The Descriptions of the Restoration of Israel in Ezekiel

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI: 10.1163/156853310X489098

Vetus Testamentum 60 (2010) 197-211 brill.nl/vt

VetusTestamentum

The Descriptions of the Restoration of Israel in Ezekiel*

Tova Ganzel**Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel

AbstractThis article focuses on the descriptions of Israel’s restoration scattered throughout the book of Ezekiel against the background of traditional prophetic portrayals of national redemption. This investigation aims to analyze the various unique motifs found in the restoration prophecies and their function in each particular occurrence. Consideration of these prophecies demonstrates a literary progression within the book of Ezekiel, and also reflects the uniqueness of Ezekiel’s descriptions of the restoration of Israel.

KeywordsEzekiel, restoration, redemption, prophecy

1. Introduction: The Restoration Prophecies in Ezekiel

In his commentary to Ezekiel, Greenberg1 notes how the motifs and termi-nology of certain post-Fall prophecies in Ezekiel develop over the course of the book. Extending this premise one step further, the present study seeks to demonstrate a systematic progression in Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies, by paying close attention to the singular features of each prophecy and how they reflect the development of the prophet’s vision of Israel’s restoration.

The prophetic message conveyed by the passages in Ezekiel describing Israel’s restoration is subject to considerable controversy, stemming at least in part from the question of the function of the unique motifs in each

*) The Anchor Bible edition was used for biblical citations, with the exception of Ezek 38-48, for which the NJPS edition was used.**) I thank Dr. B. J. Schwartz, Dr. D. Rom-Shiloni and Dr. E. Assis for generously giving of their time to read this or earlier versions of this article, and for their important and insightful comments. 1) See M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (1983), pp. 204, 303-304, 384.

198 T. Ganzel / Vetus Testamentum 60 (2010) 197-211

prophecy.2 Scholars have addressed the question of to what extent the resto-ration prophecies3 reflect the words of the prophet, a question that directly relates to these scholars’ assumptions concerning the composition of the Book of Ezekiel generally.4 On one end, we find those who claim that the book underwent a process of redaction.5 Some proponents of this theory conclude that the redaction was minimal, and includes merely the heading at the beginning of Ezekiel as well as the dating of the prophecies throughout the book.6 Others, however, contend that only a small portion of the prophe-cies in this book are Ezekiel’s, and that the redactor (or redactors) arranged the content of the book—for various reasons, and in several stages.7 On the opposite end, some scholars advance a holistic approach, claiming that the entire book was authored by the sixth-century prophet Ezekiel, as evidenced by its organized, consistent structure.8 Although the present study is limited to the literary and theological aspects of the restoration prophecies in Ezekiel, it may also shed light on the questions concerning the composition of a num-

2) See P. Joyce, Ezekiel: A Commentary, Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 482 (New York, 2007), pp. 11-12. 3) We use here the term “restoration” on the basis of the accurate distinction drawn by Schwartz between prophecies of “redemption”, of which there are none in Ezekiel, and prophecies of “restoration”. See B. J. Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View of Israel’s Restoration”, in Margaret S. Odell and John T. Strong (eds.), The Book of Ezekiel: Theological and Anthropological Perspec-tives (Atlanta, 2000), p. 46 and note 7. 4) P. Joyce, Divine Initiative and Human Response in Ezekiel, JSOTSS 51 (Sheffield, 1989), pp. 21-31 demonstrates the difficulty in conclusively resolving this question. For an updated survey, see R. Kasher, Ezekiel 1-24 (Jerusalem, 2004), p. 17 (Hebrew). See also his bibliography on pp. 27-28. 5) See W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 1, BKAT 13 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1969); English translation in Ezekiel, 1 (Hermeneia) (Philadelphia, 1979), pp. 1-77. 6) It should be noted that even Zimmerli, a proponent of the redaction theory, notes the con-sistency in style and theology in the oracles of judgment and salvation. See W. Zimmerli, “Plans for Rebuilding After the Catastrophe of 587”, in W. Brueggemann (ed.), I am Yahweh (Atlanta, 1982), p. 112. 7) For a summary of recent criteria leading to these conclusions, see Joyce, Ezekiel: A Commen-tary (New York, 2007), pp. 7-16.8) Greenberg is among the foremost proponents of this approach. See Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, pp. 18-27; M. Greenberg, “What Are Valid Criteria for Determining Inauthentic Matter in Ezekiel?” in J. Lust (ed.), Ezekiel and His Book: Textual and Literary Criticism and Their Interre-lation (Leuven, 1986), pp. 123-135. See also D. I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel, Chapters 1-24, 25-48, NICOT (1997, 1998), pp. 17-23.

T. Ganzel / Vetus Testamentum 60 (2010) 197-211 199

ber of prophetic units in the book,9 insofar as it demonstrates the conceptual progression that occurs over the course of Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies.10

B. Schwartz recently called attention to Ezekiel’s bleak portrait of YHWH’s judgment of Judah and the prophet’s generally pessimistic view of the Israel-ite people, and concluded that Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies reflect a dim outlook.11 According to Schwartz, the few favorable, optimistic verses found in Ezekiel constitute a negligible minority and are most likely a later addi-tion.12 W. Zimmerli suggests a possible motivation behind this kind of arrangement: “In his final word, however, the final redactor allows . . . That God, after a period of anger against the people’s offenses, once again turns his face to them in grace, has mercy on them, brings them back again to his land, i.e. close to God, and pours out his spirit on them . . .”.13 Furthermore, the conclusion that Ezekiel’s prophecies of future events relate to “restoration”, rather than “redemption”, and this restoration is presented as part of Israel’s punishment, rather than an act of reconciliation, led scholars to ascribe a sec-ondary status to these prophetic units.14

This study argues that a proper evaluation of the restoration prophecies throughout Ezekiel, including the unique motifs of each individual prophecy, and a consideration of the central role played by these motifs, lead to a differ-ent conclusion. Namely, the “optimistic” verses in these prophecies are not secondary, but rather constitute an integral and central component of the entire book. The natural consequence of this conclusion is that although the lion’s share of Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies do, in fact, present an “dim”

9) For discussions concerning the authenticity of these prophecies, see Thomas M. Raitt, A Theology of Exile: Judgment/Deliverance in Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Philadelphia, 1977), pp. 108-110.10) The conclusions of the present study will likely lend support to the position that the proph-ecies under discussion were written by a prophet of the 6th century B.C.E. before and after the Fall, with a consistent, overarching objective that runs throughout the restoration prophecies in the book.11) Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”.12) Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”, p. 53. Schwartz even raises the possibility that Ezekiel him-self redacted his prophecies.13) W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 2, BKAT 13/2 (Neukirchen-vluyn, 1969); English translation in Ezekiel, 2 (Hermeneia) (Philadelphia, 1983), p. 324.14) See Joyce, Ezekiel: A Commentary, pp. 11-12. Note that Joyce discusses the issue of second-ary status in each prophetic unit dealing with Israel’s restoration. See chapter 11, pp. 110-111; chapter 16, pp. 134-135; chapter 20, pp. 154-155; chapter 28, p. 180; chapter 34, pp. 195-196; chapter 36, pp. 205-206; chapter 37, p. 212; chapter 39, pp. 217-218.


perspective, they include as well a number of significant verses that convey the themes of atonement, return, compassion and deliverance.

2. The Unique Motifs in the Descriptions of Israel’s Restoration

By and large, Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies, which foresee Israel’s future in the wake of the Temple’s destruction and the nation’s exile, all share the com-mon themes of Israel’s ingathering, the sanctification of the divine name in the eyes of the nations, Israel’s return to its land, and the people’s recognition that “I am God”.15 As noted in earlier studies, these prophecies omit certain elements that are commonly found in other prophetic books, particularly Israel’s contrition or penitence for its past deeds, and God’s expression of comfort and forgiveness in response to Israel’s repentance.16

In addition to these shared themes, each of Ezekiel’s restoration oracles features its own, unique motif that does not appear in the other prophecies and does not seem to fit within the overall scheme of Ezekiel’s prophecies. Previous studies have dismissed these unique motifs as insignificant, either by suggesting textual emendations, by viewing the relevant passages as second-ary, or simply by noting the atypical feature without providing any explana-tion.17 This approach is directly or indirectly influenced by form critical theory,18 which assigns to each literary unit a fixed, mandatory structure determined by the totality of the shared features of its representative texts.

15) We list here only the motifs reflecting the broadest common denominator, though other common elements exist, as well. For a list of all the motifs in these prophecies, see Kasher, Eze-kiel 25-48 (Jerusalem, 2004), pp. 731-732 (Hebrew). Kasher classifies these prophecies as “prophecies of consolation”, though it seems that one of their defining characteristics is specifi-cally the absence of consolation.16) M. Greenberg, “Anthropopathism in Ezekiel”, in M. Harris (ed.), Perspectives in Jewish Learning (Chicago, 1965), pp. 1-10; Joyce, “Divine Initiative”, p. 100; Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”, pp. 53-55; and others.17) See, for example, Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 1, chapter 11, p. 263; chapter 16, p. 334; and chapter 20, pp. 404-405. We find these approaches taken even among proponents of the holistic method: textual emendation—Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, verse 11:21, p. 186; secondary status—Greenberg to 39:25, Schwartz, p. 53; viewing the verse as simply an exception—Greenberg to 15:63; Block, Ezekiel 1-24, p. 520.18) As put forth by Westermann in C. Westermann, Prophetic Prophecies of Salvation in the Old Testament (trans. Keith Crim; Louisville, 1991), pp. 168-186.


This paper, however, follows the holistic method of interpretation, as put forth by Moshe Greenberg in his commentary to Ezekiel.19 According to this method, a prophecy is best understood on the basis of a “close reading” of the text, taking into account its own internal structure, form and syntax. The question of secondary material is also decided according to the passage itself, rather than in light of the other texts in the unit under discussion.20

The fact that, as will be demonstrated, each of Ezekiel’s restoration prophe-cies contains unique features that do not appear in the others suggests that we should regard these features as integral parts of his depiction of Israel’s restoration. Once the reader identifies a unique element within each of Eze-kiel’s restoration prophecies, he might prefer not to view these elements as “deviant” or secondary, as previous studies have suggested. Secondly, struc-tural clues—namely, the fact that these unique features appear specifically in the conclusion to each unit, where they emphasize or reinforce motifs in the unit in question—also support the contention that these elements are authen-tic and integral to the prophecies. In the pages that follow, an attempt is made to demonstrate that this is the case in each of Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies.

Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies can be divided into two main categories: those delivered before Jerusalem’s fall, and those spoken after the Fall. A third, minor unit is the prophecies foreseeing the restoration of Tyre and Sidon. This study will address each category independently, beginning with the pre-Fall prophecies.

A. The Pre-Fall Oracles

Ezekiel’s pre-Fall prophecies of Israel’s future restoration comprise three dis-tinct units:21 chapter 11, which was delivered in the sixth year (as indicated in 8:1); chapter 16 (undated); and chapter 20, delivered in the seventh year (20:1).22

19) Ezekiel 1-20, pp. 18-27, and throughout Greenberg’s commentary in Ezekiel 21-37, AB (1997). See also Kasher, Ezekiel 1-24, p. 27, based on Kaufmann.20) See M. Weiss, Ha-mikra Ki-dmuto (Jerusalem, 1967), pp. 136-155 (Hebrew).21) One might wish to add to this list the prophecy recorded in 17:22-24. We chose not to include it because it simply presents an analogy about a leader, rather than describing Israel’s overall restoration, and because of the tendency to interpret it as a description of the Babylo-nian emperor.22) See Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 1, p. 348 (chapter 16); Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, p. 294 (chapter 11) and p. 363 (chapter 20).


1) Ezek 11:14-21The first of Ezekiel’s pre-Fall restoration prophecies appears in chapter 11 (verses 14-21) and was delivered at a time when the Temple’s destruction was already a foregone conclusion,23 as indicated by the preceding chapters’ descriptions of the divine presence leaving Jerusalem. For this reason, the prophet does not issue a call for repentance in this context. The primary pur-pose of the oracles in this unit is to convince the exiled residents in Babylonia that the Temple’s days in Jerusalem are numbered. It is only once the prophet learns of the Temple’s destruction, in chapter 33, that he presents a more extensive description of Israel’s restoration. In verse 18, however, he predicts Israel’s future repentance as part of his description of their restoration and return to their homeland: “When they arrive there, they will remove all its loathsome and abominable things from it”. This verse appears to mark a sharp departure from Ezekiel’s theology, according to which Israel’s restora-tion does not depend upon their repentance.24 In Ezekiel’s prophecies, the ingathering of the exiles and their return to their land results not from a change in their behavior, but rather from God’s need to sanctify his name in the eyes of the nations.25 Here, however, Ezekiel explicitly includes the nation’s repentance as part of the restoration process. Some scholars propose viewing verse 17 as but a secondary addendum to the text, to which verse 18 was then appended. According to this theory, verses 14-16 and 19-21 emerge as the primary, essential text, thus undermining the significance of the atypi-cal message conveyed in verse 18.26

More likely, however, the explanation for this divergence from Ezekiel’s general approach can be found in this unit’s concluding verse (21), which gives rise to numerous difficulties of its own:27 “But those whose hearts go after their heart-of-loathsome-and-abominable things [לב תועבותיהם, לב I will bring their conduct down on their heads . . .”. A number of—[שיקוציהםcommentators understood the prophet as speaking here not of the exiles, whose restoration and repentance he had just described in verse 18, but rather of the sins committed by the residents of Jerusalem.28 In fact, some

23) Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”, pp. 46-47.24) See Andrew R. Main, “Ezekiel and the Ethics of Exile”, OTM (2001), p. 212. 25) As noted by Schwartz; however, contrary to his contention, Israel’s restoration does not appear to serve as a punishment. See Schwartz, pp. 55-56. 26) Joyce, Divine Initiative, p. 162, note 36.27) See Block, Ezekiel, Chapters 1-24, p. 355, who enumerates the textual and thematic difficul-ties entailed in interpreting this verse. 28) See Kasher, Ezekiel 1-24, p. 275.


suggest emending אל לב (“to the heart”) to ואלה (“but these”, referring to the Jerusalemites).29 But it is also possible to accept the plain reading of v. 21, as referring to the returning exiles, if one assumes that this concluding verse elu-cidates the message conveyed in the preceding verses, emphasizing that the people’s sins remain in their hearts. Their persistent sinfulness requires God himself to “remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, so that they follow my laws and carefully execute my judgments” (v. 19). Only divine intervention can effect the removal of the detestable and idolatrous things.30

If so, then this prophecy demonstrates the developing God-Israel relation-ship. God at first wanted the returnees to eliminate idolatry, but their unwill-ingness to acquiesce compels him to perform this task himself, by replacing their hearts. In the context of the dispute between the exiles and the Jerusa-lemites as to the future of the exiles, this prophecy stresses that, contrary to the opinion of the Jerusalemites, the exiles will indeed return despite their unrelenting sinfulness, not because they are righteous or deserving or other-wise favored, but because God will “give them a heart of flesh so that they follow my laws”. Thus, the concluding verse of this unit serves to clarify and stress the unique motif of this prophecy—God’s compelling the exiles to eliminate idolatry in advance of their return.

2) Ezek 16:59-63The second unit predicting Israel’s restoration is found in Ezek 16:59-63, and concludes one of the more difficult oracles in the book. Middlemas31 summa-rizes the general consensus among critics concerning these verses, as follows:

The concluding message appears odd, given the intent of the allegory to illustrate divine judgment on the city. Moreover passages of restoration fit better with the prophecies of salvation in the second half of the book. The insertion of posi-tive passages in the midst of language of overriding judgment suggests editorial activity.

29) Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, pp. 186, 191.30) See Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”, pp. 58-59.31) J. Middlemas, The Templeless Age (Louisville, 2007), p. 82. See also Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 1, p. 353; W. Eichrodt, Ezekiel—A Commentary (OTL; London, 1970), p. 216 (German original: Der Prophet Hesekiel [ATD 22]; Göttingen, 1965-1966).


In truth, the peculiarity of these verses lies not only in their context, but also in their content.32 Besides the jarring absence of basic themes found in all the other restoration prophecies, one finds several unusual elements, such as the establishment of “an everlasting covenant”33 and divine kappara (כפרה)—purification from sin, though not forgiveness—for the people’s iniquity.34 The mention of kappara has led some scholars to deny this prophecy’s attribution to Ezekiel. Others propose that it represents the pre-Fall viewpoint from which the future covenant continues the past one, as opposed to Ezekiel’s post-Fall stance, whereby he foresees the emergence of a new and different covenant.35

It would seem, however, that this prophecy may indeed be reconciled with Ezekiel’s overall approach,36 and does not necessarily reflect a shift in view-point.37 He seeks to emphasize that the relationship between God and Israel remains intact despite the latter’s sins and breach of the covenant. The cove-nant of which the prophet speaks is the original covenant, which God will recall in spite of all that has transpired.38 Israel has failed to correct their behavior, but their ancient covenant with God will ensure that their bond will not be severed. For this reason, Ezekiel adds in the context of kappara sharp words of condemnation, with which he deliberately concludes this unit: “So you will remember and be ashamed and not be able to open your mouth again because of your disgrace, when I absolve you from all you have done, declares Lord YHWH” (v. 63). He chides them for their intransigence which necessitated that they be restored solely on the basis of their ancient covenant, rather than their own worthiness.

Here, too, it is in the concluding verse where the prophecy’s unique mes-sage is most clearly expressed.

32) According to the method of form criticism, oracles of doom and judgment are expected to be kept separate from those of salvation, which is why these verses might seem “odd”. See C. Westermann, cited above, note 15.33) See Kasher, “Remnant, Repentance and Covenant in the Book of Ezekiel”, Beth Mikra 44 (1999), pp. 25-27; Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”, p. 48.34) Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”, p. 49, and note 18. 35) Kasher, for example, writes, “Here, the prophet is optimistic, and still sees the future as the continuation of the past, whereas in the later chapters, composed after the Fall, the prophet speaks very critically of the past, and therefore sees the future in a different light than the past” (Kasher, Ezekiel 1-24, p. 344). 36) Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, p. 297.37) Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, pp. 303-304.38) See Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”, p. 60.


3) Ezek 20:33-44The third, and latest, of the pre-Fall restoration prophecies, which appears in Ezek 20:33-44, is similarly complex, leading scholars to view some of its ele-ments as secondary.39 Its first section (vv. 33-39) begins with a description God’s anger (33-34), followed by a warning of Israel’s judgment in the “wil-derness of the peoples” and the elimination of the rebels and transgressors from among those slated to enter the land (35-38). This section then con-cludes by observing Israel’s idolatrous practices (39). The prophecy’s second section (40-44) describes cultic worship in the land of Israel, emphasizing that Israel’s fate is not dependent on its behavior: despite its sinful behavior, God will save Israel in order to sanctify his name among the nations. This prophecy’s final verse, which concludes the prophet’s historical overview, highlights the severity of the people’s betrayal by making reference to their “evil ways and corrupt deeds” (v. 44), employing the unusual construction which is unique to this prophecy.40 ,(”corrupt deeds“) עלילות נשחתות

Thus, all three of Ezekiel’s pre-destruction restoration prophecies contain unique elements that are not found in other restoration prophecies, and, besides conveying the promise of restoration, inform the people that it is their betrayal that causes the imminent Fall. The unique feature of each unit can be identified by carefully evaluating its content and paying particular attention to its concluding clause: “their loathsome and abominable things” (chapter 11), the people’s “shame” (chapter 16), and their “evil ways and cor-rupt deeds” (chapter 20). Rather than being evidence of secondary interpola-tion, these unique features are used by the prophet himself in order to highlight Israel’s sinfulness and the fact that the people remain stubbornly defiant both before and after the Fall. They should thus be seen as integral elements of the prophet’s message in each context, rather than secondary material.

B. Post-Fall Restoration Prophecies

Ezekiel’s post-destruction restoration prophecies, which are not dated, appear within the larger unit of chapters 33-39, specifically in chapters 34, 36, 37,

39) See Zimmerli, Ezechiel 1, pp. 404-406. 40) The claim that the nation had not repented has no bearing on the question as to the extent to which they acknowledged their sinfulness. Main concludes that the exiles’ passivity mirrors their situation in Babylonia. See Andrew R. Main, “Ezekiel and the Ethics of Exile”, OTM (2001), pp. 203-256.


and 39. As will be shown, they each contain unique features that are not found in other restoration prophecies.

1) Ezek 34The prophecy in chapter 34 serves as a transition between the pre-Fall descriptions of restoration, which all conclude by emphasizing God’s anger, and the post-Fall prophecies, which are characterized by a discernibly gentler tone.41 Ezekiel describes a shepherd tenderly caring for his flock and bringing back the sheep that have strayed (11-17; 22-29), an image which, as it later emerges, is intended as an analogy of God’s care for his people: “And you, my flock, the flock of my pasturage, you are human—I am your God . . .” (31).42 The chapter’s final verses (25-30) mark a fundamental shift from the earlier prophecies,43 in that the prophet no longer addresses the past, but rather con-cludes solely with God’s words of encouragement to his people.44

2) Ezek 36:16-3845

The restoration prophecies in chapters 36 (16-38) and 37 (15-28) mark the only instance where the prophet depicts Israel’s process of purification

41) As noted by Kasher, Ezekiel 25-48, p. 652.42) It would appear that verses 30 and 31 both serve to conclude the chapter, each forming its own conclusion. Regarding the relationship between these two verses, see the different theories suggested in the following commentaries: Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, p. 704; Block, Ezekiel 25-28, pp. 306-308; Kasher, Ezekiel 25-48, p. 672.43) Thus, for example, the construction “covenant of peace” (25) presents a new description of the relationship between God and the people. See Main, “Ezekiel and the Ethics of Exile”, p. 248.44) See Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 2, p. 221, who refers to these verses as a “blessing” to the people. 45) The discussion of these verses is based on the MT, despite the fact that this oracle’s unity has been undermined by the discovery of early translations in which vv. 23c-38 are missing. These manuscripts include a Greek translation (Chester-Beatty-Scheide, p. 967), which dates to the second or third century C.E., and an early Latin translation Vetus Latina, found in the sixth-century Old Latin manuscript Codex Wirceburgensis. The absence of the verses in question in these sources led to a close linguistic examination of this prophetic unit, which identified stylis-tically unique linguistic changes. For a discussion, see J. Lust, “Ezekiel 36-40 in the Oldest Greek Manuscript”, CBQ 43 (1981), pp. 517-533. But see A. S. Crane’s comprehensive discus-sion of Ezekiel 36-39 as found in the MT in comparison to the translations (Israel’s Restoration: A Textual-Comparative Exploration of Ezekiel 36-39 [VTSup 122; Leiden, 2008], pp. 62-86, 207-264). Although, as compared to other parts of Ezekiel, unique elements are identifiable in these verses, it is not possible to conclude which text is preferable (see ibid., pp. 263-264, where Crane follows in the wake of E. Tov, “Recensional Differences in Ezekiel”, in The Greek and Hebrew Bible [VTSup 72; Leiden, 1999], pp. 397-410).


(36:24-25, 33; 37:23). Chapter 36 presents a particularly detailed descrip-tion, foreseeing God’s sprinkling of water on the people, and their purifica-tion from defilement and sin.46 God’s initiative in purifying Israel is an inevitable consequence of their persistent wrongdoing (and is perhaps also a necessary precondition for the Temple’s restoration), and this ceremony thus assumes great importance.47

As in the other chapters discussed, the unique prophetic message of chap-ter 36 can be inferred from the rhetorical devices employed by the prophet. Ezekiel first emphasizes the desecration of God’s name that results from Isra-el’s dispersion (three times in verses 20-22), using the construction שם קדשי (my holy name), the most common reference to the divine name in Ezekiel. In verse 23, however, the prophet employs the unique construction שמי הגדול (my great name), a syntactical shift that highlights the shift in his prophetic message. Whereas until now Ezekiel made reference to God’s name only in describing its desecration as a result of Israel’s sins, from this point he speaks of God’s name in regard to its being sanctified in the eyes of the nations.

The prophet concludes this prophecy by foreseeing the time when, after the nation’s purification, the desolate towns will again be filled with inhabit-ants, and the people will have a renewed awareness of God: “so shall the [once] ruined towns be filled with human flocks, and they shall know that I am YHWH” (v. 38). The process of purification will result in the restoration of both the people and the people’s ancient loyalty to God. As the nation failed to purify themselves, God will initiate this process and thereby usher in the period when “they shall know that I am YHWH”.

Once again, the unique prophetic message of this prophecy—the theme of national purification—is magnified in the prophecy’s final verse, which fore-sees the end result of this process.

3) 37:15-28Chapter 37 (15-28) includes four unique promises, which appear nowhere else throughout the book: the nation’s permanent dwelling in their land

46) See M. Greenberg, “Salvation of the Impenitent ‘ad majorem dei gloriam’: Ezek 36:16-32”, in Jan Assmann and Guy G. Stroumsa (ed.), Transformations of the Inner Self in Ancient Reli-gions (Leiden, 1999), pp. 263-271. Kasher likewise noted the unique promise in this prophecy of abundant cattle, in addition to the promise of abundant people. See Kasher, Ezekiel 25-48, p. 731.47) Regarding the meaning and significance of this purification ceremony, see Tova Ganzel, “The Purification of the People in Ezekiel: The Pentateuchal Background”, Beth Mikra 53 (2008), pp. 47-58 (Hebrew).


(v. 25), their renewed covenant with God (v. 26), the unification of the two kingdoms into a single nation with one leadership (vv. 19, 22), and the ever-lasting restoration of the Temple (v. 26). The prophecy’s concluding verse summarizes these themes by foreseeing the impression that the Temple’s ever-lasting presence amidst a unified kingdom will have upon the other nations: “And the nations shall know that I YHWH sanctify Israel, by my sanctuary’s being in their midst eternally” (v. 28).48

4) Ezek 39:21-29The final restoration prophecy, found in Ezek 39:21-29, contains unique ele-ments that relate to its role as the concluding prophecy of restoration in Eze-kiel. It begins by describing a display of divine glory among the nations, and proceeds to affirm God’s fair judgment of Israel, insisting that it was their deeds that brought their exile and led God to abandon them (23). Ezekiel employs a unique construction in reference to the people—שבות יעקב (“the fortunes of Jacob”—v. 25)—and a unique verb to describe their return to the land: אותם ,Moreover .(when I have brought them back”—v. 27“) בשובבי God has mercy on Israel (ישראל בית and is zealous for his holy 49(ורחמתי כל name (קדשי לשם Commentators treat these expressions as .(v. 25) (וקנאתי anomalous or secondary,50 but these concluding verses actually appear to sig-nify deliberate changes made by Ezekiel in order to conclude his post-Fall restoration prophecies on a conciliatory note, in contrast to the harsh, con-demning tone that characterizes the pre-Fall prophecies.51

The prophet expresses this shift not only by introducing entirely new ter-minology into his prophetic lexicon, but also through the inverted use of familiar terms. In Ezekiel 22, for example, the ingathering takes place in anger: “I will collect [וכנסתי] you and blow on you the fire of my wrath” (v. 21). Here, in the post-Fall prophecy in Ezekiel 39, this process is described

48) Based on textual comparisons, Crane observes that the restoration prophecies in chapters 36-7 correspond to a number of common Scriptural motifs, and Ezekiel employs these motifs in accordance with his socio-political-theological worldview. See A. Crane, Israel’s Restoration: A Textual-Comparative Exploration of Ezekiel 36-39 (Leiden, 2008), pp. 136-137. The motifs noted in this paper are consistent with this trend.49) The assemblage of unusual expressions throughout this prophetic unit (verses 21-29) does not, in the view of this writer, support the conclusion that specifically verse 25 constitutes a secondary passage. 50) Zimmerli, Ezechiel, 2, p. 320.51) See Kasher, Ezekiel 25-48, pp. 760-763, who concludes that the prophet’s conciliatory remarks in verses 25-29 mark his summary of the entire unit of redemption (chapters 34-37).


with the same verb, but from the precise opposite perspective: “When . . . I gather them [וכנסתים] back into their land and leave none of them behind” (v. 28). A more glaring example is the use of the root שפך (“pour”) at the end of this prophecy. This root appears thirty-three times in Ezekiel, and, until chapter 39, the verb is used exclusively in reference to God’s wrath. In chap-ter 39, however, Ezekiel employs this term in reference to the pouring of the divine spirit on Israel: “I will never again hide my face from them, for I will pour out my spirit upon the House of Israel” (v. 29).52

It is worth noting the clear progression that characterizes Ezekiel’s post-Fall restoration prophecies. He foresees first the nation’s future leader, and then the purification ritual which will result in the restoration of the desolate cit-ies. The next stage in the process is the reemergence of the Temple, and, ulti-mately, as these prophecies conclude, the emanation of the divine spirit. Ezekiel envisions a steady, multistage process of restoration, which, though complex and difficult, will eventually yield the desired outcome of complete national restoration. It appears that the post-Fall prophecies incorporate opti-mistic elements, the hopeful message of Israel’s future, offering a promise of restoration and compassion to a people ravaged by exile and despair.

We should also note the difference between the pre- and post-Fall prophe-cies with regard to the nation’s sins. Although both sets of prophecies include references to Israel’s sins, none of the post-Fall prophecies concludes with such a reference; the sins are always mentioned earlier in the prophecy. This is in direct contrast to the series of pre-Fall prophecies, in which the Ezekiel occasionally concludes a prophecy by emphasizing the people’s sinfulness. (See, for example, 36:31-32; 37:23; 39:23-24, as opposed to 11:21; 16:63; and 20 43-44.) In the post-Fall prophecies, Ezekiel seeks to stress the positive aspects of his message and therefore concludes with predictions of restora-tion, rather than with grim reminders of the people’s unworthiness.

C. Restoration Prophecies Directed to Other Nations

Ezekiel delivers another restoration prophecy (28:25-26) shortly after the Temple’s destruction (as dated in 26:1), with which he concludes his proph-ecy to Tyre and Sidon (chapter 28). Several elements of the prophecy to Tyre (such as the references to its Temple’s desecration and the cherubs’ exile from paradise) point to a parallel between that city and Jerusalem, which gives rise

52) Regarding the significance of the construction, שפך רוח (pouring of spirit) in the restoration prophecies of Ezekiel, see J. Robson, “Word and Spirit in Ezekiel”, LHBOTS 447 (2008), pp. 213-262.


to the possible misconception that Tyre has now become God’s chosen city. This false impression might be reinforced by Tyre’s escape from conquest and its prosperity at a time when Israel was dispersed and without a temple. Eze-kiel therefore felt compelled to dispel this fallacy by concluding his prophecy to Tyre by predicting Israel’s restoration.53

Ezekiel emphasizes Israel’s ultimate return to the land God granted to its ancestor Jacob, described here as “the servant of God”, and that God will judge the hostile nations.54 The consistent references to Israel in the third person clearly demonstrate the atypical nature of this prophecy’s intended audience. The prophecy further foresees the sanctification of God in the sight of the nations through Israel, and Israel’s security once it returns to its land (v. 26; 37:25-27). Here, too, Ezekiel summarizes the crux of his prophetic message in the prophecy’s concluding verse, where he foresees God visiting retribution upon the nations (v. 26).

D. The Optimistic Tone of Ezekiel’s Prophecies

Thus, each of Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies contain a unique message which receives emphasis in the prophecy’s concluding verse. The three pre-Fall prophecies conclude with, respectively, God’s unrealized hope of the elimination of idolatry, the everlasting God-Israel covenant, and the ire evoked by Israel’s ongoing idolatrous rituals. By contrast, Ezekiel’s four post-Fall restoration prophecies emphasize more positive aspects of the future res-toration, which he once again underscores through the concluding verse of each prophecy. Thus, chapter 34’s parable of the future leader concludes with Israel’s relationship with God; chapter 36’s prediction of Israel’s purification concludes with the resettling of the ruined cities; and chapter 37’s inclusion of the Northern Kingdom in the future restoration ends with the promise that the future Temple will endure forever. Finally, chapter 39 concludes all of Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies, as for the first time he describes God as merciful, through the inversion of various expressions used earlier to express God’s fury.

As opposed to the conclusion that the restoration is nothing but a divine need which God performs reluctantly, and that Israel’s return occurs force-

53) For the historical, economic and political ties between Judea and Tyre in this period, see M. Alonso Corral, Ezekiel’s Prophecies Against Tyre: Historical Reality and Motivations (Rome, 2002). 54) Reasons for the prophet’s specific mention of Jacob are proposed by Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, pp. 595-596.


fully and angrily,55 a closer reading of the text reveals that God’s attitude toward the future restoration also contains an optimistic element, in addition to his disappointment and anger. These prophecies certainly differ from the “classic” prophetic predictions of redemption, which speak in terms of national salvation, but they nevertheless include a degree of optimism that must not be overlooked.

Thus, a more nuanced description of Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies must stress each prophecy’s specific content, while noting their shared structural features. It must also reexamine the prevailing assumption that unusual con-tent reflects secondary material. This paper suggests that to the contrary, the atypical features of each of Ezekiel’s restoration prophecies very likely consti-tute an integral part of these prophecies. This discussion also sheds light on Ezekiel’s consistent insertion of unique features in his restoration prophecies and their possible significance.

55) Schwartz, “Ezekiel’s Dim View”, p. 58, and especially p. 64.

Date post:	14-May-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	biu
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

The Descriptions of the Restoration of Israel in Ezekiel

Documents