Читать книгу Ezekiel - John W. Hilber - Страница 15

Ezekiel 8:1–18

Ezekiel’s Message

Whether in secret denial of God or in open rebellion against him, human sin eventually provokes God to merciless judgment.

Key Themes

• There are degrees of sinful attitude that provoke corresponding degrees of anger in God.

• Denying God’s knowledge of sin is illusory.

• Turning from God can manifest itself in bold rebellion.

• God regards violent injustice between human beings as more reprehensible than grotesque apostasy.

Context in Ezekiel

The date formula (Ezek 8:1) introduces a new major literary unit in the book (vision of the Lord’s temple departure [Ezek 8:1—11:25]) and indicates that 14 months have transpired since Ezekiel’s original visionary call.53 In four scenes of increasing detestability (cf. Ezek 8:6, 13, 15), Ezekiel 8 demonstrates the blatant desecration of holiness by Jerusalem’s leadership in the very presence of God, prompting his abandonment of the temple (cf. Ezek 9:3; 10:3,18–19; 11:22–23). This effectively grants divine permission for the temple’s destruction and sets the stage for Ezekiel’s climactic vision of temple restoration and the return of God’s presence (Ezek 40–48).

Interpretive Highlights

8:1 elders of Judah: Ezekiel had been confined to his house, except for his dramatic sign activity conducted outside (cf. chapters 4–5, 12), and he remained mute, speaking only the oracles God moved him to deliver (Ezek 3:24–27). As noted earlier, such eccentric behavior drew his neighboring Jewish leaders to him (cf. Ezek 14:1–3; 20:1). The visionary inclusion of the “seventy elders” at the Jerusalem temple (Ezek 8:11, see discussion there) signified representation of the whole nation. This could not have escaped the notice of his home audience as a warning to them as well.

8:2 I saw a figure: The parallels to Ezekiel’s first vision build as his description unfolds (v. 4; see discussion of Ezek 1 and 10). From the description here, the figure who seizes Ezekiel is none other than the Lord himself (cf. Ezek 1:27).

8:3 entrance of the north gate: Ezekiel is not transported in body to Jerusalem, for when it is over, he reports that “the vision . . . went up from me” (cf. Ezek 11:24). Rather, in a visionary trance he see activities of the temple from various vantage points. The Jerusalem temple-building itself was surrounded by two courtyards (inner and outer [cf. Ezek 10:5]; 2 Kgs 21:5; 23:12); and Ezekiel’s first exposure to temple idolatry takes place at the northern gate leading from the outer to the inner courtyard.54

8:3–5 idol that provokes to jealousy: Commentators note that the unusual word translated “idol” only occurs elsewhere in Deut 4:16 and then again in 2 Chr 33:7, 15, where it describes Manasseh’s image of Asherah that provoked God to anger (cf. 2 Kgs 21:6–7).55 Ezekiel’s vision could be of a representation of the Canaanite goddess, Asherah, or an image associated with some other deity.56 Since Manasseh’s image of Asherah was destroyed by Josiah (2 Kgs 23:6), some question the identification of this object with the goddess Asherah.57 However, another Asherah image may well have been produced after the failure of Josiah’s reforms. Ezekiel’s vision exposes the sorts of abominations that characterized temple worship in recent memory, which includes Manasseh’s Asherah image. Why this particular idol especially provoked the Lord’s jealousy is not clear.

8:6 detestable: For this important word, see comments at Ezek 7:3–4.

8:7 entrance to the court: The second scene portrays activity inside a chamber in the gatehouse of the north gate in the previous scene.58 The necessity to dig through the wall in this visionary experience suggests that the activities inside were conducted in secret.

8:10 portrayed all over the walls: The exact nature of this worship activity is impossible to identify. Ezekiel’s language alludes to unclean animals (Lev 7:21; 11:41) and prohibited images (Deut 4:16–18). Offering incense denotes prayer, perhaps to composite (human/animal) deities in Egyptian religion or animal motifs used in Babylonian wall decorations.59

8:11 seventy elders . . . Jaazaniah: Elders served as lay leaders in the Jerusalem council (cf. Ezek 7:26), perhaps rising to prominence after the deportation of high level officials (including Ezekiel himself) in 598 BC. Their number, seventy, stands in ironic contrast to another gathering of 70 elders to worship with Moses during the covenant-making ceremonies on Mt. Sinai (Exod 24:1, 9–11) and the legitimation of a similar group who shared in a measure of Moses’ spirit (Num 11:24–25). The irony deepens if “Jaazaniah” is the son the same “Shaphan” who served under Josiah and whose other sons assisted Jeremiah (Jer 26:24; 29:3; 36:10–12, 25).60

8:12–13 shrine of his own idol . . . the Lord does not see: This first phrase is difficult (note ESV, “room of pictures”; NASB, “room of his carved images”). The word translated “idol” in the NIV refers to an object, either figurine or pictorial art, that represents a deity (Num 33:52; Lev 26:1). The word translated “shrine” denotes an interior chamber of a sort (“inner room,” 1 Kgs 22:25; “bedroom,” 2 Sam 4:7). Evidently, the chamber as a whole was covered with images (Ezek 8:10), yet each elder was assigned to a particular deity and participated in the rituals privately within his individual cubicle.

The religious rationalization of such behavior is the elders’ conclusion that God has already abandoned Jerusalem—so why not turn to every other possible divine source for help? They imagined that the Lord is no longer present to take notice of such sacrilegious activity, even in his own temple complex. Ironically, the Lord had not yet abandoned his temple; but the activities of these elders were driving him away (Ezek 8:6).

8:14 mourning the god Tammuz: The gate location of this next scene is uncertain; but, judging from the reference to God’s “house,” it seems to be a move closer to the temple building itself. In contrast to the dark, inner chamber of the previous scene, worship of the Babylonian deity Tammuz occurred in the open court directly in view of God’s temple. This reinforces the progressive detestability of each successive scene.

Special Topic: Tammuz

In Babylonian religion, the figure Tammuz appears as the ill-fated lover of the goddess, Ishtar, whose place he takes in the netherworld in order for her to return from death and inhabit life. He was associated with both newborn sheep and new growth of vegetation in the spring. In summer drought he was thought to be trapped in death’s realm until ascending to life again the following spring. Mesopotamian texts mention annual rituals in which worshippers mourn his death. For example, a seventh-century BC Assyrian text ordains “weeping” in the month of Tammuz (June/July).61 Similar practices in Canaanite religion accompanied the worship of Baal. For example, 1 Kgs 18:28 depicts mourning rites that imitated the god El’s lament over Baal’s death in Ugaritic myth. Probably related to this is later Greek worship of Adonis involving lamentation rituals by women.62 With this custom, then, Israelite religion was participating fully in ancient Near Eastern beliefs about death, life, and fertility.

8:16 backs toward the temple . . . faces toward the east: The final scene takes place at God’s front door, where “about twenty-five men” (a round number with no particular significance) worship the sun with backs turned against the Lord (cf. Jer 32:33–34). Astral deities, such as the sun, moon, planets, and stars, comprised the chief gods of ancient religion, and Jerusalem’s idolatry fell in step (Jer 8:2; Zeph 1:5), especially in worshipping the sun (2 Kgs 21:5; 23:11).

8:17 violence . . . branch to their nose: As the four scenes of abominable worship reach a climax, the Lord denounces the sin of violence as more provocative to anger than idolatrous practices (cf. “filling land with violence,” as at the time of the flood [Gen 6:11, 13]).63 The assessment that violence and injustice are more reprehensible than religious apostasy is consistent with Ezek 7:23 and Ezek 9:9–10.

The significance of putting a branch to the nose is unclear. It is possible that it refers to a gesture of entreaty, for which there is an Assyrian relief depicting the king holding a branch (flower?) to his nose in worship; or possibly the branch alludes to the cedar branch, a symbol of life associated with Tammuz and Ishtar.64 Alternatively, since the reference comes immediately after the accusation about violence, the phrase may denote a gesture of contempt or physical insult toward God commensurate with the severity of violence.65 The line had been crossed beyond which there was no hope for mercy from God (Ezek 8:18; cf. chapter 7).

Theological Bridge to Application

Against the elders’ claim that the Lord had departed and does not observe their activity (Ezek 8:13), stands the reality that the God of glory was indeed present. There are two important implications: First, God is longsuffering (Exod 34:6), as testified by his continued presence in his temple throughout years of such abominable idolatry. His reluctant departure in chapters 9 and 10 reinforce this observation. Second, denying God’s knowledge of any human affair is illusory. Perhaps these men assumed that God was not present in his temple; nevertheless, they conducted their affairs in secret, just in case, in order to remain unobserved. Yet the walls and darkness were penetrated by his watchful eye. Even had the glory been absent, he would be present to know (cf. Pss 11:4–5; 139:2, 7).

Focus of Application

Many details concerning the idolatrous practices in Ezek 8 evade our understanding. Nevertheless, the heart of the vision is clearly signaled by changes between scenes (e.g., Ezek 8:6, 13, 15): first, the progressive closeness of idolatry in the direction of God’s very presence (movement from outside the gateway to the porch of temple), and then the increasingly brazen attitude on the part of idolaters against God (hiding in secret to turning one’s back on God’s face). It is also helpful to bear in mind that Ezekiel is experiencing a vision, which like a dream-experience need not cohere to reality in every way. So, for example, attempting to make perfect sense of Ezekiel’s tunneling into the gatehouse is irrelevant to the intention of the visionary experience and narrative portrayal.

It is often the case that severity of sin is measured by a hierarchy of behaviors, the exact order of which often varies from community to community. While not denying that there are degrees of severity to sin and its consequences (Ezek 8:17 is a reminder), the attitude of the individual toward God is equally important as we think about sin in our own life or in our faith community. God’s tolerance measures the heart as much as the action (Pss 32:5; 51:17; compare Jesus’ differing posture toward sinners and Pharisees).

The second scene portrays the complexity of practical atheism. Sins committed in secret or harbored in the fantasies of the heart are not hidden from God (cf. Pss 10:11; 94:7; Zeph 1:12; Prov 15:3), although even committed believers can fall prey to this illusion in practice. Positive correction for this attitude flows from Pss 19:12–14; 138:23–24.

More severe condemnation applies to brazen defiance. In contemporary terms, this would describe the person who confesses faith but at the same time insults God and tarnishes his reputation by publically flaunting their behavior. It is this sort of situation that elicits church discipline. The difference between those who struggle under sin’s burden and those who flippantly ignore it is immense in God’s eyes.

The concluding accusation in Ezek 8:17 reminds us that God does weigh different sins in their degree of severity. Unfortunately, communities of believers have too frequently devised their hierarchy of sins based on the types of behavior that permit easy evaluation. Those who do not measure up are censured. This obsession with “external” sin can result in a benign silence regarding “internal” sin. But the specific point in this vision (like the oracle of chapter 7) is that injustice, especially in forms that result in physical harm, tops the list. When one observes the moral issues that often play large on the agenda of churches, the hierarchy of popular Christian values often overlooks this.

53. For literary design, see Block, Ezekiel 1–24, 272–73.

54. Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20, 168.

55. For discussion of Asherah, see Curtis, “Canaanite Gods,” 140–41.

56. Further, see Bodi, “Ezekiel,” 420–21.

57. Block, Ezekiel 1–24, 281.

58. Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20, 169.

59. Bodi, “Ezekiel,” 421–22; Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20, 169–70.

60. Block, Ezekiel 1–24, 291.

61. Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20, 171.

62. Block, Ezekiel 1–24, 295–96.

63. For discussion of this idiom discussed by Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20, 172 (1 Kgs 16:31; Isa 7:13).

64. Bodi, “Ezekiel,” 423.

65. For discussion, see Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20, 172–73.