Chapter 4

1 Under the type of a siege is shewed the time from the defection of Jeroboam to the captivity. 9 By the provision of the siege, is shewed the hardness of the famine.

1. Take thee. It has been a moot point with students of prophecy as to whether the strange events in this chapter were visible and outward acts or merely vivid presentations seen by the prophet in vision, later to be spoken to the people. Among the reasons listed for believing that these events were enacted visibly in the sight of the people are the following: (1) they were to be for a sign to the house of Israel (v. 3); (2) there were similar incidents in the experiences of other prophets when the acts were evidently external—Zedekiah’s horns of iron (1 Kings 22:11); Isaiah’s walking “naked and barefoot” for three years (see on Isa. 20:3); Jeremiah’s yokes of wood (Jer. 27:2); and Hosea’s marriage to the harlot (Hosea 1:3). Ezekiel’s carrying out his belongings in the sight of the people and digging through the wall (Eze. 12:2–7) is plainly a visible enactment presaging the coming siege. Such graphic presentations doubtless were intended to arrest attention, for images to the eye commonly make deeper impressions upon the mind than words can. Similar pictorial devices are still used today in the practice of the sacraments. The object is to impress divine truths more vividly.

Tile. Or, “brick,” as the Heb. lebenah is translated elsewhere (Gen. 11:3; Ex. 1:14; etc.). Bricks were anciently used for inscriptions, and many such specimens have been discovered.

2. Lay siege. The captives hoped that Jerusalem had suffered her last siege. Encouraged by false prophets, they expected soon to return to their native land. If they received Ezekiel’s prediction of another siege, that would dash their fond hopes. Nevertheless, the doom upon their beloved city was inevitable. The impending judgments were portrayed before the people in significant emblems that spoke with greater force and efficacy than words.

Fort. Heb.dayeq, a collective noun designating siegeworks, probably here of the type to overtop the walls of the besieged place, and thus to give opportunity for the besiegers to reach the defenders with their arrows as well as to provide an observation post.

Mount. This was an artificially made hill to enable the besiegers to mount the walls.

Battering rams. These were heavy beams with iron heads suspended horizontally by ropes from towers or movable frames. These beams were violently driven against the walls. Such machines appear frequently in Assyrian bas-reliefs, and seem to have been in common use at that time.

3. An iron pan. Heb. machabath, a sort of flat plate, a common cooking utensil in the East (see Lev. 2:5). The griddle may have formed part of the furnishings of the prophet’s own house. It was used to represent a shield or defense wall set up by the enemy, from behind which they discharged their missiles. The iron probably symbolized the invulnerability of the enemies’ lines.

A sign. The fact that these dramatic enactments were to constitute a “sign” lends strong support to the view that this chapter speaks of literal events (see on v. 1). For the word “sign” see on Isa. 7:14.

4. Left side. The posture is probably with reference to the fact that Samaria lay to the north of Jerusalem, that is, to the left as a man faced east. It is not necessary to infer that Ezekiel lay continuously 24 hours a day, during the long period here specified. Probably only a certain portion of the day was devoted to this form of symbolic preaching.

House of Israel. Here used in its restricted sense applying to the ten tribes.

Bear their iniquity. There is a difference of opinion as to whether Ezekiel was called upon to symbolize the sin of Israel or its punishment. Possibly both ideas were involved. Like the other ancient prophets Ezekiel was to mitigate his messages of doom with offers of the gospel balm. Nevertheless sin could not be overlooked. It needed to be atoned for. Ezekiel’s act of bearing the iniquity of Israel may have been indicative of the fact that God was willing to forgive the people’s sin, and even now, belatedly, accomplish His purpose through them.

5. Three hundred and ninety days. Many interpretations of this time period have been set forth. There are those who prefer the reading of the LXX, which assigns 150 days for bearing the iniquities of Israel and 40 days for those of Judah, and totals the two to make 190 days. This view is not without difficulty, for the 150 days do not represent the years of the captivity of the ten tribes, who were led captive in 723/722 b.c.

If we accept the figure of the Hebrew Bible, we must consider the 390 years to represent the period of Israel’s defection. The period began with the secession of Jeroboam and the ten tribes from Judah. This secession marked the beginning of Israel’s sin. Having withdrawn from the divinely appointed monarchy, the northern kingdom suffered under a long line of evil rulers; not one of their kings was a God-fearing man. But here again we are confronted with difficulty. According to the chronology of the kings adopted for this commentary (see Vol. II, pp. 140–144), the secession of the ten tribes occurred in 931 b.c. (see Vol. II, p. 77). From here to Ezekiel’s vision in 593/592 was only about 339 years, to the fall of Jerusalem only 345 years, and to the return from captivity, 395 years. By the now obsolete method of reconciling the Judah-Israel synchronisms by assuming interregnums, 390 years to Ezekiel were formerly calculated from an earlier date for the secession of the ten tribes.

However, the specifications of the symbolic period are not precisely enough stated to use this synchronism as a basis for chronology.

6. Forty days. By the same analogy as discussed under v. 5 the 40 years would represent the years of Judah’s sin. In contrast with Israel, Judah remained faithful to her appointed rulers of the house of David. Yet more and more the inhabitants of Judah, too, had become steeped in idolatry, and though there were several devout kings in the kingdom of Judah who sought to stem the rising tide of evil, the course of the nation was progressively downward. One of the last major opportunities for reform came under King Josiah, who, in the 8th year of his reign (2 Chron. 34:3), “began to seek after the God of David his father.” It was a noble attempt, but as far as the people were concerned, it was only a superficial work. They were later told that they had gone too far to turn back the threatened judgments (2 Chron. 34:23–25). If we regard Josiah’s 8th year, 633/632 b.c. as the beginning of Judah’s period of special guilt, then from that date to the first message to Ezekiel in 593/592 b.c. (see on Eze. 4:5) there are exactly 40 years.

Among other attempts to apply these time periods may be mentioned that which adds 390 and 40 to yield 430 days, which is then compared with Ex. 12:40, where 430 years is given as the years of the sojourning of the children of Israel. But such a similarity seems to be entirely without point. An entirely fanciful variation connects the 390 days with the 40 stripes of Deut. 25:3, reduced by Jewish teachers to “forty stripes save one” (2 Cor. 11:24). Thus 39 were assigned to each of the 10 tribes, leaving 40 for Judah by itself.

Each day for a year. Literally, “a day for the year, a day for the year.” This expression may be compared with a similar statement in Num. 14:34, “After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years.” In these statements are found the first intimations of the prophetic scale which later was to figure so largely in the interpretation of the great time prophecies, such as the “time and times and the dividing of time” (Dan. 7:25), and the “two thousand and three hundred days” (Dan. 8:14).

7. Set thy face. An expression denoting steadfastness and fixedness of purpose (see Lev. 17:10; 20:3, 5, 6; 26:17; Eze. 15:7; 20:46). The steadfastness of purpose was to be “toward the siege of Jerusalem.” This was to be done during the periods the prophet lay on each side, figuratively bearing the iniquity of both Israel and Judah. The combination of these acts may be best understood in the light of God’s purposes at this time as revealed through Jeremiah. By means of various types and symbols, as well as plain prophetic utterances, God declared to the remnant left in Judah that their only hope of safety lay in yielding to the king of Babylon. They had gone too far in their iniquity to avert the doom upon Jerusalem and its inhabitants. They must bear their iniquity. Captivity would be their lot. This was directly opposite to the proud ambitions of the militarists. Supported by false prophets, they defiantly rejected Jeremiah’s appeal, and pursued their plans for resistance. Jeremiah himself was branded as a fifth columnist and a traitor. Ezekiel’s fellow captives shared the same hope. Instead of patiently accepting God’s plan of bearing their iniquity and getting at the root of all their trouble—their unsubdued hearts—they fondly hoped for the continuance of their beloved city and for their own speedy return to their native country.

Uncovered. A symbol of readiness for action.

8. Lay bands. The nature of these bands is not disclosed, but the symbolism is apparent. The restraint symbolized the unrelenting character of the predicted events. Nothing that the people could do, no matter how diligently pursued, would be able to ward off the devastation of Jerusalem and the captivity of the remnant.

9. Wheat. The order in which the foodstuffs are listed doubtless indicates the scarcity of food in the straitness of the siege. The wheat and the barley would not be in sufficient supply to outlast the siege and would need to be mixed with the coarser foodstuffs.

Beans. See 2 Sam. 17:28.

Lentiles. See Gen. 25:29, 34; 2 Sam. 17:28.

Millet. Heb. dochan, a word occurring only here, and accurately translated “millet.”

Fitches. Heb. kussemim, the modern spelt, Triticum sativum. The bread containing a mixture of spelt would be of a rather unpalatable variety.

10. Meat. Heb. maЊakal, “food [in general].” This is what “meat” meant in the English of the time of the KJV.

Twenty shekels. Eight oz. avoirdupois, or 227 g. (see Vol. I, p. 164), a rather scant ration, scarcely enough to sustain life.

11. Sixth part of an hin. A hin contained about 3.8 qt., or 4 liters (see Vol. I, p. 167). A sixth part would be about 11/3 pt. The meager allotment of food and water on which Ezekiel was to subsist has been described as too much for dying, too little for living.

12. With dung. In the straitness of the siege there would be no wood left for fuel, and as the siege continued, even animal dung would all be consumed. Thus men would be forced to use, for fuel, the dried contents of the “draughthouses,” or latrines, of Jerusalem.

13. Defiled bread. The meaning is probably that in captivity it would be impossible for the Jews to observe all the Mosaic precepts that were concerned with diet.

14. Ah Lord God! Ezekiel protests the divine command. Like Peter (Acts 10:14), he declares that he has been a scrupulous observer of the law. He is heard and the command is mitigated. He is permitted to use what was a common fuel for cooking in that part of the world.

16. Staff of bread. See Eze. 5:16; 14:13; cf. Lev. 26:26; Ps. 105:16. The application of the prophetic enactment is now shown. Here the famine conditions so vividly enacted by Ezekiel are applied to Jerusalem.

Ellen G. White comments

6    DA 233; GC 324; PK 698