The book of Ezekiel is widely recognized as one of the most
idiosyncratic of the OT prophetic books. Some rabbis prohibited
anyone under the age of thirty from reading portions of the book
(i.e., the visions of God’s glory in chapters 1 and 10 might
lead to dangerous speculations about the mystery of God).
Authorship
and Date
Up
until the beginning of the twentieth century, most scholars viewed
the unparalleled extensive dating in the book (1:1–2; 8:1;
20:1; 24:1; 26:1; 29:1, 17; 30:20; 31:1; 32:1, 17; 33:21; 40:1),
along with the symmetry achieved by deliberate thematic repetition
(i.e., the “watchman” passages in 3:16–21; 33:1–9;
Ezekiel’s message of judgment/hope addressed to the mountains
of Israel respectively in chaps. 6; 36) as indisputable proof that
the book was the product of a single author. Even during the first
one hundred years or so of historical-critical dominance in OT
research, historical-critical investigations tended to confirm the
traditional views of the unity, authenticity, and date of the book of
Ezekiel, although the opinions of the majority of scholars began to
shift early in the twentieth century.
For
much of the first half of the twentieth century, issues of
authorship, dating, and provenance of the prophet’s ministry
dominated critical research on the book of Ezekiel. The book’s
peculiarities lent themselves to various suggestions regarding the
place of Ezekiel’s ministry. If, as 1:1–3 records,
Ezekiel was called to prophetic ministry among the exilic community
in Babylon, how does one explain Ezekiel’s apparent knowledge
of particular events in Jerusalem, such as the death of Pelatiah
(11:13) and the various forms of idolatry taking place in and around
the temple complex in chapters 8–11? Furthermore, what is one
to make of Ezekiel’s words to those who remained behind in
Jerusalem (5:8–17; 11:5–12; 33:23–29)?
Many
of those who sought to defend a straightforward understanding of the
book’s own claims looked to mysticism or psychology to explain
Ezekiel’s visionary involvement in events occurring some seven
hundred miles away. Explanations for the apparent idiosyncrasies of
his ministry—including extremely violent and graphic language,
his extended period of “muteness,” various striking
sign-acts, and the extended length and emotional intensity of his
visionary experiences—tended to bleed into the discussion of
how to understand his visionary experience of being transported to
remote locations. Earlier solutions ranged from noting the
similarities between Ezekiel’s experiences and those of the
mystics to characterizing Ezekiel as having a “complex
personality” and as one whose life was more attuned to the
realities of the supernatural world.
Geographical
solutions to account for Ezekiel’s apparent knowledge of events
in Jerusalem include two suggestions. The first is that Ezekiel
ministered only in Jerusalem. His preaching forms the core of
chapters 1–39, and a later exilic redactor updated these
chapters to address the concerns of an exilic audience and also added
chapters 40–48. The second suggestion is that Ezekiel
ministered in Jerusalem from 593 BC until the fall of Jerusalem, at
which time he was taken into captivity in Babylon, where he continued
his ministry among the exiles. The appeal of a dual-ministry approach
is that it accounts for the double geographical focus of Ezekiel
without resorting to ecstatic or supernatural flight from one city to
the other or positing extensive secondhand editing of the book.
On
the other hand, there is evidence from other biblical materials that
ecstatic or visionary experiences of this sort were part of the
prophetic tradition. Many of Ezekiel’s apparent idiosyncrasies
actually resemble characteristics of the preclassical prophets.
Viewing Ezekiel’s ministry as part of an accepted cultural
tradition provides a more persuasive explanation for the text as it
stands. For example, the evidence of continued contacts between the
Jerusalem and exilic communities (Jer. 29; Ezek. 33:21) suffices to
explain whatever knowledge Ezekiel possessed of events in Jerusalem.
The manner of their presentation in his visions is dictated by the
cultural standards and expectations of a prophet operating under the
influence of the “hand of Yahweh” and by the rhetorical
goals of his preaching.
It
is entirely plausible to suggest that the author of Ezekiel was an
Israelite who was a rough contemporary of the tragic events
surrounding the dismantling of the Judahite monarchy by the
Neo-Babylonian Empire.
Historical
Background
The
book of Ezekiel itself yields pertinent information about Ezekiel’s
world, which, when supplemented with other biblical texts (2 Kings,
Jeremiah, Daniel, and Habakkuk), enables us to reconstruct a working
picture of the social, historical, and theological milieu in which
Ezekiel lived and ministered.
In
701 BC the kingdom of Judah escaped annihilation by the Assyrians, as
had befallen the northern kingdom in 722 BC, due in large part to the
ministry of Isaiah and the faith of King Hezekiah (2 Kings
18:1–20:21; Isa. 36–37), albeit at a crippling financial
expense in the form of heavy tribute to Assyria. After Hezekiah’s
death in 698 BC, his son Manasseh reversed his father’s
religious reforms, which meant disaster spiritually (2 Kings
21:1–18; 2 Chron. 33:1–11) and survival politically.
Judah continued to exist for most of the seventh century BC as a
vassal kingdom under Assyrian domination. The spiritual decline of
Judah was briefly challenged during the reign of Josiah, who ruled in
the years 640–609 BC. However, Jeremiah’s strong
invectives against empty religious formalism and social
irresponsibility during much of Josiah’s reign suggest that
Josiah’s attempts at religious reforms were only nominally
successful and did not penetrate to the populace at large.
While
Josiah was seeking to institute his reforms, power in the
international scene was shifting. After the death of Ashurbanipal,
the last great Assyrian ruler, the Assyrian Empire began to wane. The
Neo-Babylonian Empire, founded by Nabopolassar (626 BC), dealt
Assyria its final blow with the conquest of Nineveh (612 BC),
followed by the destruction of Harran a few years later. This,
coupled with the untimely death of Josiah in battle against the
Egyptians at Megiddo (609 BC), spelled disaster for Judah (2 Kings
23:29–30; 2 Chron. 35:20–24). Nebuchadnezzar assumed
leadership of Babylon after the death of his father (605 BC). Later
that same year, Nebuchadnezzar defeated Egyptian forces at Carchemish
and also ordered the deportation of some of the educated young Jewish
men to Babylon (Dan. 1:1–4). This was followed by a second
deportation in 597 BC, which included King Jehoiachin, Ezekiel, and
about ten thousand Jews (2 Kings 24:14). Zedekiah was placed on
the Judean throne as a puppet king. His rebellion against Babylon
(588 BC) led to Nebuchadnezzar’s one-and-a-half-year siege of
Jerusalem before its final demise in 586 BC.
The
political crisis of 597–586 BC led to a crisis of faith. The
promises of an eternal Davidic kingdom (2 Sam. 7:7–16; Ps.
89:3–4, 35–37) and Yahweh’s vow to set up his abode
forever in the temple at Jerusalem (Pss. 68:16; 132:13–14)
seemed to be failing. At the beginning of Ezekiel’s ministry,
the Davidic promise was already under a cloud: Jehoiachin, the
rightful heir of the line of David, had been taken in captivity to
Babylon, and in his place sat the puppet king Zedekiah. In addition,
the land of Canaan had played a significant role in shaping the
Israelites’ understanding of themselves as Yahweh’s
chosen people (Gen. 12:1–3; Deut. 4:37–38; 7:1–11).
Because true worship of God was so closely aligned with the
Israelites’ inheritance of the land (Deut. 12), to be outside
the land immediately raised grave concern about their status before
God (1 Sam. 26:19). To be outside the promised land would lead
in a few short years to a questioning of whether true worship was
even possible any longer (Ps. 137:4). Throughout this period, Ezekiel
(and Jeremiah) consistently portrayed Nebuchadnezzar as an unwitting
pagan king commissioned by Yahweh to execute the covenant curses on
the recalcitrant southern kingdom.
Far
from recognizing these events as such, many Israelites in the
rebellion party, supported by rebellion prophets, asserted their
claim to divine favor and denied the validity of prophetic
indictments. They supported their claims with appeals to the
miraculous deliverance from the formidable Assyrian army (701 BC),
selective use of Scripture’s focus on the inviolability of
Jerusalem and the temple, the unconditional promises of an eternal
Davidic kingdom (see above), and predictions by rebellion prophets of
a quick return for the exiles (Jer. 28; 29:15–32; Ezek. 13).
From
Ezekiel’s perspective, the people of Judah were making a liar
out of Yahweh. Yahweh had always demanded their exclusive worship. In
light of their recent history of idolatry, the only appropriate
response was to execute judgment on them (Ezek. 20:4–44). By
denying this, the only explanation left to the rebellion party for
the destruction of Jerusalem and exile was that a mighty and wicked
kingdom that they intensely hated (Ps. 137:4) had bested Yahweh.
From
this historical survey one may distill the overall situation faced by
Ezekiel into a set of opinions probably shared by the majority of
Ezekiel’s fellow exiles. First, there was a widespread belief
that it was proper to worship other deities in addition to Yahweh.
Also, it was generally believed that the people of Judah were in good
standing with Yahweh and were objects of his favor, and that he would
shortly bring them deliverance. These beliefs combined to eliminate
serious consideration of the possibility that destruction of the
kingdom and exile were Yahweh’s intention. Consequently, once
the kingdom was destroyed and exile had become a reality, Yahweh’s
power and/or character became suspect in the minds of many.
Furthermore, the perceived link between the land and the presence and
blessing of Yahweh cast the exilic experience in an extremely
negative light. For those gripped by these convictions, exile raised
the specter of hopelessness. The sense of hopelessness was
intensified by its conjunction with the belief that destruction of
the kingdom and exile were undeserved. There was no way to integrate
the outcome of the Babylonian crisis with their previously held
beliefs about Yahweh and his purposes for Israel.
Literary
Considerations
Structure
and outline.
There are several frameworks that can help the reader understand the
“inner logic” of the book.
Tripartite
structure.
In chapters 1–24 the theme of God’s impending judgment on
the nation of Israel for violation of the covenant laws is
emphatically repeated in both word and sign-act. Chapters 25–32
serve a Janus (double) function, connecting with chapters 1–24
by continuing the theme of God’s judgment, now directed toward
the foreign nations. The pronouncements of coming judgment in these
chapters anticipate the last part of the book, with the message of
hope for Israel that dominates chapters 33–48. The emphasis on
divine judgment in the first half of the book is not a de facto
statement that God is finished with Israel; rather, it is recognition
that only by means of judgment (both of Israel and their neighbors)
is future restoration and reconciliation possible. Many recognize a
further subdivision in the third section, with chapters 33–39
focusing on the renewal of the nation and chapters 40–48
dealing with Ezekiel’s temple vision.
This
yields the following outline:
I.
God’s Judgment on Israel (1–24)
II.
God’s Judgment on the Foreign Nations (25–32)
III.
Hope for Israel (33–48)
A.
Renewal of the nation (33–39)
B.
Ezekiel’s temple vision (40–48)
Visions.
Visions open and close the book (chaps. 1–3; 40–48), with
two additional visions in between: temple idolatry and the
incremental departure of God’s glory as judgment is executed
(chaps. 8–11), and the valley of dry bones (37:1–14).
The
movement of God’s glory.
Ezekiel’s sustained concern for the temple as the place where
God’s glory dwells provides a unifying structure to the book as
Ezekiel chronicles God’s glory coming to Babylon in his ominous
inaugural vision (chaps. 1–3), the incremental departure of
God’s glory from the temple and the city (chaps. 8–11),
and the return of God’s glory in the vision of the new temple
(chaps. 40–48).
Genre.
The book of Ezekiel is considered by many to be a literary
masterpiece composed of various genres, including extended visionary
narrative (1–3; 8–11; 37:1–14; 40–48),
allegory (16; 23), poetry (19; 26–28), parable (17; 24:3), and
popular sayings (8:12; 9:9; 11:3, 15; 12:22, 27; 18:2; 33:10, 17, 20,
24, 30; 37:11). Other prophets quoted popular sayings (Isa. 40:27;
Jer. 31:29; Amos 5:14; Hag. 1:2; Mal. 1:2, 6–7, 12–13),
but the quotations are far more frequent in Ezekiel and are couched
in uniquely theocentric language. In each case it is God who informs
Ezekiel what the people are saying. Ezekiel uses popular sayings of
the people to establish their hostility toward God and to vindicate
God by demonstrating his covenant faithfulness. The unparalleled
frequency of Ezekiel’s use of popular sayings in his oracles
against the Israelites and the patently theocentric garb in which his
counterreplies are clothed serve to anchor both the judgment and the
hope of restoration in God alone. Ezekiel’s quotations serve as
a foil for a frontal attack on the entire religious enterprise of his
contemporaries in Jerusalem and Babylon. By citing these popular
sayings and refuting them, Ezekiel skillfully reveals both the
necessity and purpose of the exilic crisis. He turns the sayings of
the people against them, exposing the depths of their opposition to
God and thus furthering the purpose of vindicating God.
Theological
Message
The
sovereignty of God.
The book emphasizes God’s sovereignty over all as Ezekiel
challenged the false theology of his fellow Jewish exiles, which held
that Yahweh, bound by covenantal oath, could not destroy Jerusalem.
The formulaic expression (with variations) “After X occurs,
then you/they will know that I am the Lord/I have spoken”
occurs over sixty-five times in the book to emphasize God’s
intervention in human events, including the exile and restoration
(e.g., 7:27; 13:23; 29:16), to uphold the covenant and establish his
kingdom.
The
holiness of God.
Israel’s sins had obscured God’s holiness in the sight of
their neighbors (20:9). God’s holiness required both punishment
of Israel’s sins and the continuation of his covenantal
relationship with his people. God’s purging judgment and
restoration would be a fulfillment of his covenantal obligations and
would display his holiness (20:40–44; 28:25; 36:16–32).
Hope
in the midst of judgment.
God’s covenantal faithfulness would include restoration after
judgment (chaps. 33–39). The final temple vision (chaps. 40–48)
gives a picture of the restoration using typological images and
cultural idioms with which the people were familiar.
New
Testament Connections
There
are approximately sixty-five quotations and allusions to the book of
Ezekiel in the NT. Echoes of Ezekiel are prevalent in John’s
Gospel (John 10:1–30 [Ezek. 34]; John 15:1–8 [Ezek. 15])
and the book of Revelation (Rev. 4:6–9 [Ezek. 1]; Rev. 20–22
[Ezek. 40–48]).