The parable of the cauldron; or, the judgment upon Jerusalem.
"Again in the ninth year, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, the word of the Lord came unto me," etc. The interpretation of the chief features of this parable is not difficult. "The cauldron is Jerusalem. The flesh and the bones that are put therein are the Jews, the ordinary inhabitants of the city and the fugitives from the country. The fire is the fire of war. Water is poured into the cauldron, because in the first place only the inhabitants are regarded, not the city as such. Afterwards, where the cauldron only is intended, it is set on empty (Ezekiel 24:11). The bones, in Ezekiel 24:4, in contradistinction to the pieces of flesh, are those who lend support to the body of the state—the authorities, with the king at their head" (Hengstenberg). The precise meaning of one clause is controverted. "Burn also the bones under it" (Ezekiel 24:5) Revised Version, "Pile also the bones under it." The interpretation of Fairbairn appears to us to be correct, "What the prophet means is that the best, the fleshiest parts, full of the strongest bones, representing the most exalted and powerful among the people, were to be put within the pot and boiled; but that the rest, the very poorest, were not to escape: these, the mere bones as it were, were to be thrown as a pile beneath, suffering first, and, by increasing the fire, hastening on the destruction of the others." A remarkable confirmation and illustration of this interpretation is quoted in the 'Speaker's Commentary ' from Livingstone's 'Last Journal:' "When we first steamed up the river Shire, our fuel ran out in the elephant marsh where no trees exist. Coming to a spot where an elephant had been slaughtered, I at once took the bones on board, and these, with the bones of a second elephant, enabled us to steam briskly up to where wood abounded. The Scythians, according to Herodotus, used the bones of the animal sacrificed to boil the flesh; the Guachos of South America do the same when they have no fuel; the ox thus boils himself." The parable and its interpretation as given by Ezekiel suggest the following observations.
I. THE TIME FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE DIVINE JUDGMENTS MAY SEEM TO MEN TO BE LONG DELAYED, BUT ITS ARRIVAL IS CERTAIN. (Verses 1, 2.) This judgment against Jerusalem had been spoken of by the prophets for a long time. The people of that city had refused to believe in its approach; but now it has actually commenced. "The King of Babylon set himself against Jerusalem this same day." But notice:
1. The minuteness of the Divine knowledge of the beginning of the judgment. "In the ninth year, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month," etc. (Verses 1, 2; and cf. 2 Kings 25:1). The very day, yea, the hour and the moment, when Nebuchadnezzar began the siege were known unto God. Nothing is hidden from him (cf. 2 Kings 19:27; Psalms 139:1-4; Matthew 9:4; John 2:24, John 2:25; Hebrews 4:13).
2. The communication of this knowledge to Ezekiel. Here on a particular day, which is clearly specified and set down in writing, the prophet announced to his fellow-exiles that Nebuchadnezzar had begun to besiege Jerusalem. "The place on the Chebar where the prophet lived," says J. D. Michaelis, "was distant from Jerusalem more than a hundred German miles; it was therefore impossible for Ezekiel to know by human means that the siege of Jerusalem had commenced on that day; and when it was afterwards ascertained that the prediction had exactly corresponded with fact, it would be regarded as an invincible proof of his Divine mission."
3. The mixture record of the fact. "Son of man, write thee the name of the day, even of this selfsame day." When this prophecy was found to be exactly true, the record of it would rebuke the people for their unbelief of the prophet, and witness to the Divine inspiration and authority with which he spake. But to revert to our main point, the apparent delay of a Divine judgment does not affect its certainty. "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil." God's visitation because of persistent sin is certain, and it will take place at the precise time appointed by God. With what remarkable iteration and emphasis is this awful certainty expressed in the fourteenth verse! "I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent" (cf. Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29). God's threatenings of punishment will as surely be fulfilled as his promises of blessing.
II. IN THE EXECUTION OF HIS JUDGMENTS GOD IS NO RESPECTER OF PERSONS. "Set on the cauldron, set it on, and also pour water into it; gather' the pieces thereof into it, even every good piece, the thigh, and the shoulder'; fill it with the choice bones. Take the choice of the flock." Thus the prophet teaches that the great ones of Judah and Jerusalem—the king, the princes, the nobles—would suffer in this judgment. There is another expression which points to the same conclusion: "No lot is fallen upon it" (Verse 6). In former visitations some had been taken captive and others left. So it was when Jehoiakim and when Jehoiachin were taken away (2 Kings 24:1-20.; 2 Chronicles 36:1-10). But in this case the judgment was to fall upon all without distinction. "There is no respect of persons with God." He is a Respecter of character, but not of persons. No outward rank or riches, no distinctions of place or power, nor anything in man's secular circumstances or condition, can exempt him from the stroke of God's anger in the day when he visits a people for their sins.
III. WHEN WICKEDNESS HAS BECOME FLAGRANT, THE DIVINE JUDGMENT WILL BE NOT LESS CONSPICUOUS. "For her blood is in the midst of her; she set it upon the bare rock; she poured it not upon the ground, to cover it with dust; that it might cause fury to come up to take vengeance, I have set her blood upon the bare rock, that it should not be covered." Blood upon the bare rock is here mentioned in contradistinction to blood shed upon the earth, which is absorbed by it, or which is covered and concealed with dust. There is, perhaps, as Hengstenberg suggests, a reference to the judicial murders which were perpetrated in Jerusalem, of which that of the Prophet Urijah is an example (Jeremiah 26:10-23). But there certainly is set forth the notorious wickedness of the people of Jerusalem and Judah. They were "distinguished by the openness and audacity with which they sinned." The conspicuousness of their wickedness would manifest the righteousness of the judgment of God; and it would lead to an equal conspicuousness in the infliction of that judgment. She had poured out blood "upon the bare rock, and God would "set her blood upon the bare rock." In the administration of the Divine government there is a close relation and proportion between sin and its punishment. "It is fit," says Matthew Henry, "that those who sin before all should be rebuked before all, and that the reputation of those should not be consulted by the concealment of their punishment who were so impudent as not to desire the concealment of their sin."
IV. WHEN WICKEDNESS HAS BECOME UTTERLY INVETERATE, THE TIME FOR THE EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT HAS COME. Several things in the text indicate the inveteracy of the wickedness of the people. The scum or rust of the cauldron was not cleansed (Verses 6, 12); so the cauldron shall be put empty upon the fire, that the rust may be burnt away (Verse 11). J.D. Michaelis explains this verse: "When verdigris has eaten very deeply into it, copper is made red-hot in the fire, and cooled in water, when the rust falls off in scales. It can be partially dissolved by the application of vinegar. Only one must not think of a melting away of the rust by the fire, since in that case the copper would necessarily be melted along with it. Also through the mere heating the greater part can be loosened, so that it can be rubbed off." But here it seems that both the cauldron and the rust are to be consumed; both Jerusalem and its guilty inhabitants are to be destroyed. Nothing will avail to cleanse them but the fierce fires of stern retribution. Another evidence of the exceeding wickedness of the people is the application to them of the word translated "lewdness." זִמָּה means "deliberate wickedness," wickedness meditated and planned. For such willful and studied evil-doing there remained but judgment. "All measures of a less extreme kind," says Fairbairn, "had been tried in vain; those were non-exhausted; and as the iniquity appeared to be entwined with the whole fabric and constitution of things, nothing remained but to subject all to the crucible of a severe and overwhelming catastrophe. This is represented by keeping the cauldron on the fire till its contents were stewed away, and the very bones burnt. And as if even this were not enough, as if something more were necessary to avenge and purge out such scandalous wickedness, the cauldron itself must be kept hot and burning till the pollution should be thoroughly consumed out of it. The wicked city must be laid in ruins (cf. Isaiah 4:4)…. In plain terms, the Lord was no longer going to deal with them by half-measures; their condition called for the greatest degree of severity compatible with their preservation as a distinct and separate people, and so the indignation of the Lord was to rest on them till a separation was effected between them and sin."
V. THAT THE JUDGMENTS OF GOD ARE RETRIBUTORY IN THEIR CHARACTER. "According to thy ways, and according to thy doings, shall they judge thee, saith the Lord God." (We have already noticed this aspect of the Divine judgments in our treatment of Ezekiel 7:3, Ezekiel 7:4; Ezekiel 9:10; Ezekiel 16:43.)—W.J.
A sudden and sorrowful bereavement.
"Also the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, behold, I take away from thee the desire of thine eyes," etc. The death of the prophet's wife is introduced here as a type of the calamities which were impending over Jerusalem and its inhabitants. We believe that her death was a fact, and not merely "a vividly drawn figure" designed to set forth the more impressively the overwhelming troubles which were coming upon the Jews. We may notice, in passing, that the fact that Ezekiel had a wife suggests the unscripturalness of the papal dogma of the celibacy of the clergy. Moses was most eminent as a prophet, and he was married (Exodus 2:21, Exodus 2:22). So also was his brother Aaron, the high priest. Samuel the seer and judge was married (1 Samuel 8:1, 1 Samuel 8:2); and St. Peter (Matthew 8:14). St. Paul claimed for himself the "right to lead about a wife that is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas" (1 Corinthians 9:5). And he writes of the prohibition of marriage as a "doctrine of demons" (1 Timothy 4:1-3). Regarding the death of the wife of the prophet as a real actual occurrence, we propose to consider it at present apart from its typical significance. We notice—
I. THE REMOVAL OF A BELOVED RELATIVE BY DEATH. "Son of man, behold, I take away … the desire of thine eyes." This undoubtedly refers to the wife of Ezekiel; and this mode of speaking of her indicates the high esteem and tender affection in which she was held by her husband. "A good wife," says Jeremy Taylor, "is Heaven's last best gift to man—his angel and minister of graces innumerable—his gem of many virtues—his casket of jewels. Her voice is sweet music; her smile, his brightest day; her kiss, the guardian of his innocence; her arms, the pale of his safety, the balm of his health, the balsam of his life; her industry, his surest wealth; her economy, his safest steward; her lips, his faithful counselors; her bosom, the softest pillow of his cares; and her prayers, the ablest advocates of Heaven's blessing on his head." The sacred Scriptures, especially in the New Testament, represent the love which the husband should bear towards his wife as being of the closest, tenderest, holiest kind (Ephesians 5:25-33). When a man has a good wife, who is to him the desire of his eyes, and she is taken from him by death, great is his loss and sore his sorrow. "The death of a man's wife," says Lamartine, "is like cutting down an ancient oak that has long shaded the family mansion. Henceforth the glare of the world, with its cares and vicissitudes, fails upon the old widower's heart, and there is nothing to break their force or shield him from the full weight of misfortune. It is as if his right hand were withered; as if one wing of his angel was broken, and every movement that he made brought him to the ground. His eyes are dimmed and glassy, and when the film of death falls over him, he misses those accustomed tones which have smoothed his passage to the grave." How frequently are beloved relatives removed by death! At one time it is the true wife and tender mother. At another, it is the faithful husband and the wise and loving father. Again, it is the beloved and beautiful child.
II. THE REMOVAL OF A BELOVED RELATIVE BY DEATH SUDDENLY, "I take away from thee the desire of thine eyes with a stroke." The wife of Ezekiel did not suffer long from any illness, she had no antecedent affliction which tended to prepare him for her removal, but was snatched away as it were in a moment. It is not infrequently the case that our beloved are taken from us without any warning or without any anticipation of their removal. By virulent disease, by public calamity, by private accident, men are taken away with a stroke. This renders the suffering of the survivors more severe. If the life had slowly faded away, they would in a moment have been prepared for its departure. When there is a protracted affliction, the hearts of those who are soon to be bereaved nerve themselves for the last separating stroke when it shall come. The idea of the parting to some extent familiarizes itself to the mind. But in cases of sudden death there is no such preparation for the trial. And the stroke sometimes stuns the bereaved by its unlooked-for force, sometimes overwhelms their hearts with sorrow, and sometimes drives them into half-madness.
III. THE REMOVAL OF A BELOVED RELATIVE BY DEATH SUDDENLY BY GOD. "The word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, behold, I take away from thee the desire of thine eyes with a stroke." The agent in the removal of the prophet's wife is here said to be neither disease, nor accident, nor chance, nor fate, but the Lord himself. This is the general teaching of the Bible as to man's decease (cf. Job 1:21; Job 14:5, Job 14:20; Psalms 31:15; Psalms 68:20; Psalms 90:3, Psalms 90:5; Psalms 104:29; Revelation 1:18). In the fact which we are considering there is:
1. Deep mystery. Why does God take away our beloved ones with a stroke? Why does he not grant us at least some intimation and preparation for the coming trial? We cannot tell. But he says unto us, "What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt understand hereafter."
2. Divine instruction. The fact should teach us important lessons; e.g.:
3. Rich comfort. God is all-wise, perfectly righteous, infinitely kind, and graciously interested in us. Therefore his arrangements concerning us, and his actions in relation to us, must be for our good. It is consoling and even inspiring to know that our times are in his hand.
IV. THE REMOVAL BY GOD OF A BELOVED RELATIVE, WHO WAS NOT TO BE MOURNED BY THE BEREAVED SURVIVOR. "Yet neither shalt thou mourn or weep, neither shall thy tears run down." God does not prohibit to his servant the feeling of sorrow, but only its outward expression. All the visible signs of mourning in use amongst his countrymen he must abstain from (Verse 17). He may not weep, and even the relief of silent tears is forbidden him. It has been well said by Albert Smith that tears are "the safety-valves of the heart, when too much pressure is laid on." And Leigh Hunt writes, "Tears enable sorrow to vent itself patiently. Tears hinder sorrow from becoming despair and madness." But in this painful bereavement Ezekiel must neither weep nor shed tears, in order that he may be a more impressive sign unto his fellow-exiles. Exceedingly severe were his trials. But for us in our sorrow there is no such prohibition. Christianity does not forbid tears. "Jesus wept." In the days of his flesh he "offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death." And the solace of tears is allowed unto us. We may relieve the over-laden heart by sighs, and cool the burning brain by our flowing tears. And in the sorrows of bereavement we have richer, diviner consolations than these. We know that to those who are in Christ death is unspeakable gain; that the separations which it causes are more in appearance than in reality; and that in the great hereafter there will be blessed reunions with those who have passed beyond the veil.—W.J.