IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE BIBLE THAT PUZZLES YOU?

If so please EMail us with your question and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer.EMailus.

FREE Scholarly verse by verse commentaries on the Bible.

THE PENTATEUCH

GENESIS ---EXODUS--- LEVITICUS 1.1-7.38 --- 8.1-11.47 --- 12.1-16.34--- 17.1-27.34--- NUMBERS 1-10--- 11-19--- 20-36--- DEUTERONOMY 1.1-4.44 --- 4.45-11.32 --- 12.1-29.1--- 29.2-34.12 --- THE BOOK OF JOSHUA --- THE BOOK OF JUDGES --- PSALMS 1-17--- ECCLESIASTES --- ISAIAH 1-5 --- 6-12 --- 13-23 --- 24-27 --- 28-35 --- 36-39 --- 40-48 --- 49-55--- 56-66--- EZEKIEL --- DANIEL 1-7 ---DANIEL 8-12 ---

NAHUM--- HABAKKUK---ZEPHANIAH ---ZECHARIAH --- THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW ---THE GOSPEL OF MARK--- THE GOSPEL OF LUKE --- THE GOSPEL OF JOHN --- THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES --- 1 CORINTHIANS 1-7 --- 8-16 --- 2 CORINTHIANS 1-7 --- 8-13 -- -GALATIANS --- EPHESIANS --- COLOSSIANS --- 1 THESSALONIANS --- 2 THESSALONIANS --- 1 TIMOTHY --- 2 TIMOTHY --- TITUS --- HEBREWS 1-6 --- 7-10 --- 11-13 --- JAMES --- JOHN'S LETTERS --- REVELATION

--- THE GOSPELS

A Commentary on Ezekiel - by Dr Peter Pett BA BD (Hons-London) DD

The Book of Ezekiel

The spur to Ezekiel’s ministry was that dreadful event in Israel’s history when King Jehoiachin and the cream of Judah’s society, along with Ezekiel, were transported from Judah to Babylon, a bedraggled file of prisoners, into what seemed like permanent exile in 597 BC (2 Kings 24.12-17). All hope in the promises of God seemed faint, although Jerusalem was still, for the present, left standing.

However, to the people Jerusalem was still a monument of hope. They saw it as God’s holy city, God’s dwellingplace, and because of this they believed that He would never allow it to be destroyed. They saw it as inviolate. It would be Ezekiel’s difficult task to inform them that, in the purposes of God, Jerusalem and the temple were in fact finally to be destroyed, and that soon. And to build up to this event, so that, when it happened, their faith would respond to it.

Ezekiel’s name means ‘God strengthens’, and he certainly needed to be strengthened by God for the ministry before him. He was of an important priestly family, although he probably never ministered as a priest, having not come of age when he was in Jerusalem, but he was chosen by God to minister as a priest-prophet among the exiled Jews in Babylon, to enable them to realise why they had been exiled, and to tell them what the future held in terms of restoration. It was a book both of judgment and restoration, of despair and hope. He graduated from being a proclaimer of God’s certain judgment on Jerusalem and the nations, to being a watchman for the people of God, with a the certain hope of God’s future blessing.

He had grown up in the reign of the godly king Josiah and had watched the way in which Judah had collapsed in its faith after the king’s death. He must have been familiar with the preaching of Jeremiah, and similar ideas to his occur in the book. But his main message centred on the glory of God, against which Judah and Israel had sinned. Although a message of gloom, it was also a message of hope amidst gloom. For this theme of God’s glory see 1.28; 3.12, 23; 8.4; 9.3; 10.4, 18-19; 11.22-23; 39.11, 21; 43.2-5; 44.4.

This glory was vividly revealed to him at the beginning of his ministry to let all know that God was with them in Babylon (chapter 1). But it was shown to have departed from Jerusalem (chapter 10) leaving Jerusalem a desolate waste, although God did promise that one day that glory would return to a new ideal temple (chapter 43). Meanwhile they were constantly told that God would act to keep His name glorious (20.9, 14, 22, 39, 44; 36.20-23; 39.7, 25; 43.7-8), and would make all know that ‘I am Yahweh’. The title ‘Lord Yahweh’ occurs over 200 times. Nebuchadnezzar may have conquered them but Yahweh was still their supreme Overlord.

The book is split into sections by its dating. 1.2 is dated July 592 BC, 8.1 is dated September 592/1 BC, 20.1 is dated August 591/0 BC, 24.1 is dated January 588 BC, 33.21 is dated January 586/5 BC and 40.1 is dated April 573/2 BC, which are in chonological order. The oracles against nations were also dated (26.1-32.32), but not in strict chronological order. There are slight differences among scholars in determining the exact dates. There were differing calendars which cannot always be tied up.

Chapter 1. The Vision Glorious.

In this chapter Yahweh is revealed as the God Who is over all creation, enthroned in divine splendour over the Universe, Who can work His will wherever and whenever He wishes. And yet at the same time He is the One Who is present with His people even in their exile, and His Spirit is there to act among them.

1.1 ‘Now it happened in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives (literally ‘the captivity’) by the River Chebar, that the heavens were opened and I saw visions of God.’

Ezekiel regularly dates his visions, but usually in terms of the date of the captivity (verse 2). Thus verse 1 is a bit of an enigma. To what does the ‘thirtieth year’ refer? The probable answer is that it refers to his coming of age as a levitical priest (compare Numbers 4). Although he would never fulfil priestly functions he recognised that God had given him a different ministry among the exiles as a priest-prophet, and that he had now come of age in God’s purposes.

(Other suggestions have included thirty years since the last jubile year, thirty years since the finding of the Law, the thirtieth year of Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar, and so on, but all fail on the basis that this would surely have been mentioned.)

These captives had settled at Tel Abib by the River Chebar (3.15). The Chebar may possibly be identified with the ‘nari kabari’ (the Great Canal), the name used in a Babylonian text from Nippur for the Shatt-en-Nil canal running east of that city, although it is not certain. There is a poignant note in his words, ‘among the captivity’. They were very much aware of their unhappy position. Jerusalem, their holy city, was far away and they were not free to return. Nebuchadnezzar’s purpose in bringing them there was so that they may settle there and make it a permanent home. They were never intended to return. Their hearts were very heavy.

‘That the heavens were opened and I saw visions of God.’ This is an introductory comment on the many things that followed. The phrase ‘the heavens were opened’ is simply an indication that he knew that what he saw came from God. Its source was heavenly. But it was very important. It indicated that God was there and had not forgotten them or totally rejected them.

‘I saw visions of God.’ These words gave hope. It meant that God still had a message for them, and had much to say to them. The first vision of God will now be described. It would be futile to try to analyse what was meant by ‘visions’. We only know that Ezekiel saw the unseeable. We cannot really go further than that. (See 1.26-28; 8.4; 40.2 and compare 2 Kings 6.17).

1.2-3 ‘In the fifth day of the month, which was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin’s captivity, the word of Yahweh came expressly to Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the River Chebar, and the hand of Yahweh was on him there.’

The captivity of Jehoiachin can be precisely dated on the basis of the Babylonian Chronicle tablets to March 597 BC, thus this would be in 592 BC.

The change to the third person does not necessarily indicate different authorship. Having commenced on a personal note, Ezekiel may well now be incorporating an official introduction in the third person to authenticate the book and reveal its authorship. This is especially so as the dating here does not stand by itself but requires verse 1 to tell us that it was the fourth month. (It is quite possible, however, that he may have used a scribe).

The introduction affirms the work to be that of Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi (see also 24.24). But what was more significant was that ‘the word of Yahweh’ came to him ‘in the land of the Chaldeans’ (that is Babylonia). God was not limited by boundaries or location. Note here that central to the visions was the coming of ‘the word of Yahweh’. God had given the visions so as to speak and act among His people.

‘And the hand of Yahweh was on him there.’ Nor was there a limit on His actions. For Ezekiel was not only aware of the word of Yahweh, but he experienced the hand of Yahweh. Indeed wherever His word comes His hand acts, to protect, to strengthen, to guide and to restore. Compare Elijah in 1 Kings 18.46 and Isaiah in Isaiah 8.11. See also Isaiah 25.10; 41.10, 20). But in Ezekiel the working of ‘the hand of Yahweh’ is seen in vivid ways (3.14, 22; 8.1; 33.22; 37.1; 40.1).

The Juggernaut of God (1.4-28).

1.4 ‘And I looked, and behold a stormy wind came out of the north, a great cloud, with a fire enfolding itself (or ‘flashing continually’), and a brightness round about it, and out of the midst of it as the colour of amber out of the midst of the fire.’

He describes the scene in terms of a great storm, with the stormy wind, the great cloud and the constantly flashing lightning. But there was an added extra for there was something in the midst of this storm that was like the colour of brightly shining metal (amber), which later he describes as being part of the vision of God (see verse 27). Storm terminology is regularly used to depict theophanies elsewhere (Job 38.1; 40.6; Psalm 18.9-15, 29; Zechariah 9.14 and compare Acts 2.1-4).

‘Behold a stormy wind came out of the north.’ The idea of winds associated with the living creatures (verse 5) reminds us of 2 Samuel 22.11; Psalm 18.10, ‘He rode upon a cherub and did fly, yes, He flew swiftly on the wings of the wind’, and this, in context, amidst fire and clouds and darkness. The thought includes speed of movement around the world with no restriction, and active, invisible power. The fact that it came ‘from the north’ indicates that Ezekiel was not so lost in the vision that he was not aware of his whereabouts, although Isaiah 14.13 suggests that ‘the far north’ was seen as the direction in which lay the gathering of the heavenly hosts of Yahweh in ‘the mount of the congregation’, in the heavens, above the stars of God.

‘A great cloud.’ Manifestations of God to His people were regularly described as accompanied by cloud associated with fire (Exodus 19.9, 16; 24.15-18; 40.34-38). The idea behind it is that God cannot be seen in His full glory by man. Man cannot see God and live. Therefore God in His mercy approaches in veiled form.

‘A fire enfolding itself, and brightness round about it.’ This reminds us of the flame of a sword (lightning?) that prevented access to the tree of life (Genesis 3.24), and the many times God is revealed in fire (e.g. Genesis 15.17; Exodus 3.2; 19.16, 18; 24.17). It revealed that God is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12.29 compare Deuteronomy 4.24), dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen nor can see (1 Timothy 6.16).

‘And out of the midst of it as the colour of amber out of the midst of the fire.’ By ‘amber’ is indicated the appearance of some kind of brilliantly shining metal. It is used in verse 27 to indicate the appearance of the likeness of the glory of Yahweh.

1.5-11 ‘And out of the midst of it came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance. They had the likeness of a man. And every one had four faces, and every one of them had four wings. And their feet were straight feet, and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot, and they sparkled like the colour of burnished brass. And they had the hands of a man under their wings on their four sides, and they four had their faces and their wings thus. Their wings were joined one to another. They turned not when they went. They went every one straight forward. As for the likeness of their faces, they had the face of a man, and they four had the face of a lion on the right side, and they four had the face of an ox on their left side. They four also had the face of an eagle. And their faces and their wings were separate above. Two (wings) of every one were joined one to another, and two covered their bodies.’

Out of the glory and power of the storm Ezekiel saw four living creatures. In chapter 10 we learn that they were cherubim. These were the bearers and protectors of God’s throne, and guarded the uniqueness of God (compare Genesis 3.24 where they prevented sinful man from living on beyond his span). They were the representatives before God of the whole living creation, for man, lion, ox and eagle represent all living creatures, man, wild beast, domestic animal and bird. As God comes He comes as Lord of creation, accompanied by the watchers over creation.

Excursus on the cherubim.

The general ‘likeness’ of cherubim was clearly well known to the children of Israel. They represented celestial beings, and unlike angels were seen as having wings, probably eagles’ wings. Yahweh is described as ‘dwelling between (or on) the cherubim’ (1 Samuel 4.4; 2 Samuel 6.2; 2 Kings 19.15; Psalm 80.1; 99.1 etc.), no doubt with the Ark of the Covenant in mind, sometimes explicitly. In Ezekiel 10 they appear again as bearers of the throne of Yahweh.

They were also clearly connected with the animal world. Thus here and in 10.14 each had the faces of man, lion, ox and eagle, and they had the hands of a man (1.8; 10.8) and feet like calves’ feet (1.7). In the Temple they were represented on curtains along with lions (1 Kings 7.36), lions and oxen (7.29), and palm trees and open flowers (1 Kings 6.29, 37; 7.36). In the temple they appear to have been two-winged (1 Kings 6.27), but here they have four wings so that they may cover their bodies with two. Compare Isaiah 6.1-6 where the seraphim (‘burning ones’) have six wings, of which four are to cover themselves before God. If we see the wings in 1 Kings 6.27 as the wings of an eagle we have there a parallel combination to that in Ezekiel 1 and 10 of lion, ox and eagle. In Ezekiel 41.18-20 they were connected with palm trees and had the faces of a man and a lion.

On the Ark they would seemingly have one face each (unless they have four faces facing in the same direction, which seems unlikely). Thus it is quite likely that their shape was somewhat similar to those found in excavations at Samaria and in Phoenicia with human face, lion body, four legs and two conspicuous and elaborate wings. At Byblos such beings are found supporting the throne of the king. The idea behind the presence of the cherubim is that Yahweh is attended by those who represent the whole of creation, man, wild beast, domestic beast and bird. The palm trees and open flowers on the curtains represent the inanimate creation. They are not quite so closely connected with Yahweh.

Thus they can be represented in various ways and we are not to take the descriptions as referring specifically to literal beings. In Revelation 4.7-8 each living creature represents a different earth creature, lion, calf, man and flying eagle, and they are full of eyes. They are symbolic, rather than literal, representations. Revelation 4 seems to borrow features of both seraphim and cherubim.

Their purpose would seem to be as guardians of eternal life (Genesis 3.24) and of the holiness of God, and as His closest servants and bearers of His throne. An intercessory function has been suggested but this is nowhere explicit in Scripture where they rather concentrate on the worship of Yahweh, confirm the worship of creation, and give the command for the carrying out of God’s judgments (Revelation 4.6-9; 5.14; 6.1-8; 8.13). In 1 Chronicles 28.18 they are spoken of as ‘the chariot’, and thus act as God’s chariot (2 Samuel 22.11; Psalm 18.10).

End of excursus.

‘They had the likeness of a man. And every one had four faces, and every one of them had four wings. And their feet (or ‘legs’) were straight feet (or ‘legs’), and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot, and they sparkled like the colour of burnished brass. And they had the hands of a man under their wings on their four sides.’ The general appearance was that of a man, but with essential differences. Their four faces represented all living creatures, their wings represented birds, their feet represented domestic animals, and possibly indicate sprightliness and nimbleness (Psalm 29.6; Malachi 4.2), their hands (probably four of them on their four sides, but it could be translated ‘and the hands of a man were on the sides of the four of them’) and legs represented man. Furthermore four is the number of earth. One significance of all this is that Yahweh was seen as continually enthroned above creation, and as served by creation.

It may also be that in the man, lion, ox and eagle we are to see rationality (man), fierceness and strength (lion - Proverbs 30.30), service and strength (ox - Psalm 144.14), and swiftness (eagle - Deuteronomy 28.49; 2 Samuel 1.23; Job 9.26; Jeremiah 4.13).

‘And they four had their faces and their wings thus. Their wings were joined one to another. They turned not when they went. They went every one straight forward.’ We can compare this with the cherubim in the temple whose wings were joined (1 Kings 6.27). The idea would seem to be of the unity of creation, all serving God as one, and with one purpose in mind, to please and obey God.

It is difficult to assess whether all were facing the same way, two to the front of the ‘platform’ (verse 22), and two to the back, or whether they all faced outwards forming a square, which might be seen as indicating perfect symmetry.

‘And two covered their bodies.’ Even in their supreme status the cherubim had to cover their bodies in the presence of Yahweh, for they were but creatures. Compare Isaiah 6.2 where the seraphim covered face and feet. None are worthy of His presence. All, even these majestic heavenly creatures, must cover themselves before Him.

1.12 ‘And they went every one straight forward. Where the Spirit was to go they went. They turned not when they went.’

The idea behind this is total obedience. Their one purpose was to do what God wanted. Nothing could divert them. They obeyed the prompting of the Spirit of God, as God prompted them from His throne.

Alternative interpretations have been, 1). That ‘where the wind was to go they went’. But the idea is then similar for the wind was the wind of God. 2). That they followed the promptings of their own spirits (verse 21). But the impression there is that their spirits follow the Spirit (verse 20). They were not there to do their own will, but the will of Him whose throne they bore.

1.13-14 ‘As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like burning coals of fire, like the appearance of torches. It went up and down among the living creatures, and the fire was bright, and out of the fire went forth lightning. And the living creatures ran and returned (RSV ‘darted to and fro) as the appearance of a flash of lightning.’

The writer calls on all the resources known to man as sources for the splendour of light, apart from the heavenly bodies (which he would not wish to associate with the scene due to their significance in Babylonian worship). ‘Burning coals of fire’, ‘torches’ and ‘lightning’. The thought is of splendour and glory, and swiftness, and holiness and possibly resulting judgment. The idea is not to analyse but to wonder at the glory and splendour of the sight.

1.15-17 ‘Now as I beheld the living creatures, behold one wheel upon earth beside the living creatures, for each of their four faces. The appearance of the wheels and their work was like the colour of topaz, and they four had one likeness, and their appearance and their work was as it were a wheel within a wheel. When they went they went to their four sides. They did not turn when they went.’

By each living creature was a wheel, each similar to the other, yet not like an earthly wheel, although it rode upon the earth, for seemingly the wheels went all ways. We cannot be fully sure what the description meant, but the principle is clear. They were splendid, like gleaming yellow topaz or chrysolite, they rolled over the earth bearing the platform on which was God’s throne, they could go all ways, and they went forward without turning to one side or the other. It was the divine chariot of God. There may be some connection with whirlwinds for in chapter 10 they are called ‘the whirlers’, possibly likening them to whirlwinds.

Note the continued emphasis on the fact that its path never deviated. As Ezekiel watched, it came inevitably and inexorably on. Nothing could stop it.

1.18 ‘As for their rims (‘rings’) they were high and frightening, and they four had their rims full of eyes round about.’

This may suggest the huge size of the wheels as it sped on, ‘high and frightening’. No wonder the whole thing could be described as terrifying, for it raced towards him like a great juggernaut, a giant chariot-throne of God. Adding to the effect was the fact that the rims were full of eyes. The idea would seem to be that the chariot itself saw where it was going, and espied everything, communicating it to the living creatures, for the wheels were closely associated with the living creatures. We can compare the seven eyes on the stone set before Joshua, the High Priest (Zechariah 3.9), which indicated ‘the eyes of Yahweh, they run to and fro over the whole earth’ (Zechariah 4.10; compare also 2 Chronicles 16.9; Proverbs 15.3; Revelation 4.6).

1.19-21 ‘And 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. Wherever the Spirit was to go, they went. There was the spirit to go. And the wheels were lifted up beside them, for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels. When those went, these went, and when those stood, these stood. And when those were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up beside them, for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels.’

The close connection of the wheels with the living creatures is stressed. They were as one, the wheels following the movements of the living creatures. And the chariot was not earthbound. When the living creatures rose into the air, the chariot and the wheels rose with them, for the wheels contained the spirit of the living creatures. And the movement of the living creatures was dependent on the will of the Spirit of God (compare verse 12). Wherever he would go, they went.

1.22-23 ‘And over the head of the living creature there was the likeness of a firm level surface, like the colour of awesome ice stretched out over above their heads. And under the firm level surface were their wings, straight, the one towards the other. Every one had two which covered on this side, and every one had two which covered on that side, their bodies.’

Above the cherubim was the platform on which the throne of God was set (verse 26) and it was held up by their wings. But note the emphasis again on the fact that they had two wings with which to cover their bodies. Their task was a sacred task, and they must not presume or come ‘naked’ before the Holy One. The platform was like the colour of ‘awesome ice’, another attempt to stress the otherworldliness and divine splendour of the chariot.

1.24 ‘And when they went I heard the noise of their wings, like the noise of great waters, like the voice of the Almighty (El Shaddai), a noise of tumult like the noise of a host. When they stood they let down their wings.’

As the chariot moved onwards Ezekiel heard the sound of the wings of the living creatures as they propelled it forwards. It was a powerful sound, like the sound of great waters, of a mountain torrent, or like the mighty breakers of the sea (compare Psalm 93.4. See also Revelation 1.15). It was like the voice of the Almighty. It was like the sound of tumult at the movement of a great army. He is fighting for ideas to describe the powerfulness and awesomeness of the noise. And then when the chariot stopped, the noise of their wings ceased, for they let down their wings, and there was a great calm.

We can understand why it had such a great effect on him, this mighty heavenly chariot speeding towards him like a great juggernaut, sometimes rolling over the ground, sometimes flying like an eagle, with the splendour and the glory and the flashing of lightning, and the terrible, terrible noise of their wings, punctuated by silence when the chariot paused. And yet there was more to it than that, for there was also the rider of the chariot, as yet undescribed.

1.25-28a ‘And there was a voice above the levelled out plate that was over their heads. When they stood they let down their wings. And above the levelled out plate that was over their heads, was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone. And on the likeness of the throne was a likeness as the appearance of a man on it above. And I saw as the colour of brightly shining metal (amber), as the appearance of fire within it round about, 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 there was brightness round about him. As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of Yahweh.’

The word ‘appearance’ occurs in the passage nine times. Again he was fighting for words to describe what he saw and could not describe it exactly. First there was the voice. What it said is revealed in chapter 2. Then there was ‘the likeness of a throne’, and ‘the likeness as of the appearance of a man’. Both indefinite and yet telling. This was Yahweh’s movable throne, similar to the mercy seat above the Ark, but with the cherubim accompanying it and bearing it along. And the appearance of a man was Yahweh revealed in human form as in Genesis 18.1; compare Exodus 33.18-23; Daniel 7.9; Revelation 4.2-3. In the midst of the living creatures, who represented all living creatures, His sole concern here was with man. But His appearance was ‘as a man’, yet not a man.

The throne shone like the deep blue, with ‘golden’ flecks, of the sapphire (sappir) or lapis lazuli, a highly valued semi-precious stone (compare 10.1; Exodus 24.10). The ‘man’ shone like ‘amber’ (compare 8.2), which was some kind of brilliantly shining metal with the appearance of fire within it, upwards from the loins, and he was like the appearance of fire from the loins downwards (compare Revelation 10.1), signifying that He was a heavenly Being. Fire is both awesome and destructive, especially for those who go too near. Then he adds, ‘and there was brightness round about Him’. The picture is intended to be one of total glory. In all this we must remember that the amber shone through the cloud (verse 4). He did not see the full glory of God.

For the throne of God compare Exodus 19.20; Isaiah 6.1-3; Daniel 7.9; Revelation 4.2-3).

The ‘brightness round about Him’ is now described. It was the multicoloured brightness of the rainbow (compare Revelation 4.2-3). The throne and the cherubim have been a reminder of the covenant with Israel, for in the Tabernacle they were above Ark of the covenant of Yahweh, the rainbow is a reminder of the covenant with Noah (Genesis 9.12-15). This was the God of covenant, the covenant with Israel and the covenant with all men.

‘This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of Yahweh.’ It is this with which he finishes his vision. The likeness of the glory of Yahweh. This is what will sustain him through his ministry ahead. He does not claim to have seen God in His fullness, but he has seen something of the appearance of His likeness. This does not mean that God essentially looks like a man. It was what was different about Him that was the appearance of His likeness. But in representing Himself in physical form He chose the highest of His creations. We need to remember that when angels appeared to men, they also appeared as ‘a man’.

1.28b ‘And when I saw it, I fell on my face, and I heard a voice of one who spoke.’

Having seen God, even though veiled, was something that stirred Ezekiel to the depths of his being, and was something he would never forget. It put the past and the future in a new light. He had seen God as the omnipotent One on His throne, as the omniscient One whose eyes saw everywhere, and as the omnipresent One in constant movement about the world. He was there with them in Babylon, and He was there on His throne. The effect of the experience appears constantly throughout the book (3.12, 23; 8.4; 9.3; 10.4, 18; 11.22; 43.2-5; 44.4).

‘I fell on my face.’ An indication of total submission and worship.

‘And I heard a voice of one who spoke.’ Compare verse 25. In the end this was the purpose of the revelation he had received, that he might receive God’s word to pass on to God’s people.

The Mission of Ezekiel - The Book of Judgment (2.1-3.11).

2.1-2 ‘And he said to me, “Son of man, stand on your feet and I will speak with you.” And the spirit entered into me when he spoke to me, and set me on my feet, and I heard him who spoke to me.’

‘Son of man.’ This was a favourite address by God to Ezekiel, occurring over ninety times. It was a reminder to him that in contrast with the One he had seen he was simply a man, a creature of earth, born of human parents. ‘Son of --’ indicates partaking of the nature of. But it was also a constant reminder to him that he was a man, higher than the beasts. He was a man, and yet only a man. But its constant use was also an indication that he represented man, that he was a specially chosen man. He was the one through whom God was approaching men.

The idea would develop further in Daniel 7 where Israel was ‘a son of man’ in contrast to the nations who were wild beasts, and to their glorious representative who would come into the presence of God to receive kingship, and power and dominion on their behalf (Daniel 7.13-14, 27). It became a favourite designation by Jesus of Himself, the great, final Representative of man Who was finally to be seated at God’s right hand in power and glory.

The command to ‘stand on your feet’ revealed that God had an active purpose for him which had to be fulfilled. He could not receive such words flat on his face. God would not speak to him until he had stood up. Often we too are on our faces when we should be up and ready to be doing. Unlike the ancient kings He did not want man in humiliating postures. He wanted them erect and active in His service.

‘And the Spirit entered into me when he spoke to me, and set me on my feet.’ The Spirit has already been seen active with regard to the charioteers (1.12, 20). Now He possessed Ezekiel and set him on his feet. The vision had so weakened Ezekiel that he knew that without the Spirit’s help he would never have been able to stand up. It reminds us that it is only with the Spirit’s help that we can stand in the presence of God. Otherwise we would be helpless before Him, cowering and afraid. Then Ezekiel became aware of what the voice was saying to him.

2.3-4a ‘And he said to me, “Son of man, I am sending you to the children of Israel, to nations who are rebellious, who have rebelled against me. They and their fathers have transgressed against me, even to this very day. And the children are impudent and stiff-hearted.”

Ezekiel learned that he was being sent to ‘the children of Israel’. While this initially meant to the people of Judah, a now conglomerate people who included people from all the tribes of Israel, Ezekiel was to see his message as wider, as to all the children of Israel. The use of the plural ‘nations’, usually used of the world of nations outside Israel, is probably significant in that Israel and Judah are now seen as ‘nations’ among the nations. Because of their rebellion they have been turned out of the land and have become as the heathen. His message was to be for both Israel and Judah, although initially limited to the exiles in Tel-Abib. This included those carried away to Assyria and to the cities of the Medes (2 Kings 17.6; 18.11). God still had a message for them, and for all those who were once His people.

Notice the charge, they were in rebellion. Not to obey God and His commandments is not only to be a sinner, but also to be a rebel. It is high treason. And that rebellion had been continual and was still true of them where they were, ‘even to this very day’. They had still not learned their lesson. Indeed they were ‘impudent and stiff-hearted’ (literally ‘hard of face and firm of heart’). They turned a hard face to the pleas of Yahweh, and their hearts firmly resisted Him. It is amazing how men can claim to worship God and yet be impervious to His demands. Many of us do the same.

2.4b-5 “And you shall say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh”, and they, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear, (for they are a rebellious house), will yet know that there has been a prophet among them.”

Ezekiel was now informed why he had had the vision. It was that he might become the mouthpiece of the Lord Yahweh, so that he may be able to say, “Thus says the Lord Yahweh”. And he was promised that the people would know that there had been a prophet among them, whether they responded or not. That was the first thing that was important, that they knew that God had spoken among them. Their response would be up to them. But he was also warned that that response was not certain, because they were a rebellious people. He was to be Yahweh’s mouthpiece whether they listened or not. Ministry when men will not listen is the hardest of all services for God, but that does not excuse us from it, nor mean that His hand is not with us.

God saw in the long term. Some would labour, others would enter into that labour, building on it and benefiting by it (John 4.38). What God was concerned about here was that the people would know that He had not forgotten them, that His word still came to them. Then they would be without excuse. Any failure would be theirs, not His. It is one of the signs of the depravity of human nature that men will recognise prophets, and even at times respect them (when the prophets are not making them feel too guilty), and will yet not listen to them.

‘A rebellious house.’ Rebellious, yet recognised as of God’s household nonetheless. They were not yet fully rejected.

2.6 “And you, son of man, do not be afraid of them, nor be afraid of their words. Though briars and thorns be with you, and you dwell among scorpions, do not be afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house.”

Ezekiel was not to be in any doubt about his calling. There was to be no guarantee of success. But he must minister nonetheless. And he must be fearless in the face of opposition. Neither animosity nor harsh words, which would be his lot, must deter him.

There was no promise of an easy time, as for us. The way is often that of briars and thorns, uncomfortable and painful, but it is not thereby to be avoided. ‘You dwell among scorpions.’ The suggestion is of many hidden dangers that suddenly strike and catch men unawares. It was a painful path that Ezekiel was called on to tread. And we may be called on to tread it too.

And there would not only be harsh words, but unfriendly and threatening looks. These were to be expected, for he was speaking to a people in rebellion. The word for ‘dismayed’ is very strong. It means excessively dismayed. He must not allow them to get him down.

2.7 “And you shall speak my words to them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear, for they are most rebellious.”

The voice of the prophet must continue whether men heard or not. He was given God’s words as a sacred trust, and so he must speak. But response was not guaranteed, for he must recognise the rebelliousness of those to whom he went. This continual emphasis was a sign and a warning that soon something very difficult was going to be required of him. God was preparing him for the worst. As we serve God that is the one thing that we can guarantee, that God will prepare us for what is to come.

2.8 “But you, son of man, hear what I say to you. Do not be rebellious like that rebellious house. Open your mouth and eat what I give you.”

Now Ezekiel was made to recognise that what he was to do would not be naturally to his liking, but he was warned that if he refused he would become like ‘the rebellious house’. So he was warned to take heed and not to rebel at what was required. God often requires of us what we do not want to do. We too must beware of being rebels.

“Open your mouth and eat what I give you.” This was probably a very picturesque way of saying receive, read, mark, accept and inwardly digest. It may, however, have included actually digesting the scroll as a symbol of having received it, for the book of Ezekiel contains demanding, acted out symbols elsewhere, although as a heavenly book in a vision it may have been more edible than papyrus or leather.

2.9-10 ‘And when I looked, behold, a hand was put forth to me, and lo, a roll of a book was in it. And he spread it before me, and it was written on both sides (‘within and without’), and there was written in it lamentations, and mourning, and woe.’

The scroll was handed over by a mysterious hand, possibly one of the hands of the living creatures (1.8), or even the hand of the One Whose appearance was like that of a man (1.26). Normally a scroll would be made of papyrus or leather, but this was a heavenly scroll in vision. We do not know what it was made of. ‘And he spread it before me.’ A decisive and demanding action that required it to be read at once.

‘And it was written on both sides.’ Normally a scroll would only have writing on one side. This was to indicate that it was overfull and that what was contained in it would be of overflowing measure.

‘And there was written in it lamentations, and mourning, and woe.’ The message it contained was an unpalatable one. It presaged misery to come. And indeed for Ezekiel the next few years would be full of that message. Before building up hope he was first to proclaim the certainty of overflowing judgment. This would result in cries and groaning, weeping, and disasters and judgments. It was only after that that he would be able to offer hope.

3.1-3 ‘And he said to me, “Son of man, eat what you find. Eat this roll and go, speak to the house of Israel.” So I opened my mouth and he caused me to eat the roll, and he said to me, “Son of man, cause your stomach to digest and fill your bowels with this roll that I give you.” Then did I eat it and it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness.’

The vision continues, and in vision Ezekiel is commanded to eat the roll and then deliver its message to the house of Israel. He cannot pick and choose. He must eat what he finds. And that is what he must speak. (Whether he was actually to eat it or not is irrelevant. It was all in vision. The main point was that he was to fully digest it and make it a part of himself).

Then he is told that he must fully digest its contents. We too have a ‘scroll’. It is called the Holy Bible. It too is the word of God, and we too must ensure that we read and fully digest its contents.

‘Then did I eat it and it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness.’ So Ezekiel obeyed, and ate, and although its contents were dreadful he found it sweet to the taste, for it was the word of God and necessary for that time. It contained tough love, God being cruel to be kind. And it could only be for good. Compare Jeremiah 15.16, ‘Your words were found and I ate them, and your words were to me a joy and the rejoicing of my heart, for I am called by your name, Oh Yahweh, God of hosts’. There it was contrasted with the food with which men make merry. Jeremiah had chosen his course and delighted in it, as must Ezekiel. See also Psalm 19.10; 119.103.

3.4-7 ‘And he said to me, “Son of man, go, get you to the house of Israel and speak to them with my words. For you are not sent to a people of a strange speech and of a hard language (literally ‘deep of lip and heavy of tongue’), but to the house of Israel. Not to many peoples of a strange speech and of a hard language, whose words you cannot understand. Surely if I sent you to them they would listen to you. But the house of Israel will not listen to you, for they will not listen to me, for all the house of Israel are of a hard forehead and of a stiff heart.” ’

Ezekiel is to go to the people of Israel with Yahweh’s words, and the message as revealed in the scroll, but he is warned that in general they will not listen to him. There will of course always be some few who listen, but his message will not be popular with the people as a whole.

There is a strong element of sarcasm here. Theoretically his task should be easy. He is going to people who speak the same language as himself, rather than to people who speak and think differently, and whose language is very difficult to understand (for ‘deep of lip’ compare Isaiah 33.19 and for ‘heavy of tongue’ compare Exodus 4.10). It seemingly made his task much simpler. But in practise it will not be so. Those of another language may well have been willing to listen to his words, but Israel will not do so, because their minds and hearts are hardened. They do not want to listen to God, so they will certainly not listen to Ezekiel. Their minds are already made up. Compare Isaiah 6.9b-13; Jeremiah 1.17-19.

The point here is the obstinacy and pig-headedness of Israel. Even with stumbling words others might be willing to listen. But Israel is so set in its mind and ways that no words, however clear, will be sufficient to move them or change their ideas, as they have already proved by their response to Jeremiah and the other prophets, and their reactions in the face of disasters. They just will not recognise their own folly and guilt. It is a stress on the total stubbornness of Israel.

This repetition of the ideas in chapter 2 demonstrates how hard his task is going to be. God wants Him to be forewarned and forearmed. It stresses the hardness of men’s hearts when faced with truth which is unpalatable.

3.8-9 “Behold I have made your face hard against their faces, and your forehead hard against their foreheads. I have made you forehead as an adamant, harder than flint. Do not be afraid of them, nor be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house.”

There is a play on words here for the words for ‘hard’ and ‘harder’ come from the same verbal root as ‘Ezekiel’ (‘God hardens’). God will enable him to stand firm and resist all attempts to silence him. The word translated ‘adamant’ means literally a thorn bush, but then something pointed and hard (a diamond for engraving - Jeremiah 17.1). Thus here it indicates something hard, ‘harder than flint’. Thus he need not be afraid of them, or be distraught at the looks they give him. And he must indeed expect it because they are rebels against God, Who is the head of their household.

3.10-11 ‘Moreover he said to me, “Son of man, all my words that I shall speak to you, receive in your heart and hear with your ears, and go, get you to the captivity, to the children of your people, and speak to them and tell them, ‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh’, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear.” ’

Again there is the stress on the fact that he is going in the name of the Lord Yahweh, and with words he has received from Him. We can only truly be strong when we go with His words. He must receive those words in his heart so that they become a part of him, and hear them with his ears so that he himself responds to them.

So firstly he was again told that he must receive and absorb God’s words. Then that he must go to those who were in captivity with him in Babylonia, declaring those words with a ‘thus says the Lord Yahweh’. And he must do it whether they would listen or not.

All these words were spoken following the vision, possibly with silent periods in between as he strove to come to grips with the vision and with the scroll he had seen. God was building up his ability to continue against all the odds, and hardening him to face the inevitable.

The Spirit Carries Him Away (3.12-15).

3.12-13 ‘Then the Spirit lifted me up and I heard behind me the voice of a great commotion. “Blessed be the glory of Yahweh from his place.” And I heard the noise of the wings of the living creatures as they touched one another, and the noise of the wheel beside them, and the noise of a great commotion.’

At this point the Spirit lifted Ezekiel up and took him away, and as he was being taken away he heard behind him ‘the voice of a great commotion’. (The root can mean ‘earthquake, roaring, commotion’, compare Jeremiah 10.22; 47.3). Voices swelled up to heaven crying, “Blessed be the glory of Yahweh from His place.” They were probably the voices of the living creatures (compare Revelation 4.8; 8.13). And they praised the coming of ‘the glory of Yahweh’ from His place. The glory of Yahweh represents His presence, compare 1.23; 10.13; 11.23; 43.4. For ‘from His place’ compare Micah 1.3, ‘for behold Yahweh comes forth from His place, and will come down and tread on the high places of the earth’. Compare also Hosea 5.15; and see Ezekiel 38.15; Zephaniah 2.11. Thus they were celebrating the coming of Yahweh’s glorious presence Who had specifically come from His eternal dwellingplace to meet with Ezekiel.

‘And I heard the noise of the wings of the living creatures as they touched one another, and the noise of the wheel beside them, and the noise of a great commotion.’ As the voices swelled up he also heard the chariot of God once more on the move, the whirring of the wings of the living creatures, the rumbling of the wheels, and the continual praise and worship of the living creatures.

Some have suggested translating, ‘Then the Spirit lifted me up and as the glory of Yahweh arose from its place I heard behind me the voice of a great earthquake.’ This translation requires the changing of kaph in brk (to bless) to mem to make it brm (using the root rum - to lift up). These two letters were easily confused in ancient Hebrew. They see the text as it stands as a little awkward, They suggest that after the great roaring or earthquake we do not expect an interjection, especially as the great roaring is repeated in verse 13, nor, they say, does ‘from His place’ fit well with the interjection. The sense is in fact fairly similar but loses the paean of praise. However it seems to us that the text makes good sense as it stands.

3.14 ‘So the Spirit lifted me up and took me away, and I went in bitterness, in the heat of my spirit, and the hand of Yahweh was strong upon me.’

Ezekiel repeats and amplifies his reference to the Spirit in verse 12. He was lifted up and carried away by the Spirit (see also 8.3; 11.1, 24; 43.5), his first experience of this type of travel. This was thought of as a ‘normal’ method of transport for prophets (1 Kings 18.12; 2 Kings 2.16), possibly because they tended to suddenly appear and disappear, although no actual example is known for earlier prophets, unless we count 2 Kings 2.11. But compare Philip in Acts 8.39 -note there the Old Testament ring of ‘the Spirit of the Lord’.

This was his first experience of the Spirit acting in such a way, and along with the vision he had seen must have shaken him to the core. No wonder he went ‘in bitterness, in the heat of my spirit’. He was greatly disturbed both spiritually and emotionally.

Alternately many see his bitterness and heat of spirit as referring to his feelings about his own people in the light of what God had told him (compare Jeremiah 6.11). This is supported by the word ‘bitterness’, which is very strong, and would directly tie in with the hand of Yahweh being strong upon him, as he went to carry out his mission. He was still under the influence of his vision.

For ‘the hand of Yahweh was strong upon me’ compare 1.3 which resulted in his vision, and 3.22 where he again has a vision. See also 8.1; 33.22; 37.1; 40.1. All refer to remarkable experiences.

3.15 ‘Then I came to those of the captivity at Tel-Abib, who dwelt by the River Chebar, and to where they dwelt. And I sat there overwhelmed among them seven days.’

At some point the Spirit released him, and he then made his way back to the settlement of his fellow-captives. And for seven days he sat there ‘overwhelmed’. The word means ‘appalled, desolated’ and the causative conjugation signifies that it was the effect of what he had experienced. It took him ‘seven days’ to recover, longer than just a few days.

(‘Seven days’ generally signifies a longer period than the shorter ‘three days’, two stereotyped expressions. ‘Three days’ would mean anything from one and a half days to six days, ‘seven days’ would indicate a little longer period. Compare the use in Genesis for ‘three day’ and ‘seven day’ journeys).

It is perhaps significant that seven days was required for the consecration of a priest (Leviticus 8.33). It could be that he saw this as his period of consecration to his mission.

He Is Appointed As A Watchman (3.16-21).

3.16 ‘And it happened that at the end of seven days the word of Yahweh came to me saying.’

The ‘seven days’ having passed God again came to Ezekiel with His solemn word, to remind him that he had been made a watchman to Israel (compare Habakkuk 2.1. See also Isaiah 56.10; Jeremiah 6.17; Hosea 9.8). The task of the watchman was to keep awake and give warning of approaching danger, and to act for the preservation of those over whom he watched.

3.17-18 “Son of man, I have given you to be a watchman to the house of Israel. Therefore hear the word at my mouth and give them warning from me. When I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you do not give him warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life, the same wicked man will die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at your hand.”

As watchman, appointed by solemn charge, to Israel, Ezekiel had to watch over each individual. He was not only responsible for Israel, but for each individual within Israel, to take them the word of God. He was to watch and warn. And each individual was separately responsible to hear and respond, or to reject. The few would not be condemned for the many.

The thought here was that Yahweh watched over His people and when He saw one who was ‘wicked’, that is who was not observing the covenant and living in accordance with the principles laid down in the Law, He passed sentence on him. This He would then communicate to Ezekiel (‘hear the word at my mouth’). It was Ezekiel’s responsibility then to give him warning (‘give them warning from me’), and seek to turn the man from his evil ways so that he may save his life. If he failed to do so the man would die in his iniquity, but his death would be blameable on Ezekiel. He would be the equivalent of a murderer. Note that the expected punishment was a sudden and untimely death. There was no consideration of an afterlife. The additional consequences of that are dealt with in Daniel 12.2.

3.19 ‘And if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he will die in his iniquity, but you have saved your life.’

However if Ezekiel did give the warning and the person did nothing about it, the same consequence would come on the person, but Ezekiel would be free from blame and would be spared. Note here the deliberate reference to ‘wickedness’ in contrast with a ‘wicked way’, suggesting a comparison between the state of mind and heart in rebellion against God, and the revealing of that in behaviour.

3.20 ‘Again when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he will die. Because you have not given him warning, he will die in his sin, and his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered. But his blood I will require at your hand.’

The warning became even more solemn. Ezekiel was not only responsible for warning the wicked but for watching over the righteous. The righteous man was the one who admitted responsibility to the covenant and sought to live in accordance with it. But if he deliberately committed gross sin God would lay a stumblingblock, a snare, for him and he too would die. Past righteousness could not and would not excuse present iniquity. No one can rely on a righteous past. And if Ezekiel has not warned him, then Ezekiel too would have to face the consequences, in death.

3.21 ‘Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he does not sin, he will surely live because he took warning. And you have delivered your life.’

Note the contrast here with verse 19. It is assumed that the righteous man will hear and take warning. The suggestion seems to be that God would give him an opportunity of repentance through the ministry of Ezekiel. If he heeded it he would be spared.

The importance of this passage cannot be overemphasised. Each individual is shown to have individual responsibility. The one will not suffer for the sinfulness of the group. It also brings out that, in the place where they were, they still came within the covenant. They were still responsible to God. Furthermore it demonstrated that away from Jerusalem, and away from the possibility of offering sacrifice at the central shrine in Jerusalem, forgiveness was still possible. Both the righteous who sin, and the wicked who have lived sinfully, could still be spared through repentance and return to the covenant, even though sacrifices for sin were not available.

On the other hand it also warned that God was there. He saw their ways and their behaviour, and He would require it at their hands. Transportation had not removed them from their responsibility to God. They were still His people and He was still their Overlord.

And it finally emphasised that He had set over them a watchman. This was for them an act of mercy. He had not left them just to struggle on as they could. If they failed it would not be because God had failed to give them an opportunity for repentance, as long as the watchman was faithful. And for Ezekiel the stress was on the importance of his faithfulness. It is a solemn task to be pastor to a people.

It is impossible to overemphasise the significance of these words to Ezekiel with reference to the cult. It is noteworthy that in appointing a priest over His people God did not set up a rival cultus. The priest was not to carry out certain cultic responsibilities. No sacrifices were instituted. No altar was built. The concentration was on response to God, morality and behaviour. It was on the moral requirements of the Torah (instruction, law, found in the Books of Moses), and his responsibility to watch over them and maintain them as Israel’s covenant with Yahweh. They would no doubt meet for prayer and the reading of the Scriptures, and to listen to exhortation, (which would eventually lead on to the founding of the synagogues) but the emphasis was on manner of life before God and their duty to obey Him, and it applied to each individually as well as to the group as a whole.

A Further Vision (3.22-27)

3.22 ‘And the hand of Yahweh was there upon me, and he said to me, “Arise, go out into the valley, and I will talk with you there.’

This probably occurred after the passing of a short period of time in which Ezekiel had told the people what God had previously said. It could not be a very long period for the period from 1.2 - the fifth day of the fourth month of the fifth year- to 8.1 - the fifth day of the sixth month of the sixth year - was only about 442 actual days (assuming a thirteen month year, see on 4.5) and at least 390 (and possibly 430) of them were passed lying on his left and right sides for the punishment of Israel and Judah (4.5-6). His message had been variously received, but from most it seemed that he received short shrift, they were not impressed. Indeed they may well have seen him as mad. So it was now time for the second stage in God’s plan.

The ‘hand of Yahweh’ upon him leads us to expect something special and once again he was to receive a glorious vision. But first God sent him somewhere alone, ‘into the valley (cleft)’, where he could again meet God.

3.23 ‘Then I arose and went out into the valley, and behold the glory of Yahweh stood there, as the glory which I saw by the River Chebar, and I fell on my face.’

This was a parallel vision to that in chapter 1, repeated in full for reassurance and to press home its effect, but it was in a different place. Going out into ‘the valley’ He saw the throne-chariot of God and the accompanying glory, including the splendid figure on the throne. He saw the glory of Yahweh. And again it had the same effect. He fell on his face before God

3.24-27 ‘Then the Spirit entered into me and set me on my feet, and he spoke with me and said to me, “Go. Shut yourself within your house. But you, son of man, they shall lay bands on you, and will bind you with them, and you will not go out among them, and I will make your tongue cleave to the roof of your mouth, so that you will be dumb and will not be a reprover to them, for they are a rebellious house. But when I speak with you, I will open your mouth, and you will say to them, “Thus says the Lord Yahweh”. He who hears, let him here, and he who forbears, let him forbear, for they are a rebellious house.” ’

Following the vision and his obeisance the Spirit again lifted him on to his feet, and he again received the command of God. The Spirit of God is seen as very active in Ezekiel’s life. He was left in no doubt of God’s hand on him. This lifting up was a sign of God’s acceptance of his obeisance, and that He had something active for him to do.

What follows can basically be thought of in two ways. Either as a sign of opposition as the people, seeing him as mad, come to restrain him, and God’s response to it. Or as a deliberate acting out by Ezekiel of a message which he wanted to get over in a vivid way (something he would certainly do later). Was he bound because they thought he was mad, or did he arrange for himself to be bound so as to proclaim a message? Either way the message would be that Ezekiel was restrained by God and solely God’s mouthpiece.

‘Go, shut yourself within your house.’ From now on Ezekiel was not to live a normal life of going out and in. He was to enter his house, close the door and stay within it. Possibly, along with what followed, it was to indicate that he was no longer his own man living a normal life, but that he was separated to Yahweh. He was the servant and mouthpiece of Yahweh. Such acts would cause speculation among the people as they do among us.

Alternately it may be that it was God’s warning of growing opposition so that he must shut himself away for safety and as a sign that God would no longer speak to them. This would act for his protection. But we will shortly see that he was to let the people see his coming behaviour, so that the former is more likely.

‘But you, son of man, they shall lay bands on you, and will bind you with them, and you will not go out among them.’ There has been no suggestion up to this point of any violent opposition, thus many refer this to a voluntary act, the act of his family and friends, or of his servants (represented by a vague ‘they’), at his request. He was to make them bind him, so that he would be bound with ropes as a sign to Israel. Again it would indicate that he was now a man who did not have the freedom to do what he wanted but was restrained by God so that his only actions were to be those of service to God as a prophet. It may also have been intended to remind them that they too were captives, brought into captivity by God. This position is supported by the words ‘you shall not go out among them’ (parallel to ‘you shall not be a reprover to them’) which suggest he did have freedom of action.

Some, however, see the binding as carried out by the people in antagonism to him and his message, restricting his freedom and seeking to restrain his unwelcome activities, on the grounds that he ‘had gone mad’. This would certainly be understandable in view of his visions and his own reactions to them. Or they see it as metaphorical, with the ‘binding’ being some actions of the people taken with the intention of shutting him up. This would certainly explain the repeated words, ‘for they are a rebellious house’. But if this was so there has been no earlier indication of direct opposition.

‘And I will make your tongue cleave to the roof of your mouth, so that you will be dumb and will not be a reprover to them.’ This action is definitely revealed as God’s. He will render Ezekiel dumb, so that he can no longer generally reprove them, only when God has a specific message for them. Whether the cleaving was outwardly enforced by divine power, or enforced by Ezekiel’s voluntary obedience, is uncertain, although verse 27, ‘I will open your mouth’, may suggest the former, (although not certainly). Either way it showed that God had stopped speaking to the people.

This enforced silence would undoubtedly have a strong effect on the people. They knew that he had previously had a vivid experience of God and he had no doubt begun to reprove and warn in accordance with verses 17-13. Thus this silence would have an even greater impact. It may have made them ask why God had stopped speaking to them through him. Or it may have been intended, in the light of what followed, to indicate that Ezekiel was now solely the mouthpiece of God and could only speak when God had something to say to them.

So, if voluntary, the self-imprisonment, the binding with ropes and the dumbness were all to be signs to Israel. Perhaps they were then partly to indicate the condition of the people. They were now in captivity and not free to follow their own desires (to go back to Jerusalem). This would confirm that this was God’s present will and that they were not to chafe or speak out against it. It had all come upon them, Yahweh was saying, because ‘they are a rebellious house’.

But the enforced silence was specifically stated to be to prevent him being ‘a reprover to them’ continually. Thus the message must primarily have been intended to indicate to them that Ezekiel as God’s messenger was bound by God and could not speak to them, except when God allowed. This would also indicate to them, in the wider context (to be appreciated by them later), that for the present his ministry was restricted until God was ready for him to take up his ministry fully, for until Jerusalem was destroyed he was not, on the whole, free to make his declarations of hope. He would give hints, but that was all. He had thus at present a restricted ministry, a ministry of judgment. Meanwhile he could only speak as God commanded. His silence was not to be total silence, only silence as regards normal living. When Yahweh gave him prophetic words to say, as ‘thus says the Lord Yahweh’, he was to be free to speak.

If we see his binding as being the act of the people on the grounds that he was mad, then his enforced silence would be God’s reply to their rebellious behaviour. If they did not want Him to reprove them, He was saying, He would not reprove them. They must bear the consequences.

We are left to imagine the thoughts and feelings of the people as they saw that house in their midst, knowing that the priest-prophet Ezekiel lay there, in self-imposed isolation, bound with ropes (which could be unbound when necessary), and maintaining continual silence (see 24.27; 29.1) except for the times when he spoke in Yahweh’s service. It would also increase the impact when he spoke his prophetic utterances, and even more so when he finally did begin to speak freely again. This latter would occur some six years later in 33.22 when Jerusalem had been destroyed.

‘For they are a rebellious house.’ Yahweh had already declared that on the whole they would not respond (2.4, 6, 10; 3.7). Thus the imposed silence was a sign of this. Ezekiel’s ministry was not at this stage to be a pastoral ministry of gentle reproof. It was to be a continual ministry of periodical declarations of God’s judgment. The constant reference to Israel as ‘a rebellious house’ stresses God’s view of them at this time, as His people in rebellion against Him. He was in no doubt about their underlying attitude.

‘But when I speak with you I will open your mouth, and you will say to them, “Thus says the Lord Yahweh”, he who hears, let him here, and he who forbears, let him forbear, for they are a rebellious house.’ Whichever way we read the passage he was not called on to be completely silent. But the only exceptions to silence were to be when Yahweh spoke with him giving him a prophetic utterance to declare. Then God would open his mouth and he must say, ‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh’. Once he had done that response would be up to the listener. The inference here was that some would hear, making the ministry worthwhile, but that the majority would not hear because they were a rebellious house.

We must not judge Ezekiel’s activities by our own standards. It may well be that from the start God wanted him to proclaim his message by symbols, interspersed with spoken prophecy as God saw fit. Probably He knew that that they were not ready to receive His message openly given and that that would make the greatest impact, certainly until Jerusalem was destroyed and their last hope was gone. Ezekiel might be there as a watchman, but it was as a watchman under God’s instructions.

The message here for all of us is the responsibility that we have as the Lord’s watchmen. We too have a responsibility towards those around us, whether they are willing to hear or not. We too will be called to account for our failure to speak out for Christ. Their blood will be required at our hands. We too must see ourselves as totally devoted to serving God, willing to be restricted in our normal lives so as to better serve Christ, willing to be ‘bound’, willing to be called mad, willing to speak when called on to do so, and when necessary willing to be silent. His dedication must be our example.

Chapter 4. Ezekiel’s First Message - Judgment Is Coming On Jerusalem.

In this chapter we have an acted out prophecy against Jerusalem. The people had been brought into captivity but Jerusalem still stood. They still had hopes of returning. But they must be made to recognise that God’s anger against Israel was such that nothing could avert the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Rather than the holy city and the temple being a guarantee of Israel’s preservation by God they had become a hindrance, and must go. Their superstitious reliance on the holy city and the temple as the proof of their favour (Jeremiah 7.4), even in the midst of their sinfulness, must be destroyed. This would now be Ezekiel’s continual stress, along with judgment on the nations (25-32), until the actual destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (33.21), a destruction which would outwardly be the end of all their hopes.

In the days of Hezekiah Yahweh had promised through Isaiah the prophet, “I will defend this city to save it for My own sake and for My servant David” (Isaiah 37.35). Israel had interpreted that to mean that whatever they did God would never allow the city to be destroyed. But they were wrong. That promise had been made because Hezekiah was genuinely seeking to please and obey Yahweh. But now things were very different. Sin and disobedience was rife, God was being marginalised, and the promise would no longer apply. Jerusalem was not inviolable. And that message would be repeated by Ezekiel again and again, although derided and rejected by his hearers, until the event itself took place.

In this chapter we have first the depiction of the siege of Jerusalem in miniature (4.1-3), then the duration of the iniquity of Israel and Judah which has brought this on them (4.4-8), then the depiction of the coming famine conditions in Jerusalem and of their exile in ‘uncleanness’ (4.9-17), and finally an acted out description of the fate of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, whom the exiles probably looked back on with envy (5.1-4).

The Fate of Jerusalem.

4.1-3 “You also, son of man, you take a tile, and lay it before you, and portray on it a city, even Jerusalem, and lay siege against it, and build forts against it. Set camps also against it, and plant battering rams against it round about. And you take to yourself an iron pan, and set it as a wall between you and the city. And set your face towards it and it shall be besieged, and you shall lay siege against it. This shall be a sign to the house of Israel.’

The attention of the people having been drawn to Ezekiel by his previous strange behaviour, he would no doubt by this time have become a talking point. This strange activity continued. Word would soon get around of the next strange thing that he was doing, and it would arouse curiosity and perhaps a kind of fear. For, at Gods’ command, he was to depict a siege of Jerusalem in miniature as a sign to the house of Israel of what was to be. We must assume either that he did this outside the door of his house, or that the house was now left open for people to enter and see it.

‘Take -- a tile.’ This would probably be a rectangular sun-baked brick. On this he was to depict a picture of Jerusalem which he would depict in recognisable outline. It would be placed where all could come and see it. He would then depict the details of a siege as outlined, how we are not told. Possibly they were depicted in the sand, or, if inside the house, with clay models or depicted on small clay tablets. Ezekiel and the people would be familiar with such siege activities. They had themselves seen them in action when they themselves had been made captive.

Depictions of such war machines, manned by archers and often moveable, are known from bas-reliefs in Assyria, while mounds would be built bringing the assailants more on a level with the enemy in the city. The depiction of such activities on clay tablets is also witnessed archaeologically.

Then he was to take a large iron pot or cooking plate, possibly as used for baking bread, and set it between himself and the scene he had depicted, illustrating that he himself as God’s representative, was also laying siege against it. This would leave them in no doubt that the siege was, in the last analysis, due to the activity of God. The iron plate, in contrast with the clay, would illustrate the solidity and permanence of what it represented. It represented the certainty of God in action with the result that the consequences were also certain.

Others have seen the iron plate as signifying that there was a great barrier between God and His people in Jerusalem so that He would not intervene. He would act through Ezekiel on behalf of His people in exile, but not on behalf of Jerusalem. We can compare Isaiah 59.2, ‘your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you, that He will not hear’. Compare also Lamentations 3.44.

It was an acted out prophecy, of a kind with which their past was familiar (Exodus 9.8-12; Joshua 8.18; 1 Kings 11.30-32; 22.11; 2 Kings 13.15-19; Isaiah 8.1-4; 20.2-4; Jeremiah 13.1-11; 16.1-9; 19.1-11; 27.1-12). The physical reproduction would be looked on as making more certain its fulfilment. It would be seen as having already taken place in miniature. And as the people flocked to see this latest sensation they would be aware of the silent, brooding figure, sitting there without saying a word, and they would draw their own conclusions, fearful and awestricken.

The Long Periods of Iniquity That Have Brought Inevitable Judgment on Jerusalem and the Temple.

4.4-6 “Moreover lie on your left side, and lay the iniquity of the house of Israel on it. According to the number of days you will lie on it. You will bear their iniquity. For I have appointed the years of their iniquity to be to you a number of days, even three hundred and ninety days. So shall you bear the iniquity of the house of Israel. And again when you have accomplished these you will lie on your right side, and you will bear the iniquity of the house of Judah. Forty days, each day for a year, have I appointed it to you.”

Having depicted the siege of Jerusalem with its inevitable end, Ezekiel was now himself to depict himself as bearing the sin of Israel and Judah. The time elements were further indication that when God spoke to ‘the house of Israel’ it depicted all the tribes, both those incorporated into Judah and those scattered elsewhere among the nations. His message would reach to them as well.

By lying on his left side Ezekiel was to show himself as bearing the iniquity of the northern kingdom of Israel. The pain and the sores resulting would at times become unbearable. But it was acted out prophecy. He suffered the pain that they should have suffered. But it was not vicarious. It depicted what would be and why their suffering and exile were necessary. The reason for selecting 390 days is not explained other than that it represents a period of 390 years, although the 390 days may represent a thirteen month year (30 x 13). If we date it from approximately 930 BC, the date of the setting up of the golden calves and the break by Israel from the central sanctuary (1 Kings 12.26-33), which to a priest of Judah could well be seen as the beginning of ‘the years of their iniquity’, it would bring us down to around this time, remembering that their suffering and rebellion still continued. It need not be seen as necessarily exact. It was symbolic, and the ‘years of their iniquity’ were still continuing. But its point was not only to accentuate the length of their iniquity, but to indicate that it was coming to an end. God would yet bring them to repentance and show mercy on them.

Three hundred and ninety represents three hundreds and three thirties (three intensified). Thus it stresses a complete period based on the significance of three, the number of completeness, a perfect period. However, 390 days also represents a thirteen month year taking the approximation regularly used of thirty days to a month (Genesis 7.24; 8.3 with 7.11 and 8.4; Revelation 11.2 with 11.3). Possibly then this was such a year.

After he had finished depicting the period of the iniquity of Israel he must then turn over and depict the period of the iniquity of Judah. This was to be for forty days, depicting forty years. ‘Forty’ regularly depicts a period of trial and testing. We can compare how under Moses Israel suffered forty years in the wilderness. Thus the forty years, a round number depicting trial and testing, refers to the final period of Judah’s rebellion against God. Possibly it was to be seen as ‘dating’ from the death of Josiah around 609 BC which resulted in all his activity on behalf of Yahweh’s name ceasing and its being replaced by final idolatry which was still continuing (2 Chronicles 36.5, 9, 11). Again it is symbolic rather than exact. Their period of iniquity was far shorter than that of Israel, but it was still going on (this difference confirms that the figures look back to the past and not forward to the future).

Laying on the left or right side may have come from the fact that if he was lying on his back with his head towards Jerusalem the northern kingdom would be on his left and the southern kingdom on his right.

The point behind both representations was to demonstrate that both nations had gone through long periods of iniquity, and still did so, and that that situation would go on. They did, however, also stress that their period of iniquity would eventually come to an end in God’s time. When the restoration did take place people from both Israel and Judah would participate.

A question that is disputed is whether the 40 days follows the 390 days, or whether Ezekiel turned over after 350 days, the last forty days counting for both, thus completing a theoretical thirteen month year. 4.9 may suggest that 390 days was the total period for which he lay there, and the passage nowhere actually says that he was to lie on his left side for 390 days. But verse 4 & 6 strongly suggest it.

4.7-8 “And you shall set your face towards the siege of Jerusalem, with your arm uncovered, and you will prophesy against it, and behold I lay bands on you, and you shall not turn yourself from one side to another until you have accomplished the days of your siege.”

The suggestion that he set his face towards the siege of Jerusalem may indicate that he turned to lay facing Jerusalem, or that he set his face towards it in his mind, or more probably that he set his face towards his own representation of that siege in the model he had made, having the real city in mind. The baring of the arm indicated an arm ready for action (compare Isaiah 52.10). He was representing what God was going to do, act against Jerusalem through Nebuchadnezzar.

‘And you will prophesy against it.’ His words of prophecy would indicate to his hearers that God was about to carry out His purpose with regard to Jerusalem.

‘And behold I lay bands on you, and you shall not turn yourself from one side to another until you have accomplished the days of your siege.’ Once Ezekiel was lying in the way that God had told him, God would ‘lay bands on him’. This may mean psychologically as a result of His command, or possibly even by some kind of limited paralysis. Or it may refer back to 3.25. But, whichever it was, he was to remain there, not turning until the full time had been accomplished. ‘The days of your siege.’ While lying there and looking towards his model of the siege of Jerusalem, with arm laid bare ready for action, he was indicating that it would be besieged and ensuring it came about. He was, as it were, besieging it beforehand. There may be the thought here that the actual siege would last for about a year. Thus the pain that Ezekiel was suffering presaged the pain that Jerusalem would suffer,

Jerusalem Will Be Riddled With Famine and Its Inhabitants Will Dwell Among the Nations in Uncleanness

4.9 “Also take to yourself wheat, and barley, and beans, and lentils, and millet, and spelt, and put them in one vessel, and make of it bread for yourself. According to the number of days that you will lie in your side, even three hundred and ninety days, you will eat of it.”

The purpose of these and the following instructions was to indicate siege rations (verse 16). This is confirmed by the quantity of the rations (verse 10), and the fact that it was purportedly to be baked on human dung (verse 12; compare Deuteronomy 23.13-14) rather than cow dung, because they were shut up in the city. It also indicated that the children of Israel, once taken captive, would eat their food ‘unclean’ among the nations (verse 13; compare Hosea 9.3. See also Daniel 1.8). In other words from the beginning of the siege onwards into captivity they would experience poor food, short rations, and ritual uncleanness. There was nothing ritually unclean about the food itself as far as we are aware from Leviticus and Deuteronomy (and the Mishnah - the later Jewish oral law). Among other things it would be the way such foods came in contact with uncleanness and unclean things, and the way that they might be grown (e.g. Leviticus 19.19) or stored, that would render them unclean. With regard to meat, its source, and whether it had been killed correctly, would often not be known. Foreigners could not be depended on to maintain ritual cleanness and to kill meat in the right way.

We should note, in fact, that on his protesting in horror (4.14) God graciously allowed Ezekiel to use cow dung instead of human dung (4.15). This was in order to maintain his own ceremonial cleanness. The use of cow dung for baking on was a recognised method of baking.

The various items were all to be baked together in some form of bread. When they were under siege people would put together whatever they had, mixing it together, in order to prepare food. In Ezekiel’s case this was then to form his means of sustenance for the 390 days, which was possibly intended to represent roughly the prospective length of the siege of Jerusalem (i.e ‘a year’).

4.10 “And your food which you will eat will be by weight twenty shekels a day. Each day at the same time you will eat it.”

Twenty shekels would come to about 225 grams (eight ounces). This was minimum rations indicating siege rations. ‘Each day at the same time you will eat it.’ The Hebrew is literally ‘from time to time’ but compare the similar use in 1 Chronicles 9.25. It seems to signify a recurring action taking place at the same time each day. The purpose of this was to make it a recognised activity in front of those who came to observe his behaviour.

4.11 “And you will drink water by measure, the sixth part of a hin. Each day at the same time you will drink it.”

As for food, so for water. He was allowed a little over 0.6 litres (a pint). This was hardly survival rations, but would often be necessary when under siege with water difficult to obtain. It may be that he was allowed to supplement it out of hours when not under observation, but that this was his general practise seems to be of some doubt. The purpose of the rations was to simulate siege conditions in the eyes of the people.

4.12 “And you shall eat it as barley cakes, and you will bake it in their sight with excrement that comes out of a man.”

‘Barley cakes’ indicates the poor man’s food. They were, as described earlier, made up of a mixture of ingredients. It was to be ‘baked in their sight’, possibly on heated stones or an iron plate. The onlookers would be watching someone surviving ‘under siege’.

The use of human excrement for fuel would appal not only Ezekiel but also the onlookers, yet in times of siege it would occur. Compare Deuteronomy 23.13-14 where it was to be buried out of sight to prevent defilement.

4.13 ‘And Yahweh said, “Even thus will the children of Israel eat their food unclean among the nations whither I will drive them.” ’

The eating of food in this way would not only indicate the coming siege, it would also act as a reminder that because of their rebelliousness His people would be driven from the land of their inheritance to live in foreign lands that were seen as unclean. This signified that they would no longer be enjoying in full God’s provision for them through His covenant. While they would still be His covenant people, and be expected to live under the terms of the covenant, a major part of the privilege would have been lost. They would no longer have their own land, and their own holy city and temple, and the privilege of living fully in ritual cleanness. They would be defiled until their period of punishment was over.

4.14 ‘Then said I, “Ah, Lord Yahweh. Behold my life has not been polluted, for from my youth up, even until now, I have not eaten of what dies of itself, or is torn of beasts, nor came there any abominable flesh into my mouth.” ’

Ezekiel had borne much without protest, but he was so appalled at the thought of using human excrement that he made his first protest to God. He pointed out the great care he had taken from childhood to keep himself ritually clean. He had not eaten meat from an animal that died naturally, nor from an animal that was killed by wild beasts (Exodus 22.31; Leviticus 11.39; 17.15; 22.8; Deuteronomy 14.21). Nor had he eaten ‘abominable flesh’ (Isaiah 65.4; Leviticus 7.18; 11.4-8, 10-20, 23-31, 41-3). He was horrified to think that now his body should be tainted by something ‘unclean’. This brings out how dedicated a man Ezekiel had always been, scrupulous in his dealings with things pertaining to God. And God graciously conceded to his position. He was thoughtful concerning the feelings of His servant.

4.15 ‘Then he said, “I have given you cow’s dung for man’s excrement, and you shall prepare bread on it.”

God allowed him to use cow dung instead of man’s excrement. Cow dung was a recognised fuel used by many for cooking. Why then should God have required something that he knew would appal Ezekiel, and then made such a concession? The answer must be that it was in order to draw attention to the point in question. The uncleanness in which His people were involved. Once that was done, and the horror of their position had got over to Ezekiel, the concession could be made. It was after all only a symbol. Nothing crucial depended on it. (This brings out that all these actions were seen as symbols and not sympathetic magic. In the latter case the rules could not have been broken or else the magic would not have worked).

4.16-17 ‘Moreover he said to me, “Son of man, behold, I will break the staff of bread in Jerusalem, and they will eat bread by weight and with carefulness, and they will drink water by measure and with dismay, that they may want bread and water, and be dismayed one with another, and pine away in their iniquity.” ’

‘The staff of bread.’ Compare 5.16; 14.13. To ‘break the staff of bread’ was to take away the provisions on which man depended for survival, the things on which he leaned. Thus ample provision in Jerusalem would cease and be replaced by shortage and famine, so that bread had to be measured out and eaten with careful consideration and discrimination, in order that it might be made to last, and water also would be given by measure, with dismay and astonishment at the shortage of it. Indeed they would reach a point when they both craved it, and lacked it, because the shortage was so great. And they would waste away because of their sinful ways and hearts.

The question must arise as to whether Ezekiel had to stick strictly to this diet, or whether it only applied to daylight hours. There are actually no grounds for doubting that it was strictly required. The ‘bed sores’ and the sight of Ezekiel growing thinner and thinner may well have been part of the illustration, although possibly concession might have been allowed if things became too desperate, especially as regards water. God would be there watching over him. It was the principle revealed that was important, not the fulfilling of the minute detail.

Chapter 5. The Fate Awaiting Jerusalem and Its Inhabitants.

The Significance of His Shaven Beard and Head.

5.1-2 “And you, son of man, you take a sharp sword. As a barber’s razor you will take it to you. And you will cause it to pass over your head and on your beard. Then take for yourself balances to weigh and divide the hair. A third part you will burn with fire in the midst of the city, when the days of the siege are fulfilled. And you will take a third part and smite with the sword round about it. And a third part you will scatter to the wind, and I will draw out a sword after them.”

Shaving the head or beard was a sign of mourning (7.18; Isaiah 15.2; 22.12; Jeremiah 48.37; Amos 8.10), or even of disgrace (2 Samuel 10.4). It was also the sign of the end of a person’s separation to God (Numbers 6.5, 18). Ezekiel’s act in doing so was an indication that Jerusalem would be shorn, as a sign of disgrace, as a sign of mourning, and as a sign of the end of its separation to God.

The hair then had to be weighed and divided and separated into three parts. The weighing indicated that Jerusalem had been weighed and had been found wanting (compare Proverbs 21.2; Daniel 5.27). Then one third he had to burn in the midst of his model city, a third part he had to smite with a sword round about the city, chopping them in pieces, and a third part had to be scattered to the wind. This was to take place once he had finished his days of depicting the period of the siege. This signified that one third of the inhabitants of Jerusalem would die in the siege through pestilence and famine, one third in the fighting round about and that one third would be scattered among the nations (verse 12; compare Jeremiah 15.2). But even these latter would still be subject to further judgments from God. ‘I will draw out a sword after them’. They would be constantly harried, and many would die because of their evil ways.

5.3-4 “And you will take from there a few in number, and bind them in your robes, and of these again you will take and cast them into the midst of the fire, and burn them in the fire. From there will come out a fire to all the house of Israel.”

Of the third part who escape death and were scattered some would be selected out for preservation, but even of these some too would die by famine and pestilence. The ‘fire’ of pestilence and famine which burned in Jerusalem would reach out to some of those who have escaped. In the end the whole of the house of Israel would be affected. It is a sad picture. God’s judgments would continue to reach out continually. His scattered people would never be fully at rest because of famine, pestilence and the sword.

‘Bind them in your robes (skirts - the lower flowing ends of the robe).’ The bottom of the robe would be tucked into the belt for walking and would form a kind of container which could be used for carrying things.

The second ‘from there’ probably refers to the fire depicted as burning in Jerusalem (5.2a). It would not only affect Jerusalem but would reach out and continue its effect even in those who had escaped.

Some have seen the last sentence as referring to a fire of purification, but in view of the importance of fire in the context it is difficult to think that such a change of usage would take place in context. It is rather a summary of the effect of the fire which Ezekiel had placed in Jerusalem (which signified pestilence and famine - verse 12). It affected one third of those in Jerusalem, and it would continue to affect the exiles, even those under God’s general protection. All would share in the judgments poured out on Jerusalem, for all shared its guilt.

Jerusalem’s Guilt and Future Judgment Is Spelled Out.

5.5-6 ‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh, “This is Jerusalem. I have set her in the midst of the nations, and countries are round about her, and she has rebelled against my ordinances in doing wickedness more than the nations, and against my statues more than the countries round about her, for they have rejected my ordinances, and as for my statutes they have not walked in them.” ’

‘This is Jerusalem’ was referring to Ezekiel’s model and confirming which city it represented. Because she was Yahweh’s inheritance she was central to all the nations, the one of central importance, with Assyria and Babylon to the north, Egypt and the Sudan to the south, the sea, and the countries beyond the sea from which the Philistines had come, to the west, and Arabia to the east. No wonder she saw herself as the centre of the world (see 38.12 where she is called ‘the navel of the earth’), and God described her in her own terms. But such a privileged position had given her responsibilities. And she had failed in those responsibilities.

The ‘ordinances’ and ‘statutes’ refer to the body of Law that Israel had been given, and probably include some of the prophetic writings. But these had simply made them multiply evil. Their very privilege made their disobedience more heinous. And even by the standards of the surrounding nations they were more sinful than other nations. This was a sign that they had wholeheartedly rejected His ordinances and commandments. They were disobedient rebels.

5.7-10 ‘Therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh, “Because you are more turbulent than the nations which are round about you, and have not walked in my statutes nor have kept my ordinances, nor have done after the ordinances of the nations which are round about you, therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh, Behold I, even I am against you, and I will execute judgments against you in the eyes of the nations, and I will do in you what I have previously not done, and as I will not do any more the like, because of all your abominations. Therefore the father shall eat the sons in the midst of you, and the sons shall eat the fathers, and I will execute judgments in you, and the whole remnant of you will I scatter to all the winds.” ’

God’s indictment continues. The raging of the nations was well known (Psalm 2.1; 46.6) but Israel had been even more turbulent than they, rebelling against His statutes and ordinances, and against all moral standards. Therefore judgments would come on them so that the nations might see that Yahweh did not allow His people to behave so. They were intended to be a witness to the nations, but instead they had become their worst example. Thus God, even Yahweh, was against them. So He would do among them something unlike He had done before or will do after, because of their abominations (compare verse 11). Thus would they be an example to the nations.

For what was included in the word ‘abominations’ see 18.10-13.

Their situation would become so bad that they would become cannibals, eating even members of their own family (compare Jeremiah 19.9; Lamentations 4.10 which confirm that cannibalism is meant and not just murder). Then His judgments would come on them, plague, pestilence, famine and slaughter, and those who were left would be scattered in all directions. Winds came from all directions.

5.11 “Wherefore as I live”, says the Lord Yahweh, “surely because you have defiled my sanctuary with all your detestable things, and with all your abominations, therefore will I also diminish you, nor shall my eye spare, and I will also have no pity.”

A further indictment was that they had defiled the temple with their abominations and idolatry (see 8.10). They had diminished God. That is why He would diminish them. There would be no mercy, no pity, because they had deliberately polluted the temple and brought dishonour on God, likening Him by their behaviour to creeping and detestable things.

5.12 “A third part of you will die with the pestilence, and they will be consumed with famine in the midst of you, and a third part will fall by the sword round about you, and a third part I will scatter to all the winds, and will draw out a sword after them.”

What the shaving of his head and beard have indicated is now described in detail. For one third, death by pestilence and famine. For one third, death by the sword. For one third, scattering in all directions. But the latter will also include death at the hands of adversaries who take advantage of their condition, and death at the hands of their captors. (See 2 Kings 25.1-21; 2 Chronicles 36.17-21; Jeremiah 39.1-18).

5.13 “Thus will my anger be accomplished, and I will satisfy my fury on them, and I will be comforted. And they will know that I, Yahweh have spoken in my zeal, when I have accomplished my fury on them.”

Outwardly all the results were natural results, and came about through rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar. It was not God Who starved them. It was not God Who slew them. It was not God Who turned them to cannibalism. Yet He was the cause for He had withdrawn His protecting hand from them, because by their sins they had rejected His covenant and take themselves from under His protection. As ever in Scripture, this anger was not bad temper and vengeance because He was slighted, but the result of His holy response to what was detestable. He could not allow it to exist in those whom He had chosen and had to take every opportunity to get rid of it by judgment and refining.

‘I will satisfy (appease) My fury.’ He would call to account and give a just sentence so as to satisfy His moral demands. ‘I will be comforted.’ His hatred at sin would be appeased by a just reward for sin, as the Moral Governor of the Universe.

‘In My zeal.’ The ardour of a holy God against sin. The word is sometimes translated jealousy. There too it means the same.

5.14-15 “Moreover I will make you a desolation and a reproach among the nations who are round about you, in the sight of all who pass by. So it shall be a reproach and a taunt, an instruction and an astonishment, to the nations that are round about you, when I shall execute judgments in you in anger and in fury, and in furious rebukes. I, Yahweh, have spoken it.”

The catalogue of woes continues. All around would see their desolation, all would note that Yahweh’s people, who had boasted in their God and His power, had been humbled and devastated. All who passed by (see Lamentations 1.12) would reproach and taunt them, and would learn from what had happened to them of God’s hatred of sin. Indeed they would be astonished at what had happened to them. They were the people of Yahweh whom Sennacherib had been unable to conquer (2 Kings 19.35-36) because of what Yahweh had done. How then could this have happened to them? And the answer would be, because of the anger and fury and furious rebukes of Yahweh against their sin. Note the piling up of the verbs. The nations would be totally amazed.

5.16-17 “When I shall send on them the hurtful arrows of famine, which are for destruction, which I will send to destroy you, and I will increase the famine on you and will break your staff of bread, and I will send on you famine and evil beasts, and they will bereave you, and pestilence and blood will pass through you, and I will bring the sword on you. I, Yahweh, have spoken it.”

The desolations were now spelled out. Firstly famine. This would be like hurtful arrows (Deuteronomy 32.23), arriving suddenly, destroying men when no one was near. And the famine would increase and get worse, and the provisions on which they had leant for so long would be taken from them. They would no longer have anything to depend on.

And, as was inevitable with such famine, starving evil beasts would seek human flesh in order to survive, resulting in many bereavements, and pestilence and blood would follow on people starved of nourishment. Note the combination of ‘pestilence and blood’. The two words in Hebrew are an alliteration, ‘deber wa dam’. Elsewhere ‘blood’ often signifies pestilence. Then on top of this will come the sword. Men of violence would take advantage of the weakness resulting from their parlous state. And all this would come on them because Yahweh had allowed it. It is Yahweh Who says so.

Famine, wild beasts, pestilence, sword, these types of the judgment of God are fairly common in Scripture. See especially ‘God’s four sore judgments’ (14.21); ‘God’s seven times more plagues’ (Leviticus 26.21-26); see also Deuteronomy 32.23-25; Revelation 6.8. They are His ‘reward’ for covenant unfaithfulness.

Throughout this passage we are made aware of Ezekiel’s profound sense of the holiness of God, of the awfulness and sublimity of the divine King, of the greatness of His glory, accentuated by his great vision, and of his awareness of the sacredness and authority of the Law, the divine instruction, so that all disobedience totally outraged him. It may be that we live in the age of mercy and abundant salvation, but we need to be aware that God has not changed. He still hates sin just as bitterly.

Chapter 6. A Prophecy to the Mountains of Israel - God’s Purpose In Their Suffering.

God continues to outline His judgments but explains what He desires them to accomplish (verses 8-10).

6.1-5 ‘And the word of Yahweh came to me saying, “Son of man, set your face towards the mountains of Israel, and prophesy to them, and say, ‘You mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord Yahweh, Thus says the Lord Yahweh to the mountains and to the hills, to the watercourses and to the valleys, “Behold I, even I, will bring a sword on you, and I will destroy your high places, and your altars will become desolate, and your incense altars will be broken, and I will cast down your slain men before your idols. And I will lay the carcases of the children of Israel before their idols, and I will scatter your bones round about your altars.” ’

‘And the word of Yahweh came to me saying.’ This introduces a new passage which is not necessarily directly connected with what has gone before. It indicates the reception of a new prophetic message.

‘Son of man, set your face towards the mountains of Israel, and prophesy to them.’ To set the face meant taking up an attitude of opposition (see also 13.17; 21.2; 25.2; 28.21; 38.2). It may however be that he also did it literally, turning towards Jerusalem. Later pious Jews would turn towards Jerusalem to pray (see Daniel 6.10).

Here Ezekiel had to prophesy to ‘the mountains of Israel’, (a phrase found only in Ezekiel (12 times) apart from Joshua 11.21) but in so doing he spoke to his own people in Babylonia. The mountains were Israel’s strength and protection, and God’s gift to His people. They were the backbone of the land of Israel. They were the inheritance of Yahweh (Isaiah 65.9; Exodus 15.17; Psalm 78.54; Isaiah 57.13). But they were also the site of terrible abominations carried on at the high places, as the context here demonstrates. God’s gift had been bastardised.

‘To the mountains and to the hills, to the watercourses and to the valleys.’ The watercourse and the valleys owed their existence to the mountains and hills. Thus in addressing the mountains He was addressing them all.

‘I will bring a sword on you.’ The invading armies would penetrate the mountains and hills and would destroy their high places, their incense altars and their idols, and would slay the worshippers around them and offer them in disdain to their gods who had been able to do nothing for them. These high places were the continual bain of the prophets and of the good kings of Israel and Judah. They had largely been Canaanite shrines and were so popular that few kings dared to touch them (the exceptions were Hezekiah and Josiah. But they were quickly restored once they had died). At them men often professed to worship Yahweh, but they incorporated naturism, and fertility rites, and idolatry, with all their sexual connotations. They represented at their best debased Yahwism and at their worst the full abominations of the Canaanites, including perverted sex and possibly child sacrifices and ancestor worship.

‘And I will lay the carcases of the children of Israel before their idols, and I will scatter your bones round about your altars.’ In pointed irony God likens what will happen, to human sacrifices being offered. Their carcases will be offered ‘before their own idols’ (compare Leviticus 26.30), and with regard to their bones being scattered it was the bones of sacrifices that were scattered around altars. What they have done to their children in sacrificing them will be done to them. But in Israelite terms this scattering of bones would then pollute the altars (Numbers 19.16).

The incense altars (hammanim) are known from excavations and the word actually appears on one found in Palmyra, in Syria. The word rendered ‘idols’ is a contemptuous one (gillulim) expressing Ezekiel’s disdain. It may have been concocted from a word for ‘dung’ (gel, gelalo) whose consonants are similar, interspersed with the vowels of a word which means ‘detestable thing’ (siqqus), or it may be connected with Akkadian galalu which means a stone slab.

Excursus on High Places.

The use of high places by loyal Yahwists before the Temple was built is documented in 1 Samuel 9.13, 19, 25; 10.5; 1 Kings 3.2 (contrast Deuteronomy 12.2-3). They were local shrines, in earliest times established on hills, but later found elsewhere in towns (2 Kings 17.9), and in valleys where child sacrifices were offered (Jeremiah 7.31), possibly to Melek (Molech - the regular recipient of child sacrifices), but see Jeremiah 19.5 where it was said to be to Baal. This may have been the result of syncretism. Gibeon became known as the Great High Place (1 Kings 3.4) and the Tabernacle was at one stage pitched there (1 Chronicles 21.29).

The use of these high places was not approved of by 1 Kings 3.3 which suggests that David did not worship at high places, unless the Tabernacle was there (1 Chronicles 21.29). Such high places might incorporate an altar for sacrifice, an idol, an Asherah image, an incense altar and a small building. No doubt the one used by Samuel had been purified by the removal of unwanted material. The fact that he did use one when the Tabernacle was elsewhere reveals that the central sanctuary was not at that time seen as the only place to offer sacrifices. This may well have been due to ignorance or a softening down of the Law, but it must be considered possible that at the high place used by Samuel there had been a theophany which would legitimise it (Exodus 20.24).

The danger of the high places is apparent. They turned men’s thoughts to the old religion of Canaan and often resulted in the restoration of Canaanite worship with all its perverted sexual tendencies, fertility rites, ancestor worship and idolatry, and even sometimes child sacrifice. For this reason they were condemned by the prophets. Their approval or otherwise became a test of the genuineness of the faith in Yahweh of Judah’s kings.

End of excursus.

6.6-7 “In all your dwelling places the cities shall be laid waste, and the high places shall be desolate, that your altars may be laid waste and made desolate, and your idols may be broken and cease, and your incense altars may be hewn down, and your works may be blotted out, and the slain will fall in the midst of you, and you will know that I am Yahweh.”

The reason for the destruction of Jerusalem and Judah is now laid bare. It was in order to destroy the high places, the altars, the idols and the incense altars, and the behaviour that resulted from them. There was no other way. For over four hundred years they had clung to these and refused to give them up. Now the very things that they had given their hearts to would destroy them. For this would necessitate the destruction of their cities and the death of many of their inhabitants.

By all this they would be faced up with the fact of the living God, of Yahweh. And they would know what He really is, a hater of idolatry and the evil that springs from it.

6.8-10 “Yet I will leave a remnant in that you will have some who escape the sword among the nations, when you shall be scattered through the countries. And they who escape of you will remember me among the nations to which they will be carried captives, how that I have been broken with their whorish heart which has departed from me, and with their eyes, which go a whoring after their idols. And they will loathe themselves in their own sight for the evils which they have committed in all their abominations. And they will know that I am Yahweh. I have not said in vain that I would do this evil to them.”

God’s mercy still reached through His judgments. There would be those who survived, captives scattered among the countries, and then they would remember Yahweh and recognise what they have done to Him (see also 12.16; 14.22).

‘How that I have been broken with their whorish heart which has departed from me, and with their eyes, which go a whoring after their idols.’ These words remind us that God was affected by their evil behaviour. The attitudes of their hearts and the direction of the gaze of their eyes, turned from Him to idols, had ‘broken’ Yahweh. Compare Jeremiah 23.9 where the prophet’s heart was broken because of the behaviour of the people towards God (see also Jeremiah 8.21; Psalm 34.18; 51.17; 69.20; 147.3; Isaiah 61.1; Ezekiel 34.4, 16). The idea is of being shattered or crushed by something. God was not unaffected by their behaviour although we must not interpret it too literally. He pictures Himself as ‘crushed’. It is an anthropomorphism.

The versions alter the words to ‘I have broken’ but that does not fit well with ‘eyes’ and was probably because the translators did not like to think of God as ‘broken’.

‘And they will loathe themselves in their own sight for the evils which they have committed in all their abominations.’ The result of considering what they had done to Yahweh would make them realise their extreme sinfulness, and they would loathe themselves and how they had behaved (compare 18.13). This indeed was God’s final aim in His judgments. Nothing else would have brought them to their senses (see 14.23).

‘And they will know that I am Yahweh. I have not said in vain that I would do this evil to them.’ It would also bring home to them Who and What Yahweh is, that He is the One Who carries out His purposes and His promises. And that includes His promises of judgment on evil behaviour. They had continued to ignore Him, except perfunctorily, and now they were reaping what they had sown.

As Jesus warned in His day our danger is different, it is of the worship of the great god Mammon. Jesus warned, ‘you cannot serve God and Mammon’ (Matthew 6.24). In many countries today the god Mammon (symbolising a craving for wealth and prosperity), together with his female counterpart Sex, determine people’s lifestyles and behaviour. They worship at their altars, and ignore their Creator and His demands. They too will one day be called to give account, for God’s anger is levelled against them as well. Wealth, prosperity and sex are God given gifts, to be used wisely and rightly, but when they control our lives and solely determine our way of living they become idols (as can sport, music, strong drink, television and pop idols and so on).

6.11-12 ‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh, “Smite with your hand and stamp with your foot, and say, ‘Alas! because of all the evil abominations of the house of Israel’, for they will fall by the sword, by the famine and by pestilence. He who is far off will die of the pestilence, and he who is near will fall by the sword, and he who remains and is besieged will die of the famine. Thus will I accomplish my fury on them.” ’

Clapping with the hands and stamping with the feet were signs of gladness and rejoicing (25.6). But the verb here is ‘smite’ not ‘clap’ and may therefore indicate a different emotion. Stamping with the feet can also express delight or disapproval. Thus while many interpret this as the delight that has to be expressed by the prophet at the fulfilling of God’s will in judgment, others see it as conveying deep emotion of regret at what Israel has to suffer. This is supported by the following ‘Alas’, a word which usually signifies distress or despair.

Thus the Alas! has reference to the suffering coming on Israel. While it was God’s will, it was not to be treated lightheartedly. Ezekiel would be right to weep over their sufferings as Jeremiah did before him, even though he recognised their guilt (Jeremiah 9.1). He sorrowed over their abominations that had grieved God, but he also sorrowed over the judgments that they must receive, ‘for they will fall by the sword, by the famine and by pestilence’. This was no delight to him either.

‘He who is far off will die of the pestilence, and he who is near will fall by the sword, and he who remains and is besieged will die of the famine. Thus will I accomplish my fury on them.’ The three types of judgment, already symbolised by the shaving of his hair and beard (5.2, 12), are again mentioned, but here the pestilence affects those far away from the city, the remnant who have survived. The sword will smite those who defend the city, the famine those besieged in the city, and the pestilence those who escape the slaughter.

‘He who is far off -- and he who is near -- and he who remains --’. This covers everyone. All will be involved in His judgments.

The word translated ‘besieged’ mainly signifies ‘keep watch over, protect, guard’ (thus besieged because kept watch over by the assailants). So alternately the famine may also be seen as following those who are ‘preserved’ (6.8) and affecting them as well. But ‘besieged’ fits the context well and is an acceptable translation. Either way in the end all will be affected by all three judgments, for sword and famine and pestilence are ever the lot of men wherever they are, especially when they are captives or aliens.

‘Thus will I accomplish my fury on them.’ Again God’s anger at sin is emphasised. He was certainly going to do what He had said. The constant repetition was required because of the hardness of heart of Ezekiel’s listeners. They still found it difficult to believe that God would allow Jerusalem to be destroyed. To them it did not make sense. Jerusalem was His holy city and His temple was there. The high places had been around for centuries and God had not done such a thing. Why should He do it now? So do men reason presumptiously against God. They still do so today. They say, ‘God is love’ and so they feel that they do not need to obey Him. He will let them off. But one day they will stand in the Judgment and then they will realise, too late, the seriousness of sin before a holy God. For they have forgotten that ‘God is light’ as well.

These people forgot that they had had two chances when Hezekiah and Josiah had sought to remove the high places, but they had simply waited for a convenient opportunity and had then reopened the high places. God was not about to give them a third chance. It was clear that it would be of no avail. The time of His judgment on them had come, and He wanted them to know it. For when the actual event happened and Jerusalem was destroyed He wanted them to realise that it was not the end of the world. He wanted them to recognise that Yahweh was still in control and had allowed it in order that they may learn His hatred of sin. And He wanted them to repent.

6.13-14 “And you will know that I am Yahweh when their slain men shall be among their idols round about their altars, on every high hill, in all the tops of the mountains, and under every green tree, and under every thick oak, the place where they offered sweet savour to all their idols. And I will stretch out my hand on them, and make the land desolate and waste, from the wilderness toward Diblah throughout all their habitations. And they shall know that I am Yahweh.”

Had Yahweh protected the city and the temple of a grossly disobedient people He would not have been revealed as Yahweh, God of the covenant Who required obedience. He would have been seen as but a powerful local God Who could be treated lightly and presumptuously. But when they saw their slain among their idols, round their altars, then they would know that He is Yahweh, and that He had done this. Their idols in which they trusted could not protect them, but they would know that Yahweh could have done so, but had chosen not to do it, as He had warned them beforehand. Thus would they know that it was because of their sins and disobedience that this had happened, and they would know that He is a righteous God Who will not endure sin. They would know that He is Yahweh.

The picture of bodies strewn about everywhere is a vivid one. They had blasphemed God everywhere and their dead bodies would lie everywhere.

‘On every high hill, in all the tops of the mountains, and under every green tree, and under every thick oak, the place where they offered sweet savour to all their idols.’ Compare 2 Kings 17.10. High places were so abundant that they could be described as ‘on every hill --- and under every green tree’. They were everywhere. Trees also were seen as containing something of the life of Baal, the one who was raised from the dead at the commencement of the rainy season bringing life to the barren earth and fruit and leaves to the trees. Thus under green trees was also seen as a suitable place for their altars. And so flagrant were they that wherever there was a green tree there they would consider building an altar. ‘Under every green tree’. The exaggeration brings out the enormity of their behaviour. And these were His covenant people Who professed to worship Yahweh.

Ancient oaks were especially used for burial sites (Genesis 35.8; 1 Chronicles 10.11) and favoured for the offering of incense to Baal. Thus many would be buried under them and they may well have been seen as suitable sites for ancestor worship. Their shade also made them attractive. As Hosea describes the situation, ‘they sacrifice on the tops of mountains, and burn incense on the hills, under oaks and poplars and terebinths, because their shadow is good’ (4.13). But here ‘good’ may include the idea that they saw their shadows as beneficial because of the presence of the gods.

‘The place where they offered sweet savour to all their idols.’ In the very place whey had offered their sweet savour to idols through sacrifices, this was the place where they would lie slain. So much good had their offerings done them. The offering of sweet savour would include sacrifices and drink offerings, especially the whole burnt offering (Genesis 8.20-21; Exodus 29.18, 25, 41; Leviticus & Numbers regularly. See for drink offerings Numbers 15.7, 10).

‘And I will stretch out my hand on them, and make the land desolate and waste, from the wilderness to Diblah throughout all their habitations.’ Diblah is nowhere else mentioned. In view of the similarity in ancient Hebrew between ‘d’ and ‘r’ Riblah has been suggested as an alternative, and there is some manuscript evidence to support it.

Riblah was the place where king Zedekiah and his sons and nobles would be brought before the king of Babylon, and he would be blinded and his sons slain before his eyes (2 Kings 25.6-7; Jeremiah 39.5-6; 52.9-11). Others too would be brought there to be slaughtered after the destruction of Jerusalem (2 Kings 25.18-21; Jeremiah 52.24-27). It was a staging post on the way back to Babylon where the returning troops mustered. It would be well known to Ezekiel’s compatriots, and thus a very suitable illustration. It was on the River Orontes in Hamath which was seen as the farthest reaches of the land (Amos 6.14). ‘From the wilderness to Riblah’ would then be seen as the whole extent of the land of promise. Thus wherever His rebellious people had lived would be made desolate and waste.

‘Desolate and waste (semama u mesamma)’ This phrase, like tohu wa bohu (waste and empty) in Genesis 1.2 is a combination that depends on similarity of sound so that it is all one thought, a desolated waste.

‘And they shall know that I am Yahweh.’ This is the constant refrain in Ezekiel. This was God’s purpose. That they might know Him for Who and What He was, One Who demanded obedience to His covenant, One Who demanded righteousness and holiness, One Who hated idolatry and what it did to His people, and yet as One Who in the end would show mercy on them, for that was why He had chosen Ezekiel as His prophet.

Chapter 7. Further Diatribes Against Israel.

We must remember that when we read Ezekiel it is like reading a book of sermons. Sermons on the same theme may well be repetitive. But repetitiveness is a feature of ancient writings. Although having said all this we must remember that Ezekiel was not only preaching sermons he was bringing a revelation from God. The same theme continues. Jerusalem must be destroyed. Rather than being inviolate it would be made desolate. We must never presume on God. The message had to be repeated because they would not believe it. But the repetition was so that when it happened they would know that Yahweh Himself had determined it all along.

7.1 ‘Moreover the word of Yahweh came to me saying.’

Compare 6.1. These words introduce a new revelation from God. Each revelation may be separated by days, weeks, or even months. We do not know. But they are declaring that Yahweh has again given him words to speak in the midst of his silence.

7.2-4 “And you, son of man, thus says the Lord Yahweh to the land of Israel. ‘An end, the end has come on the four corners of the land. Now is the end on you, and I will send my anger on you, and will judge you according to your ways. And I will bring on you all your abominations. And my eye will not spare you, nor will I have pity, but I will bring your ways on you, and your abominations will be in the midst of you, and you will know that I am Yahweh.’ ”

Yahweh now confirmed that ‘the end’ had come, the end of Judah and Jerusalem, and of all Israel. The whole land was to be affected. Three times He stressed it, the number of certain completion, and each time it grew in intensity. ‘An end, the end, -- now is the end on you.’ His anger against their sinfulness would be revealed, His judgments would be revealed against their behaviour, and all the abominable things that they had done would be brought upon them. And once again this was so that they may know ‘that I am Yahweh’. God was determined to press home what He is.

Amos had declared the same thing on Israel before the destruction of Samaria and the northern kingdom, ‘the end is come upon My people Israel. I will not again pass by them any more’ (8.2). And it had happened. Now the same was to happen to Judah. Judah was doomed.

‘The four corners of the land.’ Possibly north, south east and west, or perhaps north west and north east, south west and south east. They encompassed the whole land. The mountains of Israel had previously been addressed (6.2), now it is the whole land of Israel. None must be left out.

‘And my eye will not spare you, nor will I have pity, but I will bring your ways on you, and your abominations will be in the midst of you, and you will know that I am Yahweh.’

He wanted them to know that this time there would be no turning back. They had become so set in sin and idolatry that there was no other way. This time His eye would not spare them. They would receive no pity. It had happened before that He had spared them but they had still continually failed. So this time it would not happen. What they have sown in their sin and abominations they must reap. Thus will they finally become aware that He really is Yahweh, the holy God of the covenant Who demands faithfulness and righteousness.

This continual stress should bring home to us the awfulness of sin. We can begin to treat it so lightly as they did. But it is no light thing.

7.5-9 ‘Thus says the Lord Yahweh, “An evil, an only evil, behold it comes. An end is come, the end is come, it awakes against you, behold it comes. Your doom is come to you, O inhabitant of the land, the time is come, the day is near, a day of tumult and not of joyful shouting on the mountains. Now will I shortly pour out my fury on you, and accomplish my anger against you, and will judge you according to your ways, and I will bring on you all your abominations. And my eye will not spare, nor will I have pity. I will bring on you according to your ways, and your abominations will be in the midst of you. And you will know that I am Yahweh the smiter.” ’

This might almost be a description of the end days before the final restoration, but it is not. It is describing ‘the end days’ for Jerusalem and Judah at that time. Notice again the repetition and the stress on the fact that ‘it is coming’. ‘An evil, behold it comes -- an end is come -- the end is come -- it awakes against you, behold it comes -- your doom is come -- the time is come.’ Its import could not be mistaken. It was definitely and specifically ‘at hand’.

What was coming was not only an evil but ‘an only evil’, a singular, unique evil, unlike anything previously known (5.9). Indeed it was ‘the end’ for Jerusalem and Judah that was coming, an end awakening as though out of sleep. It was ‘doom’ that was coming. For the time of His judgments was now here.

There is in this passage a further deliberate play on words. An ‘end’ is ‘qes’, ‘the end’ is ‘haqqes’, ‘awakes’ is ‘heqis’. The word for ‘doom’ is difficult. In Isaiah 28.5 it is used of Yahweh being ‘a diadem’ of beauty to the residue of His people. Thus it is something that comes on people to display what they are and here a crown of doom. The translation ‘morning’ in AV is based on an Aramaic word.

And that time, that day will be a day of tumult rather than of joyful shouting on the mountains. The mountain had known much joyful shouting as men sinned before their idols, and cavorted with the sacred prostitutes, and drank and made merry. But now that would become tumult as they were hunted down by their adversaries.

‘Now will I shortly pour out my fury on you, and accomplish my anger against you, and will judge you according to your ways, and I will bring on you all your abominations. And my eye will not spare, nor will I have pity. I will bring on you according to your ways, and your abominations will be in the midst of you. And you will know that I Yahweh do smite.’ The same warnings are given as before. The repetition is deliberate,