076. II. The Imaginative Element In Ezekiel’s Prophesying

II THE IMAGINATIVE ELEMENT IN EZEKIEL’S PROPHESYING A very characteristic element in the predictions of Ezekiel is his free but careful use of imagery and symbolism. Both are employed by other prophets. Abijah, for example, gives point to his assertion that Jeroboam had been chosen to lead the revolt of the northern kingdom by rending his new mantle into twelve pieces, ten of which he gave to the incredulous overseer (1 Kings 11). Isaiah, by walking thinly clad and barefoot (Isaiah 20), made a vivid prediction of the threatened captivity of Judah. When Jeremiah wished to impress upon his sceptical audience the destruction which Jehovah was about to visit upon the city of Jerusalem, he dashed an earthen jar to fragments in their presence. By such actions these incomparable preachers enforced their messages. Teaching by symbols not only insured the attention of their hearers and added to the impressiveness of their words, but often conveyed an idea the open expression of which might have been dangerous or inexpedient. Even more constantly do the prophets make use of various forms of imagery to illumine and beautify their addresses. Isaiah’s parable which likened Judah to an unfruitful vineyard (5), or Micah’s bold series of paronomasias (Micah 1:10-15), by which he announced the approach of danger, illustrate in strikingly different ways this tendency. All other prophets, however, are surpassed by Ezekiel in the use of figurative language. He rarely puts forward an idea without some embellishment. Sometimes he proposes a riddle to his hearers (Ezekiel 17), or utters a parable which he also illustrates by a symbolic action (Ezekiel 24), or he unfolds an elaborate allegory (Ezekiel 16), in each case making the figure of speech a mere means to the end of expressing his message more effectively. But he stands peculiar in his remarkable use of symbolism, especially of the vision, which is a higher form of the same mental tendency. He passes readily from the simpler forms of symbolism, like the metaphor, the parable, and some form of objective action, to the most complex, such as the allegory and the vision.

Ezekiel’s visions appear to be carefully worked-out products of his own creative imagination. This is one difference between the inaugural vision of Isaiah and that of Ezekiel. Isaiah conveys effectively his sense of the majesty and holiness of Jehovah, but furnishes little else, while Ezekiel describes with minuteness of detail the appearance of the Divine. Isaiah, in connection with his prophetic activity, makes no further reference to his one vision, but Ezekiel repeatedly describes the divine glory in this form. Thus, whatever may have been the objective impression made upon Ezekiel at the time of his call and at other times, he seems to have leisurely thought out and expressed in literary form what seemed to him an adequate description of the details of the vision. Hence Ezekiel’s use of the vision in prophecy is intended to be significant. Every detail must be scrutinized for its meaning.

It is of interest to note the probable sources of the details which enter into such a composite vision as, for example, that of the first chapter of his prophecy. It is a vision of God. The cherubim, wheels, arch, and throne are mere accessories. Some of them are furnished, no doubt, by the current symbolism of Hebrew poetry (Isaiah 19:1; Psalms 18:9-10). Others seem to be an elaboration of details already employed by Isaiah in his inaugural vision. Some were probably suggested by the symbolism of Babylonian temples and palaces. Ezekiel freely used suggestions from every available source. So clear is the literary stamp upon the prophecies of Ezekiel that it is often difficult to determine what the prophet actually did or saw. Did he really lie for months upon his left side to represent the duration of the captivity of the northern kingdom (Ezekiel 4)? Was it, on the other hand, a mere parable, not acted at all? Did he, on another occasion, remove all the hair of his head and face (Ezekiel 5), and dispose of it by burning and in the other ways prescribed? It is possible, as Professor Moulton suggests, that the real action was very slight, serving as an introduction and illustration of the discourse that followed. Yet we may deem it probable that the prophet, for many years, acted as well as proclaimed his message, even symbolizing in various ways the great thoughts uppermost in his mind. The finest example of a detailed vision, never meant to be understood as other than ideal, is found in the closing chapters of his book. The prophet fitly crowns his work of consoling and cheering the discouraged exiles and his additional task of creating a new social and religious system by formulating what is at once a bold and brilliant prediction of a return to Judah and of the re-establishment of the state and a notable scheme of organization. This vision is a masterpiece of literary skill and of imaginative power and yet affords clear evidence of being something more. No careful reader can fail to appreciate the force of Ezekiel’s frequent declaration that Jehovah spoke to and through him, when he realizes that through these seemingly prosaic details of organization the prophet formulated a working ideal of religious and social life for the generations yet unborn. Ezekiel was an exceedingly important factor in influencing his people to adopt the new religious point of view, which developed in course of time into Judaistic legalism. For the last results of this development he is not responsible; its helpful and useful features he strongly advocated. The prophet Ezekiel is thus a connecting link between the old and the new. He loved and understood his nation, but as a close student of her history he saw that her work under the old forms was done. The exile he looked on as a period of transition, a time of preparation for the larger future of which he was fully confident. He believed that Jehovah had revealed to him what the proper development of that future should be, in order to realize the unchanging plans of God, and he gave himself wholly to its expression. No prophet had a greater task; none fulfilled it with greater fidelity and success.