Chapter Nine

Slaughter of the wicked population of Jerusalem (in a vision)

The Lord now brings to execution the threat expressed in Ezek 8:18 for the defilement of the temple and the land. But to do this with His own hand would be unworthy of Him, and therefore His servants appear here. With careful distinction of the pious, the population of the city is slain (ch. IX) and the city itself is burned (ch. X). With the speed of lightning the command of God is executed, but the prophet rightly refrains from a detailed description of the terrible action of the heavenly force; it takes place behind the scenes of the vision, and in the interval the reader is occupied once with the prophet’s intercession for the slain (Ezek 9:8-10), and another time (Ezek 10:8-22) with a new description of the cherub chariot (Smend).

Ezekiel 9:1. And He cried out to my ears with a great voice, saying: Let those who are to punish the city draw near, each with his destroying weapon in his hand. “He cried out.” Deliberate omission of the subject. See explanation to Ezek 2:1 and Ezek 8:7. “To my ears.” As in v. 5, and as “before my eyes” Ezek 10:2—an addition intended to call attention to the reality of the vision not only in important, but also in more minor details (Ezek 10:13). “With a great voice,” corresponding to the degree of the anger of the Speaker and the importance of the command being given. “Let them draw near.” In Hebrew a verbal form allowing also the meaning of the past tense, which is why the Slavonic “drew near”; the imperative is supported by the fact that the command of God must be communicated before the action produced by it is described; cf. v. 5. “Punishers,” literally “visitations” (Vulgate: visitationes), “requital,” Greek εκδικησις, “vengeance”; since angels-punishers appear (v. 2) in response to this call, it is consequently necessary to understand here the abstract concept in its concrete, personal sense, which is permissible in Hebrew (Isa 60:17). Such a meaning is required by necessity from what follows: “each (literally: “man”) with his destroying weapon in his hand.” This weapon, literally “weapon of slaughter,” Slavonic “vessels of destruction,” is not specified more precisely either here or later (although in the following verse it is mentioned again), perhaps because it was unlike our weapons and indescribable; see, however, the explanation of this word in the following verse.

Ezekiel 9:2. And behold, six men came from the direction of the upper north gate, and each had a destroying weapon in his hand; and among them was one clothed in linen, with a writing case at his side. And they went and stood beside the bronze altar. “Six men”—angels in human form (others: commanders of Nebuchadnezzar’s army), who often appear as executors of God’s judgments (Dan 4:14 and others). Together with the “man” who was among them and had a special mission, there were seven—the sacred number of the highest angels, first mentioned (more precisely: implied) here; cf. Tob 12:15; Zech 4:10; Rev 4:5. But it is noteworthy that the direct executors of punishment are angels in a number not having sacred fullness in the even (cf. two angels who burned Sodom, four heavenly plagues). “Coming from the upper gates facing north,” undoubtedly those mentioned in Ezek 8:3-5 under the name of the inner and altar gates; the inner court gates were called “upper” in distinction from the gates in the outer wall of the temple (called lower in Ezek 40:19), because the inner court rose higher as a terrace above the outer, by which means the worship performed on it could be visible to the people; here to these gates is applied a new designation to show that the angels, coming from the outer court, had to ascend, by which means they might not have been visible earlier. The punishing angels enter through these gates, perhaps because Jehovah, coming from the north, brought these servants with Him, and passing through the temple, left them in the outer court until they were needed, or as a sign that the disaster which they bring comes from the north and that the Chaldeans will come from the north and from this same direction will break into the city. “The destroying weapon.” The LXX here already reads “axe” (cf. v. 1). Obviously simply to give some representation of the weapon; according to Hebrew the name “weapon of destruction” allows representing these weapons as a hammer (Jer 51:20). “And among them one,” evidently so distinguished from the six that he could scarcely be counted among their number, which is why the total is not shown as seven. Nevertheless, the subordinate and servile position which “one” occupies in relation to Jehovah and by which he raises himself but little above his companions, causes one to recognize in him only an angel, though a higher one, executor of a more pleasant, but also more difficult mission (marking the righteous), and not the Angel of the Covenant. The nearest conjectures about him are impossible. “Clothed in linen.” Linen clothing, Hebrew “badim,” (literally “fibers,” “linen thread”) was the clothing assigned to priests, to whom it was strictly forbidden to perform sacred service in woolen clothing (Lev 6:10; Ezek 44:17); white in color and allowing frequent washing, such clothing was a good symbol of the purity and holiness required of the priest; therefore, beginning with the present passage of Ezekiel, it became the attribute of heavenly beings, not only angels, especially the highest (Dan 12:6), but also the Son of God (Ezek 10:6). The linen fabric used for the garments of priests, and especially the high priest, was of course of the highest quality, extraordinary fineness, and dazzling whiteness, which is why it would have shone no less than silver brocade (Rev 15:6); such quality linen fabric probably was later called fine linen (Rev 19:8); perhaps also for this brilliance linen garments were attributed to heavenly beings; and when the latter are represented as appearing in shining (angels at the tomb of Christ) or white (Rev 4:4; cf. Mark 9:3) garments, these garments must be thought of as only fine linen (at such heights, not yet reached by modern manufactures, stood the weaving of the ancients!). The LXX here freely: “clothed in a robe,” and also in Ezek 10:6, where the same garment is named by them: “holy vessel”; but in Dan the Hebrew word is translated into Greek by simple transcription: βαδδιν, and only in the Pentateuch exactly through “linen,” λινον. The white garments of the seventh angel, resembling priestly attire, pointed to the service of this angel as an instrument of God’s mercy, reconciliation (the garments of the six punishing angels the prophet did not see) and foreshadowed such future service of the Savior. This was pointed to even more closely by the “writing case,” literally “the scribe’s case,” that is, an inkwell (Vulgate: atramentarium) of this angel “at his side,” where even now in the East one carries this thing (LXX instead of “writing case at the side”—“a belt of sapphire,” reading “scribe” as “sapphire”; cf. Dan 10:5). This case could remind the prophet of the “book of life” (Exod 32:32 and further Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Ps 68:29; Phil 4:3), though most immediately it was needed to mark the righteous in the city, v. 4. “And stood beside the bronze altar,” that is, the altar of burnt offering, called bronze (1 Sam 8:64) in distinction from the gold incense altar in the sanctuary. Coming from the north gates, the angels could stop at the north side of the altar. At this altar forgiveness of sins was proclaimed; therefore the punishing angels stood at it, according to the explanation of Jerome, to see who had not been forgiven their sins and who therefore was subject to the judgment of God and to death. Just as priests at this altar were mediators of the sanctification of the people, so the angels, having to bring about the destruction of the city and its population, acted actually for the sanctification of Jerusalem through the punishment of sinners and performed sacred service.

Ezekiel 9:3. And the glory of the God of Israel was lifted from the cherub on which it rested, to the threshold of the house. And He called to the man clothed in linen, who had the writing case at his side. “And the glory of God (Elohim, as in Ezek 8:4; see there) of Israel (not simply: the Lord; see Ezek 8:4) was lifted from the cherub (the first time in the Old Testament this word in the singular, but clearly in collective sense), on which it rested, to the threshold of the house,” that is, of the building of the sanctuary and the holy of holies; Slavonic: “in the uncovered place of the house,” that is, in the uncovered portico, vestibule of the sanctuary. The presence of God’s glory in the tent and temple was revealed in a cloud (Shekinah); in such a form must the glory of the Lord have changed its place here, as is apparent from Ezek 10:3-4. But from which cherub or cherubs did God’s glory depart: from the cherubs of the Ark of the Covenant, or those who had appeared and stood according to Ezek 10:3 on the right side of the inner court? The fact that the prophet has not yet called the mysterious creatures of the vision cherubs, and that he only in Ezek 10:15, apparently, finally became convinced of their identity with the cherubs, seems to give some grounds for understanding the cherubs of the holy of holies here. On the other hand, with such desecration of the temple as is presented in Chapter VIII, was the presence of Shekinah in the Holy of Holies possible? As we saw in the explanation of Ezek 8:12, the Ark of the Covenant might not have been there then. Nevertheless, it is possible to understand both of these cherubs, and the meaning of this transfer of God’s glory in both cases will be almost the same. If the glory of God departed from the Ark of the Covenant to the threshold of the temple, this was the first step toward its departure from the temple, and the stopping at the threshold could show how grievous it was for God’s glory to abandon its beloved dwelling: during the vision God’s glory appears again at this threshold (Ezek 10:4) and on leaving the city stops on a mountain. If it departed from the cherubs of the vision, then God abandons the throne-chariot which was actually intended for His departure from Jerusalem, and steps once more to the threshold of His former dwelling, from here to give direction concerning the destruction of the city and its population, or to bring judgment on Jerusalem (judgment was pronounced at the gates of the city); or perhaps this was something like a farewell to the former place of abode. Since the cherubs of the holy of holies were only images of the real cherubs now appearing in the temple, God’s glory resting on those and these could not fail to be one and the same, which is why perhaps the prophet does not indicate from which cherubs it passed to the threshold of the temple. On this ground the verb “was lifted” on the basis that the noun precedes it (“and the glory of God was lifted,” and not “and was lifted the glory of God”) can be understood as set in the remote past tense, and it is more fitting that God’s glory changed its place already before v. 1. “And called”—still without subject: “He”—is an insertion of the Russian translator.

Ezekiel 9:4. And the Lord said to him: Go through the city, through Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations being committed within it. Ezekiel 4:1. “And the Lord (Jehovah) said to him.” For the first time the acting Person in all that is happening is named, because now judgment begins which Jehovah Himself must carry out, whereas until now He led the prophet, spoke with him, and called the punishers could have been without Jehovah directly. “Through the city, through Jerusalem,” this unfortunate Jerusalem; emphasis, cf. Ezek. 4:1; but Slavonic and some Greek: “in the midst of the city of Jerusalem...” “On the foreheads.” Not only because the mark was more visible there, but because by this a special seal was placed on the mind and self-determination of man, which is considered the seat of the head. Because of this in deep antiquity a special mark was placed on the forehead indicating belonging to a certain race or cult, by which the bearer became inviolable (cf. Gen 4:15; Smith W. R. Kinship and Marriage in early Arabia, 1885, 215). It is not uninteresting therefore to bring analogies: the Egyptian Alis had on his forehead a white triangle or quadrilateral; on the forehead of the Indian Shiva were drawn the fertile waters of the Ganges; the mark of Shiva or Vishnu is placed on the forehead of a Hindu purified in sacred waters; a Japanese pilgrim in the temple of Tensio Dai Sin receives as a sign of forgiveness a small square tablet, on which the name of God is written in large letters, which he wears on his forehead; on the forehead also slaves were branded with the name of their master (inscripti literati servi); from here the present image could have been taken, which later received application also in Rev 7:3; Rev 14:1. “Groaning and sighing over all the abominations”—not only not participating in them. In Hebrew “tav” can have this meaning, and also means the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet; but since this letter in ancient alphabets (not only Hebrew, but Samaritan, Phoenician, Ethiopic, Greek, and Roman) had the form of a cross, and the cross has always been the most convenient and accepted sign (and more noticeable than a line or a dot, and the simplest and most natural after those), which is why it is named in the alphabet “sign,” “tav,” then if “tav” here has the meaning of “sign” and not letter (Slavonic: “give a sign”), those subject to salvation were all the same marked with nothing other than crosses on their foreheads—a coincidence with the Christian sign of redemption hardly unintentional, though the prophetic significance of this sign was scarcely foreseen by the prophet himself. The rabbis believed that tav was placed on the forehead as the initial letter of “torah”—“law” or “tihye”—“let him live.”

Ezekiel 9:5. And to the others He said in my hearing: Go through the city after him and strike; do not let your eye spare, nor show pity; “In my hearing”—see v. 1. “Do not let your eye spare and show no pity.” A warning against the feeling of compassion, which is so natural in angels; if the eye of the Merciful here “does not spare and does not show mercy” (v. 10; Ezek 8:18 and others), then on the part of the angels compassion in this case would mean distrust in the ways of Providence.

Ezekiel 9:6. Old men, young men and maidens, and infants and women, slay to complete destruction; but do not touch anyone on whom is the mark; and begin from My sanctuary. And they began with the elders who were before the house. “Old men, young men and maidens.” An enumeration by degree of innocence and the compassion inspired in ascending order, which then changes to descending: “and infants and women.” Infants must be slain as having by force of the law of heredity the seeds of iniquity, which when developed could again ruin the people, as well as for participation in the sin of parents, which they could not and sometimes do not take; see Jer 7:18. “To complete destruction”—without possibility of recovery; but more likely simply a pleonasm to express the strong affect of anger. “Begin from My sanctuary,” that is, from those who are in the temple and who sinned more heavily than the rest of the people (LXX freely: “from My sanctified ones,” dedicated to the service of God and who should have been holy). The punishing angels can begin from the place where they stand: judgment admits no delay. “And they began with the elders who were before the house,” that is, the sun worshippers mentioned in Ezek 8:16, who though not called elders there, but simply “men,” this is of course implied from the place they occupied.

Ezekiel 9:7. And He said to them: Defile the house, and fill the courts with the slain, and go out. And they went out and were slaying in the city. “Defile the house”: do not be concerned that you defile the temple. For a sacred place naturally the shedding of human blood, as the presence of a corpse, constituted the greatest defilement (Num 19:11), and the height of tragedy is that Jehovah Himself requires the defilement of His temple; in it there is already nothing sacred: blood will not defile it more than the abominations of idol worship already defiled it. “House” may mean here, as also in v. 6, not the entire building of the temple, but only the building of the sanctuary and the holy of holies, because this holiest part of the temple could become defiled by shedding of blood not only in it but also before it. Then the following words will not be a repetition, but a continuation of the thought: the holy house will be defiled, if “the courts (of the temple)” (Slavonic: “ways,” that is, streets of the city) are filled with corpses. “And go out.” A word pointing to the speed with which the commands of God are executed, which is also marked in vv. 5 and 11. The six so quickly carry out the command that the Lord can hardly pronounce: “defile the house”; the LXX instead of: “and go out. And they went out and were slaying” have: “going out slay,” and thus entirely do not convey the execution of the command as something taken for granted.

Ezekiel 9:8. And when they had finished slaying, I was left, then I fell on my face and cried out, and said: O Lord God! Are You about to destroy all the remnant of Israel by pouring out Your fury on Jerusalem? “I was left,” that is, alone in the temple. Although it could of itself have been known that Ezekiel was not slain by the punishing angels (it cannot sound here, as some think, surprise that he himself escaped slaughter), it was not self-evident that besides him no one remained alive in the temple. From what precedes it is clear that in the city there were those marked with the sign of salvation, while in the temple, consequently, there were none. However, the prophet, as Jerome remarks, does not add to “I was left”—“alone,” so that they might understand: with others who had sealed foreheads. “Fell on my face”—for ardent intercession, cf. Num 16:22. “Remnant of Israel”—the prophetic designation for the seed of the people destined to survive the catastrophe, with which all hopes for the future were connected. Here by this remnant of Israel is named Jerusalem (from which after the deportation of Jehoiachin relatively few remained); the ruin of it was the ruin of the kingdom of Judah, and it was the last which remained of Israel and on which all hopes of the latter rested. The prophet fears that the Lord will not preserve even such a remnant of Israel as He promised him to preserve in Ezek 5:3 and Ezek 6:8-9, fears because compared to the multitude of slain the number of those marked with the sign and spared is so small that it seems as if the entire people were destroyed. “The feeling which speaks in these words, and the painful sorrow over the fate of Israel, is not frequent in Ezekiel (cf. Ezek 11:13), while it is a usual phenomenon in Jeremiah; generally Ezekiel stands cold before his people, judging his calamities only with reason, not with feeling; however, it is precisely this passage which shows that this position should not be taken to an extreme” (Bertholet.); such an attitude of the prophet toward the people arises from an excess of zeal for God, whose name was so dishonored by Israel.

Ezekiel 9:9. And He said to me: The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah is very, very great; the land is full of bloodshed, and the city is full of perversion; for they say: “The Lord has forsaken the land, and the Lord does not see. Although God promised to preserve a small part of the people (those marked with the sign), in response to the prophet’s prayer He does not renew this promise, but makes it clear that by the laws of strict justice absolutely all Israel deserves destruction. “Israel and Judah”—a designation infrequent in Ezekiel: Ezek 4:4-6; Ezek 25 and Ezek 37:15 and following; mostly either “Israel” or “Judah” as synonyms; but here the prophet wants to show that by its calamity Jerusalem atones for the sin not only of the kingdom of Judah, but also of Israel, and that Ezekiel rightly looks upon it as the “remnant of Israel.” “Great, very great...”—cf. Gen 4:13 of Cain, Gen 18:20 of Sodom, as Lam 4:6. “The land is full of blood and the city is full of injustice.” See explanation Ezek 7:23; the “violent bloodshed” (Russian “bloody crimes”) there is repeated here more briefly “blood”; for the “violence” there (Ezek 8:17, but in Russian “iniquity”) the cause is indicated: “injustice,” that is, judicial. From the constantly repeated reproaches of “violence” and “injustice” of Jerusalem one can conclude that in the city court there reigned probably to a strong degree partiality at the expense of the poor and defenseless. Direct examples of bloodshed from that time we do not know from Jewish sources, which is why this perhaps is hyperbole; and the LXX here reads: “the land was filled with many people” (“dam,” “blood” was read as “am,” “people” and the statement was considered comparative to the following: as the land is full of people, so “the city was filled with injustice and uncleanness”). “For they say: ‘The Lord has forsaken the land and the Lord does not see.’ They think that I do not see.” A literal repetition of the reasoning of the animal worshippers in Ezek 8:12; only there first the more important for them: “the Lord does not see us.” To the sins of bloodshed and injury (practical) is added also in Judea the sin of doubt (theoretical) in Divine providence and foresight, from which one step to atheism.

Ezekiel 9:10. Therefore My eye will not spare, nor will I show pity; I will bring their deeds upon their heads. “Therefore...” Hebrew “vegam”—Ezek 8:18, but Slavonic here “and I am,” and there “and I.” “My eye (as if in opposition to: ‘does not see’ of the preceding verse) will not spare, nor will I show pity” Ezek 5:11 (where see explanation) and Ezek 7:4, in Hebrew with slight changes each time. The punishment is merciless, but this is only “their deeds,” “turned upon their heads”; the latter expression, favorite in Ezekiel (Ezek 11:21), may be owing to 1 Sam 8:32.

Ezekiel 9:11. And the man clothed in linen, who had the writing case at his side, returned and reported, saying: I have done as You commanded me. While the punishing angels were still continuing their terrible work, the protecting angel returned: he had little to do in the wicked city. But for the execution of the entire command of God no more time was needed than for its announcement; therefore the higher angel could, as commander of the detachment (cf. Josh 5:1-4), appear to the Supreme Ruler with a report of the execution of the assignment by the entire detachment. He alone returns, and therefore because only he alone finds further application (will set fire to the city). “The bloody deed is very skillfully transferred behind the scenes, but the reader from the divine dialogue has a complete understanding of it” (Bertholet.).