The Structure and Intention of Ezekiel 1

7/26/2019 The Structure and Intention of Ezekiel 1

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-structure-and-intention-of-ezekiel-1 1/18

The Structure and Intention of Ezekiel I

Author(s): Leslie C. AllenSource: Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 43, Fasc. 2 (Apr., 1993), pp. 145-161Published by: BRILLStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1519349Accessed: 11/09/2008 14:17

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Vetus Testamentum.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1519349?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1519349?origin=JSTOR-pdf



Vetus

Testamentum

XLIII,

2

(1993)

THE

STRUCTURE

AND

INTENTION OF

EZEKIEL I1

by

LESLIE C.

ALLEN

Pasadena,

California

The question of the purpose of Ezekiel's inaugural vision may be

given

a

simple

and

unsatisfying

answer:

it recounts the self-

revelation

of

the

God

who invested Ezekiel with his

prophetic

com-

mission.

This answer is

inadequate

because it at once raises another

question:

what is the

particular

character of this God? It is this

second

question

that

those commentators who have

tackled

the

issue of intention

have

sought

to

resolve. A

representative

review

of their

answers will be

preceded by

a

study

of the structure of

Ezek.

i, which will uncover its individuality and, it is hoped, establish

guidelines

for

understanding

its intention.

Topical

Structure

Some

of the older critical scholars offered divisions of the vision

account

in

Ezek.

i

by distinguishing

between its

topical episodes.

Thus Ferdinand

Hitzig

in

the course of his

exegesis

divided the

account into

a

general

statement

in

v.

4

and then

descriptions

of the

living

creatures

in

vv.

5-14

and

of

the wheels and how

they

moved

in vv.

15-21,

and

finally

an

account

of a

platform

above the

creatures and above that the throne and its divine

occupant

in

vv.

21-8.2

Rudolph

Smend3 and

Alfred Bertholet4

offered

a similar

scheme,

except

that

they

both

split

vv. 5-14

into vv.

5-12

and

13-14,

concerning

the

coals of fire. Richard

Kraetzschmar

went

further,

by

not

only isolating

vv.

13-14

but also

envisioning

two sections at

1

This

article is

a

longer

and

revised

version

of a

paper

presented

at the 1991

Annual

Meeting

of the

Society

of

Biblical Literature in

Kansas

City,

Missouri.

I

am

grateful

for the

stimulating

discussion that

followed it.

2

Der

Prophet

Ezechiel

(Leipzig, 1847),

pp.

5-11.

3

Der

Prophet

Ezechiel

(Leipzig,

1880),

pp.

7-14.

4Das

Buch Hesekiel

(Freiburg, 1897),

pp.

3-8.



LESLIE C. ALLEN

the

end,

vv.

22-5

concerning

the

firmament-platform

and

the

noise

of the creatures'

wings

beneath

it,

and vv.

26-8

concerning

the

throne and

the

glorious figure

upon

it.5

Thereafter

a

diachronic

approach

to the

chapter,

involving

extensive text and redaction

criticism,

tended to

rule out

the

earlier,

relatively

unsophisticated

schematization.

However,

in

1953

Ernst

H6hne,

who

apart

from a few

textual

changes regarded

the

chapter

as a basic

unit,

presented

an outline

midway

between

Hitzig's

and Kraetzschmar's.

He

distinguished

the features

of the

cloud

in

v.

4,

the

living

creatures and the fire

in

vv.

5-14,

the wheels

in vv. 15-21 and the divine form in vv. 26-8, with vv. 22-5 function-

ing

as

a

transitional

section.6

In more recent

times

the

emergence

of

a

synchronic perspective

has

led to

renewed division of

the

vision

account on

topical

lines. Thus Daniel I. Block has

found

an

intro-

duction

in

v.

4

and

a

summary

statement in v.

28,

while vv.

5-14,

15-21

and

22-7

form

intervening

sections;7

this scheme

is in

effect

a refinement

of

Hitzig's.

Similarly

Ronald M.

Hals

has referred

to

v.

4

as

an

introductory description

and v.

28ay

as a

summary

label,

with four inner sections of specific description, in vv. 5-14, 15-21,

22-5,

and

26-28ay.8

Moshe

Greenberg

in

the course

of

a

synopsis

has

demarcated vv.

4, 5-8a, 8b-12,

13, 14-21,

22-4,

and

25-8

as

episodes, though

he

also observes

that

vv.

4

and

27-8

form

an

envelope

for

the

entire section .9

RhetoricalStructure

It may be asked whether such varying attempts to divide the

account

into sections can be resolved

by

recourse to rhetorical

criticism,

in

its

left-brain

form

advocated

by James

Muilenburg,

which

searches for

objective

markers

in

the movement

of

a text.

Muilenburg

himself

briefly

found

structural

significance

in

the

repetition

of

demut

likeness ,

which

occurred

for

him

at

the

5

Das

Buch

Ezechiel

(G6ttingen, 1900), p.

7.

6

Die

Thronwagenvision

Hesekiels. Echtheit und

Herkunft

der

Vision Hes.

1,

4-28

und

ihrer einzelnen

Zuge

(unpublished

dissertation,

Erlangen,

1953),

pp.

84-101.

7

Text and

Emotion:

A

Study

in the

'Corruptions'

in

Ezekiel's

Inaugural

Vision

(Ezekiel

1:4-28) ,

CBQ

50

(1988),

p.

424.

8

Ezekiel

(Grand Rapids,

1989), pp.

12-14.

9

Ezekiel

1-20.

A

New Translation

with

Introductionand

Commentary

Garden

City,

N.Y.,

1983), pp.

51-52.

146



EZEKIEL I

beginning

of

each

of the

major

sections

and

climactically

three

times in

the

final section.10

Subsequently

he

referred

to the

term

as

the

keynote

of each

section ,

noting

that it occurs

in vv.

5,

10, 13,

16,

22,

and

26,

and

finding

two divisions

consisting

of three

sec-

tions

each

and

beginning

in vv.

4

and 15.11 The first division

is

apparently

made

up

of vv.

4-9,

10-12

and

13-14,

and the

second

of

vv.

15-21, 22-5,

and

26-28a.

However,

in v.

13

demut

presents syn-

tactical and

exegetical problems.

LXX

ev

JJcpa

among

and

the

parallel

benot

n

x 7

seem to

attest

a

superior

text;

even

Greenberg

has

judged

that MT

appears

to be a

corruption

of'

benot

([n.

9]

p.

46).

More

probably

the

original

was mittdk

among

:12 the

form

benot s a

redactional element

characteristic

of ch.

x,

and the

shorter

form

benoccurs later in i

13,

while

iv(Tco)

xL`aco

enders

mittok in

i

2-5.

Accordingly,

one of

Muilenburg's

sections,

vv.

13-14,

is

no

longer

discernible; moreover,

his

apparent

isolation

of

vv.

10-12

is

a

questionable

innovation.

H.

Van

Dyke

Parunak advanced

the rhetorical

understanding

of

the vision account

by

his

proposals

that vv. 4

and

26-8

form a

chiastic inclusio around three sections, vv.

5-14,

15-21 and

22-5,

and that each

of the five

overall

sections

contains a

keyword,

kecen

like the

gleam

of ,

in

vv.

4, 7,

16,

22

and

27.13

The

chiastic

inclusio consists

of

storm

language,

ruah

secdra

...

Cdnan

storm

wind ... cloud

(A,

v.

4aa),

wenogah

lo

sdbzb

and it

had

brightness

around

(B,

v.

4ay),

and

kecFn

hahasmal like

the

gleam

10

Form

Criticism and

Beyond , JBL

88

(1969), p.

18.

'

Ezekiel ,

in

Peake's

Commentary

on the

Bible

(London,

1962),

p.

571.

12

Thus

J.

Herrmann,

Ezechiel

(Leipzig,

1924),

p.

3;

G.

Fohrer and

K.

Galling,

Ezechiel

(Tiibingen,

1955), p.

11.

It

may

be

suggested

that

demut

originated

as

a

comparative

gloss

that alluded

to the

sequence

fdmut

...

hayyot

... mar'ehen

the

likeness of

...

living

creatures

...

their

appearance

in

v. 5.

Subsequently

demut

was

taken as a

correction of

the

graphically

look-alike

mittok

and

displaced

it.

G.R.

Driver's

attempt

to

interpret

demtt

as

midst

( Linguistic

and

Textual

Problems in

Ezekiel ,

Bib 19

[1938],

p.

61)

is

unconvincing;

neither

the

New

English

Bible nor the

Revised

English

Bible

adopted

it.

Block,

CBQ

50

(1988),

pp.

433-9,

has

urged

that

the MT

may

be

retained

throughout

ch.

i,

explaining

its lack

of

coherence in terms of Ezekiel's emotional state in setting it down almost

immediately

after

experiencing

it.

However,

the

vision

account

gives

an

impres-

sion of

subsequent

reflection;

moreover,

the

apparently

defective

state of the

text

in

many places

has

parallels

elsewhere

in the

book,

such as in ch.

xxxii,

where

emotion

can

hardly

have

been the

cause of

the

incoherence.

13

StructuralStudies in

Ezekiel

(unpublished

dissertation,

Harvard,

1978), pp.

123-6;

The

Literary

Architecture

of

Ezekiel's

Marodt

2Elohim ,

JBL

99

(1980),

p.

63.

147



LESLIE C. ALLEN

of amber

(?) (C,

v.

4bp,

and its

reverse

in

v.

27ao

(C',

kecn

hasgma),

n v.

27by(B'),

and

in v.

28aa

(A',

becanan

..

haggesem

in

the cloud

...

the

rain ).'4

He

evidently

linked v.

26

with vv.

27-8

by

dint

of

content rather

than

by

any stylistic

criterion.

Parunak's

scheme

may

be refined at a

couple

of

points.

First,

G.

del Olmo

Lete

has

drawn attention to the

parallelism

between

vv.

lb3

and

28ba:

the

repeated

form

wader'eh

and

I

saw

(as

distinct

from the short

form

wd>ere)

n vv.

4,

15,

27)

has a

general

introduc-

tory

role,

in

association

with the

dating

of the

vision,

and

a

con-

cluding

role,

in

conjunction

with Ezekiel's reaction.15

Within

these

limits the detailed account

begins

with its own introduction in vv.

3b-416 and

concludes with

the climatic

vv.

26-28a.

Second,

and

more

importantly,

there

are four

close

links

between vv.

3b-4

and

26-28a

on the

one

hand,

and vv. 13-14 on the other:

(i)

'S

fire

occurs

in

vv.

4,

13

(three

times)

and

27;'7

(ii)

the storm

phenomena

of vv.

4

and

28a

recur

in

v.

14,

with

habbdzdq

the

(lightning)

flash ;'8

(iii)

beside

wenogah

o

sdbib

in

vv.

4

and

27-and

also

han-

14

Proposals

to

pare

down

v.

4

drastically,

current

since Herrmann

(n.

12), pp.

1-2,

appear

to be based

on an unawareness of the role of

repetition

in

Hebrew

literature.

15

La vocacion

del

l'der

en el

antiguo

Israel.

Morfologia

de

los

relatos biblicos

de

vocacidn

(Salamanca,

1973),

pp.

300,

316.

It is

generally acknowledged

that

vv.

2-3a

repre-

sent later elements. V.

28bp begins

the

auditory

account

that

continues

till iii.

11.

16

R.

Mosis,

Das Buch Ezechiel. Teil 1.

Kap

1,1-20,44

(Diisseldorf,

1978),

p.

253,

n.

17,

has observed that v.

3b

closely

connects

with

what

follows. Cf.

viii

lb-2.

17

The old LXX

does

not

represent

v.

27a3,

kemar)eh-Ms

bit-lah

sdbib

what

looked like

fire: it had

a

covering

all

round. It

seems to be an intrusion

on

two

counts:

(i)

it

breaks

the AB/B'A' chiasmus

of v.

27a-b[,

in which the verbs

of

see-

ing

and

the

accompanying

similes function as

A/A'

and the

upper

and lower

parts

of the

body

as

B/B';

and

(ii)

in viii

2,

which is

a

reprise

of

i

27,

there

is

general

support

for the

reading

of the

LXX,

which

restricts 'fire' to the

bottom half

of

the

figure,

where alone

it

should

be

(Greenberg

[n.

9], p.

166).

The addition

in

the MT was

probably

intended

as

a

comment

on v.

27b@,

with

kemar'eh-'es

unc-

tioning

as cue words

(E.

Vogt, Untersuchungen

um Buch

Ezechiel

[Rome,

1981], p.

8).

The intent

of the

gloss

was to claim that

the radiance

enveloped

the

fire. This

ancient

interpretation

accords

with A.B. Ehrlich's

proposal

that the

masculine suf-

fix

in v.

27by

relates to the

fire,

rather than to the divine

figure (Randglossen

zur

hebraischen

Bibel

5

[Leipzig,

1912],

p.

8).

W.A.

Lind,

A

Text-Critical

Note

to

Ezekiel 1: Are Shorter Readings Really Preferable to Longer? , Journal of the

Evangelical

TheologicalSociety

27

(1984),

pp.

135-9,

rightly argued

that

the

rejection

of

longer

readings,

to be

convincing,

must be

accompanied by plausible

explana-

tions as

to

why

the

extra

material

entered the

text,

but he

worked with

a limited

repertoire

of

causes

for

textual

adaptation;

he was unable

to

find one

in this case

(p.

138).

18

Textual disorder

in vv. 13b-14 is

generally recognized.

V.

14

is

frequently

deleted,

but the

principle

of

the

priority

of the

harder

reading suggests

that

the

148



EZEKIEL

I

nogah

sdbib

the

brightness

around

in

v.

28a3-there

occurs

wenogah

lades

and the

fire

had

brightness

in v.

13ba;

and

(iv)

kemar'eh

like

the

appearance

of

occurs

only

in vv. 13-14

(twice)

and

26-28a

(originally

three

times) (see

n.

17).

The

consequence

of

these

links is

twofold: Parunak's

beginning

of the final

section with

v.

26

finds

objective

support,

and there is a new section with

which

one must

reckon,

vv.

13-14,

as

Smend,

Bertholet

and

Kraetzschmar

concluded

on

non-stylistic grounds.

To

be

sure,

Parunak's test of

the sectional

key

word

ke'n

is

not

met in vv.

13-14,

but

perfect

symmetry

is not

necessary,

as

the

absence of

our

new

key

term

kemar)eh

rom vv.

3b-4

illustrates. It

may

be

observed that

Muilen-

burg's

sectional

key

word

demzt

is in fact absent from

vv.

3b-4

and

(originally)

13-14;

its dominant

presence

in

vv.

26-28a

will

merit

comment a little

later.

Conceptual

Structure

The result of

this

investigation

of the rhetorical structure

is

that,

within

the

framework of vv.

1

and

28bao,

there

emerge

six

sections,

vv.

3b-4, 5-12,

13-14,

15-21,

22-5,

and

26-28a,

of which

the

first,

third and sixth are

closely aligned.

If

general

content

is

factored

into this

result,

the

first,

third and sixth stand out as

descriptive

of

a

storm

theophany.

Correspondingly,

the

second,

fourth, fifth,

and

also

sixth

give expression

to a

throne

vision,

here

a

throne

theophany.

The combination of

these

two different

genres

has been

recognized

hitherto,19

but their

particular

structural

role has

not

been

observed:

storm

3b-4 13-14

26-28a

throne

5-12

15-21

22-5

last two

words of

v.

13

originated

as

explanatory

comments

on,

or

variants

for,

terms in

v. 14:

yose

was

coming

out relates to

rdsod

ran ,

and

bdraq

lightn-

ing to bazdq flash . For the latter term see A. Cohen, Studies in Hebrew Lex-

icography ,

AJSL

40

(1924),

p.

163.

Symmachus,

Targum

and

Vulgate

already

render

bdzdq

as if it

were

bdrdq.

Behind the omission of

v.

14 in the old

LXX lies

a

recognition

of

the

interrelatedness of

vv.

13b?

and

14,

and a

wrong

decision

to

follow the

easy path

of the former

and to

excise the latter.

19

See,

e.g.,

W.

Zimmerli,

Ezechiel

(Neukirchen-Vluyn,

1969),

p.

50

=

E.

tr.,

Ezekiel

1: A

Commentary

n the Book

of

Ezekiel,

Chapters

1-24

(Philadelphia, 1979), p.

119.

149



LESLIE C. ALLEN

Othmar

Keel's research has demonstrated

the coherence of

at

least vv.

5-12,

22-5

and

26-28a,

in

their elaboration of the throne

vision

genre by

means of a

shared basic

conception

of

humanoid

skybearers

whose heads

support

a

firmament-platform

upon

which

the divine throne rests.20 The fourth

section,

vv.

15-21,

stands

somewhat

apart

from

its

companion

sections

in

attaching

wheels

to

the celestial

ensemble,

in order to facilitate

travel

by

land. The

redactional

nature of this section is often

urged,

and is

certainly

possible;

however,

Tryggve

N.D.

Mettinger

has

argued

in

favour

of its

originality

that there is

a

close connection between cloud and

wheeled chariot in the Old

Testament.2'

In other

respects

this sec-

tion

belongs among

the

throne-theophany

sections,

inasmuch as it

closely

relates the wheels and the

living

creatures

in

terms of their

mobility.

It

should be

borne

in

mind that the other throne

theophany

sections

also

overlap conceptually

with

the

storm sec-

tions,

in

that the

throne

is

represented

not as static and localized

solely

in heaven

but

dynamically

moving

within or

upon

the

theophanic

cloud.

It is this

conceptual

overlap

that

permits

the

final, obviously climactic section to combine explicitly the concepts

and

language

of storm

theophany

and throne

theophany,

which

previously

have

largely

alternated.

The

joint presence

of the

hitherto throne-related demut

(vv.

5,

10,

16,

22)

and

the

hitherto

storm-related

kemar'eh

(vv.

13,

14)

in

the last section bears

stylistic

witness to this combination.

Hals

has

drawn attention to the

emphasis placed

on

mobility

at

the conclusion of each of what we have called throne

theophany

sec-

tions, in vv. 12, 17-21, 24b and 25b,22 although one should proba-

bly

think

in terms

of vv.

12, 19-21,

23-24a

and

25b.23

So

rigorous

is

the desire to conclude

with

this element that it

appears

rather dis-

jointed

after mention of the

platform-firmament

in

v.

22,

20

Jahwe-

Visionen

nd

Siegelkunst.

ine

neue

Deutung

der

Majestitsschilderungen

n

Jes

6,

Ez i

und Sach

4

(Stuttgart, 1977), pp.

125-273.

21

The

Dethronement

f

Sabaoth.

Studies

n

the

Shem

and Kabod

TheologiesLund,

1982), p.

105. He cites

Pss

lxxvii

19, where he takesgalgalas wheeled vehicle ,

civ

3;

Zech. vi

1-8;

2

Kings

ii

11.

22

(n. 8)

p.

14.

V.

9b,

which also features

mobility,

seems to be

a

doublet of v.

12.

23

The role of

v.

17 is distinct and

narrower,

to

explain

the wheel within wheel

statement of v. 16b

(Fohrer [n.

12],

p.

14).

The theme of

flapping,

noisy

wings

begins

in v.

23.

Probably

v.

25a

is

a

variant

of v.

26aa,

for which v.

24b

serves

as cue words.

150



EZEKIEL I

deliberately

interrupting

the

logical

conclusion

in v.

26.

The

dominance

of

this element

will

require explanation

in

relation

to

the

overall intention

of the

vision

account.

A

Positive Intention?

As to

what that intention

is,

scholarship

is

fairly

united

in

claim-

ing

a beneficent

purpose.

It is a

view

that

goes

back at least to

C.H.

Toy,

who

wrote

in 1899: The

vision

is intended to declare that the

God

of

Israel was

come,

in

all his

glory,

to dwell with the

exiles. 24

This sentiment was later echoed

by Georg

Fohrer,

in terms of a

prophetic reinterpretation

of

the

concept

of

divine

presence,

namely

that Yahweh is

present

even with

his exiled

people

([n.

12]

pp.

14-16).

Similarly,

Walther Eichrodt declared:

The

kdbod

appears

to

the

prophet

...,

in

order

to

assure him of the

nearness and

power

of his

God

despite

the

exile

into an

unclean,

heathen

land,

and

despite

the

desecration and

destruction of the

Temple which is to follow.25

Walther Zimmerli

developed

what

had

by

then

become an

academic convention

by

grounding

it in

earlier

Israelite tradition:

[T]he prophet

encountered God

as

the

Lord

who

had

already

earlier

revealed himself

to

his

people

Israel

in

storm

and

light

(Ex

19:

ff;

24:9-11)

... Ezek

1:1-3:15

thus

recounts an

event which

actualizes

in

a remarkable

way

the

story

of

God's faithfulness to

his

people

Israel

under

new

circumstances ...

God reveals the

sovereign

freedom of his

appearing, when and where he wills, even in an unclean land.26

On similar

lines Hals

states

that

the

vision aims

to

assure the

despairing

prophet,

and

through

him

his fellow

exiles,

that

Yahweh's

presence

is

not confined

to

Jerusalem

([n.

8]

p.

16).

24

The Book

of

the

Prophet

Ezekiel

New

York,

1899),

p.

96.

25

Theology f

the Old

Testament

(E.

tr.,

London

and

Philadelphia,

1967),

p.

33

=

TheologieesAltenTestaments-3 (Stuttgart, 1961), p. 14; cf. Ezekiel:A Commen-

tary

(E.

tr.,

London

and

Philadelphia,

1970),

pp.

54,

58-9

=

Hesekiel1-18

(G6t-

tingen,

1959),

pp.

5,

8-9.

26

(n.

19)

E.

tr.,

p.

140

=

pp.

83-4. R.W.

Klein

has derived from Zimmerli's

observation his

slogan

that the

God of Ezekiel is

typically

faithful and free

( Yahweh

Faithful

and

Free-A

Study

in

Ezekiel ,

CTM42

[1971],

pp.

493-501;

Israel n Exile:A

Theologicalnterpretation

Philadelphia, 1979),

pp.

69-96;

cf.

Ezekiel:

The

Prophet

nd

His

Message

Columbia,

1988),

p.

26.

151



LESLIE C. ALLEN

One

might

cite

a

number of

other scholars who

express

this

viewpoint.27

This

ascription

of a

beneficent

intention

to

the

vision account has

an

implicit

presupposition:

it

depends

on chs

viii-xi,

where

Yahweh's

glory

is

said to

leave

the

temple

and

Jerusalem.

How-

ever,

that

vision is

regarded

as

a

later event

(viii

4,

x

15, 20,

22);

in

the

chronological

schematization

of

the book the

inaugural

vision

is dated a

year

earlier

(i

2,

viii

1),

when

Yahweh's

presence

still

graced

the

temple. Anyway,

Yahweh

is here

represented

as

coming

from

heaven,

not from

Jerusalem.

The

vision

in

Ezek.

i

needs

to

be understood

in

its

own

terms and

in the

light

of its immediate

context.

The

interpretations

of the

purpose

of

the

vision account cited

above all

assume

that Ezekiel received

the vision as

a

representative

of the

Judean

exiles,

and that he was to share with them the lesson

he

learned

from it.

However,

Greenberg

has

explained

the vision

as

a

private experience,

a manifestation of divine favour to Ezekiel

alone:

Disturbed

by

his

people's

fate,

convinced of

impending

doom,

Ezekiel is cast out

by

his

community,

which

clung

to

the

hopeful

oracles of the

prophets

promising

the exiles a

speedy

restoration ...

[T]he

heavens

opened

and

the

Majesty

of

God

appeared, vindicating

the noncomformist and

proving

that

right

and divine

favor were

with

him,

not with the

many

([n.

9]

p.

80).

Greenberg's implicit presupposition

is not

hard

to

discern.

He

seems to have in mind the traditional role of

a

theophany

as

a dem-

onstration

of divine favour to

an

individual

(cf.

Gen.

xii, xxvi;

Judg.

vi,

xiii).

A

Negative

Intention?

There have been a

couple

of

voices

crying

in

the wilderness

on

behalf of a

different

interpretation.

Kraetzschmar,

with whose

27

E.g.

A.

Bertholet and K.

Galling,

Hesekiel

Tiibingen,

1936),

p.

9;

K.W.

Carley,

The Book

of

the

Prophet

Ezekiel

(Cambridge,

1974),

p.

19;

M.E.

Andrew,

Responsibility

ndRestoration. he

Course

f

theBook

of

Ezekiel

(Dunedin,

1985), p.

13.

This

positive interpretation

is

as

old

as

Jerome:

in

consolationem

populi

transmigrati

et revelationem

sententiae

Dei,

propheta

vidit maximam

visionem

(S.

Hieronymi

resbyteri

pera

:

Opera xegetica

:

Commentariorumn Hezechielem

ibri

xiv,

Corpus

Christianorum,

Series

Latine

75

[Turnhout, 1964],

p.

7).

152



EZEKIEL I

structural

outline we earlier found reason

largely

to

agree,

wrote in

1900:

Jahve

kommt,

um das

Strafgericht

fiber

sein Volk anzukfin-

digen

und Ez. als seinen Gerichtsherold

zu bestellen

([n.

5]

p.

21).

Kraetzschmar's

view has

found

little

support,

and he must have

realized that

he

was

treading

an

unpopular

path.

Ten

years

earlier

Smend

had written

with

reference to

v.

4: Es is natiirlich

falsch

zu

meinen,

dass sich hier darin der

Zorn

Gottes uber Israel

ausdriicke

([n.

3]

p.

7).

A.B.

Davidson had issued

a

similar warn-

ing

to

English

readers:

The

theophany

here is not a

manifestation

of God

specially

in

the character

of an

avenger

or

judge. 28

Recently

William H. Brownlee has

implicitly

revived Kraetz-

schmar's thesis:

We

see this

same

manifestation later

in

chaps.

8-10,

which

is

explained

as

God's

coming

in

judgment upon

Jerusalem

(43:3).

This

warns us

against

taking

this

appearance

in vision as

one

of

comfort

to the

prophet

... The

import

of

the

vision, therefore,

is

that

the

cosmic Lord

of

the universe

is

intervening

in

history

to

judge

Israel

and to warn them

through

one

man,

Ezekiel.29

It is clear

that

this

minority viewpoint

and the

majority

one

cannot

both be

right,

unless the vision account is

deliberately

ambivalent,

as Robert R. Wilson considers.30 The

minority

view deserves a

proper hearing,

and the rest of the article will be

devoted to

amass-

ing

arguments

in

this

support.

The

Import of

the Storm

Theophany

The earlier study of the structure of Ezek. i has shown the impor-

tant

role

played by

the

storm

theophany

tradition:

at

the

outset,

in

the

middle

and,

explicitly

combined with the

heavenly

throne tradi-

tion,

at the end.

Moreover,

it has influenced

the throne tradition

by transforming

what was static

into

something

mobile.

The

basic

use of the

storm

theophany

in

the

Old

Testament

is to

portray

Yahweh's

coming

as

a

warrior to

conquer

his

human

enemies

who

28

The

Book

of

the

Prophet

Ezekiel

(Cambridge, 1892), p.

4.

29

Ezekiel

1-19

(Waco,

1986),

p.

18.

30

[T]he

significance

of

God's

dwelling among

the exiles

is not

yet

clear,

for

up

to this

point

there

has been no

verbal

communication

between God

and the

prophet.

God's

presence

may

mean

reassurance for

the

exilic

community,

but it

may

also mean

judgement

( Prophecy

in

Crisis:

The Call of

Ezekiel ,

Int 38

(1984),

p. 125=J.L.

Mays

and

P.J.

Achtemeier

(ed.), Interpreting

the

Prophets

(Philadelphia, 1987), p.

164.

153



LESLIE C. ALLEN

are also foes of

his

people.

However,

there is a

prophetic

reversal

of this

saving purpose,

as

is

the case with a number of older

tradi-

tions.

The

prophets

used the storm

theophany

genre

to

convey

the

intervention

of

Yahweh

to

bring judgement upon

Israel.

Cases

of

such

prophetic

transformation

appears

in Amos i

2

and Mic.

i

2-7,

while

in

Isa.

lix

15-20

and Mal.

iii 1-5

Yahweh's

coming

in the

storm is directed

against

the

wicked

in

Israel.31 So we must enter-

tain the

possibility

that

judgement

of Israel

is

intended

by

this

par-

ticular

prophetic

use

of the

storm

theophany

tradition.

The

genre

employs

traditional elements that

convey

the

hostility

of the warrior God. Thus fire is both a

representation

of Yahweh's

wrath and

his

dangerous

weapon

of destruction

(Jeremias

[n. 31],

pp.

29,

36,

59).

It occurs

in

this hostile sense in

2

Sam.

xxii 9

(

=

Ps.

xviii

9);

Ps. xcvii

3,

while in Isa.

Ixvi 15-16 it

is

explicitly

associated

with

divine

judgement.

Is this

the

meaning

in

vv.

4,

13,

and

27?

Lightning

in

storm

theophany

texts

refers to the arrows

of

the

divine

warrior,

for

example

in

2

Sam.

xxii 15

(=

Ps. xviii

15);

Ps.

cxliv

18-19).

Does

the

reference here

in

v.

14

bear such

an allusion?

The bow is associated with arrows in Hab. iii 9 in a theophanic

vision:

it

is

a

weapon

of war. Has

it such

a

force

in Ezek.

i

28?

Some

commentators

have seen in

the

rainbow a reminiscence

of

the

gracious

meaning

it

has

in

Gen.

ix

12-17.32

John

Calvin

denied the

contextual

validity

of such

an

interpretation:

what

interpreters

bring

forward

about

a

symbol

of

reconciliation is

altogether

out of

place .33

Modern

scholars have tended to echo his

exegetical

deci-

sion.34

Keel,

among

others,

has

compared

vv.

27-8

with a 9th-

century coloured ceramic depicting the winged god Asshur set in

the

flaming, yellow

disc

of

the

sun,

drawing

his bow

and

floating

among

the

rain clouds.35

Here

the

bow

is not held in Yahweh's

31

See

J. Jeremias,

Theophanie

Neukirchen,

1977),

pp.

130-32.

32

E.g.

Vogt

(n. 17),

p.

11;

P.C.

Craigie,

Ezekiel

(Philadelphia, 1983),

pp.

12-

13.

Jerome interpreted

thus:

Hic

arcus

signum

est

clementiae et testamenti Dei

quod

fecit cum

hominibus

([n. 27]

p.

25)

M.

Liebe,

The

Visionary

Mode

(Ithaca,

1991),

p.

36,

extrapolates

from the

reference

to the rainbow a

positive significance

for

the

whole vision:

As a

promise

of

hope,

the

inaugural

vision embodies

a

cove-

nant

theology

all

its own.

33

Commentaries n

the First

Twenty

Chapters

of

the

Book

of

the

Prophet

Ezekiel

(E.

tr.,

Edinburgh,

1849)

1,

p.

105.

34

E.g.

H6hne

(n.

6), p.

74;

Zimmerli

(n. 19),

E.

tr.,

p.

123

=

p.

57.

35

(n. 20),

p.

262,

fig.

189

=

ANEP,

fig.

536.

Greenberg

(n.

9),

p.

54,

has

drawn

attention

to

the fine

coloured

reproduction

that

appears

in A.

Parrot,

Nineveh

and

Babylon

(London, 1961), p.

227,

fig.

282.

154



EZEKIEL

I

hands,

but his

bright

aura is

compared

to

it.

Nevertheless,

such

a

depiction

of the

battling

storm

god may

lie

in the

background

of

Ezekiel's

vision,

in which

case the bow does

have a

sinister

purpose.

The

Import of

the Throne

Theophany

The

heavenly

throne

tradition

alternates with

the

storm

tradition

and dominates the vision account.

Although

it is

superimposed

upon

the other

genre

and

is altered

in

the

process,

it has

the

larger

role

in

the vision

and is

clearly

recognizable

as

a

separate

tradition.

It is worth

asking

what the intention of this tradition is in the

light

of its earlier

literary expressions.

One of these

is

found

in

1

Kings

xxii

19-22,

which

describes Micaiah's vision of Yahweh

seated on

his

heavenly

throne. Burke

O.

Long

has

identified it as a

type

of

dramatic

word-vision which

depicts

a

visionary

scene

that

is taken

as a

portent

for the

future.36 The

heavenly

council meet to

deter-

mine

by

what

means

guilty

Ahab

is to die. It is

a

word-vision of

judgement:

Micaiah

appropriately

sums

up

the word

element

by

saying

Yahweh has

spoken

evil

against you

(1 Kings

xxii

23).

The

heavenly

throne

vision in Isa. vi

is closer to

Ezek.

i,

in that

it

too

is

part

of a

prophetic

call-narrative. Rolf Knierim in

his

masterly study

of

the

chapter

has

rightly

called the

vision

a

theophany

of

judgement.37

The

function

of

the vision is to

prepare

for

Isaiah's vocation as a

prophet

of

judgement.

The divine

king

has

already judged

his

people,

and Isaiah is

invited to deliver his

verdict.

The

vision

account

by

its revelation

of God

as

judge

legitimates Isaiah as a prophet of judgement.38 The association of

the

heavenly

throne vision with

divine

judgement

raises

the

ques-

tion

whether

the

same

purpose

does not underlie its use

in

Ezek.

i.

Other

Internal

Evidence

There are

individual

elements

in

the

chapter

which

may point

to

a

negative

intention.

The

opening

of

the

heavens in v.

1

has

a

familiar ring to readers of later visionary and apocalyptic texts: it

sounds like a

standard

introduction to

the

description

of

a

heavenly

36

1

Kings

(Grand Rapids,

1984),

p.

238.

37

The

vocation of

Isaiah ,

VT

18

(1968),

pp.

54-5.

38

Cf.

O.H.

Steck,

Bemerkungen zuJesaja

6 ,

BZ,

NF

16

(1972),

p.

195,

n.

22;

Long,

Reports

of

Visions

Among

the

Prophets ,

JBL

95

(1976), p.

361.

155



LESLIE C. ALLEN

scene

or the descent

of a

heavenly

figure.

Here, however,

it

primarily belongs

to

the

storm

theophany

tradition:

it

corresponds

to the

tearing

(qrc)

of the

heavens

in

Isa.

Ixiv

1

to

allow

Yahweh

to

come

down,

and to the

spreading

open

of the heavens

like

tent cur-

tains

(nth,

in

Qal

or

Hiphil)

for the same

purpose

in

2

Sam.

xxii

10

(

=

Ps.

xviii

10);

Ps. cxliv

5.39

Yet

the

choice

of

vocabulary

here

may

be meant

to

convey

a

special

nuance. The windows

or

floodgates

of heaven were

opened

to

permit

the

sending

down of either bless-

ing (2

Kings

vii

2;

Mal.

iii

10)

or

judgement

(Gen.

vii

11;

Isa. xxiv

18).40

Is this motif here

associated with the

storm

theophany

in

order to

convey

a sense of

judgement?

If

so,

how is the reader to

discern

such

a

purpose? Perhaps

the

adjacent

reference to the

north

(v.

4)

yields

a clue.

After

the

opening

of

the

skies

in

v. 1 one

expects

the

apparition

to come

straight

down from there.

However,

a

meaning

clouded

sky ,

derived

from

spn

hide ',41

does not commend

itself,

if

some

suitable

significance

in terms of the

usual sense

of

sdpon

can be

maintained. Cecilia Grave

has

argued

for an

early meaning

clear

sky

for

Ugaritic

spn, which was then associated with the north

wind

that

clears

the

sky.42

If she is

right,

such a

meaning

would be

possible

here,

although

again

its

speculative

nature militates

against

it. A

reference to Mt

Casius,

earlier

Zaphon,

as the moun-

tain

home of the

gods

is

often

suggested,43

but seems

hardly

to fit

the celestial demand

of

the

context.

For the same reason

the

explanation

that Yahweh

travels from

Jerusalem along

the Fertile

Crescent44 is

not

probable.

If

the northern sector

of

the

sky

is

in

view, why should it have been specified? Perhaps one should go

39

For the

latter

imagery

see

F.M.

Cross,

Canaanite

Myth

and

Hebrew

Epic

(Cam-

bridge,

Mass.,

1973),

p.

159,

n. 59.

40

See

F.

Lentzen-Deis,

Das Motiv

der

Himmels6ffnung

in

verschiedenen

Gattungen

der

Umweltliteratur

des Neuen

Testaments ,

Bib 50

(1969),

p.

303.

41

Vogt,

Safon

=caelum nubibus

obductum ,

Bib 34

(1953),

p.

426;

J.

de

Savignac,

Note

sur le

sense

du terme

sdphon

dans

quelques

passages

de la

Bible ,

VT3

(1953),

pp.

95-6;

cf. N.C.

Habel,

The

Book

ofJob (Philadelphia

and

London,

1985), p.

371.

42

The

Etymology

of

Northwest Semitic

sapanu ,

UF

12

(1980),

pp.

226-7.

43

E.g.

byJeremias

(n. 31), pp.

116-17.

Interestingly,

in

Job

xxvi 7

sdpon

seems

to

be

used where

one

might expect

a reference

to the

sky,

but it

may

indicate

the

sacred

mountain,

in

synonymous parallelism

with 'eres

earth ,

as

J.J.M.

Roberts,

Sdpodn

n

Job

26,7 ,

Bib 56

(1975),

pp.

554-7,

has

argued.

It

appears

to

bear

this

meaning

in

Job

xxxvii

22

(see

Habel

[n. 41],

p. 515).

44

E.g.

Bertholet and

Galling

(n. 27),

p.

5;

Fohrer

(n. 12),

p.

12.

156



EZEKIEL I

back to an older

interpretation,

that there

is some echo of

the foe

from

the north

motif

that

appears

in

Jeremiah.45

Elsewhere in the

book

of

Ezekiel,

in

what is

seemingly

a

primary

part

of the

Gog-

Magog

unit,

the invader is described

as

coming

from the north

(Ezek.

xxxix

2;

cf. xxxviii

6,

15),

in

clear

dependence

on

that motif.

Scholars

commonly

find

links between Ezek.

ii

3-iii

11

and the call

narrative

in

Jer.

i.

In an extension to that narrative Yahweh

declares

that from the north

evil will

be

opened

up

(missdpon

ip-

pdtah

hdrdaC,

er.

i

14).

The same

passive

verb has been used

in

Ezek.

i

1,

with

regard

to the

opening

of

the

heavens. Are

we to

explain

the reference to the

north

in

terms

of

intertextuality,

so

that

a sinister

quarter

of the

sky suggests

the

unleashing

of

evil,

when

the skies

open

in

judgement?

In

our

study

of

the structure of the

vision

account

we

noted

the

emphasis

laid on the

mobility

of

the

apparition.

Should

it be con-

nected

with the

message

of relentless

judgement

delivered

by

Amos,

that

wherever

Yahweh's

people

fled,

whether to

Sheol

or to

heaven,

to the

top

of Carmel

or to

the bottom of the

sea,

they

could

not

escape

from his clutches

(Amos

ix

1-4)?

Within Ezekiel's own

oracles there is a

parallel

in v

12

(cf.

xii

14):

in the course of the

interpretation

of the

sign

of

Ezekiel's division

of his

cut

hair for

methodical

disposal,

the last third of the

people

of

Jerusalem

was

to

be

dispatched

by

Yahweh's

chasing

them

with

unsheathed sword

in

foreign

lands.

Here the

mobile

throne

of

judgement

has the

sinister

potential

to

travel from heaven

to

earth

and,

by

means

of

its

wheels,

throughout

the earth.

The description of the divine figure in vv. 26b-28ap is reflectively

summed

up

in v.

28ay

by

associating

it with the

kabod

of Yahweh.

By

this characterization Ezekiel

consciously

relates his

theophanic

vision

to

an

earlier tradition

of divine

revelation.

Zimmerli iden-

tified that tradition with

Priestly

wilderness

texts,

but was too

specific

in

relating

it to

the

Sinai revelation

(Exod.

xix

lff.,

xxiv

9-

11,

16-17,

xxxiv

29-35,

xl

34-5).46

He seems to have

been influ-

enced

by

the

older

scholarly

notion that

the Sinai

theophany

served

as a model for the Old Testament theophany tradition, a notion

45

See,

e.g.,

C.F.

Keil,

Biblischer

Commentar

ber

den

Propheten

Ezechiel

(Leipzig,

1868),

p.

12

=

E.

tr. Biblical

Commentary

on the

Propheciesof

Ezekiel

1

(Edinburgh,

1876),

pp.

20-1.

Jerome

(n. 27),

pp.

8-9,

so

interpreted.

46

(n.

19)

E.

tr.,

pp.

120, 124,

140=

52, 58,

83.

157



LESLIE

C.

ALLEN

that has since

encountered

heavy

criticism.47

Yet,

since it

may

reasonably

be

supposed

that Ezekiel

was

harking

back

to

a

Priestly

tradition,

it is

pertinent

to refer to

a

group

of

wilderness narratives

that mention

Yahweh's

appearance

in

glory

in order to

pronounce

judgement.

The closest

parallels

are Exod.

xvi

10-12;

Num.

xvii

7-

10,

where the

glory

of Yahweh is associated with his

appearance

(Niphal

of

r'h)

in the cloud. Num.

xiv

10-12,

xvi

19-21

are

similar,

except

that the element of the cloud

is

lacking.

The ImmediateContext

Ezek.

i

is

part

of

a

unit that

culminates

in

the

prophetic

call of

Ezekiel. In

Long's terminology

the whole

is

a

dramatic word-

vision,

like that

in 1

Kings

xxii.48 We

may expect

to find

con-

sistency

between

the divine vision and the

divine

word.

In

fact,

Ezekiel is

commissioned

to

be

a

prophet

of

judgement,

as three fac-

tors indicate.

First,

the

designation

of Israel

as those

who

have

rebelled

against

Yahweh

(ii 3)

and

repeatedly

as bet

(ham)meri

rebellious house represents an accusation that warrants divine

judgement.

Second,

the

messenger

formula

that occurs in ii

4;

iii

11 introduces both oracles of

judgement

and oracles

of salvation

in

the

book;

that

the former

are

in view

here is

indicated

by

the

qualification

whether

they

hear or refuse

to hear

in each

case.

Yahweh would

set

no

store

by

Israel's

response

because the

pro-

phetic message

was to be

one

of

inexorable

judgement.

The

messenger

formula

is used

as

a

cipher

for

the

prophet's

judgement

oracles. Third, in ii 10 the scroll that Ezekiel is told to eat contains

words of

lamentation,

mourning

and

woe .

The

reference is to

the

effect of

his

oracles

of

judgement

in terms of

reactions to

47

For

exponents

of

this notion

seeJeremias

(n.

31), p.

101,

n.

2.

For

negative

critiques

see C.

Westermann,

The

Praise

of

God

n thePsalms

(Richmond, Virginia,

1965; London,

1966), pp.

98-101

=

Das Loben Gottes n den

Psalmen

(2nd

edn,

Got-

tingen,

1961),

pp.

73-6;

Jeremias,

pp.

105-11.

48

JBL

95

(1967), pp.

362-3.

Zimmerli

(n. 19),

E.

tr., pp.

97-100

=

pp. 16-20,

found

a

combination

of

two

types

of

prophetic

call

account,

one

of

which

majors

in

a throne

vision,

like that in Isa.

vi,

and

the other

in the word of

Yahweh,

as

in

Jer.

i

4-10.

However,

Long, Prophetic

Call

Traditions and

Reports

of

Visions ,

ZA

W

84

(1972),

pp.

494-500,

has

disputed

Zimmerli's

bifurcation

and

envisioned

a

single

type

encompassing

divine vision and divine

word,

which

has

as

its

source ancient Near Eastern and

Israelite vision

or

dream

reports

in

which

theophany

was

a

legitimating

device.

158



EZEKIEL I

extreme

suffering;

one

may

compare

Isa.

vi

9-10,

where

Isaiah's

commission is

presented obliquely

in terms of the effect of

his

message

of

judgement

upon

the

people.

Since

the role of Ezek. i

is

to

prepare

for the

ensuing

commission,

we

may

reasonably

assume

that the

intention of the vision

account is to reveal

Yahweh as

judge.

Before he

speaks,

the scene

has

already

been set for his call

to Ezekiel to

prophesy

judgement.

The Evidence

of

iii

16b-21

The reader of the book of Ezekiel has to evaluate individual

passages

in

terms of

their

wider

literary

context.

Since the book

moves

beyond

judgement

to

a

message

of salvation and

hope,

the

question

arises whether the

presence

of

this

positive

material

caused

a shift of

meaning

for

ch.

i.

Not

necessarily:

it

may

be noted that

the

commissioning

word

in

ii

3-iii 11

is

strikingly

devoid

of

any

redactional

attempt

to

tone

down

its character of

relentless

judge-

ment.

The

account of Ezekiel's

role

as

watchman in iii

16b-21

has

a crucial bearing on the issue. It is generally taken as a redactional

anticipation

of the material in xxxiii

1-9,

which

belongs

to the

second,

positive period

of the

prophet's

ministry

in

the view of

its

accent on

repentance

and

life,

which the

earlier

passage

shares. The

suggestion

is

sometimes made that the

insertion was

motivated

by

a desire to claim that

divine concern for Israel's

repentance

was a

feature of Ezekiel's

ministry

from the

start.49

However,

one

should

take

seriously

Greenberg's

sensitivity

to

the

falsehood

involved

in

embedding a statement of his later prophetic role here for this pur-

pose

([n.

9]

p.

93).

Rather,

the

insertion

appears

to bear witness

to

a

re-reading

of the

early

chapters

from a

vantage

point

of

changed

conditions.

Although

the fall of

Jerusalem

made

possible

a new

message

of

salvation,

the

old

message

of

judgement

continued to

have a

certain relevance in

bringing

a

moral

challenge

to

those

who

had the

opportunity

of

salvation

(cf.

xx

33-8,

xxxiii

30-3,

xxxiv

20-

2).

By

means of iii

16b-21

readers

of

the

book

were invited to

take

seriously the old message of radical judgement. God had not ceased

to be

judge

of the

apostate

and the

backslider.

Although

his

judge-

49

E.g.

Fohrer

(n. 12), p.

23;

T.

Kriiger,

Geschichtskonzepte

m

Ezechielbuch

(Berlin, 1989), p.

353;

cf.

M.

Fishbane,

Sin

and

Judgment

in

the

Prophecies

of

Ezekiel ,

Int 38

(1984),

p.

134=

Interpreting

he

Prophets

n.

30),

pp.

172-3.

159



LESLIE C. ALLEN

ment

was now associated with

a

positive purpose

to

save,

it had

not

been

superseded.

The

insertion

reaffirms in

relative terms the

message

of

judgement

in

the

early chapters.

Not

only

Ezekiel's role

as

prophet

of

judgement

in ii 3-iii

11,

but also Yahweh's role as

judge

in i

1-28a

fittingly open

the

book as

a

means of

warning

that

moral

obedience should mark Israel's

response

to his word of

salvation.

Echoes

of

Ezekiel

i

The

wheeled

throne seen

by

Ezekiel

seemingly

reappears

in 1

Enoch xiv

18 and

Dan. vii 9.50 The first

case,

in

the Book of the

Watchers,

occurs

in the account of Enoch's ascent to

heaven

and

his commission to

pass

on

to the Watchers God's

message

of

punishment

for their sins. The second instance

is

part

of

a

vision

account

of

the

divine

tribunal,

where

judgement

is

given

against

the beasts. These

judgement

contexts attest awareness

of

an inten-

tion

of

judgement

for Ezekiel's

inaugural

vision,

which

they

con-

ciously

echo.

Conclusion

A

study

of

the structure

of

Ezek. i has

revealed

an

alternating

sequence

of sections

that feature

a

storm

theophany

and

a throne

theophany,

and an

emphasis

on

mobility

in

the latter sections.

Pro-

phetic

usage

of

the storm

theophany

tradition

and earlier

examples

of the heavenly throne tradition are associated with divine judge-

ment; moreover,

certain elements in Ezek.

i

may

point

to this

very

purpose.

The

ensuing

commission

of Ezekiel as

a

prophet

of

judge-

50

P.

Grelot,

Daniel

vii,

9-10

et

le livre

d'Henoch ,

Semitica

28

(1978),

pp.

71-2, 78-81,

has

argued

that the

single

wheel

in the

Greek

version of Enoch

is

a

misunderstanding

of Aramaic

glgl,

which refers rather to

a circle of

brightness,

and also that

in Dan. vii

9

galgillohi, usually

rendered

his

wheels ,

has the same

meaning. J.E. Goldingay,

Daniel

(Dallas, 1989),

p.

145,

has

adopted

Grelot's

pro-

posal. It is significant, however, that Grelot, pp. 71, 80, n. 2, considered only

Ezek.

x

2, 6,

13,

where Hebrew

galgal

in

the

singular

occurs. So for

him neither

of the later

passages

could have

any

basis

in

Ezek.

i,

where

'opdn

and

'opannim

occur.

D.

Halperin,

The Faces

of

the

Chariot.

Early

Jewish

Responses

to Ezekiel's Vision

(Tiibingen, 1988),

p.

76,

n.

12,

has observed

in favour of

a link

between

Ezek.

i

15-21

and

Dan. vii 9 the fact that the

Targum regularly

renders

?opannim

with

gilgelayya.

He has also

suggested

(p. 81)

that

the wheel

in

the Greek

of

1

Enoch

xiv

18,

if

the text

is

correct,

reflects one

wheel in Ezek.

i

15.

160



EZEKIEL I

161

ment makes

plausible

a

characterization

of

Yahweh

as

judge.

The

redactional intent of Ezek. iii

16b-21,

with

its

continuing

message

of

judgement,

is

congruent

with such a characterization. Further-

more,

the later vision

accounts

in 1

Enoch

xiv

and Dan.

vii,

which

feature divine

judgement, appear

to echo

Ezek.

i. This

cumulative

series of

arguments suggests

that the

conventional

understanding

of

the

inaugural

vision in

terms of comfort and

assurance

is erroneous

and

that Kraetzschmar and Brownlee

were

right

to

dissent.

The Structure and Intention of Ezekiel 1

Documents

Transcript of The Structure and Intention of Ezekiel 1