EXPOSITION
This chapter embraces, in its earlier section (Ezekiel 37:1-14), the concluding portion of the "word of God" begun at Ezekiel 36:16; in its later section (Ezekiel 36:15-28), an additional "word," to which the former naturally leads. The earlier, under the figure of a resurrection of dry bones, beheld by the prophet in vision, describes the political and religious reawakening of Israel; in the later is depicted, by means of a symbolic action, the reunion of its two branches. The first divides itself into two parts—the vision (Ezekiel 36:1-10) and its interpretation (Ezekiel 36:11-14). The vision was to all appearance designed to meet the objections the preceding picture of Israel's future glory might naturally be expected to call forth. It was true that in the past Israel had often suffered a decline in her national life, and as often experienced a revival. But with the fall of her capital, the burning of her temple, the slaughter of her people, and the expatriation of her nobles, her life was henceforth extinct; and to speak of returning prosperity to her in such a condition was like talking of the restoration of vitality to withered bones. Besides, the exiles were, comparatively speaking, only a handful, and to picture Judah's waste cities as being filled with flocks of men was like mocking the dejected with hopes certain to be dashed to the ground. The Exposition will show how the vision was fitted to dispel such despondent reflections. Yet diversity of sentiment prevails as to whether the vision was intended to predict an actual resurrection of the physically dead at the end of time, or merely to symbolize an ideal resurrection of Israel, then nationally dead.
1. The view, that what the prophet beheld in vision was the final resurrection of mankind, though favored by Jerome, Calovius, and Kliefoth, must be abandoned, not because the doctrine of a general resurrection would not have been a powerful consolation to the pious-hearted in Israel, or because that doctrine was not then known, but because, in the prophet's own explanation, the bones are declared to be those, not of the whole family of man, but merely of the house of Israel. At the same time, those interpreters are right who, like Hengstenberg, Keil, and Plumptre, hold that, even if the doctrine of a general resurrection had not been current in Ezekiel's time, this vision was enough to call it into existence, and even to lend strong probability to its truth.
2. Accordingly, the view is commonly preferred that, while an objective reality to the prophet's mind, and by no means a mere rhetorical garb for its conceptions, the vision was designed as a symbolic representation of Israel's resuscitation; though here again opinions diverge both as to what formed the mental background for the prophet's use of such a symbol, and as to how it served to suggest the thought of Israel's revival. While some, like Jerome and Hengstenberg, as above indicated, regard "the doctrine of the proper resurrection" as "the presupposition of the expanded figurative representation," others, with Havernick, find its historical basis in such instances of raising from the dead as were performed by Elijah and Elisha, and perhaps also in such passages as Isaiah 26:19. If Smend thinks the vision was intended to assist Israel merely by suggesting that "the unbelievable might happen," and Havernick that it was designed to inspire hope by presenting to the mind a lively picture of the creative, life-giving power of God, "which can raise even dead bones to life again," Ewald finds its chief power to console in the thought "that the nation or individual which does not despair of the Divine Spirit will not be forsaken of this Spirit in any situation, but will always be borne on by it to new life."