40:10. ... θεεκατεναντι … κ. μετρονἑνἐντ. αἰλαμἐνθενκ. ἐνθεν. Vulg.: … mensura una frontium ex utra-que parte. Ezekiel 40:12. Κ. πηχυςἐπισυναγομενςκαταπροσωποντ. θεειμπηχεοςἑνοςκ. πηχ. ἑνος, ὁριονἐνθεν,—Vulg.: … et marginem ante … cubiti unius, et cubitus unus finis utrimque— Ezekiel 40:14. κ. τοαἰθριοντουαἰλαμτ. πυληςἐξωθενπηχειςεἰκοσιπεντεκ. τοθεεμτ. πυληςκυκλω. Vulg.: … fecit frontes … et ad frontem atrium portζ undique per circuitum. Ezekiel 40:15. Κ. τοαἰθριοντ. πυληςἐξωθενεἰςτ. αἰθριοντουαἰλαμτ. πυληςἐσωθεν—Vulg.: et ante faciem portζ quζ pertingebat usque ad faciem vestibuli portζ interioris— Ezekiel 40:16. Sept.: Κ. θυριδεςκρυπταιἐπιταθεειμκ. ἐπιτκαἰλαμἐσωθεντηςαὐλης … κ. ὁσαυτωςτοιςαἰλαμθυριδες—fenestras obliquas in thalamus et in frontibus eorum, quζ erant intra portam undique per circuitum … et in vestibulis— Ezekiel 40:17. ... εἰσηγκγεν … εἰς … παστοφοριακ. περιστυλα—Vulg.: … gazophylacia … in circuitu pavimenti. Ezekiel 40:18. Κ. αἱστοαι—in fronte portarum secundum— Ezekiel 40:19. ... ἐσωθενἐπιτ. αἰθριοντ. πυληςβλεπουσηςἐξω, κηχ. ἑκατοντ. βλεπουσηςκατʼ ? ἀνατολας. Κ. εἰσηγαγενμεἐπιβορραν (20) κ. ἰδουπυληβλεπουσαπροςβορραν— Ezekiel 40:22. … κ. τααἰλαμμωνἐσωθεν.— Ezekiel 40:24. … κ. ταθεεκ. τααἰλευκ. τααἰλαμμωθ— Ezekiel 40:25. … καθωςαἱθυιδεςτουαἰλαμ— Ezekiel 40:26. … αἰλαμμωθἐσωθεν— Ezekiel 40:27. … κ. τοεὐροςπροςνοτονπηχειςεἰκοσικεντε. Ezekiel 40:32. … μεεἰςτ. πυλην … αὐτην— Ezekiel 40:33. Vulg.: thalamum ejus et frontem ej. et vestibulum ejus— Ezekiel 40:36. … θυριδεςαὐτωκυκλω, κ. τααἰλαμμωθαὐτηςκυκλω, πηχεις— Ezekiel 40:37. Vulg.: Et vestibulum ejus respiciebat … et cζlatura palmarum in fronte— Ezekiel 40:38. Ταπαστοφοριααὐτηςκ. ταθυρωματααὐτηςκ. τααἰλαμμωθαὐτηςἐπιτ. πυληςτ. δευτεραςἐκρυσις· ἐκειπλυνουσιν—Vulg.: Et per singula gazophylacia ostium in frontibus portarum; ibi— Ezekiel 40:40. Sept.: Κ. κατανωτουτουῥυακοςτ. ὁλοκαυτωματωντ. θυραςβλεπουσηςπρος … προςἀνατολαςκατανωτουτ. δευτεραςκ. τουαἰλαμ … κ. ὀκτωτραπεζαικατʼ ? ἀνατολας. Vulg.: … latus … quod ascendit … portζ, quζ … ante vestibulum portζEzekiel 40:41. … ἐπʼ ? αὐτας … ταθυματα, κατεναντιτωνὀκτωτρακεζωντωνθυματων. Vulg.: … per latera portζ octo mensζ erant— Ezekiel 40:42. … τωνὁλοκαυτωματωνλιθιναι, λελαξευμεναι— Ezekiel 40:43. ... Κ. παλαιστηνἑξουσινγεισοςλελαξευμενονἐσωθενκυκλω, κ. ἐπι … ἐπανωθενστεγαςτουκαλυπτεσθαιἀποτουὑετουκ. ἀποτηςξηρασιας. Vulg.: Et labia earum … reflexa intrinsecus per circuitum— Ezekiel 40:44. Κ. εἰσηγαγενμεεἰςτ. αὐλην· τ. ἐσωτεραν, κ. ἰδουδυοἐξεδραιἐντ. αὐλητ. ἐσωτερα, μιακατανωτουτ. πυληστ. βλεπουσηςπροςβορρανφερουσαπροςνοτον, κ. μιακατανωτουτ. πυληςτηςπροςνοτον, βλεπουσηςδεπροςβορραν. Vulg.: … una ex latere portζ orientalis— Ezekiel 40:48. … πεντετοπλατοςἐνθεκ. … πεντεἐνθεν, κ. τοεὐρος … πηχεωνδεκατεσσαρων, κ. ἐπωμιδεςτ. θυραςτουαἰλαμπηχεωντριωνἐνθεν—Vulg.: … mensus est vestibulum quinque— Ezekiel 40:49. ... τοεὐροςπηχειςδωδεκα, κ. ἐπιδεκαἀναβαθμσιν—Vulg.: … et octo gradibus ascendebatur … erant in frontibus, una hinc— REMARKSLiterature.—In addition to Bφttcher’s treatise, already mentioned in the Introduction, p. 30, we have to mention: Thenius, Proben altt. Schrifterkl, nach wissensch. Sprachforschung, Leipzig 1833; Balmer-Rinck, Des Propheten Ezechiel Ansicht vom Tempel, Ludwigsburg 1858. Of the older authors: Vitringa, Aanleydinge tot het rechte Verstant, etc., and his defence against Cocceius, the son (Naeder Ondersoeck van het rechte Verstant van den Tempel Ezechiels); Sturm, Sciagraphia Templi, etc., Leipzig 1694; and a little earlier: Villalpandus (p. 29); and, in a ponderous monograph, Matth. Hafenreffer, Templ. Ez., Tόbing. 1613.—Great diligence and acute combination distinguish Kliefoth, whose second part treats entirely of the following chapters in 390 pages.—Oeder, in his Freye Untersuch. όber einige BB. des Alten Testaments, Halle 1771, and L. Vogel, the editor of this treatise, and Corrodi also in the anonymous treatise, Beleuchtung d. jόd. und chr. Bibel-kanons, have criticised away the following nine chapters from our prophet, and capriciously attributed them to a Samaritan or a very late returned Jew; for what they have adduced upon “grounds” has been already refuted by J. D. Michaelis, Eichhorn, Bertholdt, and Jahn. Ezekiel 40:1-4. Exordium—IntroductoryAs in Ezekiel 1, with which the divine mission of our prophet opens, so also in Ezekiel 40 here, an exordium, stating the point of time, the condition of Ezekiel, the locality, as well as the first and immediate view which he got, introduces us to what follows. Ezekiel 40:1. By the first date given: in the five and twentieth year of our (Introd. § 3) captivity, the reference back to Ezekiel 1 (comp. Ezekiel 40:2) is still more express. According to Bunsen and Duncker, 573 b.c. According to Schmieder, 574. According to Hitzig, 575. As to sense and meaning, this reference back to Ezekiel 1 implies on the one hand, that the glory of Jehovah solemnizes its consummation in the glory of His kingdom (Introd. § 5), and on the other, that the divine mission of Ezekiel has now come to the close which befits its commencement. Ezekiel’s prophecy, Ezekiel 29:17 sq., is chronologically his last (comp. on it). “The prophet has introduced it as an appendix to an earlier prophecy, in order to conclude with this great vision of restoration, in contrast to the great opening vision of destruction” (Hengst.). According to J. H. Michaelis, we have to remember in regard to the twenty-fifth year in Ezekiel here, that the Babylonish captivity of the Jews began in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, when Daniel and his companions were carried away, so that there were in all thirty-two years of exile to take into account.—Hitzig interprets δַ ?ωָּׁ ?πָ ?δαְּ ?ψֹ ?ΰωׁ in the sense of “new year,” and regards the phrase: on the tenth of the month, as explanatory, since he (as also Jewish tradition) takes it to be a year of jubilee (Leviticus 25:9). The previous year must have been a sabbatic year: such a year ended in the autumn of 575, and may have been a 49th year. The significant element in this coincidence (on a day of atonement commencing a year of jubilee) would, moreover, still continue even if we should not be able, like Kliefoth, to speak of an “absolutely eschatological vision.” Rdak observes: “God let the prophet see the temple and the future freedom of Israel on the day of jubilee, because then servants become free, and on the day of atonement, because then the sins of Israel are forgiven.” If what is intended is the beginning of the civil year and the month Tisri, then, in order to that, this much later alteration of the beginning of the Hebrew year—the old Mosaic reckoning constantly prevails still in the post-exile Old Testament writings—must be proved to have been already in practice in Ezekiel’s time; to say nothing of the fact that such a departure from the law in our prophet, with his specially priestly and other peculiarities of mind and spirit, is scarcely suitable, at least without more definite indication, even to the character of our chapter. For this reason Hδvernick, with the majority of expositors, holds to the commencement of the ecclesiastical year, and thus to the month Nisan, making the phrase: ψֹ ?ΰωׁ δַ ?ωָּׁ ?πָ ?δ, not found elsewhere in the Old Testament, look back to Exodus 12:2 as a brief mode of expression for the full form there, and connecting the mention of the tenth day directly with Exodus 12:3 (on which day the lambs for the passover were set apart, Schmieder). “It is the period when the preparation begins for the solemnization of the feast of the passover. To the prophet, inspired by the Spirit of God, the future shapes itself as the consummated glorification of the past, of the first history of development of the people of God” (Hδv.). “The month did not need to be stated more exactly; from the words: In the beginning of the year, it was self-evident that the first month only could be intended. That the day is significant for the thing is confirmed by the emphatic form: On the selfsame day. On the day when of old the passover was instituted in Egypt, and the people were brought as it were into the sacred precincts of the approaching redemption, the day on which the coming sealing afresh of God’s redeeming grace had thus for centuries been solemnly announced, along with the increased pain just on account of the cessation of these festivals, hope also must have arisen more strongly than at any other time, since God had given in the redemption of the olden time a pledge to His people. The day occurs elsewhere also as significant, e.g. the leading across Jordan, Joshua 4:19, etc. On the same day was the entrance of Christ into Jerusalem, the inauguration of His kingdom. The day was thus as significant here as the day of His resurrection in Revelation 1:10. How even in later times the popular hope of deliverance was connected with the passover appears from the release at the feast of a prisoner, who, in the eyes of the Jews, represented the people enslaved by the Romans” (Hengst.). Next to the captivity, the circumstance that the city was smitten, which points back to Ezekiel 33:21, forms the second element in fixing the date. It is a verbal reference to prepare us for understanding how the renewed divine mission of the prophet, in view of that accomplished act of judgment, would now, for the first time, fully open his mouth for the prophecy of God’s compassions on His people. At all events, the capture of Jerusalem was the consummation of the misery of the Old Testament covenant-people, but with it was presented also the exactly corresponding background for the consummation of Jehovah’s glory in His kingdom in the world. And so, in this respect also, Ezekiel cannot, in conformity with his continuous mission as prophet of Jehovah’s glory in the exile, withdraw more fully from the theatre of his activity. What the prophet had been obliged to announce regarding the wrath and judgment of God on Israel throughout Ezekiel 2-24, has been all fulfilled,—God has made a tabula rasa; but the strictly fulfilled threatening presents itself also as guarantee for the realization of the promise already wrapt up in it, which, in the transition portion of our book (Ezekiel 25-32, see Introd. § 5), prepared for itself a background in the kingdoms of this world, in order with Ezekiel 33 to set forth in prospect with increasing clearness and energy the purification, sanctification, restoration, and final victory of the new Israel, the Israel after the Spirit, over the world. What had been there prophesied in isolated instances of the future salvation becomes now collected into a united whole, so that to all, appearance, as if a separate book by itself began with Ezekiel 40, our opening verses only confirm more expressly that which already results from a reconsideration of the previous chapters. “Even in the first prophecy, in the rainbow which surrounds the appearance of the offended Deity,” says Hengstenberg, “lies the germ of this last prophecy;” and Hitzig says: “Not only Ezekiel 33-39, the previous section” (to which specially our prophecy forms the conclusion), “but Ezekiel’s prophecy in general, advances here also to internal completion.”—In the selfsame day; comp. Ezekiel 24:2.—Comp. Ezekiel 1:3; Ezekiel 33:22; Ezekiel 37:1. “Not merely a divine word, but he shall experience something” (Klief.).—Not directly, but certainly indirectly, there is also a reference to Ezekiel 8. sq.; for although thither is explained from what precedes as the site of the smitten city, yet Jerusalem comes immediately—just as in Ezekiel 8. sq.—into consideration principally as regards the temple. [Hδvernick finds in the thither the direction of the longing expressed.] Ezekiel 40:2. In visions of God; comp. on Ezekiel 1:1. The state of Ezekiel.—Ezekiel 37:1.—Now comes the locality of the vision,—in general: the land of Israel, and then, in what follows, the first and immediate view in particular. Against Kliefoth’s observation, correct in itself, that ΰֶ ?μ and ςַ ?μ stand for each other in Ezekiel, we remark that here, however, occurring as they do close together, they can hardly be otherwise than distinct. Ezekiel is, in the Spirit, set down at all events at the foot or the side of a mountain, which to him, looking up in vision, appears very high. Had Ezekiel been “upon” it, he could have spoken more fitly of its size or breadth than of its height. First of all, the mountain, since it has to be taken in contrast with the smitten city, refers neither to Moriah nor Zion in particular, but symbolizes generally the loftily situated Jerusalem (comp. Ezekiel 17:22-23); but that it appears very high points, above all, to a glorious restoration, and indicates spiritual elevation, for which comp. Isaiah 2:2 (where the exaltation is immediately explained from the consciousness, the religious movement of the nations, and as no merely outward one); Zechariah 14:9-10; Zechariah 14:16; Micah 4:1 (Revelation 21:10). This establishes in the outset the ideality of the further views vouchsafed to Ezekiel. Where the first vision (Ezekiel 1.) “exhibits in prospect anger and judgment,” the last exhibits in prospect “the healing of the wounds.” There the prophet went against the dream of a God gracious to (self-righteous) sinners, and an immediately approaching future of salvation; here at the end, after that announcement has been made, he deals a last powerful blow against the second dangerous enemy of God’s people, that has now come into the foreground,—the despair, which as effectually as the former false security leads away from treading the God ordained path of repentance” (Hengst.). That, however, which is made prominent for Jerusalem in general, and described as a city-like building, is, according to what follows, the temple. [Hδvernick makes the prophet see from the mount of the temple, as the building in the south, the New Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22), situated south of the mountain where the prophet stood, and consequently makes sanctuary and city to be at once announced as the two (?) main parts of the vision. According to Abarbanel, Ezekiel saw even the builders in the south building the city. Hengstenberg finds in ςִ ?ιψ the substitute for the smitten city (Ezekiel 40:1), and the temple here, as also in Hebrews 12, included in the city in the wider sense. The reverse is the correct view, as even Hengstenberg himself goes on to call the temple “the proper essence of the city,” “the spiritual dwelling-place of the whole people.” His reference to Ezekiel 8. concerning the central position of the temple is good.] Apart from the fact, observed also by Keil against Kliefoth, that the city is not thus described in Ezekiel 45:6; Ezekiel 48:15 sq., 30 sq., everything is made clear by the distinction between ΰֶ ?μ and ςַ ?μ; to the prophet set down at the mountain, from Babylon, and hence coming from the north, the building on the mountain appears ξִ ?πֶּ ?βֶ ?α, that is, looking from the south (as in Ezekiel 21:2 sq., Judea in general), which the ἀπεναντι of the Sept. (ξִ ?πֶּ ?βֶ ?γ) renders quite correctly. Ezekiel 40:3. And He brought, etc. Resumption from Ezekiel 40:1, after that the parenthesis Ezekiel 40:2 has treated of the locality in general, and the first immediate view in particular. Now comes the vision proper: And behold. The description: a man, the less excludes the angel of the Lord, the known mediator of divine revelations, whom even Hitzig accepts here, “since He is called ‘Jehovah’ in Ezekiel 44:2; Ezekiel 44:5,” as the comparison of his appearance: as the appearance of brass (see on Ezekiel 1:5), seems to point to Ezekiel 1. (Ezekiel 40:7), and the line of flax to Ezekiel 9:2, Comp. generally what has been said on Ezekiel 9:2; also Zechariah 2:1 sq. (Matthew 16:18; Hebrews 11:16). The brass suggests to Hengstenberg: “solidity, durability, power of resistance,” which is so comforting to the Church of God, because its earthly representatives rather resemble soft wax. Hitzig, like the Sept., makes it denote a “brilliant appearance;” Kliefoth: “an ordinary angelus interpres” (Revelation 21:9). The brass not only removes the appearance from the human sphere, but also gives in the outset an idea of firmness, hence certainty, for everything which it will determine. For that the man has to measure is shown by his equipment, as that in its completeness denotes, according to Hengstenberg: “building activity in general, in contrast to the instruments of destruction (Ezekiel 9:1);” according to Hδvernick (Bφttcher), that it is: “for the greater and the lesser measurements,—the line of flax more for the site; the measuring rod more for the masonry;” according to Klief.: “that he has much to measure of various descriptions.” Hengst., referring to Revelation 21:15, calls attention to the measuring rod as distinguished from a line of flax.—He stood in the (at the) gate. Hitzig, correctly: “waiting for the new-comer.” Which gate, namely, of that which looked as a city-like building (Ezekiel 40:2), therefore which temple-gate it was, is not particularized here. But as Ezekiel comes from the north, the first that met him was probably the north gate, from which the man escorts him to the east gate (Ezekiel 40:6). Ezekiel 40:4. The supposition is (Ezekiel 40:2), that the building is already erected; hence: behold with thine eyes. That he should “hear with his ears” gives promise of oral explanation also, as, for example, Ezekiel 40:45 sq. But because the expression of the building as to its proportions will be made known to the prophet specially by measuring, Ezekiel has “to apply his heart to all” that he will in this way obtain a sight of (all that I show thee), for through him Israel is to obtain knowledge of it (comp. Exodus 25:9). Ezekiel 40:5. The Enclosing Wall. As ηεֹ ?ξָ ?δ (“checking,” “keeping off”), the wall is a barrier against what might come from without (ξִ ?ηεּ ?υ). It runs right round the house, and will thus in relation to it, that is, to the temple generally, symbolize the warding off of the profane, the unclean, the false; and not so much protection. Comp. Ezekiel 42:20, and Psalms 15. The height, at least, to be mentioned immediately, is nothing particular in the way of protection. [Hδv.: “In the former sanctuary such an enclosing wall appeared more arbitrary, a construction called forth by external circumstances. Here the wall is an essential constituent part. The Babylonian temples, too, had their surrounding walls, but here is certainly a contrast to the colossal structures of the Babylonians. The wall on the east side in the later temple, begun by Solomon, was 300 cubits high at the lowest parts.”] [The wall “bears the square form, as broad as it is high; but this being only twelve feet at the utmost, it was manifestly not designed to present, by its altitude, an imposing aspect, or by its strength to constitute a bulwark of safety. In these respects it could not for a moment be compared with many of the moral erections which existed in antiquity. But as the boundary-line between the sacred and the profane, which, being drawn by the hand of God, must therefore remain free from all interference on the part of man, it is precisely such as might have been expected.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel.—W. F.] But the measuring begins with it, and so the measuring rod is here fixed at 6 cubits—the cubit, however, with the addition of a handbreadth (Ezekiel 43:13), hence 6 cubits and 6 handbreadths = 1 rod. The measure is accordingly greater than that of the usual rod of 6 cubits. Comp. 2 Chronicles 3:3, and Deuteronomy 3:11. A cubit measure found in the ruins of Memphis shows both measures, one of 6 and one of 7 handbreadths. See a lengthened disquisition on Jewish measurement by J. D. Michaelis on our passage, p. 112 sq. [Hengst.: In the case of Solomon’s temple the former cubit, because then current, was the measure, hence it was the more needful to give the relation of the one to the other here. The greater cubit, which meets us first in Ezekiel, was probably borrowed in the exile from the Chaldeans. Keil assumes a shortening of the common cubit from the old Mosaic sacred cubit, which, he says, still formed the measure for Solomon’s temple, and will do so for the new temple likewise.] From this statement of a greater measure, we may presume that what is to be measured is uncommon, magnificent, surpassing that which actually exists.—Inasmuch as by measuring the dimension is made known as distinguished from the mere mass, we may say with Bδhr that law and proportion, hence order, consequently the spiritual, the divine ideality, are displayed. This is what is expressed generally in the numbers occurring here. But the very preponderance of the number six, in itself non-significant, forbids us to attach to them special significance. In this respect, also, Hengstenberg’s observation, that in order to get the significant number seven, it is necessary to revert to the cubit, which after the prophet’s explanation no longer comes into consideration, tells against Kliefoth. Moreover, ξָ ?γַ ?γ comes from “extending,” and serves here rather to elucidate in detail to the prophet that which he beholds as already completed work.—δַ ?αִּ ?πְ ?ιָ ?ο is the mason-work of the wall, the equality of which in breadth and height corresponds strikingly to the purpose assigned to it—to separate. Ezekiel 40:6-16. The East GateAfter the wall now follows in Ezekiel 40:6 the most noteworthy part of it, the gates, of which, as being “the chief,” as Hengstenberg supposes (“because of the rising sun”), the east gate is described. It lay opposite the entrance into the sanctuary, and hence was the one among the gates which could first come into consideration with reference to the house in the narrower sense, in respect to which it is also several times expressly defined in what follows. On the significance of the gates of Ezekiel’s temple, comp. the Doctrinal Reflections on Ezekiel 40-46. The steps, seven in number, according to Ezekiel 40:22; Ezekiel 40:26 (Sept.), are the first thing observed about the gate. Since the man arrives at it by them, they can hardly be conceived of otherwise than as before, and not running into the gate; they show, moreover, that the court to which the east gate leads lies higher by these seven steps. Thus the ascent, an exaltation (Colossians 3.), is conjoined with the separating character of the wall.—νַ ?σ is a border or panel on the ground at the entrance, thus threshold; nothing can be made of “projecting lower cornice” (Hitzig). As the threshold enters into the gate a rod-breadth, which is the breadth of the wall, it fills up exactly the opening made by the gate in the wall.—εְ ?ΰֵ ?ϊνσΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ explains the threshold measured as “one” (Hδv.: only one, because so broad), that is, for the present, for a second follows in addition, Ezekiel 40:7; hence ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ, in the sense of “first.” Ezekiel 40:7. εְ ?δַ ?ϊָּ ?ΰ placed here, at the entrance into the gate, so simply as to explain itself, is the chamber which is wont to be in this place, the guardroom for the gate-watch (Ezekiel 44:11). “An arrangement dating from David and Solomon; a sacred temple-guard was appointed to surround it” (Hδv.). [Fairbairn: “Furnished, as the gates were, so amply with guard-chambers for those who should be charged with maintaining the sanctity of the house (Ezekiel 44:11; Ezekiel 44:14), they were formed more especially with a view to the holiness, which must be the all-pervading characteristic of the place. It was imprinting on the architecture of this portion of the buildings the solemn truth, ‘that there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth, neither worketh abomination, or maketh a lie’ (Revelation 21:27),—a truth which, in past times, partly from defective arrangements, partly from the wilful disregard of such as existed, had been most grievously suffered to fall into abeyance. But henceforth it must be made known to all that holiness becometh God’s house, and that they only who possess this shall be allowed to come and minister before Him.”—W. F.] Since the gate extends from the wall into the court, and Ezekiel has first to pass through to the end, the first thing determined is as to the guardroom, of which, moreover, there were several (δַ ?ϊָּ ?ΰִ ?ιν),—the “length” (from east to west), and with that also the breadth, and in this way the form, that of a square.—It is to be understood that the intervening spaces also (the distances from chamber to chamber) were measured as they went onward, and thus made clear to the prophet.—The conclusion is formed by the threshold of the gate, which, in distinction from the entrance one (Ezekiel 40:6) of the same dimension, is named from the porch (ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν or ΰֻ ?μָ ?ν is vestibule or portico, often with pillars), into which the whole gate-building runs out, as the porch and thereby this threshold is fixed with respect to the temple, that is, westward. ΰֵ ?φֶ ?μ indicates that this threshold lay close to the porch, adjoined it. Ezekiel 40:8. The porch, because it opens the way to the court, is a principal part of the gate, hence its lengthened description. The Sept. and Hitzig erase this verse on account of the dimension being different from that given in Ezekiel 40:9. Kliefoth finds given in Ezekiel 40:8 the size of the porch in the light, the width of its inner space from east to west, namely, 6 cubits of Ezekiel’s measure (Ezekiel 40:5). The width was naturally the same as that of the gate. Consequently the measurement given in Ezekiel 40:9 would be that of the porch in the wider sense, including the projecting side-walls upon it (2 cubits) and the ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν fronting each other (Ezekiel 40:10), and each 2 cubits thick. ΰַ ?ιִ ?μ, mostly plural, signifies that which is “firm,” “strong,” which can be a prop, can afford support. The signification of the verb ΰεּ ?μ, “to be in front,” accepted by Kliefoth, is the derived one. The “Elim” (ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν) undoubtedly project, as observed, but in reality they are pillar-like props attached to the walls, to form sides and supports for doors and windows. And the porch, etc., forming a conclusion; in connection with which Kliefoth directs attention to the ξֵ ?δַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊ, repeated for the third time, as marking the difference from the gates of the inner court (Ezekiel 40:31; Ezekiel 40:34; Ezekiel 40:37). Ezekiel 40:10. A return to the “guardrooms of the east gate” (Ezekiel 40:7). They are six in number, three on one side fronting three on the other, and all of the same size. [Kliefoth: 2 Χ 3 watches at each of the three outer gates, and the same at the three inner gates, in all 3 Χ 12; “for God Himself will be the proper Guardian and Protector of this sanctuary of His people.”]—The one measure spoken of the ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν on this occasion seems to refer to those mentioned in Ezekiel 40:9. Klief.: “the gate-pillars of the porch.” [Hengstenberg supposes “pillars” one cubit thick, as in Ezekiel 40:9 (?), standing in front of the walls at both sides of the guardrooms; others otherwise.] Ezekiel 40:11. The opening of the gate is its entire width, and along with the statement of its breadth there is given at the same time the still undetermined length of the two thresholds and the steps.—In distinction from the width, δַ ?ωַּׁ ?ςַ ?ψ (from ωָׁ ?ςַ ?ψ, to make fast, to close, and so meaning literally: “closed place” [Schloss]—cognate to νֹ ?δַ ?ψ) as such signifies the ward, wherefore the gate too is very suitably treated of here in the midst of the more exact description of the guardrooms (Ezekiel 40:10; Ezekiel 40:12). (Comp. Ezekiel 44:1 sq.) Viewed with respect to its opening, it opens the way to the court; as a gate it is a silent but stedfast guardian (comp. on Ezekiel 40:48).—As every other interpretation hitherto attempted leads only to quite uncertain suppositions not contained in the text (roofed and open spaces, courtyards, and the like), the length of 13 cubits here must mean the height. In itself, ΰֹ ?ψֶ ?κ signifies: what is extended in time and space, hence: what is long. When the breadth has been given already, the extension of the gate-barricade proper (the door) can scarcely be conceived of otherwise than in height (comp. on Ezekiel 40:15), and the guardrooms supply all that is requisite to fix the length here. Length, therefore, does not in general stand for height; neither does the special application need to be explained from the circumstance that the door was lying when measured. [“To the last number of perfection, ten (δεκα, implying that it takes into it the other numbers), is added the first number of perfection, three,” Hengst.] Ezekiel 40:12. In unison with the shutting character of the gate, the idea of the guardrooms is completed by the barrier (βְ ?αεּ ?μ) of one cubit in breadth before each of them. As is evident from what follows, a ξִ ?τֹּ ?δ has to be supplied between ΰַ ?ξָּ ?δΰֶ ?ηָ ?ϊ and εְ ?ΰַ ?ξָּ ?δΞΰַ ?ηַ ?ϊ. [Klief.: “And the barrier on this side was a cubit, but the guardroom was 6 cubits on this side and 6 cubits on that,” that is to say: the guardroom formed a square of 6 cubits each side; but the barrier-space formed an oblong of 6 cubits in length before the guardroom, and 1 cubit in breadth; and the barrier-space was not taken from the space of the guardroom, which on the contrary remained a square of 6 cubits, but joined on before the guardroom.] The statement that that which was guardroom (δַ ?ϊָּ ?ΰ, collective, generic) occupied 6 cubits on either side, is here understood of the length, and hence is neither formally nor virtually (as Keil) a repetition of Eze 40:7, but is made expressly for giving a clear notion of the barriers, namely, how they ran along the entire length of each guardroom. From this it follows that these guardrooms are niche-like cells, opening into the gate, and hence closed in by the barriers, and that when one cubit on each side is taken from the 10 cubits (Ezekiel 40:11), the passage leading through is limited to 8 cubits. The barrier is hardly constructed in order that the watchman “stepping out may look around right and left, and while doing so be protected against the too near approach of the people, and hindrance by them” (Hitzig); it lessens the available space in the thoroughfare, and thereby facilitates the control on both sides, and it protects the guardroom, which without it would stand entirely open, from those who wished to press into the court in this way through the doors to be mentioned immediately. [Hengst.: “The arrangement supposes that there are impudent people among the entrants who wished to force an entrance not allowed to them; comp. Luke 13:24.”] Ezekiel 40:13. The entire breadth of the gate-buildings: 25 cubits, measured from the guardroom (δַ ?ϊָּ ?ΰ, as Ezekiel 40:12), as this is what has just been spoken of, and the guardrooms represent the greatest breadth. Thus guardroom opposite guardroom, from roof to roof, from north to south, or vice versβ, so that the whole breadth comes out. The explanation: τֶּ ?ϊַ ?ηπֶֹ ?βֶ ?γτָּ ?ϊַ ?η, indicates an opening of the guardrooms out towards the court, for the barriers close them up towards the interior of the gate. This at the same time explains to us the measuring; for since there is only a barrier closing up on either side, there is a free view on both sides into the respective guardrooms to their openings (under the end of each roof) into the court, so the man needs not go out (as Klief.) to determine the measure; moreover, And he measured will immediately (Ezekiel 40:14) pass over into: And he made! Accordingly, Ezekiel 40:7 gave only the dimensions of the interior of the guardrooms in the light, whereas now the space of the outside walls (1½ cubits each, according to Ezekiel 40:42) is included. [Hitzig: πָּ ?β is not the cover of a chamber, but its ridge = βַּ ?α.] The barriers may be imagined as situated in the gateway, but also as in the guardrooms, of course without lessening their space. The object of the barriers recommends the first view.—In order to give the entire extension of the gate-buildings in this direction, we have in Ezekiel 40:14 the statement of the height of the ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν, the two wall-pillars (Ezekiel 40:9) adjoining the porch. From their height as stated, Kliefoth explains the change of expression. [Hengst.: “The usual height of the gate-building might be gathered from the height of the gate-door, Ezekiel 40:11.”] That it is the length (height) of the gate-structure which is meant to be determined is shown by the description of these pillars. “They are as it were the head of the whole, that which the steeples are in our churches, towering up towards and pointing to heaven” (Hengst.). Kliefoth excellently observes: “They are 60 cubits high. If one had reflected that our church towers also have grown out of gate-pillars, that one can see not only by Egyptian obelisks and Turkish minarets, but also by our factory chimneys, which, moreover, are hollow, how pillars 60 cubits high can be erected on a base of 4 cubits square, and that finally the thing spoken of is a colossal building seen in vision, one would have felt no critical anxieties at this statement of height.” On: he made, Hangstenberg says: “The prophet goes back to the time when he who here explains the building to him prepared it. In reality the meaning is: he had made.”—εְ ?ΰֶ ?μΞΰַ ?ιִ ?μ collectively, and this the rather because the pillars are the highest parts of the gate-structure. It is quite clear from the description in Ezekiel 40:9 that the court (δֶ ?ηָ ?φֵ ?ψ) was immediately adjoining; an inner court is out of the question. Accordingly, δַ ?ωַּׁ ?ςַ ?ψ must be accusative; in relation to the gate, as to the gate,—ΰֶ ?μ with ΰַ ?ιִ ?μ, in which the gate terminates in the court, precedes,—hence: the outer court of the temple surrounded the gate-structure round about, this structure was built in the court. When the relation to the court into which the gate extended has been thus considered, the entire length of the gate-structure can now Ezekiel 40:15—be noted. For this purpose the gate on the side from which the measuring begins, that is, from the ascending steps of Eze 40:6, is designated as δָ ?ΰִ ?ιϊεֹ ?ο, which word is only here in the Qeri (Kethibh: δַ ?ιְּ ?ΰָ ?ϊεֹ ?ο). Either adjective or substantive, it is derived from ΰָ ?ϊָ ?δ, “to come,” and designates, as the point of departure, the entrance-gate to which one comes when one wishes to go to the temple. As the opposite standpoint, towards the court, τֶּ ?ϊַ ?ηΞδωַּׁ ?ςַ ?ψ, has been mentioned in Ezekiel 40:11, the special designation of the gate was so much the more in place.—Although for fixing the terminus ad quem, ςַ ?μΞ will have to be taken as versus, “towards,” yet when, as here, it stands in conjunction with μִ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ι, it has not its full force. There lies in it something like: “upon,” “above,” which seeks to assert itself; for in Ezekiel 40:11 the height of the gate, and in Ezekiel 40:13 the roofing of the gate-chambers, and in Ezekiel 40:14 the summit of the entire gate-structure, came into consideration. [“From” and “to” are omitted, says Hengstenberg, because the relation is clear in itself.] The porch is known from Ezekiel 40:7 sq., and thereby, as from the contrast to δָ ?ιִ ?ΰϊεֹ ?ο, the “inner” gate, the gate leading into the court, and hence to the interior of the temple; especially when the east gate is vis ΰ vis the sanctuary proper.—For this the man needs only step forward on the seventh step, look up, and, passing through the gate-buildings, calculate his starting-point: first threshold, 6 cubits; three guardrooms with two intervening spaces, 28 cubits; second threshold, 6 cubits; porch, 6 cubits; projection of the side and gate-pillars, 4 cubits = 50 cubits. This length is the double of the breadth. [“When the Psalmist calls upon the gates of the temple or of the holy city to lift themselves up, to widen themselves, at the entering in of the ark of the covenant (Psalms 24.), the idea which underlies this song is here symbolically embodied and expressed.”] Ezekiel 40:16 appropriately closes the description with an explanation of the way in which the gate-structure was lighted; for it needs light for the inspection of the watchmen especially. Hence there were windows; first of all, in the guardrooms, namely, in their wall-pillars, by which they are distinguished from the ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν in Ezekiel 40:10 (ΰֵ ?μִ ?ιν, written defectively). Pillars projecting from the wall enclosed the windows of the guardrooms. That these windows were closed (1 Kings 6:4) certainly does not mean that they were not to let the light pass through, but that they were only for light, and not to be opened for any other purpose; that they were windows meant “for a sacred purpose” (Hδv.), and “not so much for looking through” (Hitzig). The being closed explains itself fully when we once consider that they, as also the doors of these chambers, led into the court, into which, therefore, no one was to press forward, either through the doors or by means of these windows, and then consider that their relation to the gateway given as within must put them on the same line with the other windows to be mentioned immediately, which came directly into the gateway, and had to be made “so” (λֵ ?ο). Although the windows of the guardrooms are for the use of the gate, yet the word within shows that the gate gets the light first of all from the guardrooms, which indeed are also open inward up to the barrier. But since the guardrooms on both sides of the gate come forward to the court, it can be said of their windows that they were round and round the gate, as was said of the court (Ezekiel 40:14) in relation to the gate. [Klief.: “In the inside of the gate - structure round about” (?).] For the purpose, however, of giving more light to the gate-structure, there were such windows μָ ?ΰֵ ?μַ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ϊ. Since nothing is nearer to the guardrooms than their partition-walls (Ezekiel 40:7), we will have to think, in the first place, of them. ΰֵ ?ιμָ ?ν is etymologically connected with ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν and with ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν, but is, however, as Klief. has satisfactorily shown, distinct from both. The signification: “projecting part,” which Keil gives to the word, that is, what is on a solid wall for architectural ornament or necessity,—as for the windows in question, moulding, frieze, frame, and such like,—suits perfectly to the partition-walls with their windows, for these walls are, according to Ezekiel 40:30, to be taken here too as 5 cubits broad, and thus were a projection on the gate-structure. [Klief. translates: “porch walls.”] If, then, they projected likewise into the court on both sides, the “round and round” is as apposite and illustrative in respect to them as in respect to the guardrooms formerly. The carrying out of the parallel thus, the windows round and round, and the concluding expressly (inwards) with the lighting of the gateway, shows that that has been sufficiently cared for. [What Hengst. quotes from Balmer - Rinck about the pillars, by which “the windows are as it were latticed,” would have been more suitable had it been said that the Elim were on the windows, and not the reverse, as here.]—Kliefoth, however, understands by the “Elammoth” or “Elammim” not only “the parapets and walls filling up the spaces between the guardrooms, but also the sides of the porch and the sides adjoining the second threshold” as pierced through with windows. The observation also is perhaps correct, as the measuring (Ezekiel 40:13) from roof to roof of the guardrooms possibly shows already, that when the gate-structure thus has windows all over, it was roofed and covered. Since ΰַ ?ιִ ?μ in a collective sense may possibly include the just now mentioned “Elim” of the guardrooms, while in Ezekiel 40:9; Ezekiel 40:14, on the other hand, mention is specially made of the two high pillars at the porch, it will be a question whether we have, with Kliefoth, to imagine the whole of the “Elim” decorated with palm-leaf work. Hengst. (who insists on its “inseparable connection with the cherubim,” of which we may remark there is here no mention) makes the palms “indicate that the gate leads to a building consecrated to the Lord of creation; it corresponds to the merely introductory character of the gate that the creation is here represented not by the animal kingdom, but by the lower region of the vegetable kingdom, of which the palm is king.” Hδv.: “By this symbol nothing else is meant to be impressed upon the temple than the stamp of the noblest and grandest prosperity.” More fully Bδhr (see der Salom. Tempel, p. 120 sq.): “Since all fulness, riches, and glory of vegetable life is comprehended in the palm, it above all is adapted for the habitation of Jehovah, which is called a habitation of glory; it stands, therefore, parallel to the cherub, nothing vegetable can so announce the glory of the Creator. By it the habitation of Jehovah is indicated as a perpetually flourishing habitation, abiding in vigorous strength, concealing in itself the fulness of life; it becomes the place of salvation, life, peace, and joy, a paradise of God. But since the sanctification of Israel is the end and aim of Jehovah’s dwelling among them, these ideas are of an ethical character (Ps. 1:3; 52:10 [Psalms 52:8]; Jeremiah 17:8; Proverbs 11:28; Proverbs 11:30; Ezekiel 47:12; Revelation 22:2; particularly Psalms 92:13 [Psalms 92:12] sq.). The fact that the temple was adorned with these figures, while the tabernacle was destitute of them, has its ground in the Promised Land. Palestine is the native land of the palm, hence these armorial bearings and badges of the land and people of Israel on the coins of the age of the Maccabees, and on Ph�nician coins, while on those of Titus we have a palm tree with Jud�a capta. In Solomon’s temple, on the other hand, Jud�a victrix had been represented, for the temple was at once the monument of Israel’s victory over its enemies and of Jehovah’s covenant faithfulness, and a pledge of the firm possession of the land (comp. Ezekiel 37). The palm, already pointing in this way to salvation, peace, joy, and rest, was very specially a symbol of that which had dawned for Israel with the period of the ‘house’ and its builder, the Prince of Peace. Thus there is a relation of Jehovah’s habitation to the land, and of the land to the sanctuary; both relations are bound up with each other in the palm. The place of Jehovah’s residence and revelation is a place of palms, thus the land of palms is a land of Jehovah’s residence and revelation, a heavenly land.” [Klief.: “The palm branches stand in close relation to the feast of tabernacles, and it is the eschatological signification of that feast which is designed to be stamped by this adorning with palms upon the edifice of the sanctuary” (?).] Comp. however, here, for the entrance into the temple of the New Jerusalem, the entry of the Messiah through the midst of palms, Matthew 21:8; Mark 11:8. [Fairbairn: “Here also nothing was left to men’s caprice or corrupt fancies, as had been the case of old” in the outer court of Solomon’s temple. “A more perfect state of things was to be brought in; and even all in the outer court was to be regulated by God’s hand, and bear the impress of His holiness. This, too, must be hallowed ground, fashioned and ruled in all its parts after the perfect measure of the divine mind and the just requirements of His service; therefore such was evidently the practical result aimed at,—let not the ungodly and profane any longer presume to tread such courts (Isaiah 1:12), or desecrate them by the introduction of their own unwarranted inventions. Let all feel that in coming here they have to do with a God of purer eyes than to behold iniquity.”—W. F.] Ezekiel 40:17-19. The Outer CourtIt is necessary to pass over it to come to the other gates. Comp. Ezekiel 10:5.—μִ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?δ is properly: “appendage,” and so.: annexed building or side-room; specially used for small chambers at the sides, which served for keeping utensils and provisions, for the residence of the priests, and also for sacrificial feasts (1 Samuel 9:22). Comp. Jeremiah 35:2. Hengst. describes well the use of the “Leshachoth:” a refuge from storm and rain, as the pavement preserved the feet from mud, but principally for rejoicing before the Lord, for the eating and drinking before Him (Deuteronomy 12; Luke 13:26), in which the necessitous also participated, the agap� of the Old Covenant.—ψִ ?φְ ?τָּ ?δ, a stone-covered floor, literally: what is “made firm,” pavement, stone-cover, like pavimentum, from pavire (παιω), to ram tight.—ςָ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?ι is particip. masc. sing., referring, according to Hengst., to the chambers and the stone pavement as a whole in a neuter sense; according to Kliefoth, only to the stone pavement, which is feminine; but, as Keil justly observes, his grounds for this are not cogent. That both the chambers and the pavement were made for the court round about, brings them near to the wall, and makes them run along it round about the court, except its west side. Thirty such chambers are easily divided into ten in each of the three possible directions, although in Ezekiel 40:18 only the stone pavement is expressly placed in relation to the three gates; for the “Leshachoth” are described as “beside” (not “upon”) the stone pavement; according to Hengst.: opening on it, meaning probably that they bounded the pavement. Since these chambers may be supposed spacious, each like an annexe by itself,—whence also it may be seen how they presented themselves singly to the eye for numbering,—they might, reaching, as they did, nearly from gate to gate, have been like a connection between these. Ezekiel 40:18. As the chambers were ΰֶ ?μΞδָ ?ψִ ?φְ ?τָּ ?δ, so the stone pavement was ΰֶ ?μΞλֶּ ?ϊֶ ?σ, by the “shoulder,” that is, side of the gates, for the gates of the outer court are already looked on collectively; and this ΰֶ ?μΞλֶּ ?ϊֶ ?σ is more exactly explained by μְ ?ςֻ ?ξַּ ?ϊΰֹ ?ψֶ ?κְ δַ ?ωְּׁ ?ςָ ?ψִ ?ιν, meaning that the length of the gates fixed the breadth of the stone pavement. As the lower, it is to be distinguished from that situated higher, that is, the upper, inner court. Ezekiel 40:19 measures the breadth of the outer court, starting from the east gate, the gate hitherto spoken of, and that, doubtless, from the front of its porch.—δַ ?ϊַּ ?ηְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?πָ ?δ refers neither to ωַׁ ?ςַ ?ψ nor to an omitted δֶ ?ηָ ?φֵ ?ψ, but simply to the stone pavement of the outer court, called in Ezekiel 40:18 δַ ?ϊַּ ?ηְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?πָ ?δ.—To the front, etc., this terminus ad quem is indicated by ξִ ?ηεּ ?υ in respect to the gates of the inner court, as they advance 50 cubits into the outer court; and here, in respect to the east gate of the inner court, to the front of the porch of this gate, where, accordingly, one stepped from without on to the inner court (Ezekiel 40:23; Ezekiel 40:27). The man neither measured into the inner court nor yet up to its wall. The ξִ ?ηεּ ?υ also, doubtless, belongs to the starting-point of the measuring,—100 cubits + 2 gate lengths of 50 = 200 cubits. The breviloquent expression: “the east and the north,” which latter points to what follows, would, when resolved, run as follows: Thus with respect to the east side, and the same with respect to the north side. Ezekiel 40:20-23. The North GateThe length and breadth, only mentioned as measured in Ezekiel 40:20, are in Ezekiel 40:21 determined after the measure of the gate. δָ ?ιָ ?δ refers, according to Keil, to the north gate (Ezekiel 40:20), but may be referred more exactly to the collectives ΰֵ ?ιμָ ?ε‌ ?֯ ,ϊָ ?ΰָ ?ε֯, and ΰֵ ?μַ ?ξִָּ ?ε֯: all that was, etc. In citing particulars, the porch and thresholds are omitted. The number of the guardrooms is again given with more exactitude.—αָּ ?ΰַ ?ξָּ ?δ, strictly: measured “by the cubit.”—While brevity thus characterizes the repetition, with which the use of collectives harmonizes, Ezekiel 40:22 subjoins the number of the steps, applicable to the east gate also. In addition to the windows, the “Elammim” and the palms are again expressly mentioned, and what the ΰֵ ?ιμַ ?ξִּ ?ιν are is made plainer by their being indicated as before those who go up. μִ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν refers, not to ξַ ?ςֲ ?μεֹ ?ϊ, but to ιַ ?ςֲ ?μεּ. The mention of the “Elammim” here, for the third time, is in order to supplement the description of the east gate, in which only those between the guardrooms had been thought of. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 41 1And he brought me to the temple, and measured the wall-pillars, six cubits broad on this side, and six cubits broad on that, the breadth of the tent [wasthat]. 2And the breadth of the entrance [the door] was ten cubits, and the sides of the entrance five cubits on this side and five cubits on that; and he measured 3its [the temple’s] length, forty cubits, and the breadth, twenty cubits. And he went inward, and measured the wall-pillar of the entrance, two cubits; and the entrance, six cubits; and the breadth of the entrance, seven cubits. 4And he measured its [the interior’s] length, twenty cubits; and the breadth, twenty cubits, before the temple: and he said unto me, This is the most holy place. 5And he measured the wall of the house, six cubits; and the breadth of the 6side building, four cubits round and round about the house [all around]. And of the side chambers [there were], chamber on chamber, three, and that thirty times; and they came into [on] the wall, which was to the house at the side chambers round and round, so that they are held fast, and [yet] they are not 7held fast in the wall of the house. And it became broader, and changed [ana in so far it changed] still upwards in the case of the side chambers; for all the changing in the house [went on] still upwards round and round on the house; therefore was the breadth to the house upwards, and so the lower [story] will 8ascend to the upper by the middle. And I saw on the house a height round and round; the foundations of the side chambers were the full rod, six cubits 9according to that to the wrist. The breadth of the wall, which was for the side building without, was five cubits, and [five cubits] the place that was left free [with respect to] the house of the side chambers, which was annexed to the house. 10And between the chambers was a breadth of twenty cubits round 11about the house. And the opening of the side building was towards the free place, one opening towards the north, and one opening towards the south; and the breadth of the place [the space] left free was five cubits round and round. 12And the building which was before the gizrah [off-place] on the side towards the west [literally: towards the sea] had a breadth of seventy cubits; and the wall of the building was five cubits broad round and round, and its length was ninety 13cubits. And he measured the house, a hundred cubits long; and the gizrah, 14and the building, and its walls, a hundred cubits long. And the breadth of the front of the house, and of the gizrah towards the east, a hundred cubits. 15And he measured [so measured he] the length of the building which was in front of the gizrah [namely] on its back part, and [that was] its galleries on this side and on that, a hundred cubits, and the inner temple and the porches of the 16court; The thresholds, and the closed windows, and the galleries round about on all three,—over against the threshold [was] a boarding of wood round and round,—and the ground up to the windows [measured he, or: had measures], 17and the windows [were] covered; Up above the opening and [that] to the inner house and outside, and on the whole wall round and round within and 18without [were] measures. And [there were] made cherubim and palms, [so that] a 19palm was between a cherub and a cherub, and on the cherub two faces. And the face of a man was towards the palm on this side, and the face of a lion towards the palm on that side; it was made on the whole house round and round. 20From the ground to above the opening were the cherubim and the palms made, and [this on the; or: so much of the, etc.; or: this is] the wall of the temple. 21The post of the temple was square, and the front of the sanctuary; the view 22[was] as the view [had the same view]. The altar of wood was three cubits high, and its length two cubits; and it had its corners; and its length and its walls were of wood: and he said unto me, This is the table that is before Jehovah. 23, 24And two doors were to the temple and to the sanctuary. And here were two leaves to the doors, two turning leaves, two to the one door, and two 25leaves to the other. And on them, on the doors of the temple, were made cherubim and palms, as they were made on the walls; and a wooden pediment 26was on the front of the porch without. And closed windows and palms were on this side and on that, on the sides of the porch; thus [as respects] the side chambers of the house, thus [as regards] the pediments. Ezekiel 41:1. Sept.: ... εἰσηγαγενμεεἰς … τοαἰλαμ … τοπλατοςἐνθενκ. … τοεὐροςτουαἰλαμἐνθεν. Vulg.: … et sex cubitos inde, latitudinem— Ezekiel 41:2. … τουκυλωνος … κ. ἐπωμιδεςτ. πυλωνος— Ezekiel 41:3. … εἰςτ. αὐληντηνἐσωτεραν … κ. ταςἐπωμιδαςτουθυρωματοςπηχειςἑπταἐνθενκ. πηχ. ἑπταἐνθεν. Ezekiel 41:4. … τομηκοςτωνθυρωματωνπηχ. τεσσαρακοντακ. εὑρος·— Ezekiel 41:6. … Κ. ταπλευρα … τριακοντακ. τριςδις· κ. διαστημαἐντ. τοιχωτουοἰκουἐντ. πλευροιςτ. οἰκουκυκλωτουεἰναιτοιςἐπιλαμβανομενοιςὁρκν, ὁπωςτοταραπανμηἁπτωνταιτωντοιχων—Vulg.: … bis triginta tria, et erant eminentia, quζ ingrederentur per parietem domus in lateribus per circuitum, ut continerent et non attingerent parietem templi. Ezekiel 41:7. Κ. τοεὐροςτηςἀνωτεραςτωνπλενρωνκατατοπροσθεμαἐκτουοἰκου, προςτηνἀνωτερανκυκλωτουοἰκου, ὁτωςδιαπλατυνηταιἀνωθεν, κ. ἐκτωνκατωθενἀναβαινωσιἐπιταὑπερωακ. ἐκτωνμεσωνἐπιτατριωροφα. Vulg.: Et platea erat in rotundum, ascendens sursum per cochleam, et in c�naculum templi deferebat per gyrum, idcirco latius erat templum in superioribus. Et sic de inferioribus ascendebatur ad superiora in medium. Ezekiel 41:8. Sept.: Κ. τοθραελτοἰκουὐψοςκυκλωδιαστηματωνπλευρωνἰσοντωκαλαμωπηχεωνἑξ. Διαστηματα (9) κ. εὐροςτ. τοιχου … κ. ταἀπολοιταἀναμεσοντ. πλευρθντ. οἰκου (10) κ. ἀναμεσοντωνἐξεδρων. Vulg.: … fundata latera—(9) et latitudinem per parietem lateris. … Et erat interior domus in lateribus domus. Ezekiel 41:11. … ἐπιτοἀπολοιποντηςθυραςτ. μιαςτηςπροςβοῤῥαν, κ. ἡθυρα … κ. τοεὐροςτουφωτος … πλατοςκυκλωθεν. Vulg.: ad orationem. Ezekiel 41:12. … τοδιοριζονκαταπροσωποντουἀπολοιπουὡςπρος … πλατος … τουδιοριζοντος … εὐροςκυκλωθενκ. μηκοςαὐτου—Vulg.: ζdificium quod erat separatum— Ezekiel 41:13. … κατεναντιτουοἰκου … κ. ταἀπολοιπακ. ταδιοριζοντα— Ezekiel 41:14. … κατεναντι— Ezekiel 41:15. κ. ταἀτολοιπαἐνθεν … Κ. ὁναοςκ. αἱγωνιαικ. τοαἰλαμτοἐξωτερονπεφατνωμενα. Vulg: … controfaciem … ethecas ex utraque— Ezekiel 41:16. Κ. αἱθνριδεςδικτνωται, ν̔ποφανσειςκυκλω . . ὡστεδιακυπτειν. Κ. ὁοἰκοςκ. ταπλησιονἐξυλωμενακυκλω, κ. τοἐδαφοςκ. ἐκτουἐδαφουςἑωςτ. θυριδων, κ. αἱθυριδεςἀναπτυσσομεναιτρισσωςεἰςτοδιακυπτειν. Ezekiel 41:17. Κ. ἑωςπλησιοντηςἐσωτεραςκ. ἑωςτηςἐξωτερας—Vulg.: et usque ad domum— Ezekiel 41:18. ... γεγλυμμενα. Ezekiel 41:19. ... ἐνθενκ. ἐνθεν … ἐνθενκ. ἐνθεν. Διαγεγλυμμενοςὁλοςὁοἰκος. … (20) ἐκτουἐδαφουςἐωςτουφατνωμαψος … διαγεγλυμμενοι. Vulg.: … in pariete templi. Κ. τοἁγιον (21) κ. ὁναοςἀναπτυσσομενατετραγωνα, … ὁρασιςὡςὀψς (22) θυσιαστηριου … κ. τοεὐροςπηχεωνδυὀκ. κεραταεἰχεν, κ. ἡβασιςαὐτου—Vulg.: … aspectus contra aspectum. Ezekiel 41:25. Sept.: Κ. γλυφη … κ. ἑπι … κατατ. γλυφηντωνἁγιων, κ. σπουδαιαξυλακαταπροσωπον—Vulg.: … quam ob rem et grossiora erant ligna in vestibuli fronte— Ezekiel 41:26. κ. θυριδεςκρυπται. Κ. διεμετρησενἐνθενκ. ἐνθεν, εἰςταὀροφωματατουαἰλαμ, κ. ταπλευρατ. οἰκουἰζυγωμενα. Vulg.: Super quζ fenestrζ … secundum latera domus latitudinemque parietum. REMARKSEze_41:1-4. The TempleThe edifice of the temple proper is now described in continuation of Eze 40:48-49. We proceed from the temple porch to the “house,” as it is called there; to δַ ?δֵ ?ιλָ ?μ, as it is named in Ezekiel 41:1. The idea of greatness, height, like ιָ ?λֹ ?μ, “to be able,” “to have the power of” (Hupf.: “to seize,” be capable), lying at the root of this word, suggests a large and spacious edifice, in short, a palace, such as, doubtless, David had in his mind (2 Samuel 7:2), and in agreement also with the character of Solomon’s temple, as a palace of Jehovah (e.g. 1 Kings 7:12). δַ ?δֵ ?ιλָ ?μ does not need to be understood in the narrower sense of the holy place, any more than does δָ ?ΰֹ ?δֶ ?μ, which designation, embracing both the holy and the most holy place (without the porch), simply subjoins the Mosaic element to the Solomonic.—The “Elim” (see Ezekiel 40:9) are two wall-pillars, one on each side, six cubits broad, so that by this statement of the breadth of the pillars, the breadth of the whole sanctuary is given as to its bounding points, extending from the extremity of the one to the extremity of the other. For Ezekiel 41:2—there was still between them a door ten cubits broad, and on each side, literally: “shoulders,” five cubits broad, making thus the inside breadth twenty cubits, the half of the length.—In Ezekiel 41:3 it is said that he went; not: he brought me, etc. For, as Ezekiel 41:4 shows, the place in question was the most holy place, which the mere priest was not permitted to enter. Of the collective door-pillars, one is on the right and one on the left, on the wall between the two divisions of the sanctuary. On account of the following breadth of seven cubits, the six cubits have been taken to be the height of the door, or an additional cubit has been understood as the breadth of the door-posts. Ezekiel 41:4. The measuring of the length leads into the interior, to its extreme point; hence the breadth is again in front, where the temple appears as a whole, as the palace of holiness. Ezekiel 41:5-11. The Side BuildingIn Ezekiel 41:5 the measuring turns to the outside. As the wall and the side building are spoken of, it is now said the house. The wall is the wall that begins with the pillars (Ezekiel 41:1).—The thrice-repeated ρָ ?αִ ?ια undoubtedly refers to the three sides, which come into consideration, the two lengthwise and the one at the back.—According to Ezekiel 41:6. the side building was a complex of ninety chambers or rooms in three stories, sacristies for the priests, and for the custody of the manifold sacred objects, clothes, utensils, etc. (δַ ?φֵ ?μָ ?ς, in Ezekiel 41:5 collective, like ιָ ?φִ ?ε֯ ?ςַ in 1 Kings 6. From φָ ?μַ ?ς, “to turn,” “to bend,” it signifies: turning, bending, and thence: side, rib, etc. The δַ ?φְ ?μָ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ in Ezekiel 41:6 are single chambers which compose the φֵ ?μָ ?ς as a whole.) Chamber “on” chamber; ΰֶ ?μ here = ςμ, as is evident from what follows, and still more so from Solomon’s temple, through which that becomes clear which otherwise might remain dark. The eye first looks upward, and in this direction there was chamber rising on chamber. (Keil: on the north and south walls, twelve each; on the shorter west wall, six.)—As to the fastening of their floor-beams, these side chambers came “into the wall (the proper temple wall which ran around them inside);” the immediately following explanation shows that the αְּ implies such a connection with the wall in question that “into” rather implies: “on,” or: “upon”; they were indeed caught and held fast (ΰָ ?ηַ ?ζ) there, but not in the temple wall itself, for ledges ran round about the temple, upon but not into which the ends of the beams were put. (Comp. 1 Kings 6:6; 1 Kings 6:10.) Ezekiel 41:7 speaks impersonally (it), although, according to what precedes and what immediately follows, it is the house that will be thought of under reference to the side building. The widening as it went upwards (μְ ?ξַ ?ςְ ?μָ ?δμְ ?ξַ ?ςְ ?μָ ?δ) related to the side chambers (μַ ?φְּ ?μָֹ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ). Its explanation is already given in Ezekiel 41:6, namely, where the ledges let us suppose a gradual narrowing of the temple wall adapted to the three stories. As now said in Ezekiel 41:7, it was still upwards and round about the house, thus not on the outer wall of the side building, so that this wall rose perpendicular without any ledges. Accordingly, the width of the side building and relatively of the side chambers necessarily increased as the temple wall grew narrower from story to story. This is the ξεּ ?ρַ ?αΞδַ ?αּ ?ιִ ?ϊΧ (from ρָ ?αַ ?α, Niph.: εְ ?πָ ?ρְ ?αָ ?δ); this widening was the changing, which could be said of the temple house (Hengst.: “and altered itself,” “the alteration of the house”), λִּ ?ι expressing the εְ ?πָ ?ρְ ?αָ ?δ with so much the better reason as the ξεּ ?ρַ ?α was round and round on the house, and therefore (ςַ ?μΞλֵּ ?ο) ψֹ ?ηַ ?αΞμַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊ, that is, this “width” increasing “with the ascent,” this “changing” pertained in fact only to the house, with which the side building of three stories was connected on every possible side. [Keil translates: “and was surrounded,” “the surrounding of the house,” and understands by that very simply the side building; while Kliefoth understands a gallery-like “corridor” running round the house, by which one could get to the chambers of the upper story, and derives the widening above not from the temple wall, but from the corridors of the second and third stories; comp. the convincing refutation in Keil.]—If the most generally accepted translation: “and so one ascends from the lower story to the upper by the middle,” is held to say something not quite clear in itself, one must with Hengstenberg supply from 1 Kings 6:8 the winding stair, for which room was got by the breadth increasing upwards; we do not need with Keil to suppose the stair, on the outside, and to contend against its leading from the lower into the upper, and thence (!) into the middle story; it was self-evidently in the interior of the side building;—or by this translation of the close of the verse one can find the thought expressed that the priests did not step from the temple into the side chambers, but within the widening upwards which the house had through the side buildings. Keil: “proportionately to the middle story”; the difference of gender decides nothing against δַ ?ϊַּ ?ηְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?πָ ?δ as subject to ιַ ?ςֲ ?μֶ ?δ, and εְ ?λֵ ?ο indicates that the ascent took place in the way stated of the widening. What Ezekiel sees Ezekiel 41:8—was on the house, and hence still relates to the side building, without its being taken as = “house.” [Hengst.: “the height round about,” namely, of the side building, may be given.] What we may take as meant by the height (Keil: = elevation) is probably told by ξιּ ?ρְ ?γεֹ ?ϊ (Qeri: ξεּ ?ρְ ?γεֹ ?ϊ). According to Keil, particip. dual of ιָ ?ρַ ?γ; according to Gesenius, a substantive, signifying: the foundations of the side chambers, the basement of which, accordingly, a full rod high, reached to the house; and this harmonizes with the steps leading to the porch of the temple (Ezekiel 40:49); and so ξְ ?μεֹ δַ ?χָּ ?πֶ ?δ (only here, elsewhere ξְ ?μεֹ ?ΰ ,ξְ ?μΰ̇ ?) will hardly be added, “because the elevation above the ground might easily be supposed less” (Hengst.). On the contrary, the six cubits ΰַ ?φִ ?ιμָ ?δ has quite the appearance of a closer definition of that which Ezekiel calls the full rod, although whether from the elbow to the wrist, where hand and arm meet, or how, cannot be determined. J. D. Michaelis supposes short cubits. Such a more exact definition of the measure would be the more in place were it different from that of Eze 40:5. [Hengstenberg and Kliefoth understand ΰַ ?φִ ?ιμ of each of the three stories: “the foundations one full rod, six cubits its story.” Irrespective of whether ΰַ ?φִ ?ιμ can mean that, εְ is wanting.]—In Ezekiel 41:9, besides the five cubits’ breadth of the outer wall of the side building, the same extent (εַ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ) is set apart for ξֻּ ?πָּ ?η (particip. Hoph. of πεּ ?ηַ, left “over,” “free,” “empty”), that is, for the space not built upon (ver, 11). Klief.: par terre round about the first story of the side building, still to be distinguished from the wider unbuilt-on space which surrounded the temple in a width of twenty cubits.—αּ ?ιϊ regards the side building connected with the temple in this relation separately as a “house,” while the clause: ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψμַ ?αָּ ?ιϊ, still retains the fact that the house after all is the temple. Ezekiel 41:10. “The cells” are described in Ezekiel 42. The breadth of twenty cubits bounds the three sides of the temple, north, south, and west. The breviloquent expression: between, etc., Hengstenberg takes to mean: between the outer wall of the side building and the cells. Keil: between the free space and the cells. Ezekiel 41:11 shows that the side building opened with two doors towards the free space (Hengst.: “between the wall of the side building and the surrounding wall”). The five cubits round and round (in distinction from the two door-sides) are those already indicated in Ezekiel 41:9. Ezekiel 41:12-14. The Off-placeEze_41:12. Now the side building which stands in connection with the house has been treated of, and its relation to the outside too shown, a building (as the wall was called in Ezekiel 40:5) comes to be spoken of which is said to be before the gizrah, from which appellation accordingly we have to find its situation and explanation. Since it is not spoken of so incidentally and epenthetically, as Kliefoth supposes, but next to the side building which belongs to the house its measurements also being given, it must be supposed to stand in some relation or another to the temple. And so it is called δַ ?βִּ ?ζְ ?ψָ ?δ, by which is indicated something known, self-intelligible. πָּ ?ζַ ?ψ means: “to separate,” “to cut,” and is here said of a space; and thus the gizrah is an off-place. The goat bears (Leviticus 16:22) “upon him all their iniquities,” ΰֶ ?μΞΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υβְּ ?ζֵ ?ψָ ?δ. Hengst.: “The place and the building thereon serve negatively the same purpose which the temple serves positively. If this is to retain its dignity and sanctity, a place must be assigned to which all uncleanness is removed. Already in Deuteronomy 23:13 sq. we find the order for setting apart such a place outside the camp, which corresponded to the temple (?) with its courts; and also the injunction that this place is to be kept clean, which is laid down as a religious duty.” With this has been compared in Solomon’s temple 2 Kings 23:11; 1 Chronicles 26:16; 1 Chronicles 26:18 (the “refuse-gate”). See Lange on Kings, p. 262 sq. Nothing whatever is told us expressly regarding the purpose for which this place, situated behind the temple at the west, was intended, perhaps just because the name itself was quite enough. Where bloody sacrifices were brought, sacrificial feasts held, places for preparing them stood, and a numerous body of persons kept moving about, an off-place for the great quantity of all kinds of refuse was a self-evident necessity.—τְּ ?ΰַ ?ϊΧ means the same thing, whether it be taken as defining more closely ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΧ or δַ ?βִּ ?ζְ ?ψָ ?δ, for since the building stood with its east front towards the temple, the side towards the west can only denote its position in some other respect; that is, the position of the place generally. Keil’s translation is not clear: “And the building in front of the separate place was on the side towards the west seventy cubits broad.”—By the wall … round and round, the breadth of which is particularly noticed, is to be understood with Kliefoth the wall of the building. Thus “it extended westward to the outer enclosing wall of the court, and had (Hengst.) by a gate built in this its egress into the city.” In Ezekiel 41:13 the length of the gizrah (inclusive of all) is placed parallel to the length of the temple, as in Ezekiel 41:14 the breadth by which the relation, although antithetical, of the gizrah to the temple becomes very clear. Deducting accordingly the 70 + 2 Χ 5 = 80 cubits (Ezekiel 41:12), there remains of the 100 cubits a free space 20 cubits broad, doubtless 10 on the north and 10 on the south, for approaches to the gizrah building, whose length ran along the whole extent. Ezekiel 41:15-26. SupplementaryEze_41:15, summing up in accordance with Ezekiel 41:12 : 90 + 2 Χ 5 = 100, just like Ezekiel 41:13, thus being a recapitulation, intimates by this the character of the notices that still follow, as supplementary additions to the preceding.—The measuring of this length proceeds in such a way that the measurer measured the building situated before the gizrah (according to Ezekiel 41:12) in the direction towards the back part of the place. This is the meaning of the definition: ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψςַ ?μΞΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψֶ ?ιδָ, the feminine suffix referring to δַ ?βִּ ?ζְ ?ψָ ?δ, the back part being the natural antithesis to ΰֶ ?μΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ι; so that ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ may either signify “which,” or it may also be referred to the length, which extended in front over the back part of the gizrah, if it is not with Keil to be referred to δַ ?αִּ ?πְ ?ιָ ?ο. This definition is intended, namely, to form the transition to supplementary statements as to the not yet mentioned ΰַ ?ϊִּ ?εχֶ ?ιδָ ?ΰ (Qeri: ΰַ ?ϊִּ ?ιχֶ ?ιδָ ?ΰ). Meier: ΰָ ?ϊַ ?χ, from ΰֵ ?ϊ, allied to ΰָ ?ϊָ ?δ, “to go through” = ςָ ?γָ ?δ, whence ΰַ ?ϊִּ ?ιχ, “walk,” as gallery is properly derived from the German wallen=quellen (to issue forth). Gesen.: properly: “landing place,” then a short piazza, from πָ ?ϊַ ?χ, “to break off.” The signification: walks, galleries, for the word—occurring only here and in Ezekiel 42—is certainly demanded by the latter passage. The analogy to the temple retained throughout speaks in favour of this, as does also the fact that the free space of ten cubits on each side (Ezekiel 41:14, see exposition) is in this way satisfactorily disposed of. Keil makes the suffix look back to δַ ?αּ ?πְ ?ιָ ?δ in Ezekiel 41:13. The repeated statement of the hundred cubits’ length is intended to show that the galleries were as long as the building.—Since now the inner temple, i.e., that which stood in the inner court (Keil), or because it is so called in distinction from the gizrah building and the courts (Hengst.), and finally the porches of the court, that is, the projections of the gates into the court generally or into the court in question, are mentioned, all that was hitherto measured is summarily repeated; in which manner Ezekiel 41:16 continues, to which Hengst. supplies: “and he measured” (Ezekiel 41:15), while Keil takes them as nominatives absolute, and finds the predicate in ξִ ?γּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, Ezekiel 41:17.—δַ ?ρִּ ?τִּ ?ιν, mentioned in Ezekiel 40:6-7, according to Kliefoth: window sills (?).—The closed windows, see Ezekiel 40:16.—The galleries, see Ezekiel 41:15. The definition: round about on all three (the gizrah, the temple, and the porches of the court, Ezekiel 41:15), is either to be understood with respect to the description given in the foregoing of the parts designated by the article as known, and hence to be understood under limitation, or we must, for example, suppose galleries to the temple also, and likewise to the porches of the court; for which Hengst. cites John 10:23, and Josephus, Arch. 20:9. 7. The recapitulatory character of these verses—meant, as they are, for a supplement—speaks in favour of the first view, that of Keil. But that which is to be supplied is in respect of the thresholds or sills (δַ ?ρַּ ?σ collectively) over against them; and, taken strictly, it denotes the upper moulding of the door, or the door-case generally, on both sides (ρַ ?αִ ?ιαρָ ?αִ ?ια). [Hengst.: the ground floor when one looked over the threshold; Keil: the wooden case of the window openings.] ωָׁ ?ϊַ ?σ is: “to make thin,” whence ωְׁ ?ηִ ?ισ, “thin, fine” wood. Hengst. discovers such wooden boarding also in the words: “and also from the ground to the windows,” and places the windows up in the roof, as in the ark (Genesis 6:16), for one reason, because of the adjoining house, which was probably as high as the temple. Kliefoth, on the other hand, places the windows immediately on the ground floor, and makes the earth of the foundation rise up to the windows (!). As what has been just said had respect to the thresholds, so what follows with εְ ?δָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υι is supplementary to the second thing mentioned, the windows; beginning with this, that even the ground up to them, this distance, was a measured distance (Ezekiel 41:17), which had not yet been said, after which the more intelligible expression: ξְ ?λֻ ?ρּ ?εֹ ?ϊ (particip. Pual of λָּ ?ρָ ?δ), illustrates the above-mentioned δָ ?ΰֲ ?θֻ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ. Finally, with respect to the walks which ran along the doors, and the wall rounding off the whole, Ezekiel 41:17 accordingly adds, that each and all was according to measure; the space above the door (collective), even into the inner house,—the temple in its entirety is spoken of as to its principal parts,—and outside, and the whole wall round about within and without were so. [Hengst.: “a house worthy of the God who has wisely arranged all things in His creation (Psalms 104:24), and left nothing to caprice and chance.”] The expression: made, in Ezekiel 41:18, which is resumed in Ezekiel 41:19, refers to sculpture or carved work; but comp. Lange on Kings, p. 67. On the cherubim, see the same work, p. 66, and in this Commentary on Ezekiel 1:4-14, and Doct. Reflec. 10 on Ezekiel 9.; on the palms, see on Ezekiel 40:16. Hengst.: “There are the carved works in the temple, the destruction of which by the Chaldeans is lamented in Psalms 74:6; and now they are there again.” Comp. as to the significance of the grouping, Lange on Kings, p. 74 sq. Hengst. brings out the reference that the house is dedicated to the Lord of the whole terrestrial creation.—The arrangement was that a cherub and a palm, and again a cherub, always followed in order.—It is further observed, in distinction from chap, 1, that the cherub had two faces, as expositors generally say, because only two could be visible, inasmuch as figures were treated of which could present only one side. On this Bδhr observes: “But certainly the wings of the eagle and the feet of the bullock were not wanting.” Two, however, is specially the number of creation (heaven and earth), of the creaturely contrast, which therefore everything made will have in itself, harmonized here by the palm as the third between cherub and cherub into the number of the divine life. Ezekiel 41:19. The two faces were that of man and of the lion, which most aptly represents the wild animal named by way of eminence ηַ ?ιָ ?δ (ζωον). The cherub turned the one face to the palm on this side, and the other to the palm on that, whereby the union of the two with the palm to form three was made very manifest. Ezekiel 41:20 illustrates what Ezekiel 41:19 intends by: on the whole house round and round; that it was from the ground or floor to the wall-work above the door, that is, to the roof, and this on the temple within to which the door led, of which, therefore, mention is made.—εְ ?χִ ?ιψΧ, local accusative or concluding formula. But with Ezekiel 41:21 comes an additional supplement in relation to the door-post work on the temple, namely, that each pair of door-posts had the significant square form already met with in Solomon’s temple, and first fully carried out in Ezekiel (see Lange on Kings, p. 73). In this way the revelation of Jehovah, the God of the world, in the world, in its cosmic relations, comes into prominence; Klief.: the number four is “the signature of the coming universality;” it will extend itself into all the world, and to it they shall enter in from all the world. (According to Klief. ξְ ?ζεּ ?ζַ ?ϊ is not stat, constr., but an unusual form for ψְ ?αֻ ?ςָ ?δ ּ ?ξְ ?ζεּ ?ζָ ?δ, an adjective, literally: “post of the square.” Keil remarks on the breviloquence.)—The sanctuary (δַ ?χֹּ ?γֶ ?ωׁ) is the most holy place (Ezekiel 41:23). The front, which it presented to the priest prophet treading the holy place, had the view as the view just described, that is, the quadriform view of the door-posts. [Hengst.: “at the front was,” etc., since the new view is compared with a former one which the prophet himself had had (Ezekiel 43:3). Klief.: “And the superficies of the whole sanctuary was likewise square.” The Targum and Rashi suppose a reference to the vision by the Chebar.] Ezekiel 41:22 describes with similar brevity of diction the wooden altar of incense, in distinction from the brazen altar of burnt-offerings. The abrupt ςֵ ?υ forms also a contrast to the coating of gold in Solomon’s temple ( “just as there is a deep silence throughout in Ezekiel concerning gold, which plays so great a part in Solomon’s temple,” Hengst.). While observing that, “in the case of the floor also and the walls mention is made only of the wooden boarding,” Hengst. refers to the “troublous times in which temple and city should be built again,” and compares Daniel 9:25; Zechariah 4:10 (comp. Doct. Reflec. 8).—The height and length (which, considering its square form, gives at the same time its breadth)—not given in the case of Solomon’s altar—may, however, be here borrowed from it (Hengst.). Keil includes in its corners the four horns found on Solomon’s altar. But in what follows: and its length, etc., he sees in εְ ?ΰָ ?ψְ ?λεֹ a mistake for ΰַ ?γְ ?πεֹ, “its pedestal;” while Hengst. can find in it only the top of the altar. But why should we not suppose it to say plainly, because it came in the way here, that the altar in all its length and round and round was wood? Ezekiel says nothing of the candlestick, and the table for the shew-bread, and indeed nothing of a furnishing of the most holy place. Keil therefore interprets the explanation: this is the table, etc., from the Pentateuch designation of the offerings “as the bread of God.” Hengst.: “because that which is set upon this altar—the incense denoting the prayers of the saints (Psalms 141:2; Revelation 5:8; Revelation 8:3)—is regarded as a spiritual food which the people present to their Heavenly King. The altar appears as the table of the Lord also in Ezekiel 44:16; the offering as food of God in Malachi 1:7. The loaves laid on the table of shew-bread denoted good works;” to which Hengst. compares Matthew 21:18 sq., the fruit of the fig-tree, that is, of the Jewish people, after which Jesus hungered. Compare also Bδhr’s (der Salom. Tempel, p. 185 sq.) objections to the view of Hengstenberg and Keil. After all, the express declaration: This is the table that, etc., has in it something surprising, which is rather strengthened than explained by Ezekiel 44:16. Bφttcher thinks that “the altar-table was meant to combine in one the old table of shew-bread and the altar of incense” (see Doct. Reflec. 8). For the rest, the expression: before Jehovah, is explained from the place where the altar of incense stood, immediately before the ark of the covenant, which was separated from it by the veil of the most holy place. In Ezekiel 41:23 supplementary mention is made of two doors (1 Kings 6:32-33), to be explained, without doubt, by the altar of incense standing at the separating point of the two divisions of the temple, that is, one door belonging to the holy place, and one to the most holy place, both which Ezekiel 41:24—had two leaves each. These two-leaved doors are, however, still more closely described by the following phrase: two turning leaves, so that each leaf had two parts which could be opened and shut,—a very suitable, arrangement, considering the breadth of these doors. According to Ezekiel 41:25, the ornaments on these temple doors are the same as those mentioned in Ezekiel 41:18 sq.—On the front of the porch (of the temple) without there was a wooden ςָ ?α. Gesen.: probably a threshold which formed a kind of pediment as stepping-place to a colonnade or temple. How is that to be conceived of? It was evidently made of wood. A threshold-like approach, a perron?—As the beholder’s look returns again and again to the ample materials presented to it, something additional is always to be observed. Thus Ezekiel 41:26 : closed windows and simple palms on the two shoulders, that is, side-walls, right and left. Either not mentioned hitherto, or at least now more exactly.—The brief concluding clause: δַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊεְ ?δָ ?ςֻ ?αִּ ?ιρεְ ?φַ ?μְ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ, probably simply intimates, that as there were closed windows and palms on the two sides of the porch, so there were windows of the kind on the side chambers, and palms on the wooden pediments. Klief.: On the side buildings (?) of the porch and of the side stories were windows and palms, and so also the ςֻ ?αִּ ?ιν. Hengst. thinks that the words: “and the steps” [pediments] (= “and besides, the steps also are to be noticed in the porch,” Ezekiel 41:25), “place the extreme end to the east over against the extreme end to the west of the gizrah, with which the section began in Ezekiel 41:15.” HINTSOn Ch. 41 Eze 41:1 sq. “We ought to go forward under God’s guidance in the ways of the Lord from glory to glory, but not to go backward or stand still except in meditation” (Starck).—“The temple a figure of the Church of Christ; as the former was gloriously built, so also the spiritual form of the Church of Christ is glorious, Psalms 45:14 [13]” (Tόb. Bib.).—“The Good Spirit leads men to the Church, there to listen devoutly to the word of God; the evil spirit keeps them back from it, 1 John 4:6” (Starke).—That that can be entitled a palace which is at the same time called a tabernacle, shows how the King had resolved to become a pilgrim, just as He who is enthroned in the sanctuary on high walks with pilgrims, and is at home in the tabernacles of those who are humble and contrite in heart. Ezekiel 41:4 sq. “The most holy place is set before us as the goal, and we understand thereby a heavenly state on earth, namely, the Church of the New Testament. Accordingly, in Ezekiel 43 the entire circuit of the mountain is called most holy, from which it is evident that no one is truly inside of this temple, or even in its courts, who is devoid of the New Testament perfection,” etc. (Cocc.)—Heavenly glory or eternal bliss is no doubt the only complete holy of holies; yet he who has entered the kingdom of grace has come to a glory which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath entered into the heart of any man, to praise and glorify God for ever.—“When we meet together, God is present in the temple (Matthew 18); for our heart is the dwelling-place of the Father and the Son in the Holy Ghost” (Starck). Ezekiel 41:5 sq. That the chambers are connected denotes the brotherly relation in the sanctuary, Psalms 133; 1 John 3:1 sq.—God provides for His servants covert and shelter in this world.—The chambers are not all of the same size, but they are all connected with the sanctuary; the same is the case with the progress and growth of the members of the body of which Christ is the Head.—The saints of God are also measured round and round; no heavier task is laid upon them, no greater temptation befalls them, than what is their Father’s will.—Indefiniteness in spiritual endeavours is a token of disease, a want of sobriety and obedience of faith. Ezekiel 41:6. Leaning upon God, upheld by Him, but not mixed up with Him in our affairs.—Of ourselves we cannot stand a single moment. Ezekiel 41:7. “In God’s house we must go upward by growth in grace, that the mind may be always the more firmly directed heavenward” (Berl. Bib.).—The breadth in the top part.—“Christians ought not to contract, but to expand as they grow older” (Starck).—Higher grace gives expansion in width and breadth. The narrower points of view with which we ascend gradually disappear.—The broader heart on the height of the Christian life in theory and practice.—Prayer an ascending stair.—But let us not forget that which lies in the middle! In the middle is the means, the way of mediation. Ezekiel 41:8. The secret of the height depends on the foundation. Ezekiel 41:12 sq. The history of dogmas is in many respects the off-place in Ezekiel’s temple. Ezekiel 41:15 sq. God knows and determines the magnitude of the Church on earth. Ezekiel 41:17. “Enlightenment is from above; only thus do we obtain a conception of heavenly things” (Starke).—Faith is a window, and, as compared with vision, a narrow one.—“Through His wounds we see into the heart of Christ as through a window” (ΰ Lapide). Ezekiel 41:18 sq. “The ever-flourishing palm is the righteous one who has overcome sin and is in the eternal habitations. And so also we are genuine men, in God’s strength, with the heart of a lion” (Heim-Hoff.).—The palm a sign of victory, of life, of eternal glory.—The view of the palm which is promised to the victor.—“Teachers ought to be men, especially to humbled consciences, but also to be lions against enemies” (O.). Ezekiel 41:21. The New Testament presents no other view than the Old. Ezekiel 41:22. “This altar is at the same time a table, as Christ is to our souls in the Holy Supper” (Starck).—Wood: the humanity, too, of Jesus was like us in all things except sin. Ezekiel 41:23 sq. Doors let in and shut out; so also does the Church.—Ornament is here combined with solemnness. We have not here the joyous worldly beauty of Greece, but neither have we the solemnness dark as death, as in Egypt. The world opens its doors half to frivolity and half to despondency.—“The sanctuary of the heart also must be shut, and not with one door only. Our treasure is incomparable, and ought to be preserved with much watchfulness and strong exhortation” (Heim-Hoff.).—“There is no mention of a veil before the holy of holies, because it was rent at the death of Christ, and must not reappear. This the Lord knew, who showed Ezekiel everything, and Himself rent the veil. Christ is the fulfilment and substitute for everything in the former temple that is wanting in the latter” (Richter).—Here on earth, however, are only windows; face to face will be first in heaven. ON CH. 40–46 1. Hδvernick rightly finds “the nervous and lofty unity” in the prophecies of Ezekiel “manifested in this section also.” “The visions of the prophet find here their fairest completion and perfect rounding off.” Already in the exposition (on Ezekiel 40:1 sq.) the harmony with the former part of Ezekiel’s prophecy has been remarked. Ezekiel 43:3 expressly refers back to Ezekiel 1, 8. The free conformity in expression between our chapters and the whole closing portion generally, and the earlier chapters, has been often proved (comp. Philippson, p. 1294). The proof is the more striking when we consider the complete difference of the subject. That we have a vision here too harmonizes not only with Ezekiel 1, 8, but in general with the prophetic character of Ezekiel, Ezekiel 8, 15, 17. The prophet has repeatedly hinted at this close of his book. Thus Ezekiel 11:16; Ezekiel 20:40; Ezekiel 36:38; Ezekiel 37:26 sq. The last passage in particular might be regarded as the text for Ezekiel 40 sq. The eighth and following chapters required by the necessity of the idea our conclusion of the book. 2. In regard to analogies in the other prophets, Ezekiel’s contemporaries, as we may well conceive, will chiefly come into consideration. Hence, above all, Ezekiel’s fellow-labourer Jeremiah. Jeremiah represents the restoration and renewal of Israel as a rebuilding of Jerusalem, Jeremiah 31:38 sq. (with this comp. in our prophet, Ezekiel 47:13 sq., Ezekiel 48). Jeremiah 33:18 is similar to Ezekiel 44:9 sq. Haggai 2:7 sq. follows entirely the thought here of a new temple, insisting on its glory in view of a meagre present. But still more analogous are the night-visions of Zechariah (Ezekiel 2:5 [1] sq., Ezekiel 4, Ezekiel 6:13 sq., Ezekiel 14). 3. The parallel between Isaiah and Ezekiel, as it stands in relation to the vision in Ezekiel 1 (p. 41), is not completed by citing Isaiah 60 as corresponding to the close of our book; but we shall have to seek the culminating point of Isaiah’s prophecy for the culmination of Ezekiel’s, in accordance with the office of this prophet to be the prophet of Jehovah’s holiness to obdurate Israel, —just as for the commencement Isaiah 6 is covered by Ezekiel 1—not so much in the close as in Ezekiel 53. The corresponding pendant to our closing chapters is the life-like description given there of the Messiah and His sacrifice of Himself. It is this self-sanctification of Jehovah through His servant Israel which in Isaiah corresponds to the self-glorification of Jehovah in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40 sq.) by means of the new sanctuary and the new nationality; and this, again, accords with Ezekiel’s office, to behold the glory of Jehovah in the misery of the exile. In this respect Ezekiel stands to Isaiah somewhat as Easter and Pentecost do to Good Friday. 4. The different views, especially regarding the vision of the temple, may be distinguished generally as subjective and objective. I. The views which derive the explanation of Ezekiel 40 sq. solely or chiefly from Ezekiel’s subjectivity: (1) Already Villalpandus saw everywhere here only reminiscences of Solomon’s temple and of Solomon’s era, and consequently a similar line of thought to that in Ezra 3:12. Similarly Grotius, only that he reconciled the differences between Ezekiel’s temple and that of Solomon by ascribing them to the temple at the time of its destruction, just as Bunsen refers in this connection to 2 Kings 16. According to both these expositors, Ezekiel traced out from reminiscences a pattern for the future restoration. Thus, according to Ewald, Ezekiel becomes “a prophetic lawgiver.” “Such an undertaking, quite unusual in the case of earlier prophets,” is explained from the “predominating thoughts and aspirations of the better class of those days for the restoration of the subverted kingdom.” “Ezekiel probably meditated long, with passionate longing and lively remembrance, on the institutions of the demolished temple, etc.; what appeared to him great and glorious became impressed upon his mind as a pattern, with which he compared the Messianic expectations and demands, etc., until at length the outline of the whole arrangement which he here writes down pressed itself upon him!” “Above all, he sketches the holy objects, temple and altar, with the utmost exactness and vividness, as if a spirit (!) impelled him, now when they were destroyed, at least to catch up their image in a faithful and worthy form for the redemption that will one day certainly come; so that he must have diligently instructed himself in these matters from the best written and oral sources” (!). “Thus it is quite in keeping with Ezekiel’s way of prophesying, that he introduces everything as if he had been borne in spirit into the restored and completed temple, accompanied throughout by a heavenly guide, and had learned exactly from him all the single parts of this unique building as to their nature and use.” The paragraph Ezekiel 47:1-12 is, in Ewald’s opinion, “from its great, all-embracing sense, quite adapted to bring to a close briefly and pithily all these presentiments!” “Yet when precepts more moral are to be given, or the perfected kingdom has to be described in its extent, reaching even beyond the temple, this assumed form (!) easily passes over into the simple prophetic discourse.” (2) While the foregoing view looks to realization, Hitzig, for example, entirely rejects the idea that Ezekiel “considered such things (as our chapters contain) possible, feasible, or probable, and relatively commanded and prescribed them.” “One does not or did not reflect that the prophet’s calling was to express the demands of the idea, indifferent in the first instance about their realization.” All is pure fancy, a mere castle-in-the-air, a kind of “Platonic sketch,” as Herder expresses himself. The self-criticism of this view of our chapters can hardly be more suitably given than when Hitzig continues: “Inasmuch as this or that could be set in order otherwise than he imagines, he would not in regard to plans and proposals have resisted obstinately, but would have known how to distinguish the unessential of the execution from the essential of the thing itself. He sketches the future in the form he must wish it to take, in which it really would have the fairest appearance. If the reality falls short of the image, then the idea is defectively realized; but the fault lies in the reality, not in the idea, and Ezekiel is not responsible for it.” This, moreover, is merely what already Doederlein and others have held with respect to the closing portion of our book. Similarly Herder: “Ezekiel’s manner is to paint an image entire and at length; his mode of conception appears to demand great visions, figures written over on all sides, even tiresome, difficult, symbolical acts, of which his whole book is full. Israel in his wandering upon the mountains of his dispersal, among other tongues and peoples, had need of a prophet such as this one was, etc. So also as regards this temple. Another would have sketched it with soaring figures in lofty utterances; he does so in definite measurements. And not only the temple, but also appurtenances, tribes, administration, land, etc. How far has Israel always, so far as depended on his own efforts, remained below the commands, counsels, and promises of God!” (3) Bφttcher has attempted to combine both views, and after him Philippson, who expresses himself to the following effect: “Ezekiel the prophet, sunk in himself, brooding over matters in the distance and in solitude, had not, like Jeremiah, upon whom the immediate reality pressed, viewed the occurrences simply as punishment of defection and degeneracy, but was conscious also of their inward signification, which came to him in the appearance of a vision. Hence he represented the destruction of the temple as a suspension of the relation of revelation between God and Israel; and so much the more necessary was it to represent the restoration of that same relation as the return of God into the restored sanctuary. Now, from the peculiar character of Ezekiel, this necessarily had to assume a form at once ideal and real,—ideal in its entirety as something future, real as individual and special, matter of fact in its appearance.” As the “indubitable motive of the prophet,” the following is given: “to keep alive in the exiles in the midst of Babylonian idolatry the idea of the one temple, and the priestly institute consecrated to it, as the centre of the religion of the one God; and at the return into Palestine to confirm the life of the people in their calling, by the removal of all elements of strife, and by approximation to the Mosaic state of things.” Hengstenberg’s view is surprisingly near the above one; he says: “With the exception of the Messianic section in Ezekiel 47:1-12, the fulfilment of all (!) the rest of the prophecy belongs to the times immediately after the return from the Chaldean exile. So must every one of its first hearers and readers have understood it. Jeremiah, whom Ezekiel follows throughout, had prophesied the restoration of the city and temple 70 years after the beginning of the Chaldean servitude, falling in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. Thirty-two years had already elapsed. Forty years after the devastation of Egypt (Ezekiel 29:13), the nations visited by the Chaldeans shall get back to their former state. According to Ezekiel 11:16, the restoration is to follow in a brief space after the destruction of the temple. We have before us a prophecy for which it is essential (!) to give truth and poetry (! !), which contains a kernel of real thoughts, yet does not present them naked, but clothed with flesh and blood, that they may be a counterpoise to the sad reality, because they fill the fancy, that fruitful workshop of despair, with bright (!) images, and thus make it an easier task to live in the word at a time when all that is visible cries aloud, Where is now thy God? The incongruity between the prophecy of Ezekiel and the state of things after the exile, vanishes at once by distinguishing between the thoughts and their clothing, and if we can rightly figure to ourselves the wounds for which the healing plaster is here presented, and at the same time the mental world of the priest (Ezekiel), and the materials given in the circumstances surrounding him, for clothing the higher verities which he had to announce to the people.” II. The views which above all look to and keep hold of the objectivity of the divine inspiration of Ezekiel. The very regard which must, in one way or other, be paid to the circumstances under which the people for whom, and the Babylonian exile in which, Ezekiel prophesied, objectivizes in some measure his subjectivity, so that not all the views hitherto cited of our chapters and the ones that follow are to be designated as purely subjective; the properly objective, however, will be, that “the hand of Jehovah was upon him,” that he was brought “in visions of God” to the land of Israel. Here the distinction is drawn by his own hand between the prophet of Israel and the fanciful Jewish priest; and not only this, but the unavoidable and irreconcilable alternative presents itself: either Ezekiel was a man of God, or a deceiver, for whom the fact that he had deceived himself also with assumed divine objectivity were no excuse, but would only be his self-condemnation. The case of Ezekiel, for the sake of truth, is too solemn for thinking of “poetic clothing” in the case before us. The subjective for the form before us, is to keep in mind when considering it what that form is. It has pleased God to speak to us through men. If we take full account of the national peculiarity of Israel in general during the whole old covenant, and of the peculiar personality in the case of our vision here, that is, that Ezekiel is the priest-prophet, that he above all other prophets is, as Umbreit says, a “born symbolist” ( “in the temple which he erects he makes known his greatness as a symbolist, as well by what he says as by what he passes over in silence”),—if we concede to Umbreit the “surprising skill in popularizing instruction” which he observes in Ezekiel, we shall have to accept as the ultimate ground why Israel was the mediator of the world’s salvation, and Ezekiel was chosen to behold the temple of the future, divine wisdom and its purpose for the world, that is, the objective κατ̓ἐξοχην above everything subjective. In accordance with this principle, we have to judge of (1) the view objectivized in this sense of a model for the rebuilding of the temple after the return from the exile, the supporters of which assume a building-plan “issued under divine authority,” given by Jehovah through the prophet. Although there is a resemblance between Exodus 25:9; Exodus 25:40 and Ezekiel 40:4, yet it is not said to Ezekiel regarding Israel: “according to all that I show thee, the pattern of the dwelling, etc., even so shall ye make it;” the prophet is only to “convey,” announce (πָ ?βַ ?γ) all that he sees to the house of Israel. From this circumstance, and not because the reality fell short of the idea (Hitzig, Herder), or, as Philippson adduces here, “the similar fate of so many Mosaic precepts,” the fact is explained that the post-exile temple was built without any regard to our vision. Only the fundamental reference to Solomon’s temple, which in general obtains in Ezekiel also, meets us in Ezra 3:12. This fact, the more remarkable considering the nearness of time, shows that Ezekiel 40:4, soon after it was written, and when fully known, was not regarded as a divine building-specification. We do not need, therefore, to express, as Hengst., “the obvious impossibility of erecting a building according to the specifications here given.” The circumstance that the building materials are not given has at least not prevented the temple of Ezekiel from being, with more or less success, constructed and fashioned after his statements. Bunsen says that “the temple here forms a very easily realized, congruous whole, of which an exact outline may be made, as the prophet also has evidently done.” Umbreit, too, holds this latter view. And although we have to do not with an architect but with a prophet, yet nothing stands in the way of our believing that the subjectivity of Ezekiel was preeminently qualified for this vision, from the fact that he possessed architectural capacity” (Introd. § 7). (2) The symbolical view. It corresponds generally to the character of Holy Writ. (Comp. Lange, Rev. Introd. p. 11.) In particular it pays due regard to the law of Moses, to the part of it relating to worship, the subject here. Especially when the whole worship of Israel is concentrated in the temple, a symbolical view respecting a vision thereof will be quite in place. Thereby only its due right is given to this objective, to the divine idea, in the shape which it has above all assumed in Israelitish worship. The symbolical character, moreover, is specially appropriate for the prophetic writings. As has already been often said and pointed out, the symbolical predominates in Ezekiel; and as to these concluding chapters, Hδvernick adduces, as indicating their general character, the description of the circuit of the new temple (Ezekiel 42:15 sq.), the representation of the entrance, etc. of the divine glory (Ezekiel 43:1 sq.), the river (Ezekiel 47:1 sq. etc.), and observes that “it is just such passages that form the conclusion to the previous description, and hence cast a light on it.” Comp. on Ezekiel 43:10 sq. But everything architectonic is not a symbol, although everything of that nature will indeed primarily relate to the building to be erected, and will thereby at the same time in some way serve the idea of the whole. This character comes out clearly even in individual statements of number, yet all such measurements are not therefore to be interpreted symbolically. Nay, as the exposition shows, there are here bare numbers, resisting every attempt to trace them back to the idea. It is sufficient in respect to the numbers, that (comp. Umbreit, p. 259 sq.) 4, as “signature not only of regularity but also of the revelation of God in space,” e.g. in the quadrangle of the temple; 3, “the signature of the divine,” e.g. in the sets of three gates; 10, “perfection complete in itself,” occurring often; likewise the “sacred number” 7; and the number 12 in the tables for preparing the offerings (Ezekiel 40), represent symbolism. (On the symbolism of numbers, comp. Lange on Rev. Introd. p. 14.) Umbreit rightly maintains: “It is a symbolical temple, notwithstanding the arid and dry description, in which only exact specifications of the number of cubits and the apparently most insignificant calculations and measurings occur;” as he says, “quite in keeping with the poverty of the immediately succeeding age and the dignity of the most significant inwardness.” (3) The Messianic view (for which comp. Lange on Kings, p. 60 sq.) is only the taking full advantage of and applying the symbolic view in general. Symbol and type, emblem and pattern, must mutually interpenetrate one another in a law like that of Israel. What separates Israel from the heathen is its law; what qualifies Israel for the whole world is its promise. But now, because of sin, the law has come in between the promise and the fulfilment; that sin becoming the more powerful as transgression may make manifest for faith the grace which alone is still more powerful, and that consequently the necessity of the promise should be the more apparent; that is, the pedagogy of the law (and especially of its ethical part) to Christ. Thus the law of Israel is the theocratic expression of Israel, the servant of God, as he ought to be, and hence prefigures the servant of Jehovah who is the fulfilling of the law, as He is the personal fulfilling of Israel, inasmuch as in Him who was delivered for our transgressions, and raised again for our δικαιωσις, Israel after the Spirit is represented; so that here out of the law relating to worship rise up, as on the one hand sacrifice and the priesthood, so on the other the concentration of the whole of worship in the temple, this parable of the future, with reference to which Christ, John 2, gives the σημειον: Destroy (λυσατε) this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (ἐγερω), saying this of the temple of His body; as also the disciples remembered when He had risen from the dead, and as the accusation against Him ran (Matthew 26:61). Accordingly the law, and especially the temple and its service, is σκιανἐχωντωνμελλοντων: the future σωμα is given in the σωματουΧριστου (σωμαδεκατηρτισωμου, Hebrews 10). “This reference to the future,” says Ziegler (in his thoughtful little work on the “historical development of divine revelation”), “is the most dynamical among all the references of the law; its significance for its own time is so weak and unimportant, that it seems to exist solely for the sake of the future, although its office is the opposite of the office of the New Testament, which is formed and abiding in the hearts of men (διακονιατηςδικαιοσυνης, τουτνευματος); still it was a sensible type, a strongly marked and distinctly stamped shadow of the coming substances, and yet, moreover, a veil which concealed it.” What has been said shows the typical signification of the vision of Ezekiel, in which the symbolical view of it is completed, and the pedagogic and providential necessity of that form borrowed from the legal worship in which it is enshrined. Here is more than what (as Hengstenberg can say) “suffices to employ the fancy.” For the anointed one is τελοςτουνομου. But as the Messianic view of our chapters is thus justified by the symbolic view, when we have taken into account the law, particularly the law of worship in Israel, so likewise the already (Doct. Reflec. 1) noted connection of Ezekiel 40 sq. with the previous chapters, especially with Ezekiel 37:26 sq. (p. 351), yields the same result, as also the position after Ezekiel 38, 39 and the relation to this prophecy will have to be taken into consideration. What holds good of Eze 37:26 sq. will also be a hint for our chapters. But even the Talmudists saw themselves compelled (principally because of the treatment of the law of Moses, to be spoken of presently) to acknowledge “that the exposition of this portion would be first given in Messianic times,” as the “best” (according to Philippson) Jewish expositors recognised here “the type of a third temple.” The saying of Jesus in John ii. possibly alluded to the exegetical tradition of the Jews. Hδvernick accommodates as follows: “The shattered old theocratic forms rather than new ones were above all cognate to the priestly mind of Ezekiel;” so “he sees nothing perish of that which Jehovah has founded for eternity; those forms beam before him revivified, animated with fresh breath, and lit up in the splendour of true glory; he recognises their full realization as coming in first in Messianic times.” As errors are still committed, e.g. by Schmieder, in the symbolizing of particulars, so the Messianic typology of a Cocceius has deserved, although only in part, the anathema on “mystical allegories,” which above all modern criticism utters; for our defect in understanding in respect of many particulars will always have to be conceded. The Christian idea, however, the Old Testament typical symbolizing of which we have here to expound, is not only the idea of Christ, but also the idea of the Christian Church, the kingdom of God in Christ. If the resurrection of the Anointed One comes into consideration in the first respect, so in the latter does the consummation of the kingdom of grace, after its last affliction, into the kingdom of glory; comp. Revelation 21:22. The one is as eschatological in the wider, that is, christological in the narrower sense, as the other is eschatological in the narrower, or christological in the wider sense. By the translating of our passage into the higher key of John’s Apocalypse, the relation of Ezekiel 40 sq. to Ezekiel 38, 39 must be so much the more evident. Comp. Doct. Reflec. on xxxviii. and xxxix. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 42 1And he led me forth to the outer court, the way northwards, and brought me to the chamber [that is, what there was of chambers] which is over against the gizrah, and [in fact] which is over against the building, toward the north. 2Before the length [in front of the length] of a hundred cubits, the opening toward the north, and the breadth fifty cubits. 3Over against the twenty of the inner court, and over against the pavement of the outer court; gallery [was] before gallery in the third (that is, galleries). 4And before the chambers was a walk ten cubits broad, to the inner [court] way of one cubit, and their openings to 5the north. And the upper chambers were shortened, for the galleries consume [take away] from them, from the [the space of the] lower and also from the 6[the space of the] middle as respects the building. For they were three-storied and had no pillars as the pillars of the courts: therefore [space was] taken 7away from the lowest and the middle, from the ground. And a dividing-wall which is outside, close by the chambers, toward the outer court, in front of the chambers, its length was fifty cubits. 8For the length of the chambers which are to the outer court was fifty cubits; and [yet] lo, before the temple a hundred cubits. 9And from under it [the dividing-wal] were these chambers: 10the entrance was on the east in coming to them from the outer court. In the breadth of the dividing-wall of the court, toward the east, fronting the gizrah, 11and fronting the building, were chambers. And a way before them; as the look of the chambers which were towards the north, as their length so their breadth 12and all their outgoings, and as their arrangements, and as their openings, So also the openings of the chambers which were toward the south, an opening was at the head of the way, the way in face of the dividing-wall turned to it, toward the east in Coming [thence] to them [or: eastwards when one came to them (the chambers)]. 13And he said to me, The chambers of the north, the chambers of the south, which are in front of the gizrah, these are chambers of holiness, where the priests who approach Jehovah shall eat the most holy things; there shall they set down the most holy things, and [that] the meat-offering, 14and the sin-offering, and the guilt-offering, for the place is holy. The priests when entering shall not go out of the holy place to the outer court, and [but] there they shall lay down their garments wherein they shall minister; for they are holiness; they shall put on other garments, and [so] approach to 15that which [belongs] to the people. And he finished the measures of the inner house, and led me out the way of the gate whose face is toward the east, and measured it [the house] round and round. 16He measured the east side on [with] the measuring-rod five hundred [cubits?] rods [measured by rods] on the measuring-rod around. 17He measured the north side, “five hundred” in rods with the measuring-rod. 18He measured the south side, “five hundred” in rods with the 19measuring-rod. He turned to the west side; he measured “five hundred” in 20rods with the measuring-rod. Toward the four winds measured he it; a wall was to it round and round, the length “five hundred,” and the breadth “five hundred,” to separate between the holy and the profane. Ezekiel 42:1. Sept.: ... καταἀνατολαςκατεναντιτ. πυληςτ. προςβοῤῥανκ. εἰσηγαγενμἐκ. ἰδουεʼ ?ξεδρκιδεκαπεντε, ἐχομεναιτουἀπολοιπουκ. ἐχομεναιτουδιοριζοντοςπροςβοῤῥαν. Vulg.: … et contra ζdem vergentem ad oquilonem. Ezekiel 42:2. ... ἑκατονμηκοςπροςβοῤῥαν—Vulg.: … in facie … ostii aquilonis et latitudinis. Ezekiel 42:3. διαγεγραμμεναιὁντροποναἱπυλαιτ. αὐλςτ. ἐσωτερας, κ. ὁντροπονταπεριστυλατ. αὐληςτ. ἐξωτεραςἐστιχιρμεναι, ἀντιπροσωποιστοαιτρισσαι. Vulg.: … ubi erat porticus juncta porticui triplici. Ezekiel 42:4. ... ἐπιπηχειςἑκατοντομηκος, κ. τα—Vulg.: … ad interior a respiciens viζ cubiti unius. Et … (5) ubi erant … humiliora, quia supportabant porticus, quζ ex illis eminebant de inferioribus et de mediis ζdificii. (Another reading: ετϊϊιδο, fem.) Ezekiel 42:5. κ. οἱπεριπατοιοἱὑπερωοιὡσαυτωςʼ ? ὁτιἐξειχετοτοπεριστυλονἐξαὐτος, ἐκτουὑποκατωθενπεριστυλου, κ. τοδιαστημἀοὑτωςπεριστυλονκ. διαστημα, κ. οὑτωςστοαι. Ezekiel 42:6. Διοτι … στυλοιτωνἐξωτερωνʼ ? διατουτοἐξειχοντοτων … ἀποτ. γης. Vulg.: … Tristega … propterea eminebant de … a terra cubitis quinquaginta. Ezekiel 42:7. Κ. φωςἐξωθεν, ὁντροπονκ. αἱἐξεδραι … τηςἐξωτεραςαἱβλεπουσαιἀπεoακτιτ. ἐξεδρωντωνπροςβοῤῥαν—Vulg. Et peribolus exterior secundum— Ezekiel 42:8. ... τωνβλεπουσωνεἰςτ. αὐλην … κ.αὑταιεἰσινἀντιπροσωποιταυταις, τοπανEzekiel 42:9. Sept.: κ. αιθυραιτ. ἐξεδρωντουτωντηςεἰσοδουτ. προςὰνατολκς … δἰαὐτων—Vulg.: Et erat subter gazo phylacia hζc introitus ab oriente ingredientium in ea—(Qeri: εּ ?ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ϊַ ?ϊδַֹ ?μְּ ?ωָׁ ?λεֹ ?ϊ and δַ ?ξֵּ ?αιΰ f). Ezekiel 42:10. κατατοφωςτουἐνἀρχητουπεριπατουʼ ? κ. ταπροςνοτονκαταπροσωποντουδιοριζοντοςʼ ? κ. αἱἐξεδραιEzekiel 42:11. κ. ὀπεριπατοςκαταπροσωποναὐτων, καταταμετρατ. ὲξεδρων … κ. καταπασαςταςἐπιστροφαςαὐτωνκ. καταταφωτααὐτωνκ. καταταθυρωματααὐτων. Vulg.: … et omnis introitus eorum et similitudines et ostia eorum. Ezekiel 42:12. τωνἐξεδρως … κ. καταταθυρωματαἀπ̓ἀρχηςτουκεριπατουὡςἐπιφωςδιαστηματοςκαλαμου, κ. κατ̓ἀνατολαςτουεἰσκορευεσθαιδἰαὐτων. Vulg.: Secundum … quζ via erat ante vestibulum separatum per viam orientalem ingredientibus. Ezekiel 42:13. ... καταπροσωποντωνδιαστηματων, … αἱἐξεδραιτουἁγιου … οιςἱοιΣαδδουκ—Vulg.: … ante ζdificium separatum … gazophylacia sancta … ad dominum in sancta sanctorum. Ezekiel 42:14. Οὐκεἰσελενσονταιἐκειπαρεξτωνἱερεων, κ. οὐκἐξελευσονται … ὁπωςδιαπσντοςἁγιοιὠσινοἱπροσαγοντεςʼ ? κ. μηάπτωνταιτουστολισμουαὐτων … ἐναὐτοις, διοτιἁγιαἐστιςʼ ? … ότανἁπτωνταιτουλαου. (Another reading: αδν, masc. Qeri: εμָ ?αְ ?ωׁ ?εּ). Ezekiel 42:15. ... συνετελεσθηἡδιαμετρησις … ἑσωθεν … διεμετρησεντοὑποδειγματ. οἰκου … ἐνδιαταξει. Ezekiel 42:16. Κ. ἐστηκατανωτουτ. πυληςτ. βλεπουσηςκατʼ ? ἀνατολαςκ. διεμετρησενπεντακοσιουςἐντ. καλαμωτ. μετρου. Vulg.: … contra ventum … calamos in calamo mensurζ—(many codd. and all translations read ξΰεϊ instead of ΰξεϊ.) Ezekiel 42:17. Κ. ἐπεστρεψενπρος … κ. διεμετρησεντοκαταπροσωποντουβοῤῥαπηχειςπεντακοσιουςἐντ. καλαμω— Ezekiel 42:18. Κ. ἐπεστρεψενπροςθαλασσανκ. διεμετρ. τοκατ. προσωπ. τ. θαλασσης, πεντακοσιους. Vulg.: … quingentos calamos … per circuitum. Ezekiel 42:19. Κ. ἐπεστρ. πρ. νοτονκ. διεμ. καταπροσωπ. τ. νοτου, πεντακοσ. ἐν—Vulg.: Et ad ventum occidentalem. Ezekiel 42:20. εἰςτατεσσαραμερητουαὐτοςμετρου. Κ. διεταξεναὐτονκ. περιβολοναὐτωκυκλω, πεντακοσιωνπροςἀνκτολαςκ. πεντακοσιωνπηχεωνεὐρος, τουδιαστελλεινἀναμεσοντωνἀγιωνκ. ἀναμεσοντουπροτειχισματοςτουἐνδιαταξειτουοἰκου.—Vulg.: … mensus est murum ejus undique … cubitorum … cubitorum, dividentem inter— REMARKSEze_42:1-14. The Chambers of HolinessThe leading forth of Eze 42:1 is easy to be understood, both from Ezekiel 41. and from the outer court, where the structure of cells for the priests about to be described is situated, for δַ ?μְּ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?δ suggests to us such a structure. Comp. moreover, Ezekiel 40:17 sq. and Ezekiel 40:44 sq. The outer court here harmonizes with the first passage, while its purpose does not; the one there was designed for the people. It would harmonize with the second passage that there too the purpose was for the priests; on the other hand, the inner court does not harmonize.—That it is added: and brought me, etc., is quite in the copious style of Ezekiel, as the immediately following will likewise show. The general statement: the way northwards, is made more precise by the closer fixing of the locality, in which the expression: over against the gizrah, repeats itself in: over against the building (situated there, Ezekiel 41:12 sq.), just as the northern direction mentioned in the outset does by: towards the north. Hengst. expresses the opinion that, considering the object of the gizrah-building, an adjacent building on either side withdrawing it from view was very appropriate, and that the description is designed to point to that.—In Ezekiel 42:2, ΰֶ ?μַ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ιΧ can hardly (as Hengst.) mean: “before the length” (determined for the gizrah. from east to west), for the repeated ΰֶ ?μ is merely a continuation. It was the front-length of the cell building to which Ezekiel sees himself brought, as also the opening toward the north shows that the doors of the building opened northwards.—The hundred cubits of length agree with Ezekiel 41:13, so that both buildings simply cover each other as to length; whereas the sacrificial kitchens (Ezekiel 46:19) embarrass Keil, who needs for them still forty cubits of length westwards behind the cell building; while Hengstenberg claims for them no separate building, but, as is usually the case with kitchens, places them below in the cell building. According to Keil, the cell building would stretch along still before the temple.—By the description in Ezekiel 42:3 : over against the twenty, etc., the breadth of fifty cubits is put in relation to the twenty cubits’ breadth of free space belonging to the inner court (Ezekiel 41:10), and at the same time more closely stated to be in a southern direction towards the temple (Hengst.: eastward), as the following: over against the pavement (Ezekiel 40:17), on its part points out clearly the northern direction; or a reference to what is farthest out, the outer court, is added to the reference made by the first πֶ ?βֶ ?γ to what is inmost.—By the statement that gallery ran before gallery in the third, Hengst. understands: that one looked down from the walk before the chambers of the third story to another walk that was before the chambers of the second story (?). Keil: one gallery in front of the other or towards it (?). Kliefoth takes ςַ ?μ=ΰֶ ?μ ( “on,” “over”), but what would ςַ ?μΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ι mean? Also, αַּ ?ωְׁ ?μִ ?ωִׁ ?ιρ does not mean, as he supposes with Bφttcher: “into the threefold.” As Ezekiel 41:10 can refer only to our verse, we shall in the case of ΰֶ ?μΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ιΞΰַ ?ϊִּ ?ιχ have to think of the first-mentioned galleries of the gizrah house, Ezekiel 41:15 sq.; and this so much the more as the description of the cell structure was determined immediately (Ezekiel 42:1) after this building. Thus the galleries of the two buildings ran front to front; and this is said only of the third, namely, the two third galleries, for the first mention of the middle ones is in Ezekiel 42:5; the highest also caught the eye first, and with them at the same time the height of the building could be given as of three stories. The walkEze_42:4—before the chambers, which was ten cubits broad, can only be supposed as extending from west to east before the northern long side of the building. To the inner court (Ezekiel 8:3; Ezekiel 8:16; Ezekiel 10:3) was a way of one cubit in breadth; this denotes the narrow approach to the inner court, on which the wider passage round the east wall of the building abutted; and according to this account, returning to the walk, it is said of the doors of the chambers or of the galleries, that they opened on the passage to the north. Hengstenberg makes the walk to be the “approach to the chambers,” from which one had access to the interior of the chambers, and this interior to be “one cubit from the street, which was the thickness of the walls” (!). Keil, who can extract no suitable sense from the text, reads with the Sept.: ξֵ ?ΰָ ?δΰַ ?ξֹּ ?ϊ, thus making a way of a hundred cubits long lead through the north gate into the inner court (!). Ezekiel 42:5 harmonizes the galleries with the chambers, speaking first of the upper as Ezekiel 42:3 had spoken of the third galleries. These chambers are said to be shortened, and indeed they were the narrowest; and therefore it is remarked of them alone in the first place, for (the details will become clear in Ezekiel 42:6) the galleries took away from their breadth (ιεֹ ?λְ ?μεּ only here, instead of ιֹ ?ΰλְ ?μεּ). They were shorter, it is said, than the lower above all, but also than the middle. So Keil understands the second and third ξִ ?ο in a comparative sense. If it is to be taken as the first, that in ξֵ ?δֵ ?πָּ ?δ, then that one must be understood of the chambers in general, and the more exact definition must be given with the two following ξֵ, as Hengstenberg says: “in the case of the middle ones, the half of the space which in relation to the lower was cut off by the galleries from the upper.” He makes αִּ ?πְ ?ιָ ?οto be “building space—space which otherwise might have been built upon.” The mode of expression indicates that the prophet means to say: the structure, which had lower, middle, and upper chambers (for they were three-storied, Ezekiel 42:6), was shortened in the upper chambers, since the galleries there in particular occupied part of the breadth which the under chambers had entire, and which even the middle chambers had; the reason is, they had no pillars to support the upper galleries to the three stories of chambers, and so the upper chambers were necessarily contracted, and consequently had to lose in breadth, since the galleries which ran along the outer walls had to seek support in rests which were taken from the chambers. The explanatory expression: from the ground, throws light upon the αִּ ?πְ ?ιָ ?ο of the previous verse; hence the building there comes into consideration as to the ground-space which it could afford on its lower floor for the under and the middle chambers, which thus, especially the first, were broader than the upper, although self-evidently the middle chambers too must have been shortened by their gallery in comparison with the under. As the building became higher, the chambers became shorter.—We have to notice the reference to the pillars of the courts, of which nothing has been said hitherto, and we shall have to suppose them where they are wanting here, namely, in Ezekiel 40:17 sq. and 44 sq. The chambers there, too, may have had stories.—The whole description of the galleries, and the way in which this description is kept in connection with the building on the gizrah, is hardly intended merely to make plain the possibility of access to the chambers of the second and third stories, but is designed to give us the impression, that from the galleries, so easily accessible from the chambers, an equally prompt supervision over this hinder and interior part of the environs of the sanctuary was made possible, as by the guardrooms in the case of the gates; if the chambers here correspond to these guardrooms, then the galleries here correspond to the barriers there. Ezekiel 42:7. βָ ?γֵ ?ψ, that which “fences off,” is a dividing-wall, a boundary-fence, which is measured fifty cubits long, and consequently is to be sought for opposite the breadth of the building and on the east side, where the narrow way (Ezekiel 42:4) led to the inner court, in distinction from which the further description will have respect to the outer court. In the first place, however, it is said to be outside, for if this wall ran along the chambers, its position is made plainer by the phrase: towards the outer court (where γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ may remind us of γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ, Ezekiel 42:4); as also: in front of the chambers, illustrates still better the phrase: close by (running equally with) the chambers. If this wall concealed the narrow access to the inner court, still more so did it the under chambers on the east towards the outer court, and what had to be performed in these chambers, for Ezekiel 42:8—the length of the wall corresponded to the length of the chambers which are to the outer court, that is, which here come into consideration for this court, as the eye fell on them in looking from the east. The proper length of a hundred cubits on the north side—before the temple, because the temple rose behind in its length as point of view and boundary—is very perceptibly distinguished by εְ ?δִ ?πֵּ ?δ from the above-mentioned so-called length (the breadth of fifty cubits). The reason why there is no mention of a dividing-wall in the case of the chambers of this northern long side perhaps is, that their windows and galleries (comp. on Ezekiel 42:3) lay towards the gizrah, and only the doors opened towards the north (Ezekiel 42:4). Ezekiel 42:9. So the east side chambers rose up from under the dividing-wall, which concealed them only below, but did not cover them so as to cut off the light from them.—The observation regarding the entrance, that it was on the east, which is still further described by: in coming to them from the outer court, may indeed be understood in distinction from the narrow way which led along there to the inner court (Ezekiel 42:7; Ezekiel 42:4), but is rather to be taken as a corroboration, that whereas people for the most part got at these chambers from the east, a fence was requisite on this side also of the outer court. Hengstenberg converts the δַ ?ξֵּ ?αִ ?ε‌ ?֯ ?ΰ, sufficiently intelligible by the clause: in coming, etc., into a door which the “fence-wall” must have had. Ezekiel 42:10 makes the transition to a parallel building on the other side, by first repeating the last described, in such a manner, however, that no misunderstanding is possible; hence breadth is said, and not “length,” as in Ezekiel 42:7. The chambers were in the breadth of the dividing-wall, for they were situated in this breadth. The court to this wall is the just now mentioned (Ezekiel 42:9) outer court, and the expression: toward the east, likewise borrowed from Ezekiel 42:9, is a closer description of the position of the dividing-wall and consequently of the chambers, so that δַ ?χָּ ?γִ ?ιν is not to be changed into δַ ?γָּ ?ψεֹ ?ν, which definition comes afterward in Ezekiel 42:12. The description: fronting the gizrah, and (as Ezekiel 42:1): fronting the building (upon it), which occupied the whole length, signifies exactly the same as: “in front of the length of a hundred cubits,” in Ezekiel 42:2; hence the chambers were concealed on this side also by the gizrah building. That which in Ezekiel 42:4 is called ξַ ?δֲ ?μַ ?κְ, is in Ezekiel 42:11 by way of variety called γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ, but any misunderstanding is guarded against by the observation: as the look, etc. (that the chambers had the same look as those toward the north). The comprehensive: as the look, etc., said on the occasion of mentioning the way, is specialized by what follows. We would express it thus: As in relation to their length, so in relation to their breadth and in relation to all their, etc. The arrangements are what concerns the way and manner of the whole, and the particulars. Finally, the openings, although already comprehended in the outgoings, are, on account of an appendage to be immediately given to the north chambers, once more specially mentioned. Ezekiel 42:12, in the first place, shows that the chambers spoken of are to be conceived of as toward the south, in the same way as their patterns were “toward the north” (Ezekiel 42:11); it then proceeds to mention “a door-opening,” which, while only supposed in Ezekiel 42:4; Ezekiel 42:7, is now described in detail. Leading into the inner court, it was situated where the way began, or had its head at the wall of the court; hence it was constructed in this wall, wherefore it is added that the way proceeded αִּ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ι, in face of the dividing-wall, that is, so that this wall had it as it were before its eyes. γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ is perhaps so often repeated because the narrower walk in question (Ezekiel 42:4) is distinguished as γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ from the longer and broader “walks.” δַ ?βְּ ?γֶ ?ψֶ ?ϊ is collective, because said at the same time for the north side, δֲ ?βִ ?ιπָ ?δ occurs only here; it is derived from δָ ?βִ ?ο, which Meier interprets by: “to bend off,” “to bend,” “to incline,” translating the adjective here: “bending,” “turning,” or “stretching” towards, which would be quite suitable to αִּ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ιΧ, but would still more vividly express the thought: the dividing-wall inclined itself to the way passing before its eyes. Gesenius, taking for guide the rabbinical δָ ?βεּ ?ο, which means: “noble,” “graceful,” but also: “insignificant,” renders δָ ?βִ ?ιο by: “convenient,” “suitable,” which Keil transforms into this, that it denotes the wall corresponding to the cells, and running the same distance with them before the east narrow side of the building. In the remainder, similar to Ezekiel 42:9.—The interpretation given of Eze 42:10 sq., almost the same as that of Keil, supposes only two cell buildings, whereas Kliefoth and Hengstenberg reckon three, adding an eastern “priests’ court.” Keil places the building here “at or on the broad-side (?) of the court-wall over against the separate place.” In Ezekiel 42:13 (as Ezekiel 40:45 sq.) his guide tells the prophet the purpose for which the north and south chambers were intended (only these two kinds of chambers are mentioned, completely refuting the idea of more than two buildings of the kind).—Which are in front, etc., since they ran along in front of the long side (hence also simply gizrah) of the off-place.—δַ ?χֹּ ?γֶ ?ωׁ, not abstr. pro concr., but as throughout, holiness, corresponding to the holiness of Jehovah, which is no single divine attribute (comp. Ezekiel 20:39 sq., and on Ezekiel 24. p. 343, etc.), but the expression of the entire relation of God to Israel (Bδhr, der Salom. Tempel, p. 56 sq.). This relation is once more strongly pronounced in χָ ?γְ ?ωֵׁ ?ιδַ ?χֳּ ?γָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν, by which are designated the priests’ portions of the offerings, that is, of the offerings named (meat-offering, sin-offering, and guilt-offering), which had to be eaten by the priests alone, to the exclusion of their families (Leviticus 2:3; Leviticus 2:10; Leviticus 6:9 sq., 19 sq., Ezekiel 7:6, Ezekiel 10:12); hence the detailed account of their status (Hengst.: “who are near the Lord”) and official character. In the case of the heave-offering or wave-offering, the priests’ portion was partaken of even by the female members of the priests’ families (Leviticus 10:14). Comp. Bδhr, Symb. des Mos. Kultus; Kurtz, Der Alttestamentliche Opferkultus. On the distinction between “eating” and “setting down” Keil says: “Because neither the meal mingled with oil of the meat-offering, nor the flesh of the sin and guilt-offerings, could be eaten by the priests immediately after the presentation of the offering, but first the one had to be baked and the other cooked, they were, until this preparation, allowed to be set aside, but not in any place one pleased.”—The different designation: λִּ ?ιδַ ?ξָּ ?χεֹ ?νχָ ?γωׁ, shows the distinction from the previous δַ ?χֹּ ?γֶ ?ωׁ. Ezekiel 42:14 still adds, with similar emphasizing of the priests, that after performing their functions (αְּ ?αֹ ?ΰָ ?ν, as the context shows, is not: when they come to the service) in the holy place, that is, the inner room, they are not to repair without ceremony to the outer court (as Keil supposes, had they “been obliged to pass out through the inner gate in order to get to the sacred cells”), but—and for this the door, Ezekiel 42:12, is excellently adapted—the official garments in which they (ωָׁ ?ψַ ?ϊ, “to order well,” “to administer,” in the Piel of respectful services before kings and princes, especially of service before Jehovah) performed the sacred service are to be put aside, laid down in the chambers mentioned, and exchanged for common garments.—δֵ ?πָּ ?δ, namely: the priestly garments.—In εְ ?χָ ?ψְ ?αεּ we are instinctively reminded of χְ ?ψεֹ ?αִ ?ιν in Ezekiel 42:13.—ΰֶ ?μΞΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψμָ ?ςָ ?ν explains more closely the ΰֶ ?μΞδֶ ?ηָ ?φֵ ?ψδַ ?ηִ ?ιφεֹ ?πָ ?δ, that the people come into consideration there. Not until the service of God is completed are the priests allowed to come into converse with them. Ezekiel 42:15-20.—The Circumference of the whole. Ezekiel 42:15. What was begun in Ezekiel 40:3 sq. was now finished. The antithesis of the measures of the inner house is: and he measured it round and round. The prophet therefore is led out,—γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ δַ ?ωַּׁ ?ςַ ?ψ, which may mean the way to the gate, but also the way through it. The return to the east gate (comp. Ezekiel 40:6) depicts to us Ezekiel’s re-entrance into the outer court; and thus the expression: round and round, will the more readily point to the wall (Ezekiel 40:5) from which he then (hence now from the opposite direction) came to the east gate. The inner house comprehends the whole interior up to the wall, of which it is said, Ezekiel 40:5, that it was ξִ ?δεּ ?υμַ ?αַּ ?ιϊνָ ?αִ ?ιανָ ?αִ ?ια. Keil disputes, without due grounds, the reference of the suffix in εּ ?ξְ ?γָ ?ψεֹ to δַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊΧ, although we must concede to him that some indefiniteness may adhere to the suffix; at all events, round and round is not the wall as wall, which would have also its inner side, but as that which surrounded the house from without, and denoted the outside in reference to the house, so that we are pointed to the outside of the wall-girt sanctuary. Meanwhile, however, if nothing more definite follows, this only says that, after finishing all the measurings in the interior, a total measurement of the whole was taken outside on the circumference of the sanctuary. Ezekiel 42:16. The measuring begins with the east gate; and hence on the east, γεּ ?η, in the signification it has in the common expression: to the four winds, meaning the four directions whence the wind principally comes, is here said of the east side, as in the following of the north, south, and west sides.—Hengst. takes ΰֵ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ as a blending of ΰַ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ϊ and ξֵ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ, and translates: “five hundred cubits, measured in rods with the measuring-rod.” That ηֲ ?ξֵ ?ωׁ ?Ξΰֵ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ cannot mean “five hundred” is clear, but what is the meaning of “five cubits”? Hence the Qeri: ξֵ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ. Then, however, we get by what follows: “five hundred rods,” or we must say with Hengst. that by: rods on the measuring-rod around, is intended to be observed that the measure would be obtained by measuring not in cubits, but in rods, with the measuring-rod described at the commencement. At all events, Ezekiel 40:5 favours this view, as also the square of five hundred cubits for the whole of the sanctuary, already, on Ezekiel 40:27, observed to be correct, has to be harmonized with the detailed statements. The blending, too, of “a hundred” and “cubits” would agree well with the brevity of similar statements; only, such brevity and obscurity in the case of a summing up, a general survey of the spatial relations of the sanctuary, as Hengst. supposes, is difficult to conceive and hard to accept. On the other hand, the abbreviation: five hundred (thus read with the Qeri), measured by rods, is easy of acceptation, when it is so very clear, not only from the definition of the “rod” given in Ezekiel 40:5, but from a presupposed after-reckoning of all the statements of measuring hitherto coming into consideration, that only cubits can be meant; even in Ezekiel 42:20, where otherwise it might be expected, all mention of rods is omitted. Ewald, too, and Bφttcher and Hitzig have decided in favour of cubits. That Ezekiel “gives elsewhere all the greater measures in cubits and not in rods,” as Hengst. insists on, has, however, no significance when the prophet had to refer to a wider space, a space separating the sanctuary from the rest of the land, a space independent of all that had gone before, and which therefore might have been measured by rods, as Klief. and Keil hold. Comp. however, Ezekiel 45:2. Ezekiel 42:17. Five hundred, and the same in Ezekiel 42:18 and Ezekiel 42:19, merely the number; and this Hengst. explains by saying that, in the case of the other sides, the mere number suffices, so that the number given is self-evidently of cubits, according to Ezekiel 42:16.—Is the question decided in Ezekiel 42:20? But toward the four winds, that is, in the direction of the four cardinal points (it is said ρָ ?αַ ?α in Ezekiel 42:19, by which, however, at the same time, may be indicated the going round and round), is a mere rιsumι of what has been described singly in Ezekiel 42:16-19. Accordingly, the suffix also in ξְ ?γָ ?γεֹ is to be understood exactly as in Ezekiel 42:15, that is, as referring to the house.—What now is to be understood by the wall which was to the house (μεֹ)? It is called ηεֹ ?ξָ ?δ, as in Ezekiel 40:5, and, exactly as there, it is said that it was ρָ ?αִ ?ιαρָ ?αִ ?ια. It is not, indeed, said, as Hengst. expresses himself: “he measured it, namely, the wall, round about;” but the observation here, that the house had a wall, gives no further information than that the measuring will have had respect to this compass of the house! Keil, indeed, refuses to understand the ρָ ?αִ ?ια in Ezekiel 42:16-17 of a square five hundred rods in length and breadth on these two sides, yet he gets in Ezekiel 42:20 a space which measured five hundred rods towards each of the cardinal points, that is, a surrounding wall five hundred rods in length on each side; in whole, an area of two hundred and fifty thousand square rods, while the temple, with its courts, claims only two hundred and fifty thousand square cubits. Hengstenberg, at the mention of this in fact so much more considerable space than that of the sanctuary, but neither further defined nor filled up, is reminded of the Hungarian who, looking at a bare expanse, said: “Nothing but space,” and finds a mere vacuum on each of the four sides “intolerable.” But when he finds nothing corresponding in Solomon’s temple, the form of which, however, is perpetually before the prophet’s eyes, and in reply to What he otherwise expresses regarding the “enormous extent” of “useless space,” Kliefoth, in giving the purpose intended: to separate, etc., says: “In the case of the tabernacle and Solomon’s temple the outer court served for this purpose, whereas, in the case of Ezekiel’s temple, the outer court also still belongs to the sanctuary, and is itself holy; and the purpose of separating the sanctuary from the common ground must be effected by this surrounding space, which, in this respect, takes the place in regard to Ezekiel’s temple which the outer court took in the case of that of Solomon.” Keil disputes the latter statement, and says that “the tabernacle had no outer court, and in Solomon’s temple the outer court already formed a part of the sanctuary.” He continues: “Only in the ease of the latter temple, the outer court bordered immediately on the common soil of the city and of the land, so that the pollution of the land produced by the sin of the people could press without obstacle even into the sacred space of the courts. To this a limit shall be set in the sanctuary of the future, by this environing space set apart for separating the holy from the profane.” That the extent of the temple, with its courts, is not rendered insignificant by the twenty-five times’ greater size of the space in question, Keil proves from the circumstance that it “is not covered with buildings,” and hence comes into consideration merely as so significant a separation from the profane, by which “strongly marked separation peculiar to Ezekiel’s temple,” the “inviolable holiness of this sanctuary” is, on the contrary, illustrated in an enhanced measure. That the surface of Mount Moriah affords no room for this is certainly no proof against the above-mentioned view of Keil and Kliefoth, for Ezekiel 40:2 speaks only of a very high mountain. [Throughout Ezekiel 42:16-20 Dr. Fairbairn abides by the rendering of the English version: “reeds” or “rods,” not “cubits,” and adds: “We regard the immense extent of the sacred area as a symbol of the vast enlargement that was to be given to the kingdom of God in the times of Messiah. It was immeasurably to surpass the old in the extent of its territory, and in the number of its adherents, as well as in the purity of its worship. The wall that surrounded the sacred buildings is expressly said, in Ezekiel 42:20, to have been for separating between the holy and profane; not, therefore, as in Revelation 21:12, and very common elsewhere, for defence and safety; as, indeed, its comparative want of elevation might seem to render it unfit for such a purpose. But its square form, and the square appearance of the entire buildings (as in John’s city, Revelation 21:16), betokened the strength and solidity of the whole, along with a vast increase in extent and number. A perfect cube, it was the emblem of a kingdom that could not be shaken or removed. And thus every way it exhibited, to the, eye of faith, the true ideal of that pure and glorious temple, which, resting on the foundation of the Eternal Son, and girt round by all the perfections of Godhead, shall shine forth the best and noblest workmanship of Heaven.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, p. 470.—W. F.] HINTSOn Ch. 42 Eze 42:1 sq.: “As this temple was provided with many chambers, but each had its own purpose, so believing Christians must be sanctified chambers for the glory of God,—one for this use and another for that, 2 Timothy 2:21” (Starke). Ezekiel 42:5 sq. While in the previous chapter the breadth increased with the elevation, it here becomes narrower. The progressive growth in grace is a wider consciousness of Christ, but a constantly narrowing self-consciousness (1 Corinthians 15:9).—So is the service in the gospel, when with increasing years our view into eternity expands, and similarly contracts in temporal matters; the nearer the day of reckoning is, our responsibility becomes the clearer to us, and the more clearly do we see our many mistakes and disloyalties.—“There are three stages of life: youth, manhood, and old age, and the last is the narrowest of all” (Starck). Ezekiel 42:7 sq. God is able to set walls around those who desire to keep themselves pure from the stains of the flesh, and to protect them in the hour of trial and temptation.—“True believers are protected, no one can injure them, John 10:27 sq.” (Starck.)—The protection which is in an evangelically-understood official and priestly dignity.—“If God’s servants have no place under heaven, yet they have one in heaven” (Starck).—“By these buildings connected with the temple, and pertaining to its outward economy, we should be reminded that the Lord bestows upon the pious the other necessaries of life also. In Him they find their entire satisfaction; but they use food, drink, intercourse with men, and this whole world, as if they did not use all this. Thus, to the pure all things are pure that they do with pure and upright heart. The word of God makes us strong when it is with us, and blesses also outward things. David never saw a righteous man forsaken (Psalms 37). So also has the Lord ordained that they who preach the gospel should live of the gospel, 1 Corinthians 9:13-14” (�col.).—“Oh, how sweet it is to cling to the temple like Anna! Luke 2:37” (Starck). Ezekiel 42:13 sq. “If we have to understand by the priests the early Christians, or those brought up from childhood in the faith of Christ and walking in this way, then in these verses is figured their fellowship with one another in particular, their united inquiry into the word and meditation thereon and on the mystery of Christ for growth of knowledge and increase of joy, so that they are prepared and adorned in one and the same faith, alway to return to and worship at the altar, which is Christ” (Coco.).—“In word, in work, in everything, be Jesus read, and He alone” (Tersteegen).—Glory and holiness in their connection; how this connection is stamped on this temple and its arrangements and purposes, even to the most minute particulars.—His office secures enjoyment, too, to the minister of the gospel, but enjoyment from the holy; the Lord wills to be enjoyment to His own.—Profane ministers profane the sanctuary.—These two verses form a fitting text for introduction and ordination sermons.—That which is seemly for every Christian is, however, special duty for the priests. One should be able to discover in a preacher of the gospel, above all else, above all science, knowledge, culture, etc., that he is in the enjoyment of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ for the sins of the world.—“So also we ought not to approach the holy table of the Lord with worldly, impenitent hearts” (Calov.).—From Ezekiel 42:14 much pastoral wisdom may be learned.—“But the lesson is not that a pastor may for a time lay aside his clerical robes or hang them on a nail to make merry with the world” (Berl. Bib.).—A true minister of the gospel does not want to be called a clergyman in distinction from the laity,—a Pharisaic title, which the church regulations of our fathers do not know, and which modern State bureaucracy ought to abolish,—but as. he is so in the spirit of the gospel in contrast to the world, even to the so-called world of culture.—The wrong and dangerous sociability of a minister of the word. The clerical coat does not make the clergyman, yet it is a defence and an admonition. The best clerical garment, and one which we may always put on and wear everywhere, is our sanctification in Christ.—It is as great a mistake to carry about the clerical coat everywhere, like a monk, as to leave it at home from unclerical frivolity or worldly-mindedness.—Paul became all things to all men (1 Corinthians 9:19; 1 Corinthians 9:22), but not at the expense of his ministerial office.—“When we sinners come in contact with Christ by faith, we are made clean, and become a holy, reasonable sacrifice, acceptable to God. But when once we are consecrated to God, we have to be on our guard that we on no occasion defile ourselves” (�col.). Ezekiel 42:15 sq. “God gathers His Church from all the four quarters of the world, Isaiah 49:12” (Starke).—“So wide and spacious will the New Testament Church be, in distinction from the Old Testament Church. A greater than Solomon in all his pomp and glory is here; for Jesus is the Light of all nations, Isaiah 42:6; Isaiah 49:6; Luke 2:32”(Starck).—“All believers in the whole world belong to this temple. The true Church is the collection of the scattered believers that are in the world” (Starck).—“Observe, only after he had learned exactly the internal magnitude did the prophet learn the external. It is labour in vain to labour in investigating nature until we have first laid a good foundation in godliness. Without this we continue too much devoted to the contemplation of visible things, and make them our idols, so that they become a stumbling-block and a snare to ourselves and other inexperienced persons. But when thou hast come to know the inner meaning of spiritual things, and hast tasted the length, height, and depth of the love of God, then thou mayest busy thyself with all visible things. Thou wilt everywhere pause, and, contemplating things with the spiritual eye, say: O Lord our God, how excellent is Thy name in all the earth! Thou who hast made the heavens, declare Thy glory, etc. For by the contemplation of outward things thou wilt be borne along to the praise of the divine glory and the overflowing love of the heavenly Father toward His people, for whose sake He has made also this whole artistically-compacted framework of visible things” (Heim-Hoff.).—“The prophet has now depicted everything so fully and clearly, in order to preach to his contemporaries, as babes in understanding, in a way intelligible to them, the consoling truth that God’s Church is eternal through His grace, and that He will always rebuild His house among us, provided we only desire to be His. Whatever is lost must truly be restored more glorious than ever to them who love God; and where God’s word finds lovers, His kingdom, too, increasingly assumes shape. But in Christ all has assumed such a shape, that through Him the sanctuary now always continues present in humanity; and the true altar of burnt-offering, Golgotha, is always before the eyes of the Most Holy Father, in order, for the sake of the sacrifice thereon offered, to love, sanctify, and protect us all. We thank thee, O most gracious eternal God and Father, who hast set up an eternal sanctuary for us sinners, never to depart from us, and hast sanctified us by the blood of Thy Son, and now givest unto us the four ends of the earth to embrace by Thy gospel; grant unto us to remain faithful in contemplation of Thee, and, ever fuller and fuller of Thy Spirit, to praise Thee through Jesus Christ. Amen” (Diedrich). ON CH. 40–46 1. Hδvernick rightly finds “the nervous and lofty unity” in the prophecies of Ezekiel “manifested in this section also.” “The visions of the prophet find here their fairest completion and perfect rounding off.” Already in the exposition (on Ezekiel 40:1 sq.) the harmony with the former part of Ezekiel’s prophecy has been remarked. Ezekiel 43:3 expressly refers back to Ezekiel 1, 8. The free conformity in expression between our chapters and the whole closing portion generally, and the earlier chapters, has been often proved (comp. Philippson, p. 1294). The proof is the more striking when we consider the complete difference of the subject. That we have a vision here too harmonizes not only with Ezekiel 1, 8, but in general with the prophetic character of Ezekiel, Ezekiel 8, 15, 17. The prophet has repeatedly hinted at this close of his book. Thus Ezekiel 11:16; Ezekiel 20:40; Ezekiel 36:38; Ezekiel 37:26 sq. The last passage in particular might be regarded as the text for Ezekiel 40 sq. The eighth and following chapters required by the necessity of the idea our conclusion of the book. 2. In regard to analogies in the other prophets, Ezekiel’s contemporaries, as we may well conceive, will chiefly come into consideration. Hence, above all, Ezekiel’s fellow-labourer Jeremiah. Jeremiah represents the restoration and renewal of Israel as a rebuilding of Jerusalem, Jeremiah 31:38 sq. (with this comp. in our prophet, Ezekiel 47:13 sq., Ezekiel 48). Jeremiah 33:18 is similar to Ezekiel 44:9 sq. Haggai 2:7 sq. follows entirely the thought here of a new temple, insisting on its glory in view of a meagre present. But still more analogous are the night-visions of Zechariah (Ezekiel 2:5 [1] sq., Ezekiel 4, Ezekiel 6:13 sq., Ezekiel 14). 3. The parallel between Isaiah and Ezekiel, as it stands in relation to the vision in Ezekiel 1 (p. 41), is not completed by citing Isaiah 60 as corresponding to the close of our book; but we shall have to seek the culminating point of Isaiah’s prophecy for the culmination of Ezekiel’s, in accordance with the office of this prophet to be the prophet of Jehovah’s holiness to obdurate Israel, —just as for the commencement Isaiah 6 is covered by Ezekiel 1—not so much in the close as in Ezekiel 53. The corresponding pendant to our closing chapters is the life-like description given there of the Messiah and His sacrifice of Himself. It is this self-sanctification of Jehovah through His servant Israel which in Isaiah corresponds to the self-glorification of Jehovah in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40 sq.) by means of the new sanctuary and the new nationality; and this, again, accords with Ezekiel’s office, to behold the glory of Jehovah in the misery of the exile. In this respect Ezekiel stands to Isaiah somewhat as Easter and Pentecost do to Good Friday. 4. The different views, especially regarding the vision of the temple, may be distinguished generally as subjective and objective. I. The views which derive the explanation of Ezekiel 40 sq. solely or chiefly from Ezekiel’s subjectivity: (1) Already Villalpandus saw everywhere here only reminiscences of Solomon’s temple and of Solomon’s era, and consequently a similar line of thought to that in Ezra 3:12. Similarly Grotius, only that he reconciled the differences between Ezekiel’s temple and that of Solomon by ascribing them to the temple at the time of its destruction, just as Bunsen refers in this connection to 2 Kings 16. According to both these expositors, Ezekiel traced out from reminiscences a pattern for the future restoration. Thus, according to Ewald, Ezekiel becomes “a prophetic lawgiver.” “Such an undertaking, quite unusual in the case of earlier prophets,” is explained from the “predominating thoughts and aspirations of the better class of those days for the restoration of the subverted kingdom.” “Ezekiel probably meditated long, with passionate longing and lively remembrance, on the institutions of the demolished temple, etc.; what appeared to him great and glorious became impressed upon his mind as a pattern, with which he compared the Messianic expectations and demands, etc., until at length the outline of the whole arrangement which he here writes down pressed itself upon him!” “Above all, he sketches the holy objects, temple and altar, with the utmost exactness and vividness, as if a spirit (!) impelled him, now when they were destroyed, at least to catch up their image in a faithful and worthy form for the redemption that will one day certainly come; so that he must have diligently instructed himself in these matters from the best written and oral sources” (!). “Thus it is quite in keeping with Ezekiel’s way of prophesying, that he introduces everything as if he had been borne in spirit into the restored and completed temple, accompanied throughout by a heavenly guide, and had learned exactly from him all the single parts of this unique building as to their nature and use.” The paragraph Ezekiel 47:1-12 is, in Ewald’s opinion, “from its great, all-embracing sense, quite adapted to bring to a close briefly and pithily all these presentiments!” “Yet when precepts more moral are to be given, or the perfected kingdom has to be described in its extent, reaching even beyond the temple, this assumed form (!) easily passes over into the simple prophetic discourse.” (2) While the foregoing view looks to realization, Hitzig, for example, entirely rejects the idea that Ezekiel “considered such things (as our chapters contain) possible, feasible, or probable, and relatively commanded and prescribed them.” “One does not or did not reflect that the prophet’s calling was to express the demands of the idea, indifferent in the first instance about their realization.” All is pure fancy, a mere castle-in-the-air, a kind of “Platonic sketch,” as Herder expresses himself. The self-criticism of this view of our chapters can hardly be more suitably given than when Hitzig continues: “Inasmuch as this or that could be set in order otherwise than he imagines, he would not in regard to plans and proposals have resisted obstinately, but would have known how to distinguish the unessential of the execution from the essential of the thing itself. He sketches the future in the form he must wish it to take, in which it really would have the fairest appearance. If the reality falls short of the image, then the idea is defectively realized; but the fault lies in the reality, not in the idea, and Ezekiel is not responsible for it.” This, moreover, is merely what already Doederlein and others have held with respect to the closing portion of our book. Similarly Herder: “Ezekiel’s manner is to paint an image entire and at length; his mode of conception appears to demand great visions, figures written over on all sides, even tiresome, difficult, symbolical acts, of which his whole book is full. Israel in his wandering upon the mountains of his dispersal, among other tongues and peoples, had need of a prophet such as this one was, etc. So also as regards this temple. Another would have sketched it with soaring figures in lofty utterances; he does so in definite measurements. And not only the temple, but also appurtenances, tribes, administration, land, etc. How far has Israel always, so far as depended on his own efforts, remained below the commands, counsels, and promises of God!” (3) Bφttcher has attempted to combine both views, and after him Philippson, who expresses himself to the following effect: “Ezekiel the prophet, sunk in himself, brooding over matters in the distance and in solitude, had not, like Jeremiah, upon whom the immediate reality pressed, viewed the occurrences simply as punishment of defection and degeneracy, but was conscious also of their inward signification, which came to him in the appearance of a vision. Hence he represented the destruction of the temple as a suspension of the relation of revelation between God and Israel; and so much the more necessary was it to represent the restoration of that same relation as the return of God into the restored sanctuary. Now, from the peculiar character of Ezekiel, this necessarily had to assume a form at once ideal and real,—ideal in its entirety as something future, real as individual and special, matter of fact in its appearance.” As the “indubitable motive of the prophet,” the following is given: “to keep alive in the exiles in the midst of Babylonian idolatry the idea of the one temple, and the priestly institute consecrated to it, as the centre of the religion of the one God; and at the return into Palestine to confirm the life of the people in their calling, by the removal of all elements of strife, and by approximation to the Mosaic state of things.” Hengstenberg’s view is surprisingly near the above one; he says: “With the exception of the Messianic section in Ezekiel 47:1-12, the fulfilment of all (!) the rest of the prophecy belongs to the times immediately after the return from the Chaldean exile. So must every one of its first hearers and readers have understood it. Jeremiah, whom Ezekiel follows throughout, had prophesied the restoration of the city and temple 70 years after the beginning of the Chaldean servitude, falling in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. Thirty-two years had already elapsed. Forty years after the devastation of Egypt (Ezekiel 29:13), the nations visited by the Chaldeans shall get back to their former state. According to Ezekiel 11:16, the restoration is to follow in a brief space after the destruction of the temple. We have before us a prophecy for which it is essential (!) to give truth and poetry (! !), which contains a kernel of real thoughts, yet does not present them naked, but clothed with flesh and blood, that they may be a counterpoise to the sad reality, because they fill the fancy, that fruitful workshop of despair, with bright (!) images, and thus make it an easier task to live in the word at a time when all that is visible cries aloud, Where is now thy God? The incongruity between the prophecy of Ezekiel and the state of things after the exile, vanishes at once by distinguishing between the thoughts and their clothing, and if we can rightly figure to ourselves the wounds for which the healing plaster is here presented, and at the same time the mental world of the priest (Ezekiel), and the materials given in the circumstances surrounding him, for clothing the higher verities which he had to announce to the people.” II. The views which above all look to and keep hold of the objectivity of the divine inspiration of Ezekiel. The very regard which must, in one way or other, be paid to the circumstances under which the people for whom, and the Babylonian exile in which, Ezekiel prophesied, objectivizes in some measure his subjectivity, so that not all the views hitherto cited of our chapters and the ones that follow are to be designated as purely subjective; the properly objective, however, will be, that “the hand of Jehovah was upon him,” that he was brought “in visions of God” to the land of Israel. Here the distinction is drawn by his own hand between the prophet of Israel and the fanciful Jewish priest; and not only this, but the unavoidable and irreconcilable alternative presents itself: either Ezekiel was a man of God, or a deceiver, for whom the fact that he had deceived himself also with assumed divine objectivity were no excuse, but would only be his self-condemnation. The case of Ezekiel, for the sake of truth, is too solemn for thinking of “poetic clothing” in the case before us. The subjective for the form before us, is to keep in mind when considering it what that form is. It has pleased God to speak to us through men. If we take full account of the national peculiarity of Israel in general during the whole old covenant, and of the peculiar personality in the case of our vision here, that is, that Ezekiel is the priest-prophet, that he above all other prophets is, as Umbreit says, a “born symbolist” ( “in the temple which he erects he makes known his greatness as a symbolist, as well by what he says as by what he passes over in silence”),—if we concede to Umbreit the “surprising skill in popularizing instruction” which he observes in Ezekiel, we shall have to accept as the ultimate ground why Israel was the mediator of the world’s salvation, and Ezekiel was chosen to behold the temple of the future, divine wisdom and its purpose for the world, that is, the objective κατ̓ἐξοχην above everything subjective. In accordance with this principle, we have to judge of (1) the view objectivized in this sense of a model for the rebuilding of the temple after the return from the exile, the supporters of which assume a building-plan “issued under divine authority,” given by Jehovah through the prophet. Although there is a resemblance between Exodus 25:9; Exodus 25:40 and Ezekiel 40:4, yet it is not said to Ezekiel regarding Israel: “according to all that I show thee, the pattern of the dwelling, etc., even so shall ye make it;” the prophet is only to “convey,” announce (πָ ?βַ ?γ) all that he sees to the house of Israel. From this circumstance, and not because the reality fell short of the idea (Hitzig, Herder), or, as Philippson adduces here, “the similar fate of so many Mosaic precepts,” the fact is explained that the post-exile temple was built without any regard to our vision. Only the fundamental reference to Solomon’s temple, which in general obtains in Ezekiel also, meets us in Ezra 3:12. This fact, the more remarkable considering the nearness of time, shows that Ezekiel 40:4, soon after it was written, and when fully known, was not regarded as a divine building-specification. We do not need, therefore, to express, as Hengst., “the obvious impossibility of erecting a building according to the specifications here given.” The circumstance that the building materials are not given has at least not prevented the temple of Ezekiel from being, with more or less success, constructed and fashioned after his statements. Bunsen says that “the temple here forms a very easily realized, congruous whole, of which an exact outline may be made, as the prophet also has evidently done.” Umbreit, too, holds this latter view. And although we have to do not with an architect but with a prophet, yet nothing stands in the way of our believing that the subjectivity of Ezekiel was preeminently qualified for this vision, from the fact that he possessed architectural capacity” (Introd. § 7). (2) The symbolical view. It corresponds generally to the character of Holy Writ. (Comp. Lange, Rev. Introd. p. 11.) In particular it pays due regard to the law of Moses, to the part of it relating to worship, the subject here. Especially when the whole worship of Israel is concentrated in the temple, a symbolical view respecting a vision thereof will be quite in place. Thereby only its due right is given to this objective, to the divine idea, in the shape which it has above all assumed in Israelitish worship. The symbolical character, moreover, is specially appropriate for the prophetic writings. As has already been often said and pointed out, the symbolical predominates in Ezekiel; and as to these concluding chapters, Hδvernick adduces, as indicating their general character, the description of the circuit of the new temple (Ezekiel 42:15 sq.), the representation of the entrance, etc. of the divine glory (Ezekiel 43:1 sq.), the river (Ezekiel 47:1 sq. etc.), and observes that “it is just such passages that form the conclusion to the previous description, and hence cast a light on it.” Comp. on Ezekiel 43:10 sq. But everything architectonic is not a symbol, although everything of that nature will indeed primarily relate to the building to be erected, and will thereby at the same time in some way serve the idea of the whole. This character comes out clearly even in individual statements of number, yet all such measurements are not therefore to be interpreted symbolically. Nay, as the exposition shows, there are here bare numbers, resisting every attempt to trace them back to the idea. It is sufficient in respect to the numbers, that (comp. Umbreit, p. 259 sq.) 4, as “signature not only of regularity but also of the revelation of God in space,” e.g. in the quadrangle of the temple; 3, “the signature of the divine,” e.g. in the sets of three gates; 10, “perfection complete in itself,” occurring often; likewise the “sacred number” 7; and the number 12 in the tables for preparing the offerings (Ezekiel 40), represent symbolism. (On the symbolism of numbers, comp. Lange on Rev. Introd. p. 14.) Umbreit rightly maintains: “It is a symbolical temple, notwithstanding the arid and dry description, in which only exact specifications of the number of cubits and the apparently most insignificant calculations and measurings occur;” as he says, “quite in keeping with the poverty of the immediately succeeding age and the dignity of the most significant inwardness.” (3) The Messianic view (for which comp. Lange on Kings, p. 60 sq.) is only the taking full advantage of and applying the symbolic view in general. Symbol and type, emblem and pattern, must mutually interpenetrate one another in a law like that of Israel. What separates Israel from the heathen is its law; what qualifies Israel for the whole world is its promise. But now, because of sin, the law has come in between the promise and the fulfilment; that sin becoming the more powerful as transgression may make manifest for faith the grace which alone is still more powerful, and that consequently the necessity of the promise should be the more apparent; that is, the pedagogy of the law (and especially of its ethical part) to Christ. Thus the law of Israel is the theocratic expression of Israel, the servant of God, as he ought to be, and hence prefigures the servant of Jehovah who is the fulfilling of the law, as He is the personal fulfilling of Israel, inasmuch as in Him who was delivered for our transgressions, and raised again for our δικαιωσις, Israel after the Spirit is represented; so that here out of the law relating to worship rise up, as on the one hand sacrifice and the priesthood, so on the other the concentration of the whole of worship in the temple, this parable of the future, with reference to which Christ, John 2, gives the σημειον: Destroy (λυσατε) this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (ἐγερω), saying this of the temple of His body; as also the disciples remembered when He had risen from the dead, and as the accusation against Him ran (Matthew 26:61). Accordingly the law, and especially the temple and its service, is σκιανἐχωντωνμελλοντων: the future σωμα is given in the σωματουΧριστου (σωμαδεκατηρτισωμου, Hebrews 10). “This reference to the future,” says Ziegler (in his thoughtful little work on the “historical development of divine revelation”), “is the most dynamical among all the references of the law; its significance for its own time is so weak and unimportant, that it seems to exist solely for the sake of the future, although its office is the opposite of the office of the New Testament, which is formed and abiding in the hearts of men (διακονιατηςδικαιοσυνης, τουτνευματος); still it was a sensible type, a strongly marked and distinctly stamped shadow of the coming substances, and yet, moreover, a veil which concealed it.” What has been said shows the typical signification of the vision of Ezekiel, in which the symbolical view of it is completed, and the pedagogic and providential necessity of that form borrowed from the legal worship in which it is enshrined. Here is more than what (as Hengstenberg can say) “suffices to employ the fancy.” For the anointed one is τελοςτουνομου. But as the Messianic view of our chapters is thus justified by the symbolic view, when we have taken into account the law, particularly the law of worship in Israel, so likewise the already (Doct. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 43 1And he led me to the gate, the gate that looks toward the east: 2And, behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the east, and its [His] voice 3was as the voice of many waters, and the earth shone with His glory. And as the appearance [was] the appearance which I saw, as the appearance which I saw when I came to destroy the city, and [there were] sights like the appearance which I saw by the river Chebar; and I fell upon my face. 4And the glory of Jehovah came to the house by the way of the gate whose face [front] 5is toward the east. And the Spirit lifted me up, and brought me to the inner court, and, behold, the glory of Jehovah filled the house. 6And I heard one speaking to me from the house, and a man was standing beside me. 7And He said to me: Son of man, [behold] the place of My throne and the place of the soles of My feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the sons [children] of Israel for ever, and the house of Israel shall no more defile the name of My holiness, they and their kings, by their whoredom and by the corpses of 8their kings, their high places; When they gave their threshold beside My threshold and their post beside My post, and [only] the wall [was] between Me and them, and they defiled [so defiled they] the name of My holiness by their abominations which they did, and I consumed them in My anger [breath of9anger]. Now shall they put away their whoredom, and the corpses of their 10kings from Me, and I dwell in their midst for ever. Thou, son of man, show to the house of Israel the [this] house, that they may be ashamed because of their iniquities, and they measure [so they measure] the harmony of proportion. 11And if they be ashamed because of all that they did, make them know the conformation of the house, and its arrangement, and its out-goings, and its incomings, and all its forms, and what relates to all its ordinances, and all its forms, and all its precepts [laws]; and write before their eyes, that they may keep its whole conformation and all its ordinances, and they do them. 12This is the law [the Thorah] of the house; on the head [top] of the mountain all its border round and round is most holy! Behold, this is the law of the house. 13And these are the measures of the altar [altar of burnt-offering] in cubits: the cubit a cubit and a hand-breadth, and [indeed] the [a] bosom (the girth) had the cubit, and [i.e.] one cubit broad [thick], and its border at its lip [its edge] round about was a span, and this is the elevation of the altar; And [namely] from the bosom [at] the ground to the lower rest were two cubits, and a breadth, of one cubit; 14and from the lesser rest to the greater rest, four cubits and a 15breadth of one cubit. And the mountain of God four cubits; and from the 16hearth of God and upwards were the four horns. And the hearth of God 17twelve in length by twelve in breadth, square in all its four sides. And the rest fourteen in length by fourteen in breadth in its four sides, and the border round about it was half a cubit, and its bosom [girth was] a cubit round about, and its [the altar’s] steps toward the east. 18And He said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord Jehovah: These are the ordinances of the altar on the day when it is made, to cause burnt-offerings to ascend upon it, and to sprinkle 19blood upon it. And thou givest to the priests, the Levites, those who are of the seed of Zadok, who draw near to Me,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—20to minister to Me, a bullock, a young steer, for a sin-offering. And thou takest of its blood, and givest it upon its [the altar’s] four horns, and on the four corners of the rest, and on the border round about, and thou dost cleanse and 21expiate it. And thou takest the bullock of the sin-offering, and one burns it in the assigned [appointed] place of the house, without the sanctuary. 22And on the second day thou shalt offer a kid of the goats without blemish for a sin-offering, and they cleanse the altar as they cleansed with the bullock. 23When thou hast completed the cleansing, thou shalt offer a bullock, a young steer 24without blemish, and a ram of the flock without blemish. And thou offerest them before Jehovah, and the priests cast salt upon them, and make them ascend as a burnt-offering [Olah] to Jehovah. 25Seven days shalt thou prepare a kid for a sin-offering daily, and they shall prepare a bullock, a 26young steer, and a ram of the flock without blemish. Seven days do they 27expiate the altar, and purify it, and fill its hand. And they shall have completed the [these] days; thus it comes to pass on the eighth day and onwards, that the priests shall make upon the altar your burnt-offerings, and your peace-offerings; and I receive you graciously,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 43:2. Sept.: ... κατατ. ὁδοντηςπυληςτ. βλεπουσηςπρος … φωνητηςπαρεμβολησὡςφωνηδιπλασιαζοντωνπολλων … ὡςφεγγοςἀποτ. δοξηςκυριουκυκλοθες. Ezekiel 43:3. Κ. ἡὁρασιςἡνἰδονκατατ. ὁρασινἡνἰδονὁτεεἰσεπορευομηντουχρισαιτ. πολινκ. ἡὁρασιςτουἁρματοςοὑεἰδον,—Vulg.: Et vidi visionem secundum speciem, quam videram quando venit ut disperderet … et speciem secundum aspectum quem videram—(Another reading: ααΰε, i.e. cum venit dominus.) Ezekiel 43:4. … ingressa est templum— Ezekiel 43:6. Κ. ἐστηνκ. ἰδουφωνηἐκ … εἱστηκειἐχομενοςμου, Ezekiel 43:7. ... Ἑωρακας, υἱε … τουἰχνουςτωνποδων … ἐνοἱς … τοὀνομαμουἐνμεσωτουοἰκουἸσρ … .; κ. ἐντοιςφονοιςτωνἡγουμενωνἐνμεσωαὐτων, (8) ἐντωτιθεναιαὐτουςτοπροθυροςμουἐντ. προθυροιςαὐτωνκ. ταςφλιαςμουἐχομεςαςτωνφλιωναὐτων, κ. ἐδωκαντ. τοιχονμουὠςσυςεχομενονἐμουκ. αὐτων, κ. … κ. ἐξετριψααὐτοςἐνθυμωμουκ. φονω. Vulg.: … vestigiorum pedum meorum, ubi habito … et in ruinis regum suorum et in excelsis, (8) qui fabricati sunt … propter quod consumpsi eos—(Another reading: αְ ?ξεϊν, in morte eorum.) Ezekiel 43:9. ... κ. τ. φονους—Vulg.: … ruinas regum … semper. Ezekiel 43:10. Another reading: ϊαπιϊ—εΰϊδ pro ηαπιϊ. Ezekiel 43:10. ... δειξοντω … κ. κοπασουσινἀποτωνἀμαρτιων … κ. τηνὁρασιναὐτουκ. τηνδιαταξιναὐτων (11) κ. αὐτοιληψονταιτηνκολασιναὐτωνπεριπαντων … Κ. διαγραψειςτ. οἰκον … κ. τηνὑποστασιναὐτουκ. παντατ. προσταγματααὐτουκ. παντατανομιμααὐτουγνωριειςαὐτοις … κ. φυλαξονταιπανταταδικαιωματαμουκ. παρτατ. προσταγματαμου—Vulg.: … ostende … templum … et metiantur fabricam (11) et erubescant … Figuram domus et fabricζ … et omnem descriptionem … prζcepta … cunctumque ordinem … ostende eis … omnes descriptiones—(Desunt in nonnullis codd.: εΰϊλμηχϊιεελμφεψϊε, or only ελμφεψϊε. In fine versus legitur plur.: λμφεψεϊιε.) Ezekiel 43:12. Κ. τηνδιαγραφηντ. οἰκουἐπιτηςκορυφηςτουὀρους. Πανταταὁρια—Vulg.: … domus in summitate montis. Ezekiel 43:13. ... Τοκολπωμαβαθοςπηχυςἐπιπηχυν, κ. πηχυςτοεὐποςκ. γεισοςἐπιτουχειλουςαὐτουκυκλοθεν, σπιθαμης. Κ. τουτοτοὑψος—Vulg.: … In sinu ejus erat cubitus … hζc quoque erat fossa altaris. Ezekiel 43:14. Sept.: ἐκβαθουςτ. ἀρχηςτουκοιλωματος … προςτοἱλαστηπιοντομεγατοὑποκατωθεν … κ. ἀποτουἱλαστηριουτ. μικρουἐπιτ. ἱλαστηριοντομεγα—Vulg.: … usque ad crepidinem novissimam … a crepidine minore— Ezekiel 43:15. Κ. τοἀριηλ … ἀποτουἀριηλ … τωνκερατωνπηχυς. (Another reading: εδδγιΰμ, montes dei. Syr.: Adiel.—εξδΰγιΰμ, litteris transpositis.) Ezekiel 43:16. Κ. τοἀρινλ (eadem codicum varietas). Ezekiel 43:17. Κ. τοἱλαστηπιον … τοεὐροςτετραγωνονἐπιτατεσσαρα … κ. τογεισοςαὐτουκυκλοθενκυκλομενοναὐτω.—Vulg.: Et crepido … et corona in circuitu ejus— Ezekiel 43:19. ... ὁθεοςτουΑευι, … μοσχονἐκβοωνπεριἁμαρτιας—Vulg.: … vitulum de armento pro peccato. Ezekiel 43:20. Κ. ληψοντκι … κ. ἐπιθησουσιν … τουἱλαστηριουκ. ἐπιτ. βασινκυκλω, κ. περιραντιειςαὐτοκ. ἐξιλασονταιαὐτο. Vulg.: … angulos crepidinis et super coronam … et mundabis illud et expiabis. Ezekiel 43:21. Κ. ληψονται … κ. κατακαυθησεταιἐντ. ἀποκεχωρισμενωτουEzekiel 43:22. ... ληψονταιἐριφουςδυοἀποαἰγωνἀμωμουςEzekiel 43:23. ... προσοισουσιν—Vulg.: … de armento et … de grege— Ezekiel 43:24. κ. προσοισετε—Ezekiel 43:25. ... ποιησουσιν (26) ἑπταἡμερας, κ.— Ezekiel 43:26. Qeri: ιְ ?αַ ?τּ ?ψεּ. Idem legunt quam plurimi codices. Ezekiel 43:27. ... κ. προσδεξομαιὑμας—Vulg.: … et placatus ero vobis— REMARKSEze_43:1-12. The Entrance of the Glory of JehovahThe measuring is over, the house is in this respect finished as an actual house (Ezekiel 42:15), that is, its measurements are completed. But heaven and earth are said to be finished (Genesis 2.) only when the Eternal rested. And so the prophet’s guide leads him back Ezekiel 43:1—to the gate (δַ ?ωָּׁ ?ςַ ?γ), to the one that principally comes into consideration (comp. what has been remarked in the foregoing chapters regarding the significance of this gate, and also the Doctrinal Reflections), to the east gate,—we will have to imagine Ezekiel standing before this gate,—that after all the measuring he Ezekiel 43:2—may see the glory, sq. (see pp. 38 sq., 52), coming to its rest. Hengst.: a parallel to Exodus 40:34 sq., and 1 Kings 8:10 sq., and the counterpart to Ezekiel 11 of our prophet (comp. Ezekiel 10:19; Ezekiel 11:1; Ezekiel 11:23). The gate of exit then is the gate of re-entrance now.—εְ ?χεֹ ?μεֹ ?Χ, comp. on Ezekiel 1:24. The voice might refer more to the manifestation of the glory; comp. however. Revelation 1:15 : His glory is at all events the glory of the God of Israel (Luke 2:9; Revelation 18:1). The significant addition: and the earth, etc., is not sufficiently explained by a brilliant light cast upon the ground; but as the land of Canaan is hardly meant here, by this burst of light extending far beyond Israel is meant to be symbolized an enlightenment also of the face of the whole earth, that is, of the entire region of humanity, thus shown to have been in itself and hitherto dark, Isaiah 6:3; Isaiah 60:1 sq. It is like sunrise (ΰεֹ ?ψ in the Hiphil, to “make” or “give” “light,” Genesis 1:15; Genesis 1:17) for the world through Israel’s temple-gate, and in so far is certainly something additional which was not in the tabernacle or Solomon’s temple; just as in general the temple of Ezekiel is a symbol of the future. Ezekiel 43:3 in no way contradicts this. εּ ?λְ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?δδַ ?ξַּ ?ψְ ?ΰֶֹ ?δΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΧ may be translated: “and as the appearance of the appearance which, etc., as the appearance (closer definition) which I saw when,” etc., that is, quite as conspicuous as that was, was the appearance of glory this time also. Keil: “And the appearance which I saw was to look upon just like the appearance which I saw when I,” etc. λַּ is evidently a resumption of εּ ?λְ. The former appearance (εּ ?λְ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?δ) comes first before the prophet’s mind when he wishes to describe what he saw, and seeks therefore for an appearance with which he can compare it; and then he characterizes more closely this appearance (λַּ ?ξַּ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ), with which he compares that now seen. Keil’s observation against Hitzig does not meet the point, but neither is Hitzig’s alteration of the text necessary. In the first place, by means of this comparison the re-entrance of the divine glory is attested in the strongest way, and therefore so circumstantially. It was the same glory then as now. For all this, the prophet does not intend to deny the anger in the execution of judgment then, for he expressly defines more closely αְּ ?αֹ ?ΰִ ?ιμְ ?ωׁ ?ηֵ ?ϊ, which alone is the correct text, since the Lord did not come, but rather went, giving over the city to destruction, and in reality Ezekiel was the person coming—of course in the vision of God, the subject to be spoken of immediately. The prophet did not come in order to see the destruction of the city, but his coming was a seeing which had for its aim and issue his announcement of the overthrow; and then this ideal destruction on the part of the prophet was also realized by the judgment of God fulfilling it. Ezekiel first, Nebuchadnezzar afterwards (Ezekiel 30:11), but by both certainly Jehovah. In the second place, the prophet, as he had already done in Ezekiel 10:15; Ezekiel 10:20, compares the last visions (comp. Ezekiel 40:2), hence the coming of the glory with its individual manifestations, with the appearance which the manifestation had had on the Chebar (Ezekiel 1).—On his falling down Hengstenberg observes: “In Ezekiel 1:28 it was before the majesty of the angry God; here before the majesty of God appearing in His grace (Revelation 1:17).” Comp. also on Ezekiel 3:23. Ezekiel 43:4. A continuation of Eze 43:2; there: whence the glory of the God of Israel came; here: whither the glory of Jehovah came; there: from the east; here: to the house through the east gate, to its dwelling, to its rest. Ezekiel 43:5. Comp. on Ezekiel 3:12. There is still less need of the “wind” here; to arrive at the inner court, the prophet needed only to go, as hitherto, in vision. But Ezekiel needs taking up by the Spirit, not only because the impression of Eze 43:2 has cast him to the ground (Hengst.), but also in order to be able to follow, so far as was permitted to him as priest, the fresh revelation of the glory of Jehovah filling the temple. For the form of manifestation, 1 Kings 8:10 sq. might be compared, and so much the more as that becomes quite plain there, which indeed is already indicated in Exodus 40:35 sq., that the cloud is as significant in the manner of manifestation as the glory is in the actual fact, according as the cloud is one of fire or of light (Matthew 17:5). Ezekiel 43:6. Evidently, however, the ξִ ?γַּ ?αֵּ ?ψΰֵ ?μַ ?ι [Hδv. understands the Hithpael of a conversation in the interior of the sanctuary (?), of a command to the angel to communicate to the seer the revelation of God], that is, the one speaking to him from the house whom Ezekiel hears first, is meant to be represented as visible by εְ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ δָ ?ιָ ?δΧ, so that the man is the medium between Jehovah and the prophet, and so must certainly be conceived of in analogy with Ezekiel 40:3 (which comp.), as Keil: ὁλογος, John 1. Hengst. supposes: “the man has entered the door to speak to him.” ειֹ ?ΰξֶ ?ψ in Ezekiel 43:7 is certainly the ΰִ ?ιωׁ of Ezekiel 43:6.—ξְ ?χεֹ ?νΰֶ ?ϊΞ denotes an accusative, and requires a “behold” to be supplied. What the man says identifies him entirely with Jehovah, wherefore the reference by the article back to the man in Ezekiel 40:3 is intentionally omitted. We no longer walk with the prophet through the courts of the sanctuary to the measurings of his guide, but the vision is interpreted to Ezekiel, and through him to us, from the most holy place. The man’s speech, legitimating itself as word of Jehovah, shows him to be essentially the glory of the God of Israel, so that we now know why nothing farther was said regarding the way and manner in which the glory of Jehovah filled the house (Ezekiel 43:5), and the form of its manifestation. “Between the statement,” rightly remarks Hengst., “that one spake, and the speech that was spoken, stands the account of the person of the speaker, to which the prophet has his attention first directed by the speech; the seeing was first occasioned by the hearing.” We have before us in the man the essential revelation of Jehovah’s glory. Comp. on Ezekiel 1:26, pp. 55, 56; Revelation 1:10 sq. The Messianic-christological interpretation is the only explanation corresponding to the connection, so much the more significantly, as there is no mention in Ezekiel of the ark of the covenant, with which elsewhere the dwelling of Jehovah in the midst of Israel is wont to be connected; and hence also the μְ ?ςְ ?εֹ ?μָ ?ν here, and in Ezekiel 43:9, is to be taken as unconditionally literal (Ezekiel 37:26; Ezekiel 37:28). Neither in the tabernacle nor in the temple of Solomon had Jehovah dwelt for ever, although these might be called the “place of His throne,” that is, of the ark of the covenant (1 Samuel 4:4; Exodus 25:22); see Bδhr, Symb. der Mos. Kult. i. p. 387 sq., and parallel therewith ξְ ?χεֹ ?νλַּ ?τεֹ ?ϊψַ ?βְ ?μַ ?ι, by which the lower part of the throne, more exactly the ground whereon it stands, is particularized. Comp. for the latter mode of expression, Isaiah 60:13. According to Isaiah 66:1 : place of the soles of My feet, hence the same footstool (the earth) as here, perhaps alludes to the most holy place of the temple, where the ark stood, while the ark which was set up upon the floor of the most holy place is to be compared to heaven, Isaiah 66:1; Psalms 99:5; Psalms 132:7. Reference is also made hereby to the ark of the covenant (1 Chronicles 28:2). Both modes of expression symbolize the temple in the traditional legal manner as the dwelling-place of Jehovah (ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?γΰֶ ?ωְׁ ?αָּ ?οΞωָׁ ?ν),—the first referring chiefly to the ark, and the second chiefly to the most holy place (for which see Ezekiel 43:12). Bδhr says: “What the dwelling is in a larger sense and generally, the ark of the covenant is in a narrower sense and in particular; in it the dwelling of Jehovah is concentrated in a single point,” etc.—In conformity with his theory of the conditionality of certain promises, Hengst. finds in the statement: shall no more, etc., reference to a condition, whereas it simply repeats negatively what the dwelling of Jehovah for ever has already said positively (Ezekiel 37:23 sq., Ezekiel 39:24; Ezekiel 39:29; comp. John 10:28).—On: the name of My holiness, comp. on Ezekiel 36:20 sq. Ch. 16., 20.—τֶּ ?βֶ ?ψ is something “fallen down,” “flaccid,” a corpse. It cannot be proved that the burial-places of kings were in the neighbourhood of the temple. It will not do to take the corpses for dead idols, even although it should be a quotation from Leviticus 26:30, for that passage speaks of demolished idols, whereas flourishing idols are treated of here. Moreover, a closer definition could hardly be omitted (Jeremiah 16:18), which Keil, indeed, finds here in the context. Hδv. insists on finding the idols in the kings (Amos 5:26; Zephaniah 1:5), holding it to be a contemptuous expression for: the lifeless idols. On the other hand, Keil and Hengstenberg remind us of kings like Manasseh and Amon, who took to do with dead bodies, which according to the law were to be avoided, as unclean and polluting, had built for them altars or high places in the courts of the temple (2 Kings 21:4-5; 2 Kings 21:7), and patronized the worship of idols. As whoredom designates idolatry in general, so what is meant to be said by the corpses of their kings applies to the worship of kings, the forgotten subjection to Jehovah under them, who, if kings, yet are perpetuated only as corpses; one might be allowed, to call to mind Schubert’s poem: “The Princes’ Vault.” To this the appositional, loosely strung αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν the more fittingly attaches itself, as in αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ the thought of the kings as also high points, points of worship in social life, easily connects itself with the worship on the high places, which was specially popular in the time of the kings, and tolerated even by the better kings; the worship of the king, and the worship favoured by the kings, would border on one another. As idolatry in general constitutes the defilement of the name of Jehovah, the doings on the part alike of the house of Israel in general, and of their kings in particular, so the figurative and literal worshipping on high places forms, with special reference to the kings, a contrast to the enthronement of the King Jehovah, and to His dwelling in the literal sense in the midst of Israel. [In the interest of the different explanation of αְּ ?τִ ?βְ ?ψֵ ?ι it has been proposed to read αְ ?ξεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν, “in their death,” as the Chaldee paraphrase already interprets. Zunz makes αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν dependent on ιְ ?θַ ?ξְּ ?ΰεּ, but the αְּ wanting before αָּ ?ξεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν can be easily supplied from the preceding αִּ ?ζְ ?πεּ ?ϊָ ?ν and αְּ ?τִ ?βְ ?ψֵ ?ιΧ] Ezekiel 43:8. (The subject in αְּ ?ϊִ ?ϊָּ ?ν is not the kings (Hengst.), but what was subject in Ezekiel 43:7, the house of Israel and their kings. The suffix in ρִ ?τָּ ?ν means, if any particular persons, the kings, but better, Israel in general. What is then said refers neither to the temples of the high places, which had been placed so close beside the temple of God (Keil), for their threshold cannot refer to their high places, nor to idol-chambers there (comp. for this Ezekiel 8.), and idol-altars in the courts of the temple, which the kings of Judah built (such things would require to be expressed more plainly); nor is this disparaging expression meant to condemn the building of royal palaces like that of Solomon (1 Kings 7.); but if kings are specially aimed at, then the figurative mode of expression, as given by the temple of Jehovah, will pronounce sentence on the conduct of the kings who assumed an equality with Jehovah (1 Kings 12:28; 1 Kings 12:32), by their idolatrous appointments and arrangements with respect to religion and worship. It is better, however, to hold that the defilement of the name of the holiness of Jehovah by the people and the kings consisted in this, that the consciousness of the distance between Jehovah and Israel had entirely disappeared from the life of the latter, the dwelling of Jehovah was as if it were not present in Israel, Israel performed his domestic and secret worship of idols as his worship of Jehovah, so that only the temple wall (δַ ?χִּ ?ιψ) still protested, and preserved, or at least marked to Israel the boundary between the Holy One and His people. [Keil understands δַ ?χִּ ?ιψ of the temple wall, which was “the only thing between Jehovah and the corpse-gods.”]—εָ ?ΰֲ ?λμ, from λָּ ?μָ ?δ imperf. apoc. Piel (Exodus 32:10; Exodus 30:3!), signifies: to make the measure full, to finish sin by death (James 1:15).—αְּ ?ΰַ ?τִּ ?ι, comp. on Ezekiel 38:18. Ezekiel 43:9 resumes, in conclusion, the subject of Eze 43:7, as also to the same purpose; “the eternal duration of the new and perfect revelation of God as distinguished from the Old Testament merely temporary one, which is at this time passing over into complete fulfilment and glorification” (Hδv.), is repeatedly set forth.—ιְ ?ψַ ?ηַ ?χεּ (Piel: “to put far away”) ξִ ?ξֶּ ?πִ ?ι corroborates with respect to the corpses of kings the interpretation proposed (Ezekiel 43:7) of idolatrous adulation and adoration of them and their edicts regarding worship. Ezekiel 43:10. δַ ?βֵּ ?γ, Ezekiel 40:4.—The Aim of the Announcement of the Temple-vision, and consequently of the Vision itself as regards Israel. It is not said that Israel is again to build a temple of the kind; but neither is it said that he is to build up his phantasy on this architectonic interim phantasy. But with the perception that Jehovah still, and now first in the proper sense, desires to dwell in the midst of Israel,—a perception which will be brought about by the announcement of this house to the house of Israel,—shame shall come over them through the knowledge of their iniquities, from a comparison of these iniquities with the mercy and grace of God (Ezekiel 36:31-32), so that the goodness of God leads them to repentance (Romans 2:4). This moral-prophetic tendency is thoroughly in accordance with the Messianic acceptation of the templevision.—ϊָּ ?λְ ?πִ ?ιϊ (comp. Ezekiel 28:12), not so much: “plan,” model (Hengst.), but ( “proportionality,” says Fόrst): the harmony of the proportions, the regular character of the edifice. Keil: “the well-apportioned edifice.” Hengst. observes on this measuring: “not as architects, but as Abraham went through the length and breadth of the Promised Land (Genesis 13:17) with the interest of the family belonging to the house, in a meditating and loving and thankful spirit, following the measures shown,” etc. Ezekiel 43:11. And the announcement for this purpose is not, if they are ashamed of themselves, to be confined to the harmony of the whole, but will enter into particulars, which, being enumerated at the beginning, and in a profusion of words, are well fitted to produce from the outset the impression of something important. φεּ ?ψָ ?δ, from φεּ ?ψ, “to form” (Psalms 49:15 [14]), is the shape, the form, hence primarily the outside, with which is joined ϊְּ ?λεּ ?πָ ?δ, which Gesenius would derive from ϊָּ ?λַ ?ο, and compares with ϊָּ ?λְ ?πִ ?ιϊ. The word is derived from λּ ?εּ ?ο, and signifies the inside plenishing of a dwelling-place, as also the dwelling-place itself (Job 23:3), for which its out-goings and its in-comings, taking into account both the exterior and the interior, come above all into consideration. λָּ ?μΞφεֹּ ?ψϊָ ?ε is everything that φεּ ?ψָ ?δ is in the particular, the individual forms; λָּ ?μΞηֻ ?χֹּ ?ϊָ ?ιε the regulations in regard to the particulars of the arrangement; according to Keil: “regarding what Israel has to observe, the ordinances of worship.” [Hengst.: All here has a practical import (2 Timothy 3:16). The high mountain, for example, on which the house is situated proclaims: “Hearts upward.” The wall which surrounded the whole (Ezekiel 42:20) proclaims: “Ye shall be holy, for I am holy.” The guardrooms of the gates embody the word: “Without are dogs, whoremongers, murderers, idolaters.” The chambers for the people in the outer court preached: “Rejoice before the Lord always,” and: “Be ye thankful.” The arrangements for the priests reminded of sin, and demanded that one should consecrate himself to God in the burnt-offering, present to Him always the thank-offering and the meat-offering of good works. The altar of incense proclaimed to all: “Pray without ceasing.”] That the dwelling of the Holy One among His people has as its aim their sanctification in repentance and faith as to every part of them, is clear from the accompanying λָּ ?μΞηֻ ?χֹּ ?ϊָ ?ιε, which is, moreover, repeated by a parallel expression, and so strengthened (and all its forms and λָּ ?μΞϊּ ?εֹ ?ψֹ ?ϊָ ?ε), that is, all instructions and directions, what has thereby been given in doctrine according to which a man should live. And thus the symbolical view of the section (see Doct. Reflec.) has no need to seek elsewhere for farther justification. By the command: write, etc., the: make them know, passes over from oral annunciation into a more abiding form, into the written outline we have before us of the new temple, into the description given of the vision.—The: do, corresponding to the preceding: all that they did, certainly does not mean that they are to build such a temple, and just as little that they were to console themselves therewith. They are to repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. The “doing” intended is a spiritual, ethical doing. Ezekiel 43:12. The mention of the ϊּ ?εֹ ?ψֹ ?ϊָ ?ε leads to the summary of all doctrine and precepts in respect to this temple, which is significantly—in contrast with the law of Moses which Israel has not kept—one might indeed say: as the law of Christ—laid down repeatedly (Ezekiel 43:13) as the Thorah of the house. For all is summed up in this, that what has been represented on the (going back to Ezekiel 40:2) top of the mountain ( “head” of the mountain and head article of the doctrine!), the whole boundary marked out for the house round and round, is most holy (Ezekiel 45:3). The summary thought which underlies the whole, the holiness of Jehovah, the sanctification of Israel, is in a way set forth by this, that even the courts appear in the light of the most peculiar abode of Jehovah, so that the perfection of a new temple as the completion of the old is here proclaimed as a close to the temple-vision proper. Hengst. quite uselessly takes pains to tone down the χֹ ?γֶ ?ωׁ χָ ?γָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν into “eminently holy.” For if it is conceded to him that “ideally” (as he says) such (a holy place) was already extant in the tabernacle and the temple of Solomon, and all behoved in view of it to strive to be holy in their whole conversation (for which he appeals to 1 Peter 1:15), then he will have to concede that this “ideal” is set down here as a real, as the fulfilled law, since its ideality was nothing else than the idea of the future, the promised fulfilment in Christ. Numbers 18:10 rather proves this advance than furnishes ground for contending against it, with Hengstenberg; for what is said in that passage of the court of the tabernacle is expressly limited to the priestly families representing the people, and, moreover, to the male portion of them. The Old Testament form, indeed, still obtains on the top of the mountain here, but yet the novum quod in vetere latet is distinctly apparent. The question is not concerning the “world surrounding” the sanctuary, but when the vision here finishes with the temple, the mutual relation of its parts must be viewed—a view rendered possible just by this, that the most holy place still remains, as the prophet has shown. Certainly the point of view is a “practical” one; but when Hengst. says: “the passage serves as the foundation for the confident expectation expressed in Ezekiel 43:7; Ezekiel 43:9, that the people will in future lay aside all unholy dispositions,” then this looks forward to a future which points far beyond the immediatly post-exile period, namely, that God (to speak with Hengstenberg) “holds in prospect to the children of Israel a help against themselves, whereby they may succeed in conquering the enemy that makes the dwelling of God among them impossible,” this help being, of course, the Spirit of the Anointed One, of the fulfilling of the law, somewhat as in the passage cited by Hengst., 1 Peter 1:3 sq. Comp. 1 Corinthians 1:30 : ὁςἐγενηθηἡμινκαιἁγιαμος (2 Thessalonians 2:13 sq.; Ephesians 4:20 sq., and similar passages). Cocceius: “And the least on this mountain, within this wall of God, is greater than the high priest in the temple of Solomon, Matthew 11:11; Revelation 1:6; Revelation 5:10; 1 Peter 2:9; comp. also Zechariah 14:20-21.” Additional Note on Ezekiel 43:1-12[ “In this striking passage we are first of all to note the character in which the Lord now appears to dwell and manifest Himself among His people. It is as their divine King, occupying that house as the throne of His kingdom. God had always claimed this position, and had at first resisted their desires to have an earthly sovereign, because this virtually implied a rejection of Him as the proper head of the State. Even when He consented to their request, it was with a solemn and earnest protest against the person chosen ruling in his own name, and for selfish purposes, or in any other way than as the Lord’s vicegerent. The protest, however, was soon forgotten. The king looked upon himself, and the people also looked upon him, as possessing an absolute title to the throne, and the earthly head came very much to occupy, in men’s eyes, the place of the true and proper King. But in the new and more perfect order of things now unfolded in vision to the prophet, this flagrant perversion of the past must be rectified; God must be known and honoured as alone properly ‘King in Jeshurun.’ And hence, not only here does He declare that He had come to occupy His throne in the house, but, as mentioned in the note on Ezekiel 43:7, the earthly head, when spoken of in a subsequent chapter, is simply called ‘the prince.’ The supremacy and glory of Jehovah were henceforth to appear in their full splendour. We have farther to notice in the preceding passage the essentially moral character of all that was here displayed in vision respecting the future things of God’s kingdom. It was not a pattern which God was going to carry out anyhow, and accomplish as by a simple fiat of Omnipotence. It depended upon the condition of the people, and only if they agreed to put away sin from among them, and give God the supreme place in their hearts, could He manifest Himself toward them in the manner described. And finally, while the whole scheme was fraught with lessons of instruction, and inlaid with principles of holiness, the grand and distinguishing peculiarity of this pattern of the future, as compared with the past, we are expressly informed, was to be a general and all-pervading sanctity. The law of the house—what was pre-eminently entitled to be called the law—consisted in the whole region of the temple-mount being most holy. Not, as hitherto, was this characteristic to be confined to a single apartment of the temple; it was to embrace the entire circumference occupied by the symbolical institutions of the kingdom,—the chambers allotted to the priest, and even the courts trodden by the people, as well as the immediate dwelling-place of Jehovah. All were to have one character of sacredness, because all connected with them were to occupy a like position of felt nearness to God, and equally to enjoy the privilege of access to Him. So that the pattern delineated is that of a true theocracy, having God himself for king, with the community in all its members for true denizens of the kingdom, and acceptable ministers of righteousness before the Lord.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 473, 474.—W. F.] Ezekiel 43:13-27. The Altar of Burnt-offering (Ezekiel 43:13-17), and its Consecration (Ezekiel 43:18-27) [ “The remaining verses of this chapter (Ezekiel 43:13-27) which contain a description of the altar of burnt-offering, and of the necessary rites of consecration connected with it, seem at first view somewhat out of place. But there is an historical reason for such a description being given here. Now that the Lord has taken possession of the house, the prophet goes on to show how the work of fellowship and communion with Him is to proceed on the part of the people. It must, as it were, commence anew, and of course be conducted after the old manner; for no other could here come into contemplation. But in ancient times the grand medium of divine intercourse was the altar, at which all gifts and sacrifices were to be presented for the divine favour and blessing. And therefore, the prophet here, to show that the way was open, and that the people might have free access to the fellowship of God, after having briefly sketched the dimensions of the altar, gives instructions for its consecration, and the consecration of the priesthood, which was all that was needed to complete the arrangements. … The seven days’ purification services for the altar have respect to the original directions of Moses for the same purpose, in Exodus 29:37, and are simply a preparation for the great end aimed at—that God might accept the sacrifices of the people, and be gracious to them (Ezekiel 43:27). This indispensably required that there should first be a consecrated way of access—a holy altar, and a holy priesthood to minister at it.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 474, 475.—W. P.] Ezekiel 43:13, with which the vision already turns more expressly to the second particular, the service in the temple of Jehovah, has been prepared for by occasional references, such as Ezekiel 40:38 sq., Ezekiel 42:13 sq., but is introduced in particular by the “ordinances” and “precepts” commanded to be made known in Ezekiel 43:11 of our chapter. We remark, as regards the predominating evangelical tone of the vision, that the statement that Jehovah’s sanctuary, as well as Jehovah Himself, will dwell among His people, precedes any commandment or ordinance in regard to it. So the time of the wandering patriarchs was likewise before the time of the law, which simply came in between promise and fulfilment.—And these are the measures, the idea is symbolized in the “measure.”—δַ ?ξִּ ?ζְ ?αֵּ ?ηַ is the altar of burnt-offering (Ezekiel 40:47; Ezekiel 9:2; Exodus 30:28 sq.). Both on account of its significance in regard to the people in their relation to Jehovah,—since it is for the court what the ark which is wanting in Ezekiel is for the most holy place, and the altar of incense for the holy place (comp. Ezra 3),—and also because a fresh section of the vision announces itself here, the more exact statement of the measures is repeated in accordance with Ezekiel 40:5.—ηֵ ?ιχ, from ηεּ ?χ, “to surround,” is the so-called bosom,—Gesenius: the hallowed part of the altar, where the fire burnt; Keil: its base; Hengst.: the same as its back (?), namely, the enclosure, which was of brass,—as being on the outside; “back,” because it formed the periphery of the altar; “bosom,” because it embraces and grasps the heart, since ηֵ ?ιχ properly means something that grasps. Evidently the whole circumference of the altar will be first given. Keil translates: “a bottom-frame one cubit high and one cubit broad” (?). In the case of that which encloses the earth and stone, the kernel of the altar, the breadth is the thickness.—βְ ?αεּ ?μָ ?δּ (the feminine suffix here and in ωְׂ ?τָ ?ϊָ ?δּ, referring to ηֵ ?ιχ, has been explained from the transferred relation); more closely defined by ΰֶ ?μΞωְׂ ?τָ ?ϊָ ?δּ ρָ ?αִ ?ια, is, since anything else can scarcely be understood from the foregoing, the one span, that is, half cubit broad edging projecting over the circumference. δָ ?ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ, as noun: a span of unity, of the one = one span. Keil, who interprets from below upwards, places here a moulding a half cubit high.—εְ ?ζֶ ?δπַּ ?αδַ ?ξִּ ?ζְ ?αֵ ?ηַ is commonly translated: the “back,” which βַּ ?α must as little signify as it can denote the “socle” of the altar, the bottom-frame with its moulding. According to the fundamental idea of the root-word, to be “drawn together,” “heaped up,” βַּ ?α may at least quite as well denote something elevated or high, which is so easily expressed by this object (altare), as what is bowed or bent, especially when circumference and edging have preceded, and when in this way the configuration in height was not yet touched on. Ezekiel 43:14 would describe this from the bottom upwards; hence ξֵ ?ηֵ ?ιχδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ = from the circumference (starting from that with which the description began in Ezekiel 43:13), where it rose above the earth, apparently as belonging to it and raising itself out of it. [And for this reason Hδvernick already in Ezekiel 43:13 makes the bosom mean: the lowest part of the altar, the part immediately on the earth, the support of the whole. Keil understands δָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ of the filling up of the ηֵ ?ιχ with earth (?).]—δָ ?ςֲ ?ζָ ?ψָ ?δ, Hengst.: “closing;” Keil: “walling round.” The Aramaicized word, which is derived as a softened form from ςָ ?φַ ?ψ, denotes in 2 Chronicles 4:9; 2 Chronicles 6:13, the court (ηָ ?φֵ ?ψ, the “enclosure”). If derived from ςָ ?ζַ ?ψ, “to hold off” (hence, “to protect,” “to help”), the word would indicate a rest or landing-place, as the courts formed such ascending landing-places or terraces. It can hardly be a third designation for the wall of the altar (Hengst.: “especially the external wall of the two cubits thick enclosure”). When, as here, the height of the altar is treated of, two rests are to be understood, one above the other,—first a lower one, because only two cubits high, and therefore called the lesser, in relation to the greater of four cubits high, the next and higher one. The repeatedly stated breadth of one cubit makes the detailed description of the more general description in Ezekiel 43:13 more intelligible. We make by addition the height six cubits; Keil, seven cubits, but where is his half cubit πְּ ?αεּ ?μ? Ezekiel 43:15. δַ ?δַ ?ψְ ?ΰֵ ?μ, “the mountain of God,” four cubits high, denotes after the two court-like rests, in the priestly mode of expression, the altar proper, as it were the sanctuary upon the very high mountain (Ezekiel 40:2). The height of the altar which is being described suggested the expression; and accordingly the entire temple edifice, as it has been designated after the temple proper, “house” or “palace,” concentrates itself in the altar with its rests, designated as it is after its upper part: mountain of God. From this, however, the genuine priestly term: δָ ?ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ΰֵ ?ιμ, is still to be distinguished. The Qeri reads: ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ιΰֵ ?μ, adopting which Keil interprets, in conformity with Isaiah 29:1, not: “lion of God,” but, from ΰָ ?ψָ ?δ, “to burn” (ara Dei): “hearth of God.” Hengst. holds for the reading in the text: ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ι, “lion,” and takes ΰιμ, the ι being elided by the Masoretes, as “ram,” while he thinks it possible that the original form was ΰψΰֵ ?ιμ, instead of ΰψΰַ ?ιִ ?μ, so that a double sense had been intended. Lion of God and ram-lion, the lion that consumes the rams for God! At all events, what is meant is the upper surface, that is, in reality the fire-hearth of the altar from the four corners of which the four horns extended, and these, according to Jewish tradition, belonged to the essential requisites of the altar, and indicate the insignia of kingly dominion, hence the revelation of divine power and glory, etc. (Bδhr, Symb. i. p. 473); with these our description is completed as regards extent upwards. The altar has, like that of Solomon, a height of ten cubits. Ezekiel 43:16. The account of the height is followed by that of the length and breadth, measured at the highest point of the altar, and given for the whole four sides from the ground up. Ezekiel 43:17. Setting out now from that which is not a part of the altar proper (εְ ?δָ ?ςֲ ?ζָ ?ψָ ?δ, collective, comp. Ezekiel 43:14), the lower ledge, in contrast and as complement to εְ ?δָ ?ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ΰֵ ?ιμ (Ezekiel 43:16), the top surface, Ezekiel 43:17, measures fourteen instead of twelve cubits square, since it adds from Ezekiel 43:13-14 the thickness of the “bosom,” a cubit on each side, to the length and the breadth; this is referred to in what follows: and the border round about it, etc. = “and its border at its lip round about” (Ezekiel 43:13), although for the sake of variety we have half a cubit here, instead of a span there.—And its bosom, etc. (Ezekiel 43:13); this explains the difference in the measurement here from that of Eze 43:16. The mention of the bosom and the border reverts to the beginning of the description of the altar (Ezekiel 43:13), so that only βַּ ?α there still needs to be mentioned, and this is now done by naming the steps, in distinction from Exodus 20:26, indicating the elevation of the altar of burnt-offering. [Bδhr carries an inclined plane round the altar for a similar purpose as the two rests here.]—τְּ ?πεֹ ?ϊ, infinitive = when one turns, equivalent to: toward; according to others, a noun, read by Hitzig as participle τֹּ ?πεֹ ?ϊ. Ezekiel 43:18 leads to the consecration of the altar of burnt-offering, forming an introduction to its ritual for the purpose stated, and to its service. In other words, as the entire temple-edifice was referred to the underlying idea by means of the measuring, that is, was set forth as to its symbolical signification, so, in accordance with its intention as respects the people, in whom the idea is to be realized, the altar of burnt-offering has been purposely described at such length; but this intention will be effected only by this means, that, strictly parallel with the entrance of the glory into the sanctuary, a formal act of sacrificial consecration in respect of the altar of burnt-offering is provided for beforehand. The clothing of the idea is a kind of dramatic transaction between Ezekiel and the priests of the new temple, an act of the future with which we can compare from the past Leviticus 8. (Exodus 29:10 sq.); 1 Kings 8:62 sq.; 2 Chronicles 8:4 sq.—By the words: on the day when it is made, the ordinances of the altar are more closely defined as ordinances which are fulfilled (as to their idea) as soon as the whole temple, including this altar, will be in actual existence. A “being made” is also spoken of in the sense of the reference throughout to the people, just as the whole consecration points to men, who as such can do nothing pure or holy. Comp. Exodus 20:22; Leviticus 16:16. But the consecration of the altar, the ritual of which is told to the prophet in the Old Testament mode of expression, particularly by the solemn: “thus saith the Lord,” etc., holds out the prospect of a consecration of the people by Jehovah.—By the avowed purpose of the altar, “to cause ascendings” (as the burnt-offerings meant to be wholly burnt, specially fulfilling the view, are called) “to ascend upon it” (with reference to the altar, the raising up of the gift), and to sprinkle blood upon it (which precisely in these offerings was done merely on the altar round about), is therefore signified in the first instance, and corresponding at the same time to the act of consecration here, the consecration of the people to Jehovah, their entire surrender and presentation of themselves to Him. The burnt-offerings usher in the class of offerings which obtains in the state of grace. The justified man lives henceforth not to himself; the service of the Lord which is ministered in the Church is symbolized by this purpose of the altar of burnt-offering; hence there is no act of worship without burnt-offering. Its expiatory significance comes out only in a secondary way in referring to the altar, just as the sprinkling with blood in the case of the burnt-offering takes place in the most general form. But since, in the time before the law, the burnt-offerings were at the same time the sin-offerings,—just as their atoning nature reminds of the sin which continually adheres to us, although the awakened conscience is again hushed,—so likewise the history of sacrifice is represented to us by this oldest of all sacrifices; thus the self-surrendering reliance on grace continues to be taken into account, as in the past, so for the future, and so the burnt-offering may be called the perpetual offering of the Church of God. Ezekiel 43:19 passes over from the altar as to its purpose to the priests and the appropriate victims. The former are simply presupposed as a body of priests descended from Levi, belonging through the tribe to the whole people as their natural and official representatives, and that without consecration, which took place at the tabernacle; nevertheless, instead of consecration the elective appointment is repeated (comp. Ezekiel 40:46), so that only the race of Zadok who draw near to Jehovah (Ezekiel 42:13) are qualified for the service (comp. on Ezekiel 44:15 sq.). As to the second element, the victim, τַּ ?ψαֶּ ?οΞαָּ ?χָ ?ψ, a young bullock was fixed on. The male was the fitting victim for the burnt-offering, and the bullock was the most distinguished among the animals coming into consideration for a sin-offering; and so the high priest, as priestly head and representative of the community, offered for his cleansing a bullock still in the full flower of his strength (Leviticus 4:3 sq., comp. 13 sq.). Ezekiel 43:20. Comp. Ezekiel 43:15; Ezekiel 43:14; Ezekiel 43:17; Ezekiel 43:13. The sprinkling of the blood is the sprinkling in detail of the particular parts characteristic of the sin-offering. The cleansing and expiation of the altar have a reflex influence on the people that made it, and that, at the word of God (in Leviticus 17:11 the altar is a place of God), raise themselves up there to God. That which the two words employed express (cleanse, and expiate), that which the procedure above and below and around the extremities symbolizes, will be a complete sanctification of the people. With such a strong representation of the cleansing, an anointing of the altar, etc. (Leviticus 8:11) was not necessary in order to give expression to the idea. Ezekiel 43:21. δַ ?τָּ ?ψδַ ?ηַ ?θָּ ?ΰϊ, the article before the stat. constr. It is quite as unwarranted simply to suppose everything omitted, as from what is not said to make the prophet be in contradiction with the Mosaic ceremonial. The statements in this vision are mainly determined by the idea to be set forth, and which shows itself everywhere. Thus there was no need of saying anything about the blood which was not consumed, and which elsewhere was poured out at the foot of the altar of burnt-offering to prevent its being profaned, since the sanctification is so strongly expressed in that no mention is once made of the fat upon the inwards which came upon the altar, but it is so spoken as if the fire consumed the whole animal (comp. besides in Leviticus 4:12; Leviticus 8:17, the manner of expression) without the sanctuary; comp. Leviticus 4:21; Leviticus 6:23. Thus not within the house, and if in a place that may be supposed related to it, certainly (comp. what was remarked in speaking of the gizrah, Ezekiel 41) in the “off-place,” hardly Ezekiel 46:19 sq. Ezekiel 43:22. The goat is the atonement for a prince (Leviticus 4:23), but also the characteristic offering for the people on the great day of atonement (Leviticus 16.). Thus the people might be looked upon as perfectly represented at the altar of the court, Ezekiel 43:19 sq. ecclesiastically, and here civilly, by their two heads the high priest and the prince (comp. Ezekiel 44:3 sq.), with reference at the same time to the great yearly atonement. At any rate, only the second day is marked at the beginning which is made with the bullock as sin-offering; the following days up to the seventh are, as respects sin-offering, introduced and indicated by the second.—ϊָּ ?ξִ ?ιν, integer, which had to be the quality of every victim, but clearly more noteworthy here when the civil side is treated of.—εְ ?ηִ ?θְּ ?ΰεּ, the priests, or: one, etc., while at the same time Ezekiel 43:21 sq. is illustrated in this respect by λַּ ?ΰֲ ?ωψΧ. The prophet does it by instructing the priests to do it.—After what has been stated regarding these two days, that the bullock cleanses the altar, etc. (Ezekiel 43:20), to which reference is expressly made in speaking of the goat of the second day (Ezekiel 43:22), then αְּ ?λַ ?μּ ?εֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ ξֵ ?ηַ ?θּ ?ΰ in Ezekiel 43:23 can be understood only of the completion of the two sin-offerings, to which the subordinate purpose of the altar, the mention of the sprinkling of blood (Ezekiel 43:18), had led the prophet, so that he now comes to what is spoken of as the principal purpose, to the burnt-offering, which, in the indefiniteness as regards time with which the bullock and ram of which it consists are spoken of, can be quite as easily assigned to the first day as it is expressly assigned in Ezekiel 43:25 to seven days. Ezekiel 43:24. What remained still indefinite in Ezekiel 43:22 now becomes quite clear by the mention of the priests. Very significant, however, and exceedingly telling for the setting forth of the idea of sanctification already remarked in Ezekiel, is the casting of salt by the priests, which in the law is expressly demanded for the meat-offering, and appears here connected in a similar manner (ωָׁ ?μַ ?κְ) with the burnt-offering, although salt (Leviticus 2:13) was to be put on every oblation. Salt (especially in contrast with leaven and honey), by its seasoning and antiseptic power, with its hidden cleansing fire which consumes everything unclean, is meant to bring out the signification of the powerful truth which keeps off impurity and hypocritical legal sanctity, viz. the surrender to the service of the Lord symbolized in the burnt-offering. Perhaps its character as salt of the covenant of God, with reference to the eternity thereof (Numbers 18:19; 2 Chronicles 13:5), comes additionally into consideration for the act of consecration. The quality of human nature, observes Hengst., is unsalted, and may not enter into relation with God. Ezekiel 43:25. The seven days can be neither nine nor eight days, i.e. excluding the first two days, or at least the first day, for they are expressly seven; as also it is said again in Ezekiel 43:26, εְ ?λִ ?τַּ ?ψϊָּ ?δεּ (Qeri: ιְ ?λַ ?τְּ ?ψεּ), with evident allusion to εְ ?λּ ?τַּ ?ψϊָּ ?δεּ in Ezekiel 43:20. Moreover, apart from the significance of the number seven as the number of the covenant, consecration, sanctification, etc., it is the basis of all solemnities in Israel, as Keil observes: prescribed in the law without exception for every act of consecration continuing over one day. Comp. particularly Exodus 29:37; 2 Chronicles 7:9. The one kid for a sin-offering daily cannot possibly be held to run counter to this, for it expresses what relates to the majority of these days, six days; and in respect of the first day, the bullock (Ezekiel 43:19 sq.) stood clearly defined from the outset. The two victims appointed for burnt-offering (Ezekiel 43:23 sq.) are also distinguished from the kid by the change from ϊַּ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ to ιַ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?εּ. And not without significance could the cleansing sin-offering, in distinction from the burnt-offering, be ascribed—although only formally—to the prophet; in this keeping separate he represents the sanctifying grace of God, and the priests the community sanctifying themselves to God.—As Ezekiel 43:23 sq. is supplemented by the ωִׁ ?αְ ?ςַ ?ϊιָ ?ξִ ?ιν placed at the beginning of Eze 43:25, and qualifying the whole verse, the burnt-offering in question is to be offered daily during the seven days after the daily completion of the cleansing. Ezekiel 43:26, concluding the act of consecration,—hence couched in general terms,—confirms both the merely seven days’ duration of the consecration of the altar (for nothing else is meant by θִ ?δֲ ?ψεּ), and also, in virtue of the entire consecration above mentioned, its perfect purification, on the ground and in consequence of the expiation (εְ ?λַ ?τְּ ?ψεּ) of the altar, which according to Ezekiel 43:20 is its cleansing. We might translate; a pronouncing clean for the present use, treated of in Ezekiel 43:27. It is certainly also in harmony with this when, in making over to the altar thereby represented as entering personally on its functions, the peculiar phrase: fill its hand, is used. After the use previously in the description of the altar of the words “bosom” and “lip” in reference to it, its hand (ιָ ?γιָ ?ε, plur., is a needless gloss) can cause no surprise, especially in Ezekiel, who delights in bold symbols. The altar representing the people in the priests, even of itself, easily becomes a person, and still more readily if the idea of it is to be made prominent. But to “fill the hand” is the expression used in Leviticus 8. on occasion of the offering for consecrating the priests, inasmuch as those parts of the offering, which otherwise were heaved and waved in the thank-offering, were laid, along with the loaves and cakes, into the hands of the priests. With exception of the breast and shoulder, all this was laid on the altar as a sacrifice of consecration (ξִ ?μֻּ ?ΰִ ?ν). The expression: ξִ ?μֵּ ?ΰιָ ?γ, occurs similarly in Exodus 32:29; 1 Chronicles 29:5; 2 Chronicles 29:31 (ιֶ ?γְ ?λֶ ?ν), in reference to Jehovah, so that the application to the priests in general denotes the giving of a present to them, which, although by the people, is yet as from Jehovah. It indicates in particular, however, their official right to their ministry, and the obligation of this ministry to offer to Jehovah in the fire of the altar. Since the expression, different from the consecration proper of priests, implies the conferring of the priestly office, the formal installation into it,—the making of it over to the altar here, corresponding to its purification, is designed to represent the making over of the altar of burnt-offering for the service assigned to it, as Ezekiel 43:27 farther describes. The use for which this altar will have to be employed henceforth, after the completion of what has to be completed in regard to it in the seven days, as, moreover, it is expressly said: on the eighth day and onwards, is intimated by the burnt-offering and the Shelamim, which, however, appear not exactly as the principal and most frequent offerings, instar omnium (Keil, Hengst.), but to make prominent the idea of a people of God in the state of grace, as the kinds of offering befitting such a relation to Jehovah. Hence also the Shelamim are not called here ζְ ?αָ ?ηִ ?ιν, “slain offerings,” in order to give a general designation for offerings, or to mark the distinction from the burnt-offering, which falls entirely to Jehovah, but ωְׁ ?μָ ?ξִ ?ιν, that is, salvation-offerings (peace-offerings), a designation well fitted to place them on a level with the “whole offering” (λָּ ?μִ ?ιμ), as the burnt-offering is also called: full surrender is met by full grace, salvation perfect in respect to the past and for the future, and the individual’s enjoyment of peace resting on and flowing from it (in which perhaps the more private character of this species of offering compared with the more official character of the burnt-offering should be noticed). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 44 1And he led me back the way of the outer gate of the sanctuary that 2looks to the east; and it was shut. And Jehovah said to me: This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall go in through it; 3because Jehovah, the God of Israel, went in through it; thus it is shut. As to the prince, he [is] prince, he shall sit in it, to eat bread [food] before Jehovah; from the way of the [to the] porch of the gate shall he go in, and 4from its way shall he go out. And he brought me the way of the north gate before the house, and I looked, and behold, the glory of Jehovah filled 5the house of Jehovah; and I fell upon my face. And Jehovah said to me: Son of man, set thy heart, and behold with thine eyes, and hear with thine ears all that I say unto thee concerning all the ordinances of the house of Jehovah, and all its laws [or: its whole law]; and thou settest [shalt set] thy heart to the approach of the house in [conjunction with] all the out-goings of the 6sanctuary. And thou sayest to the contumacy, to the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Cease at last from all your abominations, O house 7of Israel, When ye brought sons of the outland, uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, to be in My sanctuary, to desecrate it, even My house; when ye offered My bread [My food] (through them), fat and blood, and they 8broke My covenant in addition to all your abominations. And [yea] ye have not kept the charge of My holy things, and [but] ye set [such, those] to keep My charge for you in My sanctuary. 9Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: A son of the outland, uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, shall not come to My sanctuary; in respect of every son of the outland [shall it be said] that Isaiah 10 in the midst of the children of Israel. Nay, but the Levites who went far from Me when Israel went astray, who went astray from Me after their 11detestable idols, they bear their guilt; And they are servants in My sanctuary, sentinels at the gates of the house and servants of the house; they shall slay the burnt-offering and the slain-offering for the people, and they 12shall stand before them to serve them. Because they used to serve them before their detestable idols, and were to the house of Israel a stumbling-block of guilt, therefore have I lifted My hand over them,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah,—and they bear their guilt. 13And they shall not draw near to Me, to minister as priests to Me, and to draw near over all My holy things to the most holy place, and [but] they bear their reproach and their abominations 14which they did. And I have given them to be keepers of the charge 15of the house, for all its service and for all that is to be done in it. And [but] the priests the [these] Levites, the sons of Zadok, who kept the charge of My sanctuary when the children of Israel went astray from Me, they shall come near to Me to minister unto Me, and stand before Me to offer unto Me fat 16and blood,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. They shall come to My sanctuary, and they shall draw near to My table to minister unto Me, and to 17keep My charge. And it comes to pass, when they go to the gates of the inner court; they shall put on linen garments, and wool shall not come upon them when they minister in the gates of the inner court and at the house. 18Linen turbans shall be upon their heads, and linen breeches upon their loins; 19they shall not gird themselves in sweat. And on their going out to the outer court, to the outer court to the people, they shall put off their garments in which they minister [ministered], and lay them away [down] in the cells of holiness, and put on other garments; and they shall not sanctify the people in 20[with] their garments. And their head they shall not shave, nor suffer their 21locks to grow long; polling they shall poll their heads. And no priest shall 22drink wine when they go to the inner court. And a widow and a divorced woman shall they not take to themselves for wives; but maidens of the seed of the house of Israel, and the widow who was widow of a priest they may take. 23And they shall teach My people; what [the difference is] between the holy and the common, and between the unclean and the clean, they shall make them 24know. And over [matters of] strife shall they stand to judge in My judgments, and judge them [so]; and My laws and Mine ordinances on all My festivals 25shall they keep; and My Sabbaths shall they hallow. And to a dead body of a man shall he not go to be defiled; but for father, and for mother, and for son, and for daughter, for brother, and for sister who had no husband, 26they may defile themselves. And after his cleansing they shall count to him 27seven days. And on the day of his coming to the sanctuary to the inner court, to minister in the sanctuary, he shall offer his sin-offering,—sentence of 28the Lord Jehovah. And it is to them for an inheritance [namely], I am their inheritance; and a possession shall ye not give them in Israel, I am their 29possession. The meat-offering, and the sin-offering, and the guilt-offering, they shall eat it; and every devoted thing in Israel shall be theirs. 30And the first of all the firstlings of everything, and every oblation of all, out of all your oblations, shall be to the priests, and the first of your [ground] corn shall ye give to the priest, to bring down a blessing upon thy house. Whatever is carrion, or torn, whether of fowl or of beast, 31the priests shall not eat. Ezekiel 44:2. Sept.: ... ὁτικυριος … εἰσελευσεται … κ. ἐσταικεκλεισμενη. Vulg.:—eritque clausa (3) principi. Princeps ipse—per viam portζ vestibuli ingredietur et per viam ejus— Ezekiel 44:3. Διοτιὁἡγουμενοςοὑτος … κατατ. ὁδοναἰλαμ— Ezekiel 44:4. Κ. εἰσηγαγενμε … πληρηςδοξηςὁοἰκος—(Another reading: εΰτμςμΞτπι.) Ezekiel 44:5. ... ταξονεἰςτ. καρδιαν … καταπαντα … ἐνπασιντοιςἁγιοις. Vulg.: … de universis ceremoniis in viis templi per omnes exitus— Ezekiel 44:7. ... κπαρεβαινετετ. διαθηκηνμουἐνπασαις—(Another reading: ΰϊλμ and ϊεςαϊιδν.) Ezekiel 44:8. ... κ. διεταξατετουφυλασσεινφυλακας—Vulg.: et non servastis prζcepta … et posuistis custodes observationum mearum in—vobismet ipsis. Ezekiel 44:10. ἁλλ̓ἠοἱ ?—Vulg.: Sed et … qui longe recesserunt— Ezekiel 44:11. Vulg.: … ζditui et janitores portarum— Ezekiel 44:12. ... καιἐγενετοτωοἰκω— Ezekiel 44:13. ... οὐδετουπροσαγαγεινπροςταἁγιαυἱωνἸσροὐδεπροςτ. ἁγιατ. ἁγιωνμου … τ. ἀτιμιαναὐτωνἐντηπλανησειἡἐπλανηθησαν. Vulg.: … juxta sancta sanctorum (Another reading: ΰμλμ.) Ezekiel 44:14. Κ. ταξουσιναὐτους … ὁσαἀνποιησωσιν. (Another reading: με.) Ezekiel 44:15. ... τουπροσφερεινμοιθυσιαν, στεαρ— Ezekiel 44:17. Sept.: ... ἀποτηςπυλης … κ. ἐσω. Ezekiel 44:18. βια. Ezekiel 44:19. The words repeated are wanting in several manuscripts, and in the Sept., Syr., Vulg., Arab., and Chaldee. Ezekiel 44:20.—κ. ταςκομαςαὐτωνοὐμηψιλωσουσιν, καλυπτοντεςκαλυψωσινταςκεφαλαςαὐτων. Vulg.:—neque comam nutrient, sed tondentes attondent capita sua. Ezekiel 44:23. ... κ. ἀναμεσονκαθαρουκ. ἀναμεσονἀκαθαρτου— Ezekiel 44:24. Κ. ἐπικρισιναἱματος . … ταδικαιωματαμουδικαιωσουσιν, κ. τακριματαμουκρινουσιν, κ. τανομιμα—Vulg.: … controversia, stabunt in judiciis meis et judicabunt;—(Another reading: μξωτθ.) Ezekiel 44:25. Κ. ἐπιψυχηνἀνθρωπουοὐκεἰσελευσονται—Vulg.: … ad mortuum hominem … quζalterum virum non habuerit,— Ezekiel 44:26. Another reading: ιρτψ. Ezekiel 44:27. ... εἰσπορευωνταιεἰςτ. αὐλην … προσοισουσινἱλασμον—Vulg.:—ut ministret mihi— Ezekiel 44:28. κ. ἐσταιαὐτοις … Ἐγω … και—Vulg.: Non erit autem eis— Ezekiel 44:29. Κ. ταςθυσιας— Ezekiel 44:30. Κ. ἀπαρχαιπαντωνκ. ταπρωτοτοκαπαντωνκ. ταἀφαιρεματαπανταὑμωνἐκπαντωντ. ἀπαρχων … κ. ταπρωτογεννηματαὑμων—Vulg.: Et primitiva omnium primogenitorum et omnia libamenta ex omnibus quζ offeruntur … et primitiva ciborum vestrorum … ut reponat— Ezekiel 44:31. ... θνησιμαιονκ. θηριαλωτον— REMARKSEze_44:1-3. The Prince in the East Gate[As the preceding chapter had disclosed the purpose of God to re-occupy, and that for ever, this new temple, and had described the necessary means and rites of consecration in order to its being a source of blessing to His people, so the present chapter lays down regulations for preventing any new desecration of the house, such as might again compel God to withdraw His gracious presence. These regulations refer successively to the prince and the priesthood—the two classes through whom directly the former pollutions had been introduced into the house of God.—Fairbairn.—W. F.] The prophet observed in the priests’ court (Ezekiel 43:5) all that relates to the altar of burnt-offering. He is thence brought back, as we shall have to suppose, through the inner north or south gate the way to the outer east gate. It is not without significance that the east gate of the outer court (comp. Ezekiel 43:12) is designated as “gate of the sanctuary, the outer one which,” etc. Looking into it from the court (not as Hitzig and Hengstenberg: from before the outer east gate, as Ezekiel 43:1), Ezekiel perceived that it was shut (comp. Ezekiel 40:11); and this, must the more astonish him, as this entrance to the sanctuary had been described to him in Ezekiel 40. as forming the rule for all the other gates of the temple. The fact, then, of its being closed demands an explanation, which also Jehovah (comp. on Ezekiel 43:6-7) gives him in Ezekiel 44:2. Since the whole vision points to the future, it is said first of all in reference thereto: This gate shall be shut (ιִ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ). Hence the closing shall continue for all futurity, as is again expressly confirmed by the statement: It shall not be opened, and strengthened by this other declaration: And no man (whoever he may be) shall go in through it,—in other words, by the exclusion of every one. When it is thereafter said: Because Jehovah, etc., the αִּ ?ι explains certainly the immediate present (εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ), the present closing of the gate, which, as we see in Ezekiel 44:1, is the first thing treated of; but we shall have to draw upon it for the explanation for the future likewise, for this future has been announced as the continuance of the closing in the present. The way which the glory of Jehovah went (Ezekiel 43:4) is thus a unique way, and will remain such, no man shall tread it henceforth; and this, when we look upon the fulfilment in Christ of all that had been written aforetime, reads like a Messianic prophecy, without its being necessary for us to suppose with the Church Fathers a direct reference to the virginity of Mary (fit porta Christi pervia, referta, plena gratia, transitque rex et permanet clausa ut fuit per sζcula). [The Rabbins have interpreted the closing of the gate to this effect: that the Shechinah shall no longer be able to come out, an idea which Lightfoot has transformed into the ever-during dwelling of the glory of God in the Christian Church; while Hengst. expresses it thus: that the glory of the impending revelation of the Lord “embodies” itself in the door’s remaining shut.]—When, after this quite universal explanation in respect to future and present of the shut east gate, Ezekiel 44:3, by its very commencing with the absolute construction ΰֶ ?ϊΞδַ ?πָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ, directs attention to the prince, and, besides, gives as reason for what is to be said of him in reference to the east gate, ιωֶׁ ?αΞαּ ?εֹ, that is as much as to say: qua prince it belongs to him; then an exception from the rule just laid down, that is, an exceptional entering of the prince through this gate at certain times and for certain contingencies, is not to be supposed, especially as what is announced regarding him is not: ιָ ?αΰֹ αεֹ, but simply: ιֵ ?ωֶׁ ?αΞαּ ?εֹ, that he shall sit in this gate, namely (comp. for the expression: to eat bread before God, Exodus 18:12; Luke 13:26), to enjoy the sacrificial banquets. Of this place of the prince in the east gate, Hengst. exclaims: “How glorious must the entering Lord be, when the prince cannot be more highly honoured than by a place in the gate by which He entered!” Now, since according to Ezekiel 44:1-2 the entrance through the east gate was closed to him, the way by which the prince arrived at his place of honour will necessarily have to be given, as is accordingly done; and this account is not to be interpreted, with Keil, of the outside stair over the threshold at the guardroom, and onward to the gate-porch at the inner end of the gate-structure. For such a way surely ξִ ?γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ ΰεּ ?μָ ?νΧ would be a strange mode of expression! On the contrary, this mode of expression is quite conceivable when we consider the way of the prophet (Ezekiel 44:1), who had been brought from the north or south to the east gate, and finds himself there on the side of the court west of the gate; and hence has the porch right before him, so that he will the more readily define from it the way of the prince into the gate (from its way he shall also go out), as the entering from the way of the porch of the gate forms self-evidently the contrast to an entering from the way of the gate without. Consequently, the prince has (as Hitzig rightly understands) to come through the outer north or south gate into the outer court, and to cross the same, in order to arrive at the place where he will sit, etc. Whether the gate-porch which thus lay on this side (toward the court) of the gate-barrier is meant to be given as the place for the banquets of the prince may be questioned; Hengstenberg recommends, as “specially” adapted for them, “the inner threshold immediately adjacent to the porch.” According to all this, the exception of the prince symbolizes merely, in its own way, the holiness of the sanctuary, the solemnity of drawing near to Jehovah and appearing before Him. It will no longer be as in the former temple, that any one (ΰִ ?ιωׁ) will march straight to the sanctuary through the east gate; but the saints of God, His people sanctified for ever, will know how to honour the holiness of Him who sanctified them. ( “In the case of the tabernacle and its court there was only one entrance, from the east, through which all had to go,” Klief.) But it is significant that the civil head of the people (comp. on Ezekiel 43:22), the prince, sits and eats in the east gate closed for every one, on the way which the glory of Jehovah went to fill the house (Ezekiel 44:4), and there enjoys the fruit of that which has been provided. For the significance of the banquets has regard to the communion and friendly relation in which the participants stand to one another, and with the provider of the feast, who in the last resort is Jehovah—at least He participates therein in the sense of Rev 3:20; just as also the gladness and joy before the Lord, and even the joys of the kingdom of heaven, appear under the figure of a feast (Psalms 23:5; Psalms 36:9 [8]; Matthew 8:11; Luke 14:15; Revelation 19:9). We have in this the genuine gospel feature, which excels in glory the face of the law. So much the more, however, as regards the prince—who, as has been said, is rather a reflex of the people (comp. Ezekiel 46:10), just as to them also the entrance to the temple has been opened by the setting in operation of the altar of burnt-offering (Ezekiel 43:26)—must we avoid the interpretation which accentuates in him the David of Messianic times (Ezekiel 34:23 sq., Ezekiel 37:24). On this comp. also Ezekiel 45:22; Ezekiel 46:2; Ezekiel 46:16. It would be better to insist with Hengst. on his “cheering” form, as opposed to the ceasing of the magisterial office in the exile, especially when his presence is so incidentally “presupposed.” But this prince ship, which makes orderly civil relations again obtain in Israel, had its post-exile appearance in Zerubbabel, for instance (Zechariah 4), and has at all events been perfected in the Messianic kingdom, even as to the side applicable here, which Isaiah 53:10 expresses thus: “The pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper through his hand;” while in Ezekiel 44:11 he is said: “to see,” “to be refreshed;” and similarly Ezekiel 44:12. [ “In regard to the prince, it is impossible for us to think of any one but the royal head, as he is throughout spoken of as an individual, and in the next chapter is directed ‘to prepare for himself, and for all the people of the land,’ a sin-offering (Ezekiel 45:22). So that the idea of Hδvernick, that the word is used collectively for the rulers and presidents generally of the people, is quite untenable. And not less so is the opinion, that by the expression is simply to be understood the Messiah; for this is utterly irreconcilable with all the prescriptions given, and in particular with those requiring the presentation of sacrifices and sin-offerings for the prince. It is to be explained precisely as the whole delineation here, and in the preceding visions (Ezekiel 34-39), by viewing it as part of an ideal description of coming realities under the form and aspect of the old relations. And no more than we expect other parts of the vision to find their accomplishment under the gospel by a restoration of the carnal sacrifices and institutions of Judaism, should we look here for an actual prince to follow the regulations prescribed. Standing on the position he did, the prophet must speak of the future under the image of the past; and as it was by means of the earthly head of the Jewish state that many of the former corruptions had been introduced, he now shows how a repetition of such evils is to be guarded against in the future. Whether the kingly power should ever again be concentrated in one person, or should be shared by many, is of no moment as regards the substance of the truth here unfolded.” As for the connection between the prince and the east gate (Ezekiel 44:1-3), “what could this import, but that the prince should feel he now occupied a place of peculiar nearness to God? As God’s vicegerent and deputy among the people, it became him to be the most distinguished representative in public life of God’s holiness, to tread the higher walks of spiritual communion and fellowship with Heaven, and stand pre-eminent in his zeal for the interests of truth and righteousness. Far now from usurping the authority that belonged to God, and abusing to selfish ends and purposes the power which was given by Him for higher ends, all authority and power in Israel should be exercised—if this divine ideal were reduced to practice—in a solemn feeling of subordination to God’s majesty, and with an unfeigned desire for His glory.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 477, 478.—W. F.] Ezekiel 44:4-16 The Priests. Ezekiel 44:4. The outer north gate cannot be the one spoken of, for the prophet stands in the outer court before the porch of the east gate. He is brought ΰֶ ?μΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ιδַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊ, and so γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ ?Ξωַׁ ?ςַ ?ψΞδַ ?φָּ ?τεֹ ?ο, must be the way to the inner north gate, as this was also the way by which to get near to the temple-house.—Comp. for the rest on Ezekiel 43:5; Ezekiel 43:3. As there the filling of the house with the glory of Jehovah introduced the Thorah of the temple, especially the consecration of the altar of burnt-offering, which certainly forms also the transition to the temple - service, so here by a similar introduction, in which Ezekiel 44:5 refers so far back as to Ezekiel 40:4, the service before Jehovah is now introduced, and that with attentive regard to the personelle. Thus the two parts of the section, Ezekiel 40-46, are even formally-separated.—Jehovah, as in Ezekiel 44:2.—The threefold demand upon the prophet, of which the first, which as the most inward strikes the key for the seeing and hearing, has its ground not exactly in the glory just now seen (Hengst.), but rather in what Jehovah will say to him, and in the abominations committed by Israel, to which it has reference.—What concerns the ordinances and laws of the house (comp. Ezekiel 43:11-12) is certainly limited here by δַ ?ξִּ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωׁ to the temple building proper, as is also indicated by the designation: house of Jehovah, repeated from Ezekiel 44:4, so that the approach of the house with all the out-goings is to be understood in reference to the priests. Ezekiel 44:6. That the house of Israel is to be addressed (Ezekiel 2:7) shows the more plainly how it had been represented by the priesthood of the past.—ψַ ?αΞμָ ?λֶ ?νξִ ?λָּ ?μΧ, literally: there is much to you from all your abominations, sufficient, enough for you, so that you may at last abstain (1 Peter 4:3). Like priest, like people; but also, like people, like priest (Hosea 4:9). Ezekiel 44:7, in this connection, in which the temple-house accessible to the priests alone is treated of, and priestly ministration is had regard to, can hardly refer to heathens or foreigners living amongst Israel (comp. for this Leviticus 17:10; Leviticus 17:12; Numbers 15:13 sq.; Exodus 12:43-44; 1 Kings 8:41 sq.), foreign merchants as sellers of sacrificial victims, etc., nor heathenized Israelites in general, but must be understood as referring to the introduction of priests, who, as the children of Israel were called “heathens” (βּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν) in Ezekiel 2:3, were αְּ ?πֵ ?ιΞπֵ ?λָ ?ψ, instead of being sons of Jehovah’s house. In what sense the term employed is to be taken is shown by the next clause: uncircumcised in heart, which, if said of genuine born heathens, would be nonsense; whereas, said of Israelites, of the priests here, and conjoined with the following clause: and uncircumcised in flesh, it expresses exactly the same as Romans 2:25, when the περιτομηἀκροβυστιαγεγονεν,—when the direct opposite of the idea of the symbol realizes itself (comp. besides, Deuteronomy 30:6), the distinction also which the symbol denotes will disappear, the Jew has become heathen. Comp. also Ezekiel 16:3; Zechariah 14:21 (Philippians 3:3). The expression: to be in My sanctuary, which more closely defines the αַּ ?δֲ ?αִ ?ιΰֲ ?λֶ ?ν as the bringing in to the priestly ministration, is still farther illustrated by the clause: to desecrate it, My house. When it is farther said: when ye offered μַ ?ηְ ?ξִ ?ι (in a manner, the daily bread of Jehovah, which is immediately explained to mean the sacrificial food as to its elements: fat and blood, for which comp. Numbers 28:2; Leviticus 3:11; Leviticus 21:6; Leviticus 21:8, etc.), this parallel phrase to: when ye brought to be in My sanctuary, etc., confirms the view that priests are meant who formed the pure contrast to the Israelitish priesthood according to its idea, and this the more plainly as εַ ?ιָּ ?τֵ ?ψεּ (Ezekiel 16:59; Ezekiel 17:18-19) can scarcely be said of heathens as such, who were outside of the covenant; but when understood of such priests, it looks straight into the inmost relation, from which are derived the sanctuary, the service in it, and the sanctification of Israel. The interchange of ye and they is farther shown to be intentional by the next clause: in addition to all your abominations, inasmuch as not even the priests were correct, with whose holiness the people so frequently think they may venture to dispense with their own. Ezekiel 44:8 accordingly goes on to reprimand such shameful priestly representation of the people in respect to the holy things (Ezekiel 22:8) of Jehovah (comp. Ezekiel 40:45-46). Of this Keil gives a superficial view, when he says that “the people, by unlawfully admitting ungodly heathen into the temple, had not only forgotten the reverence due to the holy things of God (!), but had also made for themselves these heathen, so to say (?), ministers of God in His sanctuary.” How can “permission to tread the temple” be “put on the same level,” even only “spiritually,” with “placing in the temple for superintending the worship”? What is meant flows, moreover, from the general statement, impossible to be understood except in its constant sense: And ye set (namely, such parties) … for you in My sanctuary. μָ ?λֶ ?ν implies also the representation of the people by such keepers of the charge, which the sanctuary and the covenant of Jehovah with them bound Israel to keep. (Comp. 1 Kings 12:31) HΔv.: “Not to serve God, but to serve your own sinful inclination.” [Fairbairn: “The children of Israel are spoken of as doing all this, because the corrupt priesthood was inseparably connected with the sins of the people—the one continually acting and reacting on the other. And the corruption in the priesthood, it will be observed, is expressed as if persons had been put into the office who were not of the tribe of Levi, or even of the seed of Israel, but uncircumcised heathen. Not that literally persons of this description had been admitted into the priestly office; that did not take place, not even in the kingdom of Israel, where still the Israelites were employed, though not of the family of Aaron. But the prophet is viewing all in a spiritual light; he is reading forth the import of the outward transactions, as they appeared to the eye of God; and as in that respect the officiating priesthood had been no better than uncircumcised strangers, so he speaks of them as having actually been such.”—W. F.] Ezekiel 44:9. We have now, in condemnation of such profanation, Jehovah’s solemn declaration regarding the personelle of His service in future. In the first place, a simple negativing of what has been, that shall no longer be; hence λָּ ?μΞαֶּ ?οΞπֵ ?λָ ?ψ, to be understood in the same sense as in Ezekiel 44:7; also the phrase: shall not come to, etc., corresponding to what has been previously said, is to be understood of priests, as: My sanctuary, proves beyond a doubt. But the summary winding up (μְ ?λָ ?μΧ, Ewald, Gram. § 310a): that is in the midst of, etc., precludes, by the explanation it gives, every thought of genuine foreigners, or even of the βֵּ ?ψִ ?ιν, strangers, Ezekiel 47:22 sq. “Jewish heathen,” as Hengstenberg designates them, are most expressly excluded by this canon of church discipline, which begins at the house of God. To be a “son of Israel” is the first qualification which Jehovah demands for His priesthood, and this taken strictly explains likewise as antithesis thereto the son of the outland. Ezekiel 44:10. λιΰνΧ (a strong “but,” Ewald, Gram. p. 856), after the ample negativing Ezekiel 44:9), introduces the position which makes everything perfectly clear that the discourse is to be concerning the tribe of Levi. This designation is given in the outset, because there will still take place a choix sur choix, a narrower election in respect of the Aaronites, the peculiarly priestly family, and a degradation of priests to be servants and assistants, like the Levites given as such to Aaron and his lineage (Numbers 3).—ψָ ?δַ ?χ (Ezekiel 11:6; Ezekiel 8:15), “to be away,” to depart from, Jeremiah 2:5; Jeremiah 2:8.—ϊָּ ?ςָ ?δ is: “to stagger” (Isaiah 28:7), in the wider signification: to go astray (Isaiah 53:6).—ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψΧ can explain “Israel’s going astray” (Ezekiel 6:4), and then it is still people and priest taken together as formerly; and this is especially clear when ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψϊָּ ?ςεּ ?Χ, corresponding to the ψָ ?ηֲ ?χεּ ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, makes it conformable to “Israel’s going astray.”—εְ ?πָ ?ωְׂ ?ΰεּ ?Χ, Ezekiel 14:10; Ezekiel 16:52; Ezekiel 16:58 (Hengst.: “they shall take their iniquity upon them”), the guilt to be borne will be made clear by the immediately following punishment. This idolatrous staggering had at different times seized hold of priest and people, sometimes more, sometimes less. Instead of allowing themselves to be dragged along by the people to active or even passive participation in the service of idols, they ought, from their office, to have restrained the people, Jeremiah 2:8. Comp. moreover, Psalms 16:4. [Hδvernick thinks here of “even the old misdeeds of Levi, which will make themselves observable.”] Ezekiel 44:11. They shall not be excluded from all service in the sanctuary, but degraded from the functions of priests to those of simple Levites; as Rashi expresses it; “to do what strangers and servants and women can perform.” ωָׁ ?ψַ ?ϊ is used also of priestly service; it is only τְּ ?χֻּ ?γָּ ?δ (the function for those discharging it) that with the words expressly added points to the gates of the house, although the word in itself is equivalent to ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ξֶ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, ξִ ?ωωְׁ ?ξָ ?ψ. It is still in respectful terms that these degraded priests are spoken of (it is not said: μַ ?ςֲ ?αֹ ?γΰֶ ?ϊΞςֲ ?αֹ ?γַ ?ϊ, as is said of the Levites specifically, Numbers 16:9). They are porters and house-servants, yet in this at least they still represent the people, that they relieve them of the slaying of the victims; it is only with their “standing before them to serve them” that their being degraded to Levites becomes more marked (comp. Numbers 16:9), because now the punishment corresponding to the guilt is Ezekiel 44:12—to be mentioned; the guilt which they shall bear is characterized by the punishment for it in this way: what they were accustomed to do in the apostasy at the will of the people—and thus as a stumbling-block which caused to fall into guilt—is now officially imposed upon them.—Comp. on Ezekiel 20:5-6; Ezekiel 20:15; Ezekiel 20:23; Ezekiel 36:7. Ezekiel 44:13 hereupon expressly cuts them off from being priests as hitherto λָּ ?δַ ?ο, the fuller stem of λּ ?εּ ?ο, signifies: those who establish anything as it should be according to the divine ordinance, the people continuing always in their functions; according to others: those bending themselves, namely, doing homage to the Eternal; Numbers 16:10 of the priesthood, as distinguished from mere Levite service. μ is therefore antithesis to μְ ?ωָׁ ?ψְ ?ϊָ ?ν, Ezekiel 44:11. Farther details are given in what follows. By the appositional δַ ?χָּ ?γָ ?ωִׁ ?ινΰֶ ?μΞχָ ?γְ ?ωֵׁ ?ι, the expression: to draw near over all My holy things, is—as itself suggests, and the plural χָ ?γְ ?ωֵׁ ?ιΧ (comp. Numbers 4:19) confirms—interpreted as referring to the eating of the most holy things (comp. on Ezekiel 42:13), appertaining to the priests alone. For the rest, comp. Ezekiel 16:52. Ezekiel 44:14 recapitulates and sums up the reproach and guilt to be borne, with respectful reference to their former priestly calling; hence ωֹׁ ?ξְ ?ψֵ ?ιξִ ?ωְׁ ?Χ, which mode of expression, however, receives its levitical limitation through μְ ?λֹ ?μςֲ ?αֹ ?γַ ?ϊεֹ ?(comp. Numbers 16:9, Ezekiel 3). Ezekiel 44:15. Those likewise are called Levites who in contrast to the punishment of the former priests are all the more exalted as priests.—φָ ?γεֹ ?χ, the son of Ahitub (1 Chron. 5:34 [1 chron6:8]), of the line of Eleazar (1 Chronicles 24:1 sq.), was co-high priest with Abiathar of the line of Ithamar, in consequence of the twofold service of worship in David’s time, that at Jerusalem and that at Gibeon (1 Chronicles 16. [1 Chronicles 16:17] 1 Chronicles 16:39). After Abiathar had like Joab repeatedly attached himself to Adonijah, the pretender to the crown, and had brought about his own fall and banishment to Anathoth (1 Kings 2), Zadok was appointed by Solomon sole high priest, and with him the line of Eleazar again became the alone high-priestly one. We are not to go along with Hengstenberg when he, in order to interpret the sons of Zadok, goes back even to the relation of fatherhood in the Decalogue, and drags in the pope too as a holy father, simply to get a father-priest, after whom all priests (since 1 Kings 2) are to be designated as his sons, “even the unfaithful,” says Hengstenberg, “who were excluded in the foregoing passage” (!!). He hazards this contradiction to the connection in order to get the faithful priests first in Ezekiel 48:11, and because he finds in Ezekiel 43:19, instead of “sons of Zadok” (as in Ezekiel 40:46), “that are of the seed of Zadok,” “the heads (!) of the high-priesthood, those who are of the high priest’s kindred (Acts 4:6), officiating at the consecration of the altar of burnt-offering” (that is, it is incorrect to say that in the whole vision the high priest never meets us!). In Zadok we might indeed be reminded of Melchizedek, had not the very name Zadok ( “righteous”), and still more what is historically known of him, symbolized him as a type of the true priestly character. The faithful position which he had taken towards David he did not forsake towards Solomon, as Abiathar did (1 Kings 1:7-8; 1 Kings 1:25-26; 1 Kings 2:22); he even anointed Solomon king over Israel. Consequently, in the theocratic (Messianic) signification of the kingdom of David and Solomon, Zadok kept himself precisely in the relation which is so significant for our vision (see Doct. Reflec.). Comp. also 1 Samuel 2:35.—[Fairbairn: “The promise of a priesthood of the house of Zadok entirely corresponded to the promise of a shepherd with the name of David. It simply indicated a race of faithful and devoted servants, in whom the outward and the inward, the name and the idea, should properly coincide,—a priesthood serving God in newness of spirit, not in the oldness of the letter, as the people whom they represented should also have become true Israelites, themselves a royal priesthood offering up spiritual sacrifices to the Lord. In truth, it is the raising up of a people who should be such a priesthood that is meant by the description, and the sons of Zadok came into notice only because in connection with them there was an historical ground for taking them as representatives of a right-hearted spiritual community.”—W. F.]—But as not all the children of Abraham are of his faith, so here the sons of Zadok are only those who kept, etc., who have kept and will keep themselves faithful to Me. Not until after this essential personal qualification for priest, is the formal and official service described: in general, the “drawing near,” etc. (Ezekiel 40:46; Ezekiel 43:19), in particular, the “standing before Me (in contrast to ‘before them,’ Ezekiel 44:11) to offer unto Me (comp. Ezekiel 44:7) fat,” etc., part of the service at the altar of burnt-offering.—Then in Ezekiel 44:16 comes the treading of the dwelling in the holy place, especially the drawing near to the altar of incense (Ezekiel 41:22), for which the name table is significantly retained. Finally, εְ ?ωָׁ ?ξְ ?ψεּ ΰֶ ?ϊΞξִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ϊִ ?ι reverts to the starting-point in Ezekiel 44:15, ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψωָׁ ?ξְ ?ψεּ ?Χ. Ezekiel 44:17-31. Priestly Duties and PrivilegesEze_44:17 begins with the most external, the clothing; the duty in this respect will make the symbolized inward obligation the more apparent. The coming to the inner gates implies the intention of service at or in the sanctuary, and thereby involves the duty of putting on (τֵּ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ, “flax”) linen garments, and this makes ωֵׁ ?ωׁ, as already ordained by Moses, perfectly clear (comp. Exodus 39:28; Exodus 28:39 sq.; Leviticus 6:3 [10], Ezekiel 16:4; Ezekiel 16:23). The express prohibition of wool (φֶ ?ξֶ ?ψ, what is “drawn together,” hanging together like vellus, ἐρος, εἰρος) gives additional emphasis to the linen, and makes the ministering in the gates of the inner court, that is, within them, and at the house, said of functions discharged within the house, the former in relation to the altar of burnt-offering, and the latter in relation to the altar of incense, still more distinctly prominent. Ezekiel 44:18, like Ezekiel 44:17, refers to the priest’s garments; τְּ ?ΰֵ ?ψ is properly: “adornment,” diadem, which might suggest the special high-priestly ξִ ?φְ ?πֶ ?τֶ ?ϊ; the word, however, occurs rather in connection with ξִ ?βְ ?αָּ ?ςֹ ?ϊ, Exodus 39:28 ( “goodly bonnets”), and we have no warrant for supposing it is a special head-covering for priests in general. It is rather meant to be remarked that they are adorned (τְּ ?ΰֵ ?ψ is suggestive of floral ornaments), although with linen.—The covering for the loins (ξִ ?λְ ?πְ ?νֵ ?ι, plural or dual), reaching from high above the loins down to about the thigh (comp. Exodus 28:42), forms the third of the four articles, as Bδhr says, designed for the official dress of the priests (in accordance with “the symbolical place of Jehovah’s testimony and revelation”); while the injunction about “girding,” which, moreover, explains the sense and spirit of the whole linen dress, subjoins the ΰַ ?αְ ?πֵ ?θ, that is, girdle of the priests, as the fourth article. This was worn higher up toward the breast, as would then be confirmed by the added defining clause: not in sweat; which certainly will not bear the meaning: while they sweat, but according to Bδhr is meant to imply: where they sweat. But αַּ ?ιָּ ?οַ ?ς (ιֶ ?ςַ ?ο), found only here, elsewhere ζֵ ?ςָ ?δ, from ζεּ ?ςַ: what is forced out by pressure or anguish) certainly means nothing but what has been said already: that no wool shall come upon them; for as the white linen makes the cleanness apparent, so sweat, so readily produced by woollen stuff, especially when forming a girdle and thus confining the body, is meant to be guarded against as uncleanness, and on the whole accordingly the holiness of the priests for the sanctification of the people to be signified. [Did the Septuagint mean too tight girding, or girding in violent haste?] Ezekiel 44:19. The repetition: to the outer court, is meant to strengthen the prohibition, which is particularly strong in our verse; to call attention to the distinction between the outer court and the inner, while both, however, are still only courts; and to the altar in the inner court, where the sanctification of the people willed by Jehovah has to take place. After this (comp. Ezekiel 42:14) comes the laying aside of the priest’s official dress, and the laying of it down at the place suitable to the “holiness of Jehovah” (Ezekiel 42:13), and the putting on of other garments, for the purpose of guarding against the thought of another sanctification than the God-ordained one by the way of sacrifice. Not in their garments, that is, it is not they, although they are priests, who are to sanctify the people (comp. John 17:19!). Consequently, the going out to the people is to be understood in reference to sanctification, and shows moreover that this outer court was for the people. Expositors generally refer here to Leviticus 6:11; Leviticus 6:20 (ιχְ ?γָּ ?ωׁ); Exodus 29:37; Exodus 30:29; comp. besides, Exodus 28:43; Leviticus 6:4 [11], Ezekiel 16:23. [That contact with the people defiles the priests when in their official dress, as Keil referring to Leviticus 21 supposes, is not said here.] Ezekiel 44:20 forbids, as already Leviticus 19:27; Leviticus 21:5, the shaving of the head smooth, as heathenish; censuring the Creator (!?), says Hengst.; according to Bδhr, as mourning, a sign of fellowship with the dead, inasmuch as the hair is a proof of life and vigour of body. The Egyptian priests kept the head always close shaved. On the contrary, the priests of Israel are to bear their head high, as the mediators of an eternal life in holiness through grace.—τֶּ ?ψַ ?ς implies: “breaking forth,” “being on the top;” hence, the hair on the head. The covering for the head is treated of next to the garments for the body. Keil cites for ωָׁ ?μַ ?η ( “to let loose”), as “to let grow freely,” Leviticus 10:6 and Numbers 6:5. But the first passage must not be so understood, and we need not suppose here, in accordance with the second, a prohibition of Nazaritism, but, as the markedly positive clause shows, the hair is simply to be kept short, to be polled. Comp. 1 Corinthians 11:14 sq. (Revelation 9:8). (λָּ ?ρֹ ?ν is found only here.). On this Hengstenberg observes: “That which is the sign of a wild, disorderly man, who lets nature take its free course, might indeed be permitted to the Nazarite, in consequence of a vow undertaken for a time, in order thereby to typify his separation from the world; but not to the priest, whose duty it was to hold converse with the world, and adapt himself to society, to enter which with shorn hair was the custom even in Joseph’s time. The priest should be no separated person.” If flowing locks and the growth of hair generally is the sign of vigorous natural life, as the forbidden shaving also on its part symbolizes, then by forbidding the priest as representative of a holy people to let his locks grow long, the false positive, in addition to the false negative, is forbidden; the maxim that: every one is his own law (as every one his own devil), unbounded naturalism is forbidden. Neither annihilation nor yet glorification of nature, neither askesis unto death nor honouring of the flesh, but simply law, divine order, is the watchword for the servant of Jehovah. The sanctification treated of is neither heathenishly self-chosen, one’s own fabrication, self-sanctification, nor is it a natural holiness of one’s own, which needs not a sanctification in Jehovah’s way. Ezekiel 44:21. Although abstinence from wine is demanded, yet our passage has nothing to do with the Nazarite proper. His was a vow regulated by law; but always a free-will dedication pro tempore, where the man thus devoted himself to God with all his naturalism, just as he had grown up. That the priests are not to drink wine (Leviticus 10:9) is grounded on no temporary, formal separation from the world, is no drastic consecration, as in the case of the Nazarite, but is simply an emblem of what is seemly, of sobriety of soul, of the true spirit of a servant of God, who goes into the inner court,—the reason assigned for the prohibition. Ezekiel 44:22. From their manner of life in respect to drinking, and no doubt generally (Romans 13:14), the obligation of the priests turns to their married life. The injunction not to marry a widow (Leviticus 21:14; Leviticus 21:13) is extended here from the high priest to the whole body of priests, who in this respect then appear high-priestly, just as in Ezekiel 43:12 everything upon the mountain round about was most holy. The ordinary priest also is not allowed to marry (Leviticus 21:7) ΰִ ?ωָּׁ ?δβְּ ?ψεּ ?ωָׁ ?δ, a woman put away by her husband, of course with reason, because of guilt; one of this kind is classified as a factitious widow with those who are really widows. The permission to take a priest’s widow forms a pendant to the judgment pronounced on the daughter of a priest in Leviticus 21:9. For the rest, the verse relates to the priests’ being holy with reference to the holiness of Jehovah. [The Jewish Talmudic view limits the first part to the high priest, understanding ξλּ ?δֵ ?ο of the other priests: “Yet the widow who is (really) a widow, those who occupy the position of ordinary priests may take.”] Ezekiel 44:23 defines the official duties of the priests. ιָ ?ψָ ?δ (Hiph.), “to spread out,” the hand, for example, to point to something, to teach, here the people, of whom Jehovah says: My people (Deuteronomy 17:10 sq., Ezekiel 33:10; Leviticus 10:10); and above all to teach them the difference between, etc., for which comp. Ezekiel 22:26. The priestly service, then, is to comprehend worship and doctrine, representation of the people before God, and representation of God before the people. (Comp. Malachi 2:7) But above all, everything with an eye to sanctification. Ezekiel 44:24 gives in addition to this the court of judicature which they form in disputed cases (Deuteronomy 17:8 sq., Deuteronomy 19:17): ςַ ?μΞψִ ?ια, they are to stand over the confused and complicated points raised by the parties, and because they have the power to stand over them as judges, since they have to judge in My judgments, they will always find in the law of Jehovah what is right in every case. Qeri: μְ ?ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θ, and Qeri: ιִ ?ωׁ ?τְּ ?θֻ ?δεּ, are both equally unnecessary. What this administration of justice is in civil life—it too being a sanctification of the people through the judgment of God—has its counterpart in church life, in the observance of all the laws and ordinances, on all the festivals of Jehovah, the key-note for which is given with the hallowing of the Sabbaths (comp. for the reverse, Ezekiel 22:26), while at the same time we are told what is always the main matter in priestly ministration. Ezekiel 44:25 therefore shows how the priests have to keep themselves from defilement.—μֹ ?ΰιָ ?αεֹ ?ΰ individualizes, to speak exactly.—The exception (λִּ ?ιΰִ ?ν) affects the same blood-relations as Leviticus 21. The exception of the high priest (Leviticus 21:10 sq.) is not noticed, just as there is no notice of the high priest in the whole book. Ezekiel 44:26 is, according to Keil, the command to purify from uncleanness by the dead sharpened, inasmuch as he believes the seven days are appointed over and above the space of seven days prescribed by the law (Numbers 19:11 sq.), and finds this indicated in θָ ?δֳ ?ψָ ?ϊεֹ, in which he thinks he sees a compensation for the previously permitted coming of the priests to the dead, which in the law had been forbidden to the high priest even in the case of father or mother. Rather perhaps the number seven simply points the more strongly to holiness and sanctification. Hengstenberg, on the other hand, insists on the distinction between: having been cleansed, and: “cleansing,” which, he says, began with the beginning of the seven days (Numbers 19), seven days being the longest period which any uncleanness lasts. At all events it cannot be denied that Ezekiel 44:27 still demands the offering of a sin-offering when the priest enters again on his ministry. After the duties come now the privileges of the priests, what is to accrue to them for their service.—In Ezekiel 44:28 we have, first of all, the fundamental condition known from the law (comp. Numbers 18:20; Deuteronomy 10:9; Deuteronomy 18:1), expressed first positively, then negatively, and finally once more positively; which the Israelite priestly consciousness received and retained in living and in dying. For, since the priests of Israel are no foreigners, no dominant race, but of Israel, like all their brethren, it would be natural, when Canaan was promised by God as πַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?δ to the people to whom they belonged, that to them also there should be a definite tribal territory for inheritance and possession (ΰֲ ?ηֻ ?ζָּ ?δ, something which one grasps and retains). But they represent Israel not as to the flesh but as to the spirit, as to the idea which from the outset makes of this people God’s peculiar possession, and thereby God their peculiar possession: “My” people, and I am Jehovah, “thy God.” Now, as the Lord already (Genesis 15:1) says to Abraham, the father of all believers: I am thy very great reward, so this is to the priests for an inheritance, that I am their inheritance (πַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?δ), as Jehovah says. They are thereby in such a position that nothing more is to be given to them (μֹ ?ΰΞϊִ ?ϊְּ ?πεּ μָ ?δֶ ?ν), at least by their fellow-countrymen, to whom on the contrary they give an earnest of the ideality of their nationality, of the eternal inheritance, of the possession of Canaan in truth, in that they as matter of fact teach Israel its better self, its true aspiration, its eternal future. [Ezekiel 44:28 does not, as Keil supposes, treat of cities to dwell in, with the houses and pasture-grounds belonging thereto, which in the Mosaic economy Jehovah assigns to the Levites and priests from His own peculiar possession in land; comp. Ezekiel 45] Ezekiel 44:29. On the contrary, they have their livelihood from the offerings, and in so far live from Jehovah’s hand. On the meat, sin, and guilt-offerings here mentioned, comp. in the law Leviticus 2:1-10; 1 Corinthians 9:13.—ηֵ ?ψֶ ?ν ( “separating”) is what is devoted to Jehovah without possibility of redemption; for this comp. Leviticus 27:21; Leviticus 27:28. Ezekiel 44:30. αִּ ?λּ ?εּ ?ψִ ?ιν are the first-fruits of tree-fruit and of corn (from αָּ ?λַ ?ψ, “to break forth”). Comp. Exodus 23:19; Exodus 34:26; Numbers 18:13; Deuteronomy 18:4.—ϊְּ ?ψεּ ?ξָ ?δ is said of parts of the offerings with reference to the ceremonial of heaving and waving, which likewise signified consecration to Jehovah. The Rabbins explain the word of the gift “separated” for the Lord; for thus it took place with all the first-fruits, sheaves as well as loaves. At all events, the heave-offering is in general whatever is according to precept or of free will lifted up for Jehovah as a consecrated gift to the sanctuary, indirectly to its ministers (Exodus 25:2 sq., Ezekiel 30:13 sq.; Numbers 15:19 sq., Ezekiel 18:27 sq.). Comp. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 45 1And when ye allot [divide] the land as inheritance, ye shall make an oblation to Jehovah, a holiness from the land; the length five and twenty thousand and the breadth ten thousand; holiness [is] it in all its border round 2about. Of this shall be [come, belong] to the sanctuary five hundred by five hundred, a square round about; and fifty cubits of environs for it round 3about. And from [according to] this measure shalt thou measure a length of five and twenty thousand and a breadth of ten thousand, and in it shall be 4the sanctuary, the most holy place. Holiness from the land is this; for the priests, the ministers of the sanctuary shall it be, who draw near to minister to Jehovah; and it is to them a place for houses, and a holy place for the 5sanctuary. And five and twenty thousand in length and ten thousand in breadth shall be [belong] to the Levites, the ministers of the house, to them 6for a possession, twenty chambers. And as a possession of the city ye shall give five thousand in breadth, and in length five and twenty thousand, beside [running along] the oblation of holiness; it shall be for the whole house of Israel 7And for the prince: adjoining the oblation of holiness on both sides and the possession of the city, before the oblation of holiness and before the possession of the city, on the west side westward, and on the east side eastward, and the length, beside [running along] one of the [tribal] portions from the west border 8to the east border. It shall be land to him for a possession in Israel; and My princes shall no more oppress My people; and [but] the land shall they give to the house of Israel according to their tribes. 9Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Enough for you, O princes of Israel; remove [put away] violence and rapine, and do judgment and justice, take away your expulsions from My people,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 10Ye shall have just balances, and a just ephah, and a just bath. 11The ephah and the bath shall be of one measure; that the bath may contain [amount to] the tenth of the homer, and the ephah a tenth of the homer; its measure shall be after the homer. 12And the shekel [shall be] twenty gerahs; twenty shekels, five and twenty shekels, fifteen shekels, shall be your maneh. 13This is the oblation which ye shall make: the sixth of the ephah from the homer of wheat, and ye shall six the ephah 14from the homer of barley. And the ordinance of the oil: the bath of oil [what is to be offered as bath from the oil shall be] the tenth of the bath out of the cor, 15[which is] ten baths, a homer; for ten baths are a homer. And one sheep [or goat] out of the flock, from two hundred from the watered [land] of Israel, for the meat-offering, and for the burnt-offering, and for peace-offerings, to atone for [to cover] them,—sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 16All the people of 17the land, they shall be [held] to this oblation for the prince in Israel. And upon the prince shall be the burnt-offerings, and the meat-offering, and the drink-offering, on the feasts, and on the new moons, and on the Sabbaths, in all the festal seasons of the house of Israel; he shall prepare the sin-offering, and the meat-offering, and the burnt-offering, and the peace-offerings, to atone for [to cover] the house of Israel. 18Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: In the first [month], on the first of the month, thou shalt take a bullock, a young steer, without blemish, and cleanse the sanctuary: 19And the priest takes of the blood of the sin-offering, and puts it upon the posts of the house, and upon the four corners of the ledge of the altar, and upon the posts of 20the gate of the inner court. And so shalt thou do on the seventh of the month for the erring man and for the fool, and ye atone for the house. 21In the first [month], on the fourteenth day of the month, shall the passover be to you, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten [one shall eat22mazzoth]. And the prince brings on this day for himself and for the whole 23people of the land a bullock as a sin-offering. And the seven days of the feast he shall bring as a burnt-offering to Jehovah seven bullocks and seven rams without blemish, daily the seven days; and as a sin-offering a kid of the 24goats for the day [daily]. And as a meat-offering he shall offer an ephah for a bullock, and an ephah for a ram, and of oil an hin for the ephah. 25In the seventh [month], on the fifteenth day of the month, in the feast he shall bring just such [offerings] seven days, as the sin-offering, as the burnt-offering, and as the meat-offering, and as the oil. Ezekiel 45:1. Sept.: ... ἀπαρχην … κ. εὐροςεἰκοσιχιλιαδας—(The second or the first ΰψκ is omitted in the various manuscripts.) Ezekiel 45:2. ... εἰςἁγιασμα … διαστημααὐτων—Vulg.: Et erit ex omni parte sanctificatum … in suburbana ejus— Ezekiel 45:3. ... διαμετρησεως … τοἁγιασματωνἁγιων. Vulg.: … templum sanctumque sanctorum. Ezekiel 45:4. ... εἰςοἰκουςἀφωρισμενουςτωἁγικσμωαὐτων. Ezekiel 45:5. ... αὐτοιςεἰςκατασχισνπολειςτουκατοικειν. Ezekiel 45:6. ... ὁντροτονλαιἡἀπαρχητωνἁγιωνπαντιοἰκωἸσρ. ἐσονται. Ezekiel 45:7. ... εἰςταςἀπαρχαςτ. ἁγιων, εἰςκατασχεσιντ. πολεως, καταπροσωποντωνἀπαρχων … ταπροςθαλασσανκ. ἀποτωνπροςθαλασσανταπροςἀνατολαςκ. τομηκοςὡςμιατωνμεριδωνἀποτωνὁριωντωνπροςθαλασσαν, κ. τομηκοςἐπιταὁρικταπροςἀνατολας (8) τηςγης. Κ. ἐστωαὐτω … οὐκετιοἱἀφηγουμενοιτουἸσρ . … κ. τηνγηνκατακληρονομησουσινοἰκοςἸσρ.—Vulg.: … et non depopulabuntur—(Another reading: μςξַ ?ϊ.) Ezekiel 45:9. Ἱκανουσθωὑμιν … κ. ταλαιπωριαν … κ. ἐξαρατεκαταδυναστειαν—Vulg.: … Iniquitatem et rapinas … separate confinia vestra a populo meo— Ezekiel 45:10. ... κ. μετρονδικαιονκ. χοινιξδικαιαἐσταιὑμιντουμετρου. Ezekiel 45:11. ... Κ. ἡχοιν.ξὁμοιεςμιαἐσταιτουλαμβανειν, τοδεκατοντουγομορἡχοινιξ, κ. τοδικατοντουγομορτομετρονπροςτογομορἐσταιἰσον. Vulg.: … ζqualia et unius mensurζ … partem cori … juxta mensuram cori erit ζqua libratio eorum. Ezekiel 45:12. Κ. τασταθμιαεἰκοσιὀβολοι, οἱπεντεσικλοικεντεκ. οἱδεκασικλοιδεκακ. πεντηκοντασικλοιἡμναἐσταιὑμιν. Vulg.: … obolos … Porro viginti sicli et … et … mnam faciunt. (Another reading: ωχμιν.) Ezekiel 45:13. ... ἑκτοντουμετρου … κ. τοἑκτοντουοἰφι—Vulg.: … primitiζ. Ezekiel 45:14. Sept: ... κοτυληνἐλαιουἀποτωνδεκακοτυλων, ὁτιοἱδεκακοτυλοιεἰσινγομορ. Vulg.: … batus olei, decima pars cori est; et decem bati corum faciunt, quia decem bati implent corum. Ezekiel 45:15. Κ. προβατονἑνἀποτ. δεκαπροβατωνἀφαιρεμαἐκπασωντωνκατριωντ. Ἱσρ.—Vulg.: Et arietem unum de grege ducentorum, de his quζ nutriunt Israel— Ezekiel 45:17. Κ. διατουἀφηγουμενουἐσται—(Other readings: δςεμδ and εαλμξεςγι.) Ezekiel 45:18. ... ληψεσθε. Ezekiel 45:19. Another reading: ξζεζεϊ. Ezekiel 45:20. ... ἐντ. μηνιτωἑβδομωμικτουμηνοςληψηπαῤἑκαστουἀγνοουτοςκ. ἀπονηπιου, Vulg.: … qui ignoravit et errore deceptus est— Ezekiel 45:22. ... ὐπεραὐτουκ. ὑπερτ. οἰκουκ. ὑπερπαντοςτ. λαουτ. γηςEzekiel 45:23. ... κ. θυσιαν. (24) Κ. πεμματωμοσχωEzekiel 45:24. Vulg.: Et sacrificium ephi per vitulum— Ezekiel 45:25. ... ποιησειςκατατααὐτα … κ. καθωςτομαναα—Vulg.: … sicut supra dicta sunt— REMARKSEze_45:1-9. The Oblation of Holiness, the Land of the Levites, the Possession of the City, and the Portion of the PrinceThat Jehovah is the inheritance and possession of His priests (Ezekiel 44:28) is a reality even for this world, as godliness in like manner has the promise “of the life that now is.” In order to give form to this truth, Ezekiel 45:1 connects what follows with the preceding.—δִ ?τִּ ?ιμ, from πָ ?τַ ?μ, signifies: “to make to fall,” and is used peculiarly of the lot (Ezekiel 24:6); but when nothing suggests this, and when μְ is not prefixed to the word, it is to be taken in its general sense, and αְּ ?πַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?δ, cum αְּ essenti�, is to be understood as meaning: to divide in general. Comp. Psalms 16:6. (The reference to the time immediately after the Babylonian servitude, hitherto maintained by Hengstenberg, must now, as we may well conceive, be abandoned; and so then he makes the prophet travel to Utopia, etc.)—ϊָּ ?ψִ ?ιξεּ ϊְ ?ψεּ ?ξָ ?δ (Hiphil of ψεּ ?ν, referring to what was done in the case of the peace or thank-offerings with the shoulder of the victim—the waving with the breast) has here the more general signification, although not that of: “to present a present,” nor that of: “to offer an offering,” but that of: to consecrate, to hallow to the Lord (μַ ?ιδεָֹ ?δ), which, moreover, was the meaning of the ceremony of heaving on high as well as of the heaving up upon the altar. Comp. also on Ezekiel 44:30. For details see on Ezekiel 48.—Holiness (corresponding to Jehovah) from the land, and thus separated, “partly for sacred and partly at least for higher, more general purposes” (Bunsen); but see the intended use in what follows.—The word length is repeated, perhaps on account of the significant number mentioned for the first time, or because the natural length of the land is not to be regarded, but by length reference is meant to be made to that which is forthwith so called in the vision, the extension from east to west, and so the repetition is not exactly pleonastic. Whether rods (Jerome, Rashi, Hδv.) or cubits (Ewald, Hitzig, Hengst.) are meant, is not said. The supporters of both interpretations appeal to Ezekiel 42:16 sq.; hence compare what is said there.—The express mention, too, of cubits in Ezekiel 45:2 is pressed into the service of both parties. Those who hold for rods say: Thus rods are always meant in what goes before, because here cubits are excepted; those who contend for cubits reply: Thus in what goes before, too, as everywhere in the case of all the large measurements, cubits are to be understood, otherwise rods would need to be expressly named. That cubits are mentioned first in Ezekiel 45:2, Hengstenberg explains from “the unexpectedly small measure there, so that one might easily think of a larger scale.” Bφttcher, moreover, adduces against the measurement by rod which he calculates would give 40 German [about 900 English] square miles (?), i.e. almost the tenth of the whole land, the colossal disproportion to the statements elsewhere, especially as to the temple, which measures only 500 cubits square. Keil, on the other hand, maintains that Ezekiel 48 with its proportions corresponds throughout to the τεμενος of 25,000 rods in length and 10,000 rods in breadth. Comp. therefore Ezekiel 48.—The breadth trends from north to south (Ezekiel 48:10).—Keil finds ςֲ ?ωָׂ ?ψָ ?δΰֶ ?μֶ ?σ for 10,000 surprising, for which, he observes, ςֲ ?ωְׂ ?ψֶ ?ϊΰֲ ?μָ ?τִ ?ιν is constantly used in Ezekiel 45:3; Ezekiel 45:5, and in Ezekiel 48. He therefore prefers the 20,000 of the Sept., giving is additional reasons for this, that the part mentioned in Ezekiel 45:3 is to be measured off from what was measured in Ezekiel 45:1; also that the Levites of Eze 45:5 are to be considered, whose possession is likewise “Terumah of holiness” (Ezekiel 48:14 sq.), as is plain from other passages of our chapter; Ezekiel 45:1 comprehends the land of the priests and of the Levites [25,000 and 20,000], which Ezekiel 45:2-3 divide into two districts.—Finally, the character of the oblation, because to Jehovah, is again insisted on, and that in respect of all its border round about. Ezekiel 45:2, after this general statement, marks-off from the above-mentioned (ξִ ?οֶּ ?δ) the sanctuary described and measured in Ezekiel 40, that is, the 500 cubits square forming the temple edifice, or, as Keil, in accordance with his view of Eze 42:15 sq.: the 500 square rods pertaining to the sacred enclosures of the temple. But as he adds: “there is still to be around this enclosure, which separates between the sacred and the common, a free space of fifty cubits on each side to keep the priests’ dwellings from being built too near to the sacred square of the temple buildings,” how, we ask, does he leave this latter entirely out of account!?—ξִ ?βְ ?ψָ ?ωׁ, comp. on Ezekiel 27:28. “A free space of 50 cubits to a sanctuary of 500 rods would be much too small. It was evidently intended to be an interspace between the house of God and the houses of the priests” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 45:3. ξִ ?οΞδַ ?ξִּ ?γָּ ?δδַ ?εֹּ ?ΰϊ is not the same as ξִ ?εֶּ ?δ in Ezekiel 45:2; for if so, this distinct and different mode of expression would not have been chosen, which, as it refers to the measuring of the sanctuary, so it designates as the sanctuary the temple building, and not the “sacred enclosure of the temple.” Keil needs 10,000 rods more in Ezekiel 45:1, because he makes δַ ?ξִּ ?γָּ ?δδַ ?εֹּ ?ΰϊ here = “this measured piece of land.” ξִ ?οΞ, as modified by δַ ?ξִּ ?γָּ ?δ, which has had always hitherto to be translated “measure,” denotes that from which the prophet has to take the measure, and is therefore entrusted with the “measuring” (ϊָּ ?ξεֹ ?γ, as it is expressly said); it had, indeed, been measured before him in Ezekiel 40. The temple building, just referred to in Ezekiel 45:2 as the principal part, is normal for the whole oblation, which as such is again referred to in Ezekiel 45:3, where also the centrality of the temple, already indicated by the phrase: and in it shall be the sanctuary, is distinctly denoted by the epithet: most holy, pointing to Ezekiel 43:12. After that the holiness, the separation from the land for the holy purpose (for Jehovah, for His sanctuary) of the land of which the oblation consists (δεּ ?ΰ), with (Ezekiel 45:3) the sanctuary in it (inclusive of the courts), has been again insisted on. Ezekiel 45:4 treats now of the area in question in its relation to the priests, who, as hitherto (Ezekiel 40:46; Ezekiel 42:13; Ezekiel 44:15)—here, however, with a view to the sanctuary and its central position—are described, both as respects their official functions and their dwelling-places. Since they are such, since this is their official calling, it is befitting to assign to them the holiness from the land as a place for houses, explained in the clause following to be: a holy place for the sanctuary, so that this latter defines the priests’ houses to be a dependency of the sanctuary, just as similarly in Ezekiel 43:12 the whole was even called most holy (Ezekiel 45:3 here). The last clause of the verse is commonly taken as indicating a second use for the area of the oblation, namely, for the temple, a superfluous repetition. The mention of houses is in harmony with the law, in which the thirteen cities for the priests (Joshua 21) likewise come into consideration simply as regards the houses in them. From that which is His own through the oblation Jehovah gives to the priests as His ministers, and as ministers of the sanctuary in the neighbourhood, the space necessary for dwellings (just as in Ezekiel 45 the necessaries of life). This is an arrangement which doubtless is to be taken in connection with the entire division of the land, but differs from that laid down in Numbers 35, so that it will have to be understood from the idea meant to be illustrated (Doct. Reflec. 19). Still more surprising is the new arrangement in Ezekiel 45:5, where an area equal to that occupied by the sanctuary and priests’ houses is assigned to the Levites as ministers of the house (Ezekiel 44:11 sq.), without any farther description, while the priests were described (Ezekiel 45:4) as ministers of the sanctuary, making thus a marked difference between them; and this distinction of the Levites is also marked by the phrase: to them for a possession; for the next verse goes on to speak likewise of a possession of the city, although this latter is “given” (comp. on the other hand 54:2–8, μֹ ?ΰΞϊִ ?ϊְּ ?πεּ), and does not simply belong (ιδιδ), and μָ ?δֶ ?νμַ ?ΰֲ ?ηֻ ?ζָּ ?δ stands evidently opposed to the εּ ?ξִ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωׁ μַ ?ξִּ ?χְ ?γָּ ?ωׁ of ver 4. But this area will be different from the one demanded in general in Ezekiel 45:1, although the Levites too belong to the ministers of the Lord, and the twenty chambers correspond very little to a special landed possession of the extent mentioned. Keil includes the land of the Levites in Ezekiel 45:1; but indeed with his 20,000 rods in breadth there, of which 10,000 fall to the priests and the sanctuary, he has still a breadth of 10,000 rods left for the Levites. Hengst. on the other hand says: “Along with the priests the Levites receive a portion of land of like extent; then follows the district of the holy city with the same length, and a breadth of 5000 cubits; so that the whole portion marked off in advance for priests, Levites, and city is in breadth as in length 25,000 cubits.”—Instead of ιִ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ, the Qeri reads: ιδָ ?ιָ ?δ.—The words ςֶ ?ωְׁ ?ψִ ?ινμְ ?ωָֹׁ ?λϊ formed a difficulty to the LXX., who perhaps imagined the text to be ςָ ?ψִ ?ινμָ ?ωֶׁ ?αֶ ?ϊ. The chambers, instead of the thirty-five Levitical cities of Moses with pasturage, form, as regards the expression, no difficulty; they are very suitable diminutives of the “houses” of the priests. The priests have houses, the Levites as inferiors only chambers, which possibly may mean ranges of cells (Rosenm.) or courts, with one-twentieth of the pasturage for each. Keil, who cannot understand the Masoretic text, and holds ςֶ ?ωְׂ ?ψִ ?ιν to be a corruption of ωְׁ ?ςָ ?ψιν, reads: μָ ?ωֶׁ ?αֶ ?ϊ, by which, however, he obtains only “gates (! !) as dwellings” for the Levites, understanding indeed the “gates” as equivalent in meaning to cities. Hengst. calls them the barracks of the Levites; the departure from the ordinance of Moses, according to which the Levites dwelt scattered through the whole land, is so much the more surprising. Ezekiel 45:6. The land of the Levites could be properly oblation only if it were the same portion of land as that of the priests and the sanctuary, or if the reading in Ezekiel 45:1 be 20,000 rods in breadth. Hence Hengst. limits the oblation to the sanctuary and the priests’ portion. Only “in the wider sense” does he make it include also the portion of the Levites and the circuit of the city; it may include even the portion of the prince (he says), “since the prince acts as the minister of God.” The structure of the clause in Ezekiel 45:5 speaks in favour of a special area of 10,000 in breadth as Levites’ land; and so does the consideration that by such a possession in land the so much greater number of cities than of priests’ cities, which according to the ordinance of Moses belonged to them, is perhaps given expression to. Comp. besides on Ezekiel 48:20. But however much the definition in Ezekiel 45:5 : to them for a possession, indicates a special pertion of Levites’ land outside of the Terumah ( “oblation”) demanded in Ezekiel 45:1, yet the possession of the city lies still farther outside, as likewise ϊִּ ?ϊְּ ?πεּ seems to separate it even from the land of the Levites. The city is the capital of the land. Its area has the same length as that hitherto given (25,000), but differs in breadth, which therefore is mentioned first; we have in this respect 10,000 + 10,000 + 5000 = 25,000. The possession of the city “is to be distinguished from the city itself, which (Ezekiel 48:16) is square, the length being equal to the breadth” (Hengst.). The length of this possession runs along the oblation of holiness, by which designation is meant specially the land of the priests and the sanctuary. Its destined purpose, for the whole house of Israel, shows that it is to belong to no single tribe merely. Comp. Ezekiel 48. The transition to μַ ?πָּ ?ωִׂ ?ιΰ in Ezekiel 45:7 is mediated by the whole house of Israel in Ezekiel 45:6, of which the prince is the civil head and representative.—Either a kind of protasis to which Ezekiel 45:8 forms the apodosis, or we may supply: “ye shall give,” from Ezekiel 45:6.—ξִ ?ζֶּ ?δεּ ?ξִ ?ζֶּ ?δ = on both sides, so that the oblation of holiness, which certainly may here include the land of the Levites, and the possession of the city lie between, running before these from north to south, so that seen from the west side what is westward as far as the Mediterranean Sea, seen from the east side what lies east as far as the Jordan is to belong to the prince; just as εְ ?ΰֹ ?ψֶ ?κְ explains that as to the length, that is from west to east, the territory shall run the same length with one, i.e. any one of the portions of the tribes, shall neither go beyond nor fall short of any single tribal portion. Jerome remarks that the prince received for himself a whole tribal portion, with the exclusion, however, of the land of the sanctuary, the priests, the Levites, and the city; but in return he has not only the duty of protecting the square in question, but also the honour of possessing on his territory whatever is holy pertaining to the nation. Ezekiel 45:8. μָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ, more exactly defined by μַ ?ΰֲ ?ηֻ ?ζָּ ?δ: the land described in Ezekiel 45:7 shall be the land assigned to him for a possession in Israel. The reason for this arrangement follows: εְ ?μֹ ?ΰΧ. The former state of things, in which no landed possession, no crown estate, was allotted to them qua princes, had tempted them to misuse of their power, to acquire for themselves possessions.—My princes corresponds to My people; hence those who will in future have princely power over the people. This My applied to both parties contains at the same time the divine sentence on the former princes, who may be considered persons as little conscious of their high and responsible position as of the significance of Israel. Instead of taking to themselves, they are rather to give to the house of Israel, that is, to leave in possession, and also, if need be, to restore. The phrase: according to their tribes, shows what land is meant. [Fairbairn: “That the whole ground for the priesthood, the prince, and the people of the city was to form together a square, betokened the perfect harmony and agreement which should subsist between these different classes, as well as the settled order and stability which should distinguish the sacred commonwealth, in which they held the highest place. That the priesthood were to occupy what was emphatically holy ground, was a symbol of the singular degree of holiness which should characterize those who stood in their official position the nearest to the Lord. And that the prince was to have a separate possession assigned him was to cut off all occasion for his lawlessly interfering with the possessions of the people, and to exhibit the friendly bearing and upright administration which was to be expected of him (Ezekiel 45:8). And not only must he personally abstain from all oppressive behaviour, but as the divinely constituted head of a righteous commonwealth, he must take effective measures for establishing justice and judgment throughout the whole. Particular examples are given of this in regard to the using of just weights and measures in the transactions of business (Ezekiel 45:9-12).”—W. F.] Ezekiel 45:9 concludes what specially regards the princes, by whose conduct in good and in bad a mirror and example was held up to the people, while at the same time it solemnly introduces the more general regulations which follow in regard to judgment and justice in trade and commerce.—The subject in Ezekiel 44:6 was the people with reference to the priesthood, here it is the prince in reference to the people; as there holiness and sanctification, so here judgment and justice. (Jerome interprets ψַ ?αΧ let this tribe-like possession suffice you!) What has already taken place far too often is now so much the more enough, as all natural temptation has been taken away by the assigning of domains (Ezekiel 45:7 sq.).—(ωַׁ ?γַ ?γωֹׁ ?γ) is virtually the same as ηָ ?ξָ ?ρ, a violent mode of acting, misuse of power, only stronger, because the consequence thereof: “devastation,” is implied in the word, as in the corresponding justice the exercise of judgment is manifested. Hengstenberg thinks: the direct address shows that representatives or descendants of the princes who had formerly committed injustice were also in exile.—βְּ ?ψֻ ?ωָׁ ?δ is expulsion of the lawful possessor from his property, as in 1 Kings 21.—The burden which this was to the community, the pressure which thereby was inflicted on Israel, is depicted in the words: δָ ?ψִ ?ιξεּ ξֵ ?ςַ ?μΧ. “The political parties especially,” observes Hengstenberg, “gave occasion for the confiscations.” Comp. besides, 1 Samuel 8:14. Ezekiel 45:10-12. Justice in Common LifeThe transition which is made by Ezekiel 45:10 shows what an example for the community the conduct of the prince may be in evil and ought to be in good.—( “Princes have in all times attempted to take advantage of their subjects by alteration of coinage and weights,” Philippson.)—ξְ ?ωׁ ?ζְ ?πַ ?ιִ ?ν dual, denotes the two scales of the balance, from ΰָ ?ζַ ?ο, “to make ready,” “to fix;” in reference to the way this can be done, “to weigh,” to determine the weight.—(ΰֶ ?τָּ ?δ) ΰֶ ?ιτַ ?δ, according to Josephine in Greek, a measure about the same as a Berlin bushel [about 1 1/12; bushels English]; see Gesen. Lexicon. In the same way as the ephah for dry goods, the αַּ ?ϊ was used for liquids, as Delitzsch observes on Isaiah 5:10. This measure occurs first in the days of the kings, and from Josephus’ calculation it might contain somewhat more than 33 Berlin quarts [about 7 gallons English], Ezekiel 45:11 now begins to discuss what is right as to measure (ϊֹּ ?λֶ ?ο, pensum, Exodus 5:18), that which the ephah and bath are to represent, in order clearly to set forth exactness in trade and commerce as the divine characteristic of the people, as their holiness in ordinary life. Ezekiel 45:10 is expounded and illustrated by examples.—μָ ?ωֵׂ ?ΰϊ Rashi explains by μָ ?χַ ?ηַ ?ϊ, “to bear” = to hold, to contain. The ηֹ ?ξֶ ?ψ (a heap collected together) shall be the measure, the norm, for ephah and bath, as the greatest dry goods measure, commonly called “cor” from the time of the kings, and (from Josephus) estimated at a little more than 15 Berlin pecks [about 600 English pints]. Ezekiel 45:12 proceeds to speak of the standard for money, the shekel. An exactly weighed and hence definite (small) pound of silver, called by the Rabbins “rock” in distinction from the gerah, which they called “little stone,” is the oldest biblical standard of value, originally, in barter a weight, afterwards a coin, like the drachma among the Greeks and the as among the Romans. The value doubtless affixed by common agreement of the dealers to the ordinary shekel before the time of Moses cannot now be determined; but originating probably in Babylon, and coming through the Ph�nicians, the word meets us also in Greek (σικλος, σιγλος).—βֵּ ?ψָ ?δ is what is “made small,” hence grain as a small piece, like “grain” (a weight), from granum; Gesenius supposes it to be the carob bean (κερατιον), which the Greeks, Romans, and Arabians used as the smallest weight, in the same way as barley and pepper-corns have been so used,—the smallest biblical silver coin.—After the value of the shekel has been thus defined from the parts it contains (comp. Exodus 30:13; Leviticus 27:25; Numbers 3:47), there may perhaps, as Cocceius and J. D. Michaelis think, be three different kinds of shekel given, a larger, an intermediate, and a smaller. Hengstenberg better: “the maneh, probably of foreign origin, which explains its rare and late occurrence, is stated at a threefold value,” according to its different worth in the several countries from which it came. The normal maneh = 20 shekels, corresponding to the 20 gerahs, stands first.—ξָ ?πֶ ?δ (1 Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69; Nehemiah 7:71-72), from a comparison of the first passage—in which Hengstenberg, indeed, prefers to read ξֵ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ instead of ξָ ?πּ ?ιν—with 2 Chronicles 9:16, it appears that a maneh is equal to 100 shekels, a result usually reconciled with our passage by saying that civil shekels, that is, Mosaic half-shekels, are intended to be meant in 2 Chronicles 9, since the αֶּ ?χַ ?ς in the course of time became as shekel the widest spread large silver piece. But still 100 such shekels, or 50 Mosaic ones, by which Ezekiel reckons, would not be 20 + 25 + 15, the numbers given here, added together = 60 shekels; and besides, the three divisions and the putting of the 20 first remain unexplained! Hence Keil infers a very ancient corruption of the text. Hitzig, accepting like Hengstenberg three manehs, the only reasonable interpretation of the present text, supposes computation in gold, silver, and copper; that is, a gold, a silver, and a copper maneh. The Chaldee paraphrast, on the other hand, took the 60 shekels as the extraordinary value of the happy Messianic age (εξπιψαΰχεγωΰιδιμλεο). The interpretation of the LXX., accepted by Boeckh (Metrol. Unters.) and Bertheau (Gesch. der Isr.), gives the following very insignificant proposition: The 5-shekel weight shall be to you 5 shekels, and the 10-shekel weight 10, and 50 shekels shall be a maneh. Ezekiel 45:13-17. The Oblation of the PeopleAs formerly it was from the prince to the people, so now it is what the people have to render to the prince. The foregoing fixing of measures forms the transition, and the designation δַ ?ϊְּ ?ψεּ ?ξָ ?δ in Ezekiel 45:13, taken from Ezekiel 45:1 sq., is also an intermediate link. The oblation is offered to Jehovah as being set apart for purposes of worship. It is to be the sixtieth part of wheat and barley. ωִׁ ?ωָּׁ ?δ, to divide into six parts, hence here: to take off the sixth part. Ezekiel 45:14. ηֹ ?χδַ ?ωֶּׁ ?ξֶ ?ο is the ordinance of the oil, what the law of the oblation is to be in respect to the oil; namely, as explained by the apposition: δַ ?αַּ ?ϊδַ ?ωֶּׁ ?ξֶ ?ο, which Hengstenberg makes a parenthesis, and paraphrases thus: “the bath is the measure for the oil,”—the quantity taken from the bath of oil shall be the tenth part of it. The cor (1 Kings 5:2 [4:22]; 2 Chronicles 2:9 [10], 27:5), for dry goods and liquids, a post-Mosaic name of a measure; and hence it is not only added that the cor is ten baths, but also that it is the same as the homer, for ten baths (Ezekiel 45:11) make a homer. [Hengst.: homer without doubt the native name; cor introduced from the Aramaic during or after the exile.] Thus the tenth of the bath is as regards the oil the hundredth part of the harvest.—Wine (specifically for the drink-offering) is not mentioned; small cattle however are Ezekiel 45:15—(the “oblation” in their case is to be one out of two hundred, and that one to come from fat pastures, to be well fed), but not oxen. The enumeration, says Keil, is not complete, but contains only the norm for levying the contributions; as Hengstenberg expresses himself: to serve as proof that the regulations here “do not bear the character of an actual tax,” but are only by way of example and outline. Philippson remarks: “This impost appears intended to serve as substitute for the tithes prescribed by Moses, which are not mentioned here.”—ξַ ?ωְׁ ?χֶ ?δ is “a watered district,” like Genesis 13:10; a significant allusion: Israel after their return to their own land will be as richly blessed as ever the valley of Jordan was before its devastation. Ezekiel 45:16 consigns this oblation to the princes.—ιִ ?δְ ?ιεּ ΰֶ ?μΧ, they are to see to it that they render it. The prince is hereby on the one hand enabled to provide for the service of worship, as on the other his representation of the people is made manifest. Hengstenberg holds the amount of this oblation to be too great, and barley moreover was not used in worship, unless we understand that “the other expenses for the general good” were to be included. Ezekiel 45:17. Instead of δָ ?ιָ ?δΰֶ ?μ, which applies to all the people, we have now δָ ?ιָ ?δςַ ?μ, that which concerns the prince only; on him it shall be incumbent. First, the things incumbent upon him are enumerated, and then is added what he has to do (δεּ ?ΰΞιַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ), namely, as is obvious from his very position, that he shall defray the material expenses of worship, and in so far perform it. He is indeed “governor of the feast,” but not “officiator in presenting the atoning sacrifice on the feast days,” with a priestly dignity, such as Umbreit attributes to him. ιַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ may simply be: cause to be done (Ezekiel 46:2). Hδvernick again well observes: “Thus there arises a beautiful contrast to the former state of matters. Instead of violent exactions, harsh oppression, infamous tyranny, and mutual injustice and disloyalty, comes a settled order of things, conscientious gifts of the people which are holy gifts. The prince appears as the theocratic head, who truly cares for the weal and safety of Israel, who supports in the liveliest and demands in the strongest manner the close communion of the people with their God; not only administering justice, but also caring for the most sacred interests of the people,” etc. Ezekiel 45:18-20. The Sin-offering in the First MonthA solemn introduction: Thus saith, etc.—( “Taking occasion from the thought in Ezekiel 45:17, the prophet now portrays, as a new, solemn cycle of feasts begins in Israel, what also the prophets elsewhere announce regarding the sacred festivals in the Messianic period, e.g. Isaiah 66:23; Zechariah 14:16,” Hδv.) The whole mode of expression in Ezekiel 45:18, as well as the comparison of Eze 43:18 sq. (of the difference between that and this), and the connection with what follows,—all this compels us to reject the view given by Hengstenberg, that corresponding to the consecration of the altar of burnt-offerings, we have to regard the consecration of the sanctuary as a solemnity occurring only once. Hengstenberg compares the seven days’ solemnity in the case of Solomon’s temple (2 Chronicles 7:8), and the fresh consecration of the temple under Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 29:18 sq.), but especially the consecration of the tabernacle on the first day of the first month in Exodus 40. Besides what we have said already, the following consideration tells against this view. Surely we may suppose a difference between these sanctuaries built by men, like the altar of burnt-offerings (αְּ ?ιεֹ ?νδֵ ?ςָ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ϊεֹ), and the divine temple beheld by Ezekiel, when its consecration in this sense had already taken place by the coming in of the divine glory (Ezekiel 43:2 sq.). The solemnity here ordained on the first and seventh days of the month (Nisan, Ezekiel 45:21) is a yearly returning one, as is shown also by the reference in Ezekiel 45:20 to continual recurrence. Numbers 28:11 sq. shows that the beginning of every month is to be solemnized, and Numbers 29 that there is to be additionally a special solemnity on the first day of the seventh month. On this comp. Ezekiel 46—The cleansing of the sanctuary is effected here through a young bullock, instead of the goat prescribed by Moses for the new moon,—an augmentation of the sin-offering as to the victim, just as in Ezekiel 45:19 through the process which accomplishes the cleansing. The posts of the house (Ezekiel 41:21) refer to the sanctuary (Ezekiel 45:18), without distinction in respect to its two divisions, the altar of burnt-offerings and the gate (doubtless collective for all the three gates, for if only the east gate were meant, specific mention of it would hardly be omitted) of the inner court. Ezekiel 45:20, however, explains in direct terms that this cleansing of the sanctuary on the first and seventh days of the first month takes place from the ground (ξִ ?ο), the cause which, in view of the holiness of the house, may be found in ΰִ ?ιωׁ ωֹׁ ?βֶ ?δ, that is: the erring, frail man, and τְּ ?ϊִ ?ι, either: folly, or, abstr. pro concreto: the fool (properly, the man open to every impression, easily led astray). The two designations are distinguished as actus and potentia, the occasional act and the natural disposition; but it has been rightly remarked that both denote sins of weakness. [Keil wrongly interprets ξִ ?οΣ “from, away from,” setting him free from his sin; for this neither agrees with the immediately following εְ ?λִ ?τַּ ?ψְ ?ϊֶּ ?νΰֶ ?ϊΞδַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊ, nor can it be found in the εְ ?λֵ ?οϊַּ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ, which refers back to Ezekiel 45:19. “Thus shall the year, newly consecrated by such a beginning, most truly present the appearance of a holy year. At the same time this is the preparation for the feast of the passover in Ezekiel 45:21” (Hδv.). Since the great day of atonement (Leviticus 16:16 sq.) had the same end in view as the very expressive and augmented solemnity ordained here on the first day of the month, the single yearly day of atonement is otherwise quite passed over, and thus there is ground for the opinion that the solemnity here is meant to express the idea of the day of atonement for the worship of the future. Ezekiel 45:21-25. The Passover and the Feast of TabernaclesEze_45:21. The chief fundamental feast of Israel, the beginning of the feast-cycle, as afterwards its close, so that with the passover and the feast of tabernacles the whole circle of feasts in the narrower sense is either embraced (Hδv.), or decreed as the annual feasts of the future (Keil). Comp. the original institution of the feast of the passover in Exodus 12.—ηַ ?βωְׁ ?αֻ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ, to which is here added ιָ ?ξִ ?ιν, is: feast of seven days, because it always lasted seven days (comp. Numbers 28:17), so that the “continuous” feast is denoted, but not, as Hengst.: “in contrast to the feast of consecration,” but rather implying that in this connection recurring feasts are spoken of. The old translations render the designation simply: “a feast of seven days”; the addition: ιָ ?ξִ ?ιν, will at least distinguish it as seven-dayed from the “feast of weeks” (ηַ ?βωְׁ ?αֻ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ), celebrated later at the close of harvest. Kliefoth, on the other hand, supposes that in future the passover will be held as a feast of seven weeks, which lasts seven weeks; and so not merely the seven days of unleavened bread, but the whole seven weeks will be passover—the feast of weeks shall be one with the passover. The ordinance regarding the ξַ ?φּ ?εֹ ?ϊ relates (he holds) to the whole seven weeks up to the feast of first-fruits. See the refutation of this in Keil on the passage. The seven days of the feast in Ezekiel 45:23 also tell very plainly what is meant. Comp. on Deuteronomy 16. Ezekiel 45:22 exhibits the prince in the charge imposed upon him (δεּ ?ΰΞιַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ, here εְ ?ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δ).—αַּ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?νδַ ?δεּ ?ΰ).—is the above-mentioned fourteenth day of the first month, the feast-day proper (δַ ?τֶּ ?ρַ ?η), on the evening of which the paschal lamb was slain and eaten.—The sin-offering precedes, whereas in Numbers 28 it follows after. In this way the idea of the day of atonement pervades also the passover of the future (for himself and for the whole people of the land). The victim, too, of the sin-offering on the first feast-day proper is not a goat, but a bullock! For the seven following days of the mazzoth there are ordained Ezekiel 45:23—as a burnt-offering, instead of the two bullocks of Moses, seven bullocks, and instead of the one ram in the law, here seven rams, all without blemish, μַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν, “for the day,” each of the seven days; and only the one goat as daily sin-offering is retained from the law of Moses. This enhancement of the feast-offerings, 49 bullocks and 49 rams as burnt-offering, is additional proof of an element which has already repeatedly shown itself, to wit, Israel’s state of grace for the future. In reference to the passover Hengstenberg observes: “That precisely the grace of redemption sealed by this festival was to receive so rich an accession by the events of the future.” The seven lambs of the first year ordained in the law are omitted by Ezekiel; we might say, because the Lamb of God, who is the fulfilment of this feast, will be sufficient in the Messianic times. But, as only befits the symbolized idea meant to be made prominent, the meat-offeringEze_45:24—accompanying the burnt-offering surpasses even the measure of the latter. In the law there are to each bullock only three-tenths of an ephah of flour mingled with oil, two-tenths to the ram, and only one-tenth to each of the seven lambs; here a whole ephah, namely of flour, is appointed for each bullock and each ram, finally of oil one δִ ?ιο (Ezekiel 4:11). Ezekiel 45:25 describes the feast of tabernacles, the feast (αֶּ ?ηָ ?β) falling on the 15th day of the 7th month, so designated because not expressed by name. Keil and Kliefoth assign as the reason for its not being named: “without doubt because the dwelling in tabernacles will for the future be discontinued.” What the prince has to perform in this feast is, as to time (seven days) and kinds of offering, the same as in the passover. Hengstenberg excepts from this similarity the number of victims. Comp. Numbers 29:13 sq. But the definition: as meat-offering, leaves us to suppose for the rest also nothing but a matter relative to number and measure, and Hengstenberg’s solicitude about the passover as “the root of all feasts,” seems in the case of such a comparison as is made here to overlook the fact that the number of victims, which indeed daily decreased, was far more signal and greater in the Mosaic feast of tabernacles; moreover, the eighth day, as concluding feast with its special offerings, is, as Keil observes, wanting here. Hδvernick farther observes: “The sacred number seven dominates here both in the passover and in the offerings of the feast of tabernacles. The gradual decrease of the number of victims in the latter, explained by Bδhr as a gradual decrease of the festal character of the seven feast-days, receives a fresh confirmation. Here, namely, an equal number of victims is appointed for every day. The distinction between the feasts themselves thereby almost disappears. Each day comes forth in its proper and symmetrical holiness. The sacred number seven pervades the whole cycle of feasts. The defective and imperfect character of the ancient mode gives place to a higher and more perfect form.” additional note on Ezekiel 45:18-25[ “As it was more especially in connection with the stated and yearly festivals that the prince had to represent the people in the public service of God, so the prophet takes a rapid glance of these, and refers particularly to the first and the last. But he first mentions a consecration service with which the year was always to begin, and of which no mention whatever was made in the law (Ezekiel 45:18-20). On the first and again on the seventh day of the first month, the sanctuary was always to be cleansed, that the year might be commenced in sacredness, and that all might be in preparation for the feast of the passover on the fourteenth day of the month. As the prophet has introduced a new solemnity before the passover, so for the passover itself he appoints quite different sacrifices from those named by Moses; instead of one ram and seven lambs for the daily burnt-offering, he has seven bullocks and seven rams; and the meat-offerings also vary. And while there were quite peculiar offerings prescribed in the law for the feast of tabernacles, constantly diminishing as the days of the feast proceeded; here, on the other hand, the prophet appoints the same as in the case of the passover. This shows how free a use was made by the prophet of the Old Testament ritual, and how he only employed it as a cover for the great spiritual truths he sought to unfold. They were not permanently fixed and immutable things, he virtually said, those external services of Judaism, as if they had an absolute and independent value of their own, so that precisely those and no other should be thought of; they were all symbolical of the spiritual and eternal truths of God’s kingdom, and may be variously adjusted, as is now done, in order to make them more distinctly expressive of the greater degree of holiness and purity that is in future times to distinguish the people and service of God over all that has been in the past.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 485, 486.—W. F.] HINTSOn Ch. 45 Ezekiel 45:1 sq. “Here in particular I acknowledge the weakness of my knowledge. I silently revere the mysteries of this passage. Neither will any mortal explain them completely, because that which God has prepared for them that love Him does not come into the heart of man. This indeed I see, that he speaks of the possession of the land of the living, as also the Revelation of John has borrowed much from this passage.” Thus �olampadius expresses himself.—“God promises believers an inheritance, and will also give it them in due time, but that is in heaven” (Starck).—“God the Lord needs indeed no land for Himself, yet it is for His honour when real estates are bequeathed to churches and schools, that those who labour in them may receive their support from them, Genesis 47:22” (Starke).—“They who live from God’s hand are content with His measure, even when it turns out small and modest” (Starck).—“It ought to be our joy to be near God, to be associated with Him” (Starck). Ver, 2. “There is nothing twisted and crooked with God; with Him everything is straight” (Starck).—“The paths are often crooked and yet straight on which Thou makest Thy children come to Thee,” etc. (Arnold.) Ezekiel 45:3. The sanctuary was situated in the centre of all; so ought religion to be the central point of all life, and Christ the centre of true religion.—Religion, faith, Christianity ought not, either in the life of nations or of individuals, to be placed in a corner merely as a tolerated piece of antiquity. Ezekiel 45:4. “If those who labour in the church and the school have no official houses, still they must have houses to dwell in. Therefore it is fitting that the community should build such, and keep them in a habitable condition” (Starke).—“When ministers’ houses are near the church, they can the better attend to their office, 1 Chronicles 9:27” (O.).—“The Lord’s faithful priests shall dwell beside Him, and be with Christ, for refreshment and revival from the strife and disquiet of men among whom they are scattered” (Cocc.). Ezekiel 45:5 sq. “Although a lesser service in the Church appears to be incumbent on church officers and school masters, yet care must be taken to provide them with food and lodging,” etc. (Starck.)—“Hence offices and ranks which are not mutually destructive ought to continue; only let each in his place belong to the Lord” (Tossani).—“The sanctuary is not included in the city or state as formerly, for God will not permit His kingdom to be confounded with the temporal power; this, however, does not mean that God cannot rule in the state, bu only that God’s kingdom and human kingdoms are different. For human authority is not to interfere in the kingdom of God, but the divine authority does interfere in the kingdoms of men, and God makes subjects obey their princes, servants their masters, and children their parents; and all obedience, if of the right kind, is paid to Him as the Lord, and to men as brethren and fellow-servants whom the common Lord has placed in authority for the Lord’s sake. But we do not obey God for the sake of a man, nor can any man by his power make us obedient to God,” etc. (Coco.)—“Hence when this prophecy places the sanctuary outside of the city, and yet annexes the sanctuary to the city, that indicates that in the kingdom of Christ states and governments will belong to the people of God; in which, however, the kingdom of God will not be absorbed nor confined” (Cocc.).—“The magisterial office is holy, and has also part in the holy, Numbers 7:1 sq.” (Cr.)—“For princes to have their domains is not unjust, but they should not seek to draw everything into these domains,” etc. (Starke.) Ezekiel 45:8 sq. “To protect, but not to fleece.—“Governments ought to give good heed to weights, measures, and coinage, and allow no inequalities to creep in” (Tόb. Bib.).—“Christians ought to be upright in their dealings, 1 Thessalonians 4:6” (O.).—“Knowingly to pass spurious coin is intentional deceit, and so is the clipping of coins in order to lessen their weight” (Starke).—“Unjust gain does not profit the third generation. Lightly come, lightly gone” (Hafenreffer). Ezekiel 45:13 sq. “Even the small gifts of the poor, when given in true love, are an acceptable offering, Hebrews 13:16” (Cocc.).—“It is reasonable that a man set apart a considerable portion of his income for the glory of God and the support of the true worship, Romans 15:16” (Tόb. Bib.).—“The revenue for spiritual objects is most defrauded” (Starke).—There are liberals and liberals; the liberals of former days built churches, the liberals of to-day would like to tear them down; to the former, church endowment was an aim, to the latter an eyesore.—“Almsgiving in private is a fruit of faith; but not less so is liberality in endowments for churches and schools”(Cocc.).—The Christian munificence of our fathers was a very different thing from the duty of subscribing to associations imposed on their children, and from the whole ordinary system of collecting as it is carried on to raise supplies for the kingdom of God. Ezekiel 45:15. “The antitype of the lambs, the Lamb that bore the sin of the world” (Starck).—The sacrifices considered in Christ.—Christian sacrifices are spiritual sacrifices.—The fulfilling of the sacrifices in the Spirit of Christ. Ezekiel 45:17. “When Chris on the cross consecrated the new temple, He can celled our sins” (Heim-Hoff.). Ezekiel 45:18 sq. The new year of grace.—“At the beginning of the new year of grace, and with the newly rising light, the temple was again raised up or opened, and the true justification and sanctification through the sacrifice of Christ recognised and proclaimed” (Berl. Bib.).—Without cleansing there is no sanctuary for man, nor sanctification of him: “Let him who desires to be clean cleanse himself in the blood of Christ, 1 John 1:7” (Starck). Ezekiel 45:20. Sin as error and seduction, and error and seduction as sin.—“We ought to attend divine service from beginning to end” (Cr.). Ezekiel 45:21 sq. The ever-renewed remembrance of redemption in every participation of the Lord’s Supper, and also in the experience of believers.—Every solemnization of the Lord’s Supper a fulfilled paschal solemnity.—But our passover is Christ, 1 Corinthians 5.—How wearisome are church festivals to the men of our time!—“This prophetic representation contains a beautiful pattern for many a land; yet the main matter is this, that the Holy Ghost teaches us here how firmly and fixedly God with His grace has settled down among us men, and how priesthood and royalty are upheld in Christendom from His fulness. But they must keep close to the sanctuary, and the magistracy must protect the confessors of the truth on the right and on the left. The deepest ground, however, is this: Christ’s disciples are all of them priests, and they themselves are also the royalty; they themselves offer sacrifice and also protect themselves, for God Himself is their strength through Christ. He who has the Spirit of Christ will easily understand the whole of this figure,” etc. (Diedrich).—“It behoves us to celebrate the feast of tabernacles in spirit and in truth so much more than the Jews the nearer we approach eternity. For the nearer we come thereto, the less ought we to hold by this world, but on the contrary ought to withdraw our thoughts from the earth, from houses, cities, and lands, and allow scarcely a thought to arise in us that we still have a portion on earth and in the world; but, since we only dwell in tabernacles, let us have our loins girded, as those who are ready to depart, that they may be with the Lord” (Berl. Bib.).—“Our home is above, to which we draw nearer every moment” (Heim-Hoff.).—Tabernacles ought to be as passover; that is, we ought to pursue our pilgrimage on the ground of eternal redemption. ON CH. 40–46 1. Hδvernick rightly finds “the nervous and lofty unity” in the prophecies of Ezekiel “manifested in this section also.” “The visions of the prophet find here their fairest completion and perfect rounding off.” Already in the exposition (on Ezekiel 40:1 sq.) the harmony with the former part of Ezekiel’s prophecy has been remarked. Ezekiel 43:3 expressly refers back to Ezekiel 1, 8. The free conformity in expression between our chapters and the whole closing portion generally, and the earlier chapters, has been often proved (comp. Philippson, p. 1294). The proof is the more striking when we consider the complete difference of the subject. That we have a vision here too harmonizes not only with Ezekiel 1, 8, but in general with the prophetic character of Ezekiel, Ezekiel 8, 15, 17. The prophet has repeatedly hinted at this close of his book. Thus Ezekiel 11:16; Ezekiel 20:40; Ezekiel 36:38; Ezekiel 37:26 sq. The last passage in particular might be regarded as the text for Ezekiel 40 sq. The eighth and following chapters required by the necessity of the idea our conclusion of the book. 2. In regard to analogies in the other prophets, Ezekiel’s contemporaries, as we may well conceive, will chiefly come into consideration. Hence, above all, Ezekiel’s fellow-labourer Jeremiah. Jeremiah represents the restoration and renewal of Israel as a rebuilding of Jerusalem, Jeremiah 31:38 sq. (with this comp. in our prophet, Ezekiel 47:13 sq., Ezekiel 48). Jeremiah 33:18 is similar to Ezekiel 44:9 sq. Haggai 2:7 sq. follows entirely the thought here of a new temple, insisting on its glory in view of a meagre present. But still more analogous are the night-visions of Zechariah (Ezekiel 2:5 [1] sq., Ezekiel 4, Ezekiel 6:13 sq., Ezekiel 14). 3. The parallel between Isaiah and Ezekiel, as it stands in relation to the vision in Ezekiel 1 (p. 41), is not completed by citing Isaiah 60 as corresponding to the close of our book; but we shall have to seek the culminating point of Isaiah’s prophecy for the culmination of Ezekiel’s, in accordance with the office of this prophet to be the prophet of Jehovah’s holiness to obdurate Israel, —just as for the commencement Isaiah 6 is covered by Ezekiel 1—not so much in the close as in Ezekiel 53. The corresponding pendant to our closing chapters is the life-like description given there of the Messiah and His sacrifice of Himself. It is this self-sanctification of Jehovah through His servant Israel which in Isaiah corresponds to the self-glorification of Jehovah in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40 sq.) by means of the new sanctuary and the new nationality; and this, again, accords with Ezekiel’s office, to behold the glory of Jehovah in the misery of the exile. In this respect Ezekiel stands to Isaiah somewhat as Easter and Pentecost do to Good Friday. 4. The different views, especially regarding the vision of the temple, may be distinguished generally as subjective and objective. I. The views which derive the explanation of Ezekiel 40 sq. solely or chiefly from Ezekiel’s subjectivity: (1) Already Villalpandus saw everywhere here only reminiscences of Solomon’s temple and of Solomon’s era, and consequently a similar line of thought to that in Ezra 3:12. Similarly Grotius, only that he reconciled the differences between Ezekiel’s temple and that of Solomon by ascribing them to the temple at the time of its destruction, just as Bunsen refers in this connection to 2 Kings 16. According to both these expositors, Ezekiel traced out from reminiscences a pattern for the future restoration. Thus, according to Ewald, Ezekiel becomes “a prophetic lawgiver.” “Such an undertaking, quite unusual in the case of earlier prophets,” is explained from the “predominating thoughts and aspirations of the better class of those days for the restoration of the subverted kingdom.” “Ezekiel probably meditated long, with passionate longing and lively remembrance, on the institutions of the demolished temple, etc.; what appeared to him great and glorious became impressed upon his mind as a pattern, with which he compared the Messianic expectations and demands, etc., until at length the outline of the whole arrangement which he here writes down pressed itself upon him!” “Above all, he sketches the holy objects, temple and altar, with the utmost exactness and vividness, as if a spirit (!) impelled him, now when they were destroyed, at least to catch up their image in a faithful and worthy form for the redemption that will one day certainly come; so that he must have diligently instructed himself in these matters from the best written and oral sources” (!). “Thus it is quite in keeping with Ezekiel’s way of prophesying, that he introduces everything as if he had been borne in spirit into the restored and completed temple, accompanied throughout by a heavenly guide, and had learned exactly from him all the single parts of this unique building as to their nature and use.” The paragraph Ezekiel 47:1-12 is, in Ewald’s opinion, “from its great, all-embracing sense, quite adapted to bring to a close briefly and pithily all these presentiments!” “Yet when precepts more moral are to be given, or the perfected kingdom has to be described in its extent, reaching even beyond the temple, this assumed form (!) easily passes over into the simple prophetic discourse.” (2) While the foregoing view looks to realization, Hitzig, for example, entirely rejects the idea that Ezekiel “considered such things (as our chapters contain) possible, feasible, or probable, and relatively commanded and prescribed them.” “One does not or did not reflect that the prophet’s calling was to express the demands of the idea, indifferent in the first instance about their realization.” All is pure fancy, a mere castle-in-the-air, a kind of “Platonic sketch,” as Herder expresses himself. The self-criticism of this view of our chapters can hardly be more suitably given than when Hitzig continues: “Inasmuch as this or that could be set in order otherwise than he imagines, he would not in regard to plans and proposals have resisted obstinately, but would have known how to distinguish the unessential of the execution from the essential of the thing itself. He sketches the future in the form he must wish it to take, in which it really would have the fairest appearance. If the reality falls short of the image, then the idea is defectively realized; but the fault lies in the reality, not in the idea, and Ezekiel is not responsible for it.” This, moreover, is merely what already Doederlein and others have held with respect to the closing portion of our book. Similarly Herder: “Ezekiel’s manner is to paint an image entire and at length; his mode of conception appears to demand great visions, figures written over on all sides, even tiresome, difficult, symbolical acts, of which his whole book is full. Israel in his wandering upon the mountains of his dispersal, among other tongues and peoples, had need of a prophet such as this one was, etc. So also as regards this temple. Another would have sketched it with soaring figures in lofty utterances; he does so in definite measurements. And not only the temple, but also appurtenances, tribes, administration, land, etc. How far has Israel always, so far as depended on his own efforts, remained below the commands, counsels, and promises of God!” (3) Bφttcher has attempted to combine both views, and after him Philippson, who expresses himself to the following effect: “Ezekiel the prophet, sunk in himself, brooding over matters in the distance and in solitude, had not, like Jeremiah, upon whom the immediate reality pressed, viewed the occurrences simply as punishment of defection and degeneracy, but was conscious also of their inward signification, which came to him in the appearance of a vision. Hence he represented the destruction of the temple as a suspension of the relation of revelation between God and Israel; and so much the more necessary was it to represent the restoration of that same relation as the return of God into the restored sanctuary. Now, from the peculiar character of Ezekiel, this necessarily had to assume a form at once ideal and real,—ideal in its entirety as something future, real as individual and special, matter of fact in its appearance.” As the “indubitable motive of the prophet,” the following is given: “to keep alive in the exiles in the midst of Babylonian idolatry the idea of the one temple, and the priestly institute consecrated to it, as the centre of the religion of the one God; and at the return into Palestine to confirm the life of the people in their calling, by the removal of all elements of strife, and by approximation to the Mosaic state of things.” Hengstenberg’s view is surprisingly near the above one; he says: “With the exception of the Messianic section in Ezekiel 47:1-12, the fulfilment of all (!) the rest of the prophecy belongs to the times immediately after the return from the Chaldean exile. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAPTER 46 1Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; and on the Sabbath day it shall be opened, and on the day of the new moon it shall be opened. 2And the prince cometh the way of [to] the porch of the gate from without, and will stand at the post of the gate; and the priests offer up his burnt-offering and his peace-offerings; and he worships at the threshold of the gate, and 3will go out; and the gate shall not be shut until the evening. And the people of the land worship at the door of this gate in the Sabbaths and in the new moons before Jehovah. 4And the burnt-offering which the prince shall offer to Jehovah on the Sabbath day is six lambs without blemish, and a ram without blemish. 5And the meat-offering [shall be] an ephah for the ram, and for the lambs the meat-offering [shall be] what his hand gives, and 6oil a hin to the ephah. And on the day of the new moon without blemish a bullock—a young steer, and six lambs and a ram; without blemish shall 7they be. And an ephah for the bullock and an ephah for the ram shall he make the meat-offering, and for the lambs so much as his hand will attain to, and oil a hin to the ephah. 8And when the prince cometh he shall come the way of the porch of the gate, and by the same way shall he go out. 9And when the people of the land come before Jehovah in the set times, he that cometh the way of the north gate to worship shall go out the way of the south gate, and he that cometh the way of the south gate shall go out the way of the north gate; he shall not return the way of the gate by which he came, but they shall go out each straight before him. 10And the prince shall come in their midst; when they come and when they go out, they shall go out [together]. 11And in the feasts and in the set times the meat-offering shall be an ephah for the bullock and an ephah for the ram, and for the 12lambs what his hand gives, and oil a hin to the ephah. And when the prince shall offer a free-will offering, burnt-offering, or peace-offering, as a free-will offering to Jehovah, then one opens to him the gate that looketh toward the east, and he offers his burnt-offering and his peace-offering, as he will do on the Sabbath day; and he goeth out, and one shuts the door after 13his going out. And a lamb a year old without blemish shalt thou daily 14offer as a burnt-offering to Jehovah; every morning shalt thou offer it. And a meat-offering shalt thou offer with it every morning, the sixth of an ephah, and oil the third of a hin, to moisten the fine flour,—a meat-offering to 15Jehovah, ordinances perpetual, continual. And they offer the lamb and the meat-offering and the oil every morning, as a continual burnt-offering. 16Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: When the prince shall give a gift to one of his sons, it [is] his inheritance, to his sons shall it be [become], their possession 17as an inheritance. And when he shall give a gift from his inheritance to one of his servants, then it is his until the year of freedom, when it returns to 18the prince; only his inheritance of his sons shall belong to them. And the prince shall not take of the people’s inheritance to thrust them out of their possession; from his own possession he may endow his sons, that My people 19be not scattered every man from his possession. And he brought me, in the entry which was at the side of the gate, to the chambers of holiness, to the priests, that look toward the north; and, behold, there was a place on the 20hinder side westward. And he said to me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the guilt-offering and the sin-offering, where they shall bake the meat-offering, so as not to bring it forth to the outer court, to sanctify 21the people. And he brought me forth to the outer court, and made me pass on to the four corners of the court, and, behold, in each corner of the court was a court. 22In the four corners of the court were smoking courts, forty [cubits] long and thirty [cubits] broad; one measure was to them to the four 23corner-rooms. And a range was round about in them, round about the four 24of them, and cooking-places were made under the ranges round about. And he said to me: These are the house of the cooks, where the ministers of the house shall boil the slain-offering of the people. Ezekiel 46:2. Sept.: ... τηςπυληςτηςἐξωθεν … ἐπιταπροθυρα—Vulg.: … stabit in limine— Ezekiel 46:3. ... καταταπροθυρα— Ezekiel 46:4. K. τοὁλοκαυτωμαπροσοισει— Ezekiel 46:6. Another reading: ϊχητψ and ϊξιν; all the old translations read singular as the latter. Ezekiel 46:9. ... ἀλλ̓ἠκατ̓εὐθυαὐτηςεξελευσεται. Vulg.: … sed e regione illius egredietur. (Another reading: ιφΰ, also Ezekiel 46:10.) Ezekiel 46:10. ... εἰσλευσεταιμετ̓αὐτων, κ. ἐντω … ἐξελευσεταιμετ̓αὐτων. Ezekiel 46:11. ... καιἐνταιςπανηγυρεσιν— Ezekiel 46:12. ... ὁμολογιανὁλοκαυτωμασωτηριουτωκυριωκ. ἀνοιξει— Ezekiel 46:13. ... ποιησει … ποιησει—(Another reading: ιςωδ, also Ezekiel 46:14.) Ezekiel 46:14. Sept.: ... προσταγμααἰωνιονδιαπαντος (15) ποιησετετονἀμνονκ. … ποιησετε—Vulg.: … cata mane … sacrificium domino legitimum, juge atque perpetuum. Ezekiel 46:15. Faciet … cata mane mane—(Qeri: ιַ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?εּ.) Ezekiel 46:16. ... υἱωςαὐτουτουἐκτ. κληρονομιαςαὐτου, τουτο— Ezekiel 46:17. ... κ. ἀποδωσει … πληντ. κληρονομιαςτ. υἱωναὐτου—Vulg.:.. hζreditas autem ejus filiis ejus erit. Ezekiel 46:18. Vulg.: … per violentiam et de possession eorum, Ezekiel 46:19. ... ἐκειτοποςκεχωρισμενος. Ezekiel 46:20. ... ἐπιτατεσσαραμερμτ. αὐλης … αὐληκατατακλιτητ. αὐλης, αὐληκατατοκλιτος, αὐλη (22) ἐπιτασεσσ. κλιτητ. αὐλης, αὐλημικραμηκους—Vulg.: … in angulo atrii, atriola singula per angulos atrii. Ezekiel 46:22. Vulg: … atriola disposita— Ezekiel 46:23. Κ. ἐξεδραι … ἐναὐταις, … κ. μαγειρειαγεγονοταὑποκατωτωνἐξεδων—Vulg.: Et paries per circuitum ambiens quatuor atriola … subter porticus— Ezekiel 46:24. ... οἰοἰκοιτωνμαγειρειων—Vulg.: domus culinarum— REMARKSEze_46:1-12. The Prince and People at SacrificeEze_44:1 sq. treated of the outer east gate, while here the inner east gate comes into consideration. There the prince appears as sitting feasting upon the offerings; here he is viewed as standing, in accordance with his duty of offering. Both passages accord to him precedence of the people. In Keil’s view the two passages supplement each other in this way, that we have here the exceptions to the rule there. But Ezekiel 44 permits no exception in regard to the shutting of the gate (comp. on Ezekiel 43:5, also Ezekiel 47:2); and besides, it is the outer gate that is spoken of there, whereas here it is the inner. If one is to call it a case of supplementing, he can say: whereas Ezekiel 44 shuts the outer east gate always, the inner east gate also, according to our passage, should as a rule be shut; the Sabbath day and the day of the new moon are to form the exceptions. Ezekiel 46:2. We are told in Ezekiel 44 how the prince arrives at the outer gate; namely, by the way of the porch of the gate (ξִ ?γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ ?Χ); that same way, only in respect to the inner east gate,—which, however, as we have seen on Ezekiel 40:31, has its porch likewise turned to the outer court,—the prince comes here also, so that ξִ ?ηεּ ?υ means just the same as ξִ ?ο in ξִ ?γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ (Ezekiel 44:3): from the outer court, into which he entered by the north or south gate. ξִ ?ηεּ ?υ only makes the gate intended, but not expressly named in Ezekiel 46:2, more plain as the inner gate, the gate that leads into the inner court. [Hengst. takes it as: “without,” “beyond”; he makes the prince proceed through the opened door of the inner east gate as far as its threshold and post; not pass through the porch, but remain standing on this side of it, beyond the gate-opening, but close by it, on the threshold between the gate-opening and the porch. Keil, again, understands ξִ ?ηεּ ?υ as meaning from outside of the temple through the outer east gate. Ewald makes as correction in Ezekiel 46:1 the gate of the “outer” court.] The mention again of the east gate repeats, in reference to the prince, the distinction conferred upon him in Ezekiel 44. It is, however, rather a distinction from the people, or a distinction of the people in his person, than a distinguishing approximation of the prince to the priests. Compare with what is here said Solomon’s probably pulpit-like brazen scaffold, on which he knelt, and which thus was situated before the altar of burnt-offering in the inner court (2 Chronicles 6:13); likewise 2 Kings 11:14; 2 Kings 23:3; 2 Chronicles 23:13; 2 Chronicles 34:31. According to the passage before us, the position even of the prince inside of the environs of the temple suffers a noteworthy modification. A definite, fixed, elevated standing place, a suggestus for the bearer of princely power at the entrance into the inner court, as occupied since Solomon by the pre-exile kings, is no longer spoken of. The king of the future is the Messiah; the princedom shines in His light (Doct. Reflec. 14), in the brightness of the glory that entered through the east gate, which in view thereof is shut for ever toward the outside, and it (namely, the east gate) is temporarily opened only toward the interior, to be shut again at even. The Messianic idea dominates the modification of the prerogative of the possession derived from the pre-exile kingdom within the architectonic symbolism of the theocracy. Hengst. says: “What is treated of here is not merely a subordination of the prince to God; there is also as regards worship a sharp line drawn between prince and priest.” Hδvernick observes: “As on the one hand the prince is unreservedly acknowledged in his special exaltation, so on the other his rights appear in due limitation, in reference to encroachment of any kind on the priestly prerogatives. With regard to this, a position is assigned to him at the post of the gate leading to the inner court, on the threshold of the gate, hence at the head of the people, yet not in the priests’ court proper.” While he stands, the priests “do” what the prince cannot do, but must cause to be done by them. δִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊַּ ?ηֲ ?εָ ?δ, (ωָׁ ?ηָ ?δ, “to bow”), Hithp. with εδ as reduplication of the third radical, reflexive.—And will go out by the way that he came (Ezekiel 44:3). As what has been said invests the prince with privileges only above the people, Ezekiel 46:3 fixes the people’s place at worship. τֶּ ?ϊַ ?ηΧ [Hengst.: “opposite the opened door, through which they catch a glimpse of the altar of burnt-offering, which the prince—this is the only difference (? he enters the inner east gate, however)—sees from a nearer point”] is, according to Klief., equivalent to: through the opening of the gate, inasmuch as the people before the outer east gate have to look at the temple through it, and also through the inner gate (comp. Ezekiel 46:9). The arrangement intimates that the people shall worship outside of the threshold of the inner east gate, the gate spoken of (δַ ?δεּ ?ΰ). Psalms 95:6. Ezekiel 46:4. The Sabbath-offerings to be brought and offered by the prince are instead of: two lambs of the first year without blemish for a burnt-offering, and two-tenth deals of flour and oil for a meat-offering and drink-offering (Numbers 28:9); in future: three times as many lambs and a ram besides. Ezekiel 46:5. This increase of offerings extends also to the meat-offering: an ephah for the ram (Ezekiel 45:24). This may, and doubtless does, imply a proportionate increase with respect to the lambs likewise; ξַ ?ϊַּ ?ϊιָ ?γεֹ, however, which does not necessarily mean the same as the formula in Ezekiel 46:7, expresses free-willingness as the other element in the ordinance. A range of freedom along with the obligation, as Hengst., is not, however, so much the thought here, as, on the one hand, greater richness and splendour, which on the other presupposes a liberal and munificent disposition in the individual. “The disposition has become changed; with the greater blessings, demands higher than hitherto present themselves. But the more the amount to be spent is left to the free will of the individual, the more of zeal and faithfulness is presupposed” (Hδv.). Ezekiel 46:6. The new-moon offerings, on the contrary, show a decrease; namely, instead of: two bullocks, one ram, seven lambs (Numbers 28:11 sq.), we have here only: one bullock, one ram, six lambs. Hengst., indeed, disputes this; the number of bullocks, he says, “is left to the free judgment, only it may not fall short of the two required by the law.” In support of this view he takes τַּ ?ψ as collective (an “ideal unity”), and appeals to the plural ϊְּ ?ξִ ?ιξִ ?ιν, which certainly cannot be interpreted as referring to the frequent recurrence of the feast. (According to Keil, it is a “blunder of the transcriber” for ϊָּ ?ξִ ?ιν.) Not only one bullock and one ram, however, but also the goat for the sin-offering (Numbers 28:15) is wanting here. Ezekiel 46:7. The increase appears to be retained only through the meat-offering (comp. Ezekiel 45:24), and to be expressed by the formula: λַּ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψϊַּ ?ωִּׂ ?ιβιָ ?γεֹ, which takes as measure, not the free will, like Ezekiel 46:5, but ability (Leviticus 14:30). In order to pass over from Sabbaths and new moons to other seasons of worship, Ezekiel 46:8 first repeats what has been said in Ezekiel 46:2. αְּ ?γַ ?ψְ ?λּ ?εֹ ?=by the same way. Ezekiel 46:9. Keil notices as a distinction from Ezekiel 46:3, that there the people were spoken of “only incidentally” ( “provided some of them came”), since they were “not bound to come on Sabbaths and new moons.” Such a distinction, however, would require to be more definitely noted. In reality, Ezekiel as much supposes the people coming in Ezekiel 46:3 as here, where the coming and going of individuals (δַ ?αָּ ?ΰ) is expressly mentioned. Something similar to Deuteronomy 16:16 is not exactly expressed here. The most that can be said is, that αַּ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ςֲ ?γִ ?ιν (this is what makes the distinction from Ezekiel 46:3)—ξεֹ ?ςֵ ?γ (ιָ ?ςַ ?γ) the set time and assembling of the community—the coming and going of the people, might make more of a throng, so that here the relative rank of people and prince, expressed in Ezekiel 46:3, is not so much regarded, but care is taken for due order in the temple; and while in Ezekiel 46:2-3 the prince was distinguished from the people, here he and they are taken together. [Fairbairn: “At the great festivals the prince was to depart from the state of isolation which it was proper for him to observe at other times, and at the head of the people join in the great throng of worshippers that were to pass through the temple courts from one side to another. It reminds us of David, who in this was doubtless the exemplar in the eye of the prophet: ‘I had gone with the multitude, I went with them to the house of God, with the voice of joy and praise, with a multitude that kept holy-day.’ A beautiful picture of a religious people: the highest in rank freely mingling with the mass of worshippers, and inspiriting their devotions by the elevating influence of his presence and example.”—W. F.] ( “The reason of the regulation in Ezekiel 46:9 can only be a theological one, that each should go out of the sanctuary another man than he came in (Philippians 3:13); to avoid a throng, all must have been obliged to go in by the same gate, and out by the opposite one.”—Hengst.) Hengst. renders αַּ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ςֲ ?γιν here: “in the feast seasons;” in Ezekiel 46:11 : “on the feast days;” in order to assure himself of the continuance of the great day of atonement; and hence he renders αַּ ?ηַ ?πִּ ?ιν: “on the joyous feasts.” Keil makes ξεֹ ?ςֲ ?γִ ?ιν comprehend “Sabbaths, new moons, and the day of atonement, all the seasons and days sanctified to the Lord.” This in itself cannot be disputed, but in the connection here in Ezekiel may be very questionable. Keil at all events overthrows by this his own distinction of Eze 46:9-10 from Ezekiel 46:3, which rests on the ground that Ezekiel 46:9-10 speak of the high feasts, at which every one has to appear. αַּ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ςֲ ?γִ ?ιν in Ezekiel 46:9 points rather to the two days appointed for the first month, Ezekiel 45:18; Ezekiel 45:20.—Since mention is made of two ways of coming, the singular Qeri (ιֵ ?φֵ ?ΰ) must be rejected. Ezekiel 46:10, very suitably for the two days of the first month, views the prince and people together. Here, too, the Qeri is to be rejected; ιֵ ?φֵ ?ΰεּ are prince and people. Hengstenberg rightly compares Psalms 42:5 [4]. Ezekiel 46:11 introduces the “feasts” strictly so called (see Ezekiel 45:21; Ezekiel 45:25) in addition to the “set seasons” (Ezekiel 45:18; Ezekiel 45:20); but, as the statement of the meat-offering shows, the ξεֹ ?ςֲ ?γִ ?ιν are chiefly meant, for as to the feasts comp. the meat-offering ordained in Ezekiel 45:24 sq., while the lambs are explained from Ezekiel 46:6 of our chapter, which tells of those for the new moon. Hence what is there mentioned for burnt-offering must hold good also in Ezekiel 45:18-20, and likewise the meat-offering here, for which comp. Ezekiel 46:7 of our chapter. While the formula there measures according to ability, the one here expresses also that which corresponds to free-will, and this the more appropriately as free-will offerings are treated of in what follows. Ezekiel 46:12. πְ ?γָ ?αָ ?δ (Psalms 110:3), from πָ ?γַ ?α, “to impel,” is the peculiar inward impulse, the joyful readiness for good and for all sacrifices which comes from the Spirit of God (Psalms 51:14 [12]). The expression is used, as of the impulse originally, so of that to which one feels himself impelled, of the gift, and especially of the sacrifice to which a man was bound by no vow (Leviticus 22:23). The repetition in our verse of this element makes it specially prominent. [Fairbairn: “To show that his worship was not merely of a public and official nature, that it should spring from a heart truly alive to divine things, and itself delighting in fellowship with God, the prophet passes from those holiday services to the voluntary offerings and the daily morning sacrifice, which the prince was also to present to the Lord. In a word, the proper head of a religious people, he was to surpass them all, and be an example to them all, in the multitude and variety of his acts of homage and adoration.”—W. F.] Keil observes on the modified regulation in regard to opening and shutting the gate, as compared with Ezekiel 46:2, that the freewill offering could be brought on any day of the week; Hengst. points to the distinction that “in the free-will offering the prince appears as an individual, in the Sabbath-offering as the representative of the people.” Ezekiel 46:13-15. The Daily SacrificeEze_46:13. The address to the people (ϊַּ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ), where hitherto we have had to do with the prince, and the comparison of what was imposed on him in Ezekiel 45:17, make it probable that the daily sacrifice is to be “an affair of the community,” which “the priests have to provide” (Keil). “Yet,” observes Hengstenberg, “the conclusion is not certain; the transition from the prince to the people is an easy one, since in the foregoing passage also the prince represents the people. Ezekiel 45:18-20 likewise began with the address to the people, and undoubtedly the close here corresponds to the beginning there; the prince is encompassed on both sides by the people.” According to Numbers 28:3 sq., two such lambs were to be offered daily for a burnt-offering, namely, one in the morning and the other in the evening. The more exact statement here: αַּ ?αֹּ ?χֶ ?ψαַּ ?αֹּ ?χֶ ?ψ, that it shall be done every morning, either abolishes the evening burnt-offering (Keil), or silently supposes it (Hengst.). The aim is, corresponding to Ezekiel 45:18 sq., a similar sanctification of the commencement of the day as of that of the month and year; hence the sanctification of the whole of time in all its divisions, in distinction, perhaps, from the significance of the evening for Israel (Exodus 12:6). If the evening sacrifice is to be discontinued, the increase of the meat-offering every morning in Ezekiel 46:14 (compared with Numbers 28:5, one-tenth of an ephah and one-fourth of a hin) perhaps comes into consideration for the deficit.—μָ ?ψֹ ?ρ, from ψָ ?ρַ ?ρ, “to rend,” to scatter, to sprinkle. Hengst. and Keil: to moisten.—ρֹ ?μֶ ?ϊ, probably from ρָ ?μַ ?μ (but of doubtful signification; Meier: to split, to widen; Gesen.: to lift up, to oscillate), is the finest wheat meal. The plural ηֻ ?χּ ?εֹ ?ϊ refers both to the burnt-offering in Ezekiel 46:13, and the meat-offering here. The significance of such a solemnity every morning is emphasized by the ϊָּ ?ξִ ?ιγ strengthening the ςεֹ ?μָ ?ν, for which, with Hitzig, Leviticus 23:14; Leviticus 23:21; Leviticus 23:31 is to be compared. Ezekiel 46:15. Keil takes εַ֯ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?εּ as imperative; it is preterite with yav. The Qeri reads the imperfect.—Again the emphatic ϊָּ ?ξִ ?ιγ. ( “That which is to be done daily forms a contrast to the festivities; it is to be acknowledged and honoured in due dignity and significance as a perpetual burnt-offering,” Hδv.) Hengst.: “We move here entirely on the realm of Old Testament worship, and there is not the slightest (?) indication that, by the sacrifice of bulls, lambs, and goats, other forms of worship are here denoted. Even if the details were only colouring and means of representation, yet an intimation in regard to the whole should not be wanting” (neither is it wanting, it is manifest throughout the whole and in every part!) “if the announcement were to extend to a time when, by the offered sacrifice of Christ, a total revolution in the worship was produced. This is certainly correct; although the prophecy refers primarily to the restoration of the Old Testament worship, and in this respect has long ago found its fulfilment, and indeed a fulfilment that has long disappeared again,—the disappearance was proclaimed by the word of Christ: Behold, your house is left unto you desolate;—yet at the same time it conceals in the details the kernel of a general truth,—the imperishability of the worship in the community of God on earth, which is demonstrated among other things also by this, that as the worship here predicted had to perish by the Roman destruction, the worship in the Christian Church rose again gloriously.” Any misunderstanding, as if Ezekiel should have predicted the Roman or Greek-Catholic worship, or a new evangelical worship of kindred form, might have been obviated by the consideration, that in everything here relative to the service of the temple of the future, the object aimed at is to give to the idea an expression as distinct as possible, although in terms of the Old Testament, and so in a symbolizing prophetic form, here specially to the idea, that whereas the Church Militant is a teaching church, the Church Triumphant of eternity (ςεֹ ?μָ ?νϊָּ ?ξִ ?ιγ) will on the contrary be a liturgic one; as also the so much debated question of constitution will be overcome, because solved. Ezekiel 46:16-24 Appendices: Ezekiel 46:16-18. The Right of the Prince as regards the Disposal of his Property. Ezekiel 46:19-24. The Sacrificial Kitchens. Just as supplementary matter to the temple building is appended in Ezekiel 41:15 sq. in the transition to the service of the temple, so we have here a supplementary statement in reference to the prince and the priests,—the former as the procurer and defrayer of the material of worship, the latter as the persons formally celebrating it, after the order of worship was finished in the foregoing. Ezekiel 46:16-18. The Prince and his PossessionEze_46:16. λֹּ ?δΞΰָ ?ξַ ?ψΧ expressly introduces what follows as a divine ordinance, and not the fancy of the prophet; and this connects itself with that which was assigned to the prince in Ezekiel 45:8 as his “possession in Israel.” As we know from that passage, reference is made here too to the former despotic regime. When Hengstenberg says that “the prophet does not set himself up as a lawgiver, but only seeks to give a representation of the thought that the princes of the future are to be no despots, are to beware of the unjust absolutism of the princes of the past,” it is clear, and Hengstenberg cannot deny it, that an ideal future is kept in view. But the ideality of the whole Old Testament is the future of the Messiah. Hengstenberg, indeed, observes quite correctly: “The prince cannot be Christ. He is one who may have several sons of his own body; who in the prospect of his death disposes of his property; who does not stand beyond the region of sin, else he should not need to be warned against it.” The concession in respect of one of his sons preserves the character of the princely possession; it becomes an inheritance, but it remains in the princely family. Hengstenberg connects πַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?ϊεֹ δִ ?ιΰ with the principal clause, and makes the suffix refer to the prince: “this shall become his inheritance (surely: his possession, which in this case he bequeaths) to his sons.” It is more natural to connect it with μְ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ ξִ ?αָּ ?πָ ?ιε, and to make the suffix refer to the prince’s son in question: the inheritance shall be his, bequeathed to him by his father (comp. on Ezekiel 46:18); and this is confirmed by the immediately following clause, which does not generalize, so that, with Keil, the suffix in μְ ?αָ ?πָ ?ιε should now revert to the prince; but his sons are the sons of the just-mentioned prince’s son, and the idea of the πַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?ϊεֹ is only farther carried out: it shall be their possession, so that it can be bequeathed (αְּ ?πַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?δ) to their sons also. Ezekiel 46:17. The idea of “inheritance” remains the key-note as formerly, so that the farther concession in respect of a meritorious or favourite servant of the prince does not indeed forbid a present to the servant in land from that which the prince possesses as hereditary property, but yet alienation and so lessening of the crown estates is guarded against by the limitation: until the year of freedom. γְּ ?ψεֹ ?ψ (from γָ ?ψַ ?ψ), which denotes free outflowing (Exodus 30:23), is free motion in general, freedom, as the year of jubilee is consequently named in Leviticus 25:10; Leviticus 25:13. The reversion is the same as in the case of an Israelitish heritable landed possession, when it passes by sale to another.—The meaning of the phrase: only his inheritance of his sons, is clear from the foregoing: only what the prince has presented to his sons from his inheritance shall remain to them. [Keil: “only his inheritance is it (?); as regards his sons, to them it shall belong.”] Ezekiel 46:18. That which is to be preserved in the case of the prince, is also to be preserved for the people: inheritance in their case as in his. ιָ ?πָ ?δ, “to oppress,” in general, hence: to exercise violence, to treat one with violence (Ezekiel 18:7 sq., 45:8), here with ξִ ?ο.—On τεּ ?υ, comp. Ezekiel 34 (1 Samuel 8:14; 1 Samuel 22:7). Ezekiel 46:19-24. The Sacrificial Kitchens for Priests and PeopleEwald inserts this section after Ezekiel 42:13-14, as he does the preceding Ezekiel 45 between Ezekiel 46:8-9. The prophet, who has not changed his standing-place since Ezekiel 44:4 sq., is brought to the δַ ?μִּ ?ωְׁ ?λεֹ ?ϊ described in Ezekiel 42:1 sq. (which comp.).—On αַּ ?ξָּ ?αεֹ ?ΰ, comp. on Ezekiel 42:9.—As the chambers in question are the priests’, Hengst. explains the appositional phrase: to the priests, as in Roman Catholic countries one may say, for example: “to the Carmelites,” etc.—The description: that look toward the north, refers of course to chambers. The gate, accordingly, is the north inner gate; according to Hengst., the entry leads “from the inner court gate on the west to the east entrance gate of the fence-wall of the priests’ cells.”—ωָׁ ?ν, Keil: “At the cells on the extreme hinder side toward the west;” Hengst.: “Thus the kitchens are in the cell building, not by and outside of it.”—The Qeri has αַּ ?ιַּ ?ψְ ?λָ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?ν (Hengst.: ιַ ?ψְ ?λְ ?ϊָ ?ν, “on their west side;” “singular, as in Genesis 49:13; the suffix refers in fact to the chambers, in form to the priests, including under them the chambers”). Gesenius derives the dual from the original signification: limb. Ezekiel 46:20. Here the guilt-offering comes first, whereas in Ezekiel 40:39; Ezekiel 42:13; Ezekiel 44:29, it always comes after the sin-offering, as it did in the law also, and hence appeared as a subordinate kind of sin-offering, ordained merely for certain cases; in accordance with the leading thought that the sinner should not only desire atonement of his sin before God by a sin-offering, but likewise endeavour as far as possible to pay what was owing, make good the damage, make restitution for the crime committed. —αָּ ?ωַׁ ?μ, “to swell;” hence, naturally: “to ripen;” artificially: “to cook” (Piel).—ΰָ ?τָ ?δ, properly: to draw together, is: “to bake.” Comp. moreover, Ezekiel 42:13.—μְ ?αִ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ιΧ, to be understood as in Ezekiel 44:19, which comp.; δεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰ, namely: out of the kitchens, which were situated in the corners of the outer court, like those which follow, where the priests had to pass through the crowd in order to get to their cells. To the outer court, mentioned to prepare for what follows, forms the transition to Ezekiel 46:21.—The repetition:ηָ ?φֵ ?ψαְּ ?ξִ ?χְ ?φֹ ?ςַ ?Χ, repeats in words what was repeatedly seen: “a court in the corner of the court, and again a court in the corner of the court” (as Hengst.), so that Ezekiel 46:22 first gives the exact number of four.—The being brought forth to the outer court is explained by its distinction from the inner, the priests’ court, against whose wall the cells and kitchens rested, as belonging to the sanctuary. Comp. Ezekiel 46:19. Ezekiel 46:22. These kitchens for the people are distinguished by the detailed description given from those formerly mentioned for the priests. Hengst. considers them: “as off-rooms of the chambers of the people in the sides of the court,” and translates χְ ?θֻ ?ψεֹ ?ϊδֲ ?φֵ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ: “smoking courts,” saying that the ascending smoke is the characteristic mark of these “buildings,” and asserting that the verb χָ ?θַ ?ψ, with all its derivatives, signifies in Hebrew only: to exhale, to smoke, etc. Gesenius assumes another root, χָ ?θַ ?ψ, “to bind,” “to close,” and understands: closed (partic. pass.) with walls and doors. This latter description would express as little as the other meanings, which Keil rightly rejects, and which the expression cannot have, such as “uncovered” (Klief.), “firm” (Hδv.), “pressed over” (Hitzig.), and the like. The description from the smoke has, on the other hand, something pictorial and emblematic, in so far as it might point to this, that in these kitchens meat to cook will never be wanting.—ξִ ?χְ ?φεֹ ?ςַ, plur. ιν—and εֹ ?ϊ—, is: corner, from χָ ?φַ ?ς, to “cut off.”—The Sept. and Vulgate omit ξְ ?ηֻ ?χְ ?φָ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ, the last word of the verse, and the Masoretes, by points placed over it, mark it as suspicious. Hengst. holds it to be “a kind of priestly proper name for those rooms (Hδv.: a peculiar technical term for: placed in the corner), which Ezekiel here brings forward as a fond reminiscence.” It is part. Hophal, and signifies: “cornered,” “a corner room,” as Hengstenberg says; according to Keil: “cornered off,” “cut off in corners” (apposition to the suffix in μְ ?ΰַ ?ψְ ?αַּ ?ςְ ?ϊָּ ?ν). Hδvernick observes that the word still depends upon ηֲ ?φֵ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ. Ezekiel 46:23. θεּ ?ψ is something on which one walks round. Keil translates: “a row of standing places was in it round about.” [Klief.: “a framework was in it round about.”] Evidently the range of cooking-places (ξְ ?αַ ?ωְּׁ ?μεֹ ?ϊ, literally: “which cause to cook,” partic. Piel), running below the court-walls (θִּ ?ιψָ ?δ) and along them, is meant to be described. [Keil: a tier of wall-work had several single tiers, under which the cooking-hearths were constructed. Hδv.: “the surrounding boundary-wall rises so high above the kitchens, that these are constructed below the wall.”] Ezekiel 46:24. αֵּ ?ιϊδַ ?ξְּ ?αַ ?ωְּׁ ?μִ ?ιν is in fact: the “kitchen-house,” but formally: the house where the cooks cook.—The ministers of the house, as formerly, are the mere Levites, in contradistinction from the priests.—“Not without reason is only the slain-offering mentioned (the name bearing reference to the form; earlier the name denoted the essence: Shelamim), in distinction from the sin and guilt-offerings to be prepared in the kitchens of the priests. Only with the slain-offerings, such offerings as are akin to common slaughtering, was a communion connected. The greater part fell to the offerers, and was consumed in the sacrificial meals. But the slain-offering was not allowed to be prepared by the people themselves” (Hengst.). HINTSOn Ch. 46 Ezekiel 46:1. “There is a time for prayer and a time for work. On work-days we are not to rest, as on the Sabbath. He who does not work ought not to eat, whatever his pretences are. The door to the Father, the Source of all grace, opens itself to us when the gracious light of the love of God again shines forth, as it often does after great darkness. The way to the Father, on which Christ preceded us when He prayed for us, now stands always open to us, for the Sabbath is eternal, and we see the door to the inner sanctuary of the temple: only in a figure through a glass do we see the glory of the Lord” (Heim-Hoff.).—At the door, but not at the altar.—The temporal power, moreover, ought, in reverence for what is sacred,—which is and ought to remain sacred to its subjects,—not to overstep the privileged position assigned to it, not to command or forbid when it has no authority for the one or the other.—“Princes and lords should abide in their calling” (Cr.).—“But the temporal power and teachers and preachers ought also to live in harmony with one another, and to assist one another in furthering the glory of God, 2 Chronicles 19:11” (W.). Ezekiel 46:3 sq. Prayer and diligent attendance on divine service are becoming alike for people and prince.—In the Old Covenant it is said: before the Lord; in the New Covenant: in the Lord. Ezekiel 46:8 sq. Every one has his assigned path under God’s guidance, and on it he should abide.—“God’s guidance demands quiet; where the foot itself makes a noise, the will of the eternal Father is exchanged for our own choice” (Zinzendorf).—“But many shall come from the north and from the south to worship in the Lord’s house, Matthew 8:11”(Starke).—“The influence of love shall extend into the whole world from the south to the north, so that they from the north and they from the south shall go to meet one another, in order to receive and embrace one another as brethren” (Berl. Bib.).—“He that will serve God must never go backward, but always forward, growing in grace, 2 Peter 3:18”(Starck).—“No one should go out of the church as he came into it; he should always take home with him something for his edification, Eccles. 4:17 [Ecclesiastes 5:1]; Acts 16:14” (Starke).—The prince has to go in the midst of his people, that his prerogative be not perverted into injustice; for the people do not exist for the sake of the prince, but the prince for the sake of the people.—“When magistrates and authorities give a good example to subjects and subordinates, that is a stronger motive than much teaching and exhortation, 2 Samuel 6:15” (Starke). Ezekiel 46:11 sq. Grace makes the heart free, and so also willing. Voluntariness is a measure of grace, as mercifulness is a sign that we ourselves shall obtain mercy.—“He who confines his prayers and devotions to Sundays and festivals does not yet know what it is to serve God, what it is always to pray (Luke 18:1) and to worship God in spirit and in truth. Daily ought we to exhort and arouse ourselves, that we fall not again into sin; daily ought the praise of God to be heard from our mouth, Hebrews 3:13” (Starke).—In every gift God looks on the giver’s heart: My son, give me thine heart.—A people that shall be pure willingness, the prospect held out in Psalms 110.—As God’s grace is new every morning, so also ought our devotion to Him to be renewed every morning.—The whole life of man ought to be a life consecrated to God.—“Our whole life should be a sacrifice, from morning to night, and next morning again” (Berl. Bib.).—The consecration of time.—Since Christ’s appearance the night has disappeared, and the day has come; there are now only morning sacrifices.—Watchman, what of the night? was a question of pre-Christian longing. Is there not yet light towards Hebron? was the daily question of the priest in the old temple.—“The whole section is of the deepest importance for us, inasmuch as it instructs us to live in the word, when God’s grace does not make itself known to us in the visible” (Hengst.). Ezekiel 46:16 sq. If the prince is understood to be the Messiah, then according to that view Christ’s gifts here to the children are different from those to servants, which are only temporary, and taken from them again !—“The year of freedom shall be ‘the day of revelation of righteous judgment,’ which is already exercised in secret. The hypocrites, who are condemned by the silent judgment of their heart, shall one day be manifest also to the world” (Heim-Hoff.).—“Rulers ought not to invade the rights of their subjects, 1 Kings 21:2 sq.” (Tόb. Bib.)—“He who is profuse in giving is (easily) compelled to take from others what belongs to them” (Hengst.).—“The kingdom of Christ is very different from an earthly one, for He supports His subjects, not His subjects Him, John 10:11” (Starck).—In Christ’s kingdom injustice has no formula, either socially or judicially.—“Spiritual things ought to be left in the spiritual order, and temporal in the temporal; confusion in this particular confuses the position of the people in other particulars also” (Heim-Hoff.). Ezekiel 46:19 sq. In the kingdom of God, as in the kingdom of nature, and in the full sense of the expression, everything has its own place. Only the things of men are in disorder, because they are sinners, and sin is disorder in every respect.—Servants of the Church should have the gift of distinguishing times and places, and above all, of discerning the spirits.—Consideration for the people, an important part of pastoral prudence.—To cook is to bring to a proper condition, so that the food tastes well and is agreeable; so ought also the truth to be prepared.—Is not homiletics a kind of sacred cookery?—“When teachers have rightly experienced whole some truths in their heart, then they understand also how to set them rightly before others, Matthew 13:52” (Starke).—“The same kind of food does not do for the simple and children and for grown men” (Berl. Bib.). ON CH. 40–46 1. Hδvernick rightly finds “the nervous and lofty unity” in the prophecies of Ezekiel “manifested in this section also.” “The visions of the prophet find here their fairest completion and perfect rounding off.” Already in the exposition (on Ezekiel 40:1 sq.) the harmony with the former part of Ezekiel’s prophecy has been remarked. Ezekiel 43:3 expressly refers back to Ezekiel 1, 8. The free conformity in expression between our chapters and the whole closing portion generally, and the earlier chapters, has been often proved (comp. Philippson, p. 1294). The proof is the more striking when we consider the complete difference of the subject. That we have a vision here too harmonizes not only with Ezekiel 1, 8, but in general with the prophetic character of Ezekiel, Ezekiel 8, 15, 17. The prophet has repeatedly hinted at this close of his book. Thus Ezekiel 11:16; Ezekiel 20:40; Ezekiel 36:38; Ezekiel 37:26 sq. The last passage in particular might be regarded as the text for Ezekiel 40 sq. The eighth and following chapters required by the necessity of the idea our conclusion of the book. 2. In regard to analogies in the other prophets, Ezekiel’s contemporaries, as we may well conceive, will chiefly come into consideration. Hence, above all, Ezekiel’s fellow-labourer Jeremiah. Jeremiah represents the restoration and renewal of Israel as a rebuilding of Jerusalem, Jeremiah 31:38 sq. (with this comp. in our prophet, Ezekiel 47:13 sq., Ezekiel 48). Jeremiah 33:18 is similar to Ezekiel 44:9 sq. Haggai 2:7 sq. follows entirely the thought here of a new temple, insisting on its glory in view of a meagre present. But still more analogous are the night-visions of Zechariah (Ezekiel 2:5 [1] sq., Ezekiel 4, Ezekiel 6:13 sq., Ezekiel 14). 3. The parallel between Isaiah and Ezekiel, as it stands in relation to the vision in Ezekiel 1 (p. 41), is not completed by citing Isaiah 60 as corresponding to the close of our book; but we shall have to seek the culminating point of Isaiah’s prophecy for the culmination of Ezekiel’s, in accordance with the office of this prophet to be the prophet of Jehovah’s holiness to obdurate Israel, —just as for the commencement Isaiah 6 is covered by Ezekiel 1—not so much in the close as in Ezekiel 53. The corresponding pendant to our closing chapters is the life-like description given there of the Messiah and His sacrifice of Himself. It is this self-sanctification of Jehovah through His servant Israel which in Isaiah corresponds to the self-glorification of Jehovah in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40 sq.) by means of the new sanctuary and the new nationality; and this, again, accords with Ezekiel’s office, to behold the glory of Jehovah in the misery of the exile. In this respect Ezekiel stands to Isaiah somewhat as Easter and Pentecost do to Good Friday. 4. The different views, especially regarding the vision of the temple, may be distinguished generally as subjective and objective. I. The views which derive the explanation of Ezekiel 40 sq. solely or chiefly from Ezekiel’s subjectivity: (1) Already Villalpandus saw everywhere here only reminiscences of Solomon’s temple and of Solomon’s era, and consequently a similar line of thought to that in Ezra 3:12. Similarly Grotius, only that he reconciled the differences between Ezekiel’s temple and that of Solomon by ascribing them to the temple at the time of its destruction, just as Bunsen refers in this connection to 2 Kings 16. According to both these expositors, Ezekiel traced out from reminiscences a pattern for the future restoration. Thus, according to Ewald, Ezekiel becomes “a prophetic lawgiver.” “Such an undertaking, quite unusual in the case of earlier prophets,” is explained from the “predominating thoughts and aspirations of the better class of those days for the restoration of the subverted kingdom.” “Ezekiel probably meditated long, with passionate longing and lively remembrance, on the institutions of the demolished temple, etc.; what appeared to him great and glorious became impressed upon his mind as a pattern, with which he compared the Messianic expectations and demands, etc., until at length the outline of the whole arrangement which he here writes down pressed itself upon him!” “Above all, he sketches the holy objects, temple and altar, with the utmost exactness and vividness, as if a spirit (!) impelled him, now when they were destroyed, at least to catch up their image in a faithful and worthy form for the redemption that will one day certainly come; so that he must have diligently instructed himself in these matters from the best written and oral sources” (!). “Thus it is quite in keeping with Ezekiel’s way of prophesying, that he introduces everything as if he had been borne in spirit into the restored and completed temple, accompanied throughout by a heavenly guide, and had learned exactly from him all the single parts of this unique building as to their nature and use.” The paragraph Ezekiel 47:1-12 is, in Ewald’s opinion, “from its great, all-embracing sense, quite adapted to bring to a close briefly and pithily all these presentiments!” “Yet when precepts more moral are to be given, or the perfected kingdom has to be described in its extent, reaching even beyond the temple, this assumed form (!) easily passes over into the simple prophetic discourse.” (2) While the foregoing view looks to realization, Hitzig, for example, entirely rejects the idea that Ezekiel “considered such things (as our chapters contain) possible, feasible, or probable, and relatively commanded and prescribed them.” “One does not or did not reflect that the prophet’s calling was to express the demands of the idea, indifferent in the first instance about their realization.” All is pure fancy, a mere castle-in-the-air, a kind of “Platonic sketch,” as Herder expresses himself. The self-criticism of this view of our chapters can hardly be more suitably given than when Hitzig continues: “Inasmuch as this or that could be set in order otherwise than he imagines, he would not in regard to plans and proposals have resisted obstinately, but would have known how to distinguish the unessential of the execution from the essential of the thing itself. He sketches the future in the form he must wish it to take, in which it really would have the fairest appearance. If the reality falls short of the image, then the idea is defectively realized; but the fault lies in the reality, not in the idea, and Ezekiel is not responsible for it.” This, moreover, is merely what already Doederlein and others have held with respect to the closing portion of our book. Similarly Herder: “Ezekiel’s manner is to paint an image entire and at length; his mode of conception appears to demand great visions, figures written over on all sides, even tiresome, difficult, symbolical acts, of which his whole book is full. Israel in his wandering upon the mountains of his dispersal, among other tongues and peoples, had need of a prophet such as this one was, etc. So also as regards this temple. Another would have sketched it with soaring figures in lofty utterances; he does so in definite measurements. And not only the temple, but also appurtenances, tribes, administration, land, etc. How far has Israel always, so far as depended on his own efforts, remained below the commands, counsels, and promises of God!” (3) Bφttcher has attempted to combine both views, and after him Philippson, who expresses himself to the following effect: “Ezekiel the prophet, sunk in himself, brooding over matters in the distance and in solitude, had not, like Jeremiah, upon whom the immediate reality pressed, viewed the occurrences simply as punishment of defection and degeneracy, but was conscious also of their inward signification, which came to him in the appearance of a vision. Hence he represented the destruction of the temple as a suspension of the relation of revelation between God and Israel; and so much the more necessary was it to represent the restoration of that same relation as the return of God into the restored sanctuary. Now, from the peculiar character of Ezekiel, this necessarily had to assume a form at once ideal and real,—ideal in its entirety as something future, real as individual and special, matter of fact in its appearance.” As the “indubitable motive of the prophet,” the following is given: “to keep alive in the exiles in the midst of Babylonian idolatry the idea of the one temple, and the priestly institute consecrated to it, as the centre of the religion of the one God; and at the return into Palestine to confirm the life of the people in their calling, by the removal of all elements of strife, and by approximation to the Mosaic state of things.” Hengstenberg’s view is surprisingly near the above one; he says: “With the exception of the Messianic section in Ezekiel 47:1-12, the fulfilment of all (!) the rest of the prophecy belongs to the times immediately after the return from the Chaldean exile. So must every one of its first hearers and readers have understood it. Jeremiah, whom Ezekiel follows throughout, had prophesied the restoration of the city and temple 70 years after the beginning of the Chaldean servitude, falling in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. Thirty-two years had already elapsed. Forty years after the devastation of Egypt (Ezekiel 29:13), the nations visited by the Chaldeans shall get back to their former state. According to Ezekiel 11:16, the restoration is to follow in a brief space after the destruction of the temple. We have before us a prophecy for which it is essential (!) to give truth and poetry (! !), which contains a kernel of real thoughts, yet does not present them naked, but clothed with flesh and blood, that they may be a counterpoise to the sad reality, because they fill the fancy, that fruitful workshop of despair, with bright (!) images, and thus make it an easier task to live in the word at a time when all that is visible cries aloud, Where is now thy God? The incongruity between the prophecy of Ezekiel and the state of things after the exile, vanishes at once by distinguishing between the thoughts and their clothing, and if we can rightly figure to ourselves the wounds for which the healing plaster is here presented, and at the same time the mental world of the priest (Ezekiel), and the materials given in the circumstances surrounding him, for clothing the higher verities which he had to announce to the people.” II. The views which above all look to and keep hold of the objectivity of the divine inspiration of Ezekiel. The very regard which must, in one way or other, be paid to the circumstances under which the people for whom, and the Babylonian exile in which, Ezekiel prophesied, objectivizes in some measure his subjectivity, so that not all the views hitherto cited of our chapters and the ones that follow are to be designated as purely subjective; the properly objective, however, will be, that “the hand of Jehovah was upon him,” that he was brought “in visions of God” to the land of Israel. Here the distinction is drawn by his own hand between the prophet of Israel and the fanciful Jewish priest; and not only this, but the unavoidable and irreconcilable alternative presents itself: either Ezekiel was a man of God, or a deceiver, for whom the fact that he had deceived himself also with assumed divine objectivity were no excuse, but would only be his self-condemnation. The case of Ezekiel, for the sake of truth, is too solemn for thinking of “poetic clothing” in the case before us. The subjective for the form before us, is to keep in mind when considering it what that form is. It has pleased God to speak to us through men. If we take full account of the national peculiarity of Israel in general during the whole old covenant, and of the peculiar personality in the case of our vision here, that is, that Ezekiel is the priest-prophet, that he above all other prophets is, as Umbreit says, a “born symbolist” ( “in the temple which he erects he makes known his greatness as a symbolist, as well by what he says as by what he passes over in silence”),—if we concede to Umbreit the “surprising skill in popularizing instruction” which he observes in Ezekiel, we shall have to accept as the ultimate ground why Israel was the mediator of the world’s salvation, and Ezekiel was chosen to behold the temple of the future, divine wisdom and its purpose for the world, that is, the objective κατ̓ἐξοχην above everything subjective. In accordance with this principle, we have to judge of (1) the view objectivized in this sense of a model for the rebuilding of the temple after the return from the exile, the supporters of which assume a building-plan “issued under divine authority,” given by Jehovah through the prophet. Although there is a resemblance between Exodus 25:9; Exodus 25:40 and Ezekiel 40:4, yet it is not said to Ezekiel regarding Israel: “according to all that I show thee, the pattern of the dwelling, etc., even so shall ye make it;” the prophet is only to “convey,” announce (πָ ?βַ ?γ) all that he sees to the house of Israel. From this circumstance, and not because the reality fell short of the idea (Hitzig, Herder), or, as Philippson adduces here, “the similar fate of so many Mosaic precepts,” the fact is explained that the post-exile temple was built without any regard to our vision. Only the fundamental reference to Solomon’s temple, which in general obtains in Ezekiel also, meets us in Ezra 3:12. This fact, the more remarkable considering the nearness of time, shows that Ezekiel 40:4, soon after it was written, and when fully known, was not regarded as a divine building-specification. We do not need, therefore, to express, as Hengst., “the obvious impossibility of erecting a building according to the specifications here given.” The circumstance that the building materials are not given has at least not prevented the temple of Ezekiel from being, with more or less success, constructed and fashioned after his statements. Bunsen says that “the temple here forms a very easily realized, congruous whole, of which an exact outline may be made, as the prophet also has evidently done.” Umbreit, too, holds this latter view. And although we have to do not with an architect but with a prophet, yet nothing stands in the way of our believing that the subjectivity of Ezekiel was preeminently qualified for this vision, from the fact that he possessed architectural capacity” (Introd. § 7). (2) The symbolical view. It corresponds generally to the character of Holy Writ. (Comp. Lange, Rev. Introd. p. 11.) In particular it pays due regard to the law of Moses, to the part of it relating to worship, the subject here. Especially when the whole worship of Israel is concentrated in the temple, a symbolical view respecting a vision thereof will be quite in place. Thereby only its due right is given to this objective, to the divine idea, in the shape which it has above all assumed in Israelitish worship. The symbolical character, moreover, is specially appropriate for the prophetic writings. As has already been often said and pointed out, the symbolical predominates in Ezekiel; and as to these concluding chapters, Hδvernick adduces, as indicating their general character, the description of the circuit of the new temple (Ezekiel 42:15 sq.), the representation of the entrance, etc. of the divine glory (Ezekiel 43:1 sq.), the river (Ezekiel 47:1 sq. etc.), and observes that “it is just such passages that form the conclusion to the previous description, and hence cast a light on it.” Comp. on Ezekiel 43:10 sq. But everything architectonic is not a symbol, although everything of that nature will indeed primarily relate to the building to be erected, and will thereby at the same time in some way serve the idea of the whole. This character comes out clearly even in individual statements of number, yet all such measurements are not therefore to be interpreted symbolically. Nay, as the exposition shows, there are here bare numbers, resisting every attempt to trace them back to the idea. It is sufficient in respect to the numbers, that (comp. Umbreit, p. 259 sq.) 4, as “signature not only of regularity but also of the revelation of God in space,” e.g. in the quadrangle of the temple; 3, “the signature of the divine,” e.g. in the sets of three gates; 10, “perfection complete in itself,” occurring often; likewise the “sacred number” 7; and the number 12 in the tables for preparing the offerings (Ezekiel 40), represent symbolism. (On the symbolism of numbers, comp. Lange on Rev. Introd. p. 14.) Umbreit rightly maintains: “It is a symbolical temple, notwithstanding the arid and dry description, in which only exact specifications of the number of cubits and the apparently most insignificant calculations and measurings occur;” as he says, “quite in keeping with the poverty of the immediately succeeding age and the dignity of the most significant inwardness.” (3) The Messianic view (for which comp. Lange on Kings, p. 60 sq.) is only the taking full advantage of and applying the symbolic view in general. Symbol and type, emblem and pattern, must mutually interpenetrate one another in a law like that of Israel. What separates Israel from the heathen is its law; what qualifies Israel for the whole world is its promise. But now, because of sin, the law has come in between the promise and the fulfilment; that sin becoming the more powerful as transgression may make manifest for faith the grace which alone is still more powerful, and that consequently the necessity of the promise should be the more apparent; that is, the pedagogy of the law (and especially of its ethical part) to Christ. Thus the law of Israel is the theocratic expression of Israel, the servant of God, as he ought to be, and hence prefigures the servant of Jehovah who is the fulfilling of the law, as He is the personal fulfilling of Israel, inasmuch as in Him who was delivered for our transgressions, and raised again for our δικαιωσις, Israel after the Spirit is represented; so that here out of the law relating to worship rise up, as on the one hand sacrifice and the priesthood, so on the other the concentration of the whole of worship in the temple, this parable of the future, with reference to which Christ, John 2, gives the σημειον: Destroy (λυσατε) this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (ἐγερω), saying this of the temple of His body; as also the disciples remembered when He had risen from the dead, and as the accusation against Him ran (Matthew 26:61). Accordingly the law, and especially the temple and its service, is σκιανἐχωντωνμελλοντων: the future σωμα is given in the σωματουΧριστου (σωμαδεκατηρτισωμου, Hebrews 10). “This reference to the future,” says Ziegler (in his thoughtful little work on the “historical development of divine revelation”), “is the most dynamical among all the references of the law; its significance for its own time is so weak and unimportant, that it seems to exist solely for the sake of the future, although its office is the opposite of the office of the New Testament, which is formed and abiding in the hearts of men (διακονιατηςδικαιοσυνης, τουτνευματος); still it was a sensible type, a strongly marked and distinctly stamped shadow of the coming substances, and yet, moreover, a veil which concealed it.” What has been said shows the typical signification of the vision of Ezekiel, in which the symbolical view of it is completed, and the pedagogic and providential necessity of that form borrowed from the legal worship in which it is enshrined. Here is more than what (as Hengstenberg can say) “suffices to employ the fancy.” For the anointed one is τελοςτουνομου. But as the Messianic view of our chapters is thus justified by the symbolic view, when we have taken into account the law, particularly the law of worship in Israel, so likewise the already (Doct. Reflec. 1) noted connection of Ezekiel 40 sq. with the previous chapters, especially with Ezekiel 37:26 sq. (p. 351), yields the same result, as also the position after Ezekiel 38, 39 and the relation to this prophecy will have to be taken into consideration. What holds good of Eze 37:26 sq. will also be a hint for our chapters. But even the Talmudists saw themselves compelled (principally because of the treatment of the law of Moses, to be spoken of presently) to acknowledge “that the exposition of this portion would be first given in Messianic times,” as the “best” (according to Philippson) Jewish expositors recognised here “the type of a third temple.” The saying of Jesus in John ii. possibly alluded to the exegetical tradition of the Jews. Hδvernick accommodates as follows: “The shattered old theocratic forms rather than new ones were above all cognate to the priestly mind of Ezekiel;” so “he sees nothing perish of that which Jehovah has founded for eternity; those forms beam before him revivified, animated with fresh breath, and lit up in the splendour of true glory; he recognises their full realization as coming in first in Messianic times.” As errors are still committed, e.g. by Schmieder, in the symbolizing of particulars, so the Messianic typology of a Cocceius has deserved, although only in part, the anathema on “mystical allegories,” which above all modern criticism utters; for our defect in understanding in respect of many particulars will always have to be conceded. The Christian idea, however, the Old Testament typical symbolizing of which we have here to expound, is not only the idea of Christ, but also the idea of the Christian Church, the kingdom of God in Christ. If the resurrection of the Anointed One comes into consideration in the first respect, so in the latter does the consummation of the kingdom of grace, after its last affliction, into the kingdom of glory; comp. Revelation 21:22. The one is as eschatological in the wider, that is, christological in the narrower sense, as the other is eschatological in the narrower, or christological in the wider sense. By the translating of our passage into the higher key of John’s Apocalypse, the relation of Ezekiel 40 sq. to Ezekiel 38, 39 must be so much the more evident. Comp. Doct. Reflec. on xxxviii. and xxxix. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ (2) The Holy Land and the Holy City (Ezekiel 47, 48). Ch. 47. 1 And he brought me back to the opening of the house, and, behold, waters issued from below the threshold of the house eastward: for the front [the face] of the house is toward the east, and the waters came down 2 from under, from the right side of the house, south of the altar. And he brought me forth the way of the north gate, and made me go round the way without to the outer gate, the way of the eastward-looking [gate]; and, behold,3 waters came purling out from the right side. When the man went forth to the east, there was a measuring-line in his hand. And he measured a thousand cubits, and made me pass through in the water—waters to the ankles 4 And he measured a thousand, and made me pass through in the water—waters to the knees [they reached]. And he measured a thousand, and made me pass 5 through—waters to the loins. And he measured a thousand—a river [was it then] which I could not pass through, because the waters rose up, waters of swimming, a river that could not be waded. 6And he said unto me, Hast thou seen, son of man ? And he led me, and brought me back to the bank 7 of the river. When I returned, behold, on the bank of the river very many 8 trees, on this side and on that. And he said unto me, These waters, going out as they do to the east boundary, then flow down over the steppe, and come to the sea, brought forth [they come] to the sea, and the waters are healed. 9 And it cometh to pass that every living thing which shall creep, whithersoever the double stream shall come, shall live; and very many fish are there, for these waters come thither, and they shall be healed; and everything 10 liveth to which the river cometh. And it cometh to pass that fishers shall stand on it [shall place themselves over it], from En-gedi even unto En-eglaim there shall be a spreading-place for nets; as to their kind, their fishes shall be as 11 the fishes of the great sea, very many. Its mire [its swamps] and its pools [holes], 12 these shall not be healed; they are given to salt. And [yet] on the river there shall rise up, on its bank, on this side and on that, every kind of tree for food; its leaf [foliage] shall not fade, nor its fruit cease; according to its months it bears first-fruits, for its waters flow forth from the sanctuary; and its fruit is for food and its leaf [foliage] for healing. 13Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: The territory itself, the land which ye shall take to you for an inheritance, 14 [shall be] for the twelve tribes of Israel; for Joseph [two] portions. And ye inherit it, every one as his brother, which I lifted up My hand to give to 15 your fathers; and [so] this land falleth to you for inheritance. And this is the border of the land on the north side, from the great sea on the way to Hethlon, to come to Zedad; 16Hamath, Berothah, Sibraim, which is between the border of Damascus and the border of Hamath; Hazar the middle, which is on the border of Hauran. 17And the border from the sea is from Hazar-Enon, the border of Damascus, and [in the] north northward there is the border 18 of Hamath; and [this] as the north side. And as to the east side, from between Hauran, and Damascus, and Gilead, and the land of Israel, is the Jordan; from the border ye shall measure to the east sea; and [this] as 19 the east side. And as to the south side, to the right; from Tamar to the waters of Meriboth-Kadesh is the inheritance [to the river] to the great sea; and 20 [this] as the side to the right southward. And with respect to the west side, the great sea from the border to over against the way to Hamath; this is the 21 west side. And ye divide this land for you according to the tribes of Israel. 22 And it cometh to pass that ye shall allot [divide] it as an inheritance to you and to the strangers sojourning in your midst, who have begotten children in your midst; and they are to you as the native among the children of Israel; 23 with you shall they share in the inheritance among the tribes of Israel. And it cometh to pass, that in the tribe with which the stranger sojourns, there shall ye give him his inheritance. Sentence of the Lord Jehovah. Ezekiel 47:1. Sept.: Κ. εἰσηγαγενμεἐπιταπροθυρα ... ἀποτουκλιτουςτουθεξιουἀπονοτουἐπιτοθυσιαστηριον. Ezekiel 47:2. ...τοὑδωρκατεφερετο—Vulg.: … aquζ redundantes— Ezekiel 47:3. κκωθςἐξοδοςἀνδροςἐξεναντιας. Κ. μητρον ... κ. διηγθενἐν ... ὑδωρἀφεσεως. Vulg.: … et traduxit me per aquam— Ezekiel 47:4. … κ. διηλθεν ... ὑδωρἑωςτωνμηρων ... ἑωςὀσφυος—Ezekiel 47:5. … χειμαῤῥους, κ. οὐκἠδυνατο ... ἐξυβριζεν ... ὑδωρὡςῥοιζοςχειμαῤῥουὁοὐδιαβησοντα. Another reading: μΰιολμ, Syr., Arabs.) Ezekiel 47:6. Sept.: … ἐπιτοχειλοςτουποταμου (7) ἐντ. ἐπιστροφημου. Ezekiel 47:8. … εἰςτηνΓαλιλαιαντηνπροςἀςατολα ... ἐπιτηνἈραβιαν . . . θαλασσανἐπιτοὑδωρτηςἐκβολης— Vulg.: … quζ egrediuntur ad tumulos sabuli orientalis … ad plana deserti, intrabunt mare et exibunt—(Another reading: δβָ ?μιμδ, Syr., Chald., Arabs, in hexaplis Origenes.) Ezekiel 47:9. … πασαψυχητωνζωωντωνἐκζεοντων . . . ὁποταμος . . . ὑγιασεικ. ζησεταιπαν . . . ἐκειζησεται. Ezekiel 47:10. … ψυγμοςσαγηνωνἐσται, κατʼ ? αὐτηνἐσταικ. ὡςοἰ ?—Vulg.: … plurimζ species erunt piscium ejus, sicut—(Another reading: γιβιν.) Ezekiel 47:11. … ἐντηδιεκβοληαὐτουκ. ἐντ. ἐπιατροφηαὐτουκ. ἐντ. ὑπεραρειαὐτου—Vulg.: In littoribus autem … in salinas dabuntur. (Another reading: εααΰιε, et in redditibus suis. Sept., Syr.) Ezekiel 47:12. … πανξυλονβρωσιμονοὐμπσλσιωθηἐπʼ ? αὐτου, οὐδεμηἐκλειπηὁκαρποςαὐτουτηςκαινοτνοςαὐτουπρωτοβολησει . . . κ. ἡἀναβασιςαὐτωνεἰςὑγειαν. Vulg.: … afferet primitiva— Ezekiel 47:13. … Ταυταταὁριακκτακληρονομησετετης, ταιςδωδεκα . . . προσθεσιςσχοινισματος. Vulg.: Hic est terminus in quo possidebitis terram in … quia Joseph duplicem funiculum habet. (Another reading: ζδ, βιΰ.) Ezekiel 47:15. … τηςμεγαληςτ. κκταβαινουσηςκ. πεισχιζουσης, τηςεἰσοδουἩμαθελδαμ. Ezekiel 47:16. Μαωσθηρας, Ἐφραμηλειαμ, ἀναμεσοντ. ὁριωνἨμαθ . . . Δαμασκου, Εὐνανκ. τουεὐναν, αἱεἰσινἐπανω—Vulg.: … et confinium Emath, domus Tichon quζ est— Ezekiel 47:17. … ἀποτ. αὐληςτουΑἱναν. (Another reading: ζΰϊτΰϊ.) Ezekiel 47:18. … ἀναμεσοντηςὨρκνιτιδος . . .ὁἸορδανηςθιοριζειἐπιτ. θαλασσαντ. προςἀνατολαςΦοινικωνος—Vulg. … de medio Auran … Jordanis disterminans ad mare orientale; metiemini etiam plagam—(Another reading: ζΰϊτΰϊΣςγδιν, etiam, Ezekiel 47:19.) Ezekiel 47:19. … προςνοτονκ. λοβαἀποΘαιμανκ. ΦοινικωοςἑωςὑδατοςΜαριμωθΚαδης, παρεκτεινονἐπι—Vulg.: Plaga autem australis meridiana … aquas contradictions Cades, et torrens usque—(Another reading: ξψιαַ ?ϊ, Vulg., Syr., Chald.) Ezekiel 47:20. Τουτοτομεροςνοτοςκ. λιΨ, τουτοτομεροςτηςθαλασσηςτ. μεγαληςδιοριζει, ἑωςκατεναντιτηςεἰσοδουἨμαθ, ἑωςεἰσοδουαὐτου—Vulg.: … a confinio per directum, donec venias—(Another reading: εΰϊτΰϊΞιν.) Ezekiel 47:22. Sept: Βαλειτεαὐτηνἐνκληρω . . .προσηλυτοις . . . μεθ’ ὑμωςφαγονταιἐνκληρονομια—Vulg.: … vobiscum divident possessionem— Ezekiel 47:23. … ἐνφυληπροσηλυτωνἑντοιςπροσηλυτοιςμετ’ κὐτων. Ἐκειδωσετε . . .αὐτοις— REMARKSAs the entrance of the glory of the God of Israel (Ezekiel 43, 44) forms the centre for the first section of this closing vision of the glory of Jehovah’s kingdom, namely, for the temple and its service, so the waters of life from the temple give the key-note for the second section,—the holy land and the holy city,—and at the same time furnish the interpretation of the second and there by of the first section. Ezekiel 47:1-12. The Waters of Life. NOTE [“It is necessary to take the first part of this chapter apart from the second, which relates to a different subject, the new division of the land, and which ought to have formed part of Ezekiel 48. The vision contained in the first twelve verses of this chapter is a thing by itself, although it stands in close connection with what precedes, and springs naturally out of it. The prophet has been exhibiting, by means of a variety of detailed representations, the blessed results to the Lord’s people of His re-occupying His temple. The way now stands open to them for a free and elevating communion with the Lord; and the work proceeds, on their part, by the regular employment of all spiritual privileges and the faithful discharge of holy ministrations. God is duly glorified in His people, and His people are blessed in the enjoyment of His gracious presence and the benefit of His fatherly administration. But what is to be the nature of the kingdom in this new form, in respect to the world without? Is it to be of a restrictive or expansive character? Is the good it discloses and provides for a regenerated people to be confined, as of old, to a select spot, or is it to spread forth and communicate itself abroad for the salvation of the world at large? In an earlier prophecy (Ezekiel 17), when speaking of the future Head of the divine kingdom under the image of a little twig, plucked from the top of a cedar in Lebanon, and planted upon a lofty mountain in Israel, the prophet had represented this not only as growing and taking root there, but as winning the regard of all the trees of the field, and gathering under its ample foliage beasts of every kind and birds of every wing. The kingdom of God, as thus exhibited, seemed to carry a benign and diffusive aspect toward the entire world. And should it be otherwise now, when presented under the different but more detailed and variegated form of a spiritual house, with the living God Himself for the glorious Inhabitant, and a royal priesthood for its ministering servants? No; it is for humanity, mankind as a whole, that God was thus seen dwelling with men; and though everything presents itself, according to the relations then existing, as connected with a local habitation and circumscribed bounds, yet the good in store was to be confined within no such narrow limits; it was to flow forth with healthful and restorative energy, even upon the waste and dead places of the earth, and invest them with the freshness of life and beauty. “This fine idea is presented by the prophet under a pleasing natural image. He is brought back by the angel from the outer court, where he was standing, to the door of the temple on the east; and there he sees a stream of water gushing from beneath the threshold, and running in the direction of south-east, so as to pass the altar on the south. He is then brought outside by the north gate, and carried round to where the waters appeared beyond the temple-grounds, that he might witness the measurements that were to be made of them, and the genial effects they produced.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 489–491.—W. F.] The bringing back of the prophet in Ezekiel 47:1 is explained from the circumstance that he had tarried (Ezekiel 46:21) in the outer court; latterly, at the sacrificial kitchens for the people. The opening of the house is the temple gate, where the entrance into the holy place of the temple opens.—ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ stands first by itself, both times parallel to each other, to describe the very first impression, namely, that the waters (Hδv.: “in particular, living spring water is often in Scripture a symbol of the divine blessings, Isaiah 41:17 sq., Ezekiel 44:3”) came forth from below, and so did not pour down from the heavens, but issued from the depth of the sacred foundation upon the mountain; and this is without doubt to be thought of in connection with the filling of the house with the glory of Johovah (Ezekiel 43, 46). What Tacitus observes (Hist. v. 12) about “a never-drying fountain, whole mountains hollowed out below the surface, and ponds and cisterns for keeping the rain water;” or when Robinson does not doubt that there is in the rock “an artificial well at a depth of some 80 feet below the Haram,”—all this serves for understanding the prophet only by way of contrast;—he means and intends to describe nothing of the kind. [W. Kraft (Topographie von Jerusalem) thinks that the prophetic contrast refers to the spring known only to the priests as hidden, and whose water served only for the outward cleansing of the people.]—The ξִ ?ωְּׂ ?ϊַּ ?οδַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊ that follows subjoins the more exact definition of the first ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ, as: below the threshold of the door of the temple, ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ without a μ, so that we have to seek the fountain-head not at this threshold, but farther in in the house.—The reason for saying eastward is the “eastern” position of the temple front; the waters which issued from below the house flowed toward the place where the glory of the Eternal had entered the house. Even Hitzig’s dictum, which makes χָ ?γִ ?ιξָ ?δ to mean: “in the east,” does not destroy the very expressive causal nexus of the two sections of these concluding chapters of Ezekiel; but W. Neumann acutely observes: “The circumstance that the water flows east appears significant to the seer, and yet again, on the other hand, natural; for, says he, the front of the house is toward the east. According to Ezekiel 47:12, the spring is the bearer of the mysteries of the sanctuary, and consequently the means of bearing along its ideal substance; and to this the τָּ ?πִ ?ιν [properly: ‘the constantly changing multiform aspects or manifestations of the soul through the exterior, the complex unity of which we call the countenance,’ Stier] corresponds; because the soul of the temple looks to the east, the gushing stream flows in the same direction.”—This already indicates the farther course of the water as to its direction immediately after its gushing forth under the threshold of the door of the temple. But before treating of this direction, mention is again made of this so characteristic gushing forth. While, however, after the first ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ, to avoid repeating the ξ before ξִ ?τְ ?ϊַּ ?ο, it is merely said: ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊξִ ?τְ ?ϊַּ ?οδַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊ, there now follows after the second ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ the more exact statement: ξִ ?λֶּ ?ηֶ ?σδַ ?αַּ ?ιִ ?ϊΧ, from the “shoulder” of the house, i.e. the right one. ξִ ?ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊ means here neither: in the south = beneath (Judges 7:8), which is sufficiently expressed by ξִ ?πֶּ ?βֶ ?α, nor: downwards (Hitzig), which is sufficiently expressed by ιֹ ?ψְ ?γִ ?ιν What is meant to be described is a stream of water flowing from the temple, not one conducted into the temple; hence the brook Etham cannot be supposed, from which Lightfoot brings the water by means of subterranean channels for washing the victims and cleansing the house. (Comp. also the combination of Judah Leo in Lundius, die alten jόd. Heiligth.) Dereser infers from ιֹ ?ψְ ?γִ ?ιν that the fountain “fell into the earth on the south side of the altar of burnt-offering in the court of the priests, and flowed on under it until it reappeared outside of the courts of the temple.” ιָ ?ψַ ?γ is employed to accord both with Ezekiel 47:8, and also in general with, the view current in Israel, according to which that which tends towards the abode of the Highest ascends, and hence that which comes out from it will descend. Keil: “because the temple lay higher than the inner court.”—δַ ?ιְ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ιϊ. After the repeatedly marked eastern direction, there can be no doubt which right side is meant; a person looking to the east has the south on his right, as also ξִ ?πֶּ ?βֶ ?α plainly indicates. This ξִ ?πֶּ ?βֶ ?α has its signification in reference to the altar of burnt-offering, which stood before the porch of the temple (Ezekiel 40:47): μַ ?ξִּ ?ζְ ?αֵּ ?η, the right (south) side of the house, the south part of the east side. The fact that the water issued “from the south end of the threshold,” Hengst. explains from the circumstance that “the altar of burnt-offering lay immediately before the east door of the sanctuary; the water must therefore issue not from the middle of the threshold, if it was not to meet with an immediate hindrance; it must first come forth where the altar no longer stood in the way.” This is quite natural. Neumann speaks of “the prominence given to the right side as the side of good fortune and power.” He says: “If even in the feasts of the Bedouins the cupbearer must hand the cup to the drinker from the right, to prevent complaint of want of respect, how could that which was here commanded by a heavenly hand for healing (Ezekiel 47:8) come from another quarter?” [Klief.: “But the temple had two thresholds, one before the flight of steps at the door of the fore-porch, and one at the west end of the porch, before the temple gate. If, then, Ezekiel 47:1 speaks in the outset of the door of the temple, that shows us that we have to understand the latter threshold. If the temple is the body, and its fore-porch the head, then its right shoulder is in the angle which the south wall of the temple porch forms with the east wall of the temple. The threshold of the door of the temple abutted with its south end on this corner, and thence under the threshold the fountain gushed out and ran down into the inner court.”] “The water,” says Hδv., “comes from the sanctuary;” that is to say, “it is the fulness of blessing which is poured out over the community from the new manifestation of God. Without this going before, the people cannot serve the Lord in the new manner; and the service of God, again, is itself a grace and a gift from Him. If the fountain proceeding from God is simply a testimony to His revelation of Himself, then it cannot be a mere material fountain.” Ezekiel 47:2. In the court, surrounded with buildings and walls, Ezekiel cannot descry the farther course of the waters. For this he is brought forth through the north gate, for the outer east gate is always shut, and to go out through the south gate the prophet would be obliged to cross over the waters. [Neumann infers, from comparing Ezekiel 40:35; Ezekiel 44:4, that the guide had a preference for the north gate (but see Ezekiel 46:9), and seeks the reason in the significance of the north in the prophecies.] He proceeds on the outside along the wall of the outer court, the way to the east gate, as the outer gate is more exactly designated. [Neumann erroneously, because against the prophet’s uniform mode of expression, refers the epithet eastward-looking to the way.] The thrice repeated γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ thus emphasizes and depicts the circuit which Ezekiel had to take, because the aim of the prophet’s going—the regaining a view of the waters—is the main matter. Whether the waters flowed forth over or under the courts is not expressly stated; at all events they ran under the surrounding walls, and doubtless under the stone pavement of the outer court.—εְ ?δִ ?πֵּ ?δΞξַ ?ιִ ?νresumes verbally, when the waters were seen again, the εְ ?δִ ?πֵּ ?δΞξַ ?ιִ ?ν of Ezekiel 47:1, so that the ξַ ?ιִ ?ν without the article occasions no difficulty whatever; no other waters can be imagined than those which the prophet had seen before.—ξְ ?τַ ?λִּ ?ιν (Piel particip. of τָּ ?λָ ?δ) only in this passage, thus a unique and not less pictorial expression. Ges.: “to trickle;” and Umbreit adduces its affinity with αָּ ?λָ ?δ, so that he gets “weeping” waters, which would portray such an “insignificant commencement of the issue” as does not harmonize with Ezekiel 47:1. How can that be thought of as trickling here which has already flowed through the courts? The affinity of the expression with αָּ ?χַ ?χ, “to pour out,” likewise observed by Gesenius, would lead to a signification such as: to gush out. Hitzig goes back to τָּ ?λַ ?κ, a word which does not exist; and Meier to αָּ ?λַ ?κ, “to burst forth” (?). Hengst thinks of τַּ ?κְ “a bottle,” and supposes a “gurgling,” like the “sound which the emptying bottle makes,” which, however, does not correspond to the “character of fulness and livingness” which, according to him, the waters in themselves must have; he translates, indeed: “gushed out.” Neumann assumes a radical signification: “to break up,” “to set free;” hence: τָּ ?λָ ?δ, “to break forth.” To translate it with Keil: “to purl,” very probably comes nearest the figure.—ξִ ?οΞδַ ?λָּ ?ϊֵ ?σδַ ?ιְ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ιϊ; Hitzig: “not the south side of the whole temple-circuit, but: the southern half of the east front;” Neum.: “on the beholder’s right hand, when he has come out here from the north;” Hengst.: “the right side is here also the south-east, the south side of the east gate, where the water comes forth only because it has taken its rise oh the south-east side of the temple;” Klief.: “the angle which the eastern outer gate formed with the wall of the outer court is meant.” At all events this is meant to be expressed, that the waters which Ezekiel here saw again were the waters which came from the sanctuary. Ezekiel 47:3. Hengstenberg translates: “When the man went forth to the east with the measuringline in his hand, he measured a thousand cubits,” etc. Ezekiel’s guide is, in distinction from Ezekiel 47:2 (εַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?υִ ?ιΰֵ ?πִ ?ι), now considered by himself(αְּ ?υֵ ?ΰϊΞδָ ?ΰִ ?ιωׁ). He had χָ ?ε (Ezekiel 40:3 : τָּ ?ϊִ ?ιμ)—from χָ ?εָ ?δ, according to Gesenius: “to twist;” according to Meier: “to bring together”—in his hand, which is remarked because of what follows, where not merely the farther course of the waters, but still more their peculiarities during the course, are set forth. Following the waters in an eastern direction, the man measured a thousand cubits.—ξֵ ?ιΰַ ?τְ ?ρָ ?ιִ ?ν give the experience of the prophet, whom the man makes to wade in the water from one bank to the other; hence it is not appositional to αַּ ?ξַּ ?ιִ ?ν, but an independent clause, the meaning of which many attempts have been made to distort, when yet it must contain a statement corresponding to the following increments. Kimchi, making use of Gen 47:15, interprets it: “water of vanishing” = little water. The dual form: ΰַ ?τְ ?ρָ ?ιִ ?ν, certainly does not refer to an abstraction, but, as uniformly, denotes things paired naturally or artificially; in the connection here, without doubt, a corporeal duality, but not, as Genesius: “foot-soles” (“shallow water which only wets the soles”); against which Hitzig justly observes that the water reached to the foot-soles in the very beginning. ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν is not exactly the same as τַּ ?ν, that is, “extension,” flat of the hand, and hence also flat of the foot, foot-sole, but ΰַ ?τְ ?νָ ?ιִ ?ν rather suggests λֻּ ?ϊֹּ ?πֶ ?ϊτַּ ?ρִּ ?ιν, a garment extended so as to reach to the ankles. [Neumann thinks that “waters of the foot-soles” probably were waters of only the depth of the sandals, which the prophet had put off(!) in the court of the priests, and again put on; and that, in conformity with the phrase: ΰַ ?τְ ?ρֵ ?ιΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ, we cave to think of the two ends, the two lower extremities of the body, that is, the feet: waters of the extremities were waters which scarcely covered the feet.]—αָּ ?ΰַ ?ξָּ ?δ, measured by the measure, which was a cubit-measure. Ezekiel 47:4. After the second measuring of a thousand cubits, i. e. of distance along the course of the waters, the result of the waters becoming always deeper is ξַ ?ιִ ?ναִּ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?ιִ ?ν, an ungrammatical form, so much the more striking, as we have the stat. constr. ξֵ ?ι before and after. See Hitzig’s explanation, which, however, is a mere conjecture, while the supposition of a separate clause (waters, to the knee they reach) is easier, and at the same time more emphatic. After a third measuring, we have waters to the loins. But after the fourth measuring of another thousand cubits, i. e. in all, at a distance of four thousand cubits, it is Ezekiel 47:5—a river! πַ ?ηַ ?μ looks like an exclamation of Ezekiel’s surprise on seeing what reminds him of the impetuous rush of a mountain torrent. The going through, hitherto possible, is no longer so, for the waters βָ ?ΰεּ, “swelled,” “grew in height” (Job 8:11; Job 10:16; comp. also Exodus 15:1) to ξֵ ?ιΞωָׂ ?ηεּ, in which swimming was possible, yea, necessary, if one were to cross from bank to bank—to a river which cannot be waded. The prophet describes the increasing volume of water by the two parallel clauses: “waters of swimming,” “a river that could not be waded.” The question in Ezekiel 47:6 indicates the halting-place in the vision, whereby what had been already seen, that is, the out-flow and on-flow of the waters in gradually increasing strength, is, in passing over to what follows, marked off as a thing apart by itself. Yet it is specially the continuous increase of the waters to which the prophet’s attention is called. Keil: “A natural brook cannot in so short distances have increased so mightily, unless brooks fell into it on all sides, which was not the case here.” Hengst.: “The Messianic salvation crescit eundo, while the streams of worldly enterprise dry up after a brief course—are streams whose waters lie (Isaiah 58:11; Job 6:15 sq.). Comp. the supplement through the person of the Mediator of salvation in Ezekiel 17:22-23; and in the New Testament, the parables of the mustard seed and the leaven. The same progress which is exhibited in its efficacy among the nations shows itself also in the life of individuals, making them become great out of small, fathers in God out of children.” Neum. calls attention to the Messianic element in the designation: son of man, and observes that “the seer was thereby reminded that his vision was for mankind, that this swelling stream flowed on to the days of the completion of the human race.” The εַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?μִ ?λֵ ?πִ ?ι taken by itself may be a mere recording here of what had taken place before,—“a wading in to the neck” (Isaiah 8:8), as Hengst. expresses it,—in order to get the knowledge indicated in Ezekiel 47:5; or, according to others, it is to be taken in conjunction with εַ ?ιְ ?ωִׁ ?αֵ ?πִ ?ιΧ, as defining it more exactly: he brought me back to come up again out of the water.—ςַ ?μΞωְׂ ?τַ ?ϊΧ, to the bank (up to the bank), etc. Neumann, Kliefoth, and Keil understand it thus: And he made me go, namely, away from the last-mentioned place, and brought me back to the bank of the river (Ewald, too, in his last edition: “and made me go and return on the bank of the stream”). According to this, the prophet was led on the bank, in order to learn the depth of the waters,—but he was rather led through three times, and hence the fourth time probably just in and out again!—and brought back to the bank, to see that it was covered with trees. It seems, however, to agree better with the end intended, to understand ςַ ?μΧ as stating the purpose; for, as Hengst. says, the attention is now to be turned to the bank, to observe it, and not as hitherto the waters in their bed. [Hitzig makes the guide measure at a distance from the water, and the prophet, after his last vain attempt, come to the guide; whereupon the latter put his question to the prophet, and returned with him to the bank of the river, and during the time that Ezekiel’s back was turned to the river, its bank became adorned with trees. Hδv.: “from the end, from the point where the river flows into the Dead Sea(!), the prophet returned once more to its bank.”] Ezekiel 47:7. αְּ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?αֵ ?πִ ?ι, literally: “when I turned myself back.” Hitzig disputes the transitive signification of the verb, but indisputably the objective suffix πִ ?ι is attached to the infinitive; whereas Hitzig takes the suffix as genitive of possession: “when he came back with me.” On the return of the prophet (αְּ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?αֵ ?πִ ?ι seems to comprehend the εַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?μִ ?λֵ ?πִ ?ιεַ ?ιְ ?ωִׁ ?αֵ ?πִ ?ι of Ezekiel 47:6)—who would probably have followed the course of the water still farther had it depended on him, but is obliged to return to the edge of the bank, just because he has to notice the bank of the river, and that (as Ezekiel 47:8 shows) as far back as the sanctuary—that is realized which was intended with a εְ ?δִ ?πֵּ ?δ, as in Ezekiel 47:1-2; it is the third stage in the vision. How much the matter treated of refers to the brink of the river, the repeated mention of it shows. But the fact that “so long as the beholder followed the measurer, he saw nothing of the trees oh the bank,” arises from the nature of the process in the vision. The looking forward gave Ezekiel the knowledge of the progressive fulness and depth of the waters; not until he looks back does he come to know—with a view to what follows—the fertilizing, enlivening effect of these waters. ςֵ ?υ, as the words: very many, show, is collective (Genesis 1:11 sq., Ezekiel 2:9), and in accordance with Ezekiel 47:12 is to be understood of fruit-bearing trees. (The phrase: on the brink of the river, indicates the cause. It has been said that Ezekiel interchanges ςַ ?μ and ΰֶ ?μ; but when the bringing of the prophet out of the water and on to the bank was referred to, ςַ ?μ was employed in Ezekiel 47:6; here, where the reference is to the trees growing on and overshadowing the bank, we have simply ΰֶ ?μ.) But it confuses the meaning of the waters when Hengst. finds here “the need of salvation denoted by hungering as well as by thirsting.” Nothing has been said of this in connection with the waters. It is not the case that “life or salvation is here represented in the shape of the fruit-tree, as before by the water”(for which Hengst. compares Isaiah 55:1 sq.).—It cannot with strictness be said that “the trees have here no independent import, but come into account only for their fruit,” for there is not the slightest mention here of their fruit. It would be better, with Hitzig, to call to mind Ezekiel 36:35, and to think of the restoration, cultivation, and fertilization of the land in general, as a blessed dwelling-place for Israel. The trees are not very “great,” but very “many,”—not one tree, as in Ezekiel 17:22 sq.; Daniel 4:7 [10] sq. “That this stream here depends on the four streams watering the garden of Eden (Genesis 2), and this forest on the tree of life, is a gratuitous assertion. Nothing is said of the immortality-giving power of the trees, and the waters no more bear fish of paradise on their waves than do the rivers in Psalms 1:3” (Neum.). Ezekiel 47:8. Corresponding to the twofold direction of the prophet’s observation, the interpretation, which now begins, tells us regarding the course of the waters and the effects they shall produce. Had the prophet desired to follow the water farther, this desire would have been met by the saying: “these waters go out;” in other words, as they come out from the sanctuary, Ezekiel 47:1-2 (ιֹ ?φְ ?ΰִ ?ιν, Ezekiel 47:1), i.e. take their departure thence, so their progress is directed out “toward,” “to” (ΰֶ ?μ), etc.—The statement: δַ ?βְּ ?μִ ?ιμָ ?δδַ ?χַּ ?γְ ?ξεֹ ?πָ ?δ, is no such “general” determination of the region in which the waters are to prove themselves effectual as Hengstenberg supposes. At any rate, what is thereby designated is not—as the exegesis of the Fathers, following the Sept., delighted to maintain, in view of Jesus’ residence there—δַ ?πָּ ?μִ ?ιμ of Joshua 20:7;, the βְּ ?μִ ?ιμδַ ?βּ ?εֹ ?ιִ ?ν of Isa. 8:23 [Isaiah 9:1]; the northern district in the tribe of Naphtali, called δַ ?βָּ ?μִ ?ιμָ ?δ in 2 Kings 15:29—the later Galilee. On the contrary, δַ ?χַּ ?γְ ?ξεֹ ?πָ ?δ expressly distinguishes it from that Galilee. The very word βְּ ?μִ ?ιμָ ?δ, the feminine formation from βָּ ?μִ ?ιμ, evidently denotes with the article a definite district; there were several βְּ ?μִ ?ιμεֹ ?ϊΧ, Joshua 13:2 (Joel 4:4 [Joe 3:9]), Joshua 22:10 sq. Derived as it is from βָּ ?μַ ?μ, “to break off,” “to roll off,” a “section,” something “bounded off,” is to be understood; and because it is here in the east, the border-land there, lying opposite the centre of the land, would be meant, as distinguished from every other border district.—After the statement of the direction (ιָ ?φָ ?ΰΰֶ ?μ), there follows the account of the course of the waters, as also it is said in the outset in Ezekiel 47:1 (ιֹ ?ψְ ?γִ ?ιν) that the waters, namely, came down (εְ ?ιָ ?ψְ ?γεּ) “flowed down,” ςַ ?μ, that is, over.—δָ ?ςֲ ?ψָ ?αָ ?δ, defined by the article, is to be interpreted by the context. From the intransitive ςָ ?ψַ ?α, to be “contracted,” hence to be “arid,” “dry,” heath, wilderness, steppe is meant.—Geographically, the Arabah is the whole valley of the Jordan, extending even beyond the Dead Sea; comp. our Comment. on Deuteronomy 1.; but in accordance with the previous definition, we find ourselves in that part of the Ghor which lies above the Dead Sea.—After ιָ ?φָ ?ΰ and ιָ ?ψַ ?γ, we have now αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ, the coming to the goal. How much stress is laid upon this goal, as that which is to be defined in respect to the course of the waters, is shown by the repetition of ΰֶ ?μΞδַ ?ιָּ ?ξָּ ?δ after δַ ?ιָּ ?ξָּ ?δ. As the Dead Sea is called in Deuteronomy 3:17; Deuteronomy 4:49, ιָ ?νδָ ?ςֲ ?ψָ ?αָ ?δ, so in Ezekiel 47:18 of our chapter it is designated the “east sea;” and thus we cannot with other expositors understand here the western, the Mediterranean Sea, which, moreover, is distinguished in Ezekiel 47:10 as “the great sea.” If the Arabah, the μεγαπεδιον of Josephus, which he names ἐρημιαν, is an unhealthy plain “full of salt clay,” then this is only the fitting introduction to the Dead Sea, with its well-known peculiarity.—δַ ?ξּ ?εּ ?φָ ?ΰִ ?ιν (particip. Hoph.) ΰֶ ?μΞδַ ?ιָּ ?ξָּ ?δ has, following the Sept., been translated: “into the sea of the mouths,” inasmuch as the Jordan falls into it, and, according to Gadow (in the Journal of the German Oriented Society, 1848, 1 p. 61), forms “a slimy delta.” [Ewald: “into the sea, into the sea of the muddy waters;” ξεּ ?φָ ?ΰ, “muddy,” “foul” !] The comparison of Zec 14:8 and the dual form in Ezekiel 47:9 have led others to suppose a dividing of the waters, so that ιָ ?ξָּ ?δ refers one time to the east, but afterwards also to the west. “The prophet,” says Umbreit, “sets out first and specially from the Dead Sea; he does not, however, confine himself to it, but makes the waters flow also into the great west and world sea. For the sea of the wilderness appears, indeed, as the most fitting symbol of the death of sin (‘the Lord hath no pleasure in the death of the sinner, but that he should turn and live’); but until now there is no water altogether healthy, and for this very reason there is a flowing forth of the fountain of life still farther into the world of sin and of death.” [According to the Midrashim, the river divides itself into twelve waters, which flow to the twelve tribes; it is even said to flow on so far as to Calabria and into Barbary.] It only remains that, in accordance with the stress laid upon the issuing forth of the waters in question in Ezekiel 47:1-2, and again in Ezekiel 47:12, we understand the expression: brought forth, used of the waters on their way to the sea, as an emphasizing again of the fact that they proceeded from the temple, and that this is done just here in order to pass on to the purpose effected by them when they have reached their goal. (Hengst.: reference “to the higher hand, which executes, according to deliberate counsel, the plan of salvation.” Neum.: “waters that well forth from the threshold of the temple, that come to the Dead Sea. Not only that, but, moreover, having arrived at the Dead Sea, they are brought forth; thus the sanctuary of the blessing expressly connects itself with the doomed domain of the curse.”)—The waters of which it is said that they are healed are self-evidently (2 Kings 2:22) the waters of the Dead Sea, as is shown also by what follows. The spiritual signification of the waters is now told to the prophet: healing of the dead, which accordingly means only sick unto death, is the aim of their being brought forth from the sanctuary to the Dead Sea, to the east boundary; that is, we might say, from Israel into the world, which is thereby auspiciously symbolized as in the east, consequently with a reference to the rising of the Sun of Righteousness (Mal. 3:20 [Ezekiel 4:2]). [Grotius explains εְ ?πִ ?ψְ ?τּ ?ΰεּ in this way, that the waters flowing in continue wholesome, notwithstanding their flowing through.] The character of the water of the Dead Sea has already been correspondingly described by Diodorus: ἐχειδιαπικρονκαικαθ’ ὑπωρβοληδυσωδες. Comp. Tacitus, Hist. v. 6. Jerome calls it mare amarissimum, quod Grζce λιμνηἀσφαλτου, id est, stagnum bituminis vocatur. Comp. von Schubert (Reise in d. Morgenl. 3 p. 85), who remarks on the deceptive appearance for thirsty persons of the “clear and pure” water. Comp. moreover, von Raumer’s Palδstina, p. 61 sq.; Robinson’s Physical Geography of the Holy Land, p. 209 sq. [Hengst.: “The wilderness is in Scripture a figure of ungodliness (?), and so a fitting emblem of the world estranged from God and excluded from His kingdom, Psalms 107:5. In Joel, the valley of the acacias, the tree of the wilderness, corresponds to the Arabah here. Comp. also Isaiah 35:6. As a symbol of the corrupt world lying in wickedness (1 John 5:19), the Dead Sea is the more appropriate, as it owes its origin to a judgment on the corrupt world, and the spiritual eye discerns under its waves the figure of Sodom and Gomorrah (Ezekiel 16).”] The transition is now made to the effects of the waters flowing to the Dead Sea. Very impressively Ezekiel 47:9 begins first of all with the prophetic εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ (Neum.: “it has then come to pass, then the fact lies open to observation”): what manifests itself in consequence of the healing of the water, in reference to the water itself, as an effect of the healing waters of the sanctuary.—But what of λָּ ?μΞπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ ηָ ?ιָּ ?δ? Is there, then, any living thing in the Dead Sea? There is not, although Prince Pόckler asserts that he ate there fishes taken living from the Dead Sea. The Jordan carries in some, or “they voluntarily accompany its waves” (von Schubert), but “they must soon pay with their life for their love of travel, because they die in the salt brine, or because this brine thrusts out their light bodies to the shore.” A fish seen by Robinson, and said to have been caught in the Dead Sea, was found near the mouth of the Jordan, and dying in a state of exhaustion. “Neither fishes nor snails live in this very salt lake” (von Schubert). “Some herons,” Gadow relates, “sought the little fishes washed into the sea, that died instantly in the sharp lye; I myself observed some wrestling with death. Sea fishes which Marshal Marmont at Alexandria cast into water taken from the Dead Sea, died in two or three minutes.” Thus “living things” can only be spoken of in respect to the Dead Sea as things that were alive and then died there, or that live but must die when they come thither. But the mode of expression employed is rather a prophetic anticipation, picturing as it does in the healed water, in contrast to the death dominating it, life already preserved,—life, too, which, through ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψιִ ?ωְׁ ?ψֹ ?υ, significantly alludes to Genesis 7:21; Genesis 8:17 (death and preservation), and Genesis 1:21 (creation). Quite as readily could a contrast to the Jordan carrying the living to death in the Dead Sea be found in the following words: everything whithersoever the double stream shall come shall live. Hitzig: “which creeps in every place to which rivers (πְ ?ηָ ?μִ ?ιν, pointed as plural) come.” (Ewald: πַ ?ηְ ?μָ ?ν.) Keil: “which swarms wherever the brook comes.”—πַ ?ηֲ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν. What is the meaning of the dual, where hitherto we have always had πַ ?ηַ ?μ? Keil thinks the best solution is that of Hengstenberg, who, referring to Jeremiah 1:2, explains “two rivers” as equivalent to strong river, remarking that the doubled often stands for the distinguished (Job 11:6; Isaiah 61:7). He might have known that already Umbreit translates it: “two rivers,” and in doing so refers to “the fulness of the water.” The aualis emphaticus, too, of Stier (Lehrgeb. p. 218) comes to the same thing, as he also cites for it Jeremiah 1. The original “waters” (ξַ ?ιִ ?ν) have grown in Ezekiel 47:5 to a πַ ?ηַ ?μ; may they not now, when they have mixed with the waters of the Dead Sea, when δַ ?ξַּ ?ιִ ?νδָ ?ΰֵ ?μֶ ?δ and the healed δַ ?ξָּ ?ιִ ?ν have been expressly named side by side in Ezekiel 47:8, be very appropriately (not indeed as Maurer: because of the similarity with ξַ ?ιִ ?ν) expressed succinctly by the dual form πַ ?ηֲ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν, and by πַ ?ηֲ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν indefinitely, because of their rushing streams sweeping away death and opening up the way to life? Thus, as Neum.: “We see it at once, the result of the flowing in is manifest in the sea itself; the river is not lost in it, but neither does the river swallow up the sea; it impenetrates it with its living power, and wherever the eye follows these united streams, it beholds the swarming newly produced life,” etc. Klief.: “When the waters of the river shall come into the waters of the sea, they will divide themselves,” etc.—ιִ ?ηְ ?ιֶ ?δ, to retain life and to enjoy life, in pregnant contrast to the dying of which this sea is suggestive. Keil: “to revive, to come to life.” [Hitzig, too, remarks on the masculine construction of πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ (ιִ ?ηְ ?ιֶ ?δ and ιִ ?ωְׁ ?ψֹ ?υ), so that ηַ ?ιָּ ?δ appears as a substantive in the genitive dependent on πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ. Neum.: “Thus everything, that in the power of life bears in itself the germ of life, shall unfold this germ; the view which underlies is not that of the feminine, of what is upheld by the Spirit, but of what breathes independently.”]—The description of this life accords with the nature of the water, the healthy vital power of which finds expression in its fulness and the multitude of its fishes. But we have first “everything that creeps and moves quickly, ωָׁ ?ψַ ?υ, said of every kind of animal mobility” (Neum.), in order primarily to give pictorial expression to life in general in the all-sided manifold swarm. The following clause adds the more special: and there are very many δַ ?γָּ ?βָ ?δ (a collective, expressing at the same time the most different kinds), a feminine form of γָּ ?β, which, from γָּ ?βָ ?δ, “to become thick,” denotes first of all, as here too in accordance with the context, the strong large sea-fish, and then fish in general. (Umbr.: “to live and multiply most abundantly.”)—The cause of this, which was formerly incorporated in the general description, is now taken by itself, in order to explain the special case of the fishes: for these waters come thither and they shall be healed, i.e., as this repetition from Ezekiel 47:8 clearly shows, the waters of the Dead Sea, to which ωָׁ ?ξָּ ?δ also points.—But the description reaches its full height of expression of life with the clause: and everything liveth, etc. First, everything, etc.; then, the many fishes of various kinds in particular—in other words, the Dead Sea in its piscine life; finally, the whole Dead Sea as such. Hence formerly ωָׁ ?ν, whereas the two following times ωׁ ?ξָּ ?δ; as also the preceding εְ ?ιֵ ?ψָ ?τְ ?ΰεּ (imperf. Niphal) is illustrated by εָ ?ηָ ?ιλֹּ ?μΧ, and therefore also we have δַ ?πָ ?ηַ ?μ, from Ezekiel 47:5 sq., in antithesis to the waters of the Dead Sea. “The Dead Sea has become a sea of life” (Neum.). [Ewald: every one that draws water out of it. Calmet: every land, however unfruitful, provided only the river waters it, shall be at once made most fruitful. Dereser: “all the regions of the Dead Sea, to which the water penetrates, shall swarm with fish.”] Ezekiel 47:10. εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ again. [“Out of death there arises, by the omnipotence and grace of God, a rich life. The new community is numerous, innumerable as the fishes of the sea,” Hδv.] Because not only the life of the sea, but the (Dead) Sea itself as alive is exemplified in the abundance of fish, this abundance is described partly as to the employment it occasions, and partly as to the numerous kinds of fish. In the former respect, ιςָ ?ξְ ?γεּ ςָ ?μָ ?ιε (Qeri: ςָ ?ξְ ?γεּ, “they have placed themselves,” one sees them standing), “fishers place themselves over it” (the river, not the Dead Sea, but also not the whole length of the river on its banks, but where the Dead Sea touches it, because the filling of it with fish-life is the subject in hand). With this agrees also the statement as to locality given: ξֵ ?ςֵ ?ιοβֶּ ?γִ ?ιεְ ?ςγΞςֵ ?ιοςֶ ?βְ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν, which has given occasion to so many disquisitions. These must be two points lying near each other, as the same expression: ςֵ ?ιοΧ and ςֵ ?ιοΧ, and not less the difference, which is simply that between a “kid” and “two calves,” seems designed to show. Hengst. thinks that perhaps ςֶ ?βְ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν is a dual, such as that in Ezekiel 47:9 : “the double calf in parallelism with the kid.” He supposes “the fountains are named after the finders,” “the calf had distinguished itself by the discovery” (!). Seriously, however, En-gedi (“kid’s fountain,” which reminds Sepp of the ibex, seldom pursued here by a hunter) is “Ain-Didi,” on the west bank of the Dead Sea, the southmost point inhabited by the Israelites, with an Egyptian climate and Egyptian products; and regarding En-eglaim (“two-calves’ fountain”), Jerome says that it is situated at the beginning of the Dead Sea, where the Jordan flows in, that is, northward. Since the death of living things occurs at the entrance into the Dead Sea, we feel certain that this is the right place. Hengst. finds “En-gedi obliquely over against the Eglaim mentioned in Isaiah 15:8;” for, “as obviously the whole compass of the sea is intended, En-eglaim is to be looked for on the east side.” Ewald: “the whole present stretch along the Dead Sea.” Neum. disregards any geographical basis: “Two fountains (ςιο) flow now into the Dead Sea, both of them living and full of fish, into the dark depths of death; but in those days of salvation, a river of life shall flow from the one to the other. No longer shall there be only small and quickly-dying fishes moving here and there before the mouths of the fountains; the whole intervening water, now waste and dead, shall then become alive, and swarm with the fishes of the great sea,”—ξִ ?ωְׁ ?θεֹ ?ηַ [Ewald: “a casting-place for nets”] is distinguished by Neumann from ξִ ?ωְׁ ?θָ ?η in Ezekiel 26:5; Ezekiel 26:14. Gesenius holds both forms to have the same signification: place of spreading out. In order, however, to suppose the act of spreading out, we must with Neumann take the fishers as a spreading out of the nets; they will be quite absorbed in that occupation, will be nothing else; and this is not so inadmissible as Kliefoth supposes; while Rosenmόller’s interpretation of the ιִ ?δְ ?ιεּ, as referring to the places, that they shall be places for spreading out the nets, can quite well be extracted out of the phrase: from En-gedi even unto, etc., although it is not so obvious.—μַ ?ηֲ ?ψָ ?ξִ ?ιν, whether for the take, or, after the take, for drying, which, however, is done as fresh preparation for new labour, for a new take. [Hengst.: “The question is not of fishers who will arrange after their kind the fish caught, but only of those who catch fish of different kinds.”] By the nets is characterized not only the fulness, but also the manifoldness, the various kinds of fishes that may be or are caught.—μְ ?ξִ ?ιπָ ?δּ, “as to the kind” (collective), intentionally (as Raphe shows) without Mappiq, means at bottom the same as with δ: “in respect to their kind;” care is always taken to express the variety of kinds corresponding to the γָּ ?βָ ?δ here and in Ezekiel 47:9. “Life is depicted with far more significance not by multitudes alone, but by the variegated mixture of the most different kinds, which are commingled together” (Neum.).—“Allusion to the account of creation (comp. also Ezekiel 47:9): the new community, a similar creation of God’s” (Hδv.).—γְּ ?βָ ?ϊָ ?ν, not: of the healed ξַ ?ιִ ?ν of the sea, nor of the πַ ?ηֲ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν of Ezekiel 47:9, nor of the banks between En-gedi and En-eglaim, but of the fishers, or the nets.—The comparison with the fishes of the great sea, said to be very many, is connected, as Hitzig observes, with the μְ ?ξִ ?ιπָ ?δ: there shall live in it the many kinds of fish of the great sea, and many of each kind,—as the fishes, sq., is proverbial for this—and not merely the few kinds of small fresh-water fish. The fish of the Mediterranean thus compared are, moreover, conceived of as living, so that this too shows that the Mediterranean cannot have been spoken of previously. [Hengst.: “The sea is a symbol of the world; accordingly men appear as the living creatures in the sea, as the fishes (Revelation 8:9). Hitherto there were only dead fishes, only unspiritual, unsaved men. Thus the meaning of the fishers cannot be doubtful: the fishes are the men who have attained to life through the Messianic salvation; the fishers are the messengers of this salvation, who gather those who are quickened into the kingdom of God, introduce them into the fellowship of the Church,’ Luke 5:11; Matthew 13:47, etc.] Ezekiel 47:11. αִּ ?φֹּ ?ΰϊ (Qeri: αφΰϊιε) is singular; the plural of the Qeri appears to be put because of the following plural, εּ ?βְ ?αָ ?ΰָ ?ιε. Gesenius: αִּ ?φֹּ ?ΰϊָ ?ιε, incorrectly written for αִּ ?φּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε. αִּ ?φָּ ?δ is a moist place. Rashi: marais (marsh). One might perhaps make the distinction to be what is turned into swamp by the natural recession of the sea from the bank, and the artificially constructed salt-pits (Zephaniah 2:9). These form the exception from the rule of healing and quickening; they are the places in which the healing waters produce no effect. “We have just observed the fishers placing themselves from one fountain to the other, that the life of the sea may become conspicuous through them; but here in the pools is death” (Neum.). “The waters even which the river brought to them,” thinks Hitzig, “would become corrupt, if left standing along with the whole mass of water without any fresh inflow.” J. D. Michaelis: “Palestine would lose much were it to lose this salt, got without labour, and were the Dead Sea to become quite fresh; hence this gift of nature is to remain.” Hitzig’s view and reasons, even if satisfactory for the εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιֵ ?ψָ ?τְ ?ΰεּ, are certainly not so for the μְ ?ξֶ ?μַ ?ηπִ ?ϊָּ ?πεּ; which clause, moreover, is not to be explained on the ground of utility (as is done by Michaelis), it is the expression of a judgment. “Those districts,” says Hδvernick, “in which the salt-deposits proper were formerly found, shall also henceforth be such waste places. The thought is this: only those who bar themselves against the gracious stream of divine love, and are unwilling to regain health, are henceforth to be given over to the curse, continuing to exist as monuments thereof (Zechariah 14:17).” Around the sea of death there lingers on a death which abides: this is the second death, the death unto death. What is given to salt is entirely forfeited to death. Klief.: “They shall be made into salt.” Hengst.: “The salt comes into consideration here not as seasoning, as frequently, but as the foe of fertility, life, and prosperity (Job 39:6). A contrast to deliverance from the corrosive power of the salt, which would be effected by the waters from the sanctuary were access afforded to them; they remain given over to salt: he that believeth not the Son of God shall not see life, etc., John 3:36.”—In Ezekiel 47:12, that of which the seer obtained merely a general view in Ezekiel 47:7 is now more exactly particularized to him, as the conclusion of the entire section. After the contrast (Ezekiel 47:11) to the healing effect of the waters of the sanctuary (Ezekiel 47:8), there comes in what follows something antithetical, and therefore parallel to Ezekiel 47:9 sq.: the quickening effects as regards the banks of the river, and so back to the source of the waters, form a parallel to the quickening effects as regards the goal, in relation to the Dead Sea. In fine, viewed forward or backward, they are the waters of life; as on the one hand they sustain life, so on the other they produce fruit.—δַ ?πַּ ?ηַ ?μ, as the waters since Ezekiel 47:5, on their way to the Dead Sea, and considered in contrast thereto (Ezekiel 47:9), have been designated, so that the reference is to their course from their coming out of the temple walls.—The description: on the river, is amplified thus: “on its bank on both sides.” The “rising up” forms also, no doubt, an antithetical pendant to the former deepening and deepening and descending of the waters.—ξַ ?ΰֲ ?λָ ?μ, “what is edible” (Hengst.: “all fruit-bearing trees;” Hitzig: “every tree of edible fruit”). Klief.: “they shall bear edible fruits of all sorts.” Their described quality, however, is not this alone, that they are trees of food, and hence yield food—not wild, acid, hard fruit; but an abiding freshness of life and vigour distinguishes this growth of trees (which is elsewhere expressed by ever-flowing, never-failing waters), both as to the leaf (πָ ?αַ ?μ, Psalms 1:3, “to fade,” “to fall off,” cognate with πָ ?τַ ?μ) and the fruit (ϊָּ ?ξַ ?ν). In respect to the latter it is said: according to its months, that is, as these change (Hitzig: distributively), ιְ ?πַ ?λֵּ ?ψ, said of the “first commencement,” of the “first of a thing;” hence αִּ ?λּ ?εּ ?ψִ ?ιν, the first-fruits, signify, according to Hitzig, that the trees produce fresh fruit every month; and this, according to Hengst., “indicates the uninterrupted enjoyment of salvation;” or the fruit is as eagerly desired and hailed with as much joy as early first-fruits, or generally as superior fruit, which can claim, as it were, the right of the first-born (Deuteronomy 21:16). Comp. Revelation 22:2. Neum.: “The thought in fact is: what used to delight the heart every year, will henceforth be furnished every month. According to Horapollo, the palm puts forth a new branch with every new moon. The month is looked on as the property of the trees, because the change of the moon always enables them to put forth in similar change the life welling up in them.” We are not to compare here the enchanted gardens of Alcinous (Odyss. vii. 114 sq.). The reason assigned, too, which makes the leading thought the active principle of the effects, accords with the closing character of the verse: its (not: the stream’s, as Neumann, but: the trees’, this forest’s) waters, namely, the waters “proceeding from the sanctuary.” Hitzig: “from the dwelling-place of Him who is the Author of all life and fertility.” Neum.: “a deep disclosure regarding what the temple of his God was to the prophet. With Him is the fountain of life, and in His light we see light, Psalms 36:10 [9]. But this is just the sanctuary; because its source is holy, therefore the flood of the river produces fruitful germs. And χָ ?γεֹ ?ωׁ is not moral purity, but sublime, transcendent purity, which sheds its enlightening beams over all the dark places of the earth. Hence the lofty praise of the seraphim in Isaiah 6:3.”—As formerly the fishes were for the nets of the fishers, so now the fruit of the trees is for food, etc. εְ ?δָ ?ιεּ (Qeri: εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ, which is unnecessary), for τִּ ?ψְ ?ιεֹ is not necessarily the fruit of each and every tree, but can be taken collectively with the plural. As we have here a reference to paradise and the first creation (Genesis 2:9), so we have also to redemption, the future salvation, in the phrase and its (the forest’s) leaf, μִ ?ϊְ ?ψεּ ?τָ ?δ—Hitzig: “for medicine;” on which he remarks: “doubtless for external application, since the leaf is laid upon wounds as soft and cooling, apart from its special healing virtue; ϊְּ ?ψεּ ?τָ ?δ is derived from ψָ ?τָ ?ΰ.” In this too, the thought of mending and of healing is united and conjoined in this closing clause, so that in this sense “medicine” is by no means “a very unsuitable disharmony in these figures of perfection,” as Neumann says, whose thoughts run on “the blessed salvation enlivened by a sweet life of rapture,” and on “adorning life with fragrant chaplets.” This last would as mere ornament be altogether out of place here. Hengst.: “Salvation must present itself for the terribly sick heathen world, above all, in the form of saving grace. Besides the nourishing fruits, therefore, are named also the healing leaves.” Hδv.: “The trees are trees of life, with allusion at the same time to Psalms 1; the figure of the fishes refers to the extent, the greatness of the community; and this figure of the trees to its nature, in so far as the divine grace transforms it into truly living members, who themselves bear rich fruit, and thereby become a means of life and recovery to others also.” [Philippson says of the entire section: “This description answers to no fountain actually existing in Jerusalem, and contains suppositions which no actually existing fountain could fulfil. Hence it belongs to the realm of those prophetic intuitions of the future land, in which this land appeared, altered in its nature, endowed with the most glorious fertility and wonderful virtues. We have to consider this section as a poetical resting-point of the prophet, in which, between dry narration and representation, the prophet’s enraptured soul expatiated on the prospects of his people.” According to this, the hope of the Jews of the present should finally be ζsthetics.] Ezekiel 47:13-23. The Fixing of the Boundaries in the Holy LandHengstenberg, in accordance with his view of the concluding portion of Ezekiel, makes the prophet return from the distant Messianic future, the prospect into which, according to him, suddenly opened in Ezekiel 47:1-12, to the lower salvation, the temple and city of the future, which formed the presupposition of the higher salvation. According to Hitzig, “the previous section forms the transition to this, inasmuch as in that section Ezekiel first of all, following the course of the river, turns himself away from the temple and the idea of the Terumah; in other words, it still remains to treat of the land itself from which that Terumah was selected.” It would be an entire break in these closing chapters, which hang so closely together, were Ezekiel 47:1-12 an insertion of essentially different character, meaning, and signification from that which precedes them, and that which follows them. But if Ezekiel 47:1-12 are decidedly symbolical, and their contents specially Messianic, then we have in them the key for everything in these chapters, both what precedes and what follows, not merely “the transition” to what follows. Then the temple is a symbol of the new revelation of God among Israel in their own land; then the partly indicated, partly instituted worship as to acts, persons, and times, symbolizes the future worshipping in spirit and in truth; then the blessing, which abolishes even the Dead Sea in its character of curse, cannot leave the Holy Land untouched, but only with the fixing of its boundaries and the division of the enclosed territory among the tribes (Ezekiel 48) will the theocracy of the future he complete. We cannot say, with Ewald, that “the whole book might have been perfectly well concluded with the last great figure in Ezekiel 47:1-12.” Ewald himself is compelled to admit that “the position of the sanctuary and its immediate environs in Ezekiel 47:1-8 is not yet explained with sufficient clearness;” but what still follows finds its explanation less by reference to this, than by the fact that in Ezekiel 45:1 the division of the land by inheritance is presupposed, without our having up to this point heard anything regarding it, except the prophecy of the return of Israel into their again reviving land (Ezekiel 34:25 sq., Ezekiel 36:8 sq., Ezekiel 37:21 sq.). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ CHAP. 48 1And these are the names of the tribes: from the north end by the way of [toward] Hethlon, as one cometh to Hamath, Hazar-Enon, the border of Damascus northward to the border of Hamath, and they are to him the east2 side, the sea: Dan one. And on the border of Dan, from the east side to 3 the westward side: Asher one. And on the border of Asher, from the eastward 4 side to the westward side: Naphtali one. And on the border of Naphtali, from the eastward side to the westward side: Manasseh one.5 And on the border of Manasseh, from the eastward side to the westward 6 side: Ephraim one. And on the border of Ephraim, from the east side, and 7 to the westward side: Reuben one. And on the border of Reuben, from the 8 east side to the westward side: Judah one. And on the border of Judah, from the east side to the westward side, shall be the oblation which ye shall offer, five and twenty thousand in breadth, and the length as one of the tribe-portions from the eastward side to the westward side; and the sanctuary Isaiah 9 in the midst of it. The oblation which ye shall offer to Jehovah is in length 10 five and twenty thousand, and in breadth ten thousand. And to these, to the priests, shall the oblation of holiness be; northward five and twenty thousand, and seaward in breadth ten thousand, and southward in length five and twenty thousand; and the sanctuary of Jehovah is in the midst of it. 11 To the priests is the hallowed portion, [to those descending] from the sons of Zadok, who kept My charge, who went not astray when the sons of Israel 12 went astray, as the Levites went astray. And there is to them a heave-portion from the oblation of the land most holy, by the border [border district] of 13 the Levites. And the Levites [receive], over against the border of the priests, five and twenty thousand in length, and in breadth ten thousand; the whole length five and twenty thousand, and the breadth ten thousand. 14And they shall not sell of it, nor exchange, nor shall the first-fruits of the land pass 15 over [into another hand]; for [it is] holiness to Jehovah. And five thousand that are left in breadth before the five and twenty thousand that is profane, for 16 the city, for dwelling, and for open space; and the city is in its midst. And these are its measures: the north side four thousand and five hundred, and the south side four thousand and five hundred, and on the east side four thousand and five hundred, and the westward side four thousand and five 17 hundred. And there is an open space for the city, northward two hundred and fifty, and southward two hundred and fifty, and eastward two hundred and fifty, and westward two hundred and fifty. 18And the residue in length, over against the oblation of holiness, ten thousand eastward and ten thousand westward; and it is over against the oblation of holiness, and the produce 19 thereof is for food for the labourers of the city. And as to the labourers of 20 the city, they shall labour it out of all the tribes of Israel. The whole oblation is five and twenty thousand by five and twenty thousand: a fourth-part shall ye offer the oblation of holiness, for a possession of the city. 21And the residue [belongs] to the prince, on this side and on that of the oblation of holiness, and of the possession of the city, before the five and twenty thousand of the oblation unto the border eastward, and westward before the five and twenty thousand toward the westward border, over against the tribe-portions, [it belongs] to the prince; and the oblation of holiness and the sanctuary of the 22 house are in its midst. And [namely] from the possession of the Levites, from the possession of the city [from that] in the midst, shall be the prince’s, between the border of Judah and between the border of Benjamin—the prince’s it 23 shall be. And the rest of the tribes: from the eastward side to the westward 24 side: Benjamin one. And on the border of Benjamin, from the eastward 25 side to the westward side: Simeon one. And on the border of Simeon, from 26 the eastward side to the westward side: Issachar one. And on the border 27 of Issachar, from the eastward side to the westward side: Zebulon one. And on the border of Zebulon, from the eastward side to the westward side: Gad 28 one. And on the border of Gad, toward the south side, to the right is the border: from Tamar to the strife-waters of Kadesh is the inheritance [along the brook] to the great sea. 29This is the land which ye shall divide of the inheritance to the tribes of Israel, and these are their portions: sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 30And these are the out-goings of the city: on the north side, four thousand and five hundred by measure. 31And the gates of the city after the names of the tribes of Israel: three gates northward; the gate of 32 Reuben one, the gate of Judah one, the gate of Levi one. And on the eastward side four thousand and five hundred: and three gates; the gate of 33 Joseph one, the gate of Benjamin one, the gate of Dan one. And as to the southward side, four thousand and five hundred by measure: and three gates; the gate of Simeon one, the gate of Issachar one, the gate of Zebulon one. 34 As to the westward side, four thousand and five hundred: its gates three; 35 the gate of Gad one, the gate of Asher one, the gate of Naphtali one. Round about eighteen thousand: and the name of the city from that day: “Jehovah thither” (Jehovah Shammah). Ezekiel 48:1. Sept.: …ἀποτ. ἀρχης . . . κατατομεροςτηςκαταβασεωςτουπερισχιζοντοςἐπιτηνεἰσοθοντηςἩμαθαὐληςτουΑἰναν, . . . Ἡμαθαὐληςκ. ἐσταιαὐτοιςταπροςἀνατολαςἑωςπροςθαλασσαν—Vulg.: … juxta viam … pergentibus Emath atrium Enan—Ezekiel 48:8. … ἡἀπαρχητουἀφορισμου—Vulg.: … primitiζ, quas separabitis—Vet. 9. … ἡνἀφοριουσιν— Ezekiel 48:10. Τουτωνἐσται . . . τοιςἱερευσιν . . . Κ. τοὀροςτωνἁγιων—Vulg.: Hζ autem erunt primitiζ sanctuarii sacerdotum—Ezekiel 48:11. … τοιςἡγιασμενοιςυἱοις—Vulg.: Sacerdotibus sanctuarium erit de filiis— (Another reading: απιδξχγω, Sept. Arabs.) Ezekiel 48:12. … ἡἀταρχηδεδομενηἐκτ. ἀπαρχωντ. γης—(Another reading: ξϊψξεϊ; δχγω pro δΰψυ.) Ezekiel 48:14. Οὐπραθησεταιἐξαὐτουοὐθεκαταμετρηθησεται, οὐθεἀφαιρεθησεταιταπρωτογεννηματατ. γης— Ezekiel 48:15. … προτειχισμαἐσταιτηπολει— Ezekiel 48:17. Another reading: ετΰϊΧ instead of εξτΰϊχγιν, and εξτΰϊΧ instead of ετΰϊΞιξδ. Ezekiel 48:18. κ. ἐσονταιαίἀπαρχαιτ. ἁγιου, κ. ἑσται . . . τοιςἐργαζομενοιςτηνπολιν. Vulg.: … erunt sicut primitiζ sanctuarii … fruges in panes his qui serviunt civitati.Ezekiel 48:20. Sept.: … ἀφοριειτεαὐτουτηνἀπαρχην . . . ἀποτηςκατασχεσεωςτ. πολεως. Vulg.: Omnes primitiζ … in quadrum, separabuntur in primitias sanctuarii et in possessionem civitatis.Ezekiel 48:21. … ἐκτουτου, κ. ἐκτουτουἀποτ. ἀπαρχων . . . κ. εἰςτ. κατασχεσιν . . . καταπροσωπον . . . χιλιαδαςμηκος, ἑωςτωνὁριωντ. προςθαλασσαν, κ. ἐχομενατωνμεριδωντ. ἀφηγουμενου· (Another reading: ςμβαεμ instead of ςγΧ.) Ezekiel 48:22. … ἐνμεσωτωνἀφηγουμενων . . . τωνἀφηγουμενωνἐσται. Ezekiel 48:28. … κ. ἑωςτωνπροςλιβα, κ. ἐσταιὁριααὐτουἀποΘαιμανκ. ὑδατοςΒαριμωθΚαδης, κληρονομια, ἑωςθαλασσης—(Another reading: ξτΰϊ pro ΰμτΰϊ; ςγξιΧ; ςγδιν.) Ezekiel 48:29. Another reading: απδμδ. Ezekiel 48:34. Another reading: ωςψιν. Ezekiel 48:35. Κυκλωμα . . . Κ. τ. ὀνοματ. πολεως, πολεως, ἀφʼ ? ἡςἀνἡμεραςγενηταιΚυριοςἐκειἐσταιτ. ὀνομκαὐτης. REMARKSEze_48:1-29.—The Division of the Land among the Tribes, with the Separation of the Part to be separated. Ezekiel 48:1-7.—The Seven Upper Tribe-portions. The division of the land, like the fixing of the boundaries (Ezekiel 47:15 sq.), begins in the north, inclining thence to the south. Hitzig denies the significance of the number seven here: “As the section itself regarding the Terumah is put in the middle, so his object is to move the central sanctuary, which must lie between Judah and Benjamin, but historically lay far nearer the south border than the north, as near indeed as possible to the centre, yet also toward the south.” Hengst., on the contrary, argues from the division of the number twelve into seven and five,—a division which often occurs also in the grouping of the Psalms, where “the sacred number seven is always the chief number, and five appears only as its supplement.” “Even upon the land,” says Hδv., “is the character of pleasing to God to be stamped throughout.” [“The territory to be divided being thus obviously viewed in an ideal light, the division itself is conducted in the same manner,—not as it ever could have taken place in the reality, but after rule and measure, in exact and regular portions, running alongside of each other the whole breadth from west to east, and standing in a common relation to the temple in the centre. Seven of the tribes have their portions on the north, on account of the greater stretch of the land in that direction with respect to the actual Jerusalem, and in the following order:—Dan, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Ephraim, Reuben, Judah; the latter having its place close by the central portion on the north, as Benjamin had on its south. This honour appears to have been given to these two tribes in consideration of their relative historical superiority, having so long adhered to the temple and ordinances of God, when the others deserted them. Dan, on the contrary, was placed at the extreme north, on account of the low religious character of the tribe, precisely as John, in representing the whole elect Church by twelve thousand from the several tribes of Israel, leaves Dan out altogether (Revelation 7). As there were actually thirteen tribes, he finds his twelve times twelve by omitting Dan, whose idolatrous and semi-heathen character made it border morally, as it did locally, on the Gentiles. Here the two tribes of Joseph are thrown into one, to admit of Dan’s having a place, but it is still the lowest place in the ideal territory of a blessed world. With these exceptions, we can discern no specific grounds for the particular places assigned to the tribes respectively. The order on the south side was, Benjamin, Simeon, Issachar, Zebulon, Gad. But the. city, the temple, the prince, and priesthood, with their respective portions, being situated precisely in the middle, and not within the boundaries of any of the tribes, was intended to intimate that all were now to be regarded as having a common interest in them; and that the miserable and mischievous jealousies which had of old exercised so disastrous an influence, especially between Judah and Ephraim, should finally and for ever cease. All now should stand related as a united and compact brotherhood to the sanctuary of the Lord, from which, as a central fountainhead of life and blessing, there should continually stream forth manifestations of grace to all the people.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 498, 499.—W. F.] Ezekiel 48:1. The starting-point: the north end, Ezekiel 47:15.—The course goes from west to east; hence “Hethlon” and “Hamath,” and “Hazar-Enon” as the eastmost point. Hengst.: “from Hazar, etc., to the border,” etc., so that the northmost point is Hamath, Ezekiel 47:17.—The words: and they are (pertain) to him, refer to the tribe immediately named, Dan.—τְ ?ΰַ ?ϊΞχָ ?γִ ?ινδַ ?ιָּ ?ν, Keil: asyndeton = the east side and the west, the tract toward both sides. Hitzig: “the east side of the sea,” that is, what lies east from the sea, namely, from the north end of this east side, from Hazar-Enon. Hengst.: “the east side, the west sea.” But he takes “him” as the ideal unity of the tribes as a whole, although Dan (he says) was specially in the prophet’s mind. At the division of the land under Joshua, Dan had, west of Benjamin, taken possession of only a part of the land’s breadth; but in the days of the Judges, Danites had pressed northward, and had named the conquered Laish Dan, so that Dan denoted the north border. Hengst. makes one of the prophet’s points of view to be to show the equality of all the tribes as “members of equal rank in the body of the people of God.” Thus in the case of the tribe allotments, and afterwards in the case of the gates, “the sons of the handmaids and of the wives, and those of the latter again among one another, were intentionally and skilfully intermixed (Revelation 7:5-8), and Dan the son of the handmaid stands at the head, because there is with God no respect of persons: Israel is a brotherly people, in which no member may raise itself above another.”—γָּ ?οΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ means: that Dan shall receive an inheritance, as Keil supplies ηֶ ?λֶ ?μ, from Ezekiel 47:13. Klief.: “the single equal heritage for each tribe being considered as a monad.” Similarly in what follows; and always, in distinction from the former order of things, taking in the whole breadth of Canaan, “from the east side to the seaward side.” Ezekiel 48:2. Asher.Ezekiel 48:3. Naphtali.Ezekiel 48:4. Manasseh.Ezekiel 48:5. Ephraim.Ezekiel 48:6. Reuben.Ezekiel 48:7. Judah, who is thus preceded by three pair of tribes, the list of the seven upper tribes closing with him, just as from him the whole people received even their name. Keil observes: “Asher and Naphtali, who formerly occupied the most northern district, are ranged beside Dan; then follows Manasseh, since half-Manasseh formerly dwelt to the east of Naphtali; and Ephraim is ranged beside Manasseh, as formerly beside the western half-Manasseh. The reason for bringing in Reuben between Ephraim and Judah seems to be that Reuben was the firstborn of Jacob’s sons.” Ezekiel 48:8-22. The Special Portion cut off from the LandEze_48:8 places, moreover, the Terumah on the border of Judah. “The normal condition of Israel is reached, according to which all the life of the whole land streams forth from its truly spiritual centre, and the unity of the whole community rests entirely upon the Lord Himself and His self-revelation in the midst of the people. In this way the fact also is explained that Judah dwells nearest the sanctuary, while Benjamin occupies a corresponding position on the south side of the temple. The reason of this is not so much the warlike character of these two tribes, as their attachment to the temple when the ten tribes revolted from it. Both tribes represent such a disposition, and the prophet’s higher spiritual point of view manifests itself in this division of the tribes, as differing essentially from the old division, inasmuch as this latter was determined principally by outward need and external relations” (Hδv.). According to Bunsen, Judah lay sufficiently near the centre in order, with Ephraim, “to form the fulcrum of defence.” The Terumah, which refers us back to Ezekiel 45:1 sq., is employed, according to Hengst., sensu latiori, including also the portion of the prince; it rather appears, however, to be denominated a parte potiori, as it is expressly said: and the sanctuary is in the midst of it, although the five and twenty thousand in breadth will comprehend all, if the clause: and the length as one (any one) of the tribe portions from the eastward side to the westward (seaward) side, is to be understood in accordance with Ezekiel 45:7. Then, however, Ezekiel 48:9, the oblation, as it is distinctively called, which ye shall offer to Jehovah, will not, like that: which ye shall offer, in Ezekiel 48:8, be the Terumah in the special sense. The “sanctuary” in Ezekiel 48:8 forms the transition to this specializing.—Thus also it cannot be misunderstood when in Ezekiel 48:10 the oblation of holiness (comp. on Ezekiel 45) is adjudged to the priests, for the sanctuary lies in their portion.—The clause: northward, etc., makes the upper boundary of this main division of the whole the same (25,000) in length, that is, from east to west, as the last-measured boundary southward. Westward and eastward, whereby the breadth is given, that is, in the direction from north to south, the measurement yields the same result in each case, 10,000.—εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δΧαְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λεֹ fixes in some measure more exactly the αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λεֹ of Ezekiel 48:8, whose suffix Keil makes refer ad sensum to ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ, instead of to ϊְּ ?ψεּ ?ξָ ?δ, At all events, αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λεֹ there is not = “therein” (Hitzig). The expression: “in the midst,” refers, however, neither to one of the tribe-portions nor to the “oblation,” but to the priests’ portion, which the oblation bounds off on all sides. In our verse the suffix refers more definitely to the oblation of holiness in its length and breadth, which are given as to the four sides. Ezekiel 48:11. Kliefoth renders δַ ?ξְ ?χֻ ?γָּ ?ωׁ, “the hallowed portion,” to the priests it shall belong. So also Rashi. Pual pass., as it is, can here denote nothing more suitably, especially as the suffix in the previous αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λεֹ is thereby most easily explained. Most expositors, following the old translations, and influenced by Isaiah 13:3, render it in a plural sense; and similarly Kimchi takes it distributively: “he who is hallowed of the sons of Zadok.” The participle certainly lies inconveniently between μַ ?λֹּ ?ηֲ ?πִ ?ιν and ξִ ?αְּ ?πֵ ?ιΧ, but the plural in 2 Chronicles 26:18 cannot decide in favour of the singular here, for the singular here would, as Hengst. grants, denote “the hallowed part as distinct from the unconsecrated part,”—a restriction which can no longer be introduced in the case of the sons of Zadok (comp. Ezekiel 44:15 sq.), after they have been repeatedly represented as the hallowed priestly personelle. What does this saying of Hengstenberg’s mean: that they are sanctified “by their fidelity, by which they made their election sure”? It ought rather to be said that the part of the Terumah which is specially the Terumah—the “oblation of holiness” (as in Ezekiel 48:10), or δַ ?ξְ ?χֻ ?γָּ ?ωׁ, as is said here—belongs to those who are the priests of the future, namely, to the priests who are taken from the sons of Zadok, who kept, etc. (referring to the “sons of Zadok”); comp. Ezekiel 44:15. The ξִ denotes no selection or restriction among the sons of Zadok, but simply their descent, whence these priests are, with a reference back to what is contained on that subject in the previous chapters. [Keil’s objection in respect to δַ ?ξְ ?χֻ ?γָּ ?ωׁ tells, moreover, against such a view as this: “to the priests it is consecrated,”—a view which indeed would correspond neither to the form of the text nor the facts of the case.] The mention of the going astray of the Levites, like whom the children of Israel went astray, shows, what hitherto is manifest throughout, namely, that the tribe of Levi, not the priestly family of Aaron, was intended; whereas Hengst., in order to have the necessary distinction and contrast, thinks of those who were “as a punishment desecrated (?), degraded, and reduced to mere Levites.” The meaning, on the contrary, is simply this: the sons of Zadok stood firm when the rest of Levi stumbled, and along with Levi, Israel. That some of the sons of Zadok also had gone astray, and in contrast to them the description here is given, is not the case. Ezekiel 48:12. εְ ?δָ ?ιְ ?ϊָ ?δμָ ?δֶ ?ν, although no formal apodosis to Ezekiel 48:11, most expressly confirms the view taken of Eze 48:11.—ϊְּ ?ψεּ ?ξִ ?ιָּ ?δ, as the following ξִ ?ο likewise shows, is less a part (Klief.) of the oblation, than an abstraction therefrom; hence in a spiritual respect somehow in relation to the oblation, what is most holy in relation to the sanctuary; Keil correctly: “the offering from the oblation.” But this “Terumiah” from the “Terumah” is designated most holy because it is this in relation to the part which belongs to the Levites. Observe how the old ordinances as regards places are converted into ordinances in reference to persons, and thereby Jehovah’s relation comes out as a relation appearing in men. [Hengst.: “the heave-portion which fell to the priests is designated most holy, because it has God’s sanctuary in the midst of it, and belongs to His most eminent ministers, in distinction from the part of the Levites, which has only the second degree of holiness, and from that of the city, which has only the third” (?).] The closing definition: ΰֶ ?μΞβְּ ?αεּ ?μΧ, not merely forms the transition to what follows, but also indicates that we have to imagine the priests’ portion as adjoining the south or the north side of the Levites’ portion.—In Ezekiel 48:13, accordingly, this latter is expressed, as it had to be expressed in respect of the Levites, namely: that they are to have their appointed portion close to the border of the priests (μְ ?ςֻ ?ξַּ ?ϊ). Hengst.: “In the description of the oblation, the prophet, for theological reasons, began with the middle portion, the priests’ part; it was then necessary to guard against the thought that the Levites’ part was separated by the city, or the city by the Levites’ part, from the sanctuary. The servants of the house, and likewise he inhabitants of the city, as constituting the holy assembly at the divine services, behoved to have the sanctuary as near as possible.” Comp. for the determination of the circumference, Ezekiel 45:5. As to the repeated closing clause: the whole length, it will lose its appearance of tautology if we assume with Kliefoth that it is meant to express briefly the two lengths (north and south) and the two breadths (east and west), instead of going through the cardinal points one by one, as in Ezekiel 48:10. Ezekiel 48:14. Comp. Leviticus 25:34. “It is regarded as the gift of first-fruits to Jehovah, to which the Lord has the sole right, and which thus may never come into the hands of another” (Hδv.). “The ordinance applies naturally also to the priests, land, although it is expressly given only for the Levites’ part, because its holiness is less, so that the thought of its being saleable might more readily arise” (Hengst.).—ιַ ?ςֲ ?αεֹ ?ψ (Qeri: ιַ ?ςֲ ?αִ ?ιψ); the Kal is quite sufficient, there is no need of a Hiphil form.—That which is acknowledged as first-fruits of the land is holy to Jehovah. “Traffic is excluded where God is the landowner and the Levites only usufructuaries” (Hengst.). “This land is an offering; the heaving is one form for it, and the gift of first-fruits the other” (Klief.). As in Ezekiel 45:6, so now in Ezekiel 48:15, the possession of the city comes after the land of the priests and Levites. Kliefoth observes, referring to Ezekiel 40:2 (?), that the prophet beheld the city to the south; hence it lay south of the priests’ portion and the sanctuary, and so the Levites’ portion lay north of that of the priests. Ezekiel, he goes on to say, setting out as he does from the middle of the Terumah, does not, as in the division of the land among the tribes, follow the direction from north to south, but takes first the more central priests’ portion (Ezekiel 48:9-12); but the fact that he then (Ezekiel 48:13-14) describes the Levites’ portion, lying north of it, and thereafter takes up the city-possession, lying south of the priests’ portion, has its ground in this, that the portion of the Levites is also holy, whereas the portion of the city is profane. It is still simpler to take as motive for the order observed, besides the reference to Ezekiel 45., the connection of priests and Levites with the central sanctuary. In this way the Levites necessarily preceded the city. The five thousand are left when we subtract twice ten thousand in breadth (Ezekiel 48:9; Ezekiel 48:13) from five and twenty thousand in breadth, that is, from north to south (Ezekiel 48:8).—δַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ψ is neuter, according to Hitzig; it is the particip. Niph. of ςַ ?μτְּ ?πֵ ?ι—ιָ ?ϊַ ?ψ, before the side in question, namely, from east to west; this gives a third oblong, which, however, is only half the breadth of the two former.—ηεֹ ?μ is profane, in contrast to the former “most holy” and “holy” of the portion of the priests and Levites. Philippson: “they are common land for the city, for dwellings, and for environs.” These five thousand are set apart generally for the city (μָ ?ςִ ?ιψ), and specially for dwellings and as precincts for free use, pasture, arable land, etc. As the city is the title for this portion of land, so the verse concludes by stating that the city is αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λֹ ?δ. Hengst. makes the feminine suffix refer to the city in the wider sense (μָ ?ςִ ?ιψ), within which the city in the narrower sense lies. Kliefoth translates: “in the middle in it.” Since the city lies in the midst of the city-district, this makes it, as Klief. observes, lie right opposite the sanctuary in the south. Ezekiel 48:16 first subjoins the more exact statement in regard to the length from east to west, previously only indicated by ςַ ?μτְּ ?πֵ ?ι. The oblation affords it a front of five and twenty thousand; its measure, however, is such as to make a square of four thousand five hundred on each side, to which is added in Ezekiel 48:17 an open space of two hundred and fifty on each of the four sides. The η֯ ?ξωׁ found in the text, and left by the Masorites unpunctuated, is almost universally considered an error of transcription; Hengst., on the contrary, says: “It points to this, that the south side equally with the north side has 4500 cubits; five stands for: on the five, or: to the five,” etc. The length of the city-district (namely, city and free space), from east to west, amounts to 4500 + 250 + 250 = 5000, and to the same in breadth from north to south, so that the square in this respect occupies the entire breadth of the city-district, while it only comes to a fifth of the 25,000 in length from east to west. [“The small compass of the city district” (cubits!), observes Hengst., “wholly excludes the inhabitants from agriculture.”] Ezekiel 48:18 disposes of what remains of the length (Klief.: “in the length”) along the holy oblation, the section eastward and the section seaward, 10,000 each. “This is to remain over against the holy Terumah, that is, as a part of it, although it is assigned neither to the priests, nor the Levites, nor the city” (Klief.). Hengst. explains the phrase: “over against the holy oblation,” as indicating “that we are not to imagine that the Levitical part is shoved in between, whereby the holy oblation would be separated from its guardians.” The proventus, the ϊְּ ?πּ ?εּ ?ΰָ ?δ of the δַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ψ, what of fruit the soil of these two districts yields, is destined for support (μְ ?μֶ ?ηֶ ?ν) for the labourers of the city. They are further described in Ezekiel 48:19, where it is said of them: ιַ ?ςַ ?αְ ?γεּ ?δεּ (1) Hδv.: “By these are not meant slaves, nor (as Kimchi) such as cultivate gardens and fields (against which there is the δָ ?ςִ ?ιψ), but, as Gesenius puts it: those who perform service in building the city, which the prophet represents as an honourable office. The holy city as well as the temple belongs now to no single tribe, but to all Israel, so all the tribes take part in building and maintaining it, by workmen chosen for the purpose, who receive their support from land assigned to them situated in the immediate vicinity of the holy temple-district.” Hδvernick makes ιַ ?ςַ ?αְ ?γεּ ?δεּ refer to δַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ψ, and the last thought of Eze 48:18 to be: “the residue of the city-district shall serve for support to the workmen, and they shall cultivate it, for which they shall be bound to the service of the city.” (2) Hengst. translates thus: “who serve the city;” and “can only understand by this a militia (!) that take the city in the midst,—military service is the only possible service on a large scale to a city,—and, as is so emphatically stated, are encamped as a guard beside the holy oblation with the temple.” “On the north side of the holy oblation are the Levites as the militia sacra (Numbers 4:23; Numbers 8:24); on the south side the ministers of the secular arm, which has to protect the Church.” “Adjoining the provision made for these servants on both sides is the domain of the prince (?!), who is to be considered the commander of these guards.” For ςָ ?αַ ?γ, in the sense of “military service,” Hengst. refers to Ezekiel 29:20. But if ever an exposition has missed the mark, it is here. We hear the mounting of guard on the Berlin University Platz, and Hengst. must also mention Egypt as an example “of such military colonies endowed with land;” he comforts himself with the thought that this militia “is not to be gathered out of the lands of other lords, as formerly the Cherethites and Pelethites, but is to consist of such as are willing also to serve their Lord in this lower (!) sphere.” (3) Klief.: “The workmen of the city are the labouring class dwelling in it; in this city they are not to be destitute of possession, as is usual in the cities of men, therefore considerable portions of land are assigned to them for support; and to explain this Ezekiel 48:19 subjoins, that from all the tribes of Israel (ςָ ?αַ ?γ, transitively with the accus.) they are to employ these in labour; namely, when they come from all parts of the land to the holy city to the feasts, and because the land in the capital gives employment to labourers,” etc. (4) Hitzig takes ςָ ?αַ ?γ as colere locum, of cultivating through residence = to inhabit: hence, “for the inhabitants of the city;” Ezekiel 48:19 : “And as to the inhabitants of the city, people from all the tribes of Israel shall inhabit it.”—δָ ?ςֹ ?αֵ ?γ, singular, stands as collective, “but the suffix in ιַ ?ςַ ?αְ ?γεּ ?δεּ does not refer to it, and to make it refer to δַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ψ would yield no suitable sense; hence we are to read: ιַ ?ςַ ?αְ ?γεּ ?δָ, and the reference to ςִ ?ιψ, which is certainly not of the common gender, is to be accepted.” As in Ezekiel 48:18 the masculine suffix in ϊְּ ?αεּ ?ΰָ ?ϊֹ ?δ refers to δַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ψ, so also does the suffix in ιςαγεּ ?δεּ. Ewald translates thus: “And every labourer of the city will cultivate it.” Neteler: “and as to the workman of the city, one will take him for workman out of,” etc. Ezekiel 48:20 sums up the whole, namely, of the previously described oblation, as a square of 25,000, i.e. inclusive of the possession of the city; and then describes the possession of the city as a fourth-part of the “oblation of holiness,” as the portions of the priests and Levites in the narrower sense are called, which have a breadth of 20,000, of which the 5000 of the possession of the city are a fourth. Philippson, on the other hand, translates thus: “In square form shall ye offer the holy oblation, together with the property of the city;” as similarly Ewald. And already Hδvernick took ΰֶ ?μΞ as: “in addition to the possession of the city.” Ezekiel 48:21; comp. Ezekiel 45:7. The portion of the prince on both sides, east and west, of the “oblation” described in Ezekiel 48:8 (25,000 from east to west). ΰֶ ?μΞτְּ ?πֵ ?ι, translated by Ewald: “close to;” by Hengst.: “over against;” by others: “along,” with reference to the east and west skirt of the Terumah, which was only 25,000 long. The position is described first eastward, and then, with some variations (instead of ΰֶ ?μ, now ςַ ?μ, with omission of the “oblation;” instead of ςַ ?γΞβְּ ?αεּ ?μ, now ςַ ?μΞβּ ?Χ), westward likewise; while in conclusion there is added: close to the tribe-portions. It is scarcely necessary to remark in explanation, that the prince’s portion abuts on the north (like the Levites’ portion) on the portion of Judah, on the south (like the possession of the city) on the portion of Benjamin. That which lies eastward and westward between Judah and Benjamin belongs to the prince, to whose domain the suffix in αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λֹ ?δ‌ ?֯ refers, namely, to δַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ψ. Ezekiel 48:22 describes the same object, only instead of eastward and westward, it is now from north to south; hence, setting out from the possession of the Levites, namely, in the north, and from the possession of the city.—The designation αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?κְ does not belong to δָ ?ςִ ?ιψ (Keil), but stands as an asyndeton, like: possession of the Levites, and: possession of the city; and counts as the third the central part, namely, the portion of the priests, with the lately-mentioned temple-sanctuary, after mention has been made of the two outer parts. Thus, what is to be the prince’s domain extends from north to south, namely, on both sides (Ezekiel 48:21); and when it is described as in the direction of north to south, it is represented as lying between the border of Judah and between the border of Benjamin. The question, moreover, of Ezekiel 45 is renewed here: rods? or cubits? Keil and Kliefoth reckon by rods, because, reckoned by cubits, “the prince’s land would be more than six times as large as the whole Terumah;” whereas, measuring by rods, the actual size of the land is in correspondence. Hengst. adduces the fifty stadia of Hecatζus in proof of the 18,000 cubits of Jerusalem. Ezekiel 48:23-29.—The Five Lower Tribe-portionsEze_48:23.—The rest of the tribes follow southward: first, Benjamin, which tribe opens the series on this side, as Judah closed it on the other. Three pairs precede Judah, and two pairs follow Benjamin: first, Ezekiel 48:24, Simeon; thereafter; Ezekiel 48:25, Issachar; then, Ezekiel 48:26, Zebulon; and, finally, Ezekiel 48:27, Gad.—For Ezekiel 48:28 comp. on Ezekiel 47:19. Ezekiel 48:29, a closing formula. Hengst.: “It is said of the inheritance, because a part of the whole was not to be distributed, but to be previously set apart as holy ground.” [“The desire of giving due prominence to the sacred portions in the centre, leads the prophet again to enter into some statements regarding the Terumah, or oblation, and its subdivisions. Nothing of importance is added to what was said before, except that the 5000 rods apportioned out of the 25,000 square to the city is here laid off in a square of 4500, with the 250 all round for suburbs. This space for the city was not strictly holy ground, in the sense that the sacerdotal portions were, and hence it is called profane or common. But being thus immediately connected with the sacred portions, and standing apart from the individual tribes, the city built on it formed a fit and proper centre to the whole land—in its position and its structure the bean-ideal of a theocratic capital, encompassed by the most hallowed influences, and fitted to exert a uniting and healthful effect upon the entire community. Hence the prophet closes the description by the mention of some things regarding the city which might serve more deeply to impress the feeling of its being the suitable representative and common centre of the community. Itself occupying a central position, and immediately in front of the house of God, it was also to have twelve gates, bearing the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel; in token that all the family of faith had their representation in it, and, as if they were actually resident in it, stood before the Lord for the enjoyment of His favour and blessing. He specifies, again, the entire circumference of the city, 18,000 rods (between twenty and thirty miles), as a symbol of the immense numbers of the covenant-people under the new and better dispensation of the future, immeasurably transcending what had existed under the old. And to exhibit the character of the city itself as representative of the community at large, and indicative of its own relative position, it was to bear from that day, namely, from the period of the beginning of this new and better order of things, the honourable name of ‘Jehovah-Shammah’—not, as has been already stated, Jehovah-there, but Jehovah-thither, or thereupon. For it was in the temple, rather than in the city, that the Lord was represented as having His peculiar dwelling-place. But His eyes were to be ever from the temple toward the city, and again from the city toward the whole land. The manifestations of His love and goodness were to radiate from the chosen seat of the kingdom through all its borders; He in all, and all united and blessed in Him. So that the consummation of this vision substantially corresponds with the object prayed for by our Lord, when He sought respecting His people that they might be where He was, and that they might be all one, as He and the Father are one; He in them, and they in Him, that they might be made perfect in one.”—Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 499, 500.—W. F.] Ezekiel 48:30-35.—The City as to Extent, Gates, and Name. In continuation of Eze 48:15 sq., we have now in Ezekiel 48:30 the out-goings of the city, that is, the outlets, with evident reference to the gates; for “the boundary-lines marked out by walls” (Hengst.), “the extremities into which a city runs out” (Keil), are only such in virtue of the gates. The measure here on each of the four sides Isaiah 4500; comp. Ezekiel 48:16.—The detailed account begins, as in the dividing of the land, and so with evident reference thereto, from the north. Ezekiel 48:31. The gates are designated after the names of the tribes of Israel. There are three gates to each side, hence twelve in all; comp. Revelation 21:12. The naming does not follow the position of the tribe-district, and thus the omitted tribe of Levi appears here in the north, honoured by a gate named after it. The three sons of Leah (as Deuteronomy 33) are first mentioned; as Keil observes: “the first-born by age, the first-born in virtue of the patriarchal blessing, and the one chosen of Jehovah for His service instead of the first-born of Israel.” In Ezekiel 48:32 the three east gates, where Joseph is named next after Levi, and comprehends in his name his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (“Rachel’s sons and the son of her handmaid,” Keil). In Ezekiel 48:33 the three south gates bear the names of the other three sons of Leah; and, lastly, in Ezekiel 48:34 the west gates are given, after the names of the other three sons of the handmaids, as Keil observes. Ezekiel 48:35. Then follows the close of the book; it closes with a name, with the symbolical name of the city, whose whole compass—doubtless calculated likewise in a symbolical point of view—is given as: 4 Χ 4500 = 18,000. Kliefoth remarks on this number, that it =Isaiah 12 Χ 1500; hence, a product of 12 by a multiple of 10. “The city of the people of God,” says he, “has now become the capital of the new world.” Neteler connects with it the millennial kingdom, saying: “A thousand years are with God as one day, and one day as a thousand years; hence the city is called the millennial kingdom” (!).—The name of the city is annexed to its whole circumference, just as before the gates named follow the statement of the extent. Thus it appears that the name of the city itself now expresses the same relation to Jehovah which the names of the gates did to the people of the covenant. Hitzig translates: “The name of the city is from that day: Jehovah there,” and understands this to mean: from the day of its being built. Hδvernick makes the following excellent remarks on the whole connection: “Already in the foregoing the thought was made prominent, that Jerusalem should be the common property of all the tribes. Over against the temple, the place of the divine revelation is Jerusalem, the Church of God, living before and in Him. As such, it forms a closely knit together, indissoluble whole, a stately unity rooting itself in God. In order duly to set forth this thought, there is annexed to the division of the land among the individual tribes a consideration of the city itself. For that division is nothing less than an isolating or dissevering of the individual tribes; but forthwith the higher unity of the prophetic intuition, again embracing and knitting all firmly together, presents itself. The community is one accepted of God and hallowed to Him; standing itself in the presence of God, it forms the one true stem of the new Church, and has thereby reached its full destination. In the first place, the greatness of the community expresses itself to the prophet in the compass of the city; and then in its name, its quality, its holiness. ‘From that day,’ that is: henceforth for ever, Isaiah 43:13. The name itself is: ‘Jehovah thither,’ not: Jehovah shall dwell there. For Ezekiel distinguishes between temple and city: Jehovah does not properly dwell in Jerusalem, but, in the proper and highest sense, only in His sanctuary. Thence He looks toward Jerusalem, is turned thither with the fulness of His love and grace. What now makes Jerusalem a true city of God is the love entirely turned toward it, the good pleasure of God resting upon it,” etc. Hengst.: ξִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν means: from the day when what is described will be so; it does not and cannot mean: “always,” and just as little can it mean: “from to-day.” ωָׁ ?ξָּ ?δ is not: “there,” but, as always: “thither.” But query Ezekiel 23:3 in Ezekiel himself, if not Ezekiel 32:29 sq. He explains the name from Deuteronomy 11:12. “This ‘Jehovah thither’ manifested itself in the most glorious manner in the appearing of Christ, in the many attempts He made to gather the children of Jerusalem, in His tears over Jerusalem. When, however, His own would not receive Him, then the ‘Jehovah thither,’ which had availed for the restored city five hundred years, passed over to the new people of God, the legitimate continuation of Israel and Jerusalem (Matthew 21:43), to which Jesus had promised to be with them unto the end of the world.”—Kliefoth with right expresses himself against an alteration of the punctuation (ωָׁ ?ξָּ ?δ into ωְׁ ?ξָ ?δּ, “and the name of the city is henceforth: Jehovah is its name”), and also against the idea that ωָׁ ?ξָּ ?δ can mean anything else than: “thither.” “But then the name purports that Jehovah will raise Himself up thither, toward the city, and will do so from the day, that is, from to-day, that this city and what depends upon it may come into being.” In view of the total ruin of the people of God, the whole comfort of the prophet’s predictions, the full significance of his labours, is yet once more completely summed up in the last words of his ministry. Schmieder says: “Notwithstanding the irregularity of the natural boundaries, Ezekiel views the Holy Land as a rectangular, oblong quadrilateral, etc. The centre falls exactly at Sychar, where Jesus speaks to the woman of Samaria (John 4). Mount Gerizim is the site of the new temple, but the Holy City is at a distance of about five miles off; the place in which it is situated is ‘the place of Bethel.’ The revelation of John contains in its closing chapters cognate views, which presuppose and surpass, but do not exactly interpret Ezekiel.” NOTE [“Thus ends the marvellous vision of the prophet—alike marvellous whether we look to the lofty pattern (true in the spirit, though unavoidably wearing the garb of imperfect forms and shadowy relations) which it embodied of better things to come in God’s kingdom, or to the time chosen for presenting this to the Church of God. The cause of Heaven was then at its lowest ebb. The temple that had been, together with the kingdom it symbolized and represented, were laid in ruins; they were to be seen only in broken fragments and mournful dilapidations, as if smitten with the powerful curse of an irrecoverable perdition. Yet from the midst of these howling desolations, as from the very ‘suburbs of hell,’ the prophet ascends, with assured step, the mount of vision, and has there exhibited to his view, not, indeed, the very image of better things to come, but the ideal pattern after which the blessed and glorious future was to be fashioned. He even sees it as already present; and, with such imperfect materials of thought and utterance as then stood at his command, he gives it forth to the Church and the world as a thing which his own eyes had beheld, showing how God would certainly dwell with His people in a manner He had never done before—how He would at once immeasurably extend the sphere of His kingdom, and greatly elevate the condition of those who belonged to it—and how, through the copious effusions of His life-giving Spirit, the former imperfections should be done away, the most remote regions of the divine territory hallowed and blessed, and even the peculiar haunts of cursing and desolation made to rejoice and blossom like the rose. ‘O scenes surpassing fable, and yet true ! Scenes of accomplished bliss! which, who can see, Though but in distant pro pect, and not feel His soul refreshed with foretaste of the joy?’ “That such scenes should hare been described with such assured confidence, and at a time so deeply overspread with gloom, was indeed an ennobling triumph of faith over sight. It gave a most illustrious proof of the height in spiritual discernment, and far-reaching insight into the purposes of Heaven, which is sometimes imparted in the hour of greatest need, especially to the more select instruments of the Spirit’s working. And surely the children of the kingdom now must be chargeable with neglecting an important privilege, if they fail to profit by so inspiriting an example. Here the heart of faith is taught never to despair—not even in the darkest seasons. And when it is seen how much of the scheme delineated in the prophetic vision has already been accomplished, should not believers feel encouraged to look and strive for its complete realization, assured that God is ready to hear their cry, and to second with the aid of His Spirit the efforts that are made to dispossess and drive out the hostile powers that continue to linger in His kingdom? It is theirs, if they feel thus, not only to contend in the best of causes, but also with the surest prospect of success; for the Lord Himself is upon their side, and His Word of promise must be established. ‘Thus heavenward all things tend. For all were once Perfect, and all must be at length restored. So God has greatly purposed; who would else In His dishonoured works Himself endure Dishonour, and be wronged without redress! —Come, then, and added to Thy many crowns, Receive yet one as radiant as the rest, Due to Thy last and most effectual work, Thy word fulfilled, the conquest of a world.’ ” —Fairbairn’s Ezekiel, pp. 501, 502.—W. F.] 1. Ch. 40–46 show the temple and its service; Ezekiel 47, 48, the land and the city. It may be said that in these two parallels temple and service stand related to each other, as do land and city. The temple comes to expression in its service, as the land finds its most expressive name in the city, Ezekiel 48:35. But the land gets sanctification, healing, and quickening from the temple; so that the waters which stream forth from the temple in connection with the entrance of the glory of Jehovah into the sanctuary, and transmit the blessing of the temple to the land, are the kernel, as they are the connecting link between the two closing sections of our prophetic book. 2. Hδvernick sums up what has preceded in the expression (Revelation 22:3): “And the throne of God, etc., shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him.” Ch. 40–43 treat of “the new and glorious indwelling of the Lord in Israel;” Ezekiel 44-45 “of the new service of the Lord which shall follow on the ground of that completion of all the divine manifestations of grace;” now, however, according to him, “the rich blessing of God which comes upon the new community from the new indwelling of God” is described. This latter assertion cannot be upheld in the face of Ezekiel 47; at least, Ezekiel 48:1-12 of that chapter, keeping, as they do, within Canaan, appear to exhibit in a very characteristic manner the perfection of Israel, rather than to contain an account of what accrues to the new community of the Lord in the way of a rich blessing of God. The community of the future, with the service which obtains in this temple, is described as being what it should be. For as Jehovah (Ezekiel 36:27) puts His Spirit within Israel, so He makes them walk in His statutes, and keep and do His judgments. But this sanctification of Israel comes (Ezekiel 37:28) with the sanctuary in the midst of them. Hence not only the specially priestly temple-service (Ezekiel 44), but likewise the representation therein of the people by the prince, yea, the people themselves (Ezekiel 46:3; Ezekiel 46:9), and that, as Ezekiel 45 shows, as to judgment and justice (comp. Ezekiel 44:24) in all their affairs (Ezekiel 45:9 sq.), appear in connection with the sanctuary. When Ezekiel portrays the new community as conformed to the law in their worship, this specially manifests the connection of the sanctification of Israel with the sanctuary of Jehovah (in accordance with Ezekiel 37:28); in general, however, the prophet comes in this way only to that which he has always throughout his book prophesied as the form of the sanctification and holiness of Israel. Only the deviations here and there from the Mosaic law in the service of the future defined by the temple, and in general, the freedom which prevails in this respect in the ordinances (while Ezra’s scrupulously exact adherence to the law shows the direct opposite), presuppose so very significantly for this future of which Ezekiel prophesies the fulfilling of the law in the popular life. The letter of the law is, as to its spirit, learned in the Spirit which Jehovah put within Israel (comp. also Ezekiel 39:29), in that it is lived, in that the idea of the law has become the life of the people. Thus there is an end to the pζdagogy of the law. The fulfilled idea of the law, as exemplified by our prophet, realizes itself in a newness of life. But that this newness has still its expression in a legal form, in the forms of the Mosaic worship, as little disparages the new reality of the future, as when in the New Testament the sacrificial service furnishes clothing for the thoughts of the Christian life. It is, however, a proof not only of the priestly, but of the historical standpoint generally of Ezekiel’s prophecy; it is the necessary shell which adheres thereto. Comp. besides the Doct. Reflec. on Ezekiel 40-46. 3. The waters from the sanctuary—to which they are finally traced back again in Ezekiel 48:12, and consequently are represented as belonging thereto—no doubt raise up fruit-bearing trees on their banks; but the significance of this is not the amplification, e.g. of Ezekiel 34:26 sq., that is, the fruitfulness of the land (Ezekiel 36:8 sq., 29 sq.); for as the aim of this water is the healing of the Dead Sea (Ezekiel 47:8 sq.), so likewise the foliage of these fruit-trees serves for healing (Ezekiel 47:12). We may say: As the aim of the temple-sanctuary is sanctification, so that of the waters from the sanctuary is healing, so that sanctification and healing are the two leading theological thoughts dominating the whole closing part of Ezekiel. But with the thought of healing the completion of Israel is already alluded to. 4. Ezekiel 16:53 prophesied the ethical restoration of Sodom, and the same thought returns here with the healing of the waters of the Dead Sea. Since the Dead Sea, like Sodom and Gomorrah, stands throughout the whole of Scripture as a type of judgment, the judgment is, in the character of threatening, by its healing symbolically removed from the sight of Israel. Israel by its sanctification is exempted from judgment, has no further judgment to fear (Ezekiel 39:29). The healing of the Dead Sea in its land, which immediately precedes the settling of the boundaries and the division of the land (Ezekiel 47:13 sq.), is the characteristic symbol of the completion of Israel, the community of God. Only the salt pools and pits of Eze 47:11 still remain, but in the same way as when in the closing verse of Isaiah (Isaiah 66:24) they go out and look upon the carcases of the apostates, whose worm dieth not, etc., and who are an abhorring unto all flesh. 5. From Genesis onward, which also relates the genesis of Israel as the people of God, there runs through Holy Scripture a twofold reference, namely, to the people of the promise, and to the Promised Land. This twofold reference meets us here also in these closing chapters. But as we have repeatedly seen, the people of Israel are to be taken in their prophetical character of the future as referring to mankind, and the land of Israel is to be taken as referring to the earth. Now in Ezekiel, people and land become united in the symbol of the sanctuary, of the temple in the midst of the twelve tribes and their portions of land, as indeed the prophet accentuates this centre, which thus unites all the parts into a whole. By this the idea is symbolized which has realized itself in the Son of man, who unites mankind in Himself; who as the second Adam is the centre for the whole earth; who can say: To Me is given all power in heaven and on earth, go ye therefore and make disciples of all nations, and preach the gospel to the whole creation! We have there the sanctuary for sanctification, and here the Saviour for healing; preparation and fulfilment, beginning and end. 6. Stier on John 7:38 rightly interprets the word of Scripture to which our Lord appeals there as referring to Christ Himself (Words of the Lord Jesus, vol. 5 p. 282 sq.; Clark’s Tr.). When here in Ezekiel the healing, life-giving waters flow from the temple, then, at least according to what Scripture here says (but comp. also Joel 4[3] 18, and afterwards Zechariah 14:8), the fulfilment cannot possibly be sought for in him who believes in Christ, (ὁπιστευωνεἰςἐμε corresponds to the ἐρχεσθωπροςἐμε (Ezekiel 48:37), just as in John 6:35 ὁἐρχομενοςπροςμε and ὁπιστευωνεἰςἐμε mutually correspond.) The αὐτος, out of whose κοιλιαποταμοιῥευσουσινὑδατοςζωντος, can also according to John only be He ἐφʼ ? ὁν the Baptist (John 1:33) Saw τοπνευμακαταβαινονκαιμενονἐπ̓αὐτον, and with allusion to whom he says in general (John 3:34): οὐγαρἐκμετρουδιδωσινὁθεοςτοπνευμα. This One who is the Anointed κατʼ ? ἐξοχην explains to the Jews (John 2) the temple of His body. Consequently He not only could, but must have understood of Himself what the Scripture says of the “rivers of living water flowing out,” as He also began by saying: If any man thirst, let him come unto Me; and this quite apart from the circumstance that, as the feast suggested ever since the march through the wilderness, “the spiritual rock that followed” was, as Paul expressly says in 1 Corinthians 10:4, the Anointed One. Zechariah 12:10 also was very clearly uttered with this reference, as Jesus, too, in John 7:39 spoke of the Spirit, not that should flow out from him that believes on Him, but “that they should receive (λαμβανειν) who believe on Him; for πνευμαἁγιον (in the sense of the outpouring of Zec 12:10) was not yet, because Jesus was not yet glorified.” Comp. John 20:22. Thus Christ has interpreted Ezekiel 47:1-12 as referring to the Spirit of Pentecost. When Stier, in accordance with his apocalyptic mysticism, makes the thought be included here of “the community of the Lord, particularly in its glorious final perfection, but only the community as a whole, in so far as the Lord Himself flows through and tills it, sends forth from it His streams of blessing,”—that goes beyond the letter, upon which Stier insists so much, and beyond the sense and spirit of the letter in John; and, moreover, the word of prophecy in Ezekiel does not point to such a perfection. We may at all events say with Roffhack (Ev. Johannis, i. p. 302 sq.): “In the derived sense the saying may hold good of believers; for twelve Galilean fishermen and publicans produced that spiritual movement in the world, the swell of whose waves still at the present time presses onward to the remotest ends of the earth.” “Interpreted as referring to believers generally,” observes Roffhack, “it could not but wholly mislead thousands regarding their own faith and that of their brethren.” 7. Hengstenberg says in his commentary on our prophet: “We shall have to regard as the Mediator of this salvation for the whole world the exalted Descendant of David, who, according to Ezekiel 17:23, grows up from a feeble sapling to a glorious cedar, under which all fowls dwell; to the fowls of every wing there, correspond here the fish of every kind in Ezekiel 48:10. In harmony with our prophecy, the salvation here announced took its beginning in the time of the second temple, and poured itself forth from the place where Jesus had the chief seat of His activity over the nations of the earth” (comp. on John 7:3-4). In the Christology, 2d ed., he observes in particular: “In Ezekiel the water issues forth under the threshold of the house toward the east; according to the Apocalypse, the stream of water proceeds from the throne of God and of the Lamb. John has completed Ezekiel 47:1 from Ezekiel 43:7. The reason why the streams of salvation now proceed from the sanctuary, is that the Lord has entered into it with His glory. From the temple, now lying in ruins, they could not issue, because the temple was not yet truly the place of God’s throne. This the sanctuary, that is, the Church, first became through Him in whom dwells the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Henceforth it is called ‘Jehovah there,’ Ezekiel 48:35. As the announcement of the indwelling of the glory of the Lord in Ezekiel 43 found its fulfilment in Christ, so John points to this when he speaks of the throne of God and of the Lamb.” In his commentary he says: “The relations of the New Testament to our section (Ezekiel 47:1-12) are very rich and manifold. In reference to it the Lord, in Matthew 4:18-19, speaks to Peter and Andrew. On it rests the miraculous draught of fishes by Peter at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus (Luke 5), and likewise the draught after the resurrection (John 21). Jesus with evident design embodies, at the commencement and the close, the contents of our prophecy in a symbolic act. Not less allusive to our prophecy is the parable of the net which gathered of every kind (Matthew 13:47). Finally, in Revelation 22:1-2, the last and most glorious fulfilment is announced.” 8. “Other prophets, too, have the symbol of a temple fountain (comp. Joel 4:[3] 18, and Zechariah 14:8), but nowhere is it seen so beautifully carried out as here” (Umbreit). The fundamental passage, or at least the older passage, is Joel’s. It is not necessary, however, to consider Ezekiel as borrowing from Joel; the thought is applied as originally in him as in Joel or Zechariah; the only thing common to the three is the water. But unmistakeably there is a connection between the three prophetic passages. That which the healing of the Dead Sea, this removal of a spectacle of judgment as old as the days of Abraham, signifies in Ezekiel as to the fulfilment of Israel, is in Joel, likewise as to Israel, expressed in the watering of the valley of Shittim, which symbolizes as fulfilled the wilderness-journey of Israel, their period of probation generally. With the east sea Zechariah takes up Ezekiel’s thought of judgment of the Dead Sea, but with the west sea he subjoins thereto reference to the salvation coming from the Jews unto the Gentiles. The Israel completed in the Messiah, in Christ, the temple, draws water with joy from the wells of salvation (Isaiah 12:3). When Jehovah counts and writes up His people among the nations (Psalms 87), all His springs are in Zion. “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters,” it is said in Isaiah 55, for there is a river whose streams make glad the city of God, the dwelling-place of the Most High (Psalms 46), whereas judgment passes over the world in the morning of the day of the Lord. Peace to him that is far off, and to him that is near, saith the Lord; I healed it, Isaiah 57:19. 9. Before we take up for comparison the representation given in the Revelation of John, let us first consider the order in our prophet. That which was prophesied to Israel specially in Ezekiel 37:26 is carried into effect in Ezekiel 40-48, in which the Messianic salvation as to land and city is symbolically set forth in the temple, its service, and the waters. These chapters are eschatological in the sense that Christ and the Christian Church are the end, the fulfilment of Israel. Ch. 38 and 39, again, contain eschatology in another sense, that is, the Christian sense; see p. 374 sq. These chapters are a specifically apocalyptic enclave in Ezekiel, whose close (Ezekiel 39:21 sq.) then points back to Ezekiel 37, by way of preparation for the following chapters, and to form connection with them. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/