EXPOSITION
The section on which we now enter—the great "parenthesis," as I have called it, of Ezekiel's prophetic work—contains messages to the seven nations that were most closely connected with the fortunes of Israel and Judah. These were
A prophet's work was hardly complete without such a survey of the Divine order of the world so far as it came within the horizon of his thoughts; and Ezekiel had before him the example of like groups of prophecies addressed to the heathen nations with which Israel was brought into contact, in Isaiah 13-23. and Jeremiah 46-51. It was natural that the two contemporary prophets should be led to address their messages to the same nations, and so we find Ezekiel's seven named together with others in Jeremiah 25:15-26, and five of them (Egypt and Philistia being excepted) in Jeremiah 27:1-4; while we have fuller and special prophecies for Egypt (Jeremiah 46:1-28.); Philistia (Jeremiah 47:1-7.); Moab (Jeremiah 48:1-47.); Ammon (Jeremiah 49:1-6); Edom (Jeremiah 49:7-22), with the addition of Damascus (Jeremiah 49:23-27); Kedar (Jeremiah 49:28-33); Elam (Jeremiah 49:34-39); Babylon (Jeremiah 1:1). What is remarkable in Ezekiel is that he has no message for Babylon, which for Isaiah and Jeremiah was the leading representative of the world-powers considered in their antagonism to the Divine kingdom. This may, in part, be explained by supposing that he omitted it in order to keep to his number of seven nations as the symbol of completeness; but a more probable hypothesis is that he was led, as Jeremiah had at one time been (Jeremiah 29:1-7), to see in the Chaldean monarchy the appointed minister of the Divine judgments on Jerusalem and on the other nations. For his immediate purpose it was fitter that the exiles for whom he wrote should "seek the peace" of the people among whom they dwelt rather than that they should exult in its future downfall. He, like Jeremiah, may have been personally favored by Nebuchadnezzar and his officials; and Daniel, whom he mentions with honor (Ezekiel 14:14), and whom he may have known personally, was the king's chief minister. There was, we may well believe, a sufficient reason for this exceptional reticence.