The Pulpit Commentary — Ezekiel — Volume 1 — Section 324

downw11rde (Jer. xxii. 13). As conlrnstcd the Ilebrew, but is legitimately intri,daced with tho sin, thero was the virtue of a~ expressing Ezekiel's meaning, where the generous almegiving (Isa. !viii. 5-7). mere pronoun hy itself would have been Ver. 8.-He thnt hath not given forth hie ambiguous. In English we might say, "He money upon usury. 'fhe word "usnry," does these things; he does not do those;" we must remember, is used, not, as wiLI, us, but this does not fall in with the Hebrew for exorbit11nt interest above the m11rket idiom. rate, but for interest of 11ny kind. Thie Ver.12.-The word abomination probably w11e allowed in commercial de11lings with covers the specific sin named in ver. 6, but foreignera (Deut. xxiii. 20), but w11e nlto- not here. gether forbidden in the case of lo11ns to Ver. 13.-One notes the special emphasis, Iero.elites (Exod. xxil. 25 ; Lev. xxv. 35, 37; first of the question, and then of the direct Deut. xxili.10; le11. xxiv. 2). The principle negntive, as though that, in the judgment implied in this distinction was that, although nlike of God and man, was the only answer it WIIB, on strict principles of justice, allowable that could be gi vcn to it in the very words t.o charge for the use of money, as for the use of the Law (Lev. xx. 9, 11, 13). of lands or the hire of cattle, Israel, 11s 11 Vere. 14-17.-Now, lo! etc. The law of people, was under the higher law of brother- personal responsibility had been pressed on hood. If money was to be lent at all, it was its darker side. It is now asserted in iti, to be lent as to a brother in want (Matt. v. brighter, and that with the special emphasis 42; Luke ~i. 35), for the relief of his indicated in its opening words. The pro- ne.cessities, nnd not to make profit. A verb of the "sour grapes" receives a direct brother .who would not he! p a brother by contradiction. The son of the evil-doer may a loan without. interest was thought un- take warning by his father's example, and worthy -of the. name: The ideal of the repent, as Ezekiel exhorted those among social polity of Israel was that it wns to whom he lived to do. In that case he need consist of a population of small freeholders, fear no inherited or transmitted curse. Ha bound together by ties of mutual help-a shall surely live; Hebrew, living he shall national friendly society, rather than of li-r,e. Th11t truth came to Ezekiel as with traders and manufactmers; and hence the the force of e. new apocalypse, and it is ob- whole drift of its legislation tended to re- viously " exceeding broad," with far-reach- press the money-making spirit which after- inl(' consequences both in ethics and theology. wards became specinlly characteristic of its Ver. 18.-The reappearance of the father, people, and ate like e. canker into its life. with the same emphatic "lo!" seems to The distinction between tile two words seems imply that Ezekiel thought of the t,rn to be that " usury" rep1·esents any int.erest phenomena as possibly contemporaneous. on money; and "increase," any profit on the Men might see before them, 11t the same so.le of goods beyond the cost of production, time, the father dying in his sins, and the son as measured by the maintenance of the worker turning from them and gaining the true life. and hie family. To buy in the cheapest Ver. 19.-Why! doth not the son, etc.? market and sell in the dearest was not to be The words 1ue better taken, with the LXX., the rule in a nation of brothers, 11nd it was Vulgnte, Revised Version, and most critics, wiser to forbid it altogether rather than to as e. single question, Why doth not the son sanction what we call e. "reasonable r11te" bear, etc.? What is the explan11tion of a fact of interest or profit. H11th exeonted true which seemingly contradicts the teaching jndgment. The last special feature in the of the Law? The answer to the question descl'iption of tho righteous man is that seems at tirst only an iteration of what had he is free from the judicial corruption which been st11ted before. The son repents, and has always boen the ineradicable evil of therefore does not bear his father's iniquity. Ee.stern sooial life (1 Sam. viii. 3; xii. 3; A man is responsible for his own sins, and Amoe v. 12; Isa. xxxiii. 15). for those only. To think otherwise is to Ver.10.-A robber. The Hebrew implies think of God as less rigbteo1rs than man. robbery with violence, perhaps, as in the Ver~. 21, 22.-But if the wicked will tlll'll, Authorized Version margin, the offence of etc. Here, however, there is a distinct the housebreaker. That doeth the· like to 11dvance. The question is carried further any of these things. 'fhe margin of the into the relntions between the past 11nd the Revised Version, following the Chaldee present ot' the same man_, between_ his old par11phr11Be, gives, who doeth to a brother and his new self. And rn Rnswtmng that any of these things. Others (Keil and Fiirst) question also Ezekiel becomes the pru11cher render, "who doeth only one of these of a gospel. Tile ju<igment of Guel deals things," AS if recognizing the principle of with cnch man 11ccordiug to his present Jas. ii. 10. On the whole, there seems state, not his past. Repentanco and con- sulticient renson for keeping ~o tho text. vc,rsion and obedience shu\l c,rnccl, RS it Ver. 11.-The word "(lnties" is not in were, the very memory of his former sins  824: THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. [oH. :x.vm. 1-32,