Tag: covenant

Posted in Exposition

The History of a Harlot: Jerusalem’s Judgement – Ezekiel 16:35-43

Posted on by writtenexposition

INTRODUCTION

My two previous posts (The History of a Harlot: Jerusalem’s Early Years – Ezekiel 16:1-14 and The History of a Harlot: Jerusalem’s Prostitution – Ezekiel 16:15-34) covered the first 34 verses of Ezekiel 16. This chapter consists of a monologue by YHWH which takes the form of an allegory in which he compares Jerusalem to a woman whom he found in a desperate state as an abandoned infant. He rescued, nurtured and cared for her and when he saw that she had matured, married her (entered into a covenant) and made her prosperous and beautiful.

However, she became spiritually unfaithful by prostituting herself with foreign powers and their false deities. She squandered her God-given resources on idolatry and prostituted herself (made alliances) with foreign nations rather than trusting her husband YHWH. She was actually worse than a prostitute because she paid others to corrupt her (i.e. paid tribute to states like Egypt, Assyria and Babylonia) rather than receive payment from them for her services. In the next section of the allegory (vv.35-43) YHWH declares judgement upon Jerusalem for her misdeeds.

JERUSALEM’S JUDGEMENT (35-43)

(35) This section begins with ‘wherefore’ (therefore, on account of, thus, so) which looks back to the accusations of prostitution set out in vv.15-34 and draws attention to what will now be said. YHWH addressing Jerusalem directly as ‘O harlot,’ tells her to ‘hear the word of the Lord.’ He is thus directing the nation to pay attention to his message of judgement.

The word here translated ‘wherefore’ appears many times in the book of Ezekiel to indicate the direct result of what has just been said (causes and consequences): Ezek 5:7; 11:11; 13:8; 15:6; 16:35, 37; 20:27; 21:24; 22:19; 23:35; 24:9; 25:4, 7, 9,13,16; 26:3; 28:6; 29:8; 31:10; 34:7, 9, 20; 35:6.11; 36:3,4, 5, 6,7, 14.

(36) Again the messenger formula ‘thus saith the Lord God’ appears, followed by two announcements of judgement (36-42; 43), each prefaced by ‘because you’ (v.36, 43). Then comes a summary of the reasons for judgement followed by a statement of the consequences.

FIRST ANNOUNCEMENT OF JUDGEMENT

THE REASONS for YHWH’s punishment are listed as;

  • Because thy filthiness was poured out, – The word translated filthiness (KJV, NKJV) means ‘bronze.’ Based on an assumption that neither the ancient Israelites nor the Babylonians used copper as money and that the verb ‘to pour out’ is used in v.15 and in Ezek 23:8 in connection with prostitution many translations (e,g. CSB; ESV; NIV; NLT; NRSV) follow the KJV thought of filthiness and translate ‘bronze’ as ‘lust.’ This idea may have been inspired by the green patina or crust caused by oxidation that forms on brass, bronze and copper. Darby, however, sensibly views ‘bronze’ as a general term for wealth and translates the word as ‘money.’ Payment of tribute in bronze was made to both Assyrians (2 Kgs 16:17-18) and Babylonians (2 Kgs 25:13-14).
  • and thy nakedness discovered through thy whoredoms with thy lovers, – the theme of the naked female body has appeared throughout this allegory and remains the focus of Jerusalem’s punishment (vv.36, 37, 39). ‘Lovers,’ referring to Egypt (v.26), Assyria (v.28) and Babylonia (v.29), occurs in vv. 33, 36 and 37.
  • and with all the idols of thy abominations, – this is the only appearance of the word ‘idols’ in Ezek 16. Here idols are linked with ‘abominations’ (offensive things), this word occurs in vv. 2, 22, 36, 43, 47, 50, 51, 58.
  • and by the blood of thy children, which thou didst give unto them; – a reference to child sacrifice (v.20).

(37-42) THE CONSEQUENCES

Exposure

Having listed Jerusalem’s crimes YHWH now pronounces the penalties. He declares that he will bring together all her former ‘lovers’ i.e. the nations with which Jerusalem had entered into alliances and idolatry. These will turn against her; therefore the ‘gathering’ against Jerusalem symbolises besieging armies. ‘Loved and hated’ reflects Judah’s shifting political relationships with other nations.

Stretching the allegory to its limits, the punishment for Jerusalem is compared to that for adultery.

‘Uncover thy nakedness’ – refers to public disgrace by exposure which formed part of the ancient punishment for being caught in the act of adultery (Isa 47:3; Jer 13:22, 26; Hos 2:3; Nah 3:5). YHWH will expose Jerusalem to the former lovers with whom she had prostituted herself. This public disgrace represents Jerusalem’s downfall that will be witnessed by the surrounding nations.

The ‘lovers’ represent the assembly (‘the men of the city’ Deut 21:21) who carry out the punishment for adultery. This, of course, is not true to real life as, according to the Law, both parties involved in adultery were due the death penalty: If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel. Deut 22:22

Death Penalty

(38) YHWH makes it clear that the death penalty pronounced upon Jerusalem is not only for adultery (‘break wedlock’) but also murder (‘shed blood’). The ‘shed blood’ may refer to the child sacrifice mentioned in v.36 or to the violence that was rife in Jerusalem (Jer 2:34; Ezek 7:23). The Law demanded execution for adultery (Lev 20:10), murder (Ex 21:12) and child sacrifice (Lev 20:1-4).

YHWH will enact this severe penalty against Jerusalem ‘in fury and jealousy.’ Fury relates to murder and the jealousy to adultery. This verse contains the final mention of blood in the chapter (see also vv. 6, 9, 22, 36).

Humiliation

(39) YHWH will cause Jerusalem’s former lovers, with whom she had previously sought security, to return her to her original state of vulnerability. Jerusalem’s former enemies will demolish the sites of false worship (mounds and high places) and strip her of YHWH’s gifts (clothes and vessels of glory, see vv.10-13); blessings which she has used unfaithfully (see vv. 16-19). In other words, Judah will lose wealth and status.

Stoning, Cutting to pieces and Burning.

(40-41) The crowd or mob that that will come up against Jerusalem represents the Babylonian army that will attack Jerusalem with stones (flung by war engines) and slay the inhabitants with swords. They will set fire to all the buildings in the city, including the Temple.

Stoning was the usual mode of execution in ancient Israel and was the penalty for a variety of crimes whereas execution by the sword was prescribed for communal idolatry (Deut 13:15). Execution by burning was unusual but did apply for two crimes (Lev 20:14; 21:9).

The term ‘many wives’ (or ‘women’, see vv. 30, 32, 34) probably represents other nations that will look on as YHWH’s public punishment on Jerusalem takes place and to which it will serve as an example. The goal of the punishment is to end Jerusalem’s prostitution, i.e. to bring an end to her idolatry and reliance upon heathen nations. Jerusalem will ‘give payment’ (ESV) no more because Judah will lose its national independence and cease to be a regional power. These verses predict the siege and invasion of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 587/586 BCE.

(42) After the judgement is carried out YHWH’s fury will be appeased and his jealousy will subside. His wrath will be calmed because the matter will have been dealt with. In this verse we have an example of anthropopathism – ascribing human feelings and emotions to something that is not human; in this case deity.

SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT OF JUDGEMENT

As with the first announcement of judgement in vv. 36-42 this second announcement in v.43 restates the motivation for and then the consequences of YHWH’s punishment of Jerusalem.

(43) THE REASONS

Like v.36 this verse begins with ‘because you.’

  • Jerusalem did not remember the days of her youth (cf. v.22), i.e. the nation forgot the Lord’s deliverance and provision during its early history e.g. the Exodus and the making of the Sinai Covenant.
  • Jerusalem enraged YHWH ‘in all these [things].’ This must refer to the examples of prostitution listed from v.15 onwards.

THE CONSEQUENCES

As in v.37 the consequences here in v.43 begin with the words ‘behold, therefore.’

  • YHWH brought her way (deeds) on her head. The idea seems to be that because of her forgetting and her bad behaviour YHWH has held her to account for her ways (perfect tense). This verse views YHWH’s judgement from a future perspective, as having happened in the past. The phrase ‘I will give your [their} way upon your [their] head’ is also found in Ezek 9:10; 11:21; 17:19; 22:31; 33:4.
  • Jerusalem will no longer do licentiousness (engage in prostitution) in addition to all her other detestable practices (abominations). ‘Licentiousness’ (KJV ‘lewdness) and ‘abominations’ together sum up Jerusalem’s sin and are again paired in v.58.

SUMMATION

Using unsettling and violent imagery YHWH, in vv. 35-43, pronounces judgement upon Jerusalem for her infidelity (breach of covenant – Lev 26:16-17, 25, 38; Deut 28:25, 41, 47-58). She will be exposed and shamed before all her former ‘lovers’ and stripped of all the blessings that YHWH has bestowed upon her. YHWH will hand her over to these ‘lovers’ who will carry out divine justice in the form of invasion, destruction and exile.

The metaphor of an adulterous wife is used to show the seriousness of Judah’s spiritual betrayal and the harshness of the punishments in the allegory emphasise that the Lord will not tolerate sin. Idolatry and unfaithfulness are especially serious. As modern readers we might well ask ourselves how often do we turn away from God and chase after things that may be morally or spiritually corrupt. Do we take his kindness and provision for granted and forget that we have a covenant relationship with him?

Posted in Exposition

The History of a Harlot: Jerusalem’s Prostitution – Ezekiel 16:15-34

Posted on by writtenexposition

INTRODUCTION

My previous post The History of a Harlot: Jerusalem’s Early Years – Ezekiel 16:1-14 introduced an extended metaphor which was communicated by YHWH to the prophet Ezekiel with a command to deliver it to the exiles. This was in order to convince them that Jerusalem’s punishment was certain because of her abominations. In the section 1-14 Jerusalem is personified as a woman whom YHWH came across as an abandoned baby, then rescued and provided for. Once she reached maturity he married her (made a covenant with her), and dressed and adorned her to the extent that she became a beautiful queen; famous for her good looks. This all symbolises the early history of YHWH’s relationship with Israel.

JERUSALEM’S PROSTITUTION (15-34)

(15) Unfortunately v.15 begins with ‘but,’ which gives a hint that the relationship might have soured. Despite having been blessed by YHWH with beauty, prosperity and influence Jerusalem trusted in her good looks and prostituted herself with foreign nations. Unlike the previous section (1-14) where the focus is on YHWH (referring to himself as ‘I’) the next major section (15-43) focuses on Jerusalem (addressed as ‘you’). The two sections are linked by the words ‘beauty and ‘renown,’ both of which occur in v.14 and then again in v.15.

The beauty which gave her renown among the nations had been bestowed upon her by YHWH but, full of pride and self-confidence, Jerusalem abused YHWH’s trust and relied on her own beauty. It is a fact that success can change some people for the worse; this was recognised by Moses, writing in the book of Deuteronomy:

Beware that thou forget not the LORD thy God, in not keeping his commandments, and his judgements, and his statutes, which I command thee this day: Lest when thou hast eaten and art full, and hast built goodly houses, and dwelt therein; And when thy herds and thy flocks multiply, and thy silver and thy gold is multiplied, and all that thou hast is multiplied; Then thine heart be lifted up, and thou forget the LORD thy God, Deut 8:11-14

A similar observation to that about Jerusalem in v.15 is made about the king of Tyre in Ezek 28:17: ‘Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty.’

With new-found self confidence Jerusalem asserted her independence and ‘poured out’ (see also v.36) her harlotry (i.e. acted like a prostitute) on every passer-by. Since v.15 links her activity with her renown and in v.14 her renown was among the nations then those who received her sexual favours are the nations. This is a metaphorical way of describing alliances with foreign powers.

The allegory very much emphasises a verb meaning ‘engaging in prostitution’ and related words like ‘prostitute’ which occur some twenty times in vv.15-36. This perhaps becomes more obvious when these verses are read in a modern translation; such as the Christian Standard Bible.

16-21 ‘YOU TOOK’

Verses 16-21 specify four actions by Jerusalem in which she took gifts given to her by YHWH and used them for prostitution.

(16) And of thy garments thou didst take, and deckedst thy high places with divers colours, and playedst the harlot thereupon: the like things shall not come, neither shall it be so.

Jerusalem took the expensive embroidered ‘garments’ (clothes or coverings, also v.18) which had been presented to her by YHWH (vv.10, 13) and made shrines (bāmôt, high places) with the material. The image is of her making up a bed with these materials given by her husband and prostituting herself on them with her lovers (interestingly, the word ‘garment’ is elsewhere translated ‘bed’ – 1 Sam 19:13). This activity by Jerusalem may be a reference to the presence of cult prostitution in Israel (cf. Isa 57:7). The clause at the end of v.16 is unclear (‘such are not to come and it will not be’) but probably means something like: ‘things like this should not take place.’

(17) Thou hast also taken thy fair jewels of my gold and of my silver, which I had given thee, and madest to thyself images of men, and didst commit whoredom with them,

YHWH says that Jerusalem also took ‘thy fair jewels.’ This may also be translated ”your vessels of glory’, a term that appears again in v.39. ‘Glory’ directs the reader back to ‘crown of glory’ (beautiful crown) in v.12. Gold and silver are mentioned in v.13 where it is implied but not stated that they were supplied by YHWH. Now v.17 makes it clear that they were indeed a gift from YHWH. Jerusalem took these precious metals and made ‘for herself’ (also v.24) ‘images of men’ (male statues), idols with which she engaged in prostitution. Israel turned to idolatry.

(18-19) And tookest thine embroidered garments, and coveredst them: and thou hast set mine oil and mine incense before them. My meat also which I gave thee, fine flour, and oil, and honey, wherewith I fed thee, thou hast even set it before them for a sweet savour: and thus it was, saith the Lord GOD.

Verse 18 begins with the third ‘you took’ specifying that the woman also used the embroidered garments (10, 13, 16) to dress the masculine images that she had made from YHWH’s precious metals. In addition she offered YHWH’s oil, incense and food (my oil, my incense, my food) to these idols. The specific food items are fine flour, oil and honey.

This is the only mention of incense in the allegory. In chapter 8:11-12 Ezekiel saw 70 elders of Israel burning incense to pagan deities. There it says that a fragrant (or thick) cloud of incense arose. The next verse in this passage (v.19), using a different word for fragrant, says that Jerusalem offered food – fine flour, oil and honey – to her idols for a ‘sweet savour’ (fragrant aroma). It was believed that as such products burned a fragrant or soothing aroma arose to the nostrils of the deity being worshipped.

This idea is first mentioned in connection with sacrifices offered by Noah after the Flood (Gen 8:20-21). Note that three of the five major Levitical fire offerings (‘ōlāh, minḥāh and šelem) in the tabernacle system of worship (Lev 1-7) are said to be ‘sweet savour’ offerings (‘ōlāh, transl. Burnt or Ascending offering – Lev 1:9, 13, 17; minḥāh, transl. Grain, Meal, Meat i.e. Food or Cereal offering – Lev 2:2, 9; šelem, transl. Peace or Fellowship offering – Lev 3:5, 16). The offering of honey by fire to YHWH was prohibited (Lev 2:11).

(20-21) Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured. Is this of thy whoredoms a small matter, That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through the fire for them?

Now YHWH accuses Jerusalem of taking her own children and giving them up to be sacrificed. ‘To them’ refers to the masculine statues of v.17 and it was to these that the woman offered up her sons and daughters (children that she had borne to YHWH) for consumption.

At the end of v.20 YHWH asks ‘Is this less than your harlotry?’ i.e. he is asking if her acts of prostitution were not enough, surely this is even worse!

She slaughtered her children whom she presented when offering them up ‘to them’ (the idols). The same verb ‘slaughtered’ (šāḥaṭ, KJV slain) is used again in Ezek 23:39 in connection with the sacrifice of children to idols. The practice of child sacrifice was associated with Canaanite religion, especially the worship of Molech. King Ahaz of Judah is said to have ‘made his son to pass through the fire,’ presumably as part of a pagan ritual (2 Kgs 16:3). That some Israelites practised this is mentioned in 2 Kgs 17:17 and Jer 32:35 cf. 2 Kgs 23:10. The Law specifically prohibited the Israelites from engaging in child sacrifice to Molech (Lev 18:21; 20:2-5).

22- 34 INGRATITUDE AND GREATER SPIRITUAL ADULTERY

(22) Jerusalem’s sin is not just idolatry but ingratitude. YHWH reminds her of her humble beginnings and of how he had rescued and provided for her (16:4-13). She has not remembered ‘the days of her youth’ (vv.22, 43) when she was ‘naked and bare’ (cf. v.70 and polluted in her own blood (cf. v.6).

(23) Upon reading the opening words of v.23 (‘then after all your evil’) one might expect a conclusion to follow but instead YHWH exclaims ‘Woe, woe, to you’ in horror at further acts of prostitution and adultery that he proceeds to list in vv.24-34.

(24-25) The accusations levelled by YHWH against Jerusalem flow from the assertion in v.15 that she trusted in her own beauty and engaged in prostitution. From vv. 16-23 that prostitution takes the form of idolatrous activity which includes the construction of shrines and the offering of sacrifices. These verses seem to concentrate on the idolatry and not so much on the sexual theme. The allegory, however, picks up the latter again in vv. 24-34 where the main idea is that Jerusalem is sexually insatiable. In vv. 24-25 the prostitution is still linked with idolatry, from v.26 the figure extends to political alliances with foreign powers.

V.24 has two accusations:

  • ‘Thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place’ – This word is not bāmôt which is translated ‘high places’ in v.16. Here the word for ‘mound’ (KJV ’eminent place’) is gaḇ; it refers to something curved, to any convex surface, e.g eyebrows in Lev 14:9, the rim (KJV nave) of a wheel, 1 Kgs 7:33; Ezek 1:18). It occurs also in v.31 and v.39.
  • ‘and hast made thee a high place in every street’ – Here the word translated ‘high place’ is rāmāh. It means a hill or high ground.

Jerusalem had constructed mounds upon which were shrines for the worship of pagan idols. The word ‘built’ in vv. 24 and 25 occurs also at v.31. These mounds were at the head of every path or square. Reḥôb means path, street, plaza or square, open area. There she ‘spread her feet to’ (had relations with) everyone that passed by. Perhaps this is a play on vv.5-6. There Jerusalem was a baby abandoned in an ‘open field’ and it was YHWH who ‘passed by’.

Jerusalem ‘multiplied her harlotry;’ this is repeated in vv. 26 and 29. Her once desirable beauty became detestable to YHWH and to others as a result of her promiscuity.

(26-29) Verse 26 again takes up the theme of prostitution with the expression ‘engaged in prostitution.’ It also occurs in vv. 15, 16 and 17 and will appear again twice in v.28. Now the prostitution is not so much cultic as political. Four nations (Egyptians, Philistines, Assyrians, Chaldeans) are mentioned in the historical order in which Jerusalem had political dealings with them. It is specifically stated that she engaged in prostitution with three of them.

1) The sons of Egypt – the Egyptians are described as neighbours and also as ‘great of flesh.’ The latter phrase is a double entendre that could either be taken to mean well-endowed or fat and flabby. As well as the repetition of ‘engaged in prostitution’ there is also repetition of the ‘multiplied your harlotry’ phrase from v.25. Several kings of Israel and Judah made it part of their diplomatic strategy to form an alliance (for political, military or economic reasons) with Egypt, one of the most powerful nations in the Ancient Near East. For example:

SOLOMON (United Monarchy)

Solomon made a marriage alliance with Pharaoh king of Egypt. He took Pharaoh’s daughter and brought her into the city of David until he had finished building his own house… 1 Kings 3:1ESV (see also 1 Kgs 9:16)

HOSHEA (Northern Kingdom – Israel) rebelled against Assyria and sought alliance with Egypt

Against him came up Shalmaneser king of Assyria. And Hoshea became his vassal and paid him tribute. But the king of Assyria found treachery in Hoshea, for he had sent messengers to So, king of Egypt, and offered no tribute to the king of Assyria, as he had done year by year. 2 Kings 17:3-4 ESV

HEZEKIAH (Southern Kingdom – Judah)

And the Rabshakeh said to them, “Say to Hezekiah, ‘Thus says the great king, the king of Assyria: On what do you rest this trust of yours? 20 Do you think that mere words are strategy and power for war? In whom do you now trust, that you have rebelled against me? Behold, you are trusting now in Egypt, that broken reed of a staff, which will pierce the hand of any man who leans on it. Such is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who trust in him. 2 Kings 18:19-21 ESV

JEHOIAKIM (Southern Kingdom – Judah)

And Pharaoh Neco made Eliakim the son of Josiah king in the place of Josiah his father, and changed his name to Jehoiakim. But he took Jehoahaz away, and he came to Egypt and died there. And Jehoiakim gave the silver and the gold to Pharaoh, but he taxed the land to give the money according to the command of Pharaoh. He exacted the silver and the gold of the people of the land, from everyone according to his assessment, to give it to Pharaoh Neco. 2 Kings 23:34-35 ESV

ZEDEKIAH (Southern Kingdom – Judah)

But he rebelled against him by sending his ambassadors to Egypt, that they might give him horses and a large army. Will he thrive? Can one escape who does such things? Can he break the covenant and yet escape? “As I live, declares the Lord GOD, surely in the place where the king dwells who made him king, whose oath he despised, and whose covenant with him he broke, in Babylon he shall die. Pharaoh with his mighty army and great company will not help him in war, when mounds are cast up and siege walls built to cut off many lives. Ezekiel 17:15-17 ESV

Verses 22 and 23 suggested that the reasons for Jerusalem’s behaviour were her forgetfulness and wickedness. Now v.26 says that the motive was a deliberate intention to provoke her husband (YHWH). Her idolatry and foreign alliances so angered YHWH that in v.27 he draws attention to the fact (‘behold!) that he therefore ‘stretched out his hand over her’ i.e. acted against her in judgement. He reduced her lot and gave her over to the greed of her enemies the Philistines. At one stage Philistia must have annexed some of Judah’s territory.

Even the Philistines were appalled by Jerusalem’s lewd conduct, i.e. her moral and spiritual corruption. She is not said to have engaged in prostitution with the Philistines but v.28 states twice that she did so with the sons of Assyria (Assyrians), and was insatiable. That she was insatiable is repeated at the end of v.29. The kings who allied with Assyria include:

MENAHEM (Northern Kingdom – Israel)

Pul the king of Assyria came against the land, and Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of silver, that he might help him to confirm his hold on the royal power. Menahem exacted the money from Israel, that is, from all the wealthy men, fifty shekels of silver from every man, to give to the king of Assyria. So the king of Assyria turned back and did not stay there in the land. 2 Kings 15:19-20 ESV

HOSHEA (Northern Kingdom – Israel)

Against him came up Shalmaneser king of Assyria. And Hoshea became his vassal and paid him tribute. 2 Kings 17:3 ESV

AHAZ (Southern Kingdom – Judah)

So Ahaz sent messengers to Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, saying, “I am your servant and your son. Come up and rescue me from the hand of the king of Syria and from the hand of the king of Israel, who are attacking me.” Ahaz also took the silver and gold that was found in the house of the LORD and in the treasures of the king’s house and sent a present to the king of Assyria. 9 And the king of Assyria listened to him. 2 Kings 16:7-9 ESV – see also Isa 7:1-17

Addicted to idolatry and political entanglements Jerusalem could not be satisfied so kept moving on to other relationships. The next relationship, mentioned in vv. 28-29, is that with the sons of Chaldea, i.e. the Babylonians, the ascendant power when Ezekiel was writing. Babylonia is described as a ‘land of Canaan’ i.e. a nation of merchants.

The Canaanites, e.g. the Phoenicians (main towns Tyre and Sidon), were so famous for trading in the ancient world that the name was used as a term for trader, trafficker or merchant. For a description of their trading activities that is of great historical interest see the Lament for Tyre in Ezekiel chapter 27, especially vv.12-25. For examples of the use of Canaanite or land of Canaan for merchant see Ezek 17:5; Prov 31:24; Hos 12:7; Zeph 1:11; Zech 14:21.

(30-34) In these last few verses of this section of the allegory accusing Jerusalem of engaging in prostitution YHWH moves on from the nations to claim that Jerusalem is not like other women and, as a matter of fact, she isn’t even like other prostitutes. The word ’iššāh, meaning woman or wife occurs 3 times in these verses, 30, 32, 34.

YHWH disgustedly asks Jerusalem what is wrong with her heart that she acted like a brazen prostitute. She had a great relationship with YHWH who loved, cared and provided her so why did she have so many relationships, moving from one to another, when none of them left her satisfied? He then refers in v.31 to some of her activities that have already been described in vv. 15-29:

  • In that thou buildest thine eminent place (gab) in the head of every way –
  • and makest thine high place (rāmāh) in every street;
  • and hast not been as a harlot, in that thou scornest hire;

The verb ‘to build’ is the same as that used in vv.24 and 25. ‘At the head of every way’ is also repeated from v.25a, there it is said of the rāmāh but here in v.31 of the gab.

Unlike other prostitutes who accept payment for their services Jerusalem was so depraved and desperate that she scoffed at payment. The word ’eṯnan, meaning a prostitute’s pay (KJV, hire or reward), occurs in v.31, v.34 twice and in v.41.

In v.32 , quite far on in the allegory the verb ‘commit adultery’ occurs (also in v.38. ‘break wedlock’ KJV). Like a woman (wife) who commits adultery Jerusalem takes strangers instead of her husband. She has therefore broken the covenant obligations of v.8.

Verse 33 quickly returns to the notion of prostitution and says that ‘they’ (i.e. the strangers) always give gifts to prostitutes (i.e. pay their fee) but Jerusalem gives presents to (i.e. bribes) her lovers ‘on every side’ that they may come ‘into’ her. This is another double entendre in the allegory; the preposition ’el can indicate motion toward (hence KJV ‘unto’) but can also mean ‘into.’ It is used of sexual intercourse in Gen 16:2 and Num 25:1. This is a metaphorical reference to Israel and Judah paying tribute as vassal states to the dominant powers of the time – the nations ‘on every side’ (i.e. all around).

V.34 makes the point that Jerusalem is not a typical female prostitute:

  • none followeth thee to commit whoredoms – none of the neighbouring states were interested in forming an alliance with Jerusalem.
  • and in that thou givest a reward, and no reward is given unto thee – In her quest for political security Jerusalem had to pay tribute to other states.

SUMMATION

In the Ezekiel 16:15-34 section of the allegory YHWH, through Ezekiel, accuses Jerusalem of pride leading to prostitution with foreign nations. Despite having experienced YHWH’s provision and protection the nation of Israel/ Judah was unfaithful. This reflects the history of Israel during the period of the judges and especially under the monarchy. The turning to idolatry and alliances with pagan states constituting spiritual adultery began in earnest with Solomon during the united monarchy. This state of affairs continued under the kings of both Israel and Judah when the monarchy divided after his death. Their dependence upon foreign nations rather than YHWH did not work out well for Israel and Judah. The Northern Kingdom (Israel) fell to Assyria in 722 BCE and the Southern Kingdom (Judah) to Babylon in 586/7 BCE. The next section of the allegory (vv. 35-43) is about Jerusalem’s judgement.

Posted in Exposition

ROMANS 11:25-36

Posted on by writtenexposition

DISCOURSE 3 continued

‘I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, and in this way all Israel will be saved. As it is written: “The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins.” As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable. Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you. For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.’ Roman 11:25-32 (NIV)

Throughout this chapter Paul has been developing his argument concerning the status of Israel in the history of salvation. He has just been addressing the possibility that Gentiles might say that God has totally rejected Israel and instead called in the Gentiles. Having insisted that the salvation of Jews is possible, and suggested that it is probable, he now goes on to assert that it is inevitable. Moo (2094, p.198) observes:

‘By common agreement, the pinnacle of Romans 9-11 is reached in 11:22-32, and especially in Paul’s claim that “all Israel will be saved” (11:26a). Here is the final and decisive answer to the question about God’s faithfulness in carrying out his promise to Israel.’

In order that the believers at Rome might not be ignorant of the salvation of ‘all Israel’ and be conceited as a result Paul presents the information to them as a mystery’. Bruce (2000, p.334) observes:

‘Paul’s own sympathies were manifestly engaged in this matter, but he does not present his forecast of Israel’s restoration as the product of wishful thinking but as the substance of a “mystery” – an aspect of the divine purpose formerly concealed but now divulged.’

V.25 mentions ‘a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in.’ That Israel was partially hardened’ (or ‘blinded’) could not be the mystery as this has already been mentioned in 11:7 (and hinted at in the ‘stumbled’ of 9:32). Nor could the mystery have been that Israel would be saved as that was widely expected by the Jews. Paul reveals the mystery with the word ‘until’. The reversal of the partial hardening will be when the full number of elect Gentiles has come in. The mystery is that the hardening is temporary (‘until’ v.25) and that it would be ‘so,’ that is, ‘in this way’ (in tandem with Gentile believers, v.26) that ‘all Israel will be saved.’

There are two major interpretative issues relating to v.26. First, what is the meaning of ‘all Israel?’

1. Does it refer to ethnic Jews or to the Church (all believers both Jew and Gentile)?

2. The second is the time and manner of Israel’s salvation. Is it a future
eschatological event subsequent to the coming in of the full number of elect Gentiles or a process occurring throughout history in tandem with the salvation of Gentiles in this age?

The disagreement on these issues by scholars has caused Moo (1996, p.719) to describe the opening words of v.26 as ‘the storm center in the interpretation of Romans 9-11 and of the NT teaching about the Jews and their future.’ Various interpretations have been suggested for ‘all Israel’ but most are variations of one of the following three: the church, the nation or the remnant.

‘All Israel’ as the Church.

Theologians such as Calvin and more recently Barth (1968) and Wright (1991, p.250) interpret ‘all Israel’ in Romans 11:26 metaphorically as the Church, the spiritual Israel composed of Jews and Gentiles. This fits with the likelihood that the church at Rome was divided and that Paul was calling for unity, which would serve his own short-term missionary goals and also advance the mission of the whole Christian church. It is, however, unlikely that ‘all Israel’ refers to the whole people of God as that would
give ‘Israel’ a new meaning which is unsupported elsewhere in Romans.

The term usually refers to Israel as a whole, or is sometimes narrowed down to refer to a part of Israel. It is never widened to include Gentiles. ‘Israel’ occurs eleven times in Romans 9-11 (9:6, 27, 31; 10:1, 19, 21; 11: 2, 7, 25) before 11:26 and refers to either ethnic Israel or a part of it, in contrast with the Gentiles. Having maintained a distinction between ethnic Israel and the Gentiles throughout Romans 9-11 and having used it in v.25 to refer to ethnic Israel in contradistinction to Gentiles it is unlikely that Paul would make such a fundamental shift in meaning in v.26a.

‘All Israel’ as the nation.

The majority view is that ‘all Israel’ refers to ethnic Israel, but not necessarily every individual. Dunn (1988, p.681) defines Israel as: ‘a people whose corporate identity and wholeness would not be lost even if in the event there were some (or indeed many) individual exceptions.’ ‘All Israel’ is viewed as the majority of Jews on earth who, after the full number of Gentiles has been saved, accept what Fitzmyer (2004, p.182) terms the ‘parousiac Christ’ in a worldwide, large-scale, mass conversion.

This viewpoint is somewhat misleading as it suggests a difference between physical Israel and the Church in the matter of salvation and stresses a literal fulfilment of prophecy about Israel. This view that ‘all Israel’ is the nation denies that the Church is the culmination of God’s saving plan.

‘All Israel’ as the remnant.

According to this view ‘all Israel’ refers to the elect of ethnic Israel throughout history. Israel will experience a partial hardening to the end of time (‘until the full number of the Gentiles has come in’) but God will always save a remnant of Jews. ‘All Israel’ will be saved in the same way as Gentiles are being saved: as they believe, throughout the course of history. The ‘mystery’ in 11:25 is not the fact of the remnant’s salvation but the manner in which they are saved. ‘And so’ (11:26a) means ‘in this manner’ and refers back to the arousal of Jews to envy so that some might turn to Christ for salvation (11:11-13).

This viewpoint fits the context of Romans 9-11. In chapter 9 Paul maintains that God is faithful in spite of Israel’s rejection of the Messiah as his promise to save Abraham’s descendants was not on the basis of national identity. The true Israel consists of children of the promise, rather than ethnic Jews. In 10:12 Paul shows that there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in the matter of salvation. God’s promises are not fulfilled in the nation but in the believing remnant.

Paul’s is thinking very much of the present, not on the long-range future. Romans chapter 11 is contemporary in nature. In v.5 Paul speaks of ‘the present time’, in which there is a ‘remnant’ (vv.2-4) and also those who were ‘hardened’ vv.8-10. Paul ‘exalts’ his ministry (v.13) in order to ‘save some’ in his own day (v.14). The Gentileswhom he was addressing were his contemporaries and he was hoping that the salvation of contemporary Gentiles would provoke Jewish contemporaries to jealousy and salvation. He was not labouring to provoke the Jews to jealousy in order to bring about a future mass conversion of ethnic Israel. That the Israelite branches broken off are contemporary as are the engrafted Gentiles is confirmed by the threefold ‘now’ in vv. 30-31. It is ‘now’ (in Paul’s day), that Israel is receiving mercy.

Some might object that ‘Israel’ in v.26 should have the same meaning as ‘Israel’ in v.25 which clearly refers to ethnic Israel (the remnant plus the hardened remainder). Paul however, has already used ‘Israel’ to refer to both the nation and the elect within the nation (‘For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel’) in 9:6, in one sentence. Wright (1991, p.250) contends that:

‘It is impermissible to argue that ‘Israel’ cannot change its referent within the space of two verses, so that ‘Israel’ in v. 25 must mean the same as ‘Israel’ in v. 26: Paul actually began the whole section (9.6) with just such a programmatic distinction of two ‘Israels’, and throughout the letter (e.g. 2.25-9) … he has systematically transferred the privileges and attributes of ‘Israel’ to the Messiah and his people.’

The climax of Paul’s discussion of God’s faithfulness in spite of Israel’s failure to receive the gospel is the assertion in 11:26a: ‘And so all Israel will be saved.’

In vv. 26-27 Paul supports his statement about the salvation of all Israel with an OT quotation based on Isaiah 59:20-21 and on Isaiah 27:9. Although using it to prove his point about the salvation of ‘all Israel’ Paul deliberately modifies the text and quotes it as ‘the deliverer will come from Zion, rather than ‘to Zion’ thus emphasizing his Messianic interpretation of the verses and identifying Jesus as the deliverer rather than God himself. Some might contend that Paul was writing after the first coming of Christ and was waiting for the deliverer of Israel to come but it is my view that ‘will come’ and ‘will turn’ point to the future from the perspective of the OT prophet, not from Paul’s first century standpoint, and thus refer to what Christ did at his first coming rather than to something that will occur at his second. The verses contain three main assertions:

1) ‘The deliverer will come from Zion.’

2) He will ‘turn godlessness away from Jacob.’

3) This would establish God’s covenant, which promised forgiveness of sins.

Wright (1997, pp. 108-109) views the latter assertion as the climax of Romans 9-11 and, speaking of Israel, claims:

‘When Paul’s fellow Jews rejected Jesus (as Paul did himself to begin with), and when they continue to reject the message about Jesus which Paul proclaims, he sees the underlying reason: they recognize, as he has had to recognize, that it will mean abandoning the idea of a covenant membership which will be inalienably hers and hers alone. So the great argument of Romans 9-11 goes on its way, reaching at its climax the most significant statement, quoting from Jeremiah 31:33 and Isaiah 27:9 – this will be my covenant with them, when I take away their sins (Romans 11:27). … Paul holds firmly to the hope that the renewal of the covenant which has taken place in Jesus the Messiah will be effective not only for Gentiles but also for Jews who will come, as he himself has done, to faith in Jesus as the Jewish Messiah.’

According to proponents of the Dual-Covenant theory the Deliverer is not Christ but God who will deliver Israel from its partial hardening in an independent act of mercy that does not involve acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. Fitzmyer (2004, p.181) explains that:

‘The main reason given for this interpretation is the fact that Christ has not been mentioned so far in chap.11, and indeed not since 10:17. Christ is not being envisaged, then, as the deliverer. Thus the solution to the problem of Israel is sought in an act of God’s mercy manifested toward the Chosen People of old. The “covenant” (11:27) would still be the everlasting covenant between Yahweh and Israel (2 Sam. 23:5). So these words of Paul have been interpreted by K. Stendahl, M. A. Getty, P. Lapide and P. Stuhlmacher.’

Regarding bi-covenantal teaching Zeisler (1989, p. 285-286) observes:

‘It has been suggested that, as Paul never states that they will become Christians, he allows for the possibility that somehow at the End God will bring together those who have followed two different tracks to being his people: the track taken by the remnant and by believing Gentiles, the Christian track; and the track of historical Israel, relying on God’s grace in his ancient covenant with them. This suggestion…is scarcely congruous with Paul’s argument and in particular with his argument towards the end of the olive tree passage. There the broken-off branches were grafted back in precisely when they no longer persisted in their lack of belief, i.e. when they came to faith in Jesus Christ. It is too much to suppose that Paul sees God as having two strategies, one for repentant branches and one for unrepentant branches, cf. Also vv.26f., 31. If that were the case, why should repentance matter?’

The view that there is a ‘Sonderweg’ (separate way) for Israel does not fit with the general thrust of the letter as throughout it Paul insists on salvation through faith in Christ for Jew and Gentile alike (1:16; 4:25; 10:9). Das (2003, p.105) maintains that:

‘Paul simply does not treat God’s salvation of Israel separately from the salvation of Gentiles. In Romans 11:31 he writes:” by means of the mercy shown to you [Gentiles], they, the Jews, will now receive mercy” (see also 11:13-16). The Jews’ reception of mercy by means of the Gentiles’ reception of mercy demonstrates that the two-covenant thesis of separate paths to salvation is simply wrong. The “two-covenant” approach does not explain why the Gentiles must experience mercy in order for the Jews to experience mercy. Paul speaks of one olive tree representing Israel’s heritage as the same tree on which the Gentiles are grafted. He does not speak of two separate trees. Since a single tree represents their respective paths to salvation, the Jews must likewise place their faith in the Jewish Messiah as the fulfilment to which the Mosaic Law had pointed all along.’

Speaking of those Israelites that will be saved (the ‘all Israel’ of v.26) Paul views their relationship to God from two different angles in v.28:

1) As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account.

2) As far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs.

These two parallel clauses contain three word pairs: gospel/election, enemies/loved, and on your account/on account of the patriarchs. The statement ‘as far as election is concerned’ indicates that although they are considered enemies when viewed according to their rejection of the gospel, they are considered beloved when viewed in reference to God’s choice. That v.28 is not a statement of the corporate status of Israel as a nation is clear from v.29, which speaks of an ‘irrevocable call,’ and confirmed by vv. 30-31 in which Paul contrasts saved Jews with the saved Gentiles whom he is addressing.

In vv. 28-32 Paul summarizes the arguments he has made in chapters 9-11:

1) ‘Enemies’: Israel, having rejected the gospel (9:30-10:21), was rejected by God (9:6-29).

2) ‘On your account’: The rejection of the Jews led to the inclusion of the Gentiles (11:11-15)

3) ‘Election’: God has chosen to accept some and reject others which is the theme of chapter 9.

In v.30 Paul further expands on the point made in vv. 11-15 that the disobedience of the Jews has resulted in salvation for the Gentiles and says (v.31) that the Jews have ‘now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy.’ The implication is that while one part of Israel is now disobedient another part (the remnant) is now receiving mercy. Robertson (2000, p.191) agrees:

‘In the end, God’s gracious activity of calling the elect within Israel to salvation is tied to the present hour by Paul’s threefold use of an emphatic “now.” Gentiles now have been shown mercy; Jews now have been disobedient, that they may also now be shown mercy (Romans 1:30-31).’

In v.32 Paul summarizes God’s purpose for both Jew and Gentiles alike: ‘For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.’ The outlook for humanity is hopeless apart from the mercy of God. In view of what Paul has said earlier about punishment (1:18; 2:5-11; 6:21-23; 9:22, 28) ‘mercy on all’ does not mean universal salvation but refers to the fact that God’s mercy will be shown to Jew and Gentile alike. Morris (1988, p.426) contends:

‘Paul is not saying that God predetermined that all should sin, but rather that he has so ordered things that all people, Jew and Gentile alike, being disobedient, show themselves to be sinners (cf. 1:24, 26, 28) and have no other escape than through his mercy.’

11: 33-36 Doxology

From him – Through him – To him

‘Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! “Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?” “Who has ever given to God, that God should repay them?” For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever!’ Rom 11:32-36 (NIV)

In vv. 33-36 theology becomes doxology. Having contemplated God’s inscrutable purposes and plans for the salvation of both Jews and Gentiles the apostle worships and glorifies him for the wisdom which lies behind them. Vv. 34-35 contain a quotation from Isaiah 40:13 and another (slightly modified) from Job 41:11. Together they pose three rhetorical questions, each beginning with ‘Who has’ and each expecting the negative answer ‘No one!’

‘Who has known the mind of the Lord?’

‘Who has been his counselor?’

‘Who has ever given to God, that God should repay them?’

No one can understand God, no one can tell God what to do and no one can accuse God of unfairness. Paul ends (v.36) by using the prepositions ‘from’, ‘through’ and ‘to’ in an affirmation that God is the creator, sustainer and goal of creation:

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen.

View my posts:

Introduction to Romans chapters 9-11

Romans 9:1-5 Paul’s Lament

Romans 9:6-29

Romans 9:30- 10:21

Romans 11:1-24

Romans 9-11 Bibliography

Posted in Exposition

ROMANS 9:1-5. PAUL’S LAMENT

Posted on by writtenexposition



‘I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit— I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen’ Romans 9:1-5 (NIV)


Romans chapter nine begins with a personal lament which introduces the problem that Paul intends to address; the failure of Israel to accept the gospel in spite of the privileges with which they had been blessed. This is the first of four times (9:1-5; 10:1-4; 11:1-6; 11:13-14) in chapters 9-11 when Paul involves himself personally at major turning points of the discussion:


a) In 9:1-5, he stresses how much God’s mercy to Israel matters to him – to the extent that he would be willing to be cut off for the sake of his people.


b) In 10:1-4 he bears witness on behalf of Israel that they have good intentions: they have a zeal for God, but it is is not according to knowledge.

c) In 11:1-6 Paul testifies to the faithfulness of God who has, in fact, called a remnant of Israel in Paul himself.

d) In 11:13-14 he says that he glorifies his ministry as apostle to
the Gentiles; this is part of God’s plan to make Israel jealous.


Paul begins this section with a series of double expressions in vv. 1-2 (‘I speak the truth —I am not lying; in Christ – through the Holy Spirit; great sorrow – unceasing anguish’) by which he asserts his honesty and expresses his grief that his fellow Jews are lost.

In v. 1 he sets forth in one sentence a five-fold cumulative assertion of his sincerity:

a) ‘I speak the truth!’

b) ‘I speak the truth in Christ’

c) ‘I speak the truth in Christ – I am not lying’

d) ‘ I speak the truth in Christ – I am not lying, my conscience confirms it’

e) ‘I speak the truth in Christ – I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit’

Paul calls on Christ himself as the one who can vouch for the truthfulness of what he is about to say about Israel and reminds his audience that a second witness, his conscience, is testifying by means of the Holy Spirit. He may have had in mind the OT Law of Evidence which required at least two witnesses (Deuteronomy 19:15-16).

Paul (v.2) describes his heartbreak as continual (adialeiptos) and his response to this as a wish (or prayer) that he might be condemned in order that they might be saved. Was Paul speaking in hyperbole or was he serious? Moo (1996, p.558) comments:

‘I prefer, in agreement with most English translations, to ascribe a hypothetical nuance to the imperfect tense; as Cranfield paraphrases, “I would pray (were it permissible for me so to pray and if the fulfilment of such a prayer could benefit them”)’

Since Paul’s giving up of his own salvation was neither possible nor permissible the wish could not be fulfilled. He seems to model himself on Moses (Exodus 30:30-32), who had also at times been badly treated by the Israelites and yet expressed a willingness to sacrifice himself for them. That those for whom Paul is heartbroken are unbelieving Jews is emphasized in v. 3 where their identification as ‘my people’ is modified by ‘those of my own race’ and further in v. 4 by ‘the people
of Israel’. Paul may have been the Apostle to the Gentiles but he was certainly a Jew by race.

In the concluding words of this lament Paul lists eight special privileges given to Israel and bemoans the fact that the Israelites have not benefitted from these spiritual advantages:

1) adoption
2) the glory
3) the covenants
4) the giving of the law
5) the temple worship
6) the promises
7) the patriarchs
8) the Messiah – who was himself a Jew

Thus in verses 1-5 Paul laments the unbelief of his fellow Jews and their failure to take advantage of their unique privileges, and expresses his overwhelming desire for their conversion. This introduces the subject that will occupy him throughout the rest of chapters 9-11; the unbelief of Israel and the question of God’s faithfulness.

See my posts:

Introduction to Romans chapters 9-11

Romans 9:6-29

Romans 9:30- 10:21

Romans 11:1-24

Romans 11:25-36

Romans 9-11 Bibliography