Ezekiel 10:20

This [is] the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel, by the river of Chebar,.... This is repeated from Ezekiel 10:15; not only for the confirmation of it; but with an addition, to show

This is the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel by the river of Chebar; and I knew that they were the cherubims. I knew that they were the cherubim.

The living creature; though four in number, but one in form, mind, and work. The God of Israel; appearing as he did, , in form of a man, it leads us to conclude it meant of Christ. I knew; either by special assurance as a prophet, or by comparing them with those which he had often, as priest about the temple, seen there.

Ezekiel 10:20 This [is] the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel by the river of Chebar; and I knew that they [were] the cherubims.Ver. 20. And I knew that they were the cherubims.] Now at last I knew. Divine light is darted into the soul by degrees, and at different times.

Verse 20. And I knew that they were the cherubims.] This formation of the plural is quite improper. In general, Hebrew nouns of the masculine gender end in ים im, in the plural; the s, therefore, should never be added to such. Cherub is singular; cherubim is plural. The s should be uniformly expunged. I have already referred to the end of this chapter for farther information relative to this glorious chariot of Jehovah; but I must say that I have met with nothing on the subject that entirely satisfies myself. In the preceding notes I have endeavoured to make the literal meaning as plain as possible; and have occasionally given some intimations relative to the general design of this sublime vision. My readers are already apprised that I do not like conjectures on Divine things; many points, that had originally no other origin, are now incorporated with creeds of which it is deemed sinful to doubt. Because some learned and pious men have written to prove that this symbolical compound figure is a representation of the Holy Trinity; therefore, the sentiment now passes current. Now this is not proved; and I suppose never can be proved. The continuator of the Historical Discourses of Saurin has made some sensible remarks on the subject of this vision; and these I shall lay here before the intelligent reader. They deserve attention. THIS intelligent writer observes: "For the right interpretation of this vision, the following rules should be laid down: - "The first rule is this: - An explanation, which accounts for all the parts contained in the vision, is much more probable than those which explain only one part. "The second is this: - An explanation which is conformable to the present circumstances of the prophet, and of the people to whom he is sent, as well as to the nature of the things which he is called upon to say to them, is incomparably more probable than those explanations which go in quest of past or future events, which have no connexion with the immediate circumstances of the prophet, nor with the end of his mission. These rules, which appear incontestable, being laid down, we observe, that their opinion who think that God here draws out a plan of the government of his providence, applied to the present state of the Jews, accounts for all that Ezekiel saw; and that in a manner which refers to the end of the prophet's mission, and all that he had to say to this rebellious people. Why wish God to represent to his prophet the future state of the Christian Church, which was not to be founded till after a series of time, rather than the state of the Jewish Church, and the chastisements which hung over the heads of that hardened people?

20. were the cherubims] Were cherubim. The remark that he knew that the living creatures were cherubim is of very great difficulty. It would scarcely be in the sense of the prophet to suppose that he learned that the living creatures were cherubim from hearing them so called by the divine speaker (Ezekiel 10:2; Ezekiel 10:6) because previous to this he himself has so called them (ch. Ezekiel 9:3). The meaning is rather that this third vision of them (ch. 1 and ch. Ezekiel 3:23) with its details and movements revealed to him that the creatures were cherubim. But admitting that the prophet had visions we can hardly escape the conclusion that the details of the phenomenon of the cherubim repose upon reflection. This reflection may have preceded the visions and been reproduced in them, but where did he find the elements that entered into his combination? Were they not derived from the temple largely, though also from the storm-cloud? Could he be unaware of the source whence he derived them? It is possible that in the excitation of the vision he did not recall the processes of his own reflection. Or may it be that we are straining the word “knew” when we understand it in the sense of learned, came to know? This is the natural sense to put upon it in this Book, and up to this time the prophet has not used the name cherubim. The derivation of the word cherub is obscure. If Assyrian scholars are right the name is Babylonian, and is found given to the colossal winged bulls (called at other times shidu, Heb. shçd) which guard the portals of palaces and temples in Babylonia. The word (Kirubu) is said to have the sense of “great” (Schrader, KAT. on Genesis 3:24, Del. Paradies, p. 150 seq.). But though the name be common to Babylonian and Hebrew, and though originally the idea expressed by the name may have been the same in both, the usage as known from Babylonian literature marks the end of a long development, and that in Hebrew marks the end of another long and independent development, and any attempt to control or explain the one by the other must be made with caution. The narrative and essential part of Ch. 10 lies in Ezekiel 10:2-4; Ezekiel 10:6-7; Ezekiel 10:18-19; the rest is annotation suggested by points in the narrative, in which ch. 1 is repeated without anything essential being added to it. A second description of the cherubim after ch. 1 looks unnecessary, and Cornill would excide Ezekiel 10:8-17 entirely. There may be occasional glosses in these verses, but no reason exists for cutting them out which does not equally apply to Ezekiel 10:20-22. The whole description of the divine chariot has an appearance of artificiality to us now, but in Ezekiel we have a peculiar mind, and it is safer to content ourselves with saying that we do not altogether understand the importance which he attaches to the phenomenon of the chariot and the living creatures.

In this departure of the glory of the Lord from the temple, the seer recognizes for the first time the full meaning of the vision which he had seen on the banks of Chebar Ezek. 1.

20-22. I knew that they were the cherubim — If we try to dissect this vision we are in great danger of taking all the life out of it.