Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

Chap. xxi. 1-7. The sword of the Lord and its disastrous effects. — Ver. 1. And the word of JehovaJi came to me, saying, Ver. 2. Son of man, set thy face toward Jerusalem, and trickle over the holy places, and prophesy over the land of Israel, Ver. 3. And say to the land of Israel, Thus saith Jehovah, Behold, I will deal with thee, and will draw my sword out of its scabbard, and cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked. Ver. 4. Because I will cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked, therefore shall my sword go forth from its scabbard against all flesh from south to north Ver. 5. And all flesh shall know that I, Jehovah, have drawn my sword out of its scabbard: it shall not return again. Ver. 6. And thou, son of man, sigh! so that the hips break; and with bitter pain sigh before their eyes I Ver. 7. And when they say to thee, Wherefore dost thou sigh? say, Because of a report that it is coming; and every heart will sink, and all hands become powerless, and every spirit will become dull, and all knees turn into water: Behold, it cometh, and will happen, is the saying of the Lord Jehovah. — In the preceding parable, the expression " forest of the field in the south," or " forest of the south-land," was enigmatical. This is explained to signify Jerusalem with its holy places (D^po, see comm. on ch. vii. 24), and the land of Israel, i.e. the kingdom of Judah. In accordance with this, the fire kindled by the Lord is interpreted as being the sword of the Lord, It is true that this is a figurative expression; but it is commonly used for war, which brings with it devastation and death, and would be generally intelligible. The sword will cut off both righteous and wicked. This applies to the outer side of the judgment, inasmuch as both good and bad fall in war. This is the only aspect brought into prominence here, since the great purpose was to alarm the sinners, who were boasting of their security; but the distinction between the two, as described in ch. ix. 4 sqq., is not therefore to be regarded as no longer existing. This sword will not return, sc. into the scabbard, till it has accomplished the result predicted in ver. 3 (cf. 2 Sam. i. 22; Isa. lv. 11). As Tremellius has aptly observed upon this passage, " the last slaughter is contrasted with the former ones, in which, after the people had been chastened for a time, the sword was returned to its scabbard again." In order to depict the terrors of this judgment before the eyes of the people, the prophet is commanded to groan before their eyes in the most painful way possible (vers. 6 sqq.). E^np |ft3B£l, with breaking of the hips, i.e. with pain sufficient to break the hips, the seat o£ strength in man (compare Nah. ii. 11; Isa. xxi. 3). nvmo bitterness, i.e. bitter anguish. The reason which he is to assign to the questioners for this sighing is " on account of the report that is coming," — an antiptosis for " on account of the coming report" (cf. Gen. i. 4, etc.). The report comes when the substance of it is realized. The reference is to the report of the sword of the Lord, — that is to say, of the approach of the Chaldeans to destroy Jerusalem and the kingdom of

Judah. The impression which this disclosure will make upon the hearers will be perfectly paralyzing (ver. lb). All courage and strength for offering resistance will be crippled and broken. a!rb DDJ (cf. Nah. ii. 11) is strengthened by prte nnrra, every spirit will become dull, so that no one will know what counsel to give, 'til nj??n D}3"0"73 corresponds to D1TT"')? *a"J (cf. ch. vii. 17). The threat is strengthened by the words, " behold, it cometh, and will take place." The subject is njnotj', the report, i.e. the substance of the report. — This threat is more fully expanded in vers. 8-17; vers. 8-13 corresponding to vers. 1-5, and vers. 14-17 to vers. 6, 7.

Vers. 8-17. The sword is sharpened for slaying. — Ver. 8. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Ver. 9. Son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus saith Jehovah, A sword, a sword sharpened and also polished: Ver. 10. That it may effect a slaughter is it sharpened; that it may flash is it polished: or shall we rejoice {saying), the sceptre of my son despiseth all viood? Ver. 11. But it has been given to be polished, to take it in the hand; it is sharpened, the sword, and it is polished, to give it into the hand of the slayer. Ver. 12. Cry and howl, son of man, for it goeth over my people, it goeth over all the princes of Israel: they have fallen by the sword along with my people: therefore smite upon the thigh. Ver. 13. For the trial is made, and what if the despising sceptre shall not come? is the saying of the Lord Jehovah. Ver. 14. And thou, son of man, prophesy and smite the hands together, and the sword shall double itself into threefold, the sword of the pierced: it is the sword of a pierced one, of tlie great one, which encircles them. Ver. 15. That the heart may be dissolved, and stumbling-blocks may be multiplied, I have set the drawing of the sword against all their gates: Alas! it is made into flashing, drawn for slaying. Ver. 16. Gather thyself up to the right hand, turn to the left, whithersoever thine edge is intended. Ver. 17. And I also will smite my hands together^ and quiet my wrath: I, Jehovah, have spoken it. — The description of the sword is thrown into a lyrical form (vers. 8-13), — a kind of sword-song, commemorating the terrible devastation to be effected by the sword of the Lord. The repetition of 2*jn in ver. 9 is emphatic, rnmn is the perfect Ilophal of TJHj to sharpen. nttno is the passive participle of DID, to polish; TWp (ver. 10), the participle Pual, with o dropped, and Dagesli euphon. nvj, -a rare form of the infinitive for ni*n. The polishing gives to the sword a flashing brilliancy, which renders the sharpness of its edge still more terrible. The very obscure words, 'U1 £*t^ iK, I agree with Schmieder and Kliefoth in regarding as a protest, interposed by the prophet in the name of the people against the divine threat of the sword of vengeance, on the ground of the promises which had been given to the tribe of Judah. itf, or perhaps; introducing an opposite case, or an exception to what has been said. The words *tfl *J3 DD^ are to be taken as an objection, so that "ibfc6 is to be supplied in thought The objection is taken from the promise given in Jacob's blessing to the tribe of Judah: "the sceptre will not depart from Judah" {Gen. xlix. 10). ♦33 l2T\y points unquestionably to this. *53 is taken from ver. 9, where the patriarch addresses Judah, whom he compares to a young lion, as *33. Consequently the sceptre of my son is the command which the patriarch holds out to view before the tribe of Judah. This seeptre despises all wood, i.e. every other ruler's staff, as bad wood. This view is not rendered a doubtful one by the fact that B?t? is construed as a feminine here, whereas it is construed as a masculine in every other case; for this construction is unquestionable in ver. 7 (12), and has many analogies in its favour. All the other explanations that have been proposed are hardly worth mentioning, to say nothing of refuting, as they amount to nothing more than arbitrary conjectures; whereas the assumption that the words are to be explained from Gen. xlix. 10 is naturally suggested by the unquestionable allusion to the prophecy in that passage, which we find in ver. 27 of the present chapter. }W) in ver. 11 is to be taken adversatively, £t but he gave it (the sword) to be sharpened.** The subject to 155 is not Jehovah, but is indefinite, "one" (many Angl. they), although it is actually God who has prepared the sword for the slaughter of Israel. The train of thought is the following: Do not think we have no reason to fear the sharply-ground sword of Jehovah, because Judah has received the promise that the sceptre shall not depart from it; and this promise will certainly be fulfilled, and Judah be victorious over every hostile power. The promise will not help you in this instance. The sword is given to be ground, not that it may be put into the scabbard, but that it may be taken in the hand by a slayer, and smite all the people and all its princes. In the phrase 2nn rnnvi K\"i, inn is in apposition to the subject &OH, and is introduced to give emphasis to the words. It is not till ver. 19 that it is stated who the slayer is; but the hearers of the prophecy could be in no doubt. Consequently — this is the connection with ver. 12 — there is no ground for rejoicing from a feeling of security and pride, but rather an occasion for painful lamentation. This is the meaning contained in the command to the prophet to cry and howl. For the sword will come upon the nation and its princes. It is the simplest rendering to take N^n as referring to 3?n, 2 n\l, to be at a person, to fasten to him, to come upon him, as in 1 Sam. xxiv. 14; 2 Sam. xxiv. 17. *2WD, not from IM, but the passive participle of "UO in the Pual, to overthrow, cast down (Ps. lxxxix. 45): " fallen by the sword have they (the princes) become, along with my people." The perfects are prophetic, representing that which will speedily take place as having already occurred. — Smiting upon the thigh is a sign of alarm and horror (Jer. xxxi. 19). |n'3, perfect Pual, is used impersonally: the trial is made. The words allude to the victories gained already by Nebuchadnezzar, which have furnished tests of the sharpness of his sword. The question which follows nip} contains an oposiopesis: and what? Even if the despising sceptre shall not come, what will be the case then? riDNb D2E>; according to ver. 10, is the sceptre of

Judah, which despises all other sceptres as bad wood. WP, in this instance, is not u to be," in the sense of to remain, but to become, to happen, to come (come to pass), to enter. The meaning is, if the sceptre of Judah shall not display, or prove itself to possess, the strength expected of it. — With ver. 14 the address takes a new start, for the purpose of depicting still further the operations of the sword. Smiting the hands together (smiting hand in hand) is a gesture expressive of violent emotion (cf. ch. vi. 11; Num. xxiv. 10). The sword i3 to double, i.e. multiply itself, into threefold (nn^p*^ adverbial), namely, in its strength, or its edge. Of -course this is not to be taken arithmetically, as it has been by Hitzig, but is a bold paradoxical statement concerning the terrible effect produced by the sword. It is not even to be understood as referring to three attacks made at different times by the Chaldeans upon Jerusalem, as many of the commentators suppose. The sword is called D??H 3yH9 sword of pierced ones, because it produces the pierced or slain. The following words are rendered by Hitzig and Kliefoth: the great sword of the slain. But apart from the tautology which this occasions, the rendering can hardly be defended on grammatical grounds. For, in the first place, we cannot see why the singular A>n should have been chosen, when the expression was repeated, instead of the plural By^O; and secondly,?i13n cannot be an adjective agreeing with 3JH, for Tin is a noun of the feminine gender, and is construed here as a feminine, as IHjhn clearly shows.?i"J|\} is in apposition to P^n? " sword of a pierced man, the great one; " and the great man pierced is the king, as Ewald admits, in agreement with Hen£stenber£ and Hiivernick. The words therefore affirm that the sword will not only slay the mass of the people, but pierce the king himself. (See also the comm. on ver. 25.) — Ver. 15a is not dependent upon what precedes, but introduces a new thought, viz. for what purpose the sword is sharpened. God has placed the flashing sword before all the gates of the Israelites, in order that (? ]Vv?9 pleonastic for V^r?) the heart may dissolve, the inhabitants may lose all their courage for defence, and to multiply offendicula, i.e. occasions to fall by the sword. The air. Xey. rin^S signifies the rapid motion or turning about of the sword (cf. Gen. iii. 24); ro«, related to tJBil, in the Mishna 7]BK. The air. Xey. H^^D, fern, of ttJMJ, does not mean smooth, i.e. sharpened, synonymous with BID, but, according to the Arabic La*, eduxit e vagina gladium, drawn (from the scabbard). In ver. 16 the sword is addressed, and commanded to smite right and left. ^inKnilj gather thyself up, i.e. turn with all thy might toward the right (Tanchum). To the verb *D*B>n it is easy to supply ^.33, from the context, H direct thine edge toward the left." njfif, whither, without an interrogative, as in Josh. ii. 5 and Neh. ii. J 6. fli"W*?, from TSJ, intended, ordered; not, directed, turned. The feminine form may be accounted for from a construction ad sensum, the gender regulating itself according to the 3nn addressed in ^39. The command to the sword is strengthened by the explanation given by Jehovah in ver. 17, that He also (like the prophet, ver. 14) will smite His hands together and cool His wrath upon them (cf. ch. v. 13).

Vers. 18-22. The sword of the king of Babylon will smite Jerusalem, and then the Ammonites also. — Ver. 18. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Ver. 19. And thou, son of man, make to thyself tivo ways, that the sivord of the king of Babylon may come by them; out of one land shall they both come forth, and draw a hand, at the cross road of the city do thou draw it. Ver. 20. Make a way that the sword may come to Rabbah of the sons of Ammon, and to Judah into fortified Jerusalem, Ver. 21. For the king of Babylon is stopping at the cross road, at the parting of the two ivays, to practise divination. lie is shaking the arrows, inquiring of the teraphim, looking at the liver. Ver. 22. The divination falls to his right: Jerusalem, to set battering-rams, to open the mouth ivith a death-cry, to lift up the voice with a war-cry, to set battering-rams at the gates, to heap up a rampart, to build siege towers. — After the picture of the terrible devastation which the sword of the Lord will produce, the last word of God in this prophecy answers the questions, in whose hand Jehovah will place His sword, and whom it will smite. The slayer into whose hand the sharpened sword is given (ver. 11) is the king of Babylon, and it will smite not only Judah, but the Ammonites also. Jerusalem and Judah will be the first to fall, and then the arch-enemy of the covenant nation, namely Ammon, will succumb to the strokes of the sword of Jehovah, in order that the embittered enemies of the Lord and His people may learn that the fall of Jerusalem is not, as they fancy, a proof of the impotence, but rather of the omnipotence, of its God. In this way does our prophecy expand into a prediction of the judgment which will fall upon the whole of the world in hostility to God. For it is only as the archenemies of the kingdom of God that the Ammonites come into consideration here. The parallel between Israel and the sons of Ammon is carried out in such a way as to give constant prominence to the distinction between them. Jerusalem will fall, the ancient theocracy will be destroyed till he shall come who will restore the right (vers. 26 and 27). Ammon, on the other hand, will perish, and not a trace be left (vers. 31, 32). — This prediction is exhibited to the eye by means of a sign. The prophet is to make two ways, i.e. to prepare a sketch representing a road leading from a country, viz. Babylon, and dividing at a certain spot into two roads, one of which leads to Rabbath-Ammon, the capital of the kingdom of the Ammonites, the other to Judah, into Jerusalem. He is to draw the ways for the coming (Kto?) of the sword of the king of Babylon. At the fork of the road he is to engrave a hand, *IJ, i.e. an index. ton signifies in the Piel to cut away (Josh. xvii. 15, 18), to dig or hew (Ezek. xxiii. 47), here to engrave written characters in hard material. The selection of this word shows that Ezekiel was to sketch the ways upon some hard material, probably a brick or tile (cf. ch. iv. 1). 1J does not mean locus spatium, but a hand, i.e. an index. SJ'jn tPfeh, the beginning of the road, i.e.

the fork of the road (ch. xvi. 25), is explained in ver. 21, where it is called ^"n? Q*s mother of the road, inasmuch as the roads start from the point of separation, and D*?J1- *}& ^"l, beginning of the two roads. "VJ 1TJJ, the road to a city. For Rabbath- Amnion, which is preserved in the ruins of Amman, on the Upper Jabbok (Nahr Amman), see the comm. on Deut. iii. 11. The road to Judah is still more precisely defined by D?BVV3 ni^'3, into fortified Jerusalem, because the conquest of Jerusalem was the purpose of Nebuchadnezzar's expedition. The omission of the article before »TTOf3 may be explained from the nature of the participle, in which, even in prose, the article may be left out after a definite noun (cf. Ewald, § 335a). The drawing is explained in vers. 21 and 22. The king of Babylon is halting P*??, to stand still, stop) to consult his oracles, and inquire which of the two roads he is to take. EDp Dbp, to take in hand, or practise divination. In order that he may proceed safely, he avails himself of all the means of divination at his command. He shakes the arrows (more strictly, the quiver with the arrows). On the practice itself Jerome writes as follows: u He consults the oracle according to the custom of his nation, putting his arrows into a quiver, and mixing them together, with the names of individuals inscribed or stamped upon them, to see whose arrow will come out, and which state shall be first attacked." l He consults the Teraphim, or Penates, worshipped as oracular deities and gods of good fortune (see the comm. on Gen. xxxi. 19 and my Biblical Archaeology, § 90). Nothing is known concerning the way in which these deities were consulted and gave their oracles. He examines the liver. The practice of rjTraro-

J The arrow-lot (Belomantie) of the ancient Greeks (Homer, II. iii. 324, vii. 182, 183) was similar to this; also that of the ancient Arabs (vid. Pococke, Specim. hist. Arab. pp. 327 sqq., and the passages from.Nuweiri quoted by Reiske, Samml. einiger Arab. Sprichworter von den Stecken oder Staben, p. 21). Another kind, in which the lot was obtained by shooting off the arrows, was common according to the Fihrist el Ulum of En-Nedim among the Hananian Ssabians (see Chwolsohn, Ssabier, ii. pp. 26 and 119, 200.

gkotticl, extispichtm, in which signs of good or bad luck, of the success or failure of any enterprise, were obtained from the peculiar condition of the liver of the sacrificial animals, was a species of divination to which great importance was attached by both the Babylonians (vid. Diod. Sic. ii. 29) and the Romans (Cicero, de divin. vi. 13), and of which traces were found, according to Barhebr. Chron. p. 125, as late as the eighth century of the Christian era among the Ssabians of Haran. — The divination resulted in a decision for Jerusalem, rrn frD'2l is not to be translated " in his right hand was," but "into his right hand there came." ^ ■ eyhero (LXX.), hu (Chald.), DDg does not mean lot (Ges.), but soothsaying, divination. Bv5^v is connected with this in the form of a noun in apposition: the divination which indicated Jerusalem. The right hand is the more important of the two. The meaning of the words cannot be more precisely defined, because we are not acquainted with the kind of divination referred to; even if we were to take the words as simply relating to the arrow in this sense, that an arrow with the inscription "Jerusalem" came into his right hand, and thus furnished the decision, which was afterwards confirmed by consulting the Teraphim and examining the liver. But the circumstance itself, that is to say, the fact that the divination coincided with the purpose of God, must not be taken, as Havernick supposes, as suggesting a point of contact between Hebraism and the soothsaying of heathenism, which wras peculiar to Ezekiel or to the time of the captivity. All that is proved by this fact is, that even heathenism is subject to the rule and guidance of Almighty God, and is made subservient to the accomplishment of the plans of both His kingdom and His salvation. In the words, to set battering rams, etc., the substance of the oracle obtained by Nebuchadnezzar is more minutely given. It is a double one, showing what he is to do: viz. (1) to set battering rams, i.e. to proceed to the siege of Jerusalem, as still further described in the last portion of the verse (ch. iv. 2); and (2) to raise the war-cry for storming the city, that is to say, to take it by storm. The two clauses *W nto? and 'w ^\k are synonymous; they are not u pure tautology," however, as Ilitzig affirms, but are chosen for the purpose of giving greater emphasis to the thought. The expression rnna creates some difficulty, inasmuch as the phrase " ut aperiat os in caede" (Vulg.), to open the mouth in murder or ruin, i.e. to put to death or lay in ruins, is a very striking one, and could hardly be justified as an " energetic expression for the battlecry " (Havernick). 3 does not mean " to," and cannot indicate the intention, all the less because rrena is parallel to TOin^ where njmn is that in which the raising of the voice expresses itself. There is nothing left then but to take POT} in the sense of field- or war-cry, and to derive this meaning either from nv*i or, per metathesin, from rnv.

Vers. 23-27. This announcement will appear to the Judaeans, indeed, to be a deceptive divination, but nevertheless it will be verified. — Ver. 23. And it is like deceptive divination in their eyes; sacred oaths are theirs (lit. to them); but he brings the iniquity to remembrance, that they may be taken. Ver. 24. Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because ye bring your iniquity to remembrance, in that your offences are made manifest, so that your sins appear in all your deeds, because ye are remembered ye shall be taken with the hand. Ver. 25. And thou pierced one, sinner, prince of Israel, whose day is come at the time of the final transgression, Ver. 2b\ Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, The turban will be removed, the crown taken off. This is not this; the low will be lifted up, and the lofty lowered. Ver. 27. Overthrown, overthrown, overthrown will I make it; even this shall not be, till He cometh, to whom is the right, to Him do I give it. — In ver. 23 (28), D(P, which is more precisely defined by DjWga^ refers to the Israelites, i.e. the Judaeans. This also applies to the following Dr6, which cannot possibly be taken as referring to a different subject, say, for example, the Chaldeans. It is evident, therefore, that it is impossible to sustain the rendering given in Gesenius' Thesaurus (s.v.) to the obscure words ntyat? "JDtt*, viz. qui juramenta jurarunt eis (sc. Chaldaeis), which Maurer has modified and expounded thus: " they will not fear these auguries; they will swear oaths to them (the Chaldeans), that is to say, according to their usual custom, these truce-breakers will take fresh oaths, hoping that the Chaldeans will be conciliated thereby." Moreover, the thought itself is an unsuitable one, inasmuch as u the defiant attitude of confidence with which they looked such awfully threatening danger in the face must have had some other ground than a reliance upon false oaths and Chaldean credulity" (Havernick). The common explanation, which Rosenmuller and Kliefoth uphold, is, u because the Chaldeans are sworn allies, sworn confederates of theirs;" or as Kliefoth explains it, u on account of the oath of fealty or vassalage sworn by Zedekiah to Nebuchadnezzar, they have sworn confederates in the Chaldeans, and relying upon this, they are confident that they have no hostile attack to fear from them." But this is altogether untenable, not only because it is perfectly arbitrary to supply il the Chaldeans," but still more for the reason adduced by Mamrer. " How," he justly asks, " could the Judaeans despise these auguries because the Chaldeans were bound to them by an oath when they themselves had broken faith? When a treaty has been violated by one party, is not the other released from his oath?" We therefore adopt the same explanation as Havernick: n oaths of oaths are theirs (to them), Le. the most sacred oaths are (made) to them, namely, by God." They rely upon that which God has solemnly sworn to them, without considering upon what this promise was conditional, namely, upon a faithful observance on their part of the commandments of God. For the fact itself, compare ch. xx. 42, and such passages as Ps. cv. 9 sqq., etc. The form ^V by the side of T\\])yy may be explained in a very simple way from the relation of the construct state, i.e. from the endeavour to secure an obvious form for the construct state, and cannot in any case furnish a well-founded argument against the correctness of our explanation. As Ezekiel uses EV?J for nte'W in ch.

xiii. 20, he may also have formed DW> QVlf) by the side of nijDB*. — As they rely upon the promises of God without reflecting upon their own breach of covenant, God will bring their sin to remembrance through His judgment, wni is Jehovah, upon whose oaths they rely. fiV must not be restricted to Zedekiah' s breach of covenant, since ver. 24 clearly shows that it is the wrong-doing of Judah generally. ^Drinp in ver. 24 (29) is also to be understood of the whole nation, which is to be taken and punished by the king of Babylon. For ver. 24 (29) introduces the reason for the statement made in the last clause of ver. 23 (28). God must put the people in remembrance of their iniquity by inflicting punishment, because they have called it to remembrance by sins committed without any shame, and thereby have, so to speak, compelled God to remember them, and to cause the sinners to be grasped by the hand of the slayer, fy "**??•? is used in ver. 24 (29) in a different sense from ver. 23 (28), and is therefore explained by 'Ul nfern. *]23, which is indefinite in itself, points back to ^ri T in ver. 11 (16), and receives from that its more exact definition.

With ver. 25 the address turns to the chief sinner, the godless King Zedekiah, who was bringing the judgment of destruction upon the kingdom by his faithless breach of oath. The words Pjn? ypn, and ''W Wto* are asyndeta, co-ordinate to one another, sbn does not mean profane or infamous (/3e^Xe, LXX.), but simply pierced, slain. This meaning is to be retained here. This is demanded not only by the fixed usage of the language, but also by the relation in which??n stands both to ver. 14 and to W5h *&n in ver. 29 (34). It is true that Zedekiah was not pierced by the sword either at that time or afterwards, but was simply blinded and led in captivity to Babylon, where he died. But all that follows from this is, that?jn is used here in a figurative sense, given up to the sword, i.e. to death; and Zedekiah is so designated for the purpose of announcing in a more energetic manner the certainty of his fate. The selection of the term?jn is the more natural, because throughout the whole prophecy the description of the judgment takes its character from the fimire of the sword of Jehovah. As God does not literally wield a sword, so?£n is no proof of actual slaying with the sword, to^, his day, is the day of his destruction (cf. 1 Sam. xxvi. 10), or of the judgment upon him. The time of the final transgression is not the time when the transgression reaches its end, i.e. its completion, but the time when the wickedness brings the end, i.e. destruction (cf. ch. xxxv. 5, and for YZ in this sense, ch. vii. 2, 3). The fact that the end, the destruction, is come, i.e. is close at hand, is announced in ver. 26 to the prince, and in his person to the whole nation. If we understand the connection in this way, which is naturally suggested by ver. 255, we get rid of the objection, which led Kliefoth to question the fact that it is the king who is addressed in ver. 25a, and to take the words as collective, " ye slaughtered sinners, princes of Israel," and to understand them as referring to the entire body of rulers, including the priests, — an explanation that is completely upset by the words K*PJ... nntf (thou... prince), which are so entirely opposed to the collective view. Again, the remark that " what follows in ver. 26, viz. the statement to be made to the K^J, has really nothing to do with him, since the sweeping away of the priesthood did not affect Zedekiah personally" (Kliefoth), is neither correct nor conclusive. For ver. 26 contains an announcement not only of the abrogation of the priesthood, but also of the destruction of the kingdom, which did affect Zedekiah both directly and personally. Moreover, we must not isolate the king addressed, even as an individual, from the position which he occupied, or, at any rate, which he ought to have occupied as a theocratic monarch, so as to be able to say that the abrogation of the priesthood did not affect him. The priesthood was one of the fundamental pillars of the theocracy, the removal of which would necessarily be followed by the collapse of the divine state, and therefore by the destruction of the monarchy. Hence it is that the abolition of the priesthood is mentioned first. The infinitives absolute (not imperatives) Vpn and Dnn are selected for the purpose of expressing the truth in the most emphatic manner; and the verbs are synonymous. D^H, to lift up, i.e. not to elevate, but to take away, to abolish, as in Isa. lvii. 14; Dan. viii. 11. riDjVD does not mean the royal diadem, like ^J in Isa. lxii. 3, but the tiara of the high priest, as it does in every instance in the Pentateuch, from which Ezekiel has taken the word. "TJ???' the king's crown. The diadem of the priest and the regal crown are the insignia of the offices of high priest and king; and consequently their removal is the abolition of both high-priesthood and monarchy. These words contain the sentence of death upon the theocracy, of which the Aaronic priesthood and the Davidic monarchy constituted the foundations. — They predict not merely a temporary, but a complete abolition of both offices and dignities; and their fulfilment took place when the kingdom of Judah was destroyed by the king of Babylon. The earthly sovereignty of the house of David was not restored again after the captivity; and the high-priesthood of the restoration, like the second temple, was only a shadowy outline of the glory and essential features of the high-priesthood of Aaron. As the ark with the Shechinah, or the gracious presence of God, was wanting in the temple of Zerubbabel; so were the Urim and Thummim wanting to the high-priesthood, and these were the only means by which the high priest could really carry out the mediation between the Lord and the people. riNt iib HKT (this is not this) does not refer to the tiara (mitre) and crown. DNt is neuter, and therefore construed with the masculine n\\ This (mitre and crown) will not be this (Hjn is prophetic), i.e. it will not continue, it will be all over with it (Havernick, Maurer, and Kliefoth). To this there is appended the further thought, that a general inversion of things will take place. This is the meaning of the words — the low will be lifted up, and the lofty lowered. «?33n and?*SB>n are infinitives, and are chosen in the same sense as in the first hemistich. The form njBBfy with n without the tone, is masculine; the n— probably serving merely to give greater fulness to the form, and to make it correspond more nearly to ^jri.1 — This general thought is expressed still more definitely in ver. 27a. fi}£, which is repeated twice to give greater emphasis to the thought, is a noun derived from nty, inversion, overthrow; and the suffix in n|D,,b*N points back to DNT in ver. 26 (31). This, the existing state, the high-priesthood and the monarchy, will I make into destruction, or utterly overthrow. But the following J1NT cannot also refer to the tiara and crown, as Kliefoth supposes, on account of the Ea which precedes it. This shows that riKT relates to the thing last mentioned. Even this, the overthrow, shall have no durability; or, as Tanch. has correctly expressed it, neque haec conditio erit durabilis. The following K3""jy attaches itself not so much to this last clause as to the main thought: overthrow upon overthrow will ensue. The thought is this: " nowhere is there rest, nowhere security; all things are in a state of flux till the coming of the great Restorer and Prince of peace " (Hengstenberg). It is generally acknowledged that the words N3~1]J DBBten hbnm contain an allusion to Gen. xlix. 10, Kia* '3 *W wW; and it is only by a false interpretation of the preceding clauses, wrung from the words by an arbitrary alteration of the text, that Hitzig is able to set this connection aside. At

1 Hitzig has given a most preposterous exposition of this verse. Taking the words TDH and D'HH as antithetical, in the sense of removing and exalting or sustaining in an exalted position, and regarding the clauses as questions signifying, " Shall the high-priesthood be abolished, and the real dignity, on the contrary, remain untouched?" he finds the answer to these questions in the words nxt N^ DNT (this, not this). They contain, in his opinion, an allirmation of the former and a negation of the latter. But he does not tell us how DNT nS> J"1NT without a verb can possibly mean, " the former (the abrogation of the high-priesthood) will take place, but the latter (the exaltation of the monarchy) will not occur." And, finally, the last clause, " the low shall be lifted up," etc., is said to contain simply a watchword, which is not for the time being to be followed by any result. Such trifling needs no refutation. We simply observe, therefore, that there is no ground for the assertion, that onn without jE cannot possibly signify to abolish.

the same time, BBBTpn ft'TC'tf is of course not to be taken as a philological explanation of the word ny&y but is simply a theological interpretation of the patriarchal prophecy, with direct reference to the predicted destruction of the existing relations in consequence of the ungodliness and unrighteousness of the leaders of the theocracy up to that time. DBttfon is not the rightful claim to the mitre and crown, but right in an objective sense, as belonging to God (Deut. i. 17), and entrusted by God to the earthly government as His representative. He then, to whom this right belongs, and to whom God will give it, is the Messiah, of whom the prophets from the times of David onwards have prophesied as the founder and restorer of perfect right on earth (cf. Ps. lxxii.; Isa. ix. 6, xlii. 1; Jer. xxiii. 5, xxxiii. 17). The suffix attached to WjlfiJ is not a dative, but an accusative, referring to EQ^p (cf. Ps. lxxii. 1). There was no necessity to mention the person again to whom God would give the right, as He had already been designated in the previous expression v IKW.

Vers. 28-32. Overthrow of the Ammonites. — Ver. 28. And thou, son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, concerning the sons of Ammon, and concerning their scorn, sword, sword, drawn to slay, polished, that it may devour, that it may flash! Ver. 29. While they prophesy deceit to thee, while they divine lying to thee, it shall lay thee by the necJcs of the sinners slain, whose day cometh at the time of the final transgression, Ver. 30. Pat it in its scabbard again. At the place where thou ivast created, in the land of thy birth will I judge thee, Ver. 31. And pour out my anger upon thee, kindle the fire of my wrath against thee, and give thee into the hand of foolish men, of smitJts of destruction. Ver. 32. Thou shalt be for the fire to devour; thy blood shall remain in the midst of the land; thou shalt be remembered no more; for I Jehovah have spoken it. — As Judah in Jerusalem will fall by the sword of the king of Babylon, contrary to all expectation; so will the Ammonites be punished for their scorn with utter extermination, nann is scorn at the overthrow of Israel (cf. ch. xxv. 3, G, and Zeph. ii. 8). The sword is already drawn against them. nmriQ, taken out of the scabbard, as in Ps. xxxvii. 14. n?9? is to be connected with nrnriQ? notwithstanding the accents, and 70H7 with nDrip. This is required by the correspondence of the clauses, ^n is regarded as a derivative of 713 by Ewald and others, in the sense of ad sustinendum, according to capacity, i.e. as much as possible. But the adverbial rendering is opposed to the context, and cannot be sustained from ch. xxiii. 32. Moreover, 713, to contain, is applicable enough to goblets and other vessels, but not to a sword. Hitzig therefore explains it from the Arabic J^, to blunt (sc. the eyes), i.e. to blind. But this is open to the objection that the form Ton points to the verb ^3 rather than 773; and also to a still greater one, — namely, that there is nothing in the Hebrew usage to suggest the use of 773 in such a sense as this, and even if it were used in the sense of blunting, it would be perfectly arbitrary to supply BW; and lastly, that even the flashing of the sword does not suggest the idea of blinding, but is intended to heighten the terror occasioned by the sharpness of the sword. We therefore adhere to the derivation of 7^3n from 73K, and regard it as a defective form for ^3**n, like HDJn for VttM&l in 2 Sam. xix. 14, W as syncopated form for?n*o (Isa. xiii. 20), and tnni for tntfrn in 2- Sam. xx. 9; literally, to cause it to eat or devour, i.e. to make it fit for the work of devouring. pn3 JVD7, literally, for the sake of the lightning (flash) that shall issue therefrom (cf. ver. 10). — In ver. 29 (34), fin? (to lay, or place) is also dependent upon nrnns 3jn, drawn to lay thee; so that the first half of the verse is inserted as a parenthesis, either to indicate the occasion for bringing the sword into the land (Hitzig), or to introduce an attendant circumstance, according to the sense in which the 3 in J"Mn2 is taken. The parenthetical clause is understood by most of the commentators as referring to deceptive oracles of Ammonitish soothsayers, which either determined the policy of Ammon, as Hitzig supposes (cf. Jer. xxvii. 9, 10), or inspired the Ammonites with confidence, that they had nothing to fear from the Chaldeans. Kliefoth, on the other hand, refers the words to the oracles consulted by Nebuchadnezzar, according to ver. 23. " These oracles, which directed the king not to march against the Ammonites, but against Jerusalem, proved themselves, according to ver. 29, to be deceptive prophesying to the Ammonites, inasmuch as they also afterwards fell by the sword; just as, according to ver. 23, they proved themselves to be genuine so far as the Israelites were concerned, inasmuch as they were really the first to be smitten." This view is a very plausible one, if it only answered in any degree to the words. But it is hard to believe that the words, " while it (one) prophesies falsehood to thee," are meant to be equivalent to u while its prophecy proves itself to be false to thee." Moreover, Nebuchadnezzar did not give the Ammonites any oracle, either false or true, by the circumstance that his divination at the cross-road led him to decide in favour of the march to Jerusalem; for all that he did in consequence was to postpone his designs upon the Ammonites, but not to relinquish them. We cannot understand the words in any other sense, therefore, than as relating to oracles, which the Ammonites received from soothsayers of their own. — Hitzig takes offence at the expression, " that it (the sword) may lay thee by (to) the necks of the sinners slain," because colla cannot stand for corpora decollata, and consequently proposes to alter ^nw into nnitf? to put it (the sword) to the necks. But by this conjecture he gets the not less striking thought, that the sword was to be put to the necks of those already slain; a thing which would be perfectly unmeaning, and is therefore not generally done. The sinners slain are the Judaeans who have fallen. The words point back to ver. 25, the second half of which is repeated here, and predict the same fate to the Ammonites. It is easy to supply 3*jn to ^'W'vN ^n: put the sword into its scabbard again. These words can only be addressed to the Ammonites; not to the Chaldeans, as Kliefoth imagines, for the latter does not harmonize in any way with what follows, viz. in the place of thy birth will I judge thee. God does not execute the judgment independently of the Chaldeans, but through the medium of their sword. The difficulties occasioned by taking the words as referring to the Ammonites are not so great as to necessitate an alteration of the text (Hitzig), or to call for the arbitrary explanation: put it now or for the present into the scabbard (Kliefoth). The use of the masculine 3^n (with Patach for 3B>n, as in Isa. xlii. 22), if Ammon is addressed by the side of the feminine ^K, may be explained in a very simple way, from the fact that the sword is carried by men, so that here the thought of the people, the warriors, is predominant, and the representation of the kingdom of the Ammonites as a woman falls into the background. The objection that the suffix in niyn can only refer to the sword (of the Chaldean) mentioned in ver. 28, is more plausible than conclusive. For inasmuch as the scabbard presupposes a sword, and every sword has a scabbard, the suffix may be fully accounted for from the thing itself, as the words, " put the sword into its scabbard," would lead any hearer to think at once of the sword of the person addressed, without considering whether that particular sword had been mentioned before or not. The meaning of the words is this: every attempt to defend thyself with the sword and avert destruction will be in vain. In thine own land will God judge thee. For Spnh3D, see the comm. on ch. xvi. 3. This judgment is still further explained in ver. 31, where the figure of the sword is dropped, and that of the fire of the wrath of God introduced in its place. TDK... &W3, we render: u the fire of my wrath I blow (kindle) against thee," after Isa. liv. 16, and not u with the fire... do I blow, or snort, against thee," as others have done; because blowing with the fire is an unnatural figure, and the interpretation of the words in accordance with Isa. I.e. is all the more natural, that in the closing words of the verse, TV1WQ *S^!Jj the allusion to that passage is- indisputable, and it is only from this that the combination of the two words can be accounted for. — Different explanations have been given of D^Jfa. Some render it ardentes, and in accordance with Isa. xxx. 27: burning with wrath. But ""W3 is never used in this sense. Nor can the rendering " scorching men" (Kliefoth) be sustained, for "W3, to burn, only occurs in connection with things which are combustible, e.g. fire, pitch, coals, etc. The word must be explained from Ps. xcii. 7, " brutish," foolish, always bearing in mind that the Hebrew associated the idea of godlessness with folly, and that cruelty naturally follows in its train. — Ver. 32. Thus will Ammon perish through fire and sword, and even the memory of it be obliterated. For ver. 32a compare ch. xv. 4. The words, " thy blood will be H?l? ^n:? in the midst of the land," can hardly be understood in any other sense than " thy blood will flow over all the land." For the rendering proposed by Ewald, "remain in the midst of the earth, without thy being mentioned," like that given by Kliefoth, " thy blood will the earth drink," does not harmonize with ch. xxiv. 7, where nvj FDire heh is affirmed of blood, which cannot penetrate into the earth, or be covered with dust. For 'HJW, see ch. xxv. 10. Ammon as the enemy of the kingdom of God will utterly perish, leaving no trace behind, and without any such hope of restoration as that held out in ver. 27 to the kingdom of Judah or the people of Israel.

To the prediction of the judgment in ch. xxi. there is appended another description of the sins of Jerusalem and Israel, by which this judgment is occasioned. The chapter contains three words of God, which are connected together both in substance and design, viz. (1) The blood-guiltiness and idolatry of Jerusalem accelerate the coming of the days when the city will be an object of scorn to all the world (vers. 1-16);

(2) The house of Israel has become dross, and is to be melted in the fire of tribulation (vers. 17-22); (3) All ranks of the kingdom — prophets, priests, princes, and people — are thoroughly corrupt, therefore has the judgment burst upon them (vers. 23-31).

Vers. 1-16. Blood-guiltiness of Jerusalem and the burden of its sins. Vers. 1—5 contain the principal accusation relating to bloodshed and idolatry; and vers. 6-16 a further account of the sins of the people and their rulers, with a brief threatening of punishment. — Ver. 1. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Ver. 2. And thou, son of man, wilt thou judge? wilt thou judge the city of blood-guiltiness f then show it all its abominations, Ver. 3. And say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, City, which sheddeth blood in the midst of it, that her time may come, and maketh idols ivithin itself for defilement. Ver. 4. Through thy blood which thou hast shed hast thou made thyself guilty, and through thine idols which thou hast made hast thou defiled thyself, and hast drawn thy days near, and hast come to thy years; therefore 1 make thee a scorn to the nations, and ridicule to all lands. Ver. 5. Those near and those far off from thee shall ridicule thee as defiled in name, rich in confusion. — The expression 'W Db^nn proves this address to be a continuation of the reproof of Israel's sins, which commenced in ch. xx. 4. The epithet city of blood-guiltiness, as in ch. xxiv. 6, 9 (compare Nah. iii. 1), is explained in ver. 3. The apodosis commences with WgHlfn, and is continued in ver. 3 (fnOfctt). nriy Nn?, that her time, i.e. her time of punishment, may come: Flfl?, like tov in ch. xxi. 30. nnb'yi is not a continuation of the infinitive W37, but of the participle rDDb\ nvV, of which different renderings have been given, does not mean u over itself," i.e. as a burden with which it has laden itself (Havernick); still less u for itself " (Hitzig), a meaning which bv never has, but literally a upon," i.e. in itself, covering the city with it, as it were, ^"Hprii, thou hast brought near, brought on thy days, that is to say, the days of, judgment, and hast come to, arrived at thy years, sc. the years of visitation and punishment (cf. Jer. xi. 23). This meaning is readily supplied by the context. OCfa Xisotp, defiled, unclean with regard to the name, i.e. having forfeited the name of a holy city through capital crimes and other sinful abominations. HD^np is internal confusion, both moral and religious, as in Amos iii. 9 (cf. Ps. lv. 10-12).

In vers. 6-12 there follows an enumeration of a multitude of sins which had been committed in Jerusalem. — Ver. 6. Behold, the princes of Israel are every one, according to his arm, in thee to shed blood. Ver. 7. Father and mother they despise in thee; toward the fot signer they act violently in the midst of thee; orphans and widows they oppress in thee. Ver. 8. Thou despisest my holy things, and desecratest my Sabbaths. Ver. 9. Slanderers are in thee to shed blood, and they eat upon the mountains in thee; they practise lewdness in thee. Ver. 10. They uncover the father s nakedness in thee; they ravish the defiled in her uncleanness in thee. Ver. 11. And one committeth abomination with his neighbour s wife, and another dejileth his daughter-in-law by incest, and the third ravisheth his sister, his father's daughter in thee. Ver. 12. They take gifts in thee to shed blood; interest and usury thou tahest, and overreachest thy neighbours with violence, and thou forgettest me, is the saying of the Lord 'Jehovah. — By the repetition of the refrain, to shed blood (vers. 6, 9, and 12), the enumeration is divided into three groups of sins, which are placed in the category of blood-guiltiness by the fact that they are preceded by this sentence and the repetition of it after the form of a refrain. The first group (vers. 6—8) embraces sins which are committed in daring opposition to all the laws of morality. By the princes of Israel we are to understand primarily the profligate kings, who caused innocent persons to be put to death, such, for example, as Jehoiakim (2 Kings xxiv. 4), Manasseh (2 Kings xxi. 16), and others. The words vn Syfyh B^K are rendered by Hitzig and Kliefoth, they were ready to help one another; and in support of the rendering they appeal to Ps. lxxxiii. 9. But in that case ijfttp B*K would stand for B*K V"\b, or rather for B**6 Vint tTK,— a substitution which cannot be sustained. Nor can they be taken in the sense proposed by Havernick, every one relying upon his arm. i.e. looking to physical force alone, but simply every one according to his arm, i.e. according to his strength or violence, are they in thee. In this case vn does not require anything to be supplied, any more than in the similar combination in ver. 9. Followed by ]Vo? with an infinitive, it means to be there with the intention of doing anything, or making an attempt, i.e. to direct his efforts to a certain end. In ver. 7 it is not the princes who are the subject, but the ungodly in general. l?f?n is the opposite of "123 (Ex. xx. 12). In the reproofs which follow, compare Ex. xxii. 20 sqq.; Lev. xix. 13; Deut. xxiv. 14 sqq. With insolence and violence toward men there is associated contempt of all that is holy. For ver. 8b, see ch. xx. 13. — In the second group, vers. 9-11, in addition to slander and idolatry, the crimes of lewdness and incest are the principal sins for which the people are reproved; and here the allusion to Lev. xviii. and xix. is very obvious. The reproof of slander also points back to the prohibition in Lev. xix. 16. Slander to shed blood, refers to malicious charges and false testimony in a court of justice (vid. 1 Kings xxi. 10, 11). For eating upon the mountains, see ch. xviii. 6. The practice of zimmdh is more specifically described in vers. 10 and 11. For the thing itself, compare Lev. xviii. 7, 8, xix. 15 and 9. The threefold t5*K in ver. 11 does not mean every one, but one, another, and the third, as the correlative inin shows. — The third group, ver. 12, is composed of sins of covetousness. For the first clause, compare the prohibition in Ex. xxiii. 2; for the second, ch. xviii. 8, 13. The reproof finishes with forgetfulness of God, which is closely allied to covetousness.

Vers. 13-16. The Lord is enraged at such abominable doings. He will interfere, and put an end to them by scattering Judah among the heathen. — Ver. 13. And, behold, I smite my hand because of thy gain which thou hast made, and over thy blood- guiltiness which is in the midst of thee. Ver. 14. Will thy heart indeed stand firm, or icill thy hands be strong for the day when I shall deal with thee? 1 Jehovah have spoken it, and also do it. Ver. 15. 1 will scatter thee among the nations, and disperse thee in the lands, and will utterly remove thine uncleanness from thee. Ver. 16. And thou wilt be desecrated through thyself before the eyes of the nations, and know that I am Jehovah. — Ver. 13 is closely connected with the preceding verse. This serves to explain the fact that the only sins mentioned as exciting the wrath of God are covetousness and blood-guiltiness. *\3 nar^ as 2 Kings xi. 12 clearly shows, is a contracted expression for *1? nsn *|3?K (ch. xxi. 19), and the smiting of the hands together is a gesture indicative of wrathful indignation. For the form ^EFJ, contracted from TO^, see the comm. on ch. xvi. 45. — As ver. 13 leads on to the threatening of judgment, so does ver. 14 point in anticipation to the terrible nature of the judgment itself. The question, " will thy heart stand firm?" involves a warning against security. l»y is the opposite of DDJ (cf. ch. xxi. 12), as standing forms the antithesis to passing away (cf. Ps. cii. 27). TjniK iW|, as in ch. xvi. 59 and vii. 27. The Lord will scatter them (cf. ch. xii. 15, xx. 23), and remove the uncleanness of sin, namely, by purifying the people in exile (cf. Isa. iv. 4). Dnn, from DEfi, to cause to cease, with JO, to take completely away. fi?nJ, Niphal of ivn, connected with DJfa ^p, as in ch. xx. 9, not from?nj, as many of the commentators who follow the Septuagint and Vulgate suppose. ^3, not in te, in thyself, but through thee, i.e. through thy sinful conduct and its consequences.

Vers. 17-22. Refining of Israel in the furnace of besieged Jerusalem. — Ver. 17. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Ver. 18. Son of man, the house of Israel has become to me as dross; they are all brass, and tin, and iron, and lead in the furnace; dross of silver have they become. Ver. 19. Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because ye have all become dross, therefore, behold, I gather you together in Jerusalem. Ver. 20. As men gather together silver, and brass, and iron, and lead, and tin into the furnace, to blow the fire upon it for melting, so will I gather (you) together in my anger and my wrath, and put you in and melt you. Ver. 21. And I will collect you together, and blow the fire of my wrath upon you, that ye may be melted therein. Ver. 22. As silver is melted in the furnace, so shall ye be melted therein (viz. in Jerusalem), and shall learn that I Jehovah have poured out my wrath upon you. — This second word of God rests no doubt upon the figure in ver. 15b, of the uncleanness or dirt of sin; but it is not an exposition of the removal of the dirt, as predicted there. For that was to be effected through the dispersion of Israel among the nations, whereas the word of God, from ver. 17 onwards, represents the siege awaiting Jerusalem as a melting process, through which God will separate the silver ore contained in Israel from the baser metals mingled with it. In ver. 18 it commences with a description of the existing condition of Israel. It has turned to dross, vn is clearly a perfect, and is not to be taken as a prophetical future, as Kliefoth proposes. Such a rendering is not only precluded by the clause 'til nvn \V] in ver. 19, but could only be made to yield an admissible sense by taking the middle clause of the verse, a all of them brass and tin," etc., as a statement of what Israel had become, or as a preterite in opposition to all the rules of Hebrew syntax, inasmuch as this clause merely furnishes an explanation of ^Dp"Vn. ^d, which only occurs here, for Pp signifies dross, t not smelting-ore (Kliefoth), literally, recedanea, the baser ingredients which are mixed with the silver, and separated from it by smelting. This is the meaning here, where it is directly afterwards interpreted as consisting of brass, tin, iron, and lead, and then still further defined as O^p *lp3, dross of silver, i.e. brass, tin, iron, and lead, with a mixture of silver. Because Israel had turned into silver-dross of this kind, the Lord would gather it together in Jerusalem, to smelt it there as in a smelting furnace; just as men gather together brass, iron, lead, and tin in a furnace to smelt them, or rather to separate the silver contained therein. *)D3 nV?P, literally, a collection of silver, etc., for " like a collection." The D simil. is probably omitted for the sake of euphony, to avoid the discord occasioned by prefixing it to fl>'?i?. Ezekiei mentions the silver as well, because there is some silver contained in the brass, iron, etc., or the dross is silver-dross. ^fifi?, nomen verbale, from TjriJ in the Hiphil, smelting; literally, as the smelting of silver takes place in the furnace. The smelting is treated here simply as a figurative representation of punishment, and consequently the result of the smelting, namely, the refining of the silver by the removal of the baser ingredients, is not referred to any further, as is the case in Isa. i. 22, 25; Jer. vi. 27-30; Mai. iii. 2, 3. This smelting process was experienced by Israel in the last siege of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans.

Vers. 23-31. The corrupt state of all classes in the kingdom is the immediate cause of its destruction. — Ver. 23. And the ivord of Jehovah came to me, saying, Ver. 24, Son of man, say to it, Thou art a land which is not shined upon, nor rained upon in the day of anger, Ver. 25. Conspiracy of its prophets is within it; like a roaring lion, which rends in pieces the prey, they devour souls, take possessions and money; they multiply its widows within it. Ver. 26. Its priests violate my law and profane my holy things; they make no distinction between holy and unholy, and do not teach the difference between clean and unclean, and they hide their eyes from my Sabbaths, and 1 am profaned among them. Ver. 27. Its princes in the midst of it are like ivolves, which rend prey in pieces, that they may shed blood, destroy souls, to acquire gain. Ver. 28. And its prophets plaster it with cement, seeing what is worthless, and divining lies for them, saying, " TJius saith the Lord Jehovah," when Jehovah hath not spoken. Ver. 29. The common people offer violence and commit theft; they crush the wretched and the poor, and oppress the foreigner against right. Ver. 30. I seek among them for a man who might build a wall and step into the breach before me on behalf of the land, that I might not destroy it, but I find none. Ver. 31. Therefore 1 pour out my anger upon them; I destroy them in the fire of my wrath, I give their way upon their head, is the saying of the Lord Jehovah. — To show the necessity for the predicted judgment still more clearly, in the third word of God contained in this chapter a description is given of the spread of deep corruption among all classes of the people, and the impossibility of saving the kingdom is plainly shown. The words n7~"iDK? u say unto her," are taken by most of the commentators as referring to Jerusalem, the abominations of which the prophet is commanded to declare. But although the clause, " thou art a land," etc. (ver. 24), could unquestionably be made to harmonize with this, yet the words of ver. 30, u I sought for a man who might stand in the gap before Jehovah for the land," indicate most unquestionably that this word of God is directed against the land of Judah, and consequently P./ must be taken as referring to H.*? which follows, the pronoun in this case being placed before the noun to which it refers, as in Num. xxiv. 17. Any allusion to the city of Jerusalem would therefore be somewhat out of place, inasmuch as in the preceding word of God the object referred to was not the city, but the house of Israel, or the nation generally, from which a transition is here made to the land, or the kingdom of Judah. The meaning of ver. 24 is a disputed question. N*n nintop fcO, which is rendered rj ov fipexo/jbiirn in the Sept., is taken by most of the expositors to mean, " it is not cleansed," the form HinbD being correctly rendered as a participle Pual of "U]9# -But this rendering does not furnish any appropriate sense, unless the following words PEP'3 K? are taken as a threat: there shall not be rain, or it shall not be rained upon in the day of wrath. But this view is hardly reconcilable with the form of the word. nDK-'a, according to the Masoretic pointing with Mappik in the n, is evidently meant to be taken as a noun D£'3 = DBfj. In that case, if the words were intended to contain a threat, RW ought not to be omitted. But without a verb the words contain a statement in harmony with what precedes. We regard the Chetib nDEtt as the perfect Pual nrpL';3. And let it not be objected to this that the Pual of this verb is not met with elsewhere, for the form of the noun D^'3 with the u sound does not occur anywhere else. As a perfect Pual, HBBfa fc6 is a simple continuation of the participial clause KV1 rnnbtp N7, containing like this an affirmation, and cannot possibly be taken as a threat or prediction. But " not cleansed " and " not rained upon " do not agree together, as rain is not a means of purification according to the Hebrew idea. It is true that in the law the withdrawal or suspension of rain is threatened as a punishment from God, and the pouring out of rain is promised as a theocratical blessing. But even if the words are taken in a tropical sense, as denoting a withdrawal of the blessings of divine grace, they will not harmonize with the other clause, " not cleansed." We therefore take rnnbD in the sense of u shined upon by the light," or provided with brightness; a meaning which is sustained by Ex. xxiv. 10, where tohar occurs in the sense of splendour, and by the kindred word tzohar, light. In this way we obtain the suitable thought, land which has neither sunlight nor rain in the day of wrath, i.e. does not enjoy a single trace of the divine blessing, but is given up to the curse of barrenness. The reason for this threat is given in vers. 25 sqq., where a picture is drawn of the moral corruption of all ranks; viz. of the prophets (ver. 25), the priests (ver. 26), the princes (ver. 27), and the common people (ver. 29). There is something very striking in the allusion to the prophets in ver. 25, not so much because they are mentioned again in ver. 28, — for this may be accounted for on the ground that in the latter passage they are simply introduced as false advisers of the princes, — as on account of the statement made concerning them in ver. 25, namely, that, like lions tearing their prey, they devour souls, etc.; a description which is not given either in chap. xiii. or elsewhere. Hitzig therefore proposes to alter \}^2) into fWfett, after the rendering a(j)7]yov/jL6vot given by the LXX. This alteration of the text, which confines itself to a single letter, is rendered very plausible by the fact that almost the same is affirmed of the persons mentioned in ver. 25 as of the princes in ver. 27, and that in the passage in Zephaniah (iii. 3, 4), which is so similar to the one before us, that Ezekiel appears to have had it in his mind, the princes (ij*^) and the judges (iTDBty) are called the prophets and the priests. The DWb>3 here would correspond to the D^fc> of Zephaniah, and the D^fr to the D*ttBfe>. According to ver. 6, the CJOSM would indicate primarily the members of the royal family, possibly including the chief officers of the crown; and the WW (ver. 27) would be the heads of tribes, of families, and of fathers' houses, in whose hands the national administration of justice principally lay (cf. Ex. xviii. 19sqq.; Deut. i. 13-18; and my Bill. Archdol. ii. § 149). I therefore prefer this conjecture, or correction, to the Masoretic reading, although the latter is supported by ancient witnesses, such as the Chaldee with its rendering N^D, scribes, and the version of Jerome. For the statement which the verse contains is not applicable to prophets, and the best explanation given of the Masoretic text — namely, that by Michaelis, a they have made a compact with one another as to what kind of teaching they would or would not give; and in order that their authority may continue undisturbed, they persecute even to blood those who do not act with them, or obey them, but rather contradict" — does not do justice to the words, but weakens their sense. "i£'P is not a predicate to f33, " they are (i.e. form) a conspiracy; " but '23 is a genitive. At the same time, there is no necessity to take ")$£ in the sense of " company," a rendering which cannot be sustained. The fact that in what follows, where the comparison to lions is introduced, the DW33 (DWtw) are the subject, simply proves that in the first clause also these men actually form the prominent idea. There is no ground for supplying ncn to 'til *W3 (they are like, etc.); but the simile is to be linked on to the following clause, v?? B>B3 is to be explained from the comparison to a lion, which devours the prey that it has captured in its blood, in which is the soul, or nephesh (Gen.

ix. 4; Lev. xvii. 11 sqq.). The thought is this: in their insatiable greed for riches they sacrifice men and put them to death, and thereby multiply the number of victims (for the fact, see chap. xix. 5, 7). What is stated in ver. 26 concerning the priests is simply a further expansion of Zeph. iii. 4, where the first two clauses occur word for word; for KHp in Zephaniah is really equivalent to ^P, holy things and deeds. The desecration of the holv things consisted in the fact that thev made no distinction between sacred and profane, clean and unclean. For the fact, compare Lev. x. 10, 11. Their covering their eyes from the Sabbaths showed itself in their permitting the Sabbaths to be desecrated by the people, without offering any opposition (cf. Jer. xvii. 27). — The comparison of the rulers (sarim) to ravening wolves is taken from Zeph. iii. 3. For the following clause, compare ver. 12 and ch. xiii. 10. Destroying souls to acquire gain is perfectly applicable to unjust judges, inasmuch as, according to Ex. xviii. 21, the judges were to hate yV3. All that is affirmed in ver. 28 of the conduct of the false prophets is repeated for the most part verbatim from ch. xiii. 10, 9, and 7. By Dnj, which points back to the three classes of men already mentioned, and not merely to the sdrim, the prophets are represented as helpers of those who support the ungodly in their wicked ways, by oracles which assured them of prosperity. H*jn DV (ver. 29), as distinguished from the spiritual and secular rulers of the nation, signifies the common people. With reference to their sins and wickedness, see ch. xviii. 7, 12, 18; and for the command against oppressing the poor and foreigners, compare Ex. xxii. 20, 21; Deut. xxiv. 17. — The corruption is so universal, that not a man is to be found who could enter into the gap as a righteous man, or avert the judgment of destruction by his intercession. &np refers not merely to the prophets, who did not enter into the gap according to ch. xiii. 5, but to all the classes previously mentioned. At the same time, it does not follow from this, that entering into the gap by means of intercession cannot be the thing intended, as Hitzig supposes. The expression "W2 *:zh

H?t c^eai"ly refers to intercession. This is apparent from the simple fact that, as Hitzig himself observes, the intercession of

Abraham for Sodom (Gen. xviii. 13 sqq.) was floating before the mind of Ezekiel, since the concluding words of the verse contain an obvious allusion to Gen. xviii. 28. Because the for the land, He pours out His anger upon it, to destroy the inhabitants thereof. With reference to the fact and the that Ezekiel "is speaking after the catastrophe" (Hitzig). For although ^2^3 expresses the consequence of Jehovah's seeking a righteous man and not finding one, it by no means follows from the occurrence of the preterite snsVD nS that V*VS) is also a preterite. "nb^Sl is simply connected with ^|52XJ as a consequence; and in both verbs the Vav consec. expresses the sequence of thought, and not of time. The seeking, therefore, with the result of not having found, cannot be understood in a chronological sense, i.e. as an event belonging to the past, for the simple reason that the preceding words do not record the chronological order of events. It merely depicts the existing moral condition of the people, and ver. 30 sums up the result of the description in the thought that there was no one to be found who could enter in the gap before God. Consequently we cannot determine from the imperfect with Vav consec, either the time of the seeking and not finding, or that of the pouring out of the wrath.

Samaria and Jerusalem, as the capitals and representatives of the two kingdoms Israel and Judah, are two sisters, who have practised whoredom from the days of Egypt onwards

(vers. 2-4). Samaria has carried on this whoredom with Assyria aiid Egypt, and has been given up by God into the power of the Assyrians as a consequent punishment (vers. 5-10). But Jerusalem, instead of allowing this to serve as a warning, committed fornication still more grievously with Assyria and the Chaldeans, and, last of all, with Egypt again (vers. 11-21). In consequence of this, the Lord will permit the Chaldeans to make war upon them, and to plunder and put them to shame, so that, as a punishment for their whoredom and their forgetfulness of God, they may, in the fullest measure, experience Samaria's fate (vers. 22-35). In conclusion, both kingdoms are shown once more, and in still severer terms, the guilt of their idolatry (vers. 36-44), whilst the infliction of the punishment for both adultery and murder is foretold (vers. 45-49).

In its general character, therefore, this word of God is coordinate with the two preceding ones in ch. xxi. and xxii., setting forth once more in a comprehensive way the sins and the punishment of Israel. But this is done in the form of an allegory, which closely resembles in its general features the allegorical description in ch. xvi.; though, in the particular details, it possesses a character peculiarly its own, not only in certain original turns and figures, but still more in the arrangement and execution of the whole. The allegory in ch. xvi. depicts the attitude of Israel towards the Lord in the past, the present, and the future; but in the chapter before us, the guilt and punishment of Israel stand in the foreground of the picture throughout, so that a parallel is drawn between Jerusalem and Samaria, to show that the punishment of destruction, which Samaria has brought upon itself through its adulterous intercourse with the heathen, will inevitably fall upon Jerusalem and Judah also.

Vers. 1-4. The sisters Oholah and Oholibah. — Ver. 1. And the word of Jehovah came to mey saying, Ver. 2. Son of man, two women, daughters of one mother were they, Ver. 3. They committed whoredom in Egypt, in their youth they committed whoredom; there were their breasts pressed, and there men handled their virgin bosom. Ver. 4. Their names are Oholah, the greater, and Oholibah her sister; and they became mine, and bare sons and daughters. But their names are: Samaria is Oholah, and Jerusalem is Oholibah. — The name nyPflfJ is formed from ^2 vn^ " my tent in her; " and, accordingly, >"6nK is to be derived from rprttf " her tent," and not to be regarded as an abbreviation of nn <n?n»J, u her tent in her," as Hitzig and Kliefoth maintain. There is no ground for this assumption, as " her tent," in contrast with " my tent in her," expresses the thought with sufficient clearness, that she had a tent of her own, and the place where her tent was does not come into consideration. The u tent " is the sanctuary: both tabernacle and temple. These names characterize the two kingdoms according to their attitude toward the Lord. Jerusalem had the sanctuary of Jehovah; Samaria, on the other hand, had her own sanctuary, i.e. one invented by herself. Samaria and Jerusalem, as the historical names of the two kingdoms, represent Israel of the ten tribes and Judah. Oholah and Oholibah are daughters of one mother, because they were the two halves of the one Israel; and they are called women, because Jehovah had married them (ver. 4). Oholah is called njVian, the great, i.e. greater sister (not the elder, see the comm. on ch. xvi. 46); because ten tribes, the greater portion of Israel, belonged to Samaria, whereas Judah had only two tribes. They committed whoredom even in Egypt in their youth, for even in Egypt the Israelites defiled themselves with Egyptian idolatry (see the comm. on ch. xx. 7). "ny"*?, to press, to crush: the Pual is used here to denote lewd handling. In a similar manner the Piel n^V is used to signify tractare, contrectare mammas, in an obscene sense.

Vers. 5-10. Samaria's whoredom and punishment. — Ver. 5. And Oholibah flayed the harlot under me, an^d burned towards her lovers, even as far as Assyria, standing near; Ver. 6. Clothed in purple, governors and officers, all of them choice men of good deportment, horsemen riding vpon horses. Ver. 7. And she directed her whoredom toward them, to the choice of the soils of Assyria all of them, and with all towards whom she burned, with all their idols she defiled herself. Ver. 8. Also her whoredom from Egypt she did not give up; for they had lain with her in her youth, and they had handled her virgin bosom, and had poured out their lust upon her. Ver. 9. Therefore I have given her into the hand of her lovers, into the hand of the soils of Assyria, towards whom she was inflamed. Ver. 10. They uncovered her nakedness, took away her sons and her daughters, and slew her with the sword, so that she became a legend among the women, and executed judgments upon her. — Coquetting and whoring with Assyria and Egypt denote religious and political leaning towards and connection with these nations and kingdoms, including idolatry and the formation of alliances with them, as in chap. xvi. *Jnnn is to be interpreted in accordance with HB^K nnri (ch. xvi. 32). 2iV9 which only occurs in Ezekiel and once in Jeremiah, denotes the eager desire kindled by passionate love towards any one. By the words "HBfertK the lovers are more precisely defined. D\2V"ii? without an article is not an adjective, belonging to (TORND, but in apposition, which is continued in the next verse. In these appositions the particular features, which excited the ardent passion towards the lovers, are pointed out. 3i"ljJ is not to be taken in an outward or local sense, but as signifying inward or spiritual nearness: standing near, equivalent to inwardly related, as in Ps. xxxviii. 12; Job xix. 14. The description given of the Assyrians in ver. 6 contains the thought that Israel, dazzled by Assyria's splendour, and overpowered by the might of that kingdom, had been drawn into intercourse with the Assyrians, which led her astray into idolatry. The predicate, clothed in purple, points to the splendour and glory of this imperial power; the other predicates, to the magnitude of its military force. CMJW nina are rulers of higher and lower grades (cf. Jer. li. 57). u Here the expression is a general one, signifying the different classes of office-bearers in the kingdom" (Havernick). With regard to nna, see my comm. on Hag. i. 1; and for IJ9> see Delitzsch on Isa. xli. 25. " Riding upon horses" is added to DWs to denote the noblest horsemen, in contrast to riders upon asses and camels ( cf. Isa. xxi. 7). In ver. lb Dir^rbzi is in apposition to ""WK 5*3 nn:y? and defines more precisely the instigation to pollution: with all towards whom she burned in love, namely, with all their (the lovers') idols. The thought is as follows: it was not merely through her intercourse with the Assyrians that Israel defiled herself, but also through their idols. At the same time, Samaria did not give up the idolatry which it had derived from Egypt. It was from Egypt that the worship of God under the image of the golden calves had been imported. The words are much too strong for us to understand them as relating simply to political intercourse, as Hitzig has done. We have already observed at ch. xx. 7, that even in Egypt itself the Israelites had defiled themselves with Egyptian idolatry, as is also 6tated in ver. 8b. — Vers. 9, 10. As a punishment for this, God gave Samaria into the power of the Assyrians, so that they executed judgment upon the harlot. In ver. 10b the prophecy passes from the figure to the fact. The uncovering of the nakedness consisted in the transportation of the sons and daughters, i.e. the population of Samaria, into exile by the Assyrians, who slew the woman herself with the sword; in other words, destroyed the kingdom of Samaria. Thus did Samaria become a name for women; that is to say, her name was circulated among the nations, her fate became an object of conversation and ridicule to the nations, not a a nickname for the nations," as Havernick supposes (yid. ch. xxxvi. 3). D*EHSP, a later form for D*DBP (cf. ch. xvi. 41).

Vers. 11-21. Whoredom of Judah. — Ver. 11. And her sister Oholibah saw it, and carried on her coquetry still more wantonly than she had done, and her whoredom more than the whoredom of her sister. Ver. 12. She was inflamed with lust towards the sons of Asshur, governors and officers, standing near, clothed in

•perfect beauty, horsemen riding upon horses, choice men of good deportment. Ver. 13. And I saw that she had defiled herself; they both went one way. Ver. 14. And she carried her whoredom still further; she saw men engraved upon the wall, figures of Chaldeans engraved with red ochre, Ver. 15. Girded about the hips with girdles, with overhanging caps upon their heads, all of them knights in appearance, resembling the sons of Babel, the land of whose birth is Chaldea: Ver. 16. And she was inflamed with lust toward them, when her eyes saw them, and sent messengers to them to Chaldea. Ver. 17. Then the sons of Babylon, came to her to the bed of love, and defiled her with their whoredom; and when she had defiled herself with them, her soul tore itself away from them. Ver. 18. And when she uncovered her whoredom, and uncovered her nakedness, my soul tore itself away from her, as my soul had torn itself away from her sister. Ver. 19. And she increased her ivhoredom, so that she remembered the days of her youth, when she played the harlot in the land of Egypt. Ver. 20. And she burned toward their paramours, who have members like asses and heat like horses. Ver. 21. Thou lookest after the lewdness of thy youth, when they of Egypt handled thy bosom because of thy virgin breasts. — The train of thought in these verses is the following: — Judah went much further than Samaria. It not only indulged in sinful intercourse with Assyria, which led on to idolatry as the latter had done, but it also allowed itself to be led astray by the splendour of Chaldea, to form alliances with that imperial power, and to defile itself with her idolatry. And when it became tired of the Chaldeans, it formed impure connections with the Egyptians, as it had done once before during its sojourn in Egypt. The description of the Assyrians in ver. 12 coincides with that in vers. 5 and 6, except that some of the predicates are placed in a different order, and 70HQ W2? is substituted for rfan *£??. The former expression, which occurs again in ch. xxxviii. 4, must really mean the same as rfari '2?, But it does not follow from this that?w*? signifies purple, as

Hitzig maintains. The true meaning is perfection; and whenused of the clothing, it signifies perfect beauty. The Septuagint rendering, evwapvcfxi) with a beautiful border, — more especially a variegated one, — merely expresses the sense, but not the actual meaning of?v3D. The Chaldee rendering is 1D!I *BW, perfecte induti. — There is great obscurity in the statement in ver. 14 as to the way in which Judah was seduced to cultivate intercourse with the Chaldeans. She saw men engraved or drawn upon the wall (ni?n*?, a participle Pual of Pi?n, engraved work, or sculpture). These figures were pictures of Chaldeans, engraved (drawn) with ItPfP, red ochre, a bright-red colour. "nun, an adjective form "fan, wearing a girdle. EPpttD, coloured cloth, from?3B, to colour; here, according to the context, variegated head -bands or turbans. nTID, the overhanging, used here of the cap. The reference is to the tiarae tinctae (Vulgate), the lofty turbans or caps, as they are to be seen upon the monuments of ancient Nineveh. D^w? not chariotwarriors, but knights: " tristatae, the name of the second grade after the regal dignity" (Jerome. See the coram, on Ex. xiv. 7 and 2 Sam. xxiii. 8). The description of these engravings answers perfectly to the sculptures upon the inner walls of the Assyrian palaces in the monuments of Nimrud, Khorsabad, and Kouyunjik (see Layard's Nineveh and its Remains, and Vaux, Nineveh and Persepolis). The pictures of the Chaldeans are not mythological figures (Havernick), but sculptures depicting war-scenes, triumphal processions of Chaldean rulers and warriors, with which the Assyrian palaces were adorned. We have not to look for these sculptures in Jerusalem or Palestine. This cannot be inferred from ch. viii. 10, as Havernick supposes; nor established by Hitzig's argument, that the woman must have been in circumstances to see such pictures. The intercourse between Palestine and Nineveh, which was carried on even in Jonah's time, was quite sufficient to render it possible for the pictures to be seen. When Israelites travelled to Nineveh, and saw the palaces there, they could easily make the people acquainted with the glory of Nineveh by the accounts they would give on their return. It is no reply to this, to state that the woman does not send ambassadors till afterwards (ver. 16), as Iiitzig argues; for Judah sent ambassadors to Chaldea not to view the glories of Assyria, but to form alliances with the Chaldeans, or to sue for their favour. Such an embassy, for example, was sent to Babylon by Zedekiah (Jer. xxix. 3); and there is no doubt that in ver. 166 Ezekiel has this in his mind. Others may have preceded this, concerning which the books of Kings and Chronicles are just as silent as they are concerning that of Zedekiah. The thought in these verses is therefore the following: — The acquaintance made by Israel (Judah) with the imperial splendour of the Chaldeans, as exhibited in the sculptures of their palaces, incited 'Judah to cultivate political and mercantile intercourse with this imperial power, which led to its becoming entangled in the heathen ways and idolatry of the Chaldeans. The Chaldeans themselves came and laid the foundation for an intercourse which led to the pollution of Judah with heathenism, and afterwards filled it with disgust, because it was brought thereby into dependence upon the Chaldeans. The consequence of all this was, that the Lord became tired of Judah (vers. 17, 18). For instead of returning to the Lord, Judah turned to the other power of the world, namely, to Egypt; and in the time of Zedekiah renewed its ancient coquetry with that nation (vers. 19-21 compared with ver. 8). The form nsayrn in ver. 20, which the Keri also gives in ver. 18, has taken ah as a feminine termination (not the cohortative ah), like ^^ in Prov. i. 20, viii. 1 (yid. Delitzsch, On Job, pp. 117 and 268). □*&0?a are scorta mascula here (Kimchi), — a drastically sarcastic epithet applied to the sdrisim, the eunuchs, or courtiers. The figurative epithet answers to the licentious character of the Egyptian idolatry. The sexual heat both of horses and asses is referred to by Aristotle, Hist. anim. yi. 22, and Columella, de re rustK vi. 27; and that of the horse has already been applied to the idolatry of the people by Jeremiah (vid. Jer. v. 8). "^3, as in ch. xvi. 26. tga (ver. 21), to look about for anything, i.e. to search for it; not to miss it, as Hiivernick imagines.

Vers. 22-35. Punishment of the harlot Jerusalem. — Ver. 22. Therefore, Oholibah, thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I raise up thy lovers against thee, from whom thy soul has torn itself away, and cause them to come upon thee from every side; Ver. 23. The sons of Babel, and all the Chaldeans, rulers, lords, and nobles, all the sons of Assyria with them: chosen men of graceful deportment, governors and officers together, knights and counsellors, all riding upon horses. Ver. 24. And they will come upon thee with weapons, chariots, and wheels, and with a host of peoples; target and shield and helmet will they direct against thee round about: and I commit to them the judgment, that they may judge thee according to their rights. Ver. 25. And I direct my jealousy against thee, so that they shall deal with thee in wrath: nose and ears will they cut off from thee; and thy last one shall fall by the sword: they will take thy sons and thy daughters; and thy last one will be consumed by fire. Ver. 26. They will strip off thy clothes from thee, and take thy splendid jewellery. Ver. 27. I will abolish thy lewdness from thee, and thy whoredom from the land of Egypt: that thou may est no more lift thine eyes to them, and no longer remember Egypt. Ver. 28. Ear thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I give tiiee into the hand of those whom thou hatest, into the hand of those from whom thy soul has torn itself away: Ver. 29. And they shall deal with thee in hatred, and take all thy gain, and leave thee naked and bare; that thy whorish shame may be uncovered, and thy lewdness and thy whoredom. Ver. 30. This shall happen to thee, because thou goest whoring after the nations, and on account of thy defiling thyself with their idols. Ver. 31. In the way of thy sister hast thou walked; therefore I give her cup into thy hand. Ver. 32. Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, The cup of thy sister thou shalt drink, the deep and broad one; it will be for laughter and for derision, because it contains so much. Ver. 33. Thou wilt become full of drunkenness and misery: a cup of desolation and devastation is the cup of thy sister Samaria. Ver. 34. Thou wilt drink it tip and dizain it, and gnaw its fragments, and tear thy breasts (therewith); for I have spoken it, is the saying of the Lord Jehovah. Ver. 35. Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Because thou hast forgotten me, and hast cast me behind thy back, thou shalt also bear thy lewdness and thy whoredom.— As Jerusalem has given herself up to whoredom, like her sister Samaria, she shall also share her sister's fate. The paramours, of whom she has become tired, God will bring against her as enemies. The Chaldeans will come with all their might, and execute the judgment of destruction upon her. — For the purpose of depicting their great and powerful forces, Ezekiel enumerates in vers. 23 and 24 the peoples and their military equipment: viz. the sons of Babel, i.e. the inhabitants of Babylonia, the Chaldeans, — the ruling people of the empire at that time, — and all the sons of Asshur, i.e. the inhabitants of the eastern portions of the empire, the former rulers of the wrorld. There is some obscurity in the words Jflpl VW) *ripB, which the older theologians have almost unanimously taken to be the names of different tribes in the Chaldean empire. Ewald also adopts this view, but it is certainly incorrect; for the words are in apposition to t3*HfcQT3l as the omission of the copula 1 before lips is sufficient to show. This is confirmed by the fact that)fiw is used, in Isa. xxxii. 5 and Job xxxiv. 19, in the sense of the man of high rank, distinguished for his prosperity, which is quite in harmony with the passage before us. Consequently "lipQ is not to be taken in the sense of visitation or punishment, after Jer. 1. 21; but the meaning is to be sought in the verb *ij?a, to exercise supervision, or lead; and the abstract oversight is used for overseer, or ruler, as an equivalent to Ti?B. Lastly, according to Rabbins, the Vulgate, and others, #ip signifies princes, or nobles. The predicates in ver. 236 are repeated from vers. 6 and 12, and D^vip alone is added. This is a word taken from the Pentateuch, where the heads of the tribes and families, as being members of the council of the whole congregation of Israel, are called n~\yr\ Wlj? or *ITO HP"*i?j persons called or summoned to the meeting (Num. i. 16, xvi. 2). As Michaelis has aptly observed, " he describes them sarcastically in the very same way in which he had previously described those upon whom she doted." — There is a difficulty in explaining the air. \ey. i>?n, — for which many mss. read }>*n, — as regards not only its meaning, but its position in the sentence. The fact that it is associated with?a^ 22~\ would seem to indicate that!>*'n is also either an implement of war or some kind of weapon. At the same time, the words cannot be the subject to wy; but as the expression D^V?nj?3*, which follows, clearly shows, they simply contain a subordinate definition of the manner in which, or the things with which, the peoples mentioned in vers. 23, 24 will come, while they are governed by the verb in the freest way. The attempts which Ewald and Hitzig have made to remove the difficulty, by means of conjectures, are forced and extremely improbable. E»T?.sp WJ, I give up to them (not, I place before them); V.?r i^J> as in 1 Kings viii. 46, to deliver up, or give a thing into a person's hand or power. 'JKJ is used in this sense in Gen. xiii. 9 and xxiv. 51. — In vers. 25, 26, the execution of the judgment is depicted in detail. The words, " they take away thy nose and ears," are not to be interpreted, as the earlier expositors suppose, from the custom prevalent among the Egyptians and other nations of cutting off the nose of an adulteress; but depict, by one particular example, the mutilation of prisoners captured by their enemies, rpinx: not posterity, which by no means suits the last clause of the verse, and cannot be defended from the usage of the language (see the comm. on Amos iv. 2); but the last, according to the figure employed in the first clause, the trunk; or, following the second clause, the last thing remaining in Jerusalem, after the taking away of the sons and daughters, i.e. after the slaying and the deportation of the inhabitants, — viz. the empty houses. For ver. 26, compare ch. xvi. 39. — In ver. 27, "from the land of Egypt" is not equivalent to "dating from Egypt;" for according to the parallel TjBD, from thee, this definition does not belong to SfttiT, " thy whoredom," but to *W3$5fy " I cause thy whoredom to cease from Egypt" (Ilitzig). — For ver. 28a, compare ch. xvi. 37; for ver. 28ft, vid. ver. 17 above; and for ver. 29, see vers. 25 and 26, and ch. xvi. 39. — Ver. 31 looks back to ver. 13; and ver. 31ft is still further expanded in vers. 32-34. Judah shall drink the cup of the wrathful judgment of God, as Samaria has done. For the figure of the cup, compare Isa. li. 17 and Jer. xxv. 15. This cup is described in ver. 32 as deep and wide, i.e. very capacious, so that whoever exhausts all its contents must be thoroughly intoxicated, HN1J1 is the third person; but the subject is n?")D) and not Dfaj. The greatness or breadth of the cup will be a subject of laughter and ridicule. It is very arbitrary to supply " to thee" so as to read: will be for laughter and ridicule to thee, which does not even yield a suitable meaning, since it is not Judah but the nations who laugh at the cup. Others regard n*nn as the second person, thou wilt become; but apart from the anomaly in the gender, as the masculine would stand for the feminine, Ilitzig has adduced the forcible objection, that according to this view the words would not only anticipate the explanation given of the figure in the next verse, but would announce the consequences of the jiJW |Vn3E> mentioned there. Hitzig therefore proposes to erase the words from HWl to Wn as a gloss, and to alter »13")D into n2T]D: which contains much, is very capacious. But there is not sufficient reason to warrant such critical violence as this. Although the form HIH& is air. \ey., it is not to be rejected as a nomen subst.; and if we take T2\h naTO, the magnitude to hold, as the subject of the sentence, it contains a still further description of the cup, which does not anticipate what follows, even though the cup will be an object of laughter and ridicule, not so much for its size, as because of its being destined to be drunk completely empty. In ver. 33 the figure and the fact are combined, — frP, lamentation, misery, being added to |i"i3B>, drunkenness, and the cup being designated a cup of devastation. The figure of drinking is expanded in the boldest manner in ver. 34 into the gnawing of the fragments of the cup, and the tearing of the breasts with the fragments. — In ver. 35 the picture of the judgment is closed with a repetition of the description of the nation's guilt. For ver. 356, compare ch. xvi. 52 and 58. Vers. 36-49. Another summary of the sins and punishment of the two women. — Ver. 36. And Jehovah said to me, Son of man, wilt thou judge Oholah and Oholibah, then show them their abominations; Ver. 37. For they have committed adultery, and blood is in their hands; and they have committed adultery with their idols; and their sons also whom they bare to me they have caused to pass through to them to be devoured. Ver. 38. Yea more, they have done this to me; they have defiled my sanctuary the same day, and have desecrated my Sabbaths. Ver. 39. When they slaughtered their so?is to their idols, they came into my sanctuary the same day to desecrate it; and, behold, they have acted thus in the midst of my house. Ver. 40. Yea, they have even sent to men coming from afar; to them was a message sent, and, behold, they came, for whom thou didst bathe thyself, paint thine eyes, and put on ornaments, Ver. 41. And didst seat thyself upon a splendid cushion, and a table was spread before them, thou didst lay thereon my incense and my oil. Ver. 42. And the loud noise became still thereat, and to the men out of the multitude there were brought topers out of the desert, and they put armlets upon their hands, and glorious crowns upon their heads. Ver. 43. Then I said to her who was debilitated for adultery, Now will her whoredom itself go whoring, Ver. 44. And they will go in to her as they go in to a whore; so did they go in to Oholah and Oholibah, the lewd women. Ver. 45. But righteous men, these shall judge them according to the judgment of adulteresses and according to the judgment of murderesses; for they are adulter- and deliver them up for maltreating and > '>/. Ver. 47.

And t ne them^and cut them in ■ with their swords; their sons and their daughters shall they ////, ami burn their house* with fire* \ er. 48. Thus will I eradicate lewdness from the land, that all women man take warning and not prox lewdness like you, Ver. 49. And Uiey shall bring your lewdness upon VOtf, and ye shall bear the sins OJ idols, and shall A that I am the Lord Jehovah. — The introductory words 'ttl DiMPnn point back not only to ch. x\ii. 2, but also to cli. xx. 4, and show that this section is really a summary of the contents of the whole group (ch. xx. 23). The actual subject-matter of these verses is closely connected with ver. L6, more especially in the designation of the sin^ as a lulterv and bloodshed (compare vers. 37 and 45 with ch. xvi. 38). /1"TW *|IO, to commit adultery with the idols, whereby the idols are placed on a par with.Jehovah as the husband of Israel (compare Jer. iii. 8 and ii. 27). For the Moloch-worship in ver. 37o, compare ch. xvi. 20, 21, and ch. xx. 31. The desecration of the sanctuary (ver. 38a) is more minutely defined in ver. 39. Win tf»3 in ver. 38, which has so offended the LXX. and Hitzig that it is omitted by the former, while the latter proposes to strike it out as a gloss, is added for the purpose of designating the profanation of the sanctuary as contemporaneous with the Moloch-worship of ver. 376, as is evident from ver. 39. For the fact itself, compare 2 Kings xxi. 4, 5, 7. The desecration of the Sabbaths, as in ch. xx. 13, 16. For ver. 39a, compare ch. xvi. 21. The words are not to be understood as signifying that they sacrificed children to Moloch in the temple, but simply that immediately after they had sacrificed children to Moloch, they went into the temple of Jehovah, that there they might worship Jehovah also, and thus placed Jehovah upon a par with Moloch. This was a profanation (w) of His sanctuary.

In vers. 40-44 the allusion is not to actual idolatry, but to the ungodly alliance into which Judah had entered with Chaldea. Judah sent ambassadors to Chaldea, and for the purpose of receiving the Chaldeans, adorned herself as a woman would do for the reception of her paramours. She seated herself upon a splendid divan, and in front of this there was a table spread, upon which stood the incense and the oil that she ought to have offered to Jehovah. This is the explanation which Kliefoth has correctly given of vers. 40 and 41. The emphatic *3 pjxi in ver. 40 is sufficient to show that the reference is to a new crime deserving of punishment. This cannot be idolatry, because the worship of Moloch has already been mentioned in vers. 38 and 39 as the worst of all the idolatrous abominations. Moreover, sending for (or to) men who come from afar does not apply to idolatry in the literal sense of the word; for men to whom the harlot sent messengers to invite them to come to her could not be idols for which she sent to a distant land. The allusion is rather to Ass}rrians or Chaldeans, and, according to ver. 42, it is the former who are referred to here (compare Isa. xxxix. 3). There is no force in Hitzig's objection, namely, that the one woman sent to these, and that their being sent for and coming have already been disposed of in ver. 16. For the singulars in the last clause of ver. 40 show that even here only one woman is said to have sent for the men. Again, HJIwJl might even be the third person singular, as this form does sometimes take the termination nj (yid. Ewald, § 191c, and Ges. § 47, Anm. 3). At the same time, there is nothing in the fact that the sending to Chaldea has already been mentioned in ver. 16 to preclude another allusion to the same circumstance from a different point of view. The woman adorned herself that she might secure the favour of the men for whom she had sent, ^nii is the Arabic Jk^^s, to paint the eyes with stibium (Jcohol). For the fact itself, see the remarks on 2 Kings ix. 30. She then seated herself upon a cushion (not lay down upon a bed; for 3$J does not mean to lie down), and in front of this there was a table, spread with different kinds of food, upon which she placed incense and oil. The suffix to ^?y refers to |nfe, and is to be taken as a neuter, which suits the table as a thing, whilst |fw generally takes the termination ni in the plural. In ver. 41, Ewald and Havernick detect a description of the lectisternia and of the licentious worship of the Babylonian Mylitta. But neither the sitting (y^l) upon a cushion (divan), nor the position taken by the woman behind the table, harmonizes with this. As Hitzig has correctly observed, u if she has taken her seat upon a cushion, and has a table spread before her, she evidently intends to dine, and that with the men for whom she has adorned herself. The oil is meant for anointing at meal-time (Amos vi. 6; Prov. xxi. 17; cf. Ps. xxiii. 5), and the incense for burning." "My incense and my oil " are the incense and oil given to her by God, which she ought to have devoted to His service, but had squandered upon herself and her foreign friends (cf. ch. xvi. 18; Hos. ii. 10). The oil, as the produce of the land of Palestine, was the gift of Jehovah; and although incense was not a production of Palestine, yet as the money with which Judah purchased it, or the goods bartered for it, were the gifts of God, Jehovah could also call it His incense. Ver. 42 is very obscure. Such renderings of the first clause as et vox multitudinis exultantis in ea (Vulg.), and " the voice of a careless multitude within her" (Havernick), can hardly be sustained. In every other passage in which p^n?ip occurs, it does not signify the voice of a multitude, but a loud tumult; compare Isa. xiii. 4, xxxiii. 3, Dan. x. 6, and 1 Sam. iv. 14, where jto^n ^p is used as synonymous with n^'n?)?. Even in cases where lion is used for a multitude, it denotes a noisy, boisterous, tumultuous crowd. Consequently w cannot be taken as an adjective connected with {ton, because a quiet tumult is a contradiction, and w does not mean either -exultans or recklessly breaking loose (Havernick), but simply living in quiet, peaceful and contented, w must therefore be the predicate to jion?ip; the sound of the tumult or the loud noise was (or became) quiet, still. H3, thereat (neuter, like 33, thereby, Gen. xxiv. 14). The words which follow, 'til D^JK?S^ are not to be taken with the preceding clause, as the connection would yield no sense. They belong to what follows. D1K 3h» D^jtf can only be the men who came from afar (ver. 40). In addition to these, there were brought, i.e. induced to come, topers from the desert. The Chetib DsK3iD is no doubt a participle of tf 3D, drinkers, topers; and the Hoplial D?K3I0 is chosen instead of the Kal B'M^ for the sake of the paronomasia, with DsN3iD. The former, therefore, can only be the Assyrians ("B^K "03, vers. 5 and 7), the latter (the topers) the Chaldeans (^33 ^3? ver. 15). The epithet drinkers is a very appropriate one for the sons of Babylon; as Curtius (ver. 1) describes the Babylonians as maxime in vinum et quae ebrietatem sequuntur effusi. The phrase "from the desert" cannot indicate the home of these men, although T3TSB corresponds to pn~iDD in ver. 40, but simply the place from which they came to Judah, namely, from the desert of Syria and Arabia, which separated Palestine from Babylon. These peoples decorated the arms of the harlots with clasps, and their heads with splendid wreaths (crowns). The plural suffixes indicate that the words apply to both women, and this is confirmed by the fact that they are both named in ver. 44. The subject to tiJrM is not merely the D^liD, but also the pn"}^P DT^S in ver. 40. The thought is simply that Samaria and Judah had attained to wealth and earthly glory through their intercourse with these nations; the very gifts with which, according to ch. xvi. 11 sqq., Jehovah Himself had adorned His people. The meaning of the verse, therefore, when taken in its connection, appears to be the following: — When the Assyrians began to form alliances with Israel, quiet was the immediate result. The Chaldeans were afterwards added to these, so that through their adulterous intercourse with both these nations Israel and Judah acquired both wealth and glory. The sentence which God pronounced upon this conduct was, that Judah had sunk so deeply into adultery that it would be