proverb – Written Exposition

Ezekiel 24:1-14 The Parable of the Cooking Pot

Posted on 22nd Nov 202518th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

INTRODUCTION TO EZEKIEL CHAPTER 24

Ezekiel 24 serves as the climactic turning point in the book – the decisive moment when prophecy moves from warning to fulfilment. For the last time Ezekiel predicts the destruction of Jerusalem and its people. This is followed by symbolism that must have affected even the most hardened of his opponents.

The destruction of Jerusalem is prophesied in the parable of a cooking pot and then symbolised in the death of Ezekiel’s wife. The oracle and the death of Ezekiel’s wife are dated the same day and both images function together to signify that Jerusalem’s calamities will be so extreme that they are beyond any expression of sorrow. The two interlock to signify external suffering and internal collapse.

The chapter may be viewed as consisting of two main sections – the parable of the cooking pot and the death of Ezekiel’s wife – although also, as Petter (2023, Introduction to 24:1-27) observes, within these sections is ‘a series of five shocking announcements: the news of the city’s siege (24:2), the death of Ezekiel’s wife (24:16), the end of the sanctuary (24:21), the news from the fugitive (24:26), and the news Ezekiel will speak again (24:27).’

1-14 The Parable of the Cooking Pot

(1-3a) A threefold instruction: record the date, use a parable, declare it to the rebellious house.

This oracle and the death of Ezekiel’s wife are dated the tenth day of the tenth month of the ninth year – the date on which Nebuchadnezzar’s forces commenced the siege of Jerusalem. All hope of deliverance has now gone, the time of intense pressure has arrived.

The oracle is viewed as very important because Ezekiel is emphatically told to record that particular date. In v.2 he is instructed to ‘write thee the name of the day, even of this same day… this same day.’

On that day – ‘the tenth day of the tenth month of the ninth year’ – Ezekiel announced to the exiles in Babylon that, some 400 miles away, Nebuchadnezzar had ‘set himself against’ (pressed violently upon, leaned heavily on, cf. Psa 88:7) Jerusalem. Ezekiel could not possibly have known that Nebuchadnezzar’s army had begun the siege of Jerusalem that very day except by revelation from YHWH. This record would therefore be indisputable proof, to anyone who later checked the dates of his prophecies, that he was a true prophet of YHWH.

Modern scholars debate what year that ‘ninth year’ actually was. According to the Parker-Dubberstein chronology the date equates to 15 January, 588 BCE. Albright, however, calculates the year as 587 BCE and Thiele as 586 BCE.

Throughout the book of Ezekiel dates are based on the year of King Jehoiachin’s exile which, since Nebuchadnezzar replaced Jehoiachin with Zedekiah, was also the year of Zedekiah’s accession. Three other biblical passages confirm that the date given by Ezekiel is that on which the siege of Jerusalem began – only they express it in terms of Zedekiah’s reign – the ninth year of Jehoiachin’s exile corresponding to the ninth year of Zedekiah’s reign.

And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it; and they built forts against it round about. And the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah. 2 Kgs 25:1-2

In the ninth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the tenth month, came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and all his army against Jerusalem, and they besieged it. Jer 39:1

And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he and all his army, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it, and built forts against it round about. So the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah. Jer 52:4-5

Ezekiel is then instructed to use a parable (māšāl – proverb, parable) and declare it to ‘the rebellious house.’ This most likely refers to the exiles who are with him in Babylonia (Ezek 2:5, 6; 12:2, 3, 9; 17:12) but perhaps also to the inhabitants of Judah. Details of the parable occupy vv.3b-14.

(3b-5) The parable involves a cauldron or cooking pot (siyr). Those for domestic use were normally made of pottery but the cauldron Ezekiel has in mind is made of copper/brass (v.11) which may suggest a large one like those used in the Temple (2 Kgs 25:14). In 11:1-12 Ezekiel has already referred to a proverb about a cooking pot that was widely quoted by the Judahites. The image of a cauldron was loaded with meaning for the people of Jerusalem who considered themselves to be like choice meat in the safety of YHWH’s protective pot (the city). Ezekiel now turns their own metaphor on its head and uses it to illustrate Jerusalem’s fate.

Addressing Ezekiel as if he were an imaginary cook YHWH tells him to:

set the cooking pot [on the fire] – the pot represents Jerusalem and the ‘setting on’ indicates the beginning of the siege.
pour in the water.
‘gather the pieces thereof’ – the pieces of meat belonging to the cooking pot – they represent the inhabitants of Jerusalem prepared for judgement.
‘even every good piece, the thigh, and the shoulder; fill it with the choice bones. . . take the choice of the flock’ – the best cuts of meat from the best animals represent the leading citizens of Jerusalem.
pile on the logs (bones) under the pot – the fire represents the siege – the heat intensifies – severe judgement.
boil the meat well – the verb rāṯaḥ (boil, seethe, be agitated) only occurs elsewhere in Job 30:27; 41:31. ‘Cook (KJV , seethe) its bones it in the pot’ – the judgement will be thorough and even the most durable will not survive.

Opinions differ as to whether the prophet publicly enacted this parable. Keil (1876, p.341) thinks that he did not but rather maintains that: the ensuing act, which the prophet is commanded to perform, is not to be regarded as a symbolical act which he really carried out, but that the act forms the substance of the māšāl, in other words, belongs to the parable itself.

It is possible, however, that Ezekiel did actually put a cooking pot on a wood fire and boil pieces of meat in it to symbolise what the population of Jerusalem would endure during the siege. To have done so would not have seemed unusual for the book records him enacting several of his prophecies:

4:1-3 The siege.
5-1-4 The city’s destruction.
12:1-16 The process of going into exile.
12:17-20 The fear and despair of the people of Jerusalem.
21:18-23 The two routes the king of Babylon could choose.
37:15-28 The two sticks symbolising the reunification of Israel and Judah.

(6-8) ‘Wherefore’ or ‘Now then’ indicates a transition from the parable itself to further explanation by YHWH. In v.6 he pronounces woe directly upon Jerusalem, calling it ‘the bloody city;’ this is repeated in v.9. That Jerusalem is notorious for murder (judicial killings and child sacrifice) is referred to in 11:6; 13:19; 16:21; 22:3. The term ‘bloody city’ was previously used by Nahum (Nah 3:1) to describe the city of Nineveh.

Jerusalem is a pot with reddish ‘scum’ (corrosion or deposit) in it that cannot be removed. The sin of murder has become part of the very fabric of the city. Since copper/brass does not rust some scholars view this ‘scum’ as verdigris, others as flaws in the metal itself and others as hardened food residue that will not scrub off.

Yet another view is that the corruption does not belong to the metal of the pot but to its contents, i.e. the meat. According to v.6 the scum is inside the pot and in v.7 so is blood. Since the consumption of blood is taboo to the Israelites (Gen 9:4; Lev 3:17; 17:10-14; Deut 12:23-25) the flesh in the pot is viewed as contaminated. The Judahites may think of themselves as choice cuts of meat but in YHWH’s sight they are putrid flesh. The meat is to be brought out of the cauldron ‘piece by piece;’ i.e. the city’s population will be taken into captivity or killed. All efforts to cleanse the filth have failed – this idea will be developed in vv.12-13.

‘Let no lot fall upon it’ – refers to the practice of decision-making by casting lots (Lev 16:7-10; Num 26:55-56; Josh 13:6; 1 Chron 24:5, 7; 25:8; 26:13-14). The results are reckoned to be God’s will: The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD. Prov 16:33. In the context of this oracle the reference may be to the casting of lots by a victorious army in order to decide which captives should be allowed to live and which should put to death (2 Sam 8:2; Joel 3:3; Nah 3:10). There is no need to cast lots concerning the leading citizens of Jerusalem for they will be executed (Jer 39:6).

Verses 7-8, beginning with ‘For,’ give the reason why the contaminated pieces of meat (the people of Jerusalem) are rejected. The city has openly and shamelessly shed blood and there has been no attempt to cover up its sin. The background to v.7 is another taboo concerning blood: And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust. Lev 17:13.

‘Her blood -‘ i.e. the blood that Jerusalem has shed – has not been covered up but deliberately poured out for all to see on non-porous rock that would not absorb it. That blood cries for vengeance (cf. Gen 4:10; Job 16:18; Isa 26:21). YHWH’s response is to likewise set Jerusalem’s blood on a rock uncovered. This will serve as a witness to other nations of the crimes that she has committed.

(9-12) In verses 9-12 the image of YHWH building a huge fire depicts the unleashing of his wrath upon Jerusalem ‘Therefore’ (i.e. because Jerusalem is full of blood and filth) YHWH again (see v.6) pronounces woe on the city and says that he will make the pile of wood great (cf. Isa 30:33).

Since YHWH is responsible for stoking the fire the siege of Jerusalem is not a random disaster but deliberate punishment by YHWH. The imaginary cook is given further instructions:

heap on wood.
light the fire
mix in the spices (KJV, ‘spice it well’)- the verb rāqaḥ is normally used for the process of making perfume and also for the preparation of the ingredients of the sacred anointing oil (Ex 30:33) – spices enhance the taste of meat – this may mean that the Chaldeans will enthusiastically enjoy destroying Jerusalem, just as hungry people enjoy well-seasoned food.
boil the meat away – the judgement is thorough and final.
empty the residue into the fire and burn the bones – the people will be dispersed and the city will be destroyed by fire. The image intensifies; it moves from cooking in v.5 to cremation in v.10. The city will lie desolate.
set the empty pot back on the coals and heat it until it is red hot and molten. All the impurities will be burned up. This recalls the smelting image in 22:20-22.

Jerusalem (v.12) has frustrated all efforts to cleanse her. The earlier attempts to do so may have included the messages from YHWH delivered by the prophets and perhaps also the reforms of King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18; 2 Chron 31) and King Josiah (2 Kgs 22-23). The Chronicler gives the following apt assessment:

And the LORD God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, rising up quickly, and sending; because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place: But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against his people, till there was no remedy. Therefore he brought upon them the king of the Chaldees. . . 2 Chron 36:15-17a

The scum in the pot has not been removed so into the fire with it!

(13-14) YHWH again addresses the city directly saying that every time he tried to cleanse her she refused to be purified from her uncleanness. Therefore she will not be pure again (there will be no more opportunities for cleansing) until his wrath against her has been satisfied.

The oracle closes with the formula: ‘I the Lord hath spoken’ (v.14). God’s word guarantees the fulfilment of what he has said. He will not reconsider or renege, what Ezekiel has prophesied will come to pass. This certainty is expressed in three negative statements:

I will not refrain, not go back
I will not spare
I will not repent (be sorry, moved to pity)

YHWH has spoken, Nebuchadnezzar’s army has now arrived. The Chaldeans will judge Jerusalem according to her ways and deeds. She is facing the consequences of her own choices.

SUMMATION

This oracle shatters once and for all the false view held by the Jerusalemites that they are YHWH’s chosen cuts of meat in the protective cauldron and that the city is therefore inviolable. Even though they were God’s people they could not evade the consequences of their sin. Like corrosion in the pot sin that is not addressed becomes deeply ingrained. When grace is consistently rejected then God’s righteous judgement upon the sinner is inevitable. The oracle emphasises that the sovereign God is directing the judgement upon Judah; the Babylonian invaders are merely his instruments.

Even while Ezekiel was delivering this solemn parable he became aware that he was about to experience great sorrow. His experience of loss was about to become the ultimate sign to the people of Judah. Chapter 24:15 moves seamlessly from public preaching to private tragedy. Inside a few hours Ezekiel’s wife will die.

BIBLOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Keil, C. F. (1876). Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Ezekiel, Vol 1. Transl. J. M. Martin. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.

Parker, R.A. and Dubberstein, W.H. (1956). Babylonian Chronology 626 B. C. – A. D. 75. Rhode Island: Brown University Press.

Petter, D.L. (2011). The Book of Ezekiel and Mesopotamian City Laments, Academic Press, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

Thiele, E. R. (1983). The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Albright, W. F. (1956). The Nebuchadnezzar and Neriglissar Chronicles. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 143, pp. 28–33.

Thiele, E.R. (1944). The Chronology of the Kings of Judah and Israel. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 3(3), pp.137–186.

DIGITAL RESOURCES

Petter, D. L. (2023). Ezekiel. [online] Available at: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/commentary/ezekiel/ accessed 22 November, 2025

Exposition

No More Sour Grapes! – Ezekiel chapter 18

Posted on 18th Jul 202518th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

INTRODUCTION

In Ezekiel 18 YHWH addresses, through the prophet, a common proverb (v.2) which is circulating among the exiles in Babylon. Two other proverbs (vv.19, 25) that express popular opinion are also quoted but they are not the main concern.

This chapter is usually classified as a disputation speech. Sweeney (2013, p.93) explains: ‘A disputation speech typically includes three major elements: a premise or thesis to be disputed, an alternative premise or thesis to be supported, and argumentation designed to demonstrate the validity of the alternative premise or thesis…’

Here the thesis is stated in v2—in the form of a proverb which metaphorically maintains that YHWH is unfairly punishing the present generation for the sins of their ancestors. YHWH disputes that and in vv.3-4 states the counter thesis that people suffer because of their own sins (the soul that sinneth, it shall die). The counter thesis is again stated in v.20 but in more detail. The argumentation for the dispute begins at verse 5.

DIVISION

1-4 A False Proverb

5-20 The False Proverb Refuted – Three Practical Examples

a) 5-9 A righteous man will surely live
b) 10-13 A righteous man’s wicked son will surely die
c) 14-17 A wicked man’s righteous son will surely live

21-32 Repentance

A FALSE PROVERB (1-4)

(1) The familiar (some 50 times in Ezekiel) prophetic word formula ‘The word of the Lord came unto me again, saying’ introduces a new section consisting of chapters 18 and 19. The formula claims divine origin for the message and lends it authenticity and authority.

(2) Ezekiel is to draw attention to a popular proverb concerning ‘the land of Israel’ and ask what the people mean by bandying it about. Since Ezekiel is addressing his fellow-exiles it is likely that he means that the proverb is circulating among them in Babylon. We know, however, from the writings of Jeremiah (Jer 31:29; Lam 5:7), that the same proverb was also in use back home in Judah.

The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge. KJV

This proverb expresses the view that children suffer for the sins of their parents or ancestors. It reflects a sense of fatalism and victimhood on the part of the Israelites and a failure to grasp the fact that they themselves are sinful. They blame earlier generations for their current woes and thus do not heed prophetic warnings about the sinfulness of Judah. They have become defensive and seek to deflect responsibility from themselves. In effect they say: ‘It is our fathers who have sinned so why is our homeland under the Babylonian yoke and why are we in exile in Babylon?’ By justifying themselves they proclaim that God is not fair.

(3) Although it is true that the effects of wrongdoing can be felt for several generations thereafter (Exod 20:5) YHWH swears an oath by himself that never again will this illogical and false proverb (that one generation eats sour grapes and a later one has a sour taste in the mouth as a result) be quoted as truth in Israel. The people are to stop saying that their misfortune is inherited. No more sour grapes!

(4) YHWH draws attention (Behold!) to the fact that all souls are his — everyone belongs to him, the son as well as the father. YHWH has the right to punish children as well as parents because everyone is accountable to him — he is not accountable to them. However, he does not do that. He judges every soul (i.e. every person) individually and holds them personally responsible for their own sin. This principle is set out in the Torah (Lev 18:5; Deut 24:16; cf. 2 Kgs 14:6).

Perhaps it ought to be borne in mind that Ezekiel is not dispensing with the idea of national or collective responsibility here but rather expressing it in individualistic terms. Since the nation is made up of individuals it is individuals whom YHWH will personally evaluate.

Righteousness and wickedness are not inherited traits but the result of personal choices. The consequences of an individual’s actions are therefore personal: the soul who sins shall die. Violation of YHWH’s moral and ethical standards will incur the death penalty.

THE FALSE PROVERB REFUTED – THREE PRACTICAL EXAMPLES (5-20)

In these verses YHWH vindicates himself against the accusation that he is unfairly punishing the present generation for the sins of their ancestors. By way of defence and to argue for individual responsibility he uses three case studies. Three scenarios are presented, each about a hypothetical individual. These individuals represent three different generations: a righteous grandfather, a wicked father and a righteous grandson.

A RIGHTEOUS MAN WILL SURELY LIVE (5-9)

Verse 5 begins with the conditional ‘if’—so the argument is presented in case law format. This casuistic legal style is typical of the Holiness Code in Leviticus (chapters 17-26) with which Ezekiel the priest (1:3) was familiar. Notice that he frequently uses the language of Lev 18:4-5 — Ye shall do my judgements, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I am the LORD your God. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgements: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.

statutes and judgements are mentioned in Ezek 18:9, 17, 19/21. See also Ezek 5:6-7; 11:12, 20; 20:11, 13, 18, 19 , 21, 25; 36:27; 37:24. (N.B. Ezek 20:11 makes it clear that statutes and judgements is a reference to the entire divine revelation at Mt. Sinai.)
The verb live occurs in Ezek 18:9, 13, 17, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 32.
if a man do, he shall live in them occurs in Ezek 20:11,13, 21.

Lev 18:5 states that if the Israelites adhere to the stipulations of the covenant they will live. Failure to keep them amounts to covenant breaking (Lev 26:15) and will incur punishment in the form of disease, famine, invasion and exile (Lev 26).

Verse 5 continues from ‘if’ with the words: a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right. The first case study is about a just or righteous man. The argument continues to the end of v.9 where the conclusion is that if a man is just, he will surely live. YHWH states that a just man will do that which is ‘lawful and right.’ This phrase is repeated in vv. 19, 21, 27; see also 33:14, 16, 19; 45:9.

Verses 6-9 list the sorts of things that constitute being ‘righteous’ in the sight of YHWH. These requirements are mainly derived from the Holiness Code in Leviticus (chapters 17-26) and echo principles found in the Ten Commandments. A ‘just’ man:

does not eat at the mountain shrines – worshipping false gods. see 18:6, 11, 15; 22:9, cf. 20:28. This is addressed in the first and second commandments, Exod 20:3-4.
does not lift up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel. This is addressed in the first and second commandments, Exod 20:3-4. ‘Idols’ is a totally contemptuous term used 38 times in Ezekiel and probably alludes to excrement. It always occurs in the plural and is said to mean ‘dung-gods.’ Found also in 18:12, 15, cf. Deut 4:19.
does not defile his neighbour’s wife. Adultery violates the seventh commandment, Exod 20:14, see also Lev 18:20; 20:10; Deut 5:18; 22:22.
does not have sexual relations with a menstruating woman. See Lev 15:24; 18:19; 20:18.
does not oppress anyone. Lev 19:33; Deut 23:16; Zech 7:10.
returns to the debtor his pledge. He gives back what he has received as collateral when someone returns what he had borrowed, Exod 22:26; Deut 24:6, 13.
does not rob anyone using violence. Lev 19:13.
gives food to those in need. Deut 15:11; 24:19-22; Isa 58:7.
gives clothes to those in need. Isa 58:7.
does not charge the needy interest (nešek) on loans. Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37; Deut 23:19-20;.
does not charge the needy increase (tarbiyt) – accrued interest – unjust rates of interest on loans. see Lev 25:35-37.
withholds his hand from iniquity in whatever form.
judges between individuals impartially. Zech 7:9; 8:16.

Verse 9 sums up a person who lives by these principles as one who observes YHWH’s statutes and judgements and does that which is true (Deut 6:25). On this basis he is legally declared righteous and is therefore allowed to live. This declaration is made by the Lord God.

A RIGHTEOUS MAN’S WICKED SON WILL SURELY DIE (10-13)

The second case study in divine justice concerns a righteous person’s wicked son. Unlike his righteous father (vv.5-9) he turns out to be violent, a robber and commits other sins, something like those previously enumerated in vv.6-8. The wicked son will:

eat on the mountains
defile his neighbour’s wife
oppress the poor and needy
not restore the pledge
lift up his eyes to idols
commit abomination
take usury
take profit

These sins (vv.11-13) that the wicked man will commit do not exactly match those that his righteous father avoids (vv.6-8) but both lists include similar categories like idolatry, adultery, robbery, usury and oppression of the poor. Notice that v.11 also adds ‘and that doeth not any of those duties.’ This teaches us that sins of omission are every bit as serious in God’s sight as sins of commission.

V.13 asks the question ‘shall he then live? The answer is supplied: ‘he shall surely die’ (suffer the death penalty, cf: Exod 21:12; Lev 20:9, 11,12, 13, 16, 27; Deut 17:6; 21:22). The point is that since the wicked son does things that his righteous father has not done then it cannot be said that the father is at fault because his son has turned out wicked. He will surely die, not because of his father’s sins but because of his own choices. His father’s righteousness will not save him.

A WICKED MAN’S RIGHTEOUS SON WILL SURELY LIVE (14-17)

By way of contrast, the grandson (the next generation) sees his father’s wickedness, takes thought (‘considereth,’ see also v.28), and chooses to be righteous like his grandfather. The crimes that the righteous grandson avoids are listed in vv.15-17a. The list is much the same as that for his grandfather in vv.6-8 but approaching a menstruating woman is left out (see v.6). Verse 17b categorically states that the son will not die for his father’s crimes but will surely live and v.18 repeats (see v.13) that the father would be put to death for his own crimes.

(19-20) These two verses are the climax of YHWH’s argument for the principle of individual responsibility. He anticipates an objection that might be raised by the people about God’s verdict in the third case – that the son has been just so he will live. A righteous person, regardless of his father’s sins, will live but they will say: ‘Why should the son not bear the father’s guilt?’ God/Ezekiel must be mistaken since the people (in their own thinking) are righteous but suffering for the sins of their ancestors.

In v.20 YHWH again states his counter-thesis: The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

The person who sins is the one who is subject to the death penalty. The son will not suffer for the iniquity of the father and the father will not suffer for the iniquity of the son. Each person is judged in accordance with his or her own actions. The righteous person is accounted as righteous and the wicked person as wicked. God’s judgement is not inherited (compare Isa 3:10-11).

The implications of this are: a) God’s judgement is personal, not arbitrary b) each person is judged according to his own actions therefore God is not unjust, and c) since God does not punish innocent people for the sins of others the Israelites cannot blame past generations for their present suffering. Their exile is the result of their own sin.

REPENTANCE (21-32)

YHWH now brings up the topic of repentance and describes two situations.

a) The wicked person’s repentance.

But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live. Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? Ezekiel 18:21-23

The first is that of a wicked person who genuinely decides to give up wrongdoing and instead live a righteous life. Since he abandons his sins and actively follows the ways of YHWH (‘keep my statutes,’ ‘do that which is lawful and right’) he will be treated as righteous and allowed to live. His past transgressions (lit, ‘rebellions’) will not be remembered and he will live (not die a premature physical death).

YHWH asks a rhetorical question in v.23: Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? The implied answer is ‘No!’ God is not a vengeful deity. Divine judgement is a necessary response to wickedness but not something in which YHWH takes delight. That is why he would allow a wicked person who repents to avoid judgement.

b) The righteous person’s reversal.

Verses 24-29 continue with the case of a righteous person who later chooses to embrace evil. Various phrases are used in v.24 (ESV) to describe this reversal:
– turns away from his righteousness
– does injustice
– does the same abominations that the wicked person does
– treachery of which he is guilty
– the sin he has committed

Verse 24b spells out the consequences. None of his righteous deeds will be remembered and he shall die for his sin. Past obedience does not count as credit against future rebellion. He will be sentenced to death for his crimes.

Verse 25 brings us back to the start of the chapter. Still of the opinion that they are suffering because of the sins of a previous generation Ezekiel’s fellow-exiles claim that YHWH is unfair. ‘Not equal’ means ‘biased.’ The verb means to weigh or be equal and was used in connection with weight and measurement. Addressing the people as a group (‘hear now’ is a plural imperative) God responds to the charge that these decisions are unfair by simply restating what he has already said in vv.21-24 in vv.26-28. Notice the double ‘turn away from’ and ‘to do.’

When a righteous person turns away from his righteousness and does injustice, he shall die for it; Ezekiel 18:26 ESV

Again, when a wicked person turns away from the wickedness he has committed and does what is just and right, he shall save his life. Ezekiel 18:27 ESV

(29) In spite of all that the Lord, through Ezekiel, has told them in this oracle the people still maintain that God’s ways are biased. YHWH retorts that it is their ways that are unfair, not his.

(30-32) The chapter concludes with a call to repentance. By arguing that those who repent will live and that those who turn to evil will die YHWH has indicated that the ‘house of Israel’ should accept responsibility for the situation in which they find themselves. He will judge them individually according to their actions so they need to repent and turn away from all their transgressions in order that iniquity will not be their ‘ruin’ (obstacle, stumbling block) i.e. downfall. The imperatives in vv.30-31 are repent, turn away, cast away, make yourselves a new heart… This passage contains one of three references in Ezekiel to ‘a new heart and a new spirit.’

And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of flesh: Ezekiel 11:19

Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? Ezekiel 18:31

A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. Ezekiel 36:26

In v.32 YHWH reiterates that he has no pleasure in the death of anyone and his final words are both an invitation and a strong warning: ‘turn and live.’

SUMMATION

In this chapter YHWH, speaking through Ezekiel, highlights the responsibility of the nation for the current disaster. His argument demolishes the fatalistic view implied by the proverb in v.2 (The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge?) that they are suffering for the sins of their ancestors. In fact, each person is accountable to YHWH for his or her own choices and actions. Using case studies of hypothetical righteous and wicked individuals across generations YHWH emphasises that those who repent and pursue justice will live, while those who pursue evil will die, regardless of their past. The chapter ends with a statement of YHWH’s desire that everyone should live and ends with a powerful appeal — ‘turn and live’ —designed to motivate the people to make the right choice and repent.

Exposition

Ezekiel 16:44-52: The Allegory of Jerusalem and Her Sinful Sisters

Posted on 2nd Apr 202518th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

INTRODUCTION

In 16:1-43 Ezekiel has YHWH speak a lengthy allegory in which Jerusalem is personified as a woman. YHWH describes how he found her as an abandoned infant. He rescued her and, once she reached ‘the age for love,’ he married her. Abusing the gifts that he had given her, Jerusalem subsequently turned to idolatry and immorality; for which YHWH sentences her to harsh punishment. At this point one would expect a conclusion to the allegory but that does not come until v.60.

The History of a Harlot: Jerusalem’s Early Years – Ezekiel 16:1-14
The History of a Harlot: Jerusalem’s Prostitution – Ezekiel 16:15-34
The History of a Harlot: Jerusalem’s Judgement – Ezekiel 16:35-43

Commentators disagree as to whether the section (16:44-59) is an extension of the allegory of 16:1-43 or a further allegory which, although closely linked with the preceding one, is not a continuation of it. I would contend that it is indeed a new allegory but one which shares the ending with the previous one.

The allegory in vv.1-43, while addressed to Jerusalem, clearly covers the history of Israel as a whole, not just Judah. In this new allegory, however, Judah and Israel are distinct. Jerusalem stands for the southern kingdom of Judah and Samaria represents the northern kingdom of Israel. In this second allegory YHWH compares Jerusalem with her ‘sisters’ Samaria and Sodom and concludes that Jerusalem has turned out much worse than either of them.

THE ALLEGORY OF THE SINFUL SISTERS

(44) Verse 44 begins with the word ‘behold’ which directs the reader’s attention to the new allegory and to the comparison of Jerusalem with Sodom and Samaria (the theme of Samaria and Jerusalem as sisters is developed more fully in chapter 23). YHWH says that everyone who quotes a proverb (cf. Num 21:27) will say of Jerusalem: ‘like mother, like daughter.’ With this short (two words in Hebrew) saying YHWH refers back to v.3 and sarcastically reminds Jerusalem that she has foreign ancestry.

(45-46) In v.3 the Amorite father is mentioned first but here the order is inverted. The Hittite mother is placed first now because this allegory focuses on female family members. Ezekiel is again referring to the Canaanite origins of the city of Jerusalem (Jebusites, Josh 15:63; Judge 1:21). This is by no means a compliment since Hittites and Amorites were two of the seven nations which the Israelites were commanded to drive out of the Promised Land ( Deut 7:1-2; Josh 3:10; 24:11) and with whom they were forbidden to intermarry (Deut 7:3).

Ezekiel paints a picture of a truly dysfunctional family. Jerusalem resembles her Hittite mother because just as her mother had shown contempt for her Amorite husband and their children (3 daughters) so Jerusalem had shown contempt for her husband and children (16:20-21, 31, 32). Her sisters, Samaria and Sodom, had likewise shown contempt for their husbands and daughters.

The husbands are not mentioned again, they don’t really feature in this allegory nor does the mother appear again after v.45. In this section Ezekiel concentrates on two important relationships; sister and daughter.

Daughter – vv. 44, 45, 46(x2), 48 (x2), 49, 53(x2), 55(x3), 57(x2), 61.
Sister – vv. 45(x2), 46(x2), 48, 49, 51, 52(x2), 55, 56, 61.

(46) YHWH begins a quite convoluted negative comparison between Jerusalem and her two sisters in which Samaria is described as the ‘elder’ sister and Sodom as the ‘younger.’ In fact, Jerusalem and Sodom had long histories whereas Samaria was much younger than either of them, having only been established (1 Kgs 16:23-24) by King Omri of Israel (884-873 BCE) almost 300 years before Ezekiel’s time. ‘Elder’ and ‘younger’ only make sense if interpreted in terms of greatness of geographical/territorial size, military power or historical importance. ‘Daughters’ probably refers to dependent satellite towns and villages, or perhaps to the inhabitants of the three cities.

Geographically Jerusalem is situated between the sites of the two cities. As one faces East the city of Samaria is to the left (North) and Sodom to the right (South). Samaria was the former capital of the northern kingdom of Israel and in patriarchal times Sodom had been the most important city of the Jordan valley (Gen 18-19).

(47) Jerusalem was not content with equalling the ways and abominations of Samaria and Sodom but became much more corrupt than they. As if despising their sinful deeds as small scale (‘a very little thing’ or ‘a thing of disgust’) Jerusalem outdid them by sinning on a much grander scale. Ezekiel’s hearers would have been greatly shocked to hear YHWH linking Jerusalem with Sodom and Samaria; cities that were notorious for sin and idolatry.

THE INIQUITY OF SODOM

(48-50) In v.48 YHWH stresses that Judah’s sins outstripped those of Sodom. In the next two verses he elaborates on the greatness of Judah’s guilt compared to that of Sodom. In v.49 YHWH specifies the ‘iniquity’ (guilt from conscious wrongdoing) of Sodom. The sins of Sodom and her daughters (the towns Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboim – Gen 10:19) are enumerated as follows:

Pride – an example of success inflating the ego.

Satiety – because of an over-abundance of food – they were gluttonous.

‘Abundance of idleness’ KJV. – This means careless rest or security. The people of Sodom were so prosperous that they became complacent.

They were indifferent to the poor and needy.

They were ‘haughty’ (arrogant).

They committed abomination (cf. Lev 18:22) in the presence of YHWH (Gen 18:21).

YHWH says that when he saw the iniquity of Sodom and her daughters he removed them. The word ‘good’ is in italics, it is not in the original and has been supplied by translators. Without the word ‘good’ the phrase means ‘when I saw it’.

Ancient writers viewed Sodom as notorious for sexual sin, social injustice, arrogance and hostility towards strangers, for example: Isa 1:9-17; Jeremiah 23:14; 2 Pet 2:6-10; Jude 7; 2 Esdras 2:8-9; 3 Maccabees 2:5; Sirach 16:8; Wisdom of Solomon 19:13-17.

(51-52) YHWH states that Samaria did not sin half as much as Jerusalem. He does not spell out Samaria’s iniquity but Ezekiel’s audience are well aware that it was idolatry. Jerusalem has multiplied the sins of Sodom and Samaria to such an extent that she has ‘justified’ those cities. In other words, Jerusalem’s sins are so evil that she makes Sodom and Samaria look righteous. These two sinful cities had so angered YHWH that he had punished them severely.

Jerusalem, having privileges like the the Law, the Temple and YHWH’s presence, had behaved worse than Sodom and Samaria. She (v.52 ‘thou also’), who had ‘given judgement’ on her sisters (i.e. agreed that their punishment was well-deserved) but had behaved more abominably than they, could therefore expect to suffer a similar fate. It is appropriate that Jerusalem be punished because her sins make the other sisters look righteous.

Many centuries later a similar thought was expressed by Jesus Christ: But into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you not, go your ways out into the streets of the same, and say, Even the very dust of your city, which cleaveth on us, we do wipe off against you: notwithstanding be ye sure of this, that the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you. But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city. Luke 10:10-12

The next section of Ezekiel chapter 16 will deal with the sisters’ future.