Bible Commentary (1871–1879 Edition)
TJie Jens' Presumptuousness Reproved. EZEKIEL XIII. The Reproof of Lying Prophets.
may declare . . . abominations—God's purpose in scattering a remnant of Jews among the Gentiles; viz., not only tliat they themselves should be weaned from idolatry (see V. 15), but that by their own word, as also by their whole state as exiles, they should make God's righteousness manifest among the Gentiles, as vindicated in their punisliment for their sins (cf. Isaiah 43. 10; Zechariah 8.
these some were conscious knaves, others fanatical dupes of their own frauds; e. jr., Ahab, Zedekiah, and Sliemaiali. Hananiah must have believed his own lie, else he would not have specified so circumstantial details (Jeremiah 2S.
2-4) ; the conscious knaves gave only general assurances of peace (Jeremiah 5. 31; 6.14; 14. 13). The language of Ezekiel has plain references to the similar language of Jeremiah (e. g., Jeremiah 23.9-38); the baneof fivlse prophecy, which had its stronghold in Jerusalem, having in some degree extended to the Chebar ; this chapter, there-
18). 18. Symbolical representation of the famine and fear with which they should eat their scanty morsel, in their exile, and especially at the siege. 19. people of the IkimI—the Jews " in the land" of Chaldea who thought themselves miserable as being exiles, and envied the Jews left in Jerusalem as fortunate, land of Israel contrasted with "the people in the land" of Chaldea. So far from being fortunate, as the exiles in Chaldea regarded them, the Jews in Jerusalem are truly miserable, for the worst is before them, whereas the exiles have escaped the miseries of the coming siege, land . . . desolate from all tliat is therein lit., ""'that the land fore, is, primarily, intended as a message to those still in the Jewish metropolis; and, secondarily, for the good of the exiles at the Chebar. 3. tliat prophesy viz., a .speedy return to Jerusalem, out off . . . own hearts—alluding to the woi-ds of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 23. 16, 26); i. e., wliat they prophesied was what they and the people wished; the wish was father to the thought. The people wished to be deceived, and so were deceived. They were inexcusable, for they had among them true prophets (who spake not their own thoughts, but as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, 2 Peter 1. 21), whom they might have known to be such, but they did not wish to know (John 3. 19). 3. foolish—though vaunting as though exclusively possessing "wisdom" (1 Corinthians I. 19-21); the fear of God being the only beginning of wisdom (Psalm 111. 10). their own spirit—instead of the Spirit of God. A threefold distinction lay between the false and the true proph-
(viz., Judea) may be despoiled of the fulness thereof;" emptied of the inhabitants and abundance of flocks and corn with which it was filled, because of . . . violence—(Psalm 107. 34.) 30. the cities—left in Judea, after the desti'uction of Jerusalem. 33. proverb—the infidel scoft', that the threatened judgment was so long in coming, it would not come at all, had by frequent repetition come to be a "proverb" with them. This skepets: (1) The source of their messages respectively; of Hie tical habit contemporary prophets testify to (Jeremiah 17.
false, " their own hearts;" of the true, an object presented to the spiritual sense (named from the noblest of the senses, a seeing) by the Spirit of God as from without, not produced by their own natural powers of reflection. The word, the body of the thought, presented itself not audibly to the natural sense, but directly to the spirit of the prophet ; and so the perception of it Is properly called a lo; 20.7; Zephaniah 1. 12). Ezekiel, at the Chebar, thus sj'mpatliizes with Jeremiah, and strengthens his testimony at Jerusalem. The Zendencj/ to the same scoflT showed itself in earlier times, but not then developed into a settled " proverb" (Isaiah .5. 19 ; Amos 5. 18). It shall again be the characteristic of the last times, when "faith" shall be regarded as an antiquated thing (Luke 18. 8), seeing that it remains stationary, whereas worldly arts and sciences progress, and when the "continuance of all things from creation" will be the argument against the possibility of their being suddenly brought to a stand still by the coming of the Lord (Isaiah 66. 5; 2 Peter 3. 3, 4). The very long-suffering of God, wliich ought to lead men to repentance, is made an argument against His word (Ecolesiastes 8. 11; Amos C. 3). days . . . prolonged . . . vision falleth seeing, he perceiving that which thereafter forms itself in his soul as the cover of the external word [Delitszch]; hence the peculiar expression, seeing the ivwd of God (Isaiah 2. 1 ; 13. 1 ; Amos 1. 1 ; Micah 1. 1). (2) The point aimed at; the false "walking after their own spirit; ' the true, after the Spirit of God. (3) The result: the false saw nothing, but spake as if they had seen; the true had a vision, not subjective, but objectively real. [Fairbairn.] A refutation of those who set the inward word above the their twofold argument: (1) The predictions shall not come lo pass till long after our time. (2) They shall fail and prove vain shadows. God answers both in v. 23, 25. 33. effect— the word, viz., fulfilled; t. e., the effective fulfilment of whatever the prophets have spoken is at hand. 31. no more . . . vain vision . . . flattering divination -All those false prophets (Lamentations 2. 14), who "flattered" the people with promises of peace and safety, shall be detected and confounded by the event itself. 35. word objective, and represent the Bible as flowing subjectively from the inner light of its writers, not from the revelation of the Holy Ghost from without. "They are impatient to get possession of the kernel without its fostering shell —they would have Christ without the Bible." [Besgel.] 4. foxes—which cunningly "spoil the vines" (Song of Solomon 2. 15), Israel being the vineyard (Psalm 80.8-15; Isaiah 5. 1-7; 27. 2; Jeremiah 2. 21); their duty was to have guarded it from being spoiled, whereas they themselves spoiled it by corruptions, in . . . deserts—whei'e. there is nothing to eat; whence the foxes become so ravenous and crafty in their devices to get food. So the prophets wander in Israel, a moral desert, unrestrained, greedy of gain which they get by craft. 5. not gone up into . . . gaps —metaphor from breaches made in a wall, to which the defenders ought to betake themselves in order to repel the entrance of the foe. The breach is that made In the theocracy through the nation's sin ; and, unless it be made up, the vengeance of God will break in through it. Those who would advise the people to repentance are the restorers of the breach (ch. 22. 30; Psalm 106. 23, 30). hedge— the law of God (Psalm 80. 12; Isaiah 5. 2, 5) ; by violating it, the people stripped themselves of the fence of God's pro-. . . sljall come to pass—in opposition to their scoflf " the vision faileth" (y. 22). The repetition, "I will speak . .'.
speak," &c. (or as Fairbairn, " For I, Jehovali, will speak whatever word I shall speak, and it shall be done") implies, tliat whenever God speaks, the effect must follow; for God, wlio speaks, is not divided in Himself (ti. 28; Isaiah 00. 11 ; Daniel 9. 12; Luke 21. 33). no more prolonged —in opposition to the scoff" {v. 22), "The days are prolonged." in your days—whilst you are living (cf. Mattliew 24. 31). 37. Not a mere repetition of the scofl"(u. 22) t liere the scoffers asserted that the evil was so often threatened and postponed, it must have no reality; Ivive formalists do not go so far as to deny that a day of evil Is coming, but assert it is far otT yet (Amos 6.3). The transition is easy from this carnal security to the gross infidelity of the former class.
tection, and lay exposed to the foe. The false prophets did not try to repair the evil by bringing back the people
CHAPTER XIII.
to the law with good counsels, or by checking the bad with reproofs. These two duties answer to the double
Ver. 1-23. Denunciation op False Prophets and I'ROl'HETESSKS; THEIR FALSE TEACHINGS, AND GOD'S CON.SEauENT Judgments. 1. As ch. 12. denounced the office of defenders in case of a breach made in a wall : (1) To repair the breach from within. (2) To oppose the foe from without, to stantl-j. e., that the city may " stand." In . . . day of . . . Iiord—in the day of the battle which God wages against Israel for their sins, ye do not try to false expectations of the people, so this denounces the false leailers who fed those expectations. As an independent witness, Kzekiel confirms at the Chebar the testimony of Jeremiah (cli. 2!). 21, 31) in his letter from Jerusalem lo Uie captive exiles, against the false prophets; of stay God's vengeance by prayers, and by leading the nation to repentance. 6. made others to Itopc, Ac—