Third Section. Ch. 8–11. New visions of Jehovah’s withdrawal from his house, and the approaching destruction of Jerusalem

On the fifth day of the sixth month of the sixth year of the Captivity of Jehoiachin (b.c. 591) the prophet sat in his house and the elders of the exile sat before him. Moved by their words or by their presence he fell into a trance and was transported by the spirit to Jerusalem, where a series of events passed before his view.

First, ch. 8, a vision of the idolatries practised by all classes in the house of the Lord.

Secondly, ch. 9, a vision of the messengers of divine vengeance, and the slaughter of the inhabitants of the city.

Thirdly, ch. 10, a vision of the destruction of the city itself by fire from God, with a new description of the cherubim.

Fourthly, ch. 11, a vision of the internal condition of the city, the counsels and thoughts of the leaders. Then the departure of Jehovah from the city, and renewal of the threat of destruction, but with a promise of restoration to those already in exile.

Finally, awaking out of his trance, the prophet narrates the proceeding revelations to the exiles (ch. Ezekiel 11:25).

Ch. 8. The manifold idolatries of Israel, whereby they profane the house of the Lord, causing him to withdraw from it

Four idolatrous scenes pass before the prophet’s view.

(1) Ezekiel 8:1-6. He is shewn an image, called the image of jealousy, situated apparently in the outer court, but near the gateway leading to the inner court.

(2) Ezekiel 8:7-11, the secret idolatries practised by the elders in the chambers of the gateway.

(3) Ezekiel 8:12-13, the lamentation for Tammuz or Adonis engaged in by the women.

(4) Ezekiel 8:15-18, sun-worship practised in front of the temple in the inner court.

1. the sixth month] The first vision of the prophet was in the fifth year of Jehoiachin’s captivity and in the fourth month (Ezekiel 1:1); the present one a year and two months later. LXX. reads fifth month, and many modern scholars accept this reading, arguing that the Heb. date is due to some copyist or reader who wished to leave room for the number of days during which the prophet had to lie on his side (ch. Ezekiel 4:5; Ezekiel 4:9). The copyist must have been an indifferent arithmetician, for 7 (Ezekiel 3:15) + 390 + 40 (ch. Ezekiel 4:5-6) = 437, while a lunar year and two months, 354 + 59 = 413 days. The discrepancies between the Heb. and LXX. dates are not easy to explain.

elders of Judah] Ch. Ezekiel 14:1. “Certain of the elders of Israel.” The meaning appears from ch. Ezekiel 11:25, “So I spake to them of the captivity all the things which the Lord had shewed me.” The community at Tel Abib were probably permitted to have a certain internal government of their own. In the “elders” before him the prophet sees represented not so much the captivity as the whole “house of Israel.” On “hand of the Lord,” cf. ch. Ezekiel 1:3.

1–3. The trance in presence of the elders. The prophet, abiding in his house (ch. Ezekiel 3:25), was visited by the elders of the captivity among whom he dwelt. They probably came to consult him regarding the affairs at home and the prospects of the city. Thrown into a state of excitation by their words or by their presence he fell into a trance. The vision of the God of Israel again appeared to him, for this thought of Jehovah chiefly occupied his mind and led to all his other thoughts, and he was carried away in the spirit to Jerusalem; and there the manifold idolatries of the people were shewn him. Two chief thoughts appear expressed by the symbolism; first, by making the “glory” of Jehovah appear in Jerusalem the prophet points the contrast between the glorious God whom the people had abandoned and the debased forms of worship to which they had addicted themselves, and also implies that this worship was done in the face of Jehovah, “to provoke the eyes of his glory” (Isaiah 3:8); and secondly, when Jehovah himself shews the idolatrous practices of the people, we see, what is characteristic of the prophet, the effort to throw himself into the consciousness, so to speak, of Jehovah, and look out at things from his mind, he being who he is. It would be a mistake to regard the details here given as due entirely to literary artifice; there is no doubt a foundation of reality under them, though when in after years the prophet reflected on the facts and recorded them he gave them great expansion and embellishment.

2. as the appearance of fire] More naturally, the appearance of a man, as LXX., cf. ch. Ezekiel 1:26-27, “the appearance of a man” (a different word, however), where the description is the same, viz. fire from the loins downwards and amber from the loins upwards. The prophet speaks with reverential vagueness of God—“a likeness as the appearance of a man,” and “he put forth the likeness of a hand.”

3. He does not even say that it was the divine hand that carried him; spirit carried him, the form of the divine hand was merely symbolical.

the visions of God] i.e. shewn him by God, ch. Ezekiel 1:1.

door of the inner gate] Rather: door of the gate of the inner court looking toward the north, i.e. the northern gate of the inner court. The word “inner” is wanting in LXX. The general opinion has been that the prophet was set down in the inner court, at the inner door of the northern gateway into that court. The term “door,” however, seems in usage to mean the outside entrance; and if the prophet had stood in the inner court he would have had to look northward through the gateway in order to see the image of jealousy, which was certainly not in the inner court. It is more natural to suppose him set down in the outer court, in front of the gateway leading into the inner court. In front of this gateway, in the outer court, stood the image of jealousy, near the entrance. Having seen this the prophet is next brought into the gateway (Ezekiel 8:7), where he enters the chamber of imagery, some one of the cells in the gateway building. From there he is carried outside the sacred enclosure altogether to the north door of the outer court (Ezekiel 8:14), where he finds the women bewailing Tammuz. And finally he is transported into the inner court where he beholds the sun-worship practised in front of the temple-house itself. Previous to this he had not been in the inner court, for when being shewn the idolatries he is always taken to the precise place where they are practised.

image of jealousy] Not an image of “jealousy” itself, considered as a deity, but an image which because it provoked to jealousy was named image of jealousy. The “jealousy” of God is a violent emotion or resentment arising from the feeling of being injured (Deuteronomy 32:21). It is uncertain what this image was. The word occurs again, Deuteronomy 4:16, in the sense of similitude or “figure,” and in Phenician with the meaning of “statue,” e.g. in an inscription from Idalion (Corp. Ins. Sem., vol. i. 88, 3, 7, &c.). According to 2 Kings 21:7 Manasseh put a graven image of Ashera in the house of the Lord, which Josiah brought out and burnt (2 Kings 23:6; 2 Chronicles 33:7; 2 Chronicles 33:15). In earlier times the Ashera (A.V. grove) was a tree or pole planted beside an altar. It is not quite certain whether the pole or stock was a substitute for the evergreen tree, when this could not be had, or whether like the sun-image it was the symbol of a goddess. In later times the term seems used as the name of a goddess. The expression “in the house of the Lord” is hardly to be pressed so far as to imply that Manasseh placed the Ashera in the temple proper, “house” is used of the whole temple buildings, including the courts. The image here may be this Ashera, whether we are to suppose it replaced after Josiah had burnt it, or whether the prophet be here taking a comprehensive view of the idolatries of Israel, including the time of Manasseh. In 2 Kings 23:11 reference is made to the horses of the sun placed “at the entering in of the house of the Lord,” but these would scarcely be called an “image.”

4. The glory of the Lord was that seen by the prophet at the Chebar (ch. 1). This glory expressed the prophet’s conception of Jehovah. And this Jehovah is here, in contrast with the deities worshipped by the people, and beholding their worship.

5. gate of the altar] Is probably the northern inner gate. The northern entrance was the most frequented, partly because the royal palace and buildings lay to the south and east, and the west was closed by the buildings of the temple itself. In Leviticus 1:4 the sacrificial victims are commanded to be slaughtered on the north side of the altar.

in the entry] The image was situated on the north of the altar gate, and the words in or at the entry are to be taken somewhat generally. The words are wanting in LXX.

6. I should go far off] i.e. withdraw. These abominations defiled Jehovah’s sanctuary, the place of his abode, causing him to abandon it. His withdrawal is symbolized ch. Ezekiel 11:1; Ezekiel 11:22-23.

turn thee … again … see] Rather: thou shalt again see greater abominations; so Ezekiel 8:13; Ezekiel 8:15.

7–12. The secret idolatry of the Elders

7. the door of the court] i.e. the outside entrance of the gateway into the inner court. Placed at first near the entrance the prophet is now brought to the gateway itself, either unto some chamber within it or some building attached to it, cf. Ezekiel 40:44. In the wall of this building he observed a hole, through which he dug and entered a chamber, on the walls of which were portrayed all manner of creatures, and in the chamber were seventy elders offering incense to the imagery on the walls.

behold a hole] The symbolism is not very clear. The “hole” is meant to suggest that entrance into the chamber was obtained secretly by those who practised their rites there. The words are wanting in LXX.

8. The words “in the wall” are wanting both times in LXX.

9. The word “wicked” is wanting in LXX.

10. The construction is difficult: lit. “and behold every likeness (Ezekiel 8:3; Deuteronomy 4:17-18) of creeping things and beasts (cattle), abomination, and all,” &c., the term “abomination” being descriptive both of creeping things and beasts. The term “beasts” is employed of the larger domestic animals, though also of the beasts of prey; it seems nowhere used of the smaller vermin. On the other hand the word “abomination” is chiefly used in regard to the smaller creatures that swarm, whether in the waters or on the land, in the latter case winged and creeping things being included (Leviticus 11), and nowhere of the animals called “beasts.” LXX. omits “likeness of creeping things and beasts,” and it is possible that these words are a marginal gloss explanatory of “abomination.” It has usually been supposed that the reference is to the debased forms of Egyptian superstition. This is possible, for the other practices mentioned, the lamentation for Tammuz and the sun-worship came from abroad. Israel appears to have fallen into the idolatries of the nations about her when she came under their influence, particularly when they became paramount over her, and their gods were thought to be stronger than her own God. The Egyptian influence had been powerful from the days of Isaiah downwards, and even after the battle of Carchemish (b.c. 604) the hope of Egyptian support induced Jehoiakim in his last years and Zedekiah toward the close of his reign to renounce their allegiance to Babylon. On the other hand the practices here mentioned may be rather a revival of ancient superstitions which, during the prosperity of the kingdom and amidst the vigour of the national religion, had fallen into disuse or maintained themselves only as a secret cult, but which, amidst the disasters of the time, when Jehovah appeared to have forsaken the land and men looked to every quarter for aid, again became prevalent (see W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 338). If the LXX. reading be followed the passage may have less significance than has been attributed to it.

and all the idols] the block-gods, see ch. Ezekiel 6:4. The fact that the “idols,” which according to ch. 6 (Ezekiel 8:4; Ezekiel 8:6; Ezekiel 8:9; Ezekiel 8:13) are to be found over all the mountains of Israel, are represented as portrayed upon the wall is peculiar, and suggests that the whole is symbolical. In ch. Ezekiel 23:14 Jerusalem sees images of the Chaldeans portrayed upon the wall and falls in love with them, but such portraits can hardly have been a reality.

11. seventy men of the ancients] i.e. of the elders. The seventy were not any court such as the later Sanhedrim, but merely seventy men representing the elders of Israel (Exodus 24:1; Numbers 11:16; Numbers 11:24-25). The elders were the leaders of the people, and probably here represent them. Prominent among these elders was Jaazaniah the son of Shaphan. There is no reason to suppose the name fictitious. Shaphan the scribe was the person who read the Book of the Law found in the temple to king Josiah (2 Kings 22:10). A son of his son Ahikam acted along with him and was a protector of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 39:14), and another son is mentioned (Jeremiah 36:10) as having a chamber in the upper court where Baruch read Jeremiah’s roll in the ears of the people. If Jaazaniah was a son of this Shaphan he pursued a different course from his father and brothers.

12. the chambers of his imagery] Or, his chambers of imagery. The language implies that there were many chambers of imagery, and again suggests that the scene was symbolical. For “ancients” elders. On “imagery” Leviticus 26:1; Numbers 33:52.

forsaken the earth] Rather: the land. The multiplied calamities of later years suggested that Jehovah no more protected the country (ch. Ezekiel 9:9). This was possibly the feeling of the elders and people in some moods, but in other moods they spoke differently. In ch. Ezekiel 11:15 they say to those already in exile, “Get you far from the Lord! unto us is this land given in possession.”

13. Turn thee yet again] See Ezekiel 8:6.

14. The women bewailing Tammuz

14. gate of the Lord’s house] i.e. outside the whole temple buildings to the north gate of the outer court; cf. ch. Ezekiel 10:19, Ezekiel 11:1. The term “house” embraces all the temple buildings (Jeremiah 35:4). The women may have been seen sitting outside the gate, or they may have been in some of the chambers of the outer gateway. Of course the temple building in Ezekiel’s time did not quite correspond to his ideal sketch in ch. 40 seq., but there were no doubt chambers at that time connected with both gateways (Jeremiah 35:2; Jeremiah 35:4; Jeremiah 36:10; Jeremiah 36:12; Jeremiah 36:20-21; cf. Jeremiah 26:10; 2 Kings 23:11). Tammuz is identical with Adonis. The latter name, Adon, “Lord,” is not a proper name, being applicable to any great god, but when the myth found its way to Greece, the word became a proper name. The name Tammuz is Babylonian Dumu-zi, Dûzi, said to signify “son of life,” and to indicate the eternal youth of the sun-god (cf. Fried. Del. in Baer’s Ezek.; Schrader, KAT. on Ezekiel 8:14; Sayce, Hibbert Lect. IV). The story of the death of Tammuz is said to be a solar myth, having reference to the death of the sun-god. The explanations given by Assyrian scholars are not very clear. Sometimes the death is said to be that which he undergoes each night, sometimes that which he undergoes when he expires before the touch of winter, and sometimes the death is that of the lusty, life-giving vernal god, who perishes along with all life on earth amidst the summer fires which he himself has kindled. The town of Gebal or Byblos, eight miles north of Beirut, was the great seat of the Adonis worship in Phenicia. It is possible that the cult passed westward from Babylonia, but it may be that in Syria the rites had an independent origin and a different meaning, and that it was not till later that they were interpreted in the sense of the Babylonian myth (W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites, index under Adonis). It was probably from Phenicia that the worship entered Judæa. Milton’s interpretation of the rites may not quite exhaust their meaning:

the love tale

Infected Zion’s daughters with like heat;

Whose wanton passions in the sacred porch

Ezekiel saw.

Such myths may originally be only beautiful nature poetry, but we are so allied to nature that we see our feelings reflected in her, as on the other hand her moods repeat themselves in us. Particularly in times of decay and loss the sadder aspects of nature intensify our own feeling by presenting to our minds a universal decay in which we and all things are involved. It is only the sorrowful side of the Tammuz rite that the prophet refers to.

15. turn thee yet again] See Ezekiel 8:6 end.

16. The sun-worshippers in the inner court

16. about five and twenty] LXX., about twenty. These men were seen adoring the sun with their faces to the east, and their backs to the temple house. Their position between the temple and the altar seems to imply that they were priests (Joel 2:17), and it is not decisive against this view that they are called “elders” in ch. Ezekiel 9:6, for Jeremiah 19:1 refers to “the elders of the priests.” They may be supposed representatives of the priesthood.

worshipped the sun] The worship of the sun, the queen of heaven, and the host of heaven, was adopted by Israel from their eastern conquerors: cf. 2 Kings 23:5; 2 Kings 23:11; Jeremiah 44:17; Job 31:26; Deuteronomy 4:19. (The Heb. is to be read mishtaḥavim.)

17. Is it a light thing] Probably: is it too light a thing for the house of Judah to commit … that they have filled: cf. Isaiah 49:6; ch. Ezekiel 9:9.

the branch to their nose] This is supposed to be part of the ceremonies of their sun-worship. It is said that the Persian sun-worshippers held before them a branch or bunch of date, pomegranate or tamarisk tree, or according to some of the Homa tree, probably that their breath might not contaminate the glory of the rising deity. The word “nose” might mean face (Genesis 3:19), but why not “mouth?” And this distinctively Persian rite is hardly probable at so early a date in Israel. Also the reference to idolatry seemed concluded, for it is asked whether these idolatries were not enough, that they had also filled the land with blood. LXX. has given a general sense, “and behold these are as mockers,” probably regarding the words as a proverbial phrase.

18. These abominations will assuredly bring down the unsparing chastisements of heaven. The phrase “shall not spare nor pity” is common in the prophet, ch. Ezekiel 5:11, Ezekiel 7:4; Ezekiel 7:9, Ezekiel 9:5; Ezekiel 9:10.

cry … with a loud voice] Comp. ch. Ezekiel 11:13, and for the general idea of vain appeal to heaven, Isaiah 1:15; Jeremiah 11:11; Proverbs 1:28.

This passage contains much that is difficult to estimate. The fact that the things described were seen in the “visions of God,” the symbolical form in which Jehovah appeared, and the analogy of ch. 9, 10, lead to the conclusion that there is at least an ideal and symbolical element in the representation of the idolatries practised in the temple. The view of Hitz., Kuen. (Onders. ii. 278) that the idolatrous practices are to be taken literally but referred to the time of Manasseh is not natural. The prophet would hardly be shewn things once but no longer in existence, though of course he might take a continuous view of Israel’s practice, as he often does. The tense in Ezekiel 8:17 “which they have committed here” is scarcely evidence for a former generation. It is not easy to say how far the representation that the idolatrous usages were practised in the temple is to be taken literally. Such practices are not referred to by Jeremiah nor other prophets of the time. It is possible that the chambers and cells about the gateways, which appear in some cases to have belonged to private persons, may have been used for illegitimate purposes, but that sun-worship was actually practised between the temple and the altar has little probability. And the scene in the chamber of imagery is obviously ideal. The prophet certainly desires to shew that idolatry both public and in private was practised by all classes, the elders representing the nation, the women, and perhaps also the priests; and that at these idolatries were not only the old native ones of Israel, but new imports at this period from all the nations around. The representation, however, that such things were done in the temple may rather be ideal. The temple was the dwelling-place of Jehovah, and every impurity done not only there but in the land and in the houses of the people was felt in the place of his abode, which it defiled, causing him to withdraw from it (Ezekiel 8:6, cf. Leviticus 15:31; Leviticus 20:3; Numbers 19:13; Numbers 19:20; and the elaborate precautions to guard against defilement adopted in ch. 40–48). On the other hand those privileged to dwell in the land or have access to the temple are spoken of as dwelling in the house, Psalm 23:6; Psalm 27:4; Psalm 84:5 &c. See preliminary remarks to the chapter.