Q: In Ezek, what is the importance of having the book of Ezekiel in the Bible?
A: God had not forgotten the Jews, and He was not through with them. As Jeremiah's message said the Lord had not forgotten them, but rather was punishing them and would later build and plant them, Ezekiel continued telling the people that God had not forgotten them during the exile either. Yes, many Jews would forget God and become assimilated with the nations around them, but a remnant would come back to God and return to the land. Today, if a Christian or group of Christians have messed up and turned away from God, God has not forgotten them either. Though there may be a "path to follow" for the disobedient Christians, God can still use them again for His glory.
In addition, Ezekiel gives us some glimpses of heavenly glory, the future Temple, and God's heart. We can learn some things in Ezekiel about real justice, as God describes it, and see that everything that happens on earth is not necessarily just.
Q: In Ezek 1, Ezek 8, and Rev 4, since God does not have the limitation of a physical body, what was Ezekiel seeing?
A: There are three points to consider in the answer.
1. In a vision, God can appear however He wishes.
2. However, God does have a physical image, Jesus Christ, as Colossians 1:15 shows.
3. In addition, some Christians interpret the enthroned one in Revelation4 as God the Father, which likely would make Ezekiel’s vision one of God the Father, too.
Q: In Ezek 1:1, what does "in the thirtieth year" mean?
A: Both the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1040 and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1227 says it probably referred to Ezekiel's age, and adds that thirty years old was the age a priest would enter the Lord's service. The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.583 says the same, though emphasizing that this is not at all certain.
Q: In Ezek 1:3 and Ezek 10:20, where was the Kebar (or Chebar) River?
A: This was a canal (man-made river) which flowed into the Euphrates River south of Babylon. The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.584 mentions that it was one of the larger canals, and it original Akkadian name was nar Kabari, meaning Grand Canal.
Q: In Ezek 1:4, what was significant about the windstorm coming from the north?
A: Because of the weather patterns, storms usually came from the north or the northwest. Because of geography, invasions from Empires other than Egypt always came from the north. Like a windstorm, this was the direction one could look to wait for God’s judgment would come, since the Assyrians and Babylonians invaded from that direction.
Q: Does Ezek 1:5-28 illustrate a UFO?
A: Not in the sense commonly understood. God’s angels were flying objects, and the one true God of the Bible is unidentified by many people. It is obvious that this refers to God and the cherubim.
Nevertheless, from a human psychological perspective, it is interesting that many people find it so much easier to ascribe anything unusual to extra-terrestrial beings than to believe in the most important an extra-terrestrial being: the Creator. See When Cultists Ask p.84-85 and When Critics Ask p.283-284 for a different, but complementary answer.
Q: In Ezek 1:5-28, what is the proper way to interpret visions such as this?
A: The vision was written in terms the human writer and immediate audience would understand. The best commentary on scripture is scripture itself. When there is a similar passage or concept, the similarity is usually not just a coincidence. They should be thought of as likely the same, unless there is a contextual reason (not just doctrinal preference) to view them otherwise.
While we do not understand everything about this vision, we can make observations that are probably (but not certainly) correct about this vision by relating it to what is revealed elsewhere in Scripture.
Q: In Ezek 1:5-28, what does this vision mean?
A: This vision is not primarily to communicate concepts or definitions, but rather a picture. Ezekiel saw a vision of God enthroned. Later, a very similar vision would show God’s glory leaving His temple in Jerusalem. As to interpreting the details of this vision, one needs only to compare this with Isaiah 6 and Revelation 4 and 5.
Q: In Ezek 1:22, what is the firmament of crystal?
A: This likely is the sea of glass, as clear as crystal, mentioned in Revelation 4:6.
Q: In Ezek 1:28, what is the glory of the Lord here?
A: This is also called the "Shekinah glory", and was manifested by the brilliant appearance and general awe that surrounded God’s throne.
See 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.182-183 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 2:1 and elsewhere, why does God frequently call Ezekiel "son of man"?
A: Perhaps to emphasize the "other-ness" of God. Ezekiel was a human, ministering to humans, with a message from a non-human, who was greater than humans could even imagine.
Q: In Ezek 2:2; 3:24, what spirit entered into Ezekiel here?
A: This is the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not limited to being in only one place at one time.
Q: In Ezek 2:5, what was the point of sending a prophet to a stiff-necked people, since God already knew many of whom would not accept His words through Ezekiel?
A: God was not required to give people who rejected Him any further opportunity for repentance. Yet, God was merciful enough to send prophets to stiff-necked people, even while knowing that only a few of them would turn and repent.
Q: In Ezek 2:6, why were the rebellious people compared to scorpions?
A: Scorpions are unusual animals. They do not run or show any fear. They lie in wait for prey, and their tails are very effective against most other insects. Fearlessly trusting in the power of their tails seems foolish when they are up against a person’s boot or shovel.
Q: In Ezek 2:9-33 and Rev 10:8-11, in these visions, why was God having his servants eat and swallow a book?
A: In these visions, both Ezekiel and John the apostle, had to tell a message, and this signified that the message was straight from God. We are likewise to "digest" God’s word and speak it forth. The truth of God’s word is compared to milk and meat in Hebrews 6.
Q: In Ezek 3:9 (KJV), what is an adamant stone?
A: There is some uncertainty as to which hard mineral is intended. The NIV simply translates this as the hardest stone.
Q: In Ezek 3:15, where is Tel-Abib?
A: This was a town south of Babylon on the Kebar River (really canal). The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1670 says the modern Israeli town of Tel-Aviv is named after Tel-abib.
Q: In Ezek 3:17-21, does this show that people can lose their salvation?
A: Christians have three views:
1. Genuine believers cannot lose their salvation.
2. Genuine believers, in New Testament times, cannot lose their salvation.
3. Genuine believers can lose their salvation.
See the discussion on Heb 3:6 and Heb 3:14 for the answer.
Q: In Ezek 3:17-21 and Ezek 33:2-7, what is the significance of the watchman?
A: The watchman stood on the city wall watching for the enemy. If all the watchmen fell asleep or left their posts, the city would be effectively unguarded, since the guards would be asleep. If at least one watchman was awake, and sounded an alarm when the enemy came, the entire army could wake up and fight them off.
Today, if all the watchmen in a church were asleep, Satan would have an easy time. What is observed today in some parts is that the watchmen are awake, but some Pentecostal and charismatic leaders despise them as "heresy hunters". Watching against heresies is an old occupation, going all the way back to the apostles John and Paul. If one did not want to pay attention to books warning against heresies, one would want to throw out Galatians, 1 John, and Jude.
See 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.183 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 3:17-21, how are we to be watchmen today?
A: As ambassadors for Christ, we have a responsibility to do our job and tell others God’s word. God judges our ministry not just on how many people have been saved through our words, but on how many we have told.
Q: In Ezek 3:18,20, why would Ezekiel be responsible for the death of the wicked that he did not warn?
A: God gave Ezekiel a responsibility to warn others, and Ezekiel would be held accountable for failing to carry out his responsibilities. Paul apparently felt a similar obligation Romans 1:14.
Q: In Ezek 3:20, when a righteous person turns away from God, why does God not remember the righteous things the man did?
A: If one believed in salvation by works, one might conclude that God sort of "averaged" the good and bad deeds everyone did. However, Ezekiel 3:20 contradicts this false idea. Being in right relationship with God, or turning away from Him, is more important the number of good or bad works. Even the greatest number of the best of our works are insufficient to merit us salvation.
Q: In Ezek 3:20, does God forget some things?
A: It depends on your definition of forget.
No, God does not forget, in the sense that He loses information, or did not know what went on in our past, present, or future. God knows everything, and Psalm 139 says that all the days ordained for us were written in His book.
Yes, God does forget, here and in other places, in the sense that He does not judge something or count something as occurring. For example, because of Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross, God forgets our iniquities.
Q: In Ezek 3:20, why does God lay a stumbling block before a man who turns from his righteousness?
A: We can see at least three reasons.
A test to see what is in the person’s heart to do.
Discipline, bringing painful and negative consequences to help persuade the man to turn back to God.
Finally, death of a disobedient believer can keep him from messing up his life, and the lives of others, even more.
Q: In Ezek 3:21, how does Ezekiel warning a man deliver Ezekiel’s soul?
A: This verse is not speaking of Ezekiel’s salvation or going to Heaven, but rather the account He will have to give when Ezekiel stands before God. Believers will receive greater or lesser rewards in Heaven, based on their works, according to 1 Corinthians 3:12-15.
Q: In Ezek 3:21, how was God himself making Ezekiel’s tongue unable to speak?
A: Ezekiel was a godly man, but obviously he would say things God would not want Him to say, at least not at that time. Obedient believers today still need to watch what they say, especially when they have anger, as James 1:19-20 shows. Sometimes you can say things that are correct but not useful to God. Sometimes you can want to say what are good things to say, but your timing is not what God wants.
Q: In Ezek 3:26, why was God Himself even deliberately putting a barrier on an obedient believer who spoke God’s word?
A: The answer can be seen in Ezekiel 3:27. God did not want Ezekiel just to speak "good" words, He wanted Ezekiel to speak only the "best" words, that is, words directly from God. He wanted Ezekiel to speak to the people God desired, at the time God desired. Paul was in a similar situation in Acts 16:6-7, where the Holy Spirit prohibited Paul from speaking in the Roman province of Asia and Bithynia at that time. See also the previous question for more discussion.
Q: In Ezek 4-5, why did Ezekiel prophesy through the actions of these role-plays instead of just using words?
A: God can use any means He desires. While scripture does not say, we can see some good reasons. God previous sent other prophets to the people, and most of the people still did not turn back to God. At this point, it was not that the people needed to be taught new information, rather they needed rebuke for not following the truth they already knew. In addition to just clearly telling the people, God used these role-plays to graphically illustrate to the people the imminent consequences of their continuing to sin.
Today, it is good to use a variety of means of input in communicating to others.
Q: In Ezek 4:1 (KJV), what is a "tile" and what does "pourtray" mean?
A: A tile was a tablet, usually made out of clay. "Pourtray" means to "portray".
Q: In Ezek 4:4-6, how could Ezekiel never move all this time?
A: Ezekiel was not in this position 24 hours a day, because in Ezekiel 4:8-12, he was still to cook food, eat and drink. See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1235 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 4:4-6, did these days represent years in the past and present, or the future?
A: While a few people have thought they represent years in the future, they must be years that had already passed, up through the present for the following reasons.
1. These represented years of their sin, not the years of their punishment.
2. If it were future, it would be strange for God to rebuke them for sins that they had not yet committed and not speak about the sins they had already done.
See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1235-1236 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 4:4-5,9, what is the significance of 390 days representing 390 years of Israel’s sin?
A: While the Septuagint says 190 days, all of the Hebrew manuscripts say 390 days. Given that they had a 360-day year, this would go back to 1106 B.C.
This means that the sin God is judging them for did not start with the divided Kingdom, but went all the way back to the time of Saul. Even during the time of King David, many in Israel and Judah were still practicing idolatry.
The idolatry of the Israelites was judged within a generation under the time of the judges. After they had a king, the idolatry was not judged, but continued to build. Today, some sins receive judgment immediately, and others do not, but the judgment builds up.
Q: In Ezek 4:6, what is the significance of a year of lying down, one day for each year, for the sins of Judah?
A: Given that they had a 360-day year, this would be 355 of our years. Either:
a) The sins were up to the current time, which would mean that Israel’s sin started about 30 years before Judah’s.
b) Judah’s period of gross sin started much later, and thus the judgment came later.
Q: In Ezek 4:12, why was Ezekiel asked to make barley cakes, using human dung as fuel?
A: This demonstrated vividly how the Jew would be reduced to cooking their food.
Q: In Ezek 4:12-15, why did God change His command once Ezekiel complained?
A: God already knew Ezekiel would raise this objection. God could have communicated this in three ways.
1. Force Ezekiel to use human dung. Others could have criticized Ezekiel for breaking the sanitary laws of the Torah.
2. Initially tell Ezekiel to use animal dung. This would have given the wrong impression that they would be using only animal dung, and taken away from the seriousness of the warning.
3. Initially tell Ezekiel to use human dung. When Ezekiel objected, as any Jew would, God said He would relent and allow animal dung instead. This shows that human dung would be used, but that Ezekiel did not have to use human dung. This is what God did.
Q: In Ezek 4:16 (KJV), how did Ezekiel drink water with "astonishment"?
A: The NIV translates this as "anxiety". In this role-play, Ezekiel was to drink water as though he was cautious and fearful of danger.
Q: In Ezek 4:17, Dan 3:24; Dan 4:19, Jer 14:9 (KJV), what does "astonied" mean here?
A: This King James version word means "astonished".
Q: In Ezek 5:6, how did God’s people change God’s justice into something more wicked than the nations around them?
A: Judgment in civil and criminal matters, in a just way, is pleasing to God. However, when the wicked go free and the righteous suffer unjustly, that turns "justice", which should be pleasing to God into a wicked thing.
Q: In Ezek 5:10, Jer 19:9; Lam 4:10, are these verses speaking of actual cannibalism?
A: Yes, it is. This is neither a commandment of God, not desired by God. Rather, God is using Ezekiel to sadly, but accurately, predict what God’s disobedient people will be forced to do, because of their sin and the severity of their judgment.
A concept to learn here is that sin often forces you to sin even more, both directly, and as in this case, indirectly through its consequences.
Q: In Ezek 5:11, how did they defile God’s sanctuary with vile images?
A: They put images in God’s holy place that did not belong there. God’s feeling about this idolatry in His temple was so strong, that in Ezekiel 6:5, God "promised" them he would lay their dead bodies before their dead idols. This strange imagery shows just how much God hates idols.
By the way, do you have any images of pagan idols in your house? See also the discussion on Isaiah 30:22 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 5:12, when would 1/3 of Jerusalem be killed by plague and famine, 1/3 killed by the sword, and 1/3 scattered.
A: This happened when the Babylonians captured Jerusalem in 587/586 B.C.
Q: In Ezek 5:17, what are the "evil beasts" here?
A: While some might consider lions and bears "evil", because of the harm they can do to people, that is not about what this verse is speaking. These are truly evil beasts in a moral sense. They are probably the locusts from the Abyss mentioned in Revelation 9:3-11.
Q: In Ezek 6:1 and Ezek 36:1, why was God speaking to the inanimate mountains of Israel?
A: The mountains were not evil of themselves. One might mistakenly think so, since much of the Canaanite religion centered on mountain shrines. However, God promises that Israelites will return and dwell on the mountains. See 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.183 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 6:10, does God do evil here?
A: Evil can mean physical harm, and it can also mean moral evil. God does do physical harm many times, but God does not do moral evil.
Q: In Ezek 7:4, why does God not have pity here?
A: God has compassion on all He has made according to Psalm 145:13,17. However, God’s patience has limits (1 Th 2:16; Gen 15:16; Rev 10:6; Psalm 2:5,12 Romans 2:5).
Q: In Ezek 7:23, why were they to make chains?
A: Ezekiel is pointing out a small detail to substantiate a major point. The invading army would need to go to the trouble to make large quantities of chains, because they would need many chains for all the Israelites they were going to enslave.
Q: In Ezek 8:1-6, what does the first part of this vision mean?
A: This is a glorious and yet tragic picture. It shows the glory of God, which the Temple was put on earth to represent. It also shows three types of gross sin, that even the Israelite leaders practiced.
See 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.183-184 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 8:11-12 (KJV), who were the "ancients" of the sons of Israel?
A: This means the elders among the Israelites.
Q: In Ezek 8:14, what was wrong with weeping for Tammuz?
A: Tammuz, also called Dumuzi, was a Sumerian, Babylonian, and Assyrian god of fertile crops. In Sumerian mythology, his wife, Inanna had him dragged off to Hell. (It’s a long story that we do not need to go into here.) Anyway, in some versions, he returns to earth every spring and departs for Hell every fall. A religious rite was for the women to weep at the season when he allegedly died, and to rejoice when he was revived.
Q: In Ezek 8:14, does the Christian practice of Good Friday and Easter Sunday owe something to the rite of Tammuz, as the skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.586 claims?
A: Asimov has no basis for this assertion. Jesus voluntarily choosing to die, and being raised from the dead, no more to die, is very different from Tammuz being taken to Hell against His will, and repeating the process every year.
Q: In Ezek 8:17, what does "putting the branch to their nose" mean?
A: The Hebrew we have today says "branch to their nose". However some Jewish commentators said this was "stench", and also "their" should be "my". Thus it might be "putting the stench to their nose" or "putting the stench to my [God’s] nose". See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1245 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 8:8-18, why did God let all of this wickedness continue for so long?
A: We do not know why God is as patient as He is, or exactly how He chooses the limits of His patience. We can see that on one hand, if there were no nation of Israel or Judah, God’s people would not prosper or grow. It would be more difficult to train their children and easier just to assimilate into the idolatrous cultures around them. One can see strong reasons for God to not want to exile His people.
On the other hand, the idolatry was not only serious, it was pervasive. During the time of Queen Jezebel, there were only 7,000 who had not bowed the knee to Baal (1 Kings 19:18). The idolatry included infant sacrifice and religious prostitution. When the idolatry was this pervasive, this bad, institutionalized, and getting worse, then perhaps exile and collecting the remnant was preferable to letting this situation continue.
Q: In Ezek 8:8-18, why will God pitilessly not hear them, even though they cry out to God?
A: When they rejected God and turned a deaf ear to His commands, God was not obligated to hear them either. Even so, God would have heard them [answered their prayer] if the had repented of all their wickedness. But, God does not answer the prayers of people who themselves turn a deaf ear to the poor (Proverbs 21:13) or cherish sin (Psalm 66:18).
Q: In Ezek 9:1-2, what were these six "men"?
A: These six beings obviously were angels. Ezekiel called them "men", because they had the appearance of human males.
Q: In Ezek 9:2, what is the higher gate?
A: This was the northern gate of the Temple in Jerusalem. It is possible that this also represents a gate between Heaven and earth.
Q: In Ezek 9:2, why would God have the destroying angels being at His sanctuary?
A: God apparently wanted the religious evildoers, and the evildoers with more knowledge, destroyed first.
Q: In Ezek 9:4, what was the mark?
A: The Hebrew speaks of this "mark" as the letter "Tau", from which our letter "T" came. Tau was the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, possibly indicating complete. It was the first letter of the Hebrew word "Torah". See the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1045 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 10:14, what does the face of a cherub look like?
A: If these were the same creatures mentioned in Revelation 4:7, the description of the four faces is the same, except that Revelation says "calf" instead of "cherub".
Q: In Ezek 10:15-19, why did God's presence leave Jerusalem, since Ps 132:13-14 says it would be His resting place forever?
A: Psalm 132:13-14 says that it will be God's resting place for eternity. Two points to consider in the answer.
1. Even though God's presence left the Temple in Jerusalem, that did not mean God did not know what was going on in Jerusalem anymore. His presence leaving Jerusalem does not necessarily equate to it not still being His resting place.
2. Even if it was not God's resting place during that time, the New Jerusalem still will be God's resting place. Psalm 132:13-14 says that God will dwell here forever; it does not specify when in the future God's resting place would be there never to leave.
Q: In Ezek 11:19 and Ezek 36:26, how and when will God give them a new heart of flesh?
A: Flesh here means a living heart, as opposed to a dead heart of stone. Since Pentecost, the Holy Spirit enters into the heart of every believer.
As 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.184 observes, flesh does not always stand for sinfulness in the Bible.
Q: In Ezek 12:7-14, what is Ezekiel prophesying here?
A: Ezekiel is prophesying the exile of the southern kingdom of Judah. The Israelites of the northern kingdom were already exiled, the southern kingdom was not yet exiled, until in the middle of Ezekiel’s ministry.
Q: In Ezek 13:4-6, what exactly were the prophets doing wrong?
A: They were doing two things wrong. They were not repairing the cracks and breaks in the spiritual life of the nations, and they were saying the Lord said things that the Lord did not say. Unfortunately, since that time, many other religious leaders have not addressed the cracks in their parishioners’ spiritual armor, and they have added many things as a part of tradition that God did not say. Many people have the attitude that if a pope, church council, or their religious leaders said something then it must be from God, because God would not allow these leaders to say something seriously wrong. God allowed it back then, and God allows it today. God gives us a means to tell, His Bible, but if people blindly follow their traditions and do not check things out with the Bible, the responsibility for being led astray is their own and not God’s.
Q: In Ezek 13:5 and Ezek 22:31, what does "standing in the gap" mean?
A: In battle, if the enemy made a hole in the city wall, defenders would stand in the gap. They would take the place of the wall and the defenders would not get in until the defenders retreated or were killed. Likewise in spiritual warfare, God looks for believers who will stand in the gap, to defend against Satan’s snares to rescue people.
Q: In Ezek 13:5 (KJV), what does "daub" mean?
A: They did not "daub" the walls, means they did not use mortar to repair the walls.
Q: In Ezek 13:18, how did these women hunt souls?
A: They searched for people to sell magic charms too. This might seem like a harmless occupation, but for every amulet they sold, the person buying it sinned against God.
Q: In Ezek 13:19, since God is in control, why are people murdered who should not have died, and some live who should not have lived?
A: This world is in a state of rebellion against God (1 John 5:19), and God has allowed this for a period of time. Many things happen here that are unjust, wicked, and break God’s heart. However, judgment will come, when God will set everything right.
Q: In Ezek 13:22 (KJV), should it say "strengthen the hand of the wicked" or "encouraged the wicked"?
A: Jay P. Green’s literal translation, as well as the King James version say "strengthen" which is the actual Hebrew word. The context though, was that the wicked would be encouraged to continue in their wickedness, as the NIV, NASB, NKJV translate.
Q: In Ezek 14:1-4 and Jeremiah 42:2-22, when is it not good to seek God’s counsel?
A: When you are not willing to follow it unless it is the answer you wanted. Romans 4:15 and 5:12 show that people are judged based on what they know. If you will not follow God unconditionally, then generally the less truth you know the better off it will be for you in the Judgment.
Q: In Ezek 14:5, how do people estrange God from themselves?
A: The nation of Israel estranged itself from God by refusing to stop worshipping their idols. Cherishing other sins can also bring the result that God chooses not to hear our prayers, according to Psalm 66:18.
Q: In Ezek 14:9, did God deceive the false prophets, and then destroy them for being false prophets?
A: God did not ever turn a good prophet into a bad one. Rather, God allowed bad prophets to be tempted to make prophecies, that in the end all would see were wrong.
In general, if some one wants to do evil, God "judicially hardens" them in the direction they want to go, as He did with Pharaoh. Jesus even told Judas, "what you are going to do, do quickly."
See When Critics Ask p.284 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 14:10, why are prophets especially singled out here?
A: Three points to consider in the answer.
1. The prophets encouraged the people who came to them to continue in their sin.
2. Thus, the prophets receive the punishment for the sins of the people who trusted in their words and continued in sin.
3. Then and today, it is very serious for a religious leader to make people feel more comfortable in their sin.
Q: In Ezek 14:14 and Ezek 28:3, who was Daniel/Danel here?
A: There are two views.
Perhaps this was the Hebrew Daniel, who was taken to Babylon as a youth.
There was an Aramean wise man known as Danel/Daniel.
Q: In Ezek 15, how was Judah like a vine instead of a tree?
A: While the wood of a tree is useful for many things, the stem of a vine is not strong enough, or straight enough, to be useful for much except perhaps to be burned.
Q: In Ezek 16, what is the point of this chapter?
A: This allegory illustrates their abominations in the context of an ungrateful adopted daughter. A parent’s feelings of being rejected in this situation are probably not as great as God’s feelings about His people rejecting Him.
Q: In Ezek 16:3,45, why did God say their ancestry was from Amorites and Hittites?
A: The Israelites were closely related to the Amorites.
1. Even from the beginning, Isaac and Jacob married wives from modern-day Syria.
2. In addition, there was intermarriage with the other peoples, including the Gibeonites, who were Hittites. For example, Uriah, Bathsheba’s original husband, was a Hittite.
3. Finally, they intermarried with the Amorite Canaanites, which they were not supposed to do.
The reason God brought this up is in Ezekiel 16:44, where He mentions them prostituting themselves to the other nations.
Q: In Ezek 16:5 (KJV), what is lothing?
A: This is the modern word "loathing".
Q: In Ezek 16:20-21, how did they sacrifice their children?
A: The Canaanites sacrificed their young children, by passing them through the fire, up to the age of two. Sadly, many Israelites adopted this wicked, ungodly practice.
Q: In Ezek 16:26-29, exactly how did the Jews prostitute themselves with the surrounding nations?
A: Starting with Solomon, kings of Judah and Israel married unbelieving wives. Even before Solomon, many Israelites were not true to God and worshipped idols. It is thought that the Transjordan tribes and Dan were among the first to completely abandon God.
Q: In Ezek 16:47, did Israel not walk in the ways of the surrounding nations, or did they multiply disobedience more than the nations around them as both Ezek 5:7 and (possibly) Ezek 16:47 say?
A: The first half of Ezekiel 16:47 says literally in the Hebrew, "Yet you have not walked in their ways"; the last half of Ezekiel 16:47 says they were even worse. Ezekiel 5:7 also says they were even worse.
In modern English it is like saying, "you were not like so-and-so, you were even worse".
Q: In Ezek 16:49 was the sin of Sodom being selfish instead of homosexuality?
A: Only if you read verse 49 and close your eyes before reading verse 50. Verse 50 says they did detestable things before God. It would be strange if some one argued that since they were arrogant and did not help others in addition to practicing homosexuality, that would somehow excuse their homosexuality. See When Cultists Ask p.85 and When Critics Ask p.285 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 16:55, when would Sodom return to her former state?
A: Since the city of Sodom was destroyed, along with every single inhabitant except Lot and his daughters, it cannot return to its former state until the people are resurrected. This will happen during the Millennium.
Q: In Ezek 17, what was the point of this allegory of the vine and two eagles?
A: To a people who were very familiar with farming, this allegory of vines, which they could see daily, would be remembered. A vine or tree that frequently changes its direction of growth does not grow straight or strong. Likewise people that frequently switch spiritual allegiance do not grow strong in the Lord, either. James 1 says that a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways, will receive nothing from the Lord. Finally, a nation that frequently changes allegiance between two empires, should not expect either empire to count them as loyal or favor them.
Today, one can play off two companies against each other, or two people against each other. If you do so, realize that you are not fostering loyalty to either of them.
Q: In Ezek 17:24, what is the point of the trees?
A: God is comparing peoples, who thrive, branch off, and are destroyed, to trees. This analogy is unusual in that it emphasizes that "Israel will not return from captivity" but only a "shoot of Israel will return".
Q: Does Ezek 18 indicate that God judges people by their behavior, instead of by faith instead of works?
A: No, because it is the "righteous" man who does the good things, and the "wicked" man or "violent" son who does the evil things. A person who is forgiven and declared righteous by God does righteous things; it is not that doing righteous things merits a person being a righteous man. See 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.185-186 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 18, how come God does not punish children for their father’s sins, since Ex 20:6 and Jer 32:18 imply the opposite?
Here are some verses showing consequences of sin. The quotes are taken from the NIV.
Exodus 20:6 "punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation"
Jeremiah 32:18 bring punishment for fathers’ sins into the laps of their children ... you reward everyone according to his conduct and as his deeds deserve.
Lamentations 5:7 "Our fathers sinned and are no more, and we bear their punishment."
Matthew 27:25 Jews (not God) said, His blood be on us and on our kids.
In Numbers 14:20-25, the children wandered for 40 years too.
Verses that show specific curses of descendants while on earth are: Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:14-19); Cain (Genesis 9:25); (illegitimate children, Ammonites, Moabites, (Deuteronomy 23:2-3,8); Eli’s sons (1 Samuel 2:31-33); Gehazi (2 Kings 5:27); Jeconiah (Jeremiah 22:28-30).
People do sometimes suffer temporal consequences for their father’s sins. However, these verses are as silent about our guilt in Adam as they are about guilt in our father.
See When Critics Ask p.285-286 and Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.221-222 for more on the distinction between consequences and guilt.
Q: In Ezek 18, what can we learn about people?
A: Here are ten things we can learn.
1. Some have strange views of God’s justice and teach wrong. Ezekiel 18:2
2. All souls belong to God and are judged by Him. Ezekiel 18:4
3. Do not be confident because of father’s righteousness. Ezekiel 18:13
4. Do not despair because of father’s wickedness. Ezekiel 18:17
5. Do not trust in your past righteousness. Ezekiel 33:12
6. If you have been wicked yourself, do not despair. God is pleased when you turn from your wickedness. Ezekiel 18:23,32; 33:12,14-16
7. Some can dishearten the righteous with lies, when God had brought them no grief. Ezekiel 13:22
8. Some can encourage/strengthen the wicked in their desire not to turn from their evil ways and save their lives. Ezekiel 13:22
9. Some accuse God of injustice for at least five reasons:.
9.1 Undeserved bad things is allowed by God in this life Job 27:2;34: 5,17;40:8
9.2 The wicked sometimes receive good things Psalm 73
9.3 God does not fully punish the wicked yet. Malachi 2:17; Habakkuk 1:2-4
9.4 The more wicked sometimes conquer the less wicked: Habakkuk 1:13
9.5 God forgives the sins of those who repent, and forgets the good things of those who turn to sin Ezekiel 18:25,29; Ezekiel 33:17-20
10. God judges each according to his own way [life] Ezekiel 18:30; 33:20
Q: In Ezek 18, what is the error known as "Realism"?
A: This error combines the following
1. A true assumption that fathers do not pass on guilt
2. A false assumption that we are guilty for Adam’s sin
3. Based on these assumption, a false conclusion is that this proves the pre-existence of our souls in the Garden of Eden.
For more info on Realism and why it is wrong, see Chosen by God by R.C. Sproul p.85-86.
Q: In Ezek 18, is Ezekiel talking about individual guilt, collective guilt of a nation, or both.
A: Both individual and collective guilt.
1. National guilt implied by "land of Israel" and plural terms 18:1,2,25,29,30,31
2. Individual guilt is implied by lack of plurals 18:4-24,26,28
3. Both, because he uses the true example of individuals to apply both individually and collectively.
Q: In Ezek 18:2, was Ezekiel saying this proverb?
A: No. The Hebrew pronoun here is you plural, not singular.
Q: In Ezek 18:2, what exactly is wrong with the proverb?
A: All of the following:
God does not like it. Ezekiel 18:2
We have no occasion to truthfully use it. Ezekiel 18:3
Implies that some souls do not directly belong to God. Ezekiel 18:4
Implies that a soul other than the one that sins dies. Ezekiel 18:4
Implies that an evil/good son is partially judged according to the goodness/evil of his father. Ezekiel 18:5-13 / 18:14-18
Implies God takes pleasure in the death of the wicked. Ezekiel 18:23,32
Implies punishing a son for father’s sins is just. Ezekiel 18:25
Implies God is not just unless He imputes the father’s guilt. Ezekiel 18:25
Implies God does not judge each person according to His own actions. Ezekiel 18:30
Implies repentance would not matter, because they would be judged for their father’s sin anyway. Ezekiel 18:30-31
Q: In Ezek 18:4, since a soul dies, does that mean there is no Heaven or Hell?
A: The Hebrew word nephesh, translated soul, can mean life as well as soul. Here it means life, while in Genesis 35:18 and other verses it means "soul".
See When Cultists Ask p.85-86 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 18:4, what is the meaning of the word "die" here?
A: God is speaking here of die, in the sense that Adam and Eve died the very day they ate of the forbidden fruit. They were not only liable to physical death, but they were liable to the second, eternal death, of which by comparison, physical death is a small matter.
Q: In Ezek 18:29 (KJV), are these words "equal" and "unequal" or should they be "just" and "unjust"?
A: The Hebrew word, takan, is a generic word that can mean balance, level, or equalize. Jay P. Green’s Literal Translation is "fair".
There is a difference, as one does not have to be equal to be just. I should not treat other women with "equal" familiarity as I do my wife, but I can still treat all women and men fairly.
Q: In Ezek 18:23,32, Ezek 33:12-20, and 2 Pet 3:9, does God not desire the death of the wicked, or does God mock at a sinner’s disaster as Prov 1:26 and Ps 2:4 show?
A: God has both love and wrath. God would rather a person repent and come to God than perish in Hell. However, for those who refuse to repent, God has great wrath toward them.
When Critics Ask p.286 points out that God scoffs when the unwise learn the foolishness of not relying on God’s wisdom. This kind of "laughing" carries no hint of rejoicing, though.
Q: In Ezek 19, what is the meaning of the allegory of the lioness and her cubs?
A: Christians have two interpretations.
Collective: The use of the word "Israel" meant the united kingdom, and the lion cubs were Israel and Judah.
Literal Individual: Perhaps Israel had already fallen by this time, and these cubs refer to individual kings of Judah. The mother of both Jehoahaz and Zedekiah was Hamutual, a wife of Josiah (2 Kings 23:31; 24:18).
Non-literal Individual: However, Jehoiachin’s mother was Nehushta (2 Kings 24:8), and this likely refers to Jehoiachin, based on Ezekiel 19:5-9. Ezekiel is not referring to biological motherhood, because the "mother" is the nation in Ezekiel 19:10-14. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1262 mentions other views, but advocates this view.
Q: In Ezek 19:4, what is a "cage" here?
A: There are three views.
1. It might be an actual cage here.
2. It might be a pit. This is how the NIV translates this.
3. Perhaps the "cage "sugar", was from the Assyrian word sigaru, which means not cage, but neck-yoke. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1262 mentions this view.
Q: In Ezek 19:9 (KJV), what does "put in ward" mean?
A: This means to imprison or put in jail.
Q: In Ezek 20:11,13,21, was the law good for people, or not?
A: God’s Law was good but had bad, and good, consequences.
Instructionally, It was good to communicate to them on what pleased God. Obeying its precepts also was a way God gave us to please Him.
In theory, it was good to tell some one how to get to Heaven by living without any sin. However, nobody was sinless and got to Heaven this way.
In reality, the law was a taskmaster, showing mankind how far we are from God’s standards. Furthermore, the more people knew, the more accountable they would be, bringing more bad consequences. Now what would people do with this information, that shone the light of truth upon their dark and ugly spiritual state?
Ultimately, the law served to drive people into the arms of God’s mercy. It made sense of the ceremonial aspects of God’s law, why we needed all those sacrifices, and why there was such a separation between fallen man and God’s Holiness.
Finally, the Law gave us a glimmer for hope. If there were a way to at least temporarily cover our sins through sacrifice, then God cared for us, and God might provide a more permanent solution … which He did in Jesus Christ.
See When Critics Ask p.286-287 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 20:15, how was Canaan the glory of all lands?
A: While it is true that Canaan could support a larger population than lands east of the Jordan River, that is not the point. Any land that God chose for you and especially gave you would surely be the glory of all the lands to you. Even more, the land of Canaan, once a land cursed with idolatry and infant sacrifice, became the land of God’s chosen people, the Jews, and the location of the ultimate blessing for all peoples of the earth.
Q: In Ezek 20:22, why did God withdraw His hand, that it not be polluted in the sight of the nations?
A: Exodus 32:11-14 gives the complete explanation of this. After God rescued the people from slavery in Egypt, if He had destroyed them suddenly in the wilderness, then others could say that God saved them only to destroy them. Ezekiel 20:22 is briefly referring to this, which most Jews would know.
Q: In Ezek 20:25, were some of God’s laws not good for the people?
A: The people here rejected God’s laws, which were for them (Ezekiel 20:19-21). Therefore, God had their rulers make laws that were unjust and not good for them. People can always complain about their political leaders, but many times people get the leaders and laws they deserve. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.314-315 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 20:29, what does "Bamah" mean?
A: Bamah might have been an actual location. On the other hand, the word "Bamah" meant high place, so it might have been a generic description of Canaanite shrines. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1265 says that this is actually a word play. "What is the high place" is mah habamah, and "you go to" is haba’im.
Q: In Ezek 20:46,47, why was Ezekiel to prophesy toward the south?
A: Ezekiel prophesied against both Israel and Judah. Here though, Ezekiel specifically was to face Jerusalem and the southern kingdom of Judah, because this prophecy was explicitly for them and not the northern kingdom.
Today, when people have neighbors more ungodly than they, it is easy to think that God must be pleased with them, simply because they appear more righteous by comparison. Remember though, that both Israel and Judah were punished, though Judah’s punishment came later and was not quite as devastating.
Q: In Ezek 20:48, how did all flesh see that God kindled this fire?
A: Perhaps Ezekiel’s prophecy itself is part of the answer. Without the prophets, one might think that Israel and Judah were destroyed because God abandoned or forgot about His people. However, the many warnings God gave through the prophets show that the destruction was not permitted by God’s inattention, but rather, it was caused by God remembering them and their disobedience.
Q: In Ezek 21:4, why do both the righteous and wicked receive judgment?
A: Two points that are not a part of the answer, and then the answer.
1. While the righteous are judged for rewards in Heaven, and the wicked receive different degrees of punishment, that is not what this verse is saying.
2. The Septuagint translated this as "unrighteous and wicked", but it is believed the Massoretic text has the best text here.
The Answer: Judgment here is the consequences of the nation’s sin. Ezekiel 21:3-4 says that both righteous and wicked people living in Israel at this time would be cut off, that is, killed and/or exiled, by the invading army. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.315-316, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1267, and 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.186 for more info.
How could both the righteous and wicked receive judgment, if Ezekiel 18 says the wicked will not die for the righteous? Throughout the Bible, the righteous do not receive guilt of the wicked. However, from the time of Abel onward, the righteous have suffered the consequences of the wickedness of others. See the discussion of Ezekiel 18 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 21:4, what is the significance of "from south to north"?
A: From south to north shows that the judgment would start in the south, in Judah. The word "south" in Hebrew is "Negev", which is also the name of the southern part of Judah. See the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1053 and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p;1267 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 21:10, what is the rod here?
A: Jay P. Green’s literal translation shows this Hebrew word is "rod", not "scepter", and that is how the KJV and NRSV translate it. There are two views of the meaning
Scepter of a king: The NKJV and NIV paraphrase this as scepter. Since God had promised the line of David would endure forever, they might have thought that the kings would never be defeated. The Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1053 also holds to this interpretation.
Rod of discipline: The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament 1267 says that "scepter" is an interpretation that seems foreign to the passage. Rod of discipline (Proverbs 10:13; 13:24; 23:13; 2 Samuel 7:14; Job 9:34; Job 21:9) is what is meant here.
Q: In Ezek 21:10,13 (KJV), what does "contemneth" mean?
A: The NIV translates this as "despise".
Q: In Ezek 22:2; 24:9, which city of blood is this prophecy directed against?
A: This is Jerusalem.
Q: In Ezek 22:9, how do some carry tales to shed blood?
A: This refers to false accusations and other means of telling false stories that get people killed.
Q: In Ezek 22:9, what was wrong with eating on the mountains?
A: The Canaanite shrines were usually on mountains and hills, and "eating on the mountains" would usually be for the purpose of participating in a Canaanite religious feast.
Q: In Ezek 22:18,19 (KJV), what is dross?
A: This is the waste material left after refining silver or gold. Dross still has very small amounts of good silver and gold in it. However, one cannot extract it profitably, and so it is not enough to do any good.
Q: In Ezek 22:25,27, how did the prophets devour souls?
A: For money and for the sake of their own position, these prophets pretended to care for the people’s spiritual needs and guard them from error. In reality, they simply told the people what they wanted to hear.
In Christianity, if the teaching is nothing else but what people want to hear, then the leaders should take care they are not following in the footsteps of these prophets that devoured souls.
Q: In Ezek 22:30-31, what does it means to stand in the gap, and why would some one standing in the gap avert God’s wrath?
A: This analogy was a double meaning.
Physically, if they had enough soldiers, they could try to fight off an invading army, in this case, the Babylonians.
Spiritually, if there were enough godly people to teach God’s word, refute error, and encourage people to return to God, then they would avert God’s punishment, in this case the Babylonian army.
See the discussion on Ezekiel 13:5 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 23, what is the meaning of the allegory of the two immoral daughters?
A: This graphic allegory shows the depth of God’s disgust with both Israel and Judah.
Q: In Ezek 23:3-4, what do Oholah/Aholah and Oholibah/Aholibah mean?
A: Oholah means "she has her own tent" or "her tent", which is something a prostitute would have. Oholibah means "my tent is in her". This was appropriate because God’s temple was in Jerusalem.
See the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1055-1056 and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1271 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 23:14 (KJV), what is vermilion?
A: This is a bright red or scarlet color.
Q: In Ezek 23:31-34, what is the cup here?
A: This symbol of God’s wrath, also mentioned in Jeremiah and Revelation, is interesting. It is something that people ingest, give others to drink, and sometimes are forced to drink. It is often compared to blood and wine, and it can make people mad.
Q: In Ezek 24:16-18, why did God take Ezekiel’s wife away from him?
A: God used even this external means to personally show the persuade the people to return to Him. Ezekiel would see his wife again in Heaven, but these people would never see Heaven if they did not repent.
Note that the Bible is silent on whether she was healthy and suddenly died, whether she had been sick with a lingering disease. Scripture is also silent on whether God especially had her die at this time, or whether God used her death, but informed Ezekiel first.
If a Christian is obedient to God, one might like to think that physical health and life of that person and their family is God’s highest priority. Actually, Ezekiel 24:16-18 shows that this is not the case. God’s perspective, of millions of years, can be different from a shortsighted perspective.
Q: In Ezek 25:6-8, what exactly was wrong with rejoicing over the destruction of Jerusalem?
A: There were a number of things wrong.
1. People should never rejoice over the destruction of God’s people, even if they were disobedient.
2. The Ammonites, Moabites, and Edomites harbored a centuries-old feud with the Israelites.
3. In addition, with Judah out of the way, the Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, and might be free to expand eastward.
Q: In Ezek 25:16 (KJV), what are "cherethims"?
A: These are "Cherethites", which is a synonym for Philistine people. This has nothing to do with "cherubim", which are an exalted class of angels.
Q: In Ezek 26:3, what is the play on words here?
A: The word for the city of Tyre, sor, means a hard rock or pebble. God said that he would scrape away Tyre's buildings and make it a bare rock. See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1278 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 26:3-14, was Ezekiel’s prophecy of victory over Tyre contradicted in Ezek 29:17-20, since Nebuchadnezzar did not conquer Tyre, as Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.587-588 asserts?
A: No. First notice that those who listened to Ezekiel did not see any difficulty, as four chapters later, in Ezekiel 29:17-18 says that Nebuchadnezzar got no reward (i.e. plunder) from Tyre. The answer first discusses the literary structure, what was prophesied, what was not prophesied, and finally what happened.
Literary structure:
Ezekiel 26:3-14 is has a chiastic structures, with some exceptions. In a perfect chiasm, each thought is put in parallel in symmetric form. The changes in pronouns in the Hebrew are important here.
Ezek 26:3 Many nations will come against Tyre
..Ezek 26:4 They will destroy Tyre's walls and towers.
….Ezek 26:4,5 I [God] will make Tyre a bare rock, a place to spread fishnets.
……Ezek 26:6 Her mainland settlements will be sacked.
……..Ezek 26:7 Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, will come against Tyre
……Ezek 26:8 He [Nebuchadnezzar] will sack your mainland settlements.
..Ezek 26:8,9 He will demolish the walls and towers
..Ezek 26:10,11 His horses will enter Tyre's gates and kill some of the people.
Ezek 26:12 They will plunder the wealth and loot. They will break down your walls and throw the rubble into the sea.
Ezek 26:13 I [God] will put an end to their songs.
….Ezek 26:14 I [God] will make Tyre bare rock, a place to spread fishnets.
As a side note, the Septuagint preserved the pronouns correctly until verse 12. Thereafter, it used "he" where it should have used "they" two times and "I" [God] one time.
2. What was prophesied:
There are three parts to the prophecy: many nations (they), God (I), and Nebuchadnezzar (he).
Many nations will come, loot Tyre, destroy Tyre's walls, and throw the rubble into the sea.
God will make Tyre a bare rock, a place to spread fishnets, and end their songs (Tyrian culture).
Nebuchadnezzar will come, sack the mainland city, and destroy the walls and towers, and kill some of the people.
3. What was not prophesied:
It never mentions that Nebuchadnezzar will do anything to the island, or which nation God will use to make the island a place for spreading fishnets. It was the many nations "they" that got the plunder, while Nebuchadnezzar only got the mainland settlements.
4. What happened:
The Assyrians, prior to Ezekiel's prophecy, unsuccessfully tried to capture the mainland city in 726/724 B.C. for five years. They tried again, and failed in 664 B.C.
Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon besieged Tyre for 13 years from 585 to 573 B.C. They successfully demolished the Mainland city. However the Tyrians in Old Tyre moved to the pre-existing New Tyre on the island (700-750 meters wide) across from the Mainland city. The Tyrian fleet kept the Babylonians from attacking the island city.
Alexander the Macedonian captured the mainland city, and he used the rubble to build a 200 foot (60 meter) wide causeway (artificial land-bridge) half a mile long (600-750 meters) connecting to the island city, and after seven months, he captured the island city in 332 B.C. The Encyclopedia Britannica mentions that in capturing Tyre he used ships from many nations: Sidon, Cyprus, Rhodes, Mallus, Soli, Lycia, and of course, Macedonia. Alexander's army killed 8,000 people at first, 2,000 crucified later, and enslaved the remaining 30,000. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol. 6 p.687 says 6,000 were killed at first, 2,000 crucified later, 30,000 sold into slavery, and 15,000 rescued by the Sidonians.
See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.276-278 and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1279 for more on the he/they showing the two-phase destruction. 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.187 reminds us that the time element of the two-phase was not specified. See also When Critics Ask p.287 for more info.
See the discussion on Ezekiel 26:14,19-20 for info on Tyre never being rebuilt.
Q: In Ezek 26:3-21, what is a history of Tyre?
A: For those who wish to see the historical details, here is a history of Tyre.
2300 B.C. is the time archaeologists think colonists from Sidon fleeing the Philistines founded Tyre, about 25 miles to the south. This would be a couple of hundred years before Abraham. The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.6 p.687 mentions that an Egyptian text from 1780-1750 B.C. mentions Tyre.
It also mentions that before Hiram I, son of Abibaal, (969-936 B.C.) the "island" of Tyre was actually two islands. People lived on one island, and the other island only had a temple of Baal. Hiram joined together the two with a causeway to form one island. The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.6 p.686 says the area of the combined island was about 57.6 hectares.
Hiram I of Tyre forces the Tityans to pay tribute.
936-929 B.C. Beleazarus, son of Hiram, rules in Tyre
929-920 B.C. Abdastartus, son of Beleazarus, rules in Tyre. He is assassinated by four sons of his nurse.
The next kings are Astartus, Aserymus his brother.
Phelles/Pheles kills his brother Aserymus and reigns for 8 months.
897/869-865/837 B.C. Ethbaal I (Josephus calls him Ithobalus), a priest of Astarte, overthrows Phelles and rules as king in Tyre
837-831 B.C. Baal-azzor, son of Ethbaal I reigns
831-822 B.C. Matgenus, son of Badezorus reigns
822/820-775/774 B.C. Pygmalion reigns
815/814 B.C. City of Carthage founded by Tyrians and Pygmalion's sister Dido.
9th century. Tyre pays Assyrians to leave it alone. (Encyclopedia Britannica 1961 vol.22 p.452)
9th century Tyre pays Shalmaneser III tribute. (Encyclopedia Britannica 1961 vol.22 p.452)
743 B.C. Assyrians capture Kashpuna, near Tyre and Sidon
?-739/738 B.C. Ethbaal II rules over Tyre and Sidon
738-730/729 B.C. Hiram II rules in Tyre
730/729 B.C. Mattan II pays 150 talents of gold
Eloulaios of Tyre puts down a revolt on Cyprus
726/724 B.C. Shalmaneser V first tries to capture Tyre by Sea
726/724-722/720 B.C. Shalmaneser V and Assyrians besiege Tyre for five years. He dies still trying.
c.720 B.C. Assyrian Sargon II conquers Tyre. (Encyclopedia Britannica 1961 vol.22 p.452)
701 B.C. Sennacherib and Assyrians capture Usse near Tyre
701-~630 B.C. Assyria does not permit any trade by Tyre.
680-669 B.C. Baal I rules Tyre and forms a "League of Hatti" against Assyria.
669 B.C. Tyre surrenders to Ashurbanipal. (Encyclopedia Britannica 1961 vol.22 p.452)
664 B.C. Ashurbanipal and Assyrian try to capture Tyre
585-573/572 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar II and the Babylonians besiege Tyre and Ethbaal II for 13 years and destroys the mainland city.
c.572 B.C. Evidence indicates the island city surrendered to Nebuchadnezzar II. (The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1279, Encyclopedia Britannica 1961 vol.22 p.452)
c.572 B.C. Ethbaal II was taken to Babylon, and Baal II ruled Tyre under the control of the Babylonians.
345 B.C. Tyre tries to revolt from Persia
332 B.C. Alexander demolishes Tyre after 7-month siege
c.50 A.D. Tyre existed in Paul’s time (Acts 12:20; 21:3,7)
638 A.D. Muslims capture Tyre, along with Antioch, Caesarea, and Tripolis in Lebanon
1124 A.D. Crusaders capture Tyre
1291 A.D. Muslims destroy Tyre
See the Encyclopedia Britannica, Josephus' Against Apion book 1 ch.18, and the Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.6 p.686-692 for more info on Tyre.
Q: In Ezek 26:9, what are engines of war?
A: These were siege engines, including towers that archers could shoot from and battering rams. These are effective against fortified cities in general, including Tyre. However, they would not be very effective against Jerusalem, since it was on a mountain, and it would be difficult to get the machines up there, and then to use them uphill.
Q: In Ezek 26:14,19-21 how would Tyre never be rebuilt, since the village of Sur (Tyre) exists today?
A: This question can be nicknamed "the question of mistaken identity." The modern city of Sur (or Tyre is not on the site of the ancient city. First some information on Tyre, then what the Bible says, and finally the situation today.
Tyre was originally only a mainland city build by Phoenician colonists from Sidon. Nobody actually conquered this city until 573 B.C., when Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians destroyed the mainland city after a 13-year siege. However, during those 13 years, the Tyrians in Old Tyre moved almost everything of value to the New Tyre on the island half a mile from the mainland city. Alexander built a causeway connecting New Tyre and Old Tyre. Silt built up along the causeway, and now there is no island, only a peninsula.
In the Bible,
Ezekiel 26:14 does not say not a soul would live there, but that the city would never be rebuilt.
Ezekiel 26:19 says the city will be laid waste, like cities that are not inhabited. The deep will come over Tyre.
Ezekiel 26:21 says that the city of Tyre will be no more, and never be found again.
Today, of the island city's two harbors, the southern harbor has filled up with sand. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica (1972), the modern town of Sur had a population of 16,483 in 1961. An aerial map shows that it is built on the north part of what was the island city and part of the causeway. The city of Old Tyre is uninhabited, bare rock east of the modern city of Sur.
Q: In Ezek 27:7, where were the coasts of Elishah?
A: Scholars do not know for certain. The Septuagint transliterates this as Elisai. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1280 mentions that some scholars equate it with Alashia, the ancient name for Cyprus. Other possibilities are parts of Greece, Italy, or Syria. The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.588 conjectures that it was a district in Cyprus or else northern Africa. Asimov has an interesting and plausible theory here. He mentions that the founder of Carthage, had a throne name of "Dido", but her actual name was Elissa, and thus Carthage was on the coast of "Elissa".
Q: In Ezek 27:10, where was Phut?
A: While this could be a scribal error for "Punt", in east Africa, that is most likely not the case. It probably refers to a place in modern-day Libya.
Q: In Ezek 27:11, where were Arvad and the people of Gammad?
A: Arvad was a coastal city in the north part of Phoenicia. Today, no one knows the location of Gammad.
Q: In Ezek 27:17, where were Minnith and Panang?
A: The Hebrew word translated as "Panang" in the KJV is uncertain. The NIV translates this not as a place, but as "confections" The NKJV and NRSV translates this as the grain "millet".
Q: In Ezek 27:32-34, 28:8, how was the city of Tyre destroyed in the middle of the sea?
A: This prophecy would have seemed strange at the time it was given, because Tyre was on the coast. However, later Tyre was expanded to also occupy an island half a mile from the original city. The original city was destroyed, but the island city survived until Alexander the Great.
Q: In Ezek 27:36; 28:19, how was Tyre destroyed forever?
A: In two ways.
Physically, the city was no more. Alexander the great used the bricks and rubble of the mainland city of Tyre to build a mole (land bridge) 200 feet wide to the island where the people of Tyre had built a new city. The physical bricks of the city, its walls, and buildings are a part of the ground.
The people of Tyre, whether on the mainland, or those who fled to the Island, were all killed or sold into slavery by Alexander the Great. 8,000 were killed when the city was captured, 2,000 were killed later, and 30,000 were sold into slavery.
Q: In Ezek 28, how did Lucifer fall and become Satan?
A: Revelation 12:7-9 gives us some insight on the circumstances of mysterious event. Apparently when Satan fell, he took 1/3 of the angels of Heaven with him. Isaiah 14:12-16 give us a hint at Lucifer’s motivation. He wanted to be like God.
Q: In Ezek 28, does this refer to Satan, or the king of Tyre?
A: It refers to both. God differentiated between the prince of Tyre, and his master, the king of Tyre. The one who was called the prince was a mortal man, whom other people would think was the master of Tyre. The real ruler was Satan though, and is addressed in Ezekiel 28:11 onward. However, the prince and king share many characteristics in common. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.316, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.278-280, When Critics Ask p.287-288, the Complete Book of Bible Answers p.241-244, and 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.187-188 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 28:8, was this a false prophecy, as the skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.590 claims?
A: No. Asimov claims this because the king of Tyre, Ethbaal (Ithobaal) II was taken captive to Babylon and not killed. While Ethbaal was taken to Babylon, Asimov is conjecturing here, because history does not record how Ethbaal was killed.
Q: In Ezek 28:10, why does it mention that the king of Tyre would die the death of the uncircumcised?
A: Like both the Egyptians and the Hebrews, the Phoenicians practiced circumcision. In contrast, the Greeks and Mesopotamian peoples did not. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1282 also mentions that this has the connotation of dying in shame.
Q: In Ezek 28:12, how could Satan fall, since he was full of wisdom?
A: Obviously, wisdom alone does not keep one from falling. In fact, knowledge, even knowledge of God, can puff up, but love builds up, according to 1 Corinthians 8:1.
Q: In Ezek 29:10 (KJV, NASB), where is Syene?
A: Syene was a city and fort in Southern Egypt. It is translated as "Aswan" in the NIV. It is significant that this southern town is mentioned, and then the border of Ethiopia, as the next answer shows.
Q: In Ezek 29:11-13; 30:23-26, when was Egypt uninhabited for forty years and the Egyptians scattered by the Babylonians?
A: This answer is a duplicate of the discussion on Jeremiah 46:13-20.
Skeptics used to think that the Babylonians never attacked Egypt, because Greek historians gave no mention of this invasion. However, not only did the Jewish historian Josephus mention this in Antiquities of the Jews 10.9.5-7 (c.93-94 A.D.), When Critics Ask p.280 points out that a fragment of a Babylonian Chronicle from 567 B.C., as well as a inscription on the funerary statue of Nes-hor in south Egypt, corroborate with Josephus and the Bible. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.276278 mentions a Babylonian cuneiform tablet discovered by Pinches tells of an invasion 569/568 B.C. (It is unclear if this is the same tablet mentioned in When Critics Ask p.280, or a different tablet.)
How far into Egypt did the Babylonians go? Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.593 (1981), admits that Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt, but says "it could not have been the resounding Babylonian success that Ezekiel had confidently predicted." The invasion probably was brief. However, according to Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.278, the funerary statue of Nes-hor says that during sometime during the reign of Uah-ib-Ra, an army of northerners went so far south as to threaten the Ethiopian border. Nes-hor was the governor of southern Egypt under Pharaoh Hophra according to When Critics Ask p.280. Note that Ezekiel did not predict how long the Babylonians would remain in Egypt, only that they would invade Egypt to the border of Ethiopia.
Q: In Ezek 29:14; 30:14; where is the land of Pathros?
A: This was another name for upper Egypt. Upper Egypt was the southern part of Egypt.
Q: In Ezek 29:18, how was every head made bald in the Babylonian army?
A: If the soldiers wore metal helmets long enough, the hair would be rubbed off. Roman soldiers also complained of this phenomena in later centuries. It is unclear whether this baldness was temporary or permanent.
Q: In Ezek 30:5, where is Chub/Cub?
A: It is believed to be a part of modern-day Libya.
Q: In Ezek 30:15 and Nah 3:8, where is the city of "No"?
A: This is another name for the city of Thebes, a major city of Egypt. The Egyptian word for village was niwt, which the Hebrews changed to No. The full Hebrew name, No-Amon, meant town/village of Amon. Thebes was destroyed in 663 B.C. and rebuilt in 654 B.C., See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1211 for more info on No.
Q: In Ezek 30:15,16, how did God pour His fury on Sin?
A: This does not refer to sinful acts, but rather to the region called the Wilderness of Sin, also called Pelusium, which is to the northeast of Egypt in the Sinai Peninsula. The skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.593 has a helpful comment here. When the Persian king Cambyses conquered Egypt, he first defeated the Egyptian army at Pelusium in 525 B.C.. There was little resistance after that.
Q: In Ezek 30:17, where are Aven and Pibeseth?
A: Aven is the Egyptian city of Avaris, which had the Greek name of Heliopolis. Pibeseth is also named Bubastis.
Q: In Ezek 31:13, in the allegory, what are the fouls of heaven and the beasts of the field?
A: The "birds and beasts settling in" sounds undesirable. Either they represented demons, or else those who would exploit them. Deuteronomy 28:26 says their bodies would be food for the birds and beasts.
Q: In Ezek 31:15-18 and Ezek 32:2, why did God cause a great mourning for the Pharaoh of Egypt?
A: Scripture does not say, but we can speculate. By being so close to the Israelites, the Egyptians, more than most other peoples, had access to much knowledge about the true God. The Egyptian religion did not have so many detestable practices as the Canaanite and Babylonian religions. Yet, pride in things Egyptian made them spiritually more distant from Israel than the Queen of Sheba and the Ethiopian Eunuch.
Q: In Ezek 32:13, in this allegory, what do the beasts that would be destroyed represent?
A: It might refer to the fact that the livestock were the means of gaining wealth.
Q: In Ezek 32:21-32, what is the meaning of this imagery from the grave?
A: There are at least three points of this vivid picture. It is certain that Babylon is going down. The use of repetition emphasizes that Babylon will be no different than Assyria, Elam, Meshech, Tubal, and other nations. Finally, just as it would be incredible to believe that the Assyrians would be destroyed in their prime, it seems incredible that the Babylonians would ever be destroyed. Yet this would certainly happen.
Q: In Ezek 33:17 (KJV), should this word be "equal" or "just"?
A: According to Strong's Concordance, the Hebrew word here, "takan", means to balance, measure out, or equalize. While the word in isolation could mean "equal" or "just", the context indicates just. The NASB translates this as "right".
Q: In Ezek 34:1-4, 8-12, how are some religious leaders like these worthless shepherds?
A: Not only do worthless shepherds do nothing, but they are relied upon to do a job, which they fail to do. It is better to not have a shepherd, for the owner to know there is no shepherd, and the owner watch the sheep himself than to have a worthless shepherd when one thought him to be a good shepherd.
Likewise, it is a serious thing to be a leader of Christians and fail to do the job one is relied upon to do.
Q: In Ezek 34:23, is this "David" who is mentioned really David, or the Messiah?
A: There are two views here. Either this is the Messiah, who will reign over all forever, or this is actually David, who some think will reign under Christ during the Millennium.
735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.188 holds to the first view.
Q: In Ezek 35:2-3,7, where is Mount Seir?
A: This is the most prominent mountain in Edom, and is used here as a synonym for the nation of Edom.
Q: In Ezek 35:15, 36:5, Isa 34:5-6 (KJV), why was Edom called Idumea here?
A: Idumea was a term used much later, by the Greeks and Romans, for Edom. The King James Version, as well as the Septuagint use the word "Idumea", but the Hebrew manuscripts say "Edom". According to the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.830, the only place the word Idumea really appears in the Bible, apart from translations, is in Mark 3:8.
Q: In Ezek 36:18, what is unusual about this word for idols?
A: The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 6 p.921 says this word, gillulim, is a favorite word of Ezekiel's for idols. It might be derived from the word gel, of dung, and thus Ezekiel is calling the idols "dung-things".
Q: In Ezek 36:21-22,32, how did God do this for His own name?
A: God would restore the Israelites, not because the deserved it, but because of His name. They were God's people, and God would preserve them as He promised to Abraham. Exodus 32:9-14 teaches the same concept.
Q: In Ezek 36:25-26, how will clean water make the Israelites clean?
A: In two ways.
Figuratively, like water cleanses from dirt, God cleanses everyone who will come to Him. Regardless of when people come to God, God does this through His specified high priest, Jesus Christ.
Physically, a time would come when God’s people would follow Christ’s command to be baptized.
Q: In Ezek 37, what is the meaning of the vision of the valley of bones?
A: While people could come up with all kinds of wild ideas of what the bones represent, Ezekiel 37:11 gives a clear answer. The bones represent the House of Israel. The Israelites were almost, but not completely killed or assimilated during the exile. However, Ezekiel 37 shows that even if every single Israelite were dead, God could still keep His promise to preserve them by bringing them back to life.
735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.183 says that this could possibly refer to the re-establishment of Israel as a nation in 1947.
Q: In Ezek 37:16-17, are the two sticks the Bible and the Book of Mormon, as Mormons claim?
A: No. Keith Meservy in an article in the Mormon Magazine The Ensign September 1977 p.22-27 had an article claiming this. He noticed that the specific Hebrew word for rod/stick, matteh, is not used in Ezekiel 37:16-17; rather the Hebrew word ‘ets is a generic word for tree/wood. Assyrian and Babylonians used wooden "writing tablets", so he says this "confirms the correctness" of the Mormon interpretation. However, the wooden tablets were hollowed on the inside so that they could be filled with wax, and the wax was written on. On one hand Meservy has shown that the "sticks" could be either writing tablets or rods. If this was really significant, this would support the New and Old Testament as much as the Bible and Book of Mormon. However, it does not refer to scripture here. Mormons totally ignore that Ezekiel 37:18b-28 says it tells already us what these two sticks mean. It means the two peoples (not scriptures) will be joined as one. They were to be gathered from among the nations where they were scattered.
At this time there was great animosity between Israel and Judah. One stick represented Israel, and the other, Judah. This prophesied that the tribes of Israel and Judah would be one people after God has gathered His people from the nations. When that happens, David shall be king over them (Ezekiel 37:24), and they will live in the land where their ancestors lived (Ezekiel 37:25). The two sticks could not be the Bible and the Book of Mormon for the following reasons.
1. The sticks refer to two peoples, not books.
2. When they are joined, David will reign over them.
3. They will be joined when they live in the land of their ancestors.
4. Finally, The Book of Mormon cannot be referred to here, as it is full of falsehoods, including a complete American civilization of which no archaeological evidence has been found. For example, ask any honest Mormon archaeologist where any city mentioned in the Book of Mormon is located, and they will tell you they have not found it yet. How many decades will go by, and how many towns of the Incas, Chimus, Aztecs, Mayans, etc. do we have to discover before concluding the cities in the Book of Mormon will never be found, because they never existed.
See the Complete Book of Bible Answers p.331-332, When Cultists Ask p.86, and a transcript of the Hank Hanegraff’s 8/7/1998 Bible Answer Man radio program (sponsored by the Christian Research Institute) for more info.
Q: In Ezek 38-39, who are Gog and Magog?
A: Magog, Tubal, and Meshech are first mentioned in Genesis 10:2. Ezekiel 38:1 probably refers to the same event with Gog and Magog in Revelation 20:8. This was the Great Battle in the Valley of Jehoshaphat, at the end of the Millennium. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.316-317 and 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.189 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 38-39, why would God bring Gog and Magog against Israel?
A: Ezekiel 38:16,23; 39:7 says that this will be done to bring glory to God. God will have these wicked people choose to invade Israel, and God will display His glory as He protects Israel.
Q: In Ezek 38:4 did God lead Gog and Magog to invade Israel, or did Satan lead them in Rev 20:7-8? (Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.594 thought this was a contradiction)
A: Three points to consider in the answer.
1. From Ezekiel 38:10-11, Gog and Magog would devise an evil plan, prepare, and apparently believe it was only they themselves that had decided this. Actually, they were summoned to do this (Ezekiel 38:8),
2. It specifically says that God will turn them from their home in the north to come against Israel. Then God will destroy them. (Ezekiel 38:4; 39:2-3)
3. God Himself does not tempt people (James 1:13). Rather, the means that God will use is to have Satan deceive Gog and Magog, according to Revelation 20:7-8.
4. This concept, of God using the evil of men and Satan to accomplish things that are a part of His plan, is called the doctrine of "concurrency" by theologians. Probably the clearest example of this truth is Genesis 50:20, when Joseph spoke to his brothers about their enslaving him. Joseph said, "Even though you intended to do harm to me, God intended it for good,…". Another example of concurrency is Judas betraying Jesus; it was a part of God’s definite plan and foreknowledge (Acts 2:23). Also, there was God using Satan to incite David to pridefully number Israel in 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1.
Q: In Ezek 38:6, where is the location of Togarmah?
A: Togarmah was a kingdom 70 miles west of Malatya. The Hittites called it Tegarama. The Assyrians called it Tilgarimanu, and the conquered it in 695 B.C. The Greeks called it Gauraena. The Armenians claim they descended from Haik, a son of Torgom. See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1721 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 39:16, how do you pronounce "Hamonah"?
A: It is pronounced as "ha-MO-na" with a dot above each a and a long o, according to The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.748.
Q: In Ezek 40, what is the point of measuring all of this?
A: Either these measurements communicate absolutely nothing, or they are physical dimensions that do have a meaning. If this is a physical temple, with real physical measurements, then it is likely that it will exist during the Millennium.
Q: In Ezek 40:1, when was the beginning of the year?
A: From the time of Exodus on, the Israelites year started in Nisan, which is our April or May. However, around this time the seventh month of Tishri (October-November) became the first month of the civil calendar. So it is either in Nisan or Tishri. See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1304 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 40-48 is this a Millennial temple, or not? What are the sacrifices for?
A: This entire section has not been fulfilled on earth yet. Christians have two very different interpretations.
Amillennialists believe there is no Millennium, and the thousand year period in Revelation 20:1-7 is all spiritualized by them to refer to Heaven. They would say that this temple refers to aspects of Heaven. As a note, many in the early church were amillennialists, including Eusebius of Caesarea (flourished 325 A.D.)
Premillennialists say there is a 1,000 year Millennial period on earth, and this temple will exist during that time. As a note, Eusebius says one of the first church fathers that was a "chiliast" (believing in a literal 1,000 years) was Papias, a disciple of John the apostle.
Q: In Ezek 40:38,42, and Ezek 43:20-22, why will the future temple still have animal sacrifices of the old covenant, since Heb 10:12-18 says that Jesus once and for all made sacrifice for sin, and there is no longer any offering for sin?
A: First of all, this question is not limited to Ezekiel, but to the entire doctrine throughout the Old Testament of bloody sacrifices after the Lord comes. We will observe what the verses say, and then give an answer.
While there was a temple built after this prophecy when the Jews returned, and Herod restored the temple, the temple layout here shows that this prophesy has not been fulfilled yet.
Ezekiel 40:38-42 mentions the room where the burnt offerings are washed.
Ezekiel 42:13 mentions rooms where the priests will eat the grain offerings, the sin offerings and the guilt offerings.
Ezekiel 43:20-22 tells of a bull and a male goat will be sacrificed as sin offerings to make atonement for the altar.
Isaiah 56:7; 66:20 mention that people of other nations will come to Jerusalem to make sacrifices, too.
In Jeremiah 33:18, God promised that the Levites would never fail to have a man to offer burnt offerings.
Other verses discussed later include Isaiah 66:21; Jeremiah 33:18; Malachi 3:3-4; and Zechariah 14:16-19.
Multiple people are doing this, and it is not Christ who is making these offerings, which are pleasing to God.
Premillennialist Gleason Archer in Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.280-281 mentions that it is hard to consider this just a "spiritual temple" as this section contains even more detailed specifics than those of the first temple in 1 Kings 6-7. However, they have to explain why animal sacrifices come when Hebrews 10:18 says there will no longer be any sacrifices.
Hank Hanegraff on CRI's Bible Answer Man radio program points out that when some Premillennialists say the sacrifices are only for the altar, and not for people, this would seem to deny the all-sufficiency and completeness of Christ's sacrifice in Hebrews 7:24-25; 9:26; 10:10,12,18 and other passages.
Amillennialists do not have to explain why there are animal sacrifices during the Millennium. Rather, they have to explain why there are slaughtered animals and bloody sacrifices for sin and guilt going on in Heaven. However, they can point to Jeremiah 33:18, where God promised that there will never fail to be priests and Levites, to be able to stand before God to offer burnt offerings. Perhaps those who were doing these things on earth, prior to Christ, still will be doing these things in Heaven.
To understand the answer, we have to understand the timing and meaning of the sacrifices and memorials to Christ.
THE ANSWER: Regardless of whether you are a premillennialist or an amillennialist, here is an answer hopefully on most of which Christians should be able to agree.
In New Testament times, we can partake in the Lord's Supper, a very important ordinance in remembrance of Jesus, without saying we are in any way taking away from the completeness of His sacrifice. (Hebrews 7:24-25, etc.)
In Old Testament times, the sacrifices were not a memorial, but rather a covering of their sin, that did not provide forgiveness of sin (Hebrews 10:3,4). This too did not take away from the completeness of Christ's sacrifice, even for them.
After Christ comes, these sacrifices will occur (Malachi 3:3-4) and continue forever (Jeremiah 33:18).
These sacrifices will be an ordinance: 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.189-190 and 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.304-305 suggest that since we are only to celebrate the Lord's supper "until He comes" (1 Corinthians 11:26), these sacrifices will serve a similar function as communion, and be a memorial to Christ's past act of atonement. Sacrifices looking forward were ordinances under the Old Covenant, communion is one of the ordinances under the New Covenant, and sacrifices, looking back, may be an ordinance after Christ comes. After Jesus comes again, doing these sacrifices as in the prior times is the thought of Malachi 3:3-4. As a side note, sacrifices may not be the only ordinance, and some things formerly for the Jews will be for all people. Some non-Jews will be selected as priests and Levites (Isaiah 66:21). After the great army is destroyed in the End times, Egypt and all the survivors that attacked Jerusalem will need to go to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles in Zechariah 14:16-19. They are supposed to do this, because God will not send rain if they do not (Zechariah 14:17). (Amillennialists might not agree with all of this point).
For whatever reason, these people during the Millennium will practice sacrifices and travel up to Jerusalem for the Feast of Booths.
See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.1305-1306 and When Critics Ask p.288-290 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 42:4, how could the passageway be ten cubits wide and one cubit long?
A: There are two possibilities:
Copyist error: While the Hebrew text says 10 by 1, the Septuagint and Syriac say ten cubits wide and 100 cubits long. 100 cubits long is the length of the north side of the building. This is the view of the NIV Study Bible p.1287. The NRSV goes with this translation, and puts the following one in a footnote.
Step, not cubit: The Hebrew word here, mahalak, can mean either step or cubit. Thus the passageway would have steps that are ten cubits wide and one cubit lengthwise. This is how the KJV and NKJV translate it.
See The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 6 p.967 for more on both views.
Q: In Ezek 43:5, why is it significant that the glory of the Lord filled the house?
A: This is the most important part of the whole Temple. The size and all the beautiful trappings mean nothing if God is not there. Likewise, today all the ornamentals of a religious building mean nothing if the true God is not the center of worship there.
Q: In Ezek 43:9, what is the significance of the dead bodies of their kings?
A: Like many peoples, the people of Judah honored their kings by burying them in a royal cemetery. Examples of this are Rehoboam (1 Kings 14:31), Asa (1 Kings 15:24) Jehoshaphat (1 Kings 22:50), Jehoram (2 Kings 8:24), Ahaziah (2 Kings 9:28), Joash (2 Kings 12:21), Azariah (2 Kings 15:7), Jotham (2 Kings 15:38), Ahaz (2 Kings 16:20), and so forth. This verse conspicuously mentions that these kings would not be given an honorable burial.
Q: In Ezek 44:3, could the prince here be the Messiah?
A: No, because in Ezekiel 45:22, the prince provides a bull as a sin offering for himself and the people in the land. He also does the other offerings. The Hebrew word here, nasi, could mean either prince or simply leader. The prince here eats the bread of the presence. See The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 6 p.974 for more info.
Q: In Ezek 44:7, under what circumstances should we not allow people into our churches?
A: Jesus came to save the lost, and with a few exceptions, we should allow anyone into our churches. Exceptions include:
1. Those that might physically harm others in the church
2. Those that are active in spiritually leading others to Hell (people in cults, etc.)
3. Christians, even genuine Christians, who defiantly refuse to repent of what they know to be sin. (1 Corinthians 5:9-13)
Q: In Ezek 44:20 (KJV), what does "poll their heads" mean?
A: This means to cut their hair.
Q: In Ezek 44:22, why could these priests not marry a widow or divorced woman?
A: Leviticus 21:7 says priests could not marry divorced women, but widows are OK. Leviticus 21:13 says that the high priest (and there was only one at a time) could not marry a widow, either. These (multiple) priests all functioned similar to high priests, because they went into the holy of holies.
Q: In Ezek 44:22, why could these priests marry the widow of a priest?
A: Scripture does not say. In Old Testament times, high priests could marry no widows, and regular priests could marry widows. In this future time, these men functioned as the only priests, as well as similar to high priests.
Q: In Ezek 46:17, will there still be servants or slaves during this Temple?
A: Sure. There will always be servants in Heaven, as well as servants in the Temple, because all believers have chosen to be slaves and servants of God.
Q: In Ezek 47:1, what are these waters here?
A: While we have not been told much about this future Temple, there is nothing to say that these waters are not physical water.
Q: In Ezek 48:9,10,12,18,20 (KJV), what is an oblation?
A: This is an offering or gift.
Q: In Ezek 48:21, who is the prince here?
A: Scripture does not say, but some think David will reign as a prince over the Jews during the Millennium. See the discussion on Ezekiel 34:23 for more info.
Q: In Ezek, what are some of the earliest manuscripts that still exist today?
A: Dead Sea scrolls: (c1 B.C.) 6 separate copies according to the Dead Sea Scrolls Today p.30 and the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.436-438.
The Chester Beatty-Schiede Ezekiel papyrus is from the first half of the third century A.D., according to Bruce Metzger's Manuscripts of the Greek Bible p.32.
Christian Bible manuscripts, from about 350 A.D., contain the Old Testament, including Ezekiel. The Chester Beatty IX Papyrii (2nd-4th century A.D.) contain Ezekiel according to The Compete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.101 and The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge p.746. Also, the same source says the John H. Scheide Biblical Papyri are dated to the 3rd century A.D. and contain Ezekiel 19:12-39:29.
Scheide Papyrii 1 contains Ezekiel, Daniel, and Esther. It is dated the early third century A.D. It originally had 118 leaves, of which 109 survive today. For more info and a photograph of Ezekiel 31:8-15 see Manuscripts of the Greek Bible p.70-71.
Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.) contains all of Ezekiel.
There are no leaves of Ezekiel in Sinaiticus.
Alexandrinus (c450 A.D.) contains all of Ezekiel.
Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (248-258 A.D.) quotes from "Ezekiel" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 48.
Q: In Ezek, what are some of the translation differences between the Hebrew and Greek Septuagint?
A: The Septuagint was a translation of the Old Testament into Greek done between 285 and 160 B.C. Different books of the Septuagint were translated with differing quality; Ezekiel was not translated as well as the Pentateuch. The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 6 p.960 says, "The LXX [Septuagint] is not a strong witness in the prophetic books, especially Ezekiel." It is interesting to see the Septuagint differences both to see what is different from the Massoretic version and how Jews before Christ interpreted the meaning of the Old Testament as they translated it into another language.
Ezek 1:1 "visions" (Massoretic text, Septuagint, Vulgate) vs. "vision" (Syriac, Targums)
Ezek 1:20 "living creature was in the wheels" (Massoretic) vs. "spirit of life was in the wheels" (Septuagint, Vulgate) vs. "creatures were in the wheels" (Targum)
Ezek 1:22 "living creature" vs. "living creatures" (Septuagint, Targums, Vulgate)
Ezek 4:9 "390 days" (all Hebrew manuscripts) vs. "190 days" (Septuagint)
Ezek 5:7 "You have not even conformed" vs. "you have conformed" in some Hebrew and the Syriac.
Ezek 6:14 "Diblah" vs. "Riblah" in a few Hebrew manuscripts.
Ezek 7:5 "An unheard-of disaster" vs. "disaster after disaster" in some Hebrew manuscripts and the Syriac.
Ezek 11:5 "your kindred/blood relatives" vs. "in exile with you" (Septuagint and Syriac)
Ezek 12:12 "they shall dig" vs. "he shall dig" (Septuagint, Syriac)
Ezek 14:14 and Ezek 28:3 "Daniel" vs. "Danel"
Ezek 16:6 "Live!" in the Septuagint, Syriac, and a few Hebrew manuscripts vs. "Live! And as you lay there in your blood I said to you, ‘Live!’" most Hebrew manuscripts.
Ezek 16:6 "live! I made you a multitude/myriad" vs. Live! And grow up" (Septuagint, Syriac)
Ezek 16:15 one Hebrew manuscript and some Septuagint manuscripts add "Such a thing should not happen." (NIV) or the Hebrew adds "let it be his" (NRSV)
Ezek 16:57 "Aram/Syria" vs. "Edom"
Ezek 18:2 Septuagint adds "son of man", and says "among the children of Israel" instead of "about/about the land of Israel." and "unripe grapes" instead of "sour grapes"
Ezek 18:5 Septuagint says "who shall be just, who executes judgment and righteousness" instead of "a righteous man who does what is just and right"
Ezek 18:7 Septuagint says "guilty of no plunder" versus "does not commit robbery"
Ezek 18:10 Septuagint says "mischevous/pestilent son" and "committing sin" instead of "violent son" and "things to a brother"
Ezek 18:14 Septuagint adds "and fear (phobos)" right before not doing these things. (KJV adds "and consider".)
Ezek 18:24 The question "Shall he live?" is absent in the Septuagint
Ezek 18:17 "the poor" vs. "iniquity"
Ezek 18:25 Septuagint says "all the house of Israel" instead of "O house of Israel"
Ezek 18:25 Septuagint uses the word "straight" instead of "just/fair/equal"
Ezek 18:26 Septuagint says "in it" instead of and "for it"
Ezek 18:29 Septuagint says "right" versus "just"
Ezek 18:30 Septuagint says "punishment of iniquity" instead of "downfall".
Ezek 18:32 "Repent and live!" is absent in the Septuagint
Ezekiel 18:31 "a new heart and a new spirit" (Hebrew, Septuagint) vs. "a fearing heart and a spirit of fear" (Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel)
Ezek 19:7 "widows" vs. "strongholds"
Ezek 19:10 "in our blood" vs. "vineyard" (correction)
Ezek 21:4 "righteous and wicked" vs. "unrighteous and wicked"
Ezek 21:15 "wrapped up for slaughter" vs. "polished for slaughter" Targum
Ezek 22:25 "indignation" vs. "princes"
Ezek 23:24 The Hebrew for the word translated "weapons" is uncertain. The Septuagint has "from the north"
Ezek 26:12 "they" vs. "he" two times.
Ezek 26:13 "I [God]" vs. "he"
Ezek 26:20 "I will give beauty" vs. "have a place"
Ezek 27:15 "Dedan" in the Hebrew vs. "Rhodes" in the Greek.
Ezek 28:13 The Hebrew word for "mountings" has uncertain meaning.
Ezek 29:7 "stand" vs. "unsteady" in the Syriac
Ezek 32:9 "bring your destruction" vs. "carry you captive"
Ezek 32:17 (absent) vs. "in the first month"
Ezek 37:23 "dwelling-places/settlements in which they have sinned" vs. "transgressions in which they have fallen" (Septuagint, Symmachus)
Ezek 40:6 "deep/wide and one threshold one read deep/wide" vs. "deep/wide"
Ezek 40:8,9 "measured" vs. "made/was"
Ezek 40:14 "measured" vs. "made/was"
Ezek 40:14 The meaning is uncertain for the Hebrew word translated as "courtyard". The Septuagint translates this as "chambers".
Ezek 40:30 the entire verse vs. (absent) (a few Hebrew manuscripts and the Septuagint)
Ezek 40:38-40 "portico of the gate" vs. "porticoes of the gates" (Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 6 p.960)
Ezek 41:1 "ten cubits wide and one cubits long" vs. "ten cubits wide and 100 cubits long" (Septuagint, Syriac)
Ezek 43:3 "when I came" "when he came" (a few Hebrew manuscripts, Theodotion, Vulgate)
Ezek 43:7 "in their high places" vs. "in their death" (Some Hebrew manuscripts, Theodotion, the Targum) (one letter difference in Hebrew)
Bibliography for this question: the Hebrew translation is from Jay P. Green’s Literal Translation and the Septuagint rendering is from Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton’s translation of The Septuagint : Greek and English. The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 6 and the footnotes in the NASB, NIV, NKJV, and NRSV Bibles also were used.
