The Departure of The Kebod Yhwh From The Temple of Jerusalem

UNIVERSIDAD DE NAVARRA
FACULTAD DE TEOLOGÍA
Ramil COSTIBOLO NICAL
THE DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH

FROM THE TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM
Extracto de la Tesis Doctoral presentada en la

Facultad de Teología de la Universidad de Navarra
PAMPLONA
2005
Ad normam Statutorum Facultatis Theologiae Universitatis Navarrensis,
perlegimus et adprobavimus
Pampilonae, die 27 mensis octobris anni 2004
Dr. Iacobus AUSÍN Dr. Franciscus VARO
Coram tribunali, die 16 mensis iunii anni 2004, hanc

dissertationem ad Lauream Candidatus palam defendit
Secretarius Facultatis
Eduardus FLANDES
Excerpta e Dissertationibus in Sacra Theologia

Vol. XLVII, n. 1
PRESENTATION
In all the world’s great religions, the temple is the privilege place
where the divinity is considered to make itself present to man and
where man enters into a communion with the former. It is the place
where the divinity receives the worship of his adorers and where they,
in turn, receive favors and blessings from the divine forces they belie-
ved in. This understanding of divine-human relationship expectedly
made the temple central to the socio-religious life of the people. The
social conditions of fortune or blessings are, to a certain extent, de-
termined and assured by seeking divine favors through the prescribed
cultic rituals and worship in the temple.
This central role of the temple in the socio-religious life of the
people is clearly evident in the book of Ezekiel, wherein the Temple
of Jerusalem plays a decisive role in understanding the cause of the
well being, as well as, the tragedy of the house of Israel. In fact, the
book’s message of judgment (first part) and restoration (second part)
are composed and revolved around the imagery of the Temple. De-
spite many literary, textual and structural difficulties that reveal its
composite character, the canonical text manifests literary coherence
and unified Temple-centered theology which reflects the single mind
of an original prophet. Through Temple symbolism and language,
Ezekiel explained the nature of YHWH, and his relationship with Is-
rael and the universe. For Ezekiel, the God of Israel is a sovereign of
universal domain. He is transcendent and not limited to a sanctuary,
a people or land. Nevertheless, by pure divine initiative, YHWH has
chosen to be identified with a particular people, establish a special re-
lationship with them and dwells in their midst. In the face of this
gratuitous choice, Israel is expected to recognize YHWH’s sovereign-
ty over them and give him due worship.
The historical reality of the destruction of the city of Jerusalem
and its Temple and the subsequent exile of its inhabitants presented
12 RAMIL COSTIBOLO NICAL
hard questions regarding Israel’s relationship with YHWH and the

validity of the Temple as sign of the divine presence in their midst.
Surely, at that time, serious theological question were undoubtedly
raised by the people. On the one hand, they must have wondered
whether YHWH was more powerful than the Babylonian god Mar-
duk and whether or not he was strong enough to keep them in the
land (Eze 36:20). On the other hand, if the exile is sign of YHWH’s
power manifested in divine punishement, they must have also ques-
tioned whether what YHWH had inflicted or would inflict upon
them was too heavy and whether he was just (Eze 18:25). Or that,
this things happened because YHWH does not care and has already
left the land (Eze 8:12)?
The pericopes presented in the excerptum provide the theological
explanation and justification for the destruction of the Temple and
justification of the exile. The content of the excerptum forms the sec-
ond and fourth subsections of Chapter II. The second section pre-
sents the four cultic abominations (Eze 8:5-18), which constitute the
rebelliousness of Israel and the cause of YHWH’s anger. The fourth
section depicts in graphic form the departure of the kebod YHWH
from the Temple due to Israel’s cultic abominations (Eze 10:1-22).
The schema of each discussion is as follows; (a) translations and
analysis; (b) structure; (c) significance and relation to the Temple of
Jerusalem; (d) summary. After the presentation of the two pericopes,
short conclusions will be presented which will hopefully highlight
the important theological points of the texts just studied.
The study seeks to understand the significance of the Temple of
Jerusalem and, in the process, gives to the Temple theology the pro-
tagonism it has in the book of Ezekiel. It approaches the theme from
the perspective of theology than from a historico-critical perspective.
We preferred the synchronic approach in the study though we made
use of diachronic methods when they appear to be indispensable.
This means that the object of the study will be the biblical book in
its present canonical state.
This study will not be possible without the cooperation of so
many people. Thus, we would like to extend our gratitude to the
professors of the Sacred Scripture Department of the Faculty of The-
ology of the University of Navarre. In a special way, our gratitude
also to D. Santiago Ausín whose generous guidance and expertise
made all scholarly difficulties surmountable.
TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE THESIS
PRESENTATION ........................................................................... i
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................... v
ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................... xi
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ xvii
CHAPTER I
THE FIRST VISION: THE CALL OF EZEKIEL
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 1
I. THE SUPERSCRIPTION ............................................................... 3
A. Translation and Analysis ...................................................... 3
B. Structure ............................................................................. 5
C. Significance and Relation to the Temple of Jerusalem .......... 11
D. Summary ............................................................................ 21
II. THE THRONE VISION ............................................................... 23
B. Structure ............................................................................. 35
1. The Cloud .................................................................... 41
2. The kebod YHWH ....................................................... 43
3. Ezekiel’s Notion of the kabod ....................................... 49
4. The Symbolism of the number «four» .......................... 53
5. The Anthropomorphic description of the kabod .......... 54
6. The Vision as a Storm Theophany ............................... 56
7. Cultic Representation ................................................... 58
8. The Vision as a Throne Theophany ............................. 61
9. The Chariot ................................................................. 66
10. The Cultic Response of the Prophet ............................. 69
D. Summary ............................................................................. 72
III. THE PROPHETIC COMMISSIONING ............................................ 74
B. Structure ............................................................................. 80

1. YHWH’s Sovereignty ...................................................... 84
2. Israel, a Rebellious People ............................................... 86
3. Transgressions since their Fathers .................................... 88
4. Israel, an Obstinate People .............................................. 88
5. YHWH’s Rejection of Israel ............................................ 89
6. The Obedience of the Prophet ........................................ 91
7. Ezekiel, the Designated Messenger .................................. 93
8. Message of Judgment ...................................................... 95
9. The Identity of the Voice ................................................ 96
D. Summary ............................................................................. 98
IV. EZEKIEL’S DUMBNESS ................................................................ 100
B. Structure ............................................................................. 102
1. Connection with the Inaugural vision ............................. 105
2. Similar Elements in Both Visions ................................... 106
3. Ezekiel’s Dumbness and the Prophetic Ministry .............. 107
4. Ezekiel’s Dumbness and the Priestly Ministry ................. 109
D. Summary ............................................................................. 110
V. RECAPITULATION ...................................................................... 111
CHAPTER II
THE SECOND VISION: THE DEPARTURE
OF THE KEBOD YHWH FROM THE TEMPLE
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 115
I. THE SETTING OF THE VISION ................................................... 123
B. Structure ............................................................................. 126
D. Summary ............................................................................. 142
II. THE FOUR CULTIC ABOMINATIONS .......................................... 143
B. Structure ............................................................................. 149
1. Symbolism of the Number «four» ................................... 150
2. tAb[eAt (abominations) ..................................................... 153
3. The Four Cultic Abominations ....................................... 155
4. The Concept of the «Sacred/Holy» ................................. 168
5. Israel’s sins were not only cultic but social ....................... 179
7. Inevitability of Judgment ................................................ 182
D. Summary ............................................................................. 185
TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE THESIS 15
III. SLAUGHTER OF THE GUILTY ...................................................... 186

B. Structure ............................................................................. 189
C. Significance and Relation to the Temple of Jerusalem ......... 191
2. Temple, a Place of Safety and Protection ......................... 196
3. amej©(defile) ..................................................................... 200
4. Man Dressed in Linen .................................................... 203
D. Summary ............................................................................. 204
IV. DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH .......................................... 206
B. Structure ............................................................................. 210
1. Connection with the Inaugural vision ............................. 216
2. Temple, the Location of the Vision ................................. 219
3. Temple, the Dwelling place of YHWH ........................... 220
4. qrz (scatter) ..................................................................... 223
5. Fire, as Instrument of Purgation ..................................... 224
7. Cultic Representation ..................................................... 228
D. Summary ............................................................................. 229
V. JUDGMENT AND HOPE .............................................................. 230
B. Structure ............................................................................. 235
1. The Total Corruption of Israel ........................................ 242
2. Theme of Divine Abandonment ..................................... 244
3. Departure of the kabod, Affirmation of Power ................ 250
4. Presence and Nearness of YHWH .................................. 251
D. Summary ............................................................................. 254
VI. RECAPITULATION ...................................................................... 255
CHAPTER III
THE THIRD VISION: THE RETURN
OF THE KEBOD YHWH TO THE TEMPLE
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 261
I. THE SETTING OF THE VISION ................................................... 272
B. Structure ............................................................................. 275
D. Summary ............................................................................. 307
II. THE RETURN OF THE KEBOD YHWH ........................................ 310
B. Structure ............................................................................. 314

1. Connections with the Previous Visions ........................... 320
2. Presence and Nearness of YHWH .................................. 322
3. Affirmation of the Holiness of the Temple ...................... 327
4. Safeguard to Avoid the Social Sins of the Past ................. 334
6. Certainty of Restoration ................................................. 341
8. Role of the Prince ........................................................... 349
9. Transcendence of YHWH .............................................. 351
D. Summary ............................................................................. 353
III. THE VISION OF THE STREAM FROM THE TEMPLE ...................... 354
B. Structure ............................................................................. 360
1. The Symbolism of the Number «four» ............................ 367
2. Reversal of the Earlier Temple Vision ............................. 370
3. Complements to the Earlier Chapters ............................. 371
4. Restoration of Covenant Relationship and Blessings ....... 373
D. Summary ............................................................................. 375
IV. THE NEW CITY ........................................................................ 376
B. Structure ............................................................................. 378
D. Summary ............................................................................. 386
V. RECAPITULATION ...................................................................... 386
CONCLUSION .................................................................................... 391

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................. 399
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE THESIS
MAIN SOURCES
ELLIGER, K., RUDOLPH, W. (eds.), Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, Deutsche

Bibelstiftung, Stuttgart 51997.
KITTEL, R., RUDOLPH, W., Biblia Hebraica, Württembergische Bibelanstalt,
Stuttgart 1973.
RAHFLS, A. (ed.), Septuaginta. Id est Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX in-
terpretes, Stuttgart 1979.
WEBER, R. et al. (eds.), Biblia Sacra: iuxta Vulgatam versionem, I-II, Würt-
tembergische Bibelanstalt, Stuttgart 1975.
ZIEGLER, J., Ezechiel, Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum graecum, XVI, 1,
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 21978.
INSTRUMENTS
ACHTEMEIER, P.J., The Harper Collins Bible Dictionary, Harper, San Fran-
cisco 1996.
ALTHANN, R., Elenchus of Biblica, Editrice Pontificio Instituto Biblico,
Roma 1985-2002.
BAUER, J.B. (ed.), Diccionario de teología bíblica, Herder, Barcelona 1967.
BOGAERT, P.-M. et al. (eds.), Diccionario enciclopedico de la Biblia, Herder,
Barcelona 1993.
BOTTERWECK, G.J., RINGGREN, H. (eds.), Theological Dictionary of the Old
Testament, I-VIII, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 1977-1997 (translation
from the original German Edition: ThWAT, I-VIII, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart
1973-1995).
CERNI, R. (trans.), Interlineal Hebreo-Español. Libros Profeticos. Traducción
literal al castellano del texto hebreo del Códice de Leningrado, IV, CLIE,
Terrasa 2002.
FACULTAD DE TEOLOGÍA DE UNIVERSIDAD DE NAVARRA, «Libros Proféticos»
Sagrada Biblia, IV, EUNSA, Pamplona 2002.
FREEDMAN, D.N. (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, I-VI, Doubleday,

New York 1992.
— (ed.), Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 2000.
GOODRICK, E.W., KOHLENBERG III, J.R., The NIV Complete Concordance,
Zondervan, Grand Rapids 1981.
HASTINGS, J. (ed.), A Dictionary of the Bible. Dealing with its Language, Lit-
erature and Contents, including the Biblical Theology, Hendrickson,
Peabody 1988.
JENNI, E., WESTERMANN, C. (eds.), Diccionario teológico manual del Antiguo
Testamento, I, Span. trans. by J.A. Mugica, Cristiandad, Madrid 1978.
— (eds.), Diccionario teológico manual del Antiguo Testamento, II, Span.
trans. by R. Godoy, Cristiandad, Madrid 1985.
JOUON-MURAOKA, P. Jouon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Eng. trans.
and revision by T. Muraoka, I-II, Subsidia Biblica 14, Pontifical Biblical
Institute, Rome 1991.
KAUTZSCH, E. (ed.), Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, Eng. trans. by A.E. Cow-
ley, Clarendon, Oxford 1996.
KOMONCHAK, J.A. (ed.), The New Dictionary of Theology, Paulines, Pasay 1991.
LAMBDIN, T.O., Introducción al hebreo bíblico, Verbo Divino, Estella 2001.
LEÓN-DUFOUR, X. (ed.), Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Paulines, Pasay 21996.
— (ed.), Vocabulario de teología bíblica, Herder, Barcelona 1990.
MCDONALD, W. (ed.), New Catholic Encyclopedia, McGraw-Hill, New
York 1969-1989.
MCKENZIE, J.L., Dictionary of the Bible, Simon & Schuster, New York
1995 (repr.).
ORR, J. (ed.), The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, I-IV, Hen-
drickson, Peabody, 1995.
PRITCHARD, J.B. (ed.), The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pic-
tures, Eng. trans. by W. F. Albright, Princeton University, Princeton 21958.
— Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, Princeton Uni-
versity, Princeton 31969.
ROSSANO, P. (ed.), Nuevo Diccionario de Teología Biblica, Span. trans. by E.
Requena and A. Ortiz, Paulinas, Madrid 1990.
SCHÖKEL, L.A., Diccionario bíblico hebreo-español, Trotta, Madrid 1994.
WEINGREEN, J., A Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew, Clarendon, Ox-
ford 21959.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
A. Old Testament in General
ALBERTZ, R., A History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period: From the
Exile to the Maccabees, II, Eng. trans. by J. Bowden, SCM, London 1994.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE THESIS 19
ALBRIGHT, W.F., Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, John Hopkins Uni-
versity, Baltimore 1956.
ANDERSON, G.W., The History and Religion of Israel, Oxford, London
1966.
BRIGHT, J., A History of Israel, Westminster, Philadelphia 31981.
CAZELLES, H., Introducción a la Biblia. Introducción crítica al Antiguo Testa-
mento, II, Herder Barcelona 1989.
CHILDS, B.S., Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, SCM, London
1979.
— Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testament. Theological Reflection on
the Christian Bible, Fortress, Minneapolis 1993.
DRIVER, S.R., An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, T. & T.
Clark, Edinburgh 21891.
EICHRODT, W., Theology of the Old Testament, Eng. trans. by J.A. Baker, I,
SCM, London 1967.
EISSFELDT, O., The Old Testament: An Introduction, Eng. trans. by P.R.
Ackroyd, Harper & Row, New York 1965.
FISHBANE, M., Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel, Clarendon, Oxford
1985.
FOHRER, G., Introduction to the Old Testament, SCM, London 1970.
FRANKEL, D., The Murmuring Stories of the Priestly School. A Retrieval of An-
cient Sacerdotal Lore, Brill, Leiden 2002.
KRAUS, H.-J., Worship in Israel: A Cultic History of the Old Testament, Eng.
trans. by C. Buswell, John Knox, Richmond 1966.
NEWSOME, J.D., By the Waters of Babylon: An Introduction to the History and
Theology of the Exile, John Knox, Atlanta 1979.
OESTERLEY, W.O.E., ROBINSON, T.H., An Introduction to the Books of the
Old Testament, Meridian, New York 21958.
PFEIFFER, R.H., Introduction to the Old Testament, A. & C. Black, London
1966.
RENDTORFF, R., The Old Testament. An Introduction, SCM, London 1985.
ROBERT, A., FEUILLET, A., Introduccion a la Biblia. Introduccion General An-
tiguo Testamento, I, Herder, Barcelona 1970.
ROWLEY, H.H., Worship in Ancient Israel. Its Forms and Meaning, SPCK,
London 1967.
SCHMIDT, W.H., Introduction to the Old Testament, SCM, London 1984.
SOGGIN, J.A., An Introduction to the History of Israel and Judah, SCM, Lon-
don 31999.
VON RAD, G., Old Testament Theology, I-II, Eng. trans. by D. M. G. Stalk-
er, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh 1962-67.
WRIGHT, G.E., The Old Testament Against its Environment, SCM, London
1966.
B. Prophetism
ABREGO DE LACY, J.M., Los libros proféticos, Verbo Divino, Estella 1993.
ACHTEMEIER, P.J., MAYS, J.L. (eds.), Interpreting the Prophets, Fortress,
Philadelphia 1987.
ARMERDING, C.E., GASQUE, W.W. (eds.), A Guide to Biblical Prophecy,
Hendrickson, Peabody 1989.
BLENKINSOPP, J., A History of Prophecy in Israel, Westminster, Philadelphia
1983.
— Prophecy and Canon: A Contribution to the Study of Jewish Origins, Uni-
versity of Notre Dame, Notre Dame 1977.
— Sage, Priest, Prophet: Religious and Intellectual Leadership in Ancient Is-
rael, John Knox, Lousville 1995.
BRUEGGEMANN, W., The Prophetic Imagination, Fortress, Philadelphia
1978.
BULLOCK, C.H., An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books,
Moody, Chicago 1986.
CARROLL, R., When Prophecy Failed. Cognitive Dissonance in the Prophetic
Traditions of the Old Testament, Seabury, New York 1979.
CLEMENTS, R.E., Prophecy and Covenants, SCM, London 1965.
COGGINS, R. (ed.), Israel’s Prophetic Tradition. Essays in Honour of Peter R.
Ackroyd, University, Cambridge 1988.
DAVIES, P.R., The Prophets, Sheffield Academic, Sheffield 1996.
GITAY, Y., Prophecy and Prophets: The Diversity of Contemporary Issues in
Scholarship, Scholars, Atlanta 1997.
GRABBE, L.L., Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages: A Socio-Historical Study of
Religious Specialists in Ancient Israel, Trinity, Valley Forge 1995.
GRIFFIN, W.P., The God of the Prophets: An Analysis of Divine Action, JSOT-
Sup 249, Academic, Sheffield 1997.
HESCHEL, A.J., The Prophets, Harper & Row, New York 1962.
KOCH, K., The Prophets, I-II, SCM, Fortress, Philadelphia 1982.
LINDBLOM, J., Prophecy in Ancient Israel, Basil Blackwell, Oxford 1973.
MCKANE, W., Prophets and Wise Men, SCM, London 1965.
MONLOUBOU, L., Los profetas del Antiguo Testamento, Span. trans. by N.
Darrical, Verbo Divino, Estella 61994.
NEWSOME, J.D., The Hebrew Prophets, John Knox, Atlanta 1984.
PETERSEN, D.L., The Role of Israel’s Prophets, JSOTSup 17, JSOT, Sheffield
1981.
— (ed.), Prophecy in Israel. Search for an Identity, Fortress, Philadelphia
1987.
SAWYER, J.F.A., Prophecy and the Prophets of the Old Testament, Oxford
Bible Series, Oxford University, Oxford 1987.
SMITH, G.V., The Prophets as Preachers. An Introduction to the Hebrew
Prophets, Broadman-Holman, Nashville 1994.
VANGEMEREN, W.A., Interpreting the Prophetic Word, Zondervan, Grand

Rapids 1990.
VON RAD, G., The Message of the Prophets, Harper & Row, New York 1965.
WESTERMANN, C., Basic Forms of Prophetic Speech, Westminster, Philadel-
phia 1967.
WILSON, R.R., Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel, Fortress, Philadelphia
1980.
ZIMMERLI, W., The Law and the Prophets. A Study of Meaning of the Old Tes-
tament, Eng. trans. by R.E. Clements, Blackwell, Oxford 1965.
SELECTED LIST OF COMMENTARIES
ALLEN, L.C., Ezekiel 1-19, World Bible Commentary, Word Books, Dallas
1994.
— Ezekiel 20-48, World Bible Commentary, Word Books, Dallas 1990.
ASURMENDI RUIZ, J., Ezequiel, in W.R. Farmer (ed.), Comentario Bíblico
Internacional. Comentario católico y ecuménico para el siglo XXI, Verbo
Divino, Estella 1999, pp. 959-89.
BLENKINSOPP, J., Ezekiel. Interpretation. A Bible Commentary for Teaching
and Preaching, John Knox, Louisville 1990.
BLOCK, D.I., The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 1-24, The New International
Commentary on the Old Testament, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1997.
— The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25-48, The New International Commen-
tary on the Old Testament, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 1998.
BOADT, L., Ezekiel, in R.E. BROWN (ed.), The New Jerome Biblical Com-
mentary, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs 1990, pp. 305-28.
BROWNLEE, W.H., The Book of Ezekiel, in C.M. LAYMON (ed.), The Inter-
preter’s One Volume Commentary on the Bible, Collins, London 1972,
pp. 411-35.
BRUCE, F.F., Ezekiel, in F.F. BRUCE, G.D.C. HOWLEY, H.L. ELLISON (eds.),
The International Biblical Commentary, Zondervan, Grand Rapids
1988, pp. 807-46.
CARLEY, K.W., The Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, in Cambridge Bible Com-
mentary on the New English Bible, Cambridge University, Cambridge
1974.
CLEMENTS, R.E., Ezekiel, Westminster Bible Companion. 1996.
CODY, A., Ezekiel: With Excursus on Old Testament Priesthood, Old Testa-
ment Message 11, Michael Glazier, Wilmington 1984.
COOKE, G.A., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Ezekiel,
in S.R. DRIVER, A. PLUMMER (eds.), The International Critical Com-
mentary, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh 1965.
COOPER, L.E., Ezekiel, in The New American Commentary 17, Broadman
& Holman, Nashville 1994.
CRAIGIE, P.C., Ezekiel, The Daily Study Bible Series, John Knox, Lousville
1983.
DARR, K.P., The Book of Ezekiel. Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,
in L.E. Keck (ed.), The New Interpreter’s Bible, VI, Abingdon, Nashville
2001, pp. 1073-1607.
DUGUID, I.M., Ezekiel, in T. MUCK (ed.), The NIV Application Commen-
tary Series, Zondervan, Grand Rapids 1999.
EICHRODT, W., Ezekiel. A Commentary, Westminster, Philadelphia 1970.
FICH, S., Ezekiel, in Soncino Bible, Soncino, London 1950.
FOHRER, G., GALLING, K., Ezechiel, HAT 13, Mohr, Tübingen 21955.
GREENBERG, M., Ezekiel 1-20, in W.-F. ALBRIGHT and D.N. FREEDMAN
(eds.), Anchor Bible 22, Doubleday, New York 1983.
— Ezekiel 21-37, in W.-F. ALBRIGHT and D.N. FREEDMAN (eds.), Anchor
Bible 22A, Doubleday, New York 1997.
HERMANN, J., Ezechiel, ubersetzt und erklart, KAT, Keichert, Leipzig 1924.
KEIL, C.F., Biblical Commentary on the Book of Ezekiel, Eng. trans. by J.
Martin, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 1950.
MAY, H.G., The Book of Ezekiel, in G.A. BUTTRICK, W.R. BOWKE (eds.),
The Interpreter’s Bible, VI, Abingdon, Nashville 1956, pp. 41-338.
MILGROM, J. Leviticus 1-16, in W. F. ALBRIGHT and D.N. Freedman (eds.),
Anchor Bible 3, Doubleday, New York 1991.
MUILENBURG, J., Ezekiel, in M. BLACK and H.H. ROWLEY (eds.), Peake’s
Commentary on the Bible, Nelson, London 1962, pp. 568-90.
STALKER, D.M., Ezekiel. Introduction and Commentary, in Torch Bible Com-
mentaries, SCM, London 1968.
VAWTER, B., HOPE, L.J., A New Heart. A Commentary on the Book of
Ezekiel, International Theological Commentary, Eerdmans, Grand
Rapids 1991.
WEVERS, J.W., Ezekiel, in New Century Bible, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids
1982 (repr.).
WILSON, R.R., Ezekiel, in J.L. MAYS (ed.), Harper’s Bible Commentary,
Harper & Row, San Francisco 1988, pp. 652-94.
ZIMMERLI, W., Ezekiel 1: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel,
Chapters 1-24, Eng. trans. by R.E. Clements, Hermeneia, Fortress, Phi-
ladelphia 1979.
— Ezekiel II: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, Chapters
25-48, Eng. trans. by J.D. Martin, Hermeneia, Fortress, Philadelphia
1983.
STUDIES AND ARTICLES
ABBA, R., Priests and Levites in Deuteronomy, VT 27 (1977) 257-67.

— Priests and Levites in Ezekiel, VT 28 (1978) 1-9.
ACKROYD, P.R., Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the

Sixth Century B.C., Old Testament Library, SCM, London 1968.
— The Temple Vessels – A Continuity Theme, in G.W. ANDERSON, P.A.H.
DE BOER (eds.), Studies in the Religion of Ancient Israel, VTSup 23
(1972) 166-81.
ALBRIGHT, W.F., The Babylonian Temple-Tower and the Altar of Burnt-Offer-
ing, JBL 39 (1920) 137-42.
— The Seal of Eliakim and the Latest Preexilic History of Judah, with Some
Observations on Ezekiel, JBL 51 (1932) 77-106.
— The Names Shaddai and Abram, JBL 54 (1935) 173-204.
— What Were the Cherubim?, BA 1 (1938) 1-3.
ALLEN, L.C., Ezekiel 24:3-14: A Rhetorical Perspective, CBQ 49 (1987)
404-14.
— The Structuring of Ezekiel’s Revisionist History Lesson (Eze 20:3-31),
CBQ 54 (1992) 448-62.
— The Structure and Intention of Ezekiel I, VT 43 (1993) 145-61.
ANDERSON, J.S., The Social Function of Curses in the Hebrew Bible, ZAW
110 (1998) 223-37.
ARANDA PÉREZ, G., BASEVI, C., CHAPA, J., Biblia, exegesis y cultura: estudios
en honor del prof. José Maria Casciaro, EUNSA, Pamplona 1994.
ARANDA PÉREZ, G., GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F., PÉREZ FERNÁNDEZ, M., Lite-
ratura judía intertestamentaria, Verbo Divino, Estella 1996.
ASURMENDI, J.M., Ezequiel, CB 38, Verbo Divino, Estella 41997.
AUSÍN, S., La tradición del Exodo en los profetas, in Biblia y Hermenéutica.
VII Simposio Internacional de Teología, EUNSA, Pamplona 1986, pp.
423-38.
— Persona y sociedad en los profetas, in Doctrina social de la Iglesia y realidad
socio-económico.XII Simposio Internacional de Teología, EUNSA, Pam-
plona 1991, pp. 307-22.
— Los profetas y la Revelación, in Dios en la Palabra y en la historia. XIII Sim-
posio Internacional de Teología, EUNSA, Pamplona 1993, pp. 503-18.
— Los profetas y la historia, in «Reseña Bíblica» 1 (1994) 31-41.
BAKON, Sh., Ezekiel: From Destruction to Redemption, JBQ 20 (1991) 144-52.
BARRICK, W.B., The Straight-Legged Cherubim of Ezekiel’s Inaugural Vision
(Ezekiel 1:7a), CBQ 44 (1982) 543-50.
BEN-MORDECAI, C.A., The Iniquity of the Sanctuary: A Study of the Hebrew
Term !wO[, JBL 60 (1982) 543-50.
BERRY, G.R., The Authorship of Ezekiel 40-48, JBL 34 (1915) 17-40.
— The Date of Ezekiel 45:1-8a and 47:13-48:35, JBL 40 (1921) 70-75.
— Priests and Levites, JBL 42 (1923) 227-38.
— Was Ezekiel in the Exile?, JBL 49 (1930) 83-93.
— The Title of Ezekiel (1:1-3), JBL 51 (1932) 54-57.
— The Glory of YHWH and the Temple, JBL 56 (1937) 115-17.
— The Composition of the Book of Ezekiel, JBL 58 (1939) 163-75.
BERTHOLET, A., GALLING, K., Hesekiel, in Handbuch zum Alten Testament

13, Mohr, Tübingen 1936.
BEWER, J.A., On the Text of Ezekiel 7:5-14, JBL 45 (1926) 223-31.
— The Text of Ezekiel 1:1-3, AJSL 50 (1934) 96-101.
— Textual and Exegetical Notes on the Book of Ezekiel, JBL 72 (1953) 158-
68.
BLACK, M., The Throne-Theophany, Prophetic Commissioning and Son of
Man, Brill, Leiden 1976.
BLANK, S., Isaiah 52:5 and the Profanation of the Name, HUCA 25 (1954)
1-8.
BLENKINSOPP, J., An Assessment of the Alleged Pre-Exilic Date of the Priestly
Material in the Pentateuch, ZAW 108 (96) 495-518.
BLOCK, D.I., Beyond the Grave: Ezekiel’s Vision of Death and Afterlife, in
BBR 2 (1992) 113-41.
— Text and Emotion: A Study in the «Corruptions» in Ezekiel’s Inaugural Vi-
sion (Ezekiel 1:4-28), CBQ 50 (1988) 418-41.
BOADT, L., Textual Problems in Ezekiel and Poetic Analysis of Paired Words,
JBL 97 (1978) 489-99.
— The A:B:B:A Chiasm of Identical Roots in Ezekiel, VT 25 (1975) 693-99.
BODI, D., The Book of Ezekiel and the Poem of Erra, OBO 104, Vanden-
hoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1991, pp. 183-218.
BOROWSKI, E., Cherubim: God’s Throne?, BarR 214 (1995) 36-41.
BROOKS, B.A., Fertility Cult Functionaries in the Old Testament, JBL 60
(1941) 227-53.
BROOME, E., Ezekiel’s Abnormal Personality, JBL 65 (1946) 277-92.
BROWNLEE, W.H., The Aftermath of the Fall of Judah According to Ezekiel,
JBL 89 (1970) 393-404.
— Ezekiel’s Parable of the Watchman and the Editing of Ezekiel, VT 28
(1978) 392-408.
— Son of Man Set Your Face: Ezekiel the Refugee Prophet, HUCA 54 (1983)
83-110.
CARLEY, K.W., Ezekiel Among the Prophets, SCM, London 1975.
CARROLL, R.P., Razed Temple and Shattered Vessels: Continuities and Discon-
tinuities in the Discourses of Exile in the Hebrew Bible, An Appreciation of
the Work of Peter Ackroyd on the Occasion of his Eightieth Birthday, JSOT
75 (1997) 93-106.
— So What Do We Know About the Temple? The Temple in the Prophets, in
T.C. ESKENAZI and K.H. RICHARDS (eds.), Second Temple Studies: Tem-
ple Community in the Persian Period, II, JSOT, Sheffield 1994, pp. 34-
51.
CHEYNE, T.K., The Image of Jealousy in Ezekiel, ZAW 21 (1901) 201-02.
CHILDS, B.S., The Enemy from the North and Chaos Tradition, JBL 78
(1959) 187-98.
CLEMENTS, R.E., The Ezekiel Tradition: Prophecy in a Time of Crisis, in R.

COGGINS, A. PHILIPS and M. KNIBB (eds.), Israel’s Prophetic Heritage: Es-
says in Honour of Peter Ackroyd, Cambridge University, Cambridge
1982, pp. 119-36.
— God and Temple, Blackwell, Oxford 1965.
CONGAR, Y.M.-J., El misterio del templo. Economía de la presencia de Dios en
su criatura, del Génesis al Apocalipsis, Span. trans. by A. Rodríguez, Es-
tela, Barcelona 1964.
COOK, S.L., Innerbiblical Interpretation in Ezekiel 44 and the History of Is-
rael’s Priesthood, JBL 114 (1995) 193-208.
COOKE, G.A., Some Considerations on the Text and Teaching of Ezekiel 40-
48, ZAW 42 (1924) 105-15.
DARR, K.P., The Wall Around Paradise: Ezekielian Ideas About the Future,
VT 37 (1987) 271-79.
— Ezekiel’s Justifications of God: Teaching Troubling Texts, JSOT 55 (1992)
97-117.
DAVIS, E.F., Swallowing the Scroll. Textuality and the Dynamics of Discourse
in Ezekiel’s Prophecy, JSOTSup 78, JSOT, Sheffield 1989.
DEAN, J.E., The Date of Ezekiel 40-43, AJSL 43 (1927) 231-33.
DÍAZ, J. Alonso, Ezequiel, el profeta de ruina y de esperanza, «Cultura bíbli-
ca» 222 (1968) 290-99.
DIJKSTRA, M., The Altar of Ezekiel: Fact or Fiction?, VT 42 (1992) 22-36.
— The Glosses in Ezekiel Reconsidered; Aspects of Textual Transmission in
Ezekiel 10, BETL 74 (1986) 55-77.
DRIVER, G.R., Ezekiel’s Inaugural Vision, VT 1 (1951) 60-62.
DUGUID, I.M., Ezekiel and the Leaders of Israel, VTSup 56, Brill, Leiden
1994.
DUKE, R.K., Punishment or Restoration? Another Look at the Levites of
Ezekiel 44, 6-16, JSOT (1988) 61-81.
ELLIOT-BINNS, L.E., Some Problems of the Holiness Code, ZAW 67 (1955)
26-40.
EWALD, H., Die Propheten des Alten Bundes erklart, Jeremiah und Hezekiel,
II, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1841.
FAGER, J.A., Land Tenure and the Biblical Jubilee: Uncovering Hebrew Ethics
Through the Sociology of Knowledge, JSOTSup 155, JSOT, Sheffield
1993.
FARMER, W.R., The Geography of Ezekiel’s River of Life, BA 19 (1956) 17-22.
FEINBERG, C.L., The Prophecy of Ezekiel, Moody, Chicago 1969.
FINEGAN, J., The Chronology of Ezekiel, JBL 69 (1950) 61-66.
FITZGERALD, A., The Mythological Background for the Presentation of
Jerusalem as a Queen and False Worship as Adultery in the OT, CBQ 34
(1972) 403-16.
FOHRER, G., Die Hauptprobleme des Buches Ezechiel, BZAW Töpelmann,
Berlin 1952.
FOX, M.V., The Rhetoric of Ezekiel’s Vision of the Valley of Dry Bones, HUCA
51 (1980) 1-15.
FREEDMAN, D.N., The Book of Ezekiel, IBC 8 (1954) 446-471.
FREEDY, K.S., The Glosses in Ezekiel I-XXIV, VT 20 (1970) 129-52.
FUJITA, S., The Temple Theology of the Qumran Sect and the Book of Ezekiel:
Their Relationship to Jewish Literature of the Last Two Centuries B.C.,
diss., Princeton University 1970.
GALAMBUSH, J., Jerusalem in the Book of Ezekiel: The City as Yahweh’s Wife,
SBLDS 130, Scholars, Atlanta 1992.
GARSCHA, G., Studien zum Ezekielbuch: Eine redaktionsgeschichtliche Unter-
suchung von Ez 1-39, Peter Lang, Bern 1974.
GASTER, Th., Ezekiel and the Mysteries, JBL 60 (1941) 289-310.
GESE, H., Der Verfassungsentwurf des Ezechiel (Kap. 40-48) traditions-
geschichtlich Untersucht, BHTh 25, Mohr, Tübingen 1957, pp. 109-15.
GORDIS, R., The Branch to the Nose, JOTS 37 (1936) 284-88.
— A Note on YAD, JBL 62 (1943) 341-44.
GOUDOEVER, J. VAN, Ezekiel Sees in Exile a New Temple-City at the Begin-
ning of a Jobel Year, BETL 74 (1986) 344-49.
GREENBERG, M., The Vision of Jerusalem in Ezekiel 8-11: A Holistic Interpre-
tation, in J.L. CRENSHAW and S. SANDMEL (eds.), The Divine Helsman:
Studies on God’s Control of Human Events, Festschrift L. H. Silberman,
Ktav, New York 1980, pp. 143-64.
— On Ezekiel’s Dumbness, JBL 77 (1958) 101-05.
— The Design and Themes of Ezekiel’s Program of Restoration [40-48], Int 38
(1984) 181-208.
GREENSPOON, D., The Prophet as Watcher, JBQ 27 (1999) 29-35.
HABEL, N., The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives, ZAW 77
(1965) 297-323.
HALPERIN, D.J., The Exegetical Character of Ezek X 9-17, VT 26 (1976)
124-41.
— The Faces of the Chariot. Early Jewish Response to Ezekiel’s Vision, Mohr,
Tübingen 1988.
HALS, R.M., Ezekiel, FOTL, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 1989.
HARAN, M., The Law Code of Ezekiel XL-XLVIII and its Relation to the
Priestly School, HUCA 50 (1979) 45-71.
— Temple and Temple-Service in Ancient Israel: An Inquiry into Biblical Cult
Phenomena and the Historical Setting of the Priestly School, Clarendon,
Oxford 1978.
HARLAND, P.J., A Land Full of Violence: The Value of Human Life in the
Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, in P.J. HARLAND, C.T.R. HAYWARD (eds.),
New Heaven and New Earth: Prophecy and the Millennium, Essays in Ho-
nour of Anthony Gelston, VTSup 77 (1999) 113-27.
HERNTRICH, V., Ezechielprobleme, BZAW 61, Töpelmann, Giessen 1932,
pp. 37-130.
HINES, H.W., The Prophet as Mystic, AJSL 40 (1923) 37-41.

HOLLADAY, W.L., Had Ezekiel Known Jeremiah Personally?, CBQ 63 (2001)
31-34.
HÖLSCHER, G., Hesekiel, der Dichter und das Buch, BZAW 39, Töpelmann,
Giessen 1924.
HOUK, C.B., The Final Redaction of Ezekiel 10, JBL 90 (1971) 42-54.
— A Statistical Linguistic Study of Ezekiel 14-311, ZAW 93 (1981) 76-85.
HOWIE, C.G., The Date and Composition of Ezekiel, SBLMS 4 (1960) 69-
84.
— The East Gate of Ezekiel’s Temple Enclosure and the Solomonic Gateway of
Megiddo, BASOR 117 (1950) 13-19.
HUROWITZ, V., I Have Built You an Exalted House: Temple Building in the
Bible in Light of Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic Writings, JSOT-
Sup 115, JSOT, Sheffield 1992.
HURVITZ, A., A Linguistic Study of the Relationship Between the Priestly
Source and the Book of Ezekiel. A New Approach to an Old Problem, CRB
20, Gabalda, Paris 1982.
HUTCHENS, K.D., Although Yahweh was there: the land in the book of
Ezekiel, DEmory 1998.
IRONSIDE, H., Ezekiel the Prophet, Loizeaux Brothers, Neptune 1949.
IRWIN, W.A., The Problem of Ezekiel, University of Chicago, Chicago 1943.
— Hashmal, VT 2 (1952) 169-70.
JAUHIAINEN, M., The Measuring of the Sanctuary Reconsidered (Rev 11, 1-2),
Bib 83 (2002) 507-26.
JENSON, P.P., Graded Holiness: A Key to the Priestly Conception of the World,
JSOTSup 106, JSOT, Sheffield 1992.
JEREMIAS, J., Hesekieltempel und Serubbabeltempel, ZAW 52 (1934) 109-12.
JACOBSEN, T., Toward the Image of Tammuz, in W.L. MORAN (ed.), Toward
the Image of Tammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian Culture and
History, Harvard University, Cambridge 1970, pp. 73-103.
JOYCE, P., Divine Initiative and Human Response in Ezekiel, JSOTSup 51,
JSOT, Sheffield 1989.
KA LEUNG WONG, The Idea of Retribution in the Book of Ezekiel, VTSup
87, Brill, Leiden 2001.
KASHER, Anthropomorphism, Holiness and Cult: A New Look at Ezekiel 40-
48, ZAW 110 (1998) 192-208.
KLEIN, R.W., Ezekiel: The Prophets and His Message, University of South
Carolina, Columbia 1988.
KOHN, R.L., A Prophet Like Moses? Rethinking Ezekiel’s Relationship to the
Torah, ZAW 114 (2002) 236-54.
KRAETZSCHMAR, R., Das Buch Ezekiel, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttin-
gen 1990.
KRASOVEC, J., Reward, Punishment, and Forgiveness: The Thinking and Be-
liefs of Ancient Israel in the Light of Greek and Modern Views, VTSup 78,
Brill, Leiden 1999.
KUTSKO, J.F., Will the Real selem ‘elohim Please Stand up?: The Image of God
in the Book of Ezekiel, in SBL 1998 Seminar Papers, Scholars, Atlanta
1998, pp. 86-105.
— Between Heaven and Earth: Divine Presence and Absence in the Book of
Ezekiel, Biblical Judaic Studies 7, Eisenbrauns, Winona 2000.
LANG, B., A Neglected Method in Ezekiel Research: Editorial Criticism, VT
29 (1979) 39-44.
LEMKE, W.E., Life in the Present and Hope for the Future, Int 38 (1984)
165-80.
LEVENSON, J.D., Theology of the Program of Restoration of Ezekiel 40-48,
HSM 10, Scholar’s, Missoula 1976.
LINDARS, B., Ezekiel and Individual Responsibility, VT 15 (1965) 452-67.
LUNDQUIST, J.M., What is a Temple? A Preliminary Typology, in H.B. HOFF-
MON, F.A. SPINA, A.R.W. GREEN (eds.), The Quest for the Kingdom of
God: Studies in Honor of George E. Mendenhall, Eisenbrauns, Winona
Lake, pp. 205-19.
LUST, J. (ed.), Ezekiel and His Book: Textual and Literary Criticism and
Their Interrelation, BETL 74, Leuven University, Leuven 1986.
LUTZKY, H.C., The Image of Jealousy (Eze 8:3, 5), VT 46 (1996) 121-24.
MATTHEWS, I.G., Ezekiel, American Baptist Publication Society, Philadel-
phia 1939.
MAZAR, A., Archaeology of the Land of the Bible 10,000 – 586 B.C.E., Dou-
bleday, Garden City 1990.
MAY, H.G., Some Aspects of Solar Worship at Jerusalem, ZAW 55 (1936)
269-81.
— The Departure of the Glory of Yahweh, JBL 56 (1937) 309-21.
— Some Cosmic Connotations of «Mayim Rabbim», «Many Waters», JBL 74
(1955) 9-21.
MCIVER, R.K., Ezekiel: Through Crisis to Glory, Abundant Life Bible Am-
plifier, diss., Pacific, Oshawa 1997.
MCKEATING, H., Ezekiel, in R.N. WHYBRAY (ed.), Old Testament Guides,
Sheffield Academic, Sheffield 1995.
— Ezekiel The «Prophet Like Moses»?, JSOT 61 (1994) 97-109.
MEIN, A.R., Ezekiel and the Ethics of Exile, diss., Oxford University, 1997.
MEGER, T.A., The Notion of Divine Glory in the Hebrew Bible, diss., Lo-
vaina 1965.
MESSEL, N., Ezechielfragen, Dybwad, Oslo 1945.
METTINGER, T.N.D., The Dethronement of Sebaoth: Studies in the Shem and
Kabod Theologies, Gleerup, Lund 1982.
MILGROM, J., The Priestly Doctrine of Repentance, RB 82 (1975) 186-205.
— Israel’s Sanctuary: The Priestly Picture of Dorian Gray, RB 83 (1976)

390-99.
MILLS, M.E., Images of God in the Old Testament, Cassell, London 1998.
MILLER, J.E., The «Thirtieth Year» of Ezekiel 1:1, RB 99 (1992) 499-503.
MONLOUBOU, L., Un sacerdote se vuelve profeta. Ezequiel, Fax, Madrid
1973.
MYERS, C.L., Jachin and Boaz in Religious and Poltical Perspective, CBQ 45
(1983) 167-78.
NEIMAN, D., PGR: A Canaanite Cult Object in the Old Testament, JBL 67
(1948) 55-60.
NEWSOM, C.A., A Maker of Metaphors – Ezekiel’s Oracles Against Tyre, Int
38 (1984) 151-64.
NIDITCH, S., Ezekiel 40-48 in a Visionary Context, CBQ 48 (1986) 208-24.
NORTH, F.S., Aaron’s Rise in Prestige, ZAW 66 (1954) 191-99.
NOTH, M., The Jerusalem Catastrophe of 587 B.C., and Its Significance for
Israel, in The Laws in the Pentateuch and Other Studies, Eng. trans. by D.
R. Ap-Thomas, Fortress, Philadelphia 1967, pp. 260-80.
O‘CONNOR, M.P., The Weight of God’s Name. Ezekiel in Context and
Canon, «Btoday» 18 (1980) 61-74.
ODED, B., Mass Deportations and Deportees in the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Re-
ichert, Wiesbaden 1979.
ODELL, M.S., The City of Hamonah in Ezekiel 39:11-16: The Tumultous
City of Jerusalem, CBQ 56 (1994) 479-89.
— You Are What You Eat: Ezekiel and the Scroll, JBL 117 (1998) 229-48.
ORLINSKY, H.M., Where Did Ezekiel Receive the Call to Prophesy?, «Basor»
122 (1951) 34-36.
PARUNAK, H. VAN DYKE, Structural Studies in Ezekiel, diss., Harvard Uni-
versity, 1978.
— The Literary Architecture of Ezekiel’s Mar’ot ’Elohim, JBL 99 (1980) 61-
74.
PATTON, C.L., Ezekiel’s Blueprint for the Temple of Jerusalem, New Haven
1991.
PAYNE, J.B., The Relationship of the Chester Beatty Papyri of Ezekiel to Codex
Vaticanus, JBL 68 (1949) 251-65.
PEIFER, C.J., Ezekiel and the New Jerusalem, «Btoday» 18 (1980) 22-27.
POPE, M.H., The Cult of the Dead at Ugarit, in G.D. YOUNG (ed.), Ugarit
in Retrospect: Fifty Years of Ugarit and Ugaritic, Eisenbraun, Winona
Lake 1981, pp. 159-79.
REGEV, E., Priestly Dynamic Holiness and Deuteronomic Static Holiness, VT
51 (2001) 243-61.
RENZ, T., The Rhetorical Function of the Book of Ezekiel, VTSup 76, Brill,
Leiden 1999.
ROBERTS, J.J.M., The Hand of Yahweh, VT 21 (1971) 244-51.
— Yahweh’s Foundations in Zion (Isa 28:16), JBL 106 (1987)27-45.
ROWLEY, H.H., The Book of Ezekiel in Modern Study, BJRL 36 (1953-54)

146-90.
— Zadok and Nehushtan, JBL 58 (1939) 113-41.
RUIZ, J.-P., Ezekiel in the Apocalypse. The Transformation of Prophetic Lan-
guage in Revelation 16, 17-19, 10, diss., Pontificia Universitas Gregori-
ana, Roma 1989.
— Exile, history, and hope: a Hispanic reading of Ezekiel 20, «Btoday» 35
(1997) 106-13.
SARNA, N., Ezekiel 8:17. A Fresh Approach, HTR 57 (1964) 347-52.
SAVOCA, G., El libro de Ezequiel, Herder, Barcelona 1992.
SCHMIDT, H., Jahwe und die Kulttradition von Jerusalem, ZAW 67 (1955)
168-97.
SCHMITT, J.W., LANEY, J.C., Messiah’s Coming Temple: Ezekiel’s prophetic vi-
sion of the future temple, Kregel, Grand Rapids 1997.
SCOTT, R.B.Y., The Pillars of Jachin and Boaz, JBL 58 (1939) 143-149.
— Meteorological Phenomena and Terminology in the Old Testament, ZAW
64 (1952) 11-25.
— The Hebrew Cubit, JBL 77 (1958) 205-14.
— Weights and Measures of the Bible, BA 22 (1959) 22-40.
SHERLOCK, C., Ezekiel’s Dumbness, ET 94 (1983) 296-98.
SMITH, D.L., The Religion of the Landless: The Social Context of the Babylon-
ian Exile, Meyer-Stone, Bloomington 1989.
SMITH, J., The Book of the Prophet Ezekiel: A New Introduction, Macmillan,
New York 1931.
SMITH, M.S., The Veracity of Ezekiel, The Sin of Manasseh, and Jeremiah 44;
18, ZAW 87 (1975) 11-16.
— The «Son of Man» in Ugaritic, CBQ 45 (1983) 59-60.
SPATAFORA, A., From the «Temple of God» to God as the Temple. A Biblical
Theological Study of the Temple in the Book of Revelation, diss., Pontificia
Universita Gregoriana, Roma 1997.
SPEISER, E.A., Background and Function of the Biblical Nasí, CBQ 25
(1963) 111-17.
SPIEGEL, S., Toward Certainty in Ezekiel, JBL 54 (1935) 145-71.
STEINMANN, J., Le prophète Ezechiel, Les Editions du Cerf, Paris 1953.
STEUERNAGEL, C., Lehrbuch der Einleitung in das Alte Testament, Mohr,
Tübingen 1912.
STEVENSON, K.R., The Vision of Transformation: The Territorial Rhetoric of
Ezekiel 40-48, SBLDS 154, Scholars, Atlanta 1996.
TALMON, S., FISHBANE, M., The Structuring of Biblical Books: Studies in the
Book of Ezekiel, ASTI 10 (1975/76) 129-53.
TORREY, C.C., Pseudo-Ezekiel and the Original Prophecy, Yale University,
New Haven 1930; repr. Ktav, New York 1970, pp. 69-86.
TSEVAT, M., The Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian Vassal Oaths and the
Prophet Ezekiel, JBL 78 (1959) 199-204.
TUELL, S.S., Ezekiel 40-42 as Verbal Icon, in CBQ 58 (1996) 649-64.

— The Law of the Temple in Ezekiel 40-48, HSM 49, Scholars, Atlanta
1992.
— The Temple Vision of Ezekiel 40-48: A Program for Restoration?, in «Pro-
ceedings of the Eastern Great Lakes Biblical Society» 2 (1982) 92-103.
TURNER, N., The Greek Translators of Ezekiel, JTS 7 (1956) 12-24.
VAN SETERS, J., Solomon’s Temple: Fact and Ideology in Biblical and Near
Eastern Historiography, CBQ 59 (1997) 45-57.
VARO, F., Los cantos del siervo en la exégesis hispano-hebrea, Monte de Piedad
y Caja de Ahorros, Cordoba 1993.
VILLAPANDO, J.B. (1555-1608), Tratado de la arquitectura perfecta en la últi-
ma visión del profeta Ezequiel, Span. trans. by L. Rubio, Servicio de Publi-
caciones del COAM, Madrid 1990.
VOGELSTEIN, M., Nebuchadnezzar’s Reconquest of Phoenicia and Palestine
and the Oracles of Ezekiel, HUCA 23 (1950-51) 197-229.
WALDMAN, N.M., A Note On Ezekiel 1:18, JBL 103 (1984) 614-18.
WILSON, R.R., An Interpretation of Ezekiel’s Dumbness, VT 22 (1972) 91-
104.
— Prophecy and Ecstasy: A Reexamination, JBL 98 (1979) 321-37.
— Prophecy in Crisis: The Call of Ezekiel, Int 38 (1984) 117-30.
WRIGHT, G.E., Solomon’s Temple Resurrected, BA 4 (1941) 26-27.
WONG, KA LEUNG, The Idea of Retribution in the Book of Ezekiel, VTSup
87, Brill, Leiden 2001.
WORDEN, T., The Literary Influence of the Ugaritic Fertility Myth on the Old
Testament, VT 3 (1953) 273-97.
YORK, A.D., Ezekiel 1: Inaugural and Restoration Visions?, VT 27 (1977)
82-98.
ZIMMERLI, W., The Special Form and Traditio-Historical Character of Ezekiel,
VT 15 (1965) 515-27.
— The Message of the Prophet Ezekiel, Int 23 (1969) 131-57.
— I am Yahweh, Eng. trans. by D. W. Stott, John Knox, Atlanta 1982.
TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS
1. ALPHABETICAL ORDER OF BIBLICAL BOOKS

Acts Acts of the Apostles
Am Amos
1 Chr 1 Chronicles
2 Chr 2 Chronicles
Col Colossians
1 Cor 1 Corinthians
2 Cor 2 Corinthians
Dan Daniel
Deut Deuteronomy
Ecc Ecclesiastes
Eph Ephesians
Est Esther
Exo Exodus
Eze Ezekiel
Ezr Ezra
Gal Galatians
Gen Genesis
Hab Habakkuk
Hag Haggai
Heb Hebrews
Hos Hosea
Isa Isaiah
Jd Jude
Jer Jeremiah
Jgs Judges
Jl Joel
Jn John
1 Jn 1 John
2 Sam 2 Samuel
Songs Song of Songs
1 Th 1 Thessalonians
2 Th 2 Thessalonians
1 Tim 1 Timothy
2 Tim 2 Timothy
2 Jn 2 John
3 Jn 3 John
Job Job
Jon Jonah
Jos Joshua
1 Kgs 1 Kings
2 Kgs 2 Kings
Lam Lamentations
Lev Leviticus
Lk Luke
Mal Malachi
Mk Mark
Mt Matthew
Mic Micah
Nah Nahum
Neh Nehemiah
Num Numbers
Obd Obadiah
1 Pet 1 Peter
2 Pet 2 Peter
Phm Philemon
Phil Philippians
Pro Proverbs
Ps(s) Psalm(s)
Rev Revelation
Rom Romans
Ru Ruth
1 Sam 1 Samuel
Titus Titus
Tob Tobit
Wis Wisdom
Zec Zechariah
Zep Zephaniah
2. REFERENCE WORKS, ARTICLES AND JOURNALS

AB Anchor Bible Commentary Series
ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary
AJA American Journal of Archaeology
AJSL American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature
TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS 35
AnBib Analecta biblica

ANEP2 The Ancient Near East. An Anthology of Texts and Pictures
(2nd edition)
ANET3 Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament
(3rd edition)
AnOr Analecta orientalia
AOS American Oriental Series
ASTI Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BBR Bulletin for Biblical Research
BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensum
BHK Biblia Hebraica Kittel
BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia
Bib Biblica
BibOr Biblica et Orientalia
BibSac Biblia Sacra
BJ Biblia de Jerusalen
BJRL Bulletin of the John Ryland Library
Btoday Bible Today
BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
CBC Cambridge Bible Commentary
CBI Comentario Bíblico Internacional
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
ConBOT Coniectanea Biblica, Old Testament
DSBS Daily Study Bible Series
DTMAT Diccionario teológico manual del Antiguo Testamento
ET Expository Times
FOTL The Forms of the Old Testament Literature
GKC Gesenius Hebrew Grammar, E. KAUTZSCH (ed.), revised by
A. E. Cowley
HAR Hebrew Annual Review
HAT Handbuch zum Alten Testament
HKAT Hankommentar zum Alten Testament
HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs
HTR Harvard Theological Review
HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual
IB The Interpreter’s Bible
IBC International Biblical Commentary
ICC The International Critical Commentary
Int Interpretation
ITC International Theological Commentary
JANESCU Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia
University
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

JBLMS Journal of Biblical Literarure Monograph Series
JBQ Jewish Biblical Quarterly
JJS Journal of Jewish Studies
JHNES John Hopkins Near Eastern Studies
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JNSL Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages
JOTS Journal for Old Testament Studies
JPS Jewish Publication Society
JQR Jewish Quarterly Review
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series
JSS Journal of Semitic Studies
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
NAB The New American Bible
NCB New Century Bible
NIB The New Interpreter’s Bible
NICOT The New International Commentary on the Old Testament
NIVACS The NIV Application Commentary Series
NJB The New Jerusalem Bible
NJBC The New Jerome Biblical Commentary
OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis
Or Orientalia
OTG Old Testament Guides
OTL Old Testament Library
PC Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
PEQ Palestinian Exploration Quarterly
PTR Princeton Theological Review
RB Revue Biblique
RevQ Revue de Qumran
SB Sagrada Biblia
SBL Society of Biblical Literature
SBLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series
SBLMS Society of Biblical Literature Monographs Series
SBLSBS Society of Biblical Literature Sources for Biblical Study
SBT Studies in Biblical Theology
SOTSMS Society for Old Testament Study Monograph Series
TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament
THAT Theologisches Handworterbuch zum Alten Testament
VT Vetus Testamentum
VTSup Vetus Testamentum Supplements
WBC World Bible Commentary
WTJ Westmister Theological Journal
ZAW Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS 37
3. OTHER ABBREVIATIONS
A = Aramaic; adj = adjective; art = article; adv. = adverb; B.C.E. = before
the Common Era; c(c). = columns; C.E. = Common Era; cf. = confer; conj
= conjuction; consec = consecutive; constr = construct; diss. = doctoral dis-
sertation; ed(s). = editor(s); e.g. = exempli gratia (for example); Eng. trans. =
English translation; fem = feminine; ff. = following; G = Septuagint; GB =
Codex Vaticanus; ibid. = ibidem (in the same work); i.e. = id est (that is);
imperf. = imperfect; K = Kethib; L = Codex Leningradensis; MS(S) = Man-
uscript(s); MSSKen = Kennicot Manuscripts; masc = masculine; OT = Old
Testament; P = Priestly Source; perf = perfect; p(p). = page(s); part = par-
ticiple; pers = person; plu = plural; Q = Qere; repr = reprint; S = Syriac;
Span. trans. = Spanish translation; sing = singular; T = Targum; TM = Tex-
tus Masoreticus; trans = translation; V = Vulgate; Vrs. = versions; v(v). =
verse(s).
DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH FROM
THE TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM
I. THE FOUR CULTIC ABOMINATIONS (Eze 8:5-18)
In this pericope, we will discuss Ezekiel’s vision of the cultic

abominations which was shown to him in his first Temple tour. The
pericope covers Eze 8:5-18 of the book and the narratives are cen-
tered around the prophet’s vision of and in the Temple. From his
place of exile, Ezekiel was brought to Jerusalem in a «divine vision»
and was shown the source of YHWH’s anger, namely, the cultic
abominations that the house of Israel commits at the very Temple
dedicated to YHWH. The four cultic abominations shown consti-
tute the main rebellion of Israel and leads to the departure of the di-
vine kabod from the Temple. In this vision, the historical tragedy of
death, destruction and exile find theological explanation and justifi-
cation. The scholarly assumption is that these cultic abominations
somehow explain the doom of the city and the Temple1.
A. Translation and Analysis
a. The image of jealousy (Eze 8:5-6)
5 Then he said to me, «Son of man, raise your eyes now toward2 the
north». So I lifted up my eyes toward the north, and behold, to the
north of the altar3 gate, the image of jealousy was at the entrance4.
6 He said to me, «Son of man, do you see what they are doing? The
great abominations which the house of Israel5 are committing here, to
drive me away from my sanctuary? Yet you will see still greater abomi-
nations».
b. Rites before pagan imagery (Eze 8:7-13)

7 Then he brought me to the entrance of the court; and I saw and
behold a hole in the wall6.
8 Then he said to me, «Son of man, dig now through the wall»7 so I
dug through the wall8, and behold, an entrance.
9 And he said to me, «Go in, and see the vile9 abominations that
they are committing here».
10 So I went in, and saw, and behold, all kinds of reptiles and abom-
inable animals10, and all the idols of the house of Israel carved11 on the
wall12 all around13.
11 Before them stood seventy men, of the elders of the house of Israel,
and Jaazaniah son of Shaphan standing among them14. Each had his
censer in his hand, and the fragrant cloud of15 incense was ascending.
12 Then he said to me, «Son of man, do you see what the elders of
the house of Israel are doing in the dark16, each in his chamber17 of im-
ages? For they say, “The Lord does not see (us)18, the Lord has forsaken
the land”».
13 And he said to me again, «You will see still greater abominations
that they are committing».
c. Worship of the Tammuz (Eze 8:14-15)

14 Then he brought me to the entrance of the gate of the house of
the Lord which was towards the north; and behold, there, sat women19
weeping for the Tammuz20.
15 Then he said to me, «Do you see this, son of man? You will see
still greater abominations than these».
d. Worship of the sun (Eze 8:16-18)

16 Then he brought me into the inner court of the house of the
Lord; and behold, at the entrance of the temple of the Lord, between
the porch and the altar, were about twenty-(five)21 men, with their backs
to the temple of the Lord, and their faces toward the east, prostrating
themselves22 to the sun toward the east23.
17 And he said to me, «Do you see this, son of man? Is it a light thing24
for the house of Judah to commit the abominations which they commit
here? Must they fill the land with violence25, and repeatedly provoke me to
anger? For behold, they are putting the branch to their nose!26.
18 Therefore I will act with fury27; my eye will not spare, nor will I
have pity; and though they cry in my ears with a loud voice, I will not
listen to them»28.
THE DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH FROM THE TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM 41
B. Structure
Eze 8:4-18 is the narrative about the four cultic abominations

committed within the Temple precinct (vv. 4-6, 7-13, 14-15, 16-17)
and YHWH’s response to them (v. 18). The unity between the four
acts of cultic abominations is established by repeated use of literary
formulas such as; location29; the repeated command to see30; (3) de-
scription of the abomination and participants introduced by hnhw31;
the question as to whether the prophet sees repeatedly introduced by
usual title «son of man»32; and a transitional note warning that worse
is more to come33. This clearly manifest that Eze 8:1-18 is intended
to be read as a unity whose principal motif is the cultic abominations
committed inside the Temple precinct. The guided tour given to the
prophet in the Temple of Jerusalem is meant to show in a graphic
manner the source of YHWH’s anger and the reason for the recent
crisis.
C. Significance and Relation to the Temple of Jerusalem
This part of Ezekiel’s first Temple vision presents the four cultic
abominations commited by the house of Israel against the sovereign-
ty of YHWH. It fully clarifies the repeated description of Israel’s re-
belliousness in the inaugural vision and serves as the foundation why
the kebod YHWH intends to leave the Temple of Jerusalem. This im-
portant point can be amply seen in our discussion of the theological
significance of the abominations shown to the prophet in Eze 8:5-
18. To establish the relationship of this narrative with the Temple of
Jerusalem, I would like to present some observations.
1. The Symbolism of the Number «four». As noted in the inaugural

vision, Ezekiel uses motifs to transmit his theological message. One
of these is the symbolic use of the number four for the living beings
(their faces, their wings, the feet, the wheels, etc.)34. In Eze 8:3-18,
the prophet approached the Temple from the outer into the inner
courtyard, in the direction of the eastern entrance leading into the
atrium in four stages. At each of the stage he saw idolatrous practice
being carried out each being considered worse than than the one
which precedes it35.
Scholars have tried to disprove the veracity of these cultic abomi-
nations as occuring in the time of Ezekiel. The main argument sup-
porting this position is the claim that the narrative of Eze 8 stands in
contrast with the data from Jeremiah and Lamentations and there-
fore its veracity seems questionable36. But, as M. Greenberg correctly
observes, the point of the vision is to present vividly the cultic de-
pravity of the sanctuary and thus predicts its doom as something ir-
revocable37. I. M. Duguid takes the same position, by stating that
they should not be regarded as descriptions of actual events taking
place in the Temple in the time of Ezekiel. This does not imply that
Ezekiel’s narrative was false, nor does this makes the prophet a «liar».
Ezekiel’s purpose was not to preserve historical data but to convict
Judah of cultic sin and thus provide a theological rationale for the de-
struction of Jerusalem38.
Corollary to this, in the discussion of the inaugural vision, we ex-
plained that the predominance of the number four in the description
of the living creatures implies totality39. If we apply the same symbol-
ism in the incidence of four cultic abominations, the scene clearly ex-
presses the totality of the religious and cultic corruptions of the peo-
ple. Israel is corrupted through and through. This obliges YHWH,
the Holy One of Israel, to abandon them to their fate and thus leaves
no doubt the irrevocability of the impending destruction which the
people richly deserves for their sins. In this way, Ezekiel reinterpreted
the historical tragedy of Israel from a religio-cultual perspective.
2. tAb[eAt (abominations). The evaluation of history from a cultic

perspective can be clearly seen in Ezekiel’s use of cultic terminologies.
The transgressions of the house of Israel against YHWH are referred
to as tAb[eAt40, «abominations», a word which occurs forty-three times
in the book. The word appears once in Isaiah, and a few times in Je-
remiah while it does not occur in other pre-exilic prophetic litera-
tures41. This statistic clearly manifests that the term is highly charac-
teristic of Ezekiel. It appears in the Temple vision three times and is
used to condemn the idolatrous practices committed in the Temple
precinct42. The word tAb[eAt refers to something «which is excluded
by its very nature, that which seems dangerous or sinister»43. Its refer-
ence ranges from antisocial behavior to pagan worship44. In Ezekiel,
it often refers to cultic offences45. Thus, the cultic offences in Eze
8:1-18 and 11:1-13 can both be understood as comprising all the
abominations committed by Israel which defile the Temple and all
the land46.
This term clearly marks the cultic perspective from where the nar-
rative is seen47. The acts committed by Israel are transgressions
against YHWH enthroned in the Temple. Since the transgressions

are cultic in nature expectedly all this demanded ritual cleansing48.
But the cultic sins of Israel are so great (as may be intimated by the
number «four») that the very Temple, the house of YHWH, is totally
contaminated by it. The gravity of Israel’s cultic sins and the rejec-
tion of YHWH are affirmed in the graphic description of the depar-
ture of the kebod YHWH from inside the Temple. This is in conso-
nance with the Priestly concept that the divinity cannot reside in a
totally impure sanctuary49. Since the God of Israel is no longer in the
Temple, then no expiation and ritual cleansing are possible, no for-
giveness will be obtained. Israel’s doom is therefore sealed.
3. The Four Cultic Abominations. The narrative in Eze 8:5-18 de-
scribes the defilement of the Jerusalem Temple consisting of an image
and cultic actions, called abominations, committed by the people at
the very Temple precinct dedicated to the sole worship of the God of
Israel. After giving the chronological data and circumstances sur-
rounding the vision, Ezekiel begins the account.
a. the image of jealousy (vv. 5-6). When Ezekiel arrives in
Jerusalem, he is first brought to the entrance to the inner court’s gate
(v. 3), which is known also as the altar gate because the altar of sacri-
fice is located just inside that gate (v. 5). As he looks northward, he
sees the «image of jealousy» (ha©n>Qih; lm,se) at its entrance50. This ex-
pression is not altogether clear and therefore its identity cannot be es-
tablished with certainty. Studies have been divided regarding the
identity of the divinity to whom this image was dedicated to. Opin-
ions range from an image representing Tammuz51, Asherah52, any
fanciful image53, and even, YHWH himself54.
Though the identity of this statue is not clear, from the emotion
of jealousy that the image evokes in YHWH (v. 3) and the title at-
tributed to it (vv. 3, 5), it is clear that this image is not simply an or-
nament or a symbolic guard but a representation of a divinity that
stands as a rival to the adoration intended for YHWH alone55. The
normal term for «idols», from the cultic perspective is gillulim, which
appears forty-eight times in the OT and thirty-nine of it is in
Ezekiel56. The Hebrew word lm,s,e translated here as «image», appears
only twice in Ezekiel57 and both are used to refer to this unknown
statue. Though the word occurs only twice in Ezekiel, it was in gene-
ral use among the Phoenicians for a statue of a god or goddess, and
the form changes gender accordingly58. It is also used to denote the
statue of a human being59. Thus, it seems we have here a case of an
alien cult object designated by a probably foreign term60. With the

seeming confrontation between the statue and YHWH already noted
in vv. 3-4, this designation strongly underlines that this cultic object
is foreign and has no right to be in the Temple dedicated to «the God
of Israel».
Finally, its location at the outer north gate suggests that the image
probably is intended to guard or protect the city from attack. As Eze
38:6, 15 clearly state, the north is the traditional direction from
which Jerusalem’s enemies are believed to approach61. If so, then its
location also manifests Israel’s lack of confidence in YHWH’s power
to save his own people. Thus, they have asked the protection of foreign
gods62.
b. rites before pagan imagery (vv. 7-13). The heavenly guide then
leads Ezekiel to the entrance of the court and there sees a hole in the
wall to where he is ordered to dig through. The inside wall of the
outer court of the Temple is lined with unclean creatures, «reptiles»
or «creeping things» (fm,r,)63, «abominable animals» (#q,v, hm©heb.)64,
«and all the idols of the house of Israel» (laer©f.yI tyBe yleWLGI-lk©w>). The
identity of these idols, again, cannot be ascertained with any certain-
ty. One suggestion is that they are Egyptian idols that often had ani-
mal forms: «The precise nature of the elders practice is not known.
Possibly it is some form of Egyptian worship, since king Zedekiah of
Jerusalem is at this time making political overtures to Egypt. The
adoption of Egyptian worship, with its animal gods, would have
been natural»65. Thus, the ceremonies being conducted by these offi-
cial representatives of Judean society are probably aimed at enlisting
the support of Egyptian deities, which also implies the support of the
Egyptian overlords66. In any case, the cultic action clearly manifest
their loss of confidence in the God of Israel and his power to act,
which may have been the meaning behind the elders justification for
idolatrous act: «the Lord does not see us, the Lord has forsaken the
land»67.
The specific and repeated mention of the participants as the el-
ders of the house of Israel (vv. 11-12) should be considered as an im-
portant emphasis here68. It should be remembered that in Israelite
history, a group of elders was chosen to represent the whole house of
Israel. Num 11:16-30 speaks of seventy elders who were endowed
with the same spirit as Moses, so as to help him carry the burden of
leading the people. In Exo 24:1-11 a group of seventy elders, together
with Moses, Aaron and his two sons, is mentioned as receiving the
privilege of seeing God. Clearly, the group of seventy elders plays an
important role in the community as mediator between YHWH and

the people. If the representatives or the people chosen to lead are
idolaters and sinners, logically those whom they represent and lead
must be too69. This enforces the depiction of Israel as totally corrupt
and therefore deserves to be abandoned by YHWH. Judgment is
then inevitable.
Finally, a note of irony can be noted in the second cultic abomi-
nation. In OT custom, the practice of offering incense has an apotr-
paic function, that is, to ward off dangers from demonic forces70.
Considering the historico-political context of the text, the purpose of
the elders cultic action is probably to seek deliverance from the im-
pending danger that looms over Israel, namely, the threat of invasion
of a new enemy, the Babylonian empire. But in seeking deliverance
from this new threat, they turned and asked helped from an old ene-
my, Egypt, who had once enslaved them in the past. Instead of turn-
ing to YHWH, who has been their deliverer, they spurned him,
doubted his power and turned towards their former Egyptian mas-
ters from whom YHWH has already saved them71. The succeeding
narratives will prove them wrong. Israel will see the power of
YHWH in judgment, and, Egypt, to whom they have put so much
trust, cannot do anything to prevent the impending destruction. In-
deed, both Israel and Egypt will suffer the judgments of YHWH.
c. worship of the Tammuz (vv. 14-15). The prophet is then led to
the northern entrance to the inner court where he sees women crying
for Tammuz72. D. I. Block suggests that «the Tammuz» refers to a
particular genre of lament, rather than to a foreign god. What Block
pretends to prove here is that the women were not weeping for the
death and departure of a foreign god, as the Tammuz ritual would
imply, but they used the Tammuz ritual to grieve the departure of
YHWH himself. The close proximity of this passage with the elder’s
assertion of YHWH’s absence seems, for Block, to point towards this
interpretation73. Although this interpretation serves to explain ade-
quately the special construction zWMT;h;-ta, tAKb;m., «weeping for the
Tammuz» (with the sign of the direct object and the article on Tam-
muz), but read in the context of the abominations that precede and
follow it, this interpretation seems inappropriate. It should be noted
that the two prior abominations (like the fourth to follow) involve Is-
rael’s veneration of a deity other than YHWH, thus, the likely con-
clusion would be that this one does as well.
If this is the case, the women are weeping therefore not out of hu-
man grief but performing a sacral act associated with the Babylonian
god Tammuz. The place where the worship is located manifests their
loss of faith: at the very entrance to YHWH’s sacred sanctuary, they
are weeping for another god. Their cultic action does not only mani-
fest their lack of faith but also their lack of understanding of the na-
ture of the God of Israel. The God of Israel is above all the «living
God»74. To worship a dying god in the very house of the living God
of Israel is a direct and double affront to YHWH’s sovereignty and
power over Israel and all creation. Israel have lost confidence in the
power of the living God, but their substitute for him was a god
whose power oscillates from life to death and then back from death
to life, according to the rhythm of nature. As T. Jacobsen explains:
«In the cult drama of the death of the god and lament for him, cele-
brated at the end of spring, the loss of the god, the waning of power
for new life in nature, is counteracted by mourning and lament»75.
Thus, their substitute god, supposedly restored to life aided by ritual
weeping of his devotees, is clearly inferior to YHWH and could not
even be considered a god in the strict sense. The succeeding chapters
will amply show the folly and uselessness of their action. The god
from whom they expect life and blessings will, in fact, be the cause of
their death and destruction.
d. worship of the sun (v. 16). The last act of abomination concerns
the twenty-five sun-worshipers in the inner court, between the inner
porch and the altar, with their backs to the sanctuary. The identity of
these men are not given but their number invites immediate associa-
tion with the twenty-five men, who appear in Eze 11:1, designated as
the «princes of the people» (~[©h© yref©). Although this identification
is attractive, it cannot be confirmed by the absence of a more specific
evidence76. Furthermore, their location in a place normally reserved
for the priests, and thus of special sanctity77, argues against this iden-
tification. The suggestion that they are the representatives of the
twenty-four priestly courses led by the high priest seems also incon-
clusive, since the institution came into existence later78. Despite the
uncertainty of their identity, we can deduce from the text that, since
they conducted the ritual in this place of special sanctity, they must
be a body of official standing in Israel.
They are depicted to be bowing to the sun in worship. This solar
rite is not new to the Temple precinct for 2 Kgs 23:11 narrates that
during Josiah’s reform, the king did away with the horses and burned
the chariots dedicated to the sun-god, Shemesh79. Whether they are
worshipping the sun as such, or whether they worshipped the sun as a
symbol of God80, it cannot be known for certain; if it was the latter,
they were breaking the second commandment, believing that a part of

the created order could be an image of the true God. The worship of
the rising sun entails turning one’s back on the Temple structure,
which itself faces east. The eastward orientation of the worshipers here
is in contrast with what seems to be prescribed in later writings, where
the worshiper must face the Temple81. Much more, in view of Eze
43:17 where the steps of the altar is constructed in such a way that the
priest who offers the sacrifice will be facing the sanctuary, the specific
mention that «their backs was to the Temple of the Lord» (v. 16) must
mean something more. In OT writings, turning one’s back on YHWH
is found used a metaphor for apostasy82. Since the Temple is consid-
ered to be the dwelling place of YHWH, where his holy presence is
enthroned, the men’s turning their back to the Temple must also mean
turning their back to YHWH. In the fourth abomination, the phrase
is therefore used literally and, at the same time, it also retains the sense
of the metaphor83. Much more their act of prostration before the sun
was an act that is reserved for YHWH alone, as the divine sovereign.
The verb ~t,ywIxT] v; m. i «prostrating» is a court language which «denotes the
physical gesture of prostration before a superior»84. Thus, the cult ren-
dered by these men to the sun does not only constitute an apostasy
but also an act of rebellion against the sovereignty of YHWH over Is-
rael. This case of double offense may have contributed to its evalua-
tion as being the worst of all the abominations of Israel.
4. The Concept of the «sacred/holy». The discussions above will be

further enriched if we take in consideration the biblical concept of
the «sacred/holy». In the opinion of most scholars, the Hebrew root
vdq has the basic meaning of «separation» or «withdrawal»85. But as
H.-P. Muller opines this meaning is not basic to the word but is de-
rived, that is, the separation is established for mutual protection for
both the sacred and the profane86, stemming from the idea that illicit
contact with the «numinous» or the deity is dangerous87. The word,
as properly understood, signifies that which is proper to the nature of
the divinity, his essence and not merely one of his divine attributes88.
Rudolf Otto’s analysis of the nature of holiness is widely accepted
and casts light on the biblical concept. Otto identifies the holy with
the «numinous», the mysterious quality of the divine, which he de-
scribes as «wholly other»; that which strikes man in the presence of
the divine and the created. The effect of the numinous is twofold
and paradoxical: it is «tremendous», fearful, and so repels, but, at the
same time, it is «fascinating» and attracts man89.
In the OT, the holiness of God as his proper nature is seen in the
passages where YHWH «has sworn by his holiness»90 and where he
affirms that he is «God and not man, the holy one present among»91
his people. It is therefore a quality unique to YHWH for, «there is no
Holy One like the Lord»92. When YHWH shows himself to be holy,
he demonstrates his divinity93. This is always a demonstration of
power directed to some purpose worthy of his divinity. He shows his
holiness in his protection and deliverance94, which is the great work
of his justice95 and his faithfulness96. Thus his holiness is often men-
tioned in contexts where the restoration of Israel occurs; for this
restoration is the establishment of an order in which his moral will is
supreme and his power over the forces of evil is asserted97. It is in the
holiness of YHWH where the trust in the salvation of Israel and
promises of restoration are founded98.
Persons or objects which are said to be holy derive their holiness
in relation to YHWH. The Temple, its personnel and the furniture
of the cult belong to YHWH, for, in some way or another, they con-
tain and manifest the presence and power of the numinous. The ho-
liness of persons or objects is therefore not part of their essence nor
an attribute but an effect of their relation (or contact) with the di-
vine99. Most occurrences of the word are found in liturgical con-
texts100. It is not surprising therefore that in the statistics provided by
Muller, among the OT books which contains the word vdq and its
derivatives, Leviticus comes first with a hundred fifty-two (152), fol-
lowed by Ezekiel with a hundred and five (105)101. The fact that
these two books are written within the context of the cult developed
in the Temple of Jerusalem affirms the term’s association with the
cult and also suggests the perspective from where it shall be best un-
derstood.
The basic Priestly conviction here is that the «wholly other» de-
sires to have fellowship with sinful humanity. Since God cannot be-
come less holy in order to establish this fellowship, man must there-
fore become more holy («sanctified»)102; once gained, holiness may
be lessened or contaminated by contact with various proscribed sub-
stances and by feeling, thinking, or acting in ways that God has for-
bidden (impurity)103. Once the sphere of the holy is infringed by the
impure, the fellowship established between man and YHWH deity is
in peril and disastrous consequences can be expected. In the Priestly
cosmogony, impurity is a dynamic and malefic force which attacks
the sphere of the holy not just by direct contact but from a dis-
tance104. In this conception, the «impure» acquires the malefic power
once attributed by Israel’s neighboring nations to demons105. Israel

thoroughly overhauled this concept of impurity in adapting it to its
monotheistic system106. The demons, which has no place in a
monotheistic cosmogony, have been excised from the world but man
has taken their place. Though man is not identified as demonic, he is
capable of the demonic. He alone has the power to break the fellow-
ship God has established with man. He alone can contaminate the
sanctuary and force God out107. Thus, there is a constant need in the
Priestly circle to continually and constantly purge the sanctuary from
all impurities that will threaten the holy presence within it108. Holi-
ness is also maintained not only by cultic ritual but by meeting the
demands of the moral will of YHWH; Israel should be holy because
YHWH is holy109. This principle introduces a series of moral pre-
cepts, as reflected in Lev 19:3, 9-18.
From the above discussion on the biblical concept of holiness, it is
clear that the Temple, being the dwelling place of YHWH, is of ut-
most holiness. YHWH’s permanent presence in it has far-reaching
consequences for the cultic and moral life of Israel, for it creates all
around it a sphere of supreme sanctity110. This sanctity extends
throughout the land in decreasing scale111. The most sacred area is
the Holy of Holies, the cultic center and the place where the sacred
presence is encountered. The further one is from the Temple the less-
er is the degree of holiness112. D.P. Wright has proven that within the
Temple of Jerusalem and precincts this gradation of holiness also ex-
ists113. The terminology used to call the different parts of the Temple
manifest this. The entire area of the Temple (Solomon’s), including
the courts, is called in Hebrew vD©q.mi, «holy/sanctuary area»114. The
Temple structure is divided into three parts. The innermost part
where the kebod YHWH sits enthroned above the cherubim throne is
called in Hebrew ~yvid©Q\h; vd,qo, «Holy of Holies»115. The middle part
of the shrine is called the vd,Q,o «holy place»116. The front part is called
the ~l©Wa, «vestibule/porch»117. The materials used to decorate these
parts of the Temple, the cultic furnitures placed in them, and the fre-
quency of access permitted into them, also expressess the varying de-
gree of holiness accorded to each of them118. The Holy of Holies is
overlaid with gold and it contains the ark underneath the wings of
gold covered cherubim119; the holy place is also overlaid with gold
and it contains a gold incense altar, a gold bread table, and gold
lampstands120; outside the Temple, in its court is found the copper al-
tar, a large copper laver, and ten small coper lavers121. The two pillars
standing in front of the Temple are of copper122. No Levites123 or any
laypersons124 are allowed to enter the Temple building. This right is

reserved only to the priests125. Yet even the high priest, the holiest of
the Israelites, is only allowed to enter the Holy of Holies once a year
at the Day of Atonement. It is in the holy place (the central part of
the Temple) that the high priest aided by regular priests can perform
daily and weekly rites; while the Levites and Israelites are permitted
access only to the Temple court126.
The recognition that there is a graded scale of holiness would help
explain the otherwise puzzling remark of YHWH to Ezekiel at the
conclusion of every cultic abomination; «you will see still greater
abominations than this»127. The idolatrous practices Ezekiel saw in
his tour of the Temple are apparently more or less interchangeable
acts of idolatry. There is no indication that each act in itself is far
worse than the other. Equally, the gravity of the cultic crime cannot
be clearly established in terms of the persons involved, that is, the
women crying for Tammuz should be considered as more significant
personages than the seventy zeqenim. This is difficult to justify as rea-
son for the gravity of the idolatry. The most probable aggravating
factor lies solely in the location of the offence, not in the specific acts
themselves, nor the people performing them128. For, in a graded
scheme of holiness, the closer one approaches to the source of holi-
ness the stricter is the control of access so as to safeguard the holy
presence from illigetimate incursions (i.e., impure objects, persons,
etc.). In the same manner, the closer the cultic abomination infringes
on the sacred sphere the graver is the offense committed and the
more contaminating is the pollution it brings to the realm of the sa-
cred. Thus, one will perfectly understands why each successive act of
idolatry that the prophet saw as he advanced into the Temple court
was considered a greater abomination than the previous one129. Prob-
ably one of the reasons why Ezekiel was guided gradually towards the
Temple is to show how the whole Temple had been defiled from its
outer parts to the inner court, by the sins of the people. This point is
expressed explicitly in Eze 5:11: «you have defiled my sanctuary with
all your detestable things and with all your abominations. This with-
out doubt shows the extent of the depravity of the house of Israel
who are audacious or irreverent enough to commit their impure
practices, their abominations, at the very house of YHWH, the
source and domain of all that is holy and pure»130.
5. Israel’s sins were not only cultic but also social. The total corrupt-
ness of the people is further enforced by Ezekiel when he did not
limit their sins to cultic offenses but that they also «fill the land with
violence»131. The phrase used here is: sm©x© #r,a©h©-ta, Wal.m-yKi. This
recalls the same phrase used in Gen 6:11 to describe the violence that
provoked the cleansing of the land with a flood during the time of
Noah: sm©x© #r,a©h© aleM©Ti. This phrase may have been used precisely
to recall the event of the Flood and warn them of the gravity of their
sins which now reach the level where total destruction was the only
option. The term sm©x© («treat or act violently»), in the context of
the verse and its usual usage, suggests ethical sins. But it does not
simply mean oppression against one’s fellow, for, in a more theologi-
cal sense, it could mean that which constitutes a direct violation of
the order established by God132. It is therefore a term endowed with a
deeper religious sense than merely socio-ethical violations. Thus, al-
though the condemnation now directly addresses the relationship be-
tween Israelites (i.e., social in nature), it is still expressed in a priestly
religious language. This theological perspective is consonant with
what we have already noted in the four cultic abominations, that is,
not to narrate the historical sins of Israel but to show their theologi-
cal depravity before YHWH. For Ezekiel, then, the sins of Israel are
not only against their covenant relationship with YHWH but against
the order established by God for them. The violation of this estab-
lished order may be expressed in many forms, ranging from the ethi-
cal (e.g., extreme wickedness, malicious witness/judicial murder, in-
stitutional injustice, injurious language, etc.) to the physical (e.g.,
physical murder, apportation of other people’s land, etc.).
6. Israel, a rebellious people. The inaugural vision describes Israel

clearly as a house in revolt, a rebellious nation133. Two special terms
are used to express rotundly this quality, namely, marad (dr;m©),
which occured three times in Eze 2:3, and pesa‘ ([v;P,). Both terms
have political as well as theological sense although the latter is clearly
the emphasis. The rebelliousness of Israel is further qualified as al-
ready present since their forefathers and enduring till the very time of
Ezekiel’s call134. As to what type or in what manner this rebellion is
expressed, the prophetic commissioning does not specify. The inau-
gural vision describes this rebelliousness of the house of Israel in gen-
eral terms, such as «brazen-faced and hard-hearted»135, they will
refuse to listen to Ezekiel for they refuse to listen to YHWH136.
The Temple vision, on the other hand, clearly presents the acts of
rebellion committed by the house of Israel. It is cultic idolatry, an act
of rebellion against YHWH himself137, and violence against their fel-
low Israelites138. The narratives of Eze 8:5-18 thus describe the rebel-
liousness of Israel. The elements used in this narratives further quali-
fy their rebellion as total. All these rebellious acts against YHWH,
their sovereign God will surely not go unpunished.
7. Inevitability of Judgment. In Chapter I of this paper, we af-

firmed that the dumbness of Ezekiel was a sign that he could not in-
tercede for his fellow Israelites nor can he reprove them so that they
may change their ways and be saved139. It is interesting to note that if
in the inaugural vision, the impediment (dumbness) was on the part
of Ezekiel, in the Temple vision, the impediment (deafness) now oc-
curs with YHWH140. One may notice that both impediments are re-
lated to communication process and both impediments clearly block
the change of course of events. Ezekiel, as a prophet and a priest, can-
not reprove Israel so that they can change their ways and be save.
YHWH, as sovereign power, cannot hear the people’s cry for mercy
so that he will stop the destruction. Both impediments clearly show
the inevitability of the events that are about to occur.
The additional condemnation that the house of Judah has «filled
the land with violence» (v. 17), recalls the description of the land in
the time of Noah before the flood. It was the same reason that made
God regret that he made man and moved him to destroy them141.
This expectedly suggests the idea that just as YHWH destroyed hu-
manity through the flood (except for Noah), he will also destroy all
Israel (except for a remnant)142.
In this vision, Ezekiel witnesses four cultic abominations committed
in the immediate vicinity of the YHWH’s own Temple (chap. 8).
These accounts –vivid illustrations of the depravity of Jerusalem’s in-
habitants, including its leaders– justify the following mass execution
(chap. 9)143. Several motifs, such as: the symbolic number of the abom-
inations, the specific mention of the participants of the abominations
(which somehow represents Israel), the added referrance to ethical sins
(which recalls the social conditions before the Flood), and the clear ef-
fort to place these cultic abominations within the very Temple, all add
up to the picture of Israel’s grave and total corruption. In the words of
P. J. Harland: «Wholesale corruption leads to total destruction; that is
the only way in which the city can be treated»144. The corruption of the
people had led to their own demise. Thus, the coming destruction and
divine abandonment of Israel is explained and justified.
Judgment has been passed and acted upon in the divine sphere.
All that is left is its fulfillment in the earthly sphere, which in light of
its divine consumation, is now inevitable. The link between these

two spheres is the vision of the kebod YHWH’s abandonment of the
Temple of Jerusalem. Since the protective divine presence has left the
Temple and, thus, the city and the land, the physical destruction of
the city, Temple and its inhabitants is but a matter of time. The
prophet’s intercession will not detain the course of punishment that
Israel deserves145. What is left for Ezekiel to do is return to his fellow
exiles in Babylon and tell them all that he has seen.
D. Summary
To sum up all that we have discussed; Ezekiel’s first Temple vision,

which occurred fourteen months later after the inaugural vision, nar-
rates the prophet’s first vision of and in the Temple. It reveals the rela-
tionship between Israel and YHWH. The indwelling of YHWH in
the Temple is totally gratuitous. In the face of this gratuitous choice,
Israel is expected to recognize YHWH’s sovereignty over them and
give him due worship. But, as the vision of the cultic transgressions
suggests, the house of Israel has refused to fulfill this perennial obliga-
tion and thus caused the break in their relationship with YHWH.
Thus, the failure of Israel to give proper worship was the cause of the
kabod’s departure and the historical tragedy of exile.
The fact that the vision started with these four cultic transgres-
sions is suggestive of the theological message of the first Temple vi-
sion. For Ezekiel, the historical tragedy of Israel is not due to any
outside heavenly or earthly powers (no mention of other gods or in-
vading forces is made in the vision) but from a more malefic power
which comes from the people themselves. Thus he repeatedly called
them tAb[eAt (abominations), a cultic term which defines those which
are, by its very nature, against the holiness of YHWH. Since the
transgressions are cultic in nature, expectedly, all this demanded ritu-
al cleansing. But, as intimated by the number «four» (the i.e., symbol
for fullness), the cultic depravity of Israel are so grave and total that
no expiation and ritual cleansing seem possible.
II. DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH (EZE 10:1-22)
The pericope studies the narrative on the departure of the kebod

YHWH from the Temple. The continuous reading of the vision nar-
ratives will show that the this pericope theologically follows the affir-
mations of the previous pericopes, namely, that Israel’s religious de-
pravations are so grave and severe that YHWH is forced to leave his
dwelling place. The pericope is the central theme to which all the
narratives of the first Temple vision lead to. The vision of YHWH’s
departure affirms the gravity of Israel cultic transgressions and the
break in relationship between them and YHWH. The vision thus
culminates YHWH’s judgment against his rebellious people. It also
serves as a sign of the certainty of judgment and punishment for Is-
rael in the historical level.
A. Translation and Analysis
1 Then I looked, and behold, on the firmament that was above the
heads of the cherubim like sapphire-stone, with the appearance of146 the
likeness of a throne visible147 above them148.
2 And he said to the man clothed in linen, and said149, «Enter be-
tween the wheels beneath the cherub150; and fill your hands with burn-
ing coals from among the cherubim, and scatter them over the city». He
went in as I looked on.
3 Now the cherubim were standing on the south side of the Temple
when the man entered; and the cloud filled the inner court.
4 Then the glory of the Lord rose up from the cherub to the thresh-
old of the Temple; the house was filled with the cloud, and the court
was full of the brightness of the glory of the Lord.
5 And the sound of the wings of the cherubim was heard as far as the
outer court, like the voice of God Almighty when he speaks.
6 And it came to pass, when he commanded the man clothed in
linen151, «Take fire from within the wheels, between the cherubim»,
then he entered and stood beside a wheel.
7 Then the cherub stretched out his hand from between the cheru-
bim152 to the fire that was between the cherubim, took and put it into
the hands of the man clothed in linen153, who took it and went out.
8 And there appeared154 in the cherubim the form of hand of a man
under their wings.
9 Then I looked, and behold four wheels beside the cherubim, one
wheel beside each cherub; and the appearance of the wheels was like the
sparkle of beryl stone.
10 And as their appearance, the four had one155 likeness, something
like a wheel within a wheel.
11 When they moved, they moved in any of their four directions156

without turning as they moved; but to the place the head looked, they
followed it157 without turning as they moved.
12 And their entire body158, their backs159, their hands, their wings,
and the wheels160, were full of eyes all around, so the wheels of the four
of them.
13 As for their wheels, they were called in my hearing «the wheel-
work».
14 Each one had four faces: the first face161 was that of the cherub,
the second face162 was the face of a man, the third163 the face of a lion,
and the fourth164 the face of an eagle165.
15 Then the cherubim rose up. This are the living creatures that I
saw by the canal166 Chebar.
16 When the cherubim moved, the wheels moved beside them; and
when the cherubim extended up their wings to rise above the earth, the
wheels also turned not from beside them.
17 When they stopped, the others stopped; and when they rose up,
the others rose up with them; for the spirit of the living creatures was in
them.
18 Then the glory of the Lord went out from the threshold167 of the
Temple and stopped above the cherubim.
19 And the cherubim extended up their wings and rose up from the
earth before my eyes as they went out with the wheels beside them.
They stopped at the entrance of the east gate of the house of the Lord;
and the glory of the God of Israel was high above them.
20 These were the living creatures168 that I saw underneath the God
of Israel by the canal Chebar169; and I knew that they were cherubim.
21 Each one of the four170 had four faces, each one had four wings,
and the likeness of the hands of a man underneath their wings.
22 And the appearance of their faces was the same faces which I saw
near the river Chebar, their appearance and themselves171: each one
moved straight ahead.
B. Structure
The third part of the Temple vision narrative172 narrates the burn-
ing of Jerusalem173, the departure of the kebod YHWH174, and the de-
scription of the cherubim and wheels175. The transition in the narra-
tive is signalled by the phrase, «I looked and behold» (hNEhwi > ha,ra> w, ©)176.
The presence of this phrase in Eze 10:1, 9, on the one hand, signals
the presence of transition in the continuity of the narratives found in
chapter 8-9, and, on the other, it effectively divides chapter 10 into
two sections, namely: Eze 10:1-8, which speaks of the burning of

Jerusalem and the departure of the kebod YHWH from the cherubim
throne in the Holy of Holies to the threshold of the Temple; and Eze
10:9-22, which contains the description of the chariot-throne and
the departure of the kebod YHWH from the threshold of the Temple
to the cherubim.
The transitional phrase therefore manifests the composite nature
of the narratives contained therein. The mixture of these different
themes in this chapter is often regarded as due to editorial work177.
Modern critics who assert not only the essential unity of chaps. 8-9,
but also the integrity of the juxtaposition, perceive in chap. 10 prob-
lems of a more serious sort178. W. Zimmerli, for example, considers
almost all of the second section179 as the result of multiple levels of
ongoing editorial expansion thus secondary and not part of the ori-
ginal work of the prophet180. Since, it is not our goal here to provide
explanation for the history of its literary composition, it would be
enough to indicate that the composite structure of Eze 10 has made
scholars seriously question its presence in the original Temple narra-
tive.
The suggestion that the presence of Eze 10 in the Temple vision
narrative is due to editorial hand receives a greater impulse when one
examines the content of the chapter. The two sections of the chapter
contain descriptions of the kebod YHWH and its bearers that strong-
ly recall and complements the descriptions contained in the inaugur-
al vision. The similarity, as well as the differences, of descriptions
contained in both visions has made scholars question the exact rela-
tionship between these visions. M. Dijkstra, for example, after exam-
ining the editorial glosses in Eze 10 concludes that: «originally, the
text of ch. 10 was a visionary report independent from ch. 1. It is not
those elements, which makes ch. 10 differ from ch. 1, which have to
be excised as later additions to the text. On the contrary, the addi-
tions are those elements which harmonize the text of ch. 10 accord-
ing to ch. 1... The vision of the cherubim and not, as textual tradi-
tion gradually wanted to reshape it, the vision of the [chariot throne]
in ch. 1»181.
Whatever the exact literary development and relation of Eze 10
with the inaugural vision, we can safely deduce the existence of lite-
rary affinities between the two visions. This literary connection, edi-
torial or otherwise, encourages any reader of the canonical book of
Ezekiel to regard the two visions as closely connected and related182.
Much more, in the observation of D.I. Block, the descriptions in Eze
10 are not simply repetitions or borrowed from the elements of the

inaugural vision but serve to clarify, explain and deepen the signifi-
cance of the former183. Such literary modifications can only be ade-
quately explained if we admit the presence of editorial hands that
compiled and gave the structure to the present text we have184.
Another difficulty posed by Eze 10 is the departure of the kebod
YHWH from the Temple of Jerusalem which has become quite
problematic as it appears in the present canonical text. In the appear-
ance of the kebod YHWH in 8:4, its specific position is vaguely indi-
cated as «there». Some situates the kabod in the Temple court and
thus in effect identifying the cherubim where it occupied in 9:3 as
the divine vehicle185. From where did the kabod and the cherubim
throne came? From heaven, according to chap. 1, which describes
the vision seen in Babylon; but here the prophet has been transport-
ed to Jerusalem; and we may well imagine, with the Targum and the
Jewish commentators on this verse, that the kabod came from the in-
ner sanctuary of the Temple, where it had always been since the ark
was first brought in under the wings of the cherubim186. They would
omit 10:4 as a doublet of 9:3 (that is, if we consider 9:3 as part of the
original narrative), otherwise they follow the text: YHWH moves to
the threshold (9:3), while the cherubim with the vacant throne wait
at the south side of the Temple (10:3) until the kebod YHWH re-
mounts and departs (10:18). As a rationale of the situation this is in-
telligible187.
As we now read the present structure of the narrative, YHWH’s
departure takes place in two stages: first, the kebod YHWH moves to
the east gate and stands there (10:19); then the kabod ascends from
“the midst of the city”, and, later in the narrative, stands on the east
hill outside (11:22). But when 10:18-19 are compared with 11:22-
23, it will be seen that they describe the same thing; so that what
probably lies behind the present text is not two acts of departure but
one. Originally, we may suppose, it took place at this point: the ka-
bod stood upon the cherubim (10:18); the cherubim lifted up their
wings, and the wheels beside them (10:19a); the kabod ascended
from the city, and, after a pause on the east hill, vanished out of sight
(11:23). The two and a half verses preserve all the fragments that re-
main of the original narrative. The latter, however, received the addi-
tion of 11:1-21, and, according to 11:1, the incident occured at the
east gate of the the Temple; so the moving throne was made to pause
there (10:19b), and thus allow 11:1-21 to be included in the vision.
Then the narrative had to be resumed (11:22) from the point where
it had been interrupted (10:19a); hence arose the present form of the
text, which gives the impression that the departure took place in two
stages. In other words, 10:19b and 11:22 are secondary, and are due
to the insertion of 11:1-21188. Eze 11:22-25 should have followed
10:19 if not for the insertion of 11:1-21.
C. Significance and Relation to the Temple of Jerusalem
The following observations should help us understand the signifi-

cance of this part of the vision narrative and its relation to the Tem-
ple of Jerusalem.
1. Connections with the Inaugural Vision. It is clear from the at-

tentive reading of the narratives on the Temple vision that an effort
to establish the connection between the inaugural vision and the
Temple vision can befound in the different chapters that constitute
the first Temple vision. This intentionality is manifested in the repe-
tition of motifs that were present in the inaugural vision. This can be
seen in the similarity of description of the fiery figure between the
two visions189. Also, Ezekiel’s prophetic ministry is continually pat-
terned according to that of Elijah and Elisha, important personages
in Israel’ prophetic tradition190. K.P. Darr clearly states its purpose,
«Such links roots him deeply in Israel’s prophetic movement; in this
case, the association both provides Ezekiel’s claims with a traditional
precedent and imparts to him some of the authority of his predeces-
sors»191.
In Eze 10 that intentionality to connect the two visions is also
clearly noticeable. These connections can be noted in the description
of the sapphire throne above the firmament carried by the cherubim
in Eze 10:1 which recalls a similar description in Eze 1:26; the de-
scription of the chariot wheels in 10:9-17 which reminds us of the
descriptions found in Eze 1:5-26. The comparison of the sound of
the wings of the cherubim as the voice of the Almighty192, the explic-
it and repeated identification of the cherubim in the present vision as
the same living creatures he saw at the Chebar canal193, helped en-
force the connection between the two visions. These and other simi-
larities between the two visions invite the reader to interpret both vi-
sions from the same theological perspective.
The reason why a detailed description of the kebod YHWH
should appear late in the vision narrative remains unclear. These de-
scriptions, normally, should have been presented at the outset of the

present vision194, which in this vision contains minimal descriptions
of the kebod YHWH195. Nevertheless, as repeatedly affirmed above,
the chapter (i.e., Eze 10) manifests clearly the intention that the pre-
sent vision should be regarded as a continuation with the former one.
Thus, this chapter may have been a belated effort to strengthen the
literary affinities and connections between the two visions. The final-
ity of establishing such connection may have been: first, to suggest
that any theological understanding on the present vision must take
into consideration the theological apportations of the former; sec-
ond, it may also constitute an implicit claim for validity of the pre-
sent vision, just as the detailed descriptions of the kebod YHWH did
in the former vision; finally, it may have been intended to emphasize
the idea that the kebod YHWH who appeared to Ezekiel in Babylon
is the same kebod YHWH who resides in the Temple of Jerusalem.
He first appeared to Ezekiel to sent him as a prophet so that the
house of Israel will know how they have badly offended YHWH196.
2. Temple, the location of the vision. If if in the inaugural vision

the Temple was at the periphery and any connection with it can only
be established by implications; in the present vision, the Temple of
Jerusalem is at the very center of the prophetic message. The theolog-
ical explanation for Israel’s historical woe, as a people and as a nation,
turns out to be something connected with the Temple of Jerusalem.
It is the location wherein in the vision narrative develops and pro-
gresses. The cultic abominations and their punishments were all nar-
rated to occur and develops from the Temple. The present pericope,
which deals with YHWH’s command for the linen clothed man to
scatter fire over the city is also placed within the Temple precincts.
The Temple of Jerusalem plays therefore a determinant role in the
divine message that YHWH, through the prophet, wants to impart to
the rebellious house of Israel. It will only be from the perspective of
the Temple of Jerusalem, in its significance for the Israelite faith that
one can rightly perceive and understand the second vision and even
the whole book of Ezekiel. Thus to understand Eze 8-11 one has to
take into consideration the deeper significance of the Temple197.
3. Temple, the dwelling place of YHWH. A basic theological affir-

mation of Israelite faith is the conviction that YHWH has chosen to
dwell in their midst. From their earliest encounter with him as a peo-
ple at Sinai, YHWH has revealed his divine will to be with his peo-
ple. He travelled with them in the wilderness first as a pillar of cloud.

Then with the construction of the Tabernacle, the cloud descended
and took possession of it as his preferred place of encounter with
Moses and thus a tangible sign of his presence in their midst. Finally,
when Israel took possession of the land and was formed as a monar-
chy, the kebod YHWH, the divine manifestation through a cloud
dwelt in their midst in the Temple of Jerusalem. Though YHWH has
his heavenly dwelling place, his presence in Israel’s midst is manifested
through the kebod YHWH (Priestly tradition and Ezekiel) which re-
sides in the Temple of Jerusalem. Thus, the Temple is considered first
and foremost as YHWH’s house198. Terms such as «threshold», «door-
posts», or «a wall between me and them» underline the understanding
of the Temple in Ezekiel as the home of YHWH199. This divine in-
dwelling in the Temple is further emphasized by expressions such as
«where I shall dwell among the sons of Israel forever»200 and «I will
dwell among them forever»201, both using the Hebrew root !kv, «to
dwell». F.M. Cross shows that this verb is generally used in the OT to
denote an impermanent presence202, but Ezekiel understood this di-
vine indwelling as permanent. What Ezekiel did was inject the ele-
ment of permanence by adding the adverb ~l©[ol,. «forever»203.
This conviction of YHWH’s presence in the Temple implies that
he is a God not far away from his chosen people but dwells and
reigns in the midst of them. The repetitive descriptions of the kebod
YHWH in Eze 10 and Ezekiel’s mention that the divine manifesta-
tion is within the Temple affirm without doubt this most cherished
Israelite belief that YHWH indeed dwells in their midst. Though the
descriptions affirm YHWH’s presence in his dwelling place, they also
serve to highlight the impending tragedy that awaits the house of Is-
rael. YHWH is in his Temple but he is ready to abandon it because
of the grave impurity that is driving him away from his dwelling
place. When YHWH finally departs from their midst, all hopes of
protection and salvation will also be gone.
4. qr;z« (scatter). Eze 10:2 mentions again the man clothed in

linen who was commanded by YHWH to get burning coals from be-
tween the cherubim and scatter them over the city. The verb qr;z© («to
scatter, sprinkle»), occurs basically in two contexts, when used with a
priest. The first is the sprinkling of blood against the sides of the altar
in a sacrifice204. This action, according to J. Milgrom, is performed
with the intention of purifying the altar, a sort of ritual detergent205.
The second is the sprinkling of the water of purgation on objects or
persons who are corpse-contaminated206. Again, the action concerns

purification.
The verb qr;z« occurs three times in Ezekiel207. Eze 10:2 speaks of
the command of YHWH to the linen clothed man to scatter (qr;z©)
burning coals over the city. In 36:25, it speaks of God sprinkling
(qr;z©) clean water on the people to cleanse them, and 43:18 speaks of
dashing (qr;z©) blood against the altar to offer holocaust. It appears
that the use of the verb (qr;z©) in Ezekiel 36:25 and 43:18 is to signify
purification and sacrifice. Both purposes are closely connected with
the cultic functions of the priests. This made us suspect that the use
of the verb in Eze 10:2 is also in a cultic sense. Whatever the real pur-
pose of scattering burning coals over the city, what can be clearly af-
firmed here is that Ezekiel is using terminologies with clear
ritual/cultic meaning whose origin can be traced to the Temple itself.
5. Fire, as instrument of purgation. Many scholars understand

both the slaughter in Eze 9 and the burning of the city in Eze 10 as
punishments for the cultic offences in Eze 8 and an actualization of
the threat in Eze 8:18208. Without negating the scholarly understand-
ing that the action in Eze 10 is an act of punishment, it is also possi-
ble to interpret it from a cultic perspective, that is, as an act of purga-
tion209. Even if in the OT fire is often used as an agent of punishment
this does not necessarily mean that it should be solely understood as
such210. In Eze 10:2, 6-7, the linen clothed man, who seems to func-
tion as a priestly figure211, is commanded by YHWH to scatter fire
(vae) over the city. As stated in the earlier discussion, the act of scat-
tering (qr;z©) may be done for the purpose of purgation or offering of
sacrifice, which are both priestly functions. The combination of the
cultic undertone of the verb qr;z©, the fire, and the priestly linen
clothing of the man results in the possible interpretation that the ac-
tion in Eze 10 is the fulfillment of a priestly function212.
Another datum concerning fire should also be considered. In Eze
22 and 24, Jerusalem is compared to a pot to which fire is applied to
cleanse it of its impurity caused by idolatry and bloodshed213, the ex-
act sins described in the Temple vision. The comparison of Jerusalem
to a pot is precisely found in the immediate context of Eze 10, that
is, in Eze 11:1-3. In fact, the former seems to act as an elucidation, a
deeper discussion of the pot allegory in Eze 11:1-3214. The presence
of these elements (fire and pot) in narratives considered as a compos-
ite whole opens the possibility of interpreting them as; Jerusalem is
the pot (Eze 11) where burning coals/fire is to be apllied (Eze 10) so
that it could be cleansed/purged of all its impurities caused by idola-

try (Eze 8) and bloodshed (Eze 11)215. This interpretation, as will be
easily noticed, is completely in accord with Eze 24:11. Thus, affirm-
ing our interpretation here that the action of scattering fire over the
city is a priestly act of purgation and cleansing.
6. Man Dressed in Linen. This interpretation of the act in Eze 10
as a purgation allows us to establish a coherence in the actions per-
formed by the linen clothed man216. In the same manner that we can
interpret the action of marking in Eze 9 as a priestly act of distin-
guishing the pure from the impure, the action of scattering fire over
the city in Eze 10 can also be understood as the priestly act of purifi-
cation for the city already considered impure. The element that calls
attracts attention in the unidentified man is his distinctive linen
clothing, which in Ezekiel is the normal clothing for the priest. The
conglomeration of these priestly elements force us to posit the idea
that he, by his clothing and actions performed, is fulfilling priestly
and cultic functions in the vision. If we accept the priestly identity of
the linen clothed man, then his connection with the Temple can pos-
sibly be established. For we have to remember that the only possible
origin of this priestly imagery can only be from the Temple priest-
hood to which Ezekiel was born and formed to be. Thus affirming
that Temple theology and symbolism plays a central role in the man-
ner Ezekiel presented his second vision of the kebod YHWH.
7. Cultic Representation. If in the earlier discussion we pointed
out the terminologies with clear cultic undertones used by Ezekiel in
his narration of the Temple vision, it is also possible to point out cer-
tain elements that can be considered as derived or part of the Temple
symbolism. We affirmed earlier that elements of the inaugural vision,
like the cherubim, sapphire throne and the sound of the wings like
the sound of the God of Almighty, etc., are elements can all be traced
back to cultic representations found in the Temple of Jerusalem217.
Since these same elements are found in Eze 10, they, like in the inau-
gural vision, prove the influence of the Temple theology and symbol-
ism in the second great vision of Ezekiel.
D. Summary
The impression of literary unity and integrity of the Temple vi-

sion in Eze 8-9 is suddenly broken when the Temple vision narrative
reached Eze 10. The presence of two transitional phrases at the be-
ginning and middle of the chapter manifest the composite nature of
the narratives contained therein. Nevertheless, the two sections of
the chapter contain descriptions of the kebod YHWH and its bearers
that strongly recall and complements the descriptions contained in
the inaugural vision. This literary connection, editorial or otherwise,
encourages any reader of the canonical book of Ezekiel to consider
the pericope as part of the Temple vision and as necessarily connect-
ed with the inaugural vision.
Like the preceding two pericopes (i.e., cultic abominations and
their punishments) studied, the present pericope, which deals with
YHWH’s command for the linen clothed man to scatter fire over the
city is also placed within the Temple precincts. If, death and destruc-
tion was YHWH’s reponse to Israel’s cultic abominations; the pre-
sent pericope serves as the cultic counterpart of purification to the
defilement YHWH ordered in Eze 9. This interpretation seems to be
behind the act of scattering (qr;z©) fire over the city, in which both el-
ements have cultic implications. Interpreting this action as cultic in
nature is further strengthened by the linen cloth, normally worn by
priests in the book of Ezekiel, that the man wears. Thus, Ezekiel’s in-
terpretation of history is markedly Temple centered, that is, from the
cultic perspective.
CONCLUSIONS
From the two pericopes presented the following conclusions can

be posited:
1. From the point of view of literary-critical study, the Temple
symbolisms and terminologies were the medium through which
Ezekiel expressed his theology, the Temple of Jerusalem was central
towards understanding his theology. Foremost among these symbol-
isms is the explicit identification of the divine manifestation that ap-
peared to Ezekiel as the kabod YHWH, which according to the
Priestly tradition is enthroned in the Temple of Jerusalem. The re-
peated mention and similar descriptions of elements of the vision,
such as, the cherubim, throne, fire, brilliance, etc., which all have
cultic representations in the Temple affirm the use of these symbol-
isms. Ezekiel also interpreted history from a Temple perspective us-
ing cultic terminology. Thus, Israel’s sins were called abominations
(tAb[eAt). This us of cultic terminology and Temple imagery is in ac-

cordance with the priestly identity of the prophet.
2. The Temple is where the identity of man is revealed. Other
prophets frequently used the imagery of the people of God (i.e., a
community or society united under a human leader who acts and
governs in behalf of YHWH). On the other hand, Ezekiel gave more
emphasis on the concept of the individual. Thus, in the first Temple
tour, the cultic sins presented were described to be committed by
specific groups and individuals (e.g., seventy elders with Jaazaniah,
son of Shaphan; women weeping; twenty-five men between the
porch and altar; twenty-five men at the door of the gateway, among
them Jaazaniah the son of Azzur, and Pelatiah the son of Benaiah).
This theologically implies that the punishment of exile is due to the
rebellion of the present generation and not because of the sins of
their forefathers. Thus, Ezekiel expressly denied the validity of the
axiom: «The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set
on the edge» (Eze 18:2).
3. The Temple also reveals the relationship between Israel and
YHWH. YHWH’s choice to dwell in the Temple is totally gratu-
itous. In the face of this gratuitous choice, Israel is expected to recog-
nize YHWH’s sovereignty over them and give him due worship. If
the presence of the kabod YHWH in Babylon (as narrated in the in-
augural vision) imply a break in relationship, the first Temple vision
shows that this break in relationship was caused by Israel’s cultic
abominations in the Temple. The failure of Israel to give proper wor-
ship was the cause of the kabod’s departure and the historical tragedy
of exile.
Thus, in this vision of the kebod YHWH, the Temple of Jerusalem
appears not just part or one among his many theologies. In fact, it
could be rightly said that it is the perspective from where Ezekiel’s in-
terpretation of history is developed and expressed. In this vision, the
historical tragedy of death, destruction and exile find theological ex-
planation and justification.
NOTES
1. This vision of and in the Temple affirms that there was indeed a breach in the
covenant relationship between YHWH and the house of Israel. The rebelliousness
of Israel, YHWH’s general accusation in the inaugural vision, is now clarified and
further specified. It was from this perspective that the graphic descriptions of Is-
rael’s cultic sins and their corresponding punishment can be best understood.
They serve to manifest, explain and justify why Jerusalem and the Temple have to
be destroyed and its people be driven to exile. All these points are gathered togeth-
er in one theological imagery, that is, the departure of the kebod YHWH from the
Temple of Jerusalem.
2. Ezekiel uses %r,D, as a preposition especially in chaps. 40-48.
3. Rather than «altar», G LD S has xr©z>Mhi ,; «east». But, in our opinion, the reading of
TM is valid.
4. Is not found in G. BHK suggests that the phrase should probably be read Aabom.B
hyh. Eze 8:5b should be better translated as, «So I lifted up my eyes toward the
north, and behold to the north of the altar gate, the image of jealousy was at the
entrance».
5. Is ommited in G possibly because it is considered as a gloss from the margin. Cf.
G.A. COOKE, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Ezekiel, in S.R.
DRIVER, A. PLUMMER (eds.), The International Critical Commentary, T. & T.
Clark, Edinburgh 1965, p. 92 (onwards will be cited as G.A. COOKE, Ezekiel,
ICC).
6. G depicts the scene less extraordinary by omitting this phrase (v. 7b) and through
the wall twice in v. 8. Cf. G.A. COOKE, Ezekiel, ICC, p. 93.
7. Is omitted in G LD. Cf. G.A. COOKE, Ezekiel, ICC, p. 93.
8. Is omitted in G.
9. Is not found in GB LD manuscripts. This adjective is superflous and may have come
from the margin and is not found in v. 17. Cf. G.A. COOKE, Ezekiel, ICC, p. 94.
10. Is not found in G. Freedy regards the phrase as an explicative gloss based on Deut
4:16-18. Cf. K. S. FREEDY, The Glosses in Ezekiel I-XXIV, VT 20 (1970) 150 (on-
wards will be cited as K. S. FREEDY, «Glosses in Ezekiel»).
11. The word used here is hQ,xum (pual participle masc sing, from the verb hqx verb).
This word is better rendered in English as carved rather than portrayed or painted.
This word may be intentionally used to capture the gravity of Israel’s idolatry. It is
not just «superficial», as the terms «portrayed» or «painted» may suggest, but
something deeper and more permanent, as the term carved implies.
12. G instead translates wyl©[©, «on it» (l[; preposition suffix: 3rd pers masc sing).
13. The translation «all around» is achieved from the repetition of the same adverb by-
bis© bybis©. But G omits the first bybis©, rendering simply «around».
14. Since this clause disrupts the flow of thought, separating ‘omedim from its subject,
it is often deleted as a gloss. BHS suggests that it should be deleted like G.
15. This is not found in G LD, though this recalls the cloud of incense in Lev 16:13
which protects the High Priest Aron at the altar before the presence of the Lord.
16. GA translates not %v,xoB;, «in the dark» but hPo, «there» (adverb). G renders it
kruptw/, «secret, hidden, private; inward, inmost». Thus, it seems that the main
idea is not about literal darkness but something done in secret or hidden. On the
other hand, GB omits the word altogether. Eichrodt replaces bahosek with poh, af-
ter the pattern of vv. 6, 9, 17. Cf. W. EICHRODT, Ezekiel. A Commentary, West-
minster, Philadelphia 1970, p. 106 (onwards will be cited as W. EICHRODT,
Ezekiel).
17. It should be better read as rd;xB] ,; «chamber» (common noun masc sing) like G S T
V. TM has yredx> B; ,. «chambers» (common noun masc plu constr).
18. Is not found in G. This agrees well with the phrase found in Eze 9:9: «The Lord
has forsaken the land, and the Lord does not see!».
19. In distinction with TM, G dropped the article h; to the common noun plural
~yviN©, «women».
20. The phrase is zWMT;h;-ta, tAKb;m., with the sign of the direct object and the article on
the Tammuz. Thus literally should be translated as, «weeping for the tammuz».
This opened up a lot of possible interpretations. For Block, the «Tammuz» men-
tioned here denoted a special genre of lament rather than the deity himself. He
proved this by mentioning the preceding verse whose main idea was the affirma-
tion that YHWH has abandoned the land and consequently, the women either
equated YHWH with Tammuz or are expressing their grief at YHWH’s departure
through a Tammuz ritual. Cf. D.I. BLOCK, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 1-24,
The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, Eerdmans, Grand
Rapids, 1997, p. 295 (onwards will be cited as D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24,
NICOT). Though the interpretation was attractive and logical, the connection
between the two scenes of idolatry (or the whole series of abominations that oc-
cured in this chapter) was far from established. Another thing, the attachment of
the article «the» may be an effort to trivialize the pagan deity and the practices at-
tached to his worship. Thus, the phrase «weeping for the tammuz», was intended
to reduce him to just a fetish, rather than a god. Nevertheless, the majority of
translations have «weeping for Tammuz», maintaining the reference to the
Sumerian deity. Cf. B. PRITCHARD (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the
Old Testament, Princenton University, Princeton 31969. pp. 265-66 (onwards
will be cited as B. PRITCHARD, ANET3). For a critical rendering of the text see T.
JACOBSEN, The Sumerian King List, Oriental Institute Assyriological Studies 11,
University Press, Chicago 1939. On the biblical evidence for Tammuz, see E. M.
YAMAUCHI, «Tammuz and the Bible», JBL 84 (1965) 283-290. On Tammuz and
his cult in Mesopotamia, see T. JACOBSEN, «Toward the Image of Tammuz», in
W.L. MORAN (ed.), Toward the Image of Tammuz and Other Essays on Mesopota-
mian History and Culture, Cambridge University, Cambridge 1970.
21. This is not found in two Hebrew manuscripts and in GB. In effect, they only pre-
sent twenty men facing towards the sun in the east. Other translators follow the G
reading of «twenty», arguing that this represents a better approximation than
«twenty-five». Cf. G.A. COOKE, Ezekiel, ICC, p. 99; W. ZIMMERLI, Ezekiel I, p.
221. But Greenberg claims that «twenty-five» is a favored number in Ezekiel (e.g.,
NOTES 67
40:1, 13, 29, 45). Cf. M. GREENBERG, Ezekiel 1-20, in W.-F. ALBRIGHT, D.N.
FREEDMAN (eds.), Anchor Bible 22, Doubleday, New York 1983, p. 172 (on-
wards will be cited as M. GREENBERG, Ezekiel 1-20).
22. TM has ~t,ywIx]T;v.mi, but BHK suggests that the correct reading should be ~ywIx]T;v.mi
(hitpael part masc plu) like 15 MSS.
23. This is phrase is the second mention of the east in these verse and is thus reden-
dant and superflous. This is probably why it is deleted in GB.
24. In modern English means «trivial».
25. The critical apparatus of BHS and BHK opine that this is probably a later addition.
26. Jewish tradition regards the suffix of ’appam «their nose» as a euphemism (tiqqun
soperim) for ’appi «my nose». A later scribe may have intentionally modified this to
remove an objectionable anthropomorphism and thus protect the dignity and
honor of YHWH. Cf. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, p. 297. For a discus-
sion on such intentional alterations, see E. WURTHWEIN, The Text of the Old Tes-
tament, Eng. trans. by E. F. Rhodes, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 1979, pp. 18-19.
Thus this phrase, if literally read, should be to «my nose». Its exact meaning is ob-
scure though in a general sense could be understood as «goad to fury». Greenberg
opines that this obscure expression, «putting the branch to their noses», is not
connected with temple abominations but with social wrongdoings. Cf. M.
GREENBERG, Ezekiel 1-20, AB, pp. 172-73. Efforts to find meaning through com-
parisons with ancient Near East cultic gestures (taking the gesture as an idolatrous
rite) have proven fruitless and unsatisfactory. But such gesture is known among
agrico-pastoral societies, as a gesture to make fun of, irritate and even goad ani-
mals to fury. Probably the gesture has its origin in this agrico-pastoral settings.
27. G adds ~x<B©, «hot».
28. This half of the verse is deleted in G. This is often deleted as a premature anticipa-
tion of 9:1. Cf. W. EICHRODT, Ezekiel. A Commentary, Westminster, Philadelphia
1970, p. 108 (onwards will be cited as W. EICHRODT, Ezekiel).
29. Cf. Eze 8:3b, 7a, 14a, 16aa.
30. Cf. Eze 8:5a, 9.
31. Cf. Eze 8: 5b, 10-11, 14b, 16abb.
32. Cf. Eze 8: 6a, 12, 15a, 17a.
33. Cf. Eze 8:6bb, 13b, 15b. For further discussion, see KA LEUNG WONG, The Idea
of Retribution in the Book of Ezekiel, VTSup 87, Brill, Leiden 2001, p. 158.
34. Cf. Eze 1:15-17.
35. Contrary to efforts which try to integrate them into one cultic act with successive
phases, J. Blenkinsopp suggests that they should be regarded separately and take
them «as examples of the disintegration of the cultic and religious life of Judah
during the last quarter of a century of its independent existence». J. BLENKINSOPP,
Ezekiel, p. 54.
36. C. C. Torrey is the first one to suggest that the depicted cultic abuses in chapters
8-11 do not refer to the time of Ezekiel but is more appropriate to the reign of
Manasseh, since such deplorable state of affairs was not mentioned by Jeremiah
and Kings. Cf. C. C. TORREY, Pseudo-Ezekiel and the Original Prophecy, Yale Uni-
versity, New Haven 1930; Ktav, New York 1970 (repr.), p. 48 (onwards will be
cited as C. C. TORREY, Pseudo-Ezekiel). A similar motivation led R. S. Foster to
locate a sitz im leben for these abominations in the pre-Nehemiah period, i.e., mid
5th century B.C.E. Cf. R. S. FOSTER, The Restoration of Israel. A Study in Exile and
Return, London 1970, p. 181f.
37. Cf. M. GREENBERG, Ezekiel 1-20, AB, pp. 201-2.
38. Cf. I.M. DUGUID, Ezekiel and the Leaders of Israel, VTSup 61, Brill, London
1994, pp. 67-68 (onwards will be cited as I. M. DUGUID, Ezekiel and the Leaders
of Israel); also, K. P. DARR, Ezekiel, NIB, p. 1172. The theological purpose of the
account thus far outweighed the factual veracity of the account. We have to re-
member that Ezekiel was trying to give an explanation of the recent historical
events from the priestly perspective, which was expectedly theological. The main
purpose in his interpretation of history was to save the sovereignty of YHWH, the
faith of Israel vis a vis its a identity as a people of God. To achieve this, Ezekiel
reinterpreted history using the resources in his hand, that is, the priestly tradition
and delivering them through prophetic form. Whether this reflected reality, this
was beside the point.
39. This understanding of the number four as signifying totality may come from the
understanding that four represents the number of the cardinal points. Cf. J. ASUR-
MENDI RUIZ, Ezequiel, in W.R. FARMER (ed.), Comentario Bíblico Internacional.
Comentario católico y ecuménico para el siglo XXI, Verbo Divino, Estella 1999, p.
965 (onwards will be cited as J. ASURMENDI RUIZ, Ezequiel, CBI); W. ZIMMERLI,
Ezekiel I, p. 120.
40. Or hb©[eAt. The word can be translated as a noun: «disgusting thing» or «abomina-
tion»; or, as an adjective: «abominable». Thus, understood in a ritual sense, the term
may refer to unclean food, idols and mixed marriages; if taken in ethical sense, this
could refer to any act of wickedness and social injustice. The term is basically used
in the OT to designate those who by its very nature was excluded as dangerous.
Since its nature is incompatible with the nature of YHWH, they are rejected by
him. When Israel commits them or allows them to exist in their midst, the relation-
ship between Israel and YHWH was placed in jeopardy. It was not only in the the-
ological aspect that such danger was perceived, abominations (in the ethical/moral
sense) also destroyed the unity of the community. Cf. E. GERSTENBERGER, «b[t», in
E. JENNI, C. WESTERMANN (eds.), DTMAT, II, Cristiandad, Madrid 1985, cc.
1316-22 (onwards will be cited as E. GERSTENBERGER, «b[t», DTMAT).
41. In the opinion of E. Gerstenberger, the term is more frequent in exilic texts which
has the theological preoccupation of presenting certain acts as taboo to be avoided
by the community. Cf. E. GERSTENBERGER, «b[t», DTMAT, cc. 1317-18.
42. Cf. Eze 8:6 (2x), 9, 13, 15, 17; 9:4.
43. E. GERSTENBERGER, «b[t», DTMAT, c. 1429.
44. The idea is from M.A. GRISANTI, «b[t», New International Dictionary of Old Tes-
tament and Exegesis, IV, pp. 314-18, and is adapted by KA LEUNG WONG, The
Idea of Retribution, p. 141.
45. Cf. W. ZIMMERLI, Ezekiel 1, p. 190.
46. The connection between abominable acts and their defiling power echoes the
Priestly texts. In particular, Lev 20:3 related the Molech cult to the defilement of
the sanctuary. Another reference is 2 Chr 36:14 where performing the abom-
inable acts of the nations will result in defiling God’s Temple. Cf. KA LEUNG
WONG, The Idea of Retribution, p. 141.
47. In fact, these evaluation of the sins of Israel, seen and expressed from the cultic
perspective, covers the whole book. H.G. McKeating rightly observes that the
condemnation of the people are all cultic related. They are condemned for profan-
ing the sabbath (llx 22:8), the sanctuary (23:39), and thereby profaning the
name of God (36:20-23). Cf. H. MCKEATING, Ezekiel, in R.N. Whybray (ed.),
Old Testament Guides, Sheffield Academic, Sheffield 1995, p. 88ff. (onwards
will be cited as H. MCKEATING, Ezekiel, OTG).
NOTES 69
48. The land has become detestable because of the pollution (Eze 36:25, 33). The
land which should have shown purity was unclean and this was caused in a large
part by the shedding of blood (Eze 33:25). The land should have been treated
with reverence because that was where God had chosen to dwell. Instead the place
had become an object of loathing because of the sin of the people. Such concepts
of purity were fundamental to the life of Israel, and the priesthood, of which
Ezekiel was a member, was entrusted with the task of maintaining the cleanliness
of the land. The corruption of Israel was so grave that the people had to be de-
stroyed and sent into exile. It was this state of uncleanness which was the cause of
the exile (Eze 36:17ff.). the profanation of the sanctuary was an insult to God, a
privation of the reverence due to him. Cf. P.J. HARLAND, A Land Full of Violence:
The Value of Human Life in the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, VTSup 77 (1999) 119
(onwards will be cited as P.J. HARLAND, «A Land full of Violence»).
49. Cf. J. MILGROM, Israel’s Sanctuary: The Priestly Picture of «Dorian Gray», RB 83
(1976) 397 (onwards will be cited as J. MILGROM, The Priestly Picture of «Dorian
Gray»).
50. ha©n>qi here can be rendered as «outrage». But since in the context of the passage it
expresses YHWH’s passionate resentment at seeing what is his being given to an-
other, it is more appropriately rendered as «jealousy». So also, M. GREENBERG,
Ezekiel 1-20, AB, p. 168. For further discussion, see G. SAUER, «ha©n>q», in E. JEN-
NI, C. WESTERMANN (eds.), Diccionario teológico manual del Antiguo Testamento,
II, Span. trans. by R. Godoy, Cristiandad, Madrid 1985, cc. 815-819 (onwards
will be cited as G. SAUER, «ha©n>q», DTMAT).
51. Cf. H.G. MAY, Ezekiel, IB, p. 106.
52. Cf. K.P. DARR, Ezekiel, NIB, p. 1175. Many scholars interpret it as Asherah, in
virtue of 2 Kgs 21:7 mention of a sculptured image (pesel) of Asherah that King
Manasseh set up in the Jerusalem Temple; which in 2 Chr 33:7, 15, this very im-
age is called (pesel has) semel- apparently reflecting our Ezekiel passage, and identi-
fying «the statue of outrage» with Manasseh’s image of the Canaanite goddess,
Asherah. The goddess seemed to have been popular among the Israelites for Josiah
also had had to remove it in his reformation (2 Kings 23:6). Jeremiah’s denuncia-
tion of the worship of the Queen of Heaven may also be related to this image (Jer
7:18; 44:17-30). The fact that the image’s identity seems to be assumed in the
context seems to favor this identification. P.C. Craigie, on the other hand, proves
the same identification but from a different perspective. He states that any image
can be the cause of divine jealousy. But if the expression can be translated to «im-
age of lust» rather than «image of jealousy», then this would certainly, he claimed,
to refer to Asherah, the Cananite goddess of love. Cf. P.C. CRAIGIE, Ezekiel,
DSBS, p. 57. This opinion is also shared by J. BLENKINSOPP, Ezekiel, p. 54.
53. M. Haran rejects outright the identification of the image as that of Asherah. He
argues that Ezekiel’s semel has nothing to do with Manasseh’s Asherah but is
merely a fanciful statue, in keeping with the essentially fictitious nature of the en-
tire portrayal of the situation in Jerusalem. Cf. M. HARAN, Temple and Temple-
Service in Ancient Israel: An Inquiry into Biblical Cult Phenomena and the Historical
Setting of the Priestly School, Clarendon, Oxford 1978, p. 283 (onwards will be cit-
ed as M. HARAN, Temple and Temple-Service).
54. Cf. A. SPATAFORA, From the «Temple of God» to God as the Temple. A Biblical The-
ological Study of the Temple in the Book of Revelation, diss., Pontificia Universita
Gregoriana, Roma 1997, p. 35 (onwards will be cited as A. SPATAFORA, From the
«Temple of God» to God as the Temple).
55. This idol provokes the Lord to jealousy, for he had declared to Israel that he alone
is their God (Exod 20:1-3) and that all forms of idolatry is forbidden (Deut 4:16;
32:16, 21; 1 Kings 14:22; Ps 78:58).
56. For example, Eze 14:6; 16:36; 18:12. Cf. E. GERSTENBERGER, «b[x», DTMAT, c.
1318.
57. Cf. Eze 8:3, 5.
58. Cf. G.A. COOKE, North Semitic Inscriptions, nos. 13, 23, 25, 27.
59. Cf. C. F. JEAN and J. HOFTIJZER, «sml», Dictionaire des inscriptions sémitiques de
l’ouest, Brill, Leiden 1965.
60. Cf. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, p. 281.
61. Cf. also Eze 39:2. In the Gog-Magog unit of narratives (Eze 38-39), the invader
was described as coming from the north. This belief is somehow echoed Jer 1:14
wherein YHWH said: «from the north evil will be poured out on all who live in
the land».
62. The subsequent abominations would fortify the presence of Israel’s conviction in
YHWH’s impotence. Nevertheless, Eze 9:1-11 would show how badly mistaken
they are. It is Israel’s idols that are powerless to prevent the destruction of the city
from YHWH’s agents of destruction. Cf. I.M. DUGUID, Ezekiel, in T. Muck
(ed.), The NIV Application Commentary Series, Zondervan, Grand Rapids
1999, p. 131 (onwards will be cited as I.M. DUGUID, Ezekiel, NIVACS).
63. In the OT, the term is often found in Genesis where it is clearly emphasized that
creeping things are created (Gen 1:27) and that YHWH has control life or death
over them (Gen 6:7, 20; 7:8, 23; 9:3). Thus, YHWH strongly prohibits any rep-
resentation of these created things as divinities (Deut 4:18).
64. The term used was #q,v,, «detestable things», a term which belongs to the priestly
arena. It was usually found in the book of Leviticus, where the prohibition for un-
clean foods are stated. Cf. Lev. 7:21;11:10, 12, 13, 20, 23, 41, 42.
65. K.W. CARLEY, The Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, in Cambridge Bible Commentary on
the New English Bible, Cambridge University, Cambridge 1974, p. 55 (onwards
will be cited as KW. CARLEY, Ezekiel, CBC). Albright also holds the same opinion
that this abomination is of Egyptian influence, recalling the serpent and animal
figures in the Book of the Dead and late magical representations. Cf. W. F. AL-
BRIGHT, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, p. 166. He is followed by J. Blenk-
insopp who sees the scene as reminiscent of Egyptian burial chambers, the walls of
which are covered with brilliantly painted images of deities in animal form, in-
cluding Anubis, the jackal-headed god who weighed the souls of the dead. Cf. J.
BLENKINSOPP, Ezekiel, p. 55. For a dissenting opinion, see G.A. COOKE, Ezekiel,
ICC, p. 94.
66. Cf. J. BLENKINSOPP, Ezekiel, p. 55.
67. Cf. Eze 8:12.
68. One of them is expressly identified as Jaazaniah, who was designated the son of
Shaphan. The designation possibly associates him with the family that was promi-
nent in the reforms of Josiah in 2 Kgs 22:3-14. If this is the case, his presence
among the idolaters may point out to the extent of Israel religious and cultic
degradation that even those who were believed to be champions of YHWH’s or-
thodoxy are now part of the new abominations occuring in the Temple precincts.
69. For further discussions, see I.M. DUGUID, Ezekiel and the Leaders of Israel, pp.
113-14.
70. Cf. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, p. 293. For example, in Num 16:12-13 in-
cense is used to ward off the plague which was killing the Israelites in the desert. This
NOTES 71
apotropaic function may also be behind the cultic instruction that Aaron should put
incense on the fire before the Lord so as to cover the mercy seat or else he will die
(Lev 16:12-13). It should be noted though that in Ps 141:2 incense is treated as a
symbol of prayer, probably because of the upward movement of the smoke.
71. For further discussions, see P.C. CRAIGIE, Ezekiel, DSBS, p. 61.
72. Tammuz is of Babylonian origin (Duzu or Dumuzi) linked with the seasonal cy-
cle of death and rebirth: «Essentially representing the cycle of the season, this veg-
etation deity was held to have been betrayed and killed in the summer, when the
land became parched and plant life dies away. But his sister Ishtar freed him from
the underworld and they married, giving rise to the new growth of the vegetation
in spring. At the time of his death each year women mourned in a customary dis-
play of grief, but that was in the moth called “Tammuz” (June-July) and not, as
here in the vision, two months later. Tammuz is an Assyrian name (the equivalent
of Baal in Syria and Dumuzi in Babylon) and the worship associated with him
was introduced to Israel during the 8th and 7th centuries. It also involved sexual
rites promoting the fertility of fields and herds, and it stands in stark contrast to
the worship of Israel’s “living God”, whose control of nature was quite indepen-
dent of a heavenly consort and of stimulation by the sexual activity of his people».
K.W. CARLEY, Ezekiel, CBC, p. 56.
73. Cf. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, pp. 294-96.
74. Cf. Pss 42:3; 84:3.
75. Cf. T. JACOBSEN, Toward the Image of Tammuz, pp. 73-103, esp., p. 100.
77. Cf. M. GREEBERG, Ezekiel 1-20, AB, p. 171. The place is the open space in the
court between the Temple porch and the altar of burnt offering, with which Ahaz
replaced the old, smaller bronze altar (2 Kgs 16:10-16). This location is invested
with special sanctity for it is the site of the priest’s lamentation at a public ceremo-
ny of repentance (Jl 2:17).
78. Cf. J. BLENKISOPP, Ezekiel, p. 56.
79. For a discussion, see H.G. MAY, Some Aspects of Solar Worship at Jerusalem, ZAW
55 (1937) 269-81 (onwards will be cited as H. G. MAY, Solar Worship).
80. Zimmerli raised the possibility that the participants may have intended their sun-
worship as a legitimate extension of their traditional faith. Cf. W. ZIMMERLI,
Ezekiel I, pp. 243-44.
81. Cf. 1 Kgs 8:29, 35; Dan 6:10.
82. Cf. Jer 2:27; 32:33; also 2 Chr 29:6.
83. Cf. L. C. ALLEN, Ezekiel 1-19, WBC, p. 145.
84. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, p. 297.
85. Cf. J. DE VAUX, Santo, in X. LÉON-DUFOUR (ed.), Vocabulario de teología bíblica,
Herder, Barcelona 1966, pp. 740-44; J.L. MCKENZIE, «Holy», Dictionary of the
Bible, Simon & Schuster, New York 1995 (1st Touchstone edition), pp. 365-67;
T.P. JENNEY, Holiness, Holy, in D. FREEDMAN et al. (eds.), Eerdmans Dictionary of
the Bible, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 2000, pp. 598-99 (onwards will be cited as
T.P. JENNEY, Holiness, Holy). The character of «apartness» of the holy should be
further qualified as «set apart from common use to the divine purpose». W.T.
SMITH, W.J. HARRELSON, Holiness, in J. HASTING (ed.), Dictionary of the Bible,
Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York 1963, p. 387. In OT, it is this positive conno-
tation of apartness upon which the stress is laid. For further treatment on the top-
ic of holiness, see also J.C. LAMBERT, Holiness, in J. ORR et al. (eds.), The Interna-
tional Standard Bible Encyclopedia, III, Hendrickson, Peabody 1994, pp. 1403-4.
86. Cf. H.-P. MULLER, «vdq», in JENNI, E., WESTERMANN, C. (eds.), Diccionario
teológico manual del Antiguo Testamento, II, Span. trans. by R. Godoy, Cristian-
dad, Madrid 1985, c. 742 (onwards wil be cited as H.-P. MULLER, «vdq», DT-
MAT).
87. Cf. Jgs 6:22; 13:22.
88. KA LEUNG WONG, The Idea of Retribution, p. 124.
89. Cf. R. OTTO, The Idea of the Holy. An Inquiry into the non-rational factor in the
idea of the divine and its relation to the rational, Eng. trans. by J. W. Harvey, Ox-
ford University, New York 1958, pp. 5-31. In the OT, holiness is primarily nei-
ther a physical nor a moral quality but an attribute which combines both; it affects
man now in one order and now in the other.
90. Am 4:2.
91. Hos 11:9.
92. 1 Sam 2:2.
93. The nifal of the verb «vdq» means, «to prove oneself holy». Thus, we find this pas-
sage: «These are the waters of Meribah, where the Israelites contended against the
Lord, and where he revealed his sanctity (vdeQ©YI) among them» (Num 20:13). A
similar use of the word also occurred in Eze 39:27, wher YHWH promised the fu-
ture restoration of Israel: «When I... prove my holiness (yTiv.D;q.nI) through them in
the sight of many nations». The hithpael reflexive form of the verb «vdq» also has
the same meaning. Thus, Eze 38:23 is translated: «I will prove my greatness and
holiness (yTivD. qI t; h. )i and make myself known in the sight of many nations; thus they
shall know that I am the Lord». Cf. H.-P. MULLER, «vdq», DTMAT, c. 745.
94. Cf. Eze 28:25.
95. Cf. Isa 5:16.
96. Cf. Pss 33:4; 40:10; 54:5; 89:24; 91:4.
97. Cf. Isa 29:23; 41:14; 43:3; Eze 20:41; 36:23; 39:27.
98. Cf. Ps 33:21. In Isa 37:23, the blasphemy of Sennacherib against the Holy One of
Israel is the cause of his defeat and the deliverance of Israel. According to Eze
28:22-26, YHWH will manifest his holiness when he inflicts punishments on
Sidon and the rest of other nations who despise his people Israel. Thus by YH-
WH’s salvific action in behalf of his people, YHWH will be glorified and sancti-
fied.
99. Cf. KA LEUNG WONG, The Idea of Retribution, p. 124. The following are consid-
ered holy in the Bible: the heavens (Deut 26:15), the places where YHWH mani-
fest himself: to Moses in a bush (Exo 3:5), to Joshua near Jericho (Jos 5:15),
Canaan (Pss 78:54; Zec 2:16), Jerusalem (Pss 46:5; Isa 48:2; 52:1), Zion, the
Temple hill (Isa 27:13; Jer 31:22), the Tent of Meeting (Exo 28:43), Temple (Ps
5:8), the priests (Exo 28:41), the altar (Exo 29:37). The sacred seasons are times
holy to YHWH (jubilee, Lev 25:12; Sabbath, Gen 2:3; Exo 20:8; Jer 17:22). Sac-
rificial victims and all gifts to YHWH become holy by the offering. The vestments
of the priest are holy (Lev 16:4).
100. Cf. J.L. MCKENZIE, «Holy», p. 366.
101. Cf. H.-P. MULLER, «vdq», DTMAT, c. 748.
102. Israel is considered holy because YHWH has chosen her among the nations to be-
come his own people and thus has been admitted to the sphere of divinity; it be-
longs to him by election and his covenant (Exo 19:6; Lev 20:8; Deut 7:6; Jer 2:3;
Eze 37:28). The new status of Israel as a «holy nation» to the Lord facilitated this
fellowship between her and YHWH.
103. Cf. T.P. JENNEY, «Holiness, Holy», p. 598.
NOTES 73
104. Cf. J. MILGROM, The Priestly Picture of «Dorian Gray», 394. This can be seen by
the belief that the outer altar was polluted though the laity may not even enter it
and finally, the Holy of Holies was polluted though no one, not even the high
priest, may enter.
105. The idea that the sacred (i.e., the gods themselves and especially their temples) is
always under constant threat from malefic forces may explain the presence protec-
tor gods set before temple entrances (e.g., the sedu and lamassu in Mesopotamia
and the lion-gargoyles in Egypt) and, above all, the elaborate cathartic and
apotropaic rites to rid buildings of demons and prevent their return. Cf. ANET3,
pp. 325, 329-30.
106. But the notion of its dynamic and malefic power, especially in regard to the sanc-
ta, was not completely expunged from the Priestly Code. Cf. Lev 20:3; Lev 15:31;
Num 19:20. It is clear that these texts are grounded in the axiom, common to all
ancient Near Eastern cultures, that impurity is the implacable foe of holiness
wherever it exists; it assaults the sacred realm even from afar.
107. Israel and the neighboring nations held in common that the impure and the holy
are mutually antagonistic and irreconcilable. Thus the sanctuary needs constant
purification lest the resident god abandons it together with his devotees. On one
basic issue they differ: the pagan world was suffused with demonic impurity
whereas Israel has eviscerated impurity of its magical power. Only in its nexus
with the sancta does it spring to life. However, this malefic impurity does not in-
here in nature; it is the creation of man. Only man can evict God from his earthly
abode and destroy himself. Cf. J. MILGROM, The Priestly Picture of «Dorian Gray»,
397-99.
108. Cf. D.P. WRIGHT, Unclean and Clean (OT), in D.N. FREEDMAN (ed.), The An-
chor Bible Dictionary, IV, Doubleday, New York 1992, p. 735 (onwards will be
cited as D.P. WRIGHT, Unclean and Clean (OT) ABD). This can be seen in P’s
prescription to remove corpses from the sanctuary area, keeping certain impurities
from sacred persons, cleansing the sanctuary with hattat sacrifices, and require-
ments of excluding severely impure persons from the habitation (Num 5:2-3). In
addition, P listed general prohibitions about bringing what is impure in contact
with what is holy (Lev 7:19-21; 22:3-7; Num 18:11, 13). It is one of the duties of
the priests to teach the distinction between pure and impure and the holy and the
profane so that improper contact of the spheres would be avoided (Lev 10:10;
11:47: Eze 22:26; 44:23).
109. Cf. Lev 19:2.
110. This explains why in his vision of the restored Israel, Ezekiel does not allow every-
one access to the various part of the Temple. This may also be the reason for the
disapperance –or, rather the abolition– of the High Priesthood in Ezekiel’s Temple
and the disregard for the rituals performed within the Temple itself. Cf. Eze 40-48.
111. According to E. Regev: «The Priestly tendency of grading, derives from the per-
ception of dynamic holiness: by grading, holiness is measured and evaluated. If
holiness was not dynamic, there would be no reason or possibility to grade it,
since in static holiness there are only two polar categories-sacred and non-sacred».
E. REGEV, Priestly Dynamic Holiness and Deuteronomic Static Holiness, VT 51
(2001) 257 (onwards will be cited as E. REGEV, «Dynamic and Static Holiness»).
112. Cf. T.P. JENNEY, «Holiness, Holy», p. 599.
113. For discussion, see D.P. WRIGHT, «Holiness (OT)», in D.N. FREEDMAN (ed.),
Anchor Bible Dictionary, III, Doubleday, New York 1992, pp. 237-49 (onwards
will be cited as D.P. WRIGHT, «Holiness», ABD).
114. Cf. Eze 9:6; 23:39; see also 5:11; 8:6; 23:38; 24:21.
115. Cf. Exo 26:33, 34; 1 Kgs 6:16; 7:50; 8:6;2 Chr 3:8, 10; 2 Chr 3:8, 10; 4:22; 5:7;
Eze 41:4; 42:13; 44:13. In other biblical books the preferred term is rybiD>. The
preference for ~yvid©Q\h; vd,q,o may imply the emphasis of Ezekiel which was the ho-
liness of God.
116. 1 Kgs 8:8, 10; 2 Chr 5:11.
117. Cf. 1 Kgs 7:6; 2 Chr 15:8; Eze 40:7; 46:2, 8. Its lack of any religious connotation
and cultic objects or furnitures, reflect its purpose as just an entrance structure to
the Temple.
118. «The distribution of furniture, the extent of access to the different parts of the
sanctuary, the materials used in the tabernacle, the annointing rites also display
the structure’s graded holiness». D.P. WRIGHT, «Holiness», ABD, p. 242.
119. Cf. 1 Kgs 6:20, 27-28, 31-32; 8:6-9.
120. Cf. 1 Kgs 6:21-22, 30, 33-35; 7:48-50.
121. Cf. 1 Kgs 7:27-39, 43-45; 8:64.
122. Cf. 1 Kgs 7:13-22.
123. Cf. 2 Chr 29:16.
124. Cf. 2 Chr 26:16-21.
125. Cf. 1 Kgs 8:6, 10-11.
126. Cf. D.P. WRIGHT, «Holiness», ABD, p. 242.
127. Cf. Eze 8:6, 13, 15.
128. Cf. I.M. DUGUID, Ezekiel and the Leaders of Israel, p. 113.
129. On the basis of Lev 4 and 16, Milgrom distinguishes three grades of impurities.
First, the individual’s severe physical impurity and inadvertent offences defile the
sacrificial altar (in the courtyard) which is cleansed by daubing blood on its horns
(Lev 4:25, 30; 9:9). Second, the inadvertent offences of the high priest or the
whole congregation pollute the shrine which is then cleansed by sprinkling blood
seven times in front of the curtain and putting blood on the horns of the incense
altar (Lev 4:5-7, 16-18). Third, unrepented sins are able to pollute not just the
sacrificial altar and the shrine, but also the Holy of Holies. The cleansing has to
wait until the Day of Atonement (or Purgation). It consisted of two steps: the
cleansing of the Holy of Holies of the wanton sins, and the cleansing of the shrine
and sacrificial altar. Thus, «the graded purgations of the sanctuary lead to the con-
clusion that the severity of the sin or impurity varies in direct relation to the depth
of penetration into the sanctuary». J. MILGROM, Leviticus 1-16, AB, p. 257. For J.
Milgrom the importance of purging the sanctuary lay in the postulate that «the
God of Israel will not abide in a polluted sanctuary». Ibid., p. 258. God will toler-
ate only a certain degree of impurity. The impurity can build up to such a point
that God will leave the sanctuary, leaving the people to their doom. This, claims
Milgrom, is depicted in Eze 8-11. The importance of the purification offering is
not for the atonement of the offerer, but for the purgation of the sanctuary so that
God will remain in it. Cf. also, KA LEUNG WONG, The Idea of Retribution, p. 163.
130. It is interesting to note in this connection that the defilement went no further
than the inner courtyard: it never entered the Temple building itself. Similarly in
the vision of reconstruction the activities are all restricted to the inner and outer
courts. Is the building itself too holy to be entered?
131. Cf. Eze 8:17.
132. Cf. H.J. STOEBE, «sm©x©», in E. JENNI, C. WESTERMANN (eds.), Diccionario teológico
manual del Antiguo Testamento, I, Span. trans. by J.A. Mugica, Cristiandad, Ma-
drid 1978, c. 811 (onwards will be cited as H.J. STOEBE, «sm©x©», DTMAT); see also,
NOTES 75
H. HAAG, «smx», in G.J. BOTTERWECK, H. RINGGREN (eds.), Theological Dictionary

of the Old Testament, IV, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids 1980, pp. 478-87 (onwards will
be cited as H. HAAG, «smx», TDOT). The Hebrew concept of violence («sm©x©»)
concerns ethical and physical wrongs which submits the innocent to suffering due
to man’s greed or hatred. According to Kirk-Duggan: «Ancient people desired stabil-
ity, intimately related to YHWH, which grounded the sacrificial system. The
covenants provided divine assurance that life could continue. Disturbances to such
order involved evil, suffering and death». C.A. KIRK-DUGGAN, Violence, in D.
FREEDMAN et al. (eds.), Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids
2000, 1357-58 (onwards will be cited as C.A. KIRK-DUGGAN, Violence).
133. Cf. Eze 1:28b-3:15.
134. Cf. Eze 2:3.
135. Cf. Eze 2:4.
136. Cf. Eze 2:4, 7; 3:7, 11.
137. Cf. Eze 8:1-16.
138. Cf. Eze 8:17; 11:1-12.
139. Cf. Eze 3:22-27. His role as a reprover can be understood in two ways. As a
prophet, he is expected to denounce the wrongdoings of his fellow Israelites (spe-
cially on the area of social injustices and political pretensions of the leaders), and
as a priest, he is expected to admonish and denounce the idolatrous practices of
the people and the leaders of Israel who represent them before YHWH. The
dumbness of Ezekiel effectively impedes him to be «a man who reproves them»
(Eze 3:26). The impediment therefore contribute to the irrevocability of Israel’s
tragic fate.
140. Cf. Eze 8:17.
141. Cf. Gen 6:13.
142. Cf. Eze 11:14-21.
143. Cf. K.P. DARR, Ezekiel, NIB, p. 1172. In Eze 10, God commands a linen-clothed
man to set the city afire, even as YHWH’s glory prepared to abandon the city
aboard a chariot throne borne aloft by four cherubim. Ezekiel 11 further castigates
Jerusalem’s leaders and took to task those who arrogantly assumed a privileged po-
sition vis-a-vis the exiles. Their sins will redound upon them; the exilic communi-
ty, by contrast, will be restored and transformed by God’s grace. The forward
movement of the narrative culminated in Ezekiel’s vision of the kebod YHWH’s
abandonment of the Temple of Jerusalem. The judgment was already passed and
executed in the heavenly sphere. The linen-clothed man’s report that he has done
everything as YHWH has ordered added to the sense of inevitability of the forego-
ing acts of judgment. Cf. Eze 9:11.
144. P.J. HARLAND, A Land Full of Violence, 116.
145. Cf. Eze 9:8; 11:13.
146. This is not found in G, possibly deleted by accident. This is characteristic of the
description of the kebod YHWH.
147. This is not found in G.
148. Instead of TM’s ~h,yle[] (prep + suffix: 3rd per masc plu), G translates wyl©[© (prep +
suffix: 3rd per masc sing).
149. This is not found in G and is probably an erroneous addition.
150. Is plural, «cherubim», in G S V T.
151. G adds th.n a`gi,an, interpreting the man as a holy person.
152. This is not found in G. BHK states that there is a question to its being an addition
to the verse.
153. Is also questioned and is considered as a possible addition to the verse.

154. TM has ar©YEw: (conj + nifal imperf waw consec 3rd per masc) while ar,aew© (conj +
qal imperf waw consec 1st per common) is the one translated by GB S. This
changes the perspective of the verse from the third person to the first person.
155. TM has dx©a, (adj masc sing). It should be read as tx;a; (adj fem sing) because the
word it modifies, tWmD>, is a common noun fem sing.
156. BHK suggets that the term should rather be read as ~h,yreb[. , (noun masc plu const +
suffix: 3rd per masc plu), «their sides».
157. TM has wyr©x]a; (adv + suffix: 3rd per fem sing), «followed it». But G translates
dx©a,h© (art + adj masc sing), «the one».
158. BHK opines that this phrase should probably be deleted as in G LD. G omits
wekol-besaram, literally «all their flesh», perhaps because it is unsuitable for cheru-
bim. Cf. M. GREENBERG, Ezekiel 1-20, AB, p. 182.
159. BHK states that this should be read as ~t©Bogw: > (conj + common noun masc plu con-
st suffix: 3rd per masc plu), «and their backs». Rather than TM’s ~h,Beg:w>. In Eze
1:18 the word is translated into «their rims» (which other translators did the same
in this verse), but because of the context which puts «their entire body» as the sub-
ject of the verse, translating it as «their backs», coincides and makes better sense.
160. Their is a possibility that these are additions to the verse. Though this is still a
question.
161. Is not found in S, is rather substituted by «one».
162. «Another» in S.
165. The whole verse is not found in GB. This verse is missing probably due to its diffi-
culty and discrepancies with 1:10. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, p. 323.
Halperin interprets this absence in G and the transformation of wheels into angel-
ic beings as a sign of lateness. Cf. D. J. HALPERIN, The Exegetical Character of
Ezek. X 9-17, VT 26 (1976) 138-40 (onwards will be cited as D. J. HALPERIN,
The Exegetical Character of Ezek.).
166. The preposition l[ should be placed before rh;n>. Thus reading like in Eze 10:22,
rb©K.-rh;n-> l[;, «near the canal Chebar». Cf. also Eze 1:1, 3.
167. This phrase is not found in G rather the preposition !mi, «from», occupies its place.
168. TM has the singular, but this is intended to be understood collectively.
169. For consistency, this phrase should be read as, rb©K.-rh;n>-l[;, «near the canal
Chebar».
170. Looks like a dittography and should probably be deleted as in G and V.
171. Is not found in G which simplifies the difficult reading of TM’s ~t©Aaw> ~h,yaerm> ; by
translating only ~hew.>
172. Cf. Eze 10:1-22.
173. Cf. Eze 10:1-3, 6-7.
174. Cf. Eze 10:4. The mention of the departure of the kabod from its enthronement
in the Temple first appeared in essentially the same form in 9:3a, then continues
in 10:18-19 and culminates in 11:22-23.
175. Cf. Eze 10:5, 8-17, 20-22.
177. Cf. KA LEUNG WONG, The Idea of Retribution, p. 159.
178. Cf. K. P. DARR, Ezekiel, NIB, p. 1182.
179. Cf. Eze 10:8-22.
180. Cf. W. ZIMMERLI, Ezekiel I, pp. 231-32.
NOTES 77
181. M. DIJKSTRA, The Glosses in Ezekiel Reconsidered: Aspects of Textual Transmission

in Ezekiel 10, in J. LUST (ed.), Ezekiel and his Book: Textual and Literary Criticism
and Their Interrelation, Leuven University, Leuven 1986, p. 77 (onwards will be
cited as M. DIJKSTRA, The Glosses in Ezekiel Reconsidered). Parunak opines that the
chariot vision is the central motif in both visions though the use of the motif is
completely different. Cf. H. VAN DYKE PARUNAK, Ezekiel’s Mar’ot ’Elohim, 61, 66.
D. I. Block, on the other hand, understands Eze 10:9-22 as one of «the most ob-
vious illustrations of echo literary strategy in Scripture». Cf. D.I. BLOCK, Text and
Emotion: A study in the «Corruptions» in Ezekiel’s Inaugural Vision (Ezekiel 1:4-
28), CBQ 50 (1988) 440-42. In his later two-volume commentary, Block will call
this «resumptive exposition». He defines this literary style as the employment of
preexistent accounts or segments thereof to shape the recounting of a new event.
Cf. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, pp. 24-25.
182. In fact, reading the Temple vision (8-11) right after the inaugural vision (1-3) facili-
tates a better understanding of the message of both visions. The Temple vision clari-
fies what was vague and elaborates what was mentioned only in passing in the inau-
gural vision. Surely, such a considerable editorial reworking must have been done for
a reason. The most obvious reason is the intention to have both visions be read and
understood as related to one another either as a continuous narrative or that the mes-
sage of each vision should be viewed from the same perspective and importance.
183. As properly noted by D.I. Block, it is not a simple case of borrowing and repeti-
tions for the description of the chariot wheels in the second vision is improved,
and the ambiguities of the inaugural vision are clarified. Even grammatical diffi-
culties that were abundant in chapter 1 is smoothed out. Cf. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel
1-24, NICOT, pp. 316-17.
184. It is fitting to remind us here that the term «editorial hand» is used loosely in this
paper. It may refer and apply to the subsequent reworking and addition to the orig-
inal text either by the «school» of Ezekiel (disciples), later editors and even from the
original prophet himself. This is the understanding that the present scholarship on
Ezekiel attributes to the term (e.g., W. Zimmerli, M. Greenberg, D. I. Block, etc.).
185. For example, G.A. COOKE, Ezekiel, ICC, p. 105.
186. Cf. 1 Kgs 8:6-7.
187. Cf. G.A. COOKE, Ezekiel, ICC, p. 105.
188. Cf. ibid., p. 118.
189. Compare Eze 8:2 and 1:26b-27. The description of the being in v. 2 resembles in
a significant ways the depiction of kebod YHWH in 1:26-27. Though he speaks in
the name of YHWH, his function precludes identification with YHWH himself
(8:17-18). Cf. J. BLENKINSOPP, Ezekiel, pp. 52-53. What can safely be assumed is
that this mysterious being is somehow related to YHWH, probably a messenger of
some sort. As a consequence, the reader might assume that the prophet is again in
called into YHWH’s presence and any message that he receives will come from
YHWH.
190. This prophetic motif was seen: (a) first, the setting of the vision mentioned Ezekiel
as sitting in his house with the elders before him (Eze 8:1). This recalls Elisha which
also was depicted as sitting in his house with the elders of Israel (2 Kgs 4:38; 6:32);
(b) second, in the manner reminiscent of Eze 1:3, Eze 8:1 described the coming of
the vision with a reference to the hand of YHWH (similar with the onset of
prophetic vision to Elijah in 1 Kgs 18:46 and Elisha in 2 Kgs 2:15); (c) finally, he is
carried from Babylon to the Temple of Jerusalem by the lock of his hair (like Elijah
in 1 Kgs 18:12; 2 Kgs 2:1-12, 16-18). The clear similarity wherein a person is car-
ried by the lock of his hair is found in the apocryphal account on Habakkuk where
he is also carried by the lock of his hair to Babylon to bring Daniel some food. The
similarity can be explained though by the scholarly opion that this apocryphal ac-
count may be an offshot of the influence of Ezekiel. Cf. M. GREENBERG, Ezekiel 1-
20, AB, pp. 167-68; also, D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, p. 280.
191. K. P. DARR, Ezekiel, NIB, p. 1175.
192. Cf. Eze 10:5; also, Eze 1:24.
193. Cf. Eze 10:15, 20, 22.
194. Cf. Eze 8:2, 4.
195. Whether this chapter is inserted by Ezekiel’s disciples and editors; or whether it is
integral to the vision, is a question that has remained unresolved. Cf. P.C.
CRAIGIE, Ezekiel, DSBS, p. 69. The study of Parunak on the structures of the
three visions is very enlightening for it shows in a detailed manner the existing lit-
erary affinities between the three visions, with special emphasis on the «divine vi-
sions». H. VAN DYKE PARUNAK, Ezekiel’s Mar’ot ’Elohim, 61-74.
196. The historical crisis that the house of Israel found itself in is not because their God
has not fulfilled the covenant promises but they are the ones who have failed to
fulfill the covenant obligations. Nor is the crisis the proof that YHWH is a weak
God. It is precisely because of YHWH’s power that the catastrophe has occured.
This theological explanation is precisely the purpose of the Temple vision.
197. Its religious condition reflects the religious condition of Israel, for the Temple re-
presents the whole population who is to be judged. It is the religious depravity com-
mitted by Israel which offended YHWH and justifies the judgment passed against
whole Israel (Eze 7:8 ff.). Cf. M.E. MILLS, Images of God in the Old Testament, Cas-
sell, London 1998, p. 85 (onwards will be cited as M.E. MILLS, Images of God).
198. R. KASHER, Anthropomorphism, Holiness and Cult: A New Look at Ezekiel 40-48,
ZAW 110 (1998) 192-208 (onwards will be cited as R. KASHER, Anthropomor-
phism, Holiness and Cult).
199. The expression, «the place of my throne and the place for the soles of My feet»,
delivers the same message: the Temple was not only God’s «footstool» but also his
seat, His dwelling place. Cf. Isa 66:1.
200. Eze 43:7.
201. Eze 43:9.
202. Cf. F.M. CROSS, The Priestly Tabernacle, BA 10 (1947) 65-68.
203. The idea of permament presence of God in the Temple is the only adequate explana-
tion why when the kebod YHWH left the Temple of Jerusalem he did not ascended to
heaven but remain standing on the mount east of Jerusalem: «And the glory of the
Lord ascended from the middle of the city, and stopped on the mountain which (is)
east of the city» (11:23). In fact, according to Eze 35:10, God was present in Israel’s
midst, on earth, at the time of the desctruction. Was this because YHWH, having
abandoned his home, was awaiting the reconstruction of another Temple, his new
home? This would explain why he returned to the Temple of Jerusalem from the east,
the same direction he left and was located when he left it (Eze 43:1ff.; 44:1-2). I would
say that only the view of God as inhabiting a terrestrial abode may explain why He
does not leave the Temple and ascend to heaven, but instead remain standing on the
mount east of Jerusalem. Cf. R. KASHER, Anthropomorphism, Holiness and Cult, p. 95.
204. Cf. Lev 1:5, 11; 3:2, 8, 13; 7:2, 14; 2 Kgs 16:15; 2 Chr 29:22; 30:16. A. van den
Born claims that qr;z© in P and Ugarit is a technical term for the splashing of blood
on the altar. Cf. A. VAN DEN BORN, Ezechiel, BOT, Romen & Zonen, Roermond
1954, p. 69 (onwards will be cited as A. VAN DEN BORN, Ezechiel).
NOTES 79
205. Cf. J. MILGROM, The Priestly «Picture of Dorian Gray», 391.

206. Cf. Num 19:13, 20; also, Num 19:18; 31:23.
207. Cf. Eze 10:2; 36:25; 43:18.
208. Cf. W. EICHRODT, Ezekiel, p. 134; K.W. CARLEY, Ezekiel, CBC, p. 61; W. ZIM-
MERLI, Ezekiel I, p. 251; M. GREENBERG, Ezekiel 1-20, AB, p. 181.
209. According to Ka Leung Wong: «The purifying power of fire lies in its ability to
destroy impurities». KA LEUNG WONG, The Idea of Retribution, p. 174.
210. In the OT, fire is often used by God as a means of punishment. The most famous
example is the fire and brimstone that rained upon the two cities of Sodom and
Gomorrah in Gen 19:24-25. God uses fire to punish and destroy the sinful inhab-
itants of these cities. Another example is found in Lev 10:1-2 wherein Nadab and
Abihu, sons of Aaron, are said consumed by fire coming from God’s presence as
punishment for offering illegitimate fire before his presence. The third example is
found in Num 11:1 which narrates of some complaining Israelites who are con-
sumed by fire sent by YHWH. But aside from being an instrument of punish-
ment, fire is also used as an agent of purification in the OT. It is used in metallur-
gical description as means of purification (e.g., Jer 6:27-30; Eze 22:17-22;
24:3-14). It is also used as means of purification for vessels contaminated by
corpses (e.g., Num 31:21-24).
211. Cf. I.M. DUGUID, Ezekiel and the Leaders of Israel, p. 124.
212. According to C. B. Houk, the combination of a priestly figure together with the
action of scaterring or sprinkling gives a picture of purification. Cf. C.B. HOUK,
The Final Redaction of Ezekiel 10, JBL 90 (1971) 53. This understanding is fur-
ther enforced by the use of qr;z© elsewhere in Ezekiel.
213. Cf. Eze 24:11.
214. One of the literary problems of the book of Ezekiel is the seeming repetitiveness and
sometimes seeming discplacement of many of its accounts, that is, similar subjects
are not all dealt with in the same place or a subject is briefly introduced in the earlier
text, then dropped and later resumed and developed further. The concrete example
is the text that we have at present (i.e., the allegory of the pot). D. I. Block seems to
provide the best answer to this problem. Following the «holistic approach» of Green-
berg, Block credits Ezekiel with the authorship of the majority of the book and ar-
gues that these literary displacements and repetitions are not conclusive arguments
for denying their Ezekielian authorship. Taking inspiration from the work of M.
Fishbane, he claims that their is a tendency for biblical authors to take an earlier text,
interpreting and applying them to new situations. He later calls this «inner-composi-
tional exegesis» as resumptive exposition. Cf. D.I. BLOCK, Ezekiel 1-24, NICOT, pp.
24-25; see also M. FISHBANE, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel, Clarendon, Ox-
ford 1985. Further discussions on this topic can be seen in ft. nt. 403.
215. Cf. KA LEUNG WONG, The Idea of Retribution, p. 177.
216. Contrary to the opinion of K.P. Darr that the function of the linen clothed man
has changed from that of salvation in Eze 9 to that of destruction in Eze 10. Cf.
K.P. DARR, Ezekiel, NIB, pp. 1182-83.
217. Though we have also to remember that the cultic representations found in the Tem-
ple are the concrete expressions of how YHWH manifested himself to his people.
YHWH is enthroned over the cherubim, seated above a glorious throne just as he is
believed to be enthroned in the heavens. The cultic representations found in the
Temple are the cultic approximation of the divine realities. Thus, these elements are
seen and included in Ezekiel’s descriptions of his visions of the kebod YHWH.
TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE EXCERPTUM
PRESENTATION ........................................................................... 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE THESIS ................................. 13
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE THESIS .............................................. 17
TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................... 33
DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH FROM THE TEMPLE OF
JERUSALEM ..................................................................................... 39
I. THE FOUR CULTIC ABOMINATIONS .......................................... 39
B. Structure ............................................................................. 41
1. Symbolism of the Number «four» ................................... 41
2. tAb[eAt (abominations) ..................................................... 42
3. The Four Cultic Abominations ....................................... 43
4. The Concept of the «sacred/holy» ................................... 47
5. Israel’s sins were not only cultic but social ....................... 50
7. Inevitability of Judgment ................................................ 52
D. Summary ............................................................................. 53
II. DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH .......................................... 53
B. Structure ............................................................................. 55
1. Connection with the Inaugural Vision ............................ 58
2. Temple, the location of the Vision .................................. 59
3. Temple, the dwelling place of YHWH ............................ 59
4. qrz (scatter) ..................................................................... 60
5. Fire, as instrument of purgation ...................................... 61
7. Cultic Representation ..................................................... 62
D. Summary ............................................................................. 62
CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................. 63
NOTES ........................................................................................... 65
TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE EXCERPTUM ....................... 81

The Departure of The Kebod Yhwh From The Temple of Jerusalem

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Departure of The Kebod Yhwh From The Temple of Jerusalem

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Departure of The Kebod Yhwh From The Temple of Jerusalem

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the central role of the temple according to the text?

What is the central role of the temple according to the text?

What theological questions were undoubtedly raised by the people according to the text?

What theological questions were undoubtedly raised by the people according to the text?

UNIVERSIDAD DE NAVARRA

Ramil COSTIBOLO NICAL

THE DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH

Extracto de la Tesis Doctoral presentada en la

Pampilonae, die 27 mensis octobris anni 2004

Dr. Iacobus AUSÍN Dr. Franciscus VARO

Coram tribunali, die 16 mensis iunii anni 2004, hanc

Excerpta e Dissertationibus in Sacra Theologia

hard questions regarding Israel’s relationship with YHWH and the

C. Significance and Relation to the Temple of Jerusalem .......... 84

III. SLAUGHTER OF THE GUILTY ...................................................... 186

C. Significance and Relation to the Temple of Jerusalem .......... 319

CONCLUSION .................................................................................... 391

ELLIGER, K., RUDOLPH, W. (eds.), Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, Deutsche

FREEDMAN, D.N. (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, I-VI, Doubleday,

A. Old Testament in General

VANGEMEREN, W.A., Interpreting the Prophetic Word, Zondervan, Grand

SELECTED LIST OF COMMENTARIES

STUDIES AND ARTICLES

ABBA, R., Priests and Levites in Deuteronomy, VT 27 (1977) 257-67.

ACKROYD, P.R., Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the

BERTHOLET, A., GALLING, K., Hesekiel, in Handbuch zum Alten Testament

CLEMENTS, R.E., The Ezekiel Tradition: Prophecy in a Time of Crisis, in R.

HINES, H.W., The Prophet as Mystic, AJSL 40 (1923) 37-41.

— Israel’s Sanctuary: The Priestly Picture of Dorian Gray, RB 83 (1976)

ROWLEY, H.H., The Book of Ezekiel in Modern Study, BJRL 36 (1953-54)

TUELL, S.S., Ezekiel 40-42 as Verbal Icon, in CBQ 58 (1996) 649-64.

1. ALPHABETICAL ORDER OF BIBLICAL BOOKS

2. REFERENCE WORKS, ARTICLES AND JOURNALS

AnBib Analecta biblica

JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

I. THE FOUR CULTIC ABOMINATIONS (Eze 8:5-18)

In this pericope, we will discuss Ezekiel’s vision of the cultic

A. Translation and Analysis

a. The image of jealousy (Eze 8:5-6)

b. Rites before pagan imagery (Eze 8:7-13)

c. Worship of the Tammuz (Eze 8:14-15)

d. Worship of the sun (Eze 8:16-18)

Eze 8:4-18 is the narrative about the four cultic abominations

C. Significance and Relation to the Temple of Jerusalem

1. The Symbolism of the Number «four». As noted in the inaugural

2. tAb[eAt (abominations). The evaluation of history from a cultic

against YHWH enthroned in the Temple. Since the transgressions

alien cult object designated by a probably foreign term60. With the

important role in the community as mediator between YHWH and

they were breaking the second commandment, believing that a part of

4. The Concept of the «sacred/holy». The discussions above will be

once attributed by Israel’s neighboring nations to demons105. Israel

laypersons124 are allowed to enter the Temple building. This right is

6. Israel, a rebellious people. The inaugural vision describes Israel

7. Inevitability of Judgment. In Chapter I of this paper, we af-

its divine consumation, is now inevitable. The link between these

To sum up all that we have discussed; Ezekiel’s first Temple vision,

II. DEPARTURE OF THE KEBOD YHWH (EZE 10:1-22)

The pericope studies the narrative on the departure of the kebod