Ezekiel - John W. Hilber

Скачать книгу

with images (Ezek 8:10), yet each elder was assigned to a particular deity and participated in the rituals privately within his individual cubicle.

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

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

      Special Topic: Tammuz

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

      Theological Bridge to Application

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

      Focus of Application

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

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

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

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

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