16 An ingenious attempt has been made by Professor Cornill to rearrange the verses so as to bring out two separate series of actions, one referring exclusively to the exile and the other to the siege. But the proposed reading requires a somewhat violent handling of the text, and does not seem to have met with much acceptance. The blending of diverse elements in a single image appears also in ch. xii. 3‐16.
17 The correspondence would be almost exact if we date the commencement of the northern captivity from 734, when Tiglath‐pileser carried away the inhabitants of the northern and eastern parts of the country. This is a possible view, although hardly necessary.
18 Or, with a different pointing, “She changed My judgments to wickedness.”
19 See ch. xxvii.
20 _Hammânim_—a word of doubtful meaning, however. The word for idols, _gillûlîm_, is all but peculiar to Ezekiel. It is variously explained as _block‐gods_ or _dung‐gods_—in any case an epithet of contempt. The _ashērah_, or sacred pole, is never referred to by Ezekiel.
21 In ver. 14 the true sense has been lost by the corruption of the word Riblah into Diblah.
22 The reason may be that two different recensions of the text have been combined and mixed up. So Hitzig and Cornill.
23 Amos viii. 2.
24 Cf. Luke xvii. 26‐30.
25 Ezekiel’s use of the divine names would hardly be satisfactory to Renan. Outside of the prophecies addressed to heathen nations the generic name אלהים is never used absolutely, except in the phrases “visions of God” (three times) and “spirit of God” (once, in ch. xi. 24, where the text may be doubtful). Elsewhere it is used only of God in His relation to men, as, _e.g._, in the expression “be to you for a God.” אל שדי occurs once (ch. x. 5) and אל alone three times in ch. xxviii. (addressed to the prince of Tyre). The prophet’s word, when he wishes to express absolute divinity, is just the “proper” name יהוה, in accordance no doubt with the interpretation given in Exod. iii. 13, 14.
26 Of what nature this idolatrous symbol was we cannot certainly determine. The word used for “image” (_semel_) occurs in only two other passages. The writer of the books of Chronicles uses it of the _asherah_ which was set up by Manasseh in the Temple, and it is possible that he means thus to identify that object with what Ezekiel saw (cf. 2 Chron. xxxiii. 7, and 2 Kings xxi. 7). This interpretation is as satisfactory as any that has been proposed.
27 The nature of the cults is best explained by Professor Robertson Smith, who supposes that they are a survival of aboriginal totemistic superstitions which had been preserved in secret circles till now, but suddenly assumed a new importance with the collapse of the national religion and the belief that Jehovah had left the land. Others, however, have thought that it is Egyptian rites which are referred to. This view might best explain its prevalence among the elders, but it has little positive support.
28 It has been supposed, however, that the sun‐worship referred to here is of Persian origin, chiefly because of the obscure expression in ver. 17: “Behold they put the twig to their nose.” This has been explained by a Persian custom of holding up a branch before the face, lest the breath of the worshipper should contaminate the purity of the deity. But Persia had not yet played any great part in history, and it is hardly credible that a distinctively Persian custom should have found its way into the ritual of Jerusalem. Moreover, the words do not occur in the description of the sun‐ worshippers, nor do they refer particularly to them.
29 Following the LXX.
30 It is noteworthy that in the dirge of ch. xix. Ezekiel ignores the reign of Jehoiakim. Is this because he too owed his elevation to the intervention of a foreign power?