READINGS ON EZEKIEL (1)
READINGS ON EZEKIEL (1)
Ezekiel 1: 1 - 28; Ezekiel 2: 1 - 4; Ezekiel 3: 22 - 27
JT What is in mind this evening, in commencing to read the book of Ezekiel, is to show the character of the prophet’s gift and of his mission.
The chapters from which we have read are introductory. It will be necessary for us in pursuing our subject to keep in mind the description of the living creatures; for it presents much detail, which will only be intelligible to us as we consider the scenes presented in this wonderful book. Dates have a great place in this book; we read in verse 1: “Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth of the month” Ezekiel 1: 1, and then in verse 2 it says, “it was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin’s captivity” Ezekiel 1: 2. These two dates are to be understood, if we are to see how ministry is to be prospered, for it is the prophet’s ministry which will come before us. The first date, the thirtieth year, according to a backward computation of the reigns of various kings, alludes to Josiah’s reign, and more specifically to the year in which he held the passover — the eighteenth year of his reign — and it is evidently implied here that Ezekiel had that in mind; a time of revival and prosperity amongst the saints.
And then the reference to Jehoiachin’s captivity, of course, suggests the adverse side. It is a humiliating thought, reminding us of failure and the awful state of the people. Those two things are necessary in the servant’s soul; the idea of a revival as in Josiah’s day, thirty years before, and then the sorrowful failure of his family; for Jehoiachin, a grandson of Josiah, is here referred to as in captivity, having been captive for five years when this vision was seen by Ezekiel.
WR [p. 2] One who was faithful to God and to man is referred to here as priest; not as prophet. His priesthood is emphasised.
JT It is not simply a priest but the priest. “The word of Jehovah came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest” (Ezekiel 1: 3). It was characteristic of him. Now, as remarked, the thirtieth year alludes to the lapse of time since the year of Josiah’s passover, which was a landmark in Israel (see 2 Chronicles 35). Computing the different periods given, you reach back to that year; the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign, a point of great significance as a revival. There had been no passover like it from the days of Samuel. That God gives such occasions as that would be a matter of positive importance to the soul of the prophet in his ministry. A minister ought to have that in mind in his service, for God can cause it to recur. The other date is sorrowful: one of Josiah’s family had failed, and was a captive. That a king of Judah should be in captivity was indeed a sorrowful matter.
ABP Do you suggest that in Ezekiel’s mind the time dates from the passover?
JT Evidently. We do not know if there was any other incident in Ezekiel’s mind, but we do know it refers to that year, a most important year in Israel’s history. We can understand that a man like Ezekiel would have it in his mind, as we have the beginning of the great revival in our day, in our minds. But then there are sorrowful things that have happened during the last hundred years that we have to remember, too. The date of Josiah’s passover is carefully given both in 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles.
CAM Would these two happenings synchronise? Would one be seen as from God’s side, in blessing, and then would the other be governmental?
JT Yes, thirty years back, and five years back. The five years refer to what is humiliating; the captivity of one of the kings of Judah. I think in that way dates are especially important for those who are serving; that [p. 3] is, what has happened in the history of God’s people must be kept continually in mind.
CAM Would the first date give a sort of impetus to the ministry?
JT Yes. And the second date would challenge us as to whether we are in captivity or whether we are going on in the energy of revival, looking for another, or looking for the maintenance, to the end, of that which God has recovered.
JHE The second date is in a parenthesis, as if it were added in a secondary way to strengthen the thought of date.
JT It was thirty years from one date and five years from the other; so that Jehoiachin was taken in captivity twenty-five years after the first date.
ABP Does the reference to Jehoiachin indicate that the ministry of Jeremiah had been refused?
JT Yes. Jeremiah’s ministry in that period was at Jerusalem. Ezekiel is ministering away in the east at the river Chebar, where the people had been taken.
Ques Is it right to say that in relation to ministry we have what is substantial to look back to, as well as what God may disclose to us in the midst of difficulty, such as the “visions of God” here?
JT Quite so; the two dates we have referred to would be in the prophet’s mind, but now there is something fresh coming in on this particular date; the heavens are opened. What stimulation there is in that! Ezekiel says, “the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. On the fifth of the month, (it was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin’s captivity,) the word of Jehovah came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar” (Ezekiel 1: 1 - 3). God is operating now far away from Jerusalem, following up the captives, and a greater thing happens here than perhaps we can find elsewhere in the prophets: the heavens were opened.
[p. 4] Ques Do you connect that in any way with matters being directed from heaven? In Revelation 2 and 3 the position would seem to be heavenly, although what is seen is on earth. The Lord is really in charge of the matter, whether on earth or as directing from heaven.
JT Yes; the heavens are opened; heaven is intervening now. Influence no longer emanates from Jerusalem; it is from heaven. So the scene corresponds with incidents in the New Testament: what happened at the banks of the Jordan, and particularly at the death of Stephen, who beheld the heavens opened. The Son of man was operating from heaven instead of from Jerusalem.
ANW There are the “visions of God” and “the word of Jehovah”. The “visions of God” seem to be connected with Josiah, and “the word of Jehovah” with Jehoiachin, are they not?
JT Yes; the expression, “visions of God” appears in verse 1; but “the word of Jehovah came expressly unto Ezekiel” appears in verse 3. The latter is what he is going to say. We need not say everything that we see, but the word of Jehovah is urgent. The vision is not said to be express, but “the word” is. It is a message. You may ponder over and enjoy what you see; it may build you up; but the message is express, as it says, “the word of Jehovah came expressly” Ezekiel 1: 3.
ARS Is this not very similar to the circumstances surrounding John’s being at Patmos? Ezekiel is a captive by the river Chebar, and John was a captive in Patmos; also, John was called up to heaven, and Ezekiel sees the heavens opened as he remains on the earth.
JT Quite so; there is a correspondence, I am sure, particularly with chapter 4 of Revelation. The Son of man is seen on earth among the candlesticks in chapter 1 of that book; in chapters 2 and 3 it is “the things that are” (that is the church period), “and the things that are about to be after these” Revelation 1: 19 would refer to [p. 5] chapter 4. The scene of operation is transferred to heaven, so John is caught up to heaven. We do not get that kind of thing here in Ezekiel, but rather a great system portrayed for us, which God has ordered for the maintenance of His government, Jerusalem having failed Him. Although the house of David has failed Him, He has this wonderful array of power among the gentiles; hence, it is the Son of man that is in mind; Christ in relation to the nations.
ARS Why is the first date connected with the reign of Josiah, for Ezekiel at this time was amongst the captives at the river Chebar?
JT Well, we might go back in our thoughts to what happened in Ireland over a hundred years ago and recognise how God brought about such wonderful recovery; but then, we may be in captivity now. The position is different, and it is humiliating. For, in Ezekiel’s day, one of the kings of Judah was in captivity, and he refers to that also in mentioning dates.
JS Going back a hundred years, we find most of the people of God in captivity, but a remnant was delivered, would you say?
JT Quite so.
B Your reference to Ezekiel and the word coming expressly to him is like what is said of the apostle Paul. The men that were with him at the time of his conversion saw the light, but they “heard not the voice of him that was speaking to me”, Acts 22: 9. Paul could record exactly what he heard in the message.
JT Quite so. In Acts 9: 7, it is said they heard the voice, but that would be in the sense of ‘sound’ as the margin reads. Saul heard words: he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why dost thou persecute me?”
WSS Would the second date given suggest the moral conditions that obtained at the time Ezekiel ministered? Reference has been made to the refusal of Jeremiah’s prophecy. Ezekiel evidently was one who [p. 6] had accepted it, and in those deplorable moral conditions there was this priest to whom the word of God came expressly. Is it not an encouragement to us at the present time that there are still possibilities?
JT Quite so; you would want to be a priest so that God could trust you with a message. The apostle Paul says, “the Spirit speaks expressly”, 1 Timothy 4: 1. It is an urgent matter. You want to be available to the Lord, and I believe that is the force of the expression “Ezekiel the priest”. Jeremiah was one of the priests, but Ezekiel is a distinctive priest, evidently characteristically so, so that God can trust him with this message.
The nearer we get to the beginning of that thirty years, the brighter things will be found to be. Ezekiel was reverting to a brighter period. Whether or not he had part in it we cannot definitely say; but it would recall the blessed time they had in the days of Josiah. One can understand how a priest of God would revert to such a time as that. Why not have times like it again?
Ques Will you say something more about the vision in contrast to speaking?
JT Well, what you see is one thing; what you say is another. Take Stephen, for instance. We are told that he saw the glory of God and Jesus, but he does not say that. He says, “Lo, I behold the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God”, Acts 7: 56. The account of the Spirit of God in verse 55 is: “But being full of the Holy Spirit, having fixed his eyes on heaven, he saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God” Acts 7: 55, but when Stephen spoke in testimony he called Him “Son of man”. The time had come to announce the truth as to the Lord’s position as the Son of man, which is a wider thought of Christ; His operations would now extend out to the whole race of man. So that the servant does not always say just what he sees. The levitical touch means that I know what to say. You find it constantly in Scripture with servants of God.
[p. 7] They see something and then present in testimony what is suitable at the moment.
Ques Paul also, in Acts 9, saw a vision. The Lord said to Ananias, “behold, he is praying, and has seen in a vision a man” Acts 9: 12. Is there any suggestion in the introduction of vision there of the setting aside of the speaking at Jerusalem?
JT The vision in Saul’s case was Ananias coming in and putting his hands on him. In our chapter, Ezekiel says, “the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God” Ezekiel 1: 1. Then we have the description of what he saw, and in order to grasp this we have to look over the chapter carefully. He says: “And I looked, and behold, a stormy wind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the look of glowing brass, out of the midst of the fire. Also out of the midst thereof, the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance: they had the likeness of a man. And every one had four faces, and every one of them had four wings. And their feet were straight feet; and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot; and they sparkled as the look of burnished brass. And they had the hands of a man under their wings on their four sides; and they four had their faces and their wings: their wings were joined one to another; they turned not when they went; they went every one straight forward. And the likeness of their faces was the face of a man; and they four had the face of a lion on the right side; and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; they four had also the face of an eagle. And their faces and their wings were parted above; two wings of every one were joined one to another, and two covered their bodies. And they went every one straight forward: whither the Spirit was to go, they went; they turned not when they went” (Ezekiel 1: 4 - 12).
It will be helpful for all, I think, to see that the general appearance of this great array is the appearance [p. 8] of a man. It is not the presentation of the beasts, but it is a question of man. There are the four heads of creation, but the general appearance has the likeness of a man. And then there is a man’s hand, and then the likeness of their faces was the face of a man. These three items help us to understand what is in mind; that they are not heartless, like the beasts of the gentile monarchies. Man is the characterising thought in them. The idea of “man” runs right through, both as to their general appearance and their faces and then the operative part — the hands — were the hands of a man. All is human.
JS Is this array of power in the living creatures connected with the movement of testimony from Jerusalem to Chaldea?
JT That is the thought; God has this immense power among the gentiles, and He is bringing Ezekiel into it. It is to give character to Ezekiel’s prophecy, as I hope we shall see as we go through the book. The “man” runs through the governmental dealings of God. The gentile monarchies are likened to beasts, but here the characterising feature is man. There is sympathy for men in it.
AFM Does it suggest special regard for men in contrast to the dealings of God with Israel? Israel was set aside, and now in the Son of man, God acts in affection towards recovery in the race of men.
JT Of course sympathetic consideration marked God’s dealings with Israel too. But here the threefold allusion to man is striking. Then finally a Man on the throne; supreme authority above is in Man. The first part of the description runs on to verse 12, where we have the living creatures and their wings moving with the Spirit. And then the general operative power in verses 13 and 14; there is no idea of presenting concreteness here. These are symbols; hence the frequency of the words “likeness” and “appearance”. The intent is to impress our minds with the ideas [p. 9] suggested. It is really what marks the agencies of the government of God. The operative part is most energetic and rapid and characterised by fire. And then we have, from verse 15 to the end of verse 21, the idea of wheels and unity in the movement, and the same spirit was in the wheels and in the living creature, and they all moved together; the wheels allude to the contact with the earth. This government makes contact with the earth, because wheels have to do with solid earth. And then, in verse 22, we have an expanse or firmament over the heads of the living creature, and above that expanse, a throne (verse 26). The whole domain of God’s operations would be suggested; the wheels on the earth, and then the expanse above, which has the look of a “terrible crystal”, so that we are impressed with the majesty of God, and the greatness, the incomprehensibleness of the means and sphere of His government. It is intended to subdue us and cause us to fear Him in all this. Then, over this, the throne, as it says: “And above the expanse that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone; and upon the likeness of the throne was a likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it. And I saw as the look of glowing brass, as the appearance of fire, within it round about; from the appearance of his loins and upward, and from the appearance of his loins and downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about. As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of Jehovah. And when I saw, I fell on my face, and I heard a voice of one that spoke” (verses 26 - 28).
The prophet is brought into all this, and he is engaged and hears a voice. It is all to prepare him for his mission.
Rem This would be a presentation of Christ?
JT Quite so; it is Christ, only here He is on the throne as a Man with affections — the appearance of [p. 10] the loins upward and downward carrying through the thought of man in the entire presentation of the matter.
Rem John, beholding Jesus as He walked, testified to Him as the Son of God; whereas Ezekiel here, was a witness of Him in the character of Son of man.
JT Exactly; Ezekiel now would be able to speak about what he saw. He would speak about Him, but, of course, under the limitations of Old Testament times (see 1 Peter 1: 10 - 12).
JS In chapter 1, Ezekiel is introduced as priest, yet spoken to as son of man in chapter 2.
JT Yes; he is to embody the spirit of all this. That is the idea of the recurrence of the words “likeness” and “appearance”, showing the formation of the prophet, especially in his intelligence, so that he could convey what God had in His mind.
JS It fits in remarkably with Stephen’s experience in Acts 7, as you have already mentioned.
CAM This likeness of man (verses 4 - 12), would have the effect of focusing our attention on man in relation to the whole realm of creation. This gives a sort of key thought; that God’s thoughts centre in manhood.
JT Quite so; Ezekiel is to be impressed with man now, instead of with Israel alone; that God has man in His mind.
FHL Is that the reason for emphasis of the number four?
JT I think so; it suggests what is universal.
Ques If we are to be workers together with God, we must understand how God operates — everything in all — and is this the vision of it?
JT It is to impress the servant with what God has in His mind. God is imparting what is in His mind, but it is conveyed by means of symbols. They are not concrete things, but appearing things that are wholly symbolic.
[p. 11] Ques Is there sufficient representation in these symbols, if properly understood, to provide for everything connected with government?
JT Exactly; you feel that things will be done, and done quickly — drastically when necessary — but all the time you are impressed with the idea of man. And then, I think the reference to the voice from above the expanse that was over the heads of the creatures is very beautiful. Verse 24 says, “when they stood, they let down their wings” Ezekiel 1: 24, then in verse 25 after the voice is mentioned it says again, “When they stood, they let down their wings” Ezekiel 1:25. These two statements are the same, but a voice comes between them. The repetition is of something that is to be taken into our souls; their wings are their locomotive power, but they have let them down. I believe the allusion is, that as having part in this great service, we are to be humble and let down our wings — to stand at attention. Let us be available and ready to be detained before God, and then we shall hear something. We are not told what the voice said, but we have the suggestion that in letting down our wings, there is a voice. The servant is to be exercised in godly fear; he is to be reverential. If one has gift and power in ministry, he is apt to go on in that, and forget to let down his wings to be detained before God. After all, it is that “the surpassingness of the power may be of God, and not from us”, 2 Corinthians 4: 7. And so there is the voice. We must get communications from heaven.
WSS Would you say Paul let down his wings at Corinth? He was with them “in weakness and in fear and in much trembling”, 1 Corinthians 2: 3.
JT Yes; you feel the necessity for this in your ministry; that you hear the voice, for you need a fresh communication from the Lord in serving. The repetition of the letting down of the wings is to stress the idea of humility. The wings are prominent and they make a tremendous noise. We are apt to think of the [p. 12] noise we are making, but that is not the end in view. In service we need to let down the wings, be quiet and listen to God, so that there will be a voice. I think that is seen at the banks of the Jordan in the blessed humiliation of Christ. How lowly He was! And then as He went up from the Jordan and was praying, there was a voice from heaven: “Thou art my beloved Son, in thee I have found my delight”, Luke 3: 21,22. There is a voice; and that is what we need in our ministry.
WSS There seems to be a resemblance in the opening of Ezekiel, as has already been remarked, to the opening of John’s gospel. “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated his glory)” (John 1: 14), as if in a day of departure such as Ezekiel’s and John’s day, there is to be the light of the glory of Christ’s Person.
JT Yes; the voice is referred to here, and then the glory of the Lord on the throne in the next section — the likeness of a throne — but it is above this terrible crystal-like expanse; so that this is an elevated view which would stress the greatness of Christ in the government of God. There is “the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone; and upon the likeness of the throne was a likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it” (Ezekiel 1: 26). As our minds absorb these great thoughts, Christ becomes greater and greater to us. This array of power in the creatures is below the firmament, but He is above it. The firmament is a great thing in itself. The difference between what is below and what is above is pronounced. It is as the look of the terrible crystal, which suggests that we are to be subdued and feel that we have to do with God in these matters, for it is a divine Person who sits on the throne. Our attention being called to the “loins” would point to the fact that although He is so great and glorious above, He has feelings and affections in relation to men.
JS [p. 13] Would the introduction of glowing brass and fire call attention to the need for self-judgment on our part?
JT I think so. You feel how drastic the means are in this array of governmental power.
JTJr Do you think that David, when he went in and sat before the Lord, would be subdued by it, and like the living creatures, there would be a letting down of his wings, and then taking account of all the greatness that was inside?
JT That is a good illustration; and what wonderful thoughts came into his mind about God!
WB-w It says their feet were straight feet. Does that mean that the ministers are to be guarded as to their feet and pathway as they serve?
JT Quite so.
Ques What relation has the movement of the wheels to the movement of the wings?
JT It is one great system. The wings appear to be the locomotive power; they make a great noise. It says, “And when they went, I heard the noise of their wings, like the noise of great waters, as the voice of the Almighty, a tumultuous noise, as the noise of a host: when they stood, they let down their wings” (Ezekiel 1: 24). The initial apostolic power, for instance, was very great, and everybody’s attention was called to the testimony, but then in letting down of the wings there was reverence and lowliness marking the apostles, and then other communications followed.
JS Would the wings be for movement in the air, and the wheels for movement on the earth?
JT Yes; there is power to mount up, but then there is contact with the earth; the government is heavenly, but there is contact here below.
FHL Should we not be impressed with the idea of going “straight forward”, also of being “lifted up”?
JT Quite so. Both these thoughts were exemplified in Christ.
WR Psalm 19: 1 says, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the expanse sheweth the work of his hands”.
JT That is the testimony in the heavens; it is always there. But here we have what is most extraordinary, and yet the prophet is to absorb it all into his soul; you get the idea of eating at the end of chapter 2, the idea of appropriation and assimilation of certain things. In the section, verses 26 - 28, our minds are focused on the appearance of Man on a throne; and it is said to be the appearance of the likeness of the glory of Jehovah, and the prophet says, “And when I saw, I fell on my face” (Ezekiel 1: 28). He is deeply affected by it. He is now, as it were, qualified for his service.
AFM The introductory part of this book would be preparatory for Ezekiel. All these great things coming before him so affected him that he fell on his face. And then in the next chapter the Spirit entered into him, when Jehovah spoke to him, and set him upon his feet.
JT He is now qualified, falling on his face, showing how humble and reverential he was. He says, “This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of Jehovah” Ezekiel 1: 28; that is, he puts it all into a few words. He understands that it is the glory of Jehovah in relation to His government here. “And when I saw, I fell on my face, and I heard a voice of one that spoke”. Ezekiel 1: 28. This sentence directs us back to the idea of “voice”. He is now qualified through the vision, and he is getting communications. So the next thing is, “he said unto me, Son of man, stand upon thy feet” (Ezekiel 2: 1.) He would be reminded of the straight feet of the cherubim as the voice uttered the word “feet”. He had feet, too; now the Spirit sets him on them.
JS And following this, would he be prepared to hear [p. 15] the voice?
JT I think he is already qualified; just as the voice comes in relation to the letting down of the wings, now Ezekiel falls on his face and hears a voice.
Ques Is there any suggestion of the covenant in verse 28?
JT Well, yes, in the broad sense in which the bow suggests covenant relations, I suppose. God’s covenant with His creation would be recalled.
ABP What is the thought in, “from the ... loins and upward from the ... loins and downward” Ezekiel 1: 27?
JT I think the allusion is to divine compassion in Christ. The description is “from the appearance of his loins”, alluding to feelings; compassionate feelings.
ABP Would there also be the direction of those feelings, as expressed Godward and manward?
JT That is the idea; you have in the same Person what refers to God and what refers to man — upward and downward. Then it goes on to say, “and I heard a voice of one that spoke” Ezekiel 1: 28. And then again in Ezekiel 3: 12, “the Spirit lifted me up, and I heard behind me the sound of a great rushing, saying, Blessed be the glory of Jehovah from his place!” — so that there are actual communications now.
GMacP Peter in his second epistle says, “such a voice being uttered to him by the excellent glory”; and then goes on to say, “this voice we heard uttered from heaven”, 2 Peter 1: 18.
JT Yes; when he was about to put off his tabernacle he could speak of what he had seen, being with Him on the holy mountain; not simply when there, but when with Him. The point is association with Christ there.
Ques Will you help us as to the distinction between a priest and a prophet? Do they run concurrently, or does one precede the other?
JT One may be a priest without being a prophet. Christians are all priests, but we are not all prophets. I think that morally the priest comes before the prophet.
[p. 16] Moses was a prophet. He had the privilege of priesthood, too. Entering into the holiest, he received divine communications. Every saint is a priest, as you know — “a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ”, 1 Peter 2: 5. The general thought is that we have access to God; so morally I think priesthood comes before prophecy. If I am not able to draw near to God, I shall not have a word from Him for the brethren. Prophecy is toward man.
WSS I was thinking, in regard to the last verse of chapter 1, “This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of Jehovah” Ezekiel 1: 28, how it would exercise us that we might be in line with these features of government and encourage us also that there might be conditions in which this glory may be apprehended.
JT Yes; Ezekiel is able to name it. He is able to name what he saw and to act rightly in regard to it; able to put it into smaller compass of expression. It is the appearance of the glory of Jehovah. He is not elated. He falls down. He is impressed with it, and that qualifies him, I think, for the further word: “Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I will speak with thee” (Ezekiel 2: 1); that is, qualification of the servant is in mind here, all the way through.
WSS Would you say the glory that is referred to here is a glory in the light of which we may live and move at the present time, requiring, of course, suited conditions on our side?
JT Each one, in his ministry, must have some contact with God in this way, secretly; that one may see the glory. You see something in relation to what God has in mind for you to do, which is designed to enable you to do it. It is right to fall down, but then He says, Stand up. You are to be used as on your own feet.
WFK Is the service of the living creatures completed in Revelation?
JT Well, you get them there with variations from those we are considering. When they give glory and [p. 17] honour and thanksgiving to Him that sits on the throne, the elders fall down and worship. The living creatures in Revelation have six wings; we are not told what they did with them, but we are told what they say. They celebrate Him that sits on the throne. We get much more than what is found in Ezekiel 1, for the elders worship when they celebrate, but here our mind is being focused on one man who is going to be used of God. And so God would use any of us, but we must be qualified to put a name on what is presented to us from God; we must be reverent in regard to it; not light about it, or elated, but lowly, and prepared to let down our wings, and fall down in the presence of God. And then the word will be to stand upon our feet, and God will speak and tell us what our missions are to be. That is the great lesson in chapter 2.
B Is there not a great similarity between the taking up of Ezekiel and the call of Jeremiah?
JT Quite so; only the grandeur of the display here is much greater.
APf Ezekiel is told, “Son of man, I send thee” Ezekiel 2: 3. Is that a further thought?
JT He is being commissioned. He has qualified in chapter 1 in the way he acted in relation to the glory. He named it and fell down, and then the word is, “Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I will speak with thee” Ezekiel 2: 1. One must change his position if he is to get any communication; and then he says, “the Spirit entered into me” Ezekiel 2: 2. How important this is! The Spirit of God is my strength now. “And the Spirit entered into me when he spoke unto me, and set me upon my feet; and I heard him that spoke unto me. And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to nations that are rebellious, which have rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me unto this very day; and these children are impudent and hard-hearted: I am sending thee unto [p. 18] them; and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah”, Ezekiel 2: 2 - 4. That is his commission.
AR Do you think we would have less difficulty in following the ministry that comes to us, if we were more exercised about listening in the power of the Spirit? It says the Spirit entered into Ezekiel.
JT That is the next thing to see here; for one spirit actuated the wheels and the living creatures. Wherever the Spirit was to go, they went. The point now is Ezekiel, an actual man, the others are merely symbols — likenesses — intended to make impressions on the prophet’s mind.
JS God has His communications on earth now through Ezekiel.
JT That is it. He says, in principle, You are going to have a hard time, but you are to go. There is nothing for the flesh in this at all. The Lord said, “the Son of man has not where he may lay his head”, Luke 9: 58. And then Ezekiel has to eat the roll; “And he said unto me, Son of man, eat what thou findest; eat this roll, and go, speak unto the house of Israel. So I opened my mouth, and he caused me to eat that roll. And he said unto me, Son of man, cause thy belly to eat, and fill thy bowels with this roll which I give thee. And I ate, and it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness” (Ezekiel 3: 1 - 3). This would signify that Ezekiel is moving with God in the matter.
We cannot go into all the details, but we should note the word “valley” (Ezekiel 3: 22): “And the hand of Jehovah was there upon me; and he said unto me, Arise, go forth into the valley, and there I will talk with thee”. The word “valley” suggests a descent — that we are to go down — and would include the suggestion of death. I am to go there, and I get a message there.
AFM As to the eating of the roll in Ezekiel 3, it was in Ezekiel’s mouth as honey for sweetness, and when John ate the little book of Revelation 10 it was in his mouth as honey; but when he had eaten it,
[p. 19] his belly was made bitter. Was it after having gone through so much sorrow and suffering in spirit in connection with his mission sympathetically?
JT I suppose the New Testament emphasises intelligence in the servant. John would discern what was involved, in the little book, for the saints of God. He would discern that it meant suffering for the saints, and that caused him sorrow. Here, the prophet is not seen as discerning that, although there were lamentations and woes. He is impressed with the sweetness of the word of God.
JS Would you say a word about the prophet’s movement here from the river Chebar to the valley?
JT Well, he is told to go. “And the hand of Jehovah was there upon me; and he said unto me, Arise, go forth into the valley” Ezekiel 3: 22. He was by the river Chebar. That was his own matter. He was there and saw the vision there, but now he is directed by God to go to the valley, and it meant that Ezekiel must go down, foreshadowing Christ going into death, for one has to understand what it is to go down into death, to be effective as a servant. The servant must go wherever God directs him. There is always divine significance in a direction of this kind.
Ques What about the glory following him in the end of verse 23?
JT “Arise, go forth into the valley; and there I will talk with thee” (Ezekiel 3: 22). He must go there or he will not get the word. “And I arose, and went forth into the valley, and behold, the glory of Jehovah stood there” (Ezekiel 3: 23). It is worth while going there to get the glory; to see it. “The glory of Jehovah stood there, like the glory which I saw by the river Chebar”. Ezekiel 3: 23. It is the same thing; it is now in the valley. “And I fell on my face” (Ezekiel 3: 23); he is again reverential.
WSS It is striking that Ezekiel, Daniel, Paul, and John all fell on their faces, or fell to the earth, and they were all told to stand on their [p. 20] feet.
JT I think the idea is that you are to be a man. Jehovah said to Job: “Gird up now thy loins like a man” (Job 38: 3). It is right to fall on your face as in the presence of God, but for service, a man is to be on his feet — balanced, ready for action. Joshua fell on his face, too, but God told him to get up. There are things to be done, Standing on your feet means that you are available to God as a man, because manhood is needed in these matters.
WSS Falling on our faces would be the result of the impression made upon us personally; standing on our feet would be for service in relation to that impression.
JT One is told to do it. God puts one on his feet, “And the Spirit entered into me, and set me upon my feet” (Ezekiel 3: 24). It is in the power of the Spirit that one stands.
ANW As falling on his face, he heard the voice; but in standing up, he heard Him.
WH-w Do you think Ezekiel gets his gift in chapter 1; in chapter 2 his commission; and in chapter 3, the word?
JT Quite so; he is now actually in the place of death. It is like the apostle’s experience preceding the writing of 2 Corinthians. He had gone down, and that is the secret, I believe, of the peculiar character of the second epistle as compared with the first. He had gone down. He says, “We ourselves had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not have our trust in ourselves, but in God who raises the dead; who has delivered us from so great a death, and does deliver”, 2 Corinthians 1: 9.
RWS Ezekiel says, “And I went in bitterness, in the heat of my spirit” (Ezekiel 3: 14). Did that involve the valley?
JT The bitterness reminds us of the apostle’s saying, “if against my will”. There is nothing for the flesh in all this; indeed, it is against the flesh. He says there, “And the Spirit lifted me up, and took me away; and I went in bitterness, in the heat of my spirit, and the hand of Jehovah was strong upon me. And I came to them of the captivity at Tel-abib, that dwelt by the river Chebar, and I sat where they sat; and I sat there astonied among them seven days” (Ezekiel 3: 14, 15). What an experience that was among the captives! Think of the bitterness of his spirit; but then he comes out in power.
Ques Paul speaks of the greatness of the revelations in the second epistle, and then he goes on to speak about the thorn that was given to him for the flesh. Is that a kindred thought to what we have here; something to modify the effect of the greatness of the revelation upon him?
JT Yes. He says, “when I am weak, then I am powerful”, 2 Corinthians 12: 10. That is what the word “valley” would imply. “And the Spirit entered into me, and set me upon my feet; and he spoke with me, and said unto me, Go, shut thyself within thy house. And thou, son of man, behold, they shall put bands upon thee, and shall bind thee therewith, and thou shalt not go out among them. And I will make thy tongue cleave to the roof of thy mouth, that thou shalt be dumb, and shalt not be to them a reprover; for they are a rebellious house. And when I speak with thee, I will open thy mouth, and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: He that heareth, let him hear; and he that forbeareth, let him forbear: for they are a rebellious house” (Ezekiel 3: 24 - 27).
What an experience he had there! Instead of giving powerful ministry, he has to shut himself up, and they put bands on him, and moreover, his tongue would cleave to the roof of his mouth. What an experience that was! Who of us knows anything about that? But that is what is involved in the valley, and it is in order that in due course God will open his mouth to speak to a people who perhaps will not hear him at all.
[p. 22] It is to bring out the wonderful patience of God; that God is ready to testify to them in spite of their rebelliousness.
JS All this glory is shown him over against the rebellious condition of the people.
JT You can see the necessity for it. What power you need to minister under these circumstances; when people do not want to hear you!