264 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279

The presence of YHWH in exile according to the

Book of Ezekiel, with special reference to the
meaning of the expression ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬in Ezekiel
11:16
PIETER DE VRIES (VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT, AMSTERDAM)
ABSTRACT

In Ezek 11:16, we find the promise that YHWH will be for the people
of Israel in exile a ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬. This promise of YHWH is an answer to
the desperate exclamation of the prophet: “Ah, Lord God! Will you
make a full end of the remnant of Israel?” (Ezek 11:13b).1 In this
article, I investigate not only whether we must understand this
expression as “a little sanctuary” or “a sanctuary for a while”, but
also in what sense we must understand the presence of YHWH among
the exiles in the form of a sanctuary.

Ezekiel was the only Hebrew prophet mentioned in the HB to

receive his calling in exile. The kernel of his message was that hope
for Israel would exclusively be realized through the exilic community.
The readers of his book are urged to distance themselves from the
past and orientate themselves on the future. In his second vision, the
prophet sees the glory of YHWH depart the temple. This is the very
time at which he receives the promise for the exilic community that
YHWH will be for them a ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬. This expression can be
understood both as a small and a temporal sanctuary.
In exile, both the prophet himself and the oracles of hope he
receives mediate the presence of YHWH for the exilic community.
Hence, we can say that the message of the prophet Ezekiel is the
embodiment of the ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬, and especially with the final vision of
the return of the glory of YHWH to a completely new and purified
temple, Ezekiel the prophet functions as a priest. This vision gives
hope to the exiles in their present condition. It also makes clear that
when that is fulfilled, a ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬will be finally be a thing of the
past. The temporary character of the ‫ ִמ ְקדׁש‬will then definitely have
elapsed, and the presence of YHWH will no longer be a reduced
presence.

* Submitted: 19/09/2017; peer-reviewed: 24/12/2017; accepted: 12/02/2018. Pieter

de Vries, “The presence of YHWH in exile according to the Book of Ezekiel, with
special reference to the meaning of the expression ‫ ְמעַט ִמ ְקדָּׁ֣ש‬in Ezekiel 11:16,” OTE 31
no. 1 (2018): 264-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17159/2312-3621/2018/v31n1a13
1
The English translation I follow is the ESV.
 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279 265

A INTRODUCTION
No event before the Common Era had such a disrupting effect on the people of
Israel as the destruction of Jerusalem with its temple of YHWH. A great number
of the people who survived the destruction were deported to Babylon.2 Even
before the destruction of Jerusalem, a substantial part of the upper classes had
already gone into exile.
What was the cause of the exile? Why did YHWH not prevent the
destruction of Jerusalem and the temple? Was there any future for the people of
Israel? And if the answer to the latter was affirmative, could anything concretely
be said about this future? Such were the questions with which the people of Israel
wrestled in exile.
We feel the impact of the exile in much of the HB or the OT: either as
something foreseen, a present or a past reality. As a foreseen and present reality,
this is especially true of the Major Prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. The
HB interprets the Babylonian exile as the fulfilment of prior promises of
judgment and blessing. We may mention especially in this regard the curses and
blessings of the Holiness Code in Leviticus and in Deuteronomy. 3 Instead of
ending with judgement, however, all the prophetic books culminate in hope and
joyful expectation. That hope is expressed in language which makes increasingly

2
I do not enter here into the discussion as to what the percentage of the people who
remained in the land had been. Certainly, a substantial number remained, as indicated
by archaeological data. A close reading shows us that this is not in contradiction to the
HB. Cf. Kenneth A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2003), 67: “The idea that the Babylonians carried everybody from both
Jerusalem and Judah off to Babylon is true neither archaeologically nor to the biblical
text itself.” However, the HB or OT represents with regard to the exile almost
exclusively the viewpoint of the exiles and not of the people who remained in the land.
From the perspective of the exiles, a theological explanation is given of the destruction
of Jerusalem and the first temple. The book of Lamentations is a notable exception, but
the explanation given there is the same as in other texts of the HB. Lamentations most
likely reflects the feelings of people who survived the Babylonian siege and remained
in the land.
3
Especially in the book of Ezekiel, we see a close relationship between the
prophecies of Ezekiel and the Holiness Code. Margaret S. Odell, Ezekiel, SHBC
(Macon: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 2005), 162, 284, 291, 487, 488; Michael A.
Lyons, From Law to Prophecy: Ezekiel’s Use of the Holiness Code, LHBOTS 507
(New York: T & T Clark, 2009); Pieter de Vries, The Kābôd of Yhwh in the Old
Testament: With Particular Reference to the Book of Ezekiel, SSN 65 (Leiden: Brill,
2015), 262ff.
266 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279

plain that the future reality would far surpass whatever had been seen heretofore.4
This is especially true of Ezekiel.
More than Isaiah and his near contemporary Jeremiah, Ezekiel must be
characterized as a prophet of the exile. He is the only of the Scripture prophets
who was called to his office in the Babylonian exile; an exile that according to
the view represented in the book of Ezekiel had started already with the
deportation of king Jehoiakchin and a section of the elite of Jerusalem in 598/597
BCE.
What is true of the person of Ezekiel is also true of the book that bears his
name. The whole book is structured from the viewpoint of the reality and cause
of the exile and its reversal. YHWH is portrayed as the sole performer both of
the exile and its reversal. The exile was not caused because Babylon or its gods
were mightier than YHWH, but rather its cause was the sin of the people of
Israel.5 Idolatry, social and sexual sins and sabbath violation are particularly
mentioned in this regard. As a priest who was called by YHWH to be his prophet,
Ezekiel prefers cultic terms for describing sin, even when its character is not
cultic.6
Likewise, when the prophets predict the reversal of the exile, he uses a
fair preponderance of cultic terms (see Ezek 36). Ezekiel’s final vision of the

4
Ronald E. Clements, “Law and Promise,” in Old Testament Theology: Flowering
and Future, ed. Ben C. Ollenburger (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2004), 167.
5
Ezekiel shows a marked preference for the expression ‫( ֵבָּ֣ית ִי ְשר ֵאל‬house of Israel).
“House of Israel” usually signifies Judah and Jerusalem and its inhabitants, but it also
denotes the exilic community. This latter use is an indication of a hopeful future for
Israel. “Israel” is used 186 times, “house of Israel” 83 times (out of a total of 147 times
in the HB), “Judah” 15 times, and “house of Judah” 5 times. The terms “house of Judah”
and “house of Israel” are used in parallel for the citizens of Jerusalem in Ezek 8:6, 10-
12, 17. The terms “elders of Israel” and “elders of Judah” are used indiscriminately in
Ezek 8:1; 20:1, 3 for the leaders of the exilic community. Although in Ezek 9:9; 25:3;
27:17 Israel and Judah are mentioned alongside each other, there is no indication that
they refer to two different entities. The only exception to this is Ezek 4:4-6; in the
dichotomy described there, “Israel” refers to the northern kingdom and “Judah” to the
southern kingdom. In Ezek 37:17, “Judah” is used for the southern kingdom and
“Joseph” and “Ephraim” for the northern kingdom. The really important distinction in
the book of Ezekiel is that between the community in the homeland and in Babylon.
The future belongs to the latter community.
6
When Ezek 1:1 states that the prophet was called in the thirtieth year, I think this is
a reference to the prophet’s age (his thirtieth year). Ezekiel was called to be a prophet
at the age at which if he had been in Jerusalem, he would have been anointed a priest
(Num 4:23). Leslie C. Allen, Ezekiel 1-19, WBC 28 (Dallas: Word Books, 1994), 39-
40; Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, AB 22 (Garden City: Doubleday, 1983), 39;
Walther Zimmerli, Ezechiel 1-24, BKAT 13/1 (Neukirchen–Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1996), 40ff.; de Vries, Kābôd, 237-238.
 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279 267

return of the glory of YHWH to a new temple and a completely renewed land
inhabited by a completely renewed people is the climax of his prophecies, and
that not only structurally but also with regard to its content. The reversal of the
exile is solely ascribed to YHWH. His only reason for giving Israel a new and
glorious future is that he is determined to vindicate his own name. The
repentance of the people does not precede but rather follows the gift of the
renewing spirit of YHWH to his people.
Even more radically than his near-contemporary Jeremiah, Ezekiel
proclaimed in the name of YHWH that fulfilment of the promise of the glorious
future would take different forms than many of their contemporaries had
imagined. This future was not for the inhabitants of Jerusalem or Judah, either
before or after the destruction of Jerusalem, but was for the exiles in Babel and
their offspring.7 For Ezekiel, the glorious future of Israel is first and foremost a
future with the glory of YHWH in its midst.
Noteworthy is that for Ezekiel, the actual exile started not with the
destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, but with the deportation of king
Jehoiachin.8 Ezekiel wrote his book to interpret for the exiles in Babylon the
disaster of the exile. His message offered them hope for their future that far
surpassed their imagination.9 The book itself has its origins completely in exile;10
this is another way in which it distinguishes itself from the book of Jeremiah.

7
In the book of Jeremiah, too, we see that YHWH will bring the future of salvation
through the means of deportation to Babylon. This is stated explicitly in Jer 24, 27 and
29. The narrative of the assassination of Gedaliah (Jer 41-44) shows that all other ways
will come to a dead end. Eric Peels, “The Assassination of Gedaliah (Jer 40:7-41:18),”
in Exile and Suffering, ed. Bob Becking and David Human, OtSt 50 (Leiden: Brill,
2009), 99-101.
8
The dates in the book of Ezekiel are given as reckoned from this deportation.
9
The book of Ezekiel is actually about what YHWH told the prophet to say, not what
Ezekiel said to the people. More than any of the other prophetic books, the book of
Ezekiel was immediately committed to writing. We must assume that the prophet’s
written compositions were read aloud after delivery. Ezekiel must be seen not only as
prophet and priest but also as a writer. His first delivery of much of his message was
directly in writing, i.e. there was never a time when his message was free of the written
form. It is telling in this connection that he had to eat a scroll when he was first called
(Ezek 2:1-3; cf. 24:1-2 and 37:16). Ellen F. Davis, Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality
and the Dynamics of Discourse in Ezekiel’s Prophecy, JSOTSup 78 (Sheffield:
Sheffield University Press, 1989), 45. That does not mean that we have to deny that the
written book derives from an oral exchange (Thomas Renz, The Rhetorical Function of
the Book of Ezekiel, VTSup 76, Leiden: Brill, 1999), 16.
10
I think this is true of the whole book, the chapter on Gog and the final vision
included. I do not deny that we see signs of editing in the book of Ezekiel, but even this
editing can be dated to the exile and was perhaps already partly done by the prophet
himself.
268 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279

Thomas Renz rightly called attention to the strongly rhetorical character

that the book of Ezekiel has in the form we have it. Readers are called upon to
distance themselves from Israel’s past. They are invited to identify themselves
with the exilic community at the river Chebar in Babel and to orientate
themselves, just as this exilic community was expected to do, radically towards
a totally new and brilliant future.11
The hope of the future is exclusively ascribed to YHWH and not to
possibilities or capacities of the exiles or their offspring. It is significant to note
that the last time Jerusalem is mentioned in the book of Ezekiel is when a
messenger announcing its destruction arrives among the exiles in Babylon. The
name of the future new city is not Jerusalem but ‫( יְ הוָ֥ה ׁשמה‬YHWH is there).
B WHAT ABOUT THE PRESENCE OF YHWH IN BABEL?
The exilic community and all readers of the book of Ezekiel are warned to
distance themselves from Israel’s past and to orientate their lives radically to the
future promised by YHWH. But can we say anything about the condition of the
exiles in Babylon with regard to the relationship of YHWH with them? In Ezek
8-11, we read that the prophet is transported in spirit from the community of Tel
Aviv at the river Chebar in Babylon to the temple in Jerusalem. In his second
vision, he sees with his own eyes how the glory of YHWH leaves the temple.12
The description of the departure is described in four phases or scenes in all.13

11
Renz, Rhetorical Function, 70, 165, 178.
12
de Vries, Kābôd, 273. William Tooman, “Ezekiel’s Radical Challenge to
Inviolability,” ZAW 121/4 (2009): 498-514, has argued that the vision of Ezek 8-11
does not depict the abandonment of the temple by the glory of YHWH, but rather a
visitation by the glory of YHWH to destroy it. His main point is that the glory of YHWH
had already been depicted outside the temple when Ezekiel was called (Ezek 1-3). For
the prophet’s second vision, the glory of YHWH transports him from Babylon to
Jerusalem (Ezek 8:2). I do not find Tooman’s arguments conclusive. The fact that the
glory of YHWH could manifest itself outside the temple does not mean that it actually
resided in it. The final vision, in particular, makes clear that the temple is the place
where the glory of YHWH resides on earth. The abandonment described in Ezek 8-11
is reversed. The difference with the former situation is that the glory of YHWH will not
leave the temple any more (Ezek 44:1-2).
13
First, the glory of YHWH moves from the cherub(s) above the mercy-seat to the
temple threshold (Ezek 9:3). This description is repeated with the remark that the temple
was filled with the cloud and its court with the brightness of the glory of YHWH (Ezek
10:4). In the third scene, we read that the glory of YHWH goes up from the threshold
of the temple to the vehicle (throne with cherubs as throne-bearers) ready waiting, and
stands upon it (Ezek 10:18-19). Finally it is stated that that the glory of YHWH went
up from the midst of the city and stood on the mountain that is to the east of the city
(Ezek 11:22-23).
 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279 269

YHWH departs from Jerusalem and its inhabitants, but what about the
exiles in Babylon? According to Ezek 9:2, while the prophet is in spirit in the
court of the temple, the six men (angelic beings) appear out of the north with a
slaughter weapon in their hands.14 The prophet also sees a seventh heavenly
figure, clothed in linen.15 This heavenly scribe is tasked with placing a mark upon
those inhabitants of Jerusalem who sigh under the religious, cultic and social
injustice of their day. Even before the judgment has been executed, the first phase
of the departure of the glory of YHWH is mentioned (Ezek 9:3). When the
judgment is executed by the six heavenly figures, the prophet asks in Ezek 9:8b
in despair whether even the remnant (‫)ׁש ֵא ִרית‬ְ of Israel will be given over to
destruction; a question he repeats in Ezek 11:13b. If even the remnant is
completely destroyed, the judgment will be completely irreversible.16
The answer of YHWH in Ezek 9:9-10 seems to imply that the prophet’s
fear is well-founded: YHWH says that he will not spare, nor have pity, because
guilt of the house of Israel and Judah is exceedingly great. Between the third
(Ezek 10:18-19) and the fourth phase (Ezek 11:22-23) of the departure of the
glory of YHWH, the prophet for the second time cries out in despair in

14
The north is the direction from which the Assyrian and Babylonian enemies came
to the land of Israel from Mesopotamia. Hence, the north is connected with destruction.
15
Linen was characteristic clothing both for priests (Exod 28:29-42) and for heavenly
beings (Dan 10:5; 12:6-7). Here, we must think of the figure that does service in the
heavenly Temple.
16
In the HB, the concept of the remnant (mostly: ‫ׁש ֵא ִרית‬/sometimes: ְ ‫)ׁשאר‬ ְ is
developed in connection with the falling away of the people of Israel from YHWH and
his service. The first usage of the term in the HB in its canonical form is found in the
narrative of the Flood. According to Gen 7:32b: “Only Noah was left (‫)וַ ִי ָּׁ֧ש ֶאר‬, and those
with him in the ark.” In the history of Israel as a people in the land of Canaan, we find
its earliest expression in the narratives of Elijah. YHWH assures Elijah: “Yet I will
leave seven thousand in Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Baal, and every
mouth that has not kissed him.” (‫עו וְ ִה ְׁש ַא ְר ִ ָ֥תי‬ ּ֙ ‫ל־ה ִב ְר ַכיִ ם ֲא ֶ ֶׁׁ֤שר לא־כ ְר‬
ַ ‫ְב ִי ְשר ֵ ֵ֖אל ִׁש ְב ַעָּ֣ת ֲאל ִ ִ֑פים כ‬
‫ל־ה ַּ֔ ֶפה ֲא ֶ ָׁ֥שר לא־נ ַ ֵׁ֖שק לו׃‬
ַ ‫) ַל ַַּ֔ב ַעל וְ ָ֨כ‬. The remnant idea is most articulated among the prophets
of the eighth century BCE, beginning with Amos. The remnant motive plays a
significant role in the book of Isaiah. Jeremiah, who lived during the end of the pre-
exilic period and the beginning of the exilic period, makes the most extensive use of
the root ‫ׁשאר‬. In the book of Jeremiah, the noun ‫ ְׁש ֵא ִרית‬usually designates the survivors
left behind in Jerusalem by their conquerors. This remnant is insignificant or will be
totally destroyed. Hope for the future is connected with the exiles in Babylon. The word
‫ ְׁש ֵא ִרית‬can be used of them also (Jer 23:3; 31:7; 50:20). However, Jeremiah seems to
prefer the word ‫( גלות‬exiles) when speaking about the positive future of the exiles (Jer
24:5; 28:4, 6; 29:4, 16, 20).
270 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279

Ezek 11:13b: “Ah, Lord YHWH, will you make a full end of the remnant of
Israel?” In fact, the second cry is more urgent than the first.17
Only after this second cry of despair YHWH assures the prophet that this
fear is unfounded. YHWH promises not only that he will restore Israel and gather
the exiles out of the countries where they have been scattered, but also that he
will be a ‫( ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬temporary or little sanctuary) for the exiles in Babylon
(Ezek 11:14ff.). Perhaps it not without significance that the glory of YHWH
when departing is seen for the last time by the prophet as it hovers on the
mountain that is to the east of Jerusalem (the Mount of Olives) (Ezek 11:23). The
glory of YHWH departs in an eastward direction, which is in the direction of
Babylon, where the exiles live. So the fourth stage contains the veiled hint of a
presence of YHWH among the exiles in Babylon; this provides an indication as
ִ 18
to the meaning of the ‫מ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬.
C EZEKIEL 11:16: TWO WAYS TO UNDERSTAND THE
EXPRESSION ‫ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬
In Ezek 11:26, YHWH promises explicitly to the prophet that he will be a ‫ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש‬
‫ ְמ ַעט‬for the exiles. In the first place, I note that the book of Ezekiel makes great
use of older traditional material. In several instances, this must have been
material that was also available in written form.19 If we can rely upon the MT at
Isa 8:14, it therefore seems quite likely that we can hear an allusion to this text
of Isaiah in Ezek 11:26.20 In the context of the threats posed to Judah by Syria
17
In the first cry, the prophet uses the hip‘il of the verb ‫( ׁש ַחת‬destroy), and in the
second the qal of the verb ‫( כלה‬completely destroy/make a full end of).
18
In the book of Ezekiel, the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH is never directly related to ‫מ ְקדׁש‬. ִ When
directly related to the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH, the sanctuary is always called ‫( ַַּ֫ביִ ת‬house) (Ezek
9:3; 10:4, 18, 19; 43:4, 5; 44:4). I do not suggest that the word ‫ ִמ ְקדׁש‬as such suggests
a reduced presence, for it is also used when in Ezek 37:26, 28 a new sanctuary is
promised. Nevertheless, it remains noteworthy that the word ‫ ַַּ֫ביִ ת‬for the new temple is
reserved for the final vision in connection with the return of the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH.
19
I shall give two examples in which it is very likely that the prophet had access to
written material. The description of the situation on the Day of YHWH in Ezek 7:19 is
almost completely comparable to that given in Zeph 1:18. In the portrayal of the
spiritual condition of the people of Israel, the book of Ezekiel is congruent with the
priestly code of the Pentateuch and particularly with the Holiness Code (Lev 17-26).
Especially, there is a close connection between Ezek 4-6 and the curses of the covenant
in Lev 26. Both Avi Hurvitz, A Linguistic Study of the Relationship between the Priestly
Source and the Book of Ezekiel: A New Approach to an Old Problem, CahRB 20 (Paris:
Gabalda, 1982), and Mark F. Rooker, Biblical Hebrew in Transition: The Language of
the Book of Ezekiel, JSOTSup 90 (Sheffield: Sheffield University Press, 1990) have
shown that the language of the Holiness Code predates the language of the book of
Ezekiel.
20
The conjectures ‫מוקׁש‬ֵ (snare) or ‫( ַמ ְק ִׁשיר‬cause of difficulty) have been suggested.
Targum Jonathan has but ‫( פורען‬vengeance/avenger). The MT is clearly the harder
 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279 271

and Northern Israel in the latter half of the eighth century BCE, the prophet
assures the inhabitants of Jerusalem that YHWH himself will be for them a
sanctuary, a place of refuge.21
We can interpret the expression ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬in Ezek 11:26 in two ways: we
can understand it either temporally (a little while, temporary) or quantitatively
(not large).22 Perhaps both elements are intended. It is the latter that will have to
bear the emphasis: the presence of YHWH and his ‫ כבוד‬with the exiles are small
in comparison with his presence in the temple prior to his departure from it. We
have to do with a reduced presence of YHWH. Nevertheless, he will be present,
and that is a message of hope. Another consideration supporting the hopefulness
of the message is that we may also see in ‫ ְמ ַעט‬a hint that the exile will not last
interminably.
In Ezek 11:16, the place of worship is personalized. If we reject the MT
of Isa 8:14, then Ezek 11:16 is the only place in the HB where YHWH himself
is said to be a sanctuary. YHWH promises to be for the exiles what the temple
had been for them heretofore in Jerusalem.23 As long as the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH
resided in the temple, this oracle could not have any real significance; once the
prophet has seen in his second vision that the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH leaves the temple,
this oracle is highly significant and a source of hope for the exiles.

reading and makes excellent sense. The LXX agrees with the MT and translates
ἁγίασμα but puts a negative before the ensuing parallels. The MT presupposes here that
the attitude the inhabitants of Jerusalem take towards YHWH will determine how they
experience him.
21
Garry V. Smith, Isaiah 1-39, NAC 15a (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Academic,
2007), 227, points out the parallel with Ezek 11:16.
22
‫ ְמ ַעט‬can be a substantive but is also used appositional-adjectivally or adverbially.
In Ezek 11:16 it is either being used adjectivally or adverbially. If we understand ‫ְמ ַעט‬
as an adjective in Ezek 11:16, we must translate ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬as “a little/small sanctuary”;
compare ‫( ֵעזֶ ר ְמעט‬a little help) in Dan 11:24. However, ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬may also be
understood adverbially, either temporally “for a little while” – alluding to the limited
duration of the exile, or quantitatively – “to a limited extent.” The adverbial renderings
better suit the context. If we compare leading translations, we can see that several
translators have made differing choices here.
Compare the following translations:
LXX: καὶ ἔσομαι αὐτοῖς εἰς ἁγίασμα μικρὸν.
VULGATE: ero eis in sanctificationem modicum.
KJV: yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary.
NIV: yet for a little while I have been a sanctuary for them.
ESV: yet I have been a sanctuary to them for a while.
JPS: and I have become to them a diminished sanctity.
23
We can moreover understand the ‫מ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬,
ִ in light of Jer 29:12-14, as being the
closeness of YHWH experienced by the exiles in prayer.
272 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279

The kernel of the promise of which a ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬is the harbinger is the
covenant formula, which is cited in its full form in Ezek 11:20b: “And they shall
be my people, and I will be their God” (‫אֹלהים‬
ִ ‫יו־לי ְל ַּ֔עם וַ ֲא ִִ֕ני ֶא ְה ֶיָ֥ה ל ֶ ֵ֖הם ֵל‬
ָּ֣ ִ ‫)וְ ה‬. YHWH
will remain faithful to his covenant with Israel. The exiles can be sure that in
accordance with his covenant loyalty, YHWH will reverse the exile (cf. Ezek
16:62). He is loyal to his covenant despite Israel’s unfaithfulness. This assurance
is already a form of ‫מ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬.
ִ
D HOW YHWH WILL BE A SANCTUARY FOR THE EXILIC
COMMUNITY
How are we to understand the kind of presence that YHWH will have in the
exile? The ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬should in the first place be understood in terms of the ‫כבוד‬
of YHWH, which according to the prophet’s calling-vision is well able to appear
in Babylon. The calling of Ezekiel is an indication that in some sense the prophet
mediates the presence of YHWH in exile (Ezek 1-3).24 It is a sign of the fact that
YHWH has not completely left the exiles. After the six executioners have done
their work, the prophet starts Ezek 9:8a with the acknowledgement: ‫אׁש ַ ֵ֖אר ִ֑א ִני‬ֲ ‫וְ ֵנ‬.25
This expression can be understood as “I was left by myself” or “I alone was left.”
I suggest the second interpretation and see here again an indication that the
prophet mediates the presence of YHWH in exile. That impression is reinforced
by how the prophet here – unusually – uses the personal pronoun ‫ ֲא ִני‬of himself.
In the book of Ezekiel, that little word is reserved almost exclusively for
YHWH. Of the 169 times that ‫ ֲא ִני‬occurs in Ezekiel, all but nine of the mentions
refer to YHWH. Apart from in Ezek 9:8, ‫ ֲא ִני‬refers to the prophet in Ezek 1:1;
8:1; and 12:11. The profundity of the expression ‫אׁש ַ ֵ֖אר ִ֑א ִני‬
ֲ ‫ וְ ֵנ‬is partly indicated
by the fact that this is the only time in the book of Ezekiel that ‫ ֲא ִני‬is used of the
prophet in a verb sentence. The three other sentences where ‫ ֲא ִני‬is used for the
prophet are nominal sentences. Noting the correspondence between Ezek 9:8a
and Ezek 11:13ff., we can conceive of the little sanctuary as the prophet himself,
who has been given to see the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH in exile and through whose
prophecies of salvation YHWH is close to the exiles.
Later, we read expressly that the prophet is a sign (‫)מופת‬ֵ for the exiles
(Ezek 12:6, 11; 24:24, 27). He is not only a sign of judgment but also of hope.
This hope has to do with the fact that after the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet’s

24
In the traditional Jewish exegesis, ‫ ִמ ְקדש ְמ ַעט‬is taken to mean the synagogue. We
find this interpretation as early as Targum Jonathan. However, there is no proof for that
notion: the first indications of the presence of synagogues are several centuries after the
exile.
25
The nip‘al of the verb ‫ ׁשאר‬in the first part of Ezek 9:8 has a relationship with the
noun ‫ ְׁש ֵא ִרית‬in the second part. The clause ִ‫אׁש ַ ֵ֖אר ִ֑אנ‬
ֲ ‫ וְ ֵנ‬is not translated in the LXX. We
must assume that the words did not feature in the Hebrew manuscript used by the
translator of the LXX.
 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279 273

silence ends (Ezek 24:24, 27; 33:22). From now on, his message is exclusively a
message of hope.
E THE SILENCE OF THE PROPHET AND ITS ENDING
If we relate the promise of the ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬to Ezekiel and his message of hope, it
is clear that we must pay attention in this context to his silence beginning seven
days after his having been called (Ezek 3:24-27). 26 It finally ends when he hears
the news of the fall of Jerusalem (Ezek 33:22). The passages on the silence of
the prophet confront us with some difficulties. Gerhard Fohrer and Walther
Zimmerli are of the opinion that the words in 3:24b-27 about the prophet’s
muteness are secondary and ought to be moved to a place after 24:26b.27 These
OT scholars believe that these words obtained their placement in 3:24b-27 in
order to accentuate the muteness.
Berend Maarsingh believes that there were two distinct periods of
muteness: the first when his prophetic work commenced and the second, which
lasted 175 days, around the fall of Jerusalem.28 According to Ellen F. Davis,
Ezekiel’s muteness is metaphoric for the trend towards immediately writing
down prophetic messages. The prophetic message comes to Ezekiel in the form
of a text; the digested scroll (Ezek 2:9ff.) must speak through him.29
Nevertheless, if we follow this view, the actual silence of the prophet remains
unexplained.
I suggest that Ezekiel’s silence means that he remained at home and spoke
only to the elders who came to him. We must translate 3:27a iteratively: “every
time I address you, I lose your tongue.”30 Seven days after his calling, the prophet

26
The period of seven days between the calling of the prophet and his initiation
corresponds to the time of separation for those who were being consecrated priests (Lev
8:33ff.). This is an indication that the calling of Ezekiel to prophet hood has the traits
of a priestly dedication. Henry L. Ellison, Ezekiel: The Man and His Message (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), 29; Thomas J. Betts, Ezekiel the Priest: A Custodian of Tôrâ,
StBibLit 74 (New York: Peter Lang, 2005), 47ff. Ezekiel’s silence, too, is priestly in
character: the priests were expected to be silent as they carried out the sacrificial service.
Israel Knohl, The Sanctuary of Silence: The Priestly Torah and the Holiness School
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995).
27
Georg Fohrer, Ezechiel, HAT 13 (Tübingen: Mohr, 1955), 26); Zimmerli, Ezechiel
1-24, 106ff.
28
Berend Maarsingh, Ezechiël, Vol 1, POuT (Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1985), 1:50.
29
My translation. The ESV has “But when I speak with you, I will open your mouth.”
Cf. Davis, Swallowing the Scroll, 50ff.
30
Allen, Ezekiel 1-19, 63; Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25-48
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 158; Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, 102; De Vries, Kābôd,
258.
274 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279

hears that he will not be able to speak but will be dumb. The muteness of the
prophet is one of a trio of restrictions relating to his forthcoming actions.31
When the prophet opens his mouth before the fall of Jerusalem, it is
usually for prophecies of judgments to be declared in each case. Ezekiel is merely
the mouthpiece of YHWH. When Ezekiel speaks, YHWH is speaking, and when
Ezekiel is silent, YHWH keeps silent. While the prophet is mute, he cannot act
as an ‫מוכ ַיח‬ ִ 32 The prophet is not given powers to play a mediator’s role.33
ִ ‫איׁש‬.
One can only either resist the message of God’s judgments or accept them.34 The
judgments as such are irreversible. Repentance is no longer a possibility, so that
YHWH will not carry them out. For Ezekiel’s muteness, we find a parallel in
Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s older contemporary: Jeremiah was not permitted to intercede
for the people (Jer 7:16; 11:14; 14:11).
Only once the veracity of his prophecies of doom has been borne out does
Ezekiel speak openly and in public (Ezek 24:25-27; 33:21-22). The prophet’s
muteness constitutes a prelude to the departure of the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH. When his
tongue is loosened again, this is a harbinger of the return of the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH.
After Ezek 33 we find no longer a message judgment for Israel, but only a
message of hope.
F THE ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬AND THE ORACLES OF HOPE IN EZEKIEL 34-
48
How did the prophet Ezekiel and the oracles YHWH give him as a ‫ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬
function in exile? I start with the fact that is highly significant here that the call
of Ezekiel to prophethood has priestly features.35 As a prophet, Ezekiel diagnoses
Israel’s problem in priestly terms.36 He offers a solution using priestly traditions.
The promises made in Ezek 3:18ff., 18:4ff. and 33:1ff. that the just and the
repentant will live, have as their background the casuistical, priestly laws.
31
The other two restrictions are that he must remain at home from now on and he must
be bound.
32
The word combination ‫מוכ ַיח‬
ִ ‫ ִאיׁש‬is specific to Ezek. It can be compared with ‫נ ִביא‬
‫ ִאיׁש‬in Judg 6:8.
33
In the wisdom literature, we encounter the ‫מוכ ַיח‬
ִ as the one who punishes and warns
in an attempt to improve the behaviour of another (Prov 9:7; 24:15; 25:12; 28:23). In
legal trials, the ‫מוכ ַיח‬
ִ had a role in the conduct of procedure (Isa 29:1; Amos 5:10).
Whether he acted as prosecutor or defendant depended on the context. In Job 9:33, the
‫מוכ ַיח‬
ִ is a man who lays his hands on the shoulders of both parties to attain a right
relationship between them.
34
Renz, Rhetorical Function, 159-160; Robert R. Wilson, “An Interpretation of
Ezekiel’s Dumbness,” VT 22/1 (1972): 91-104.
35
Cf. page 12 and especially note 23.
36
Ezekiel uses the words ‫( ט ֵמא‬unclean/defile) and ‫( ח ַלל‬pollute, defile, profane) to
characterize the sins of the people of Israel, and that not only for cultic but also for
sexual and social sins.
 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279 275

Another background that can be understood for the use of language in those
passages is the temple liturgy (Pss 15; 118:19-20) sung when the gates of the
temple were entered. Ezekiel is promising life to those in exile, just as in
Jerusalem the priests did when they sang such promises as they passed inside the
gates of the sanctuary.37
Already in the first section of Ezekiel, we find here and there a message
of hope.38 Ezekiel 6 is the hinge: it contains a message of total perdition yet
concludes with the cleansing of the prophet himself and with a veiled message
of hope and expectation. It is no coincidence that we find the first explicit
ִ 39
message of hope in Ezek 11:14-21; that is within the passage of the ‫מ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬.
The transition within Ezekiel to a message exclusively of hope we find
after Ezek 33. This chapter belongs formally and structurally to the third section
of the book of Ezekiel, but it also harks back to Ezek 24 and it is the conclusion
of the message of judgment. Before the prophet actually makes the transition to
announcing a message of hope, he first declares on the authority of YHWH that
there is no hope for the remaining inhabitants of the land of Israel after the fall
of Jerusalem (Ezek 33:23-33). Ezekiel 34-48 announces the restoration and
glorious future of the people and land of Israel.
The promise of a ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬is the harbinger of a new exodus and of an
inward transformation (Ezek 11:17ff.); the promise of an inward transformation
receives its outworking in the second half of the book of Ezekiel, especially in
Ezek 36-37. This transformation opens the way for the return of the ‫ כבוד‬of
YHWH to a completely new temple that surpasses the old temple in holiness.40

37
Walther Zimmerli, The Fiery Throne: The Prophets and Old Testament Theology,
ed. Karl C. Hanson (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 94; Zimmerli, Ezechiel 1-24,
398.
38
We can divide the book of Ezekiel into either three or two sections, namely Ezek 1-
24; 25-32; and 33-48. In Ezek 25-32, we find the prophecies against the nations. If we
divide the book of Ezekiel into two sections, we must reckon them to belong to the
second section. The judgment of the nations is an introduction to the message of hope
for the nations. In Ezek 28:24-26, we find a message explicitly of hope for Israel. Within
Ezek 25-32, there are 97 verses preceding 28:24-26 and another 97 verses after that
section (see Block, Ezekiel: Chapters 25-48, 4-5).
39
There are also glimpses of hope in Ezek 16:60-63; 17:22-24 and (if we divide the
book of Ezekiel into three sections) in the second part, in Ezek 28:24-26.
40
The tabernacle had only three zones with increasing degrees of holiness. If we
assume that the walls around the forecourt of the temple of Solomon and the gates that
give access to the innermost court of the temple of Ezekiel demarcate a separate sphere,
then the zone count is five and seven respectively. Given the meaning of the number
seven, that is the preferable interpretation of the number of the spheres of holiness in
the temple of Ezekiel. Much more emphatically than in the tabernacle and the temple
of Solomon, the focus is upon gradation and the concomitant separation. Kalinda Rose
276 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279

The final vision of Ezekiel, in particular, shows that the mediating function of
the prophet has a priestly aspect.
The fulfilment of the final vision will see to it that the exile is definitely a
past reality, but in the exile this vision is an essential part of the promise of the
‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬for the exiles. In Ezek 11:15, the prophet repeats the words of the
inhabitants of Jerusalem who are left in the land after the destruction of the city
and the temple: “Go far from YHWH (‫הוה‬ ַּ֔ ְ‫קו ֵמ ַ ָּ֣על י‬
ּ֙ ‫;)ר ֲח‬
ַ to us this land is given for
a possession.” In Ezek 11:16, YHWH admits that he has distanced the exiles
among the nations (‫ים‬ ּ֙ ‫גוים ִה ְר ַח ְק ִת‬
ִַּ֔ ‫)ב‬.
ַ There immediately follows the promise of a
‫מ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬.
ִ Although they are distanced from the land, YHWH is present among
the exiles and not among them who are left in the land. Thus, the ‫ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬
mitigates the fact that the exiles are alienated from the land.
The verb ‫ רחק‬is used for the first time in the book of Ezekiel in Ezek 8:6.
By their sins, the people of Israel are driving away, or distancing, YHWH from
his sanctuary (‫)ע ִ ָּ֣שים פה ְלר ֳחק ּ֙ה ֵמ ַ ָּ֣על ִמ ְקד ִַּׁ֔שי‬. After the return of the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH
to a completely new temple, the prophet hears YHWH saying to the people of
Israel that they will or must put their whoring and the dead bodies of their kings
far from him. Then he will dwell in their midst forever (‫ופגְ ֵ ָ֥רי‬ ִ ‫נותם‬
ָ֛ ְ‫ַע ָּ֞תה יְ ַר ֲח ָּׁ֧קו ֶאת־ז‬
‫תוכם ְלעולם׃‬
ֵ֖ ‫יהם ִמ ֶ ִ֑מ ִני וְ ׁש ַכנְ ִ ָ֥תי ְב‬
ֵ֖ ֶ ‫מ ְל ֵכ‬,
ַ Ezek 43:9).
Must we understand ‫ יְ ַר ֲח ָּׁ֧קו‬in Ezek 43:9 as a command or an
announcement? Almost all translations choose the former option.41 In almost

Stevenson, The Vision of Transformation: The Territorial Rhetoric of Ezekiel 40-48,

SBLDS 154 (Atlanta: SBL Press, 1996), 117; Jon D. Levenson, Theology of the
Program of Restoration of Ezekiel 40-48, HSM 10 (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976),
16; de Vries, Kābôd, 307-8. In the final vision, when the new temple and its service are
described, no high priest is mentioned. The explanation for this cannot be that the
legislation in the final vision of Ezekiel predates the priestly legislation of the
Pentateuch; the presupposition of such a view is that the priestly legislation of the
Pentateuch is the later development of an earlier stage of priestly service in which there
was no place for a high priest. In fact, the final vision of Ezekiel presupposes the priestly
legislation of the Pentateuch. In the final vision, the holy of holies is so exclusively the
property of the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH that it may never be entered by man. Because his
services are no longer required, no high priest has been spoken of throughout the book
of Ezekiel. In the temple of Ezekiel, the holy place has only a wooden altar, which is
also called a table (Ezek 41:22). It is likely that this wooden altar or table has the
function that the table of shewbread had in the tabernacle and the temple of Solomon.
It is not impossible that the intention of this inclusion is that the holy place of the new
temple will have only a table of shewbread and no incense offering. The fact that the
altar is wooden also decreases the likelihood that it is there for incense offerings. This
therefore means that the holy place will only be entered on sabbaths for the priests to
change the shewbread (cf. Lev 24:8). De Vries, Kābôd, 305-6, 315-16.
41
An exception is the Dutch States Translation (SV, 1637). This is one of the instances
where the SV does not follow the KJV (1611). The medieval Jewish exegetes Rasji and
 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279 277

every instance, a qatal or yiqtol form in the third person after ‫ ַעתה‬can be
understood as an imperative mood. Obvious exceptions to this are 1 Kgs 12:26b
and Job 16:7.42 Following the Vulgate (nunc ergo repellant), I would more
readily prefer an indicative mood here.43 My argument is that in the third section
of the book Ezekiel, we read almost exclusively about what YHWH does and not
about what Israel is commanded to do.44 YHWH himself accomplishes among
the members of the people of Israel what he expects of them.45
By reading or hearing the description given by the prophet of the new
temple and its service, the readers and listeners of the book of Ezekiel can
imagine what it will be like to participate in its service. They can be sure that the
future that is described will one day be a reality. Hence, the description of the
new temple and its service has, especially in the exile, the function of a ‫ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש‬
‫מ ַעט‬.
ְ
The residing of the ‫ כבוד‬of YHWH in a new and completely pure temple
is the final hope of the book of Ezekiel. In the final vision of Ezekiel the new
temple is outside the new city. Nevertheless, the name of the new city, which
forms the expression that concludes the final vision and the entire book of
Ezekiel, is a suitable summary of the final hope which YHWH gives the exile
through the oracles of Ezekiel: ‫( יְ הוָ֥ה ׁשמה‬YHWH is there). This is a powerful
assurance that the ‫מ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬,
ִ although a consoling reality, is not (as indicated
by the word ‫)מ ַעט‬
ְ the final reality.
In summary, I restate that there are several indications that the prophetic
ministry of Ezekiel in its consoling aspects is the ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬mentioned in Ezek
11:16. Firstly, we can consider in this regard his message of life for those who
adhere to their righteousness and for the wicked who repent. He functions for
them as a kind of priest who assures them of the spiritual presence of YHWH; a
reality to be compared with the entry into the sanctuary. Above all, the message

David Kimchi support the view that we must understand ‫ יְ ַר ֲח ָּׁ֧קו‬as a future and not as a
jussive.
42
In 1 Kgs 12:26b we read: ‫ע ָ֛תה ת ָׁ֥שוב ַה ַמ ְמל ֵ֖כה ְל ֵ ָ֥בית ִדוד‬. ַ The ESV translates: “Now
the kingdom will turn back to the house of David.” In Job 16:7 we read: ‫ְך־ע ָ֥תה ֶה ְל ִ֑אנִ י‬ ַ ‫א‬. ַ
The ESV translates: “Surely now God has worn me out.”
43
The LXX has an imperative of the aorist here: ἀπωσάσθωσαν. However, in Ezek
26:18 the LXX translates ‫ ַעת ּ֙ה יֶ ְח ְר ָּ֣דו ה ִא ִַּ֔ין‬as καὶ φοβηθήσονται αἱ νῆσοι (and the islands
shall be frightened).
44
Now it is true that in Ezek 43:11 we find a condition, namely “if they are ashamed
of all that they have done” (‫)וְ ִאם־נִ ְכ ְל ָּ֞מו ִמ ָּ֣כל ֲא ֶׁשר־עשו‬. However, it is remarkable that the
LXX does not have a condition here. It has the following translation: καὶ αὐτοὶ
λήμψονται τὴν κόλασιν αὐτῶν περὶ πάντων (“and they shall receive their punishment
for all they have done”).
45
I can cite here the words of St. Augustine: “give what you command and command
what you will” (Persev. 20, 53).
278 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279

of Ezekiel functions as the ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬in passages where the glorious future of
Israel is foretold and especially in its heralding of the new temple that will
surpass the old temple in holiness.
The glorious presence of YHWH among the exiles is a reduced presence
compared with the past, but even more so compared with the future. Even the
expression ‫ ִמ ְק ָּ֣דׁש ְמ ַעט‬itself makes clear that the reduced presence will not be a
permanent reality. What will follow is the new temple filled with the ‫ כבוד‬of
YHWH, who will never leave it again. This latter aspect is symbolized by the
fact the east gate of the outer court is closed for ever after the entry of the ‫כבוד‬
of YHWH into the new temple (Ezek 44:1-2).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, Leslie C. Ezekiel 1-19. WBC 28. Dallas: Word Books, 1994.
Betts, Thomas J. Ezekiel the Priest: A Custodian of Tôrâ. StBibLit 74. New York:
Peter Lang, 2005.
Block, Daniel I. The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25-48. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1998.
Clements, Ronald E. “Law and Promise.” Pages 156-73 in Old Testament Theology:
Flowering and Future. Edited by Ben C. Ollenburger. Winona Lake:
Eisenbrauns, 2004.
Davis, Ellen F. Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and the Dynamics of Discourse in
Ezekiel’s Prophecy. JSOTSup 78. Sheffield: Sheffield University Press, 1989.
de Vries, Pieter. The Kābôd of Yhwh in the Old Testament: With Particular Reference
to the Book of Ezekiel. SSN 65. Leiden: Brill, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1163/
9789004307650
Ellison, Henry L. Ezekiel: The Man and His Message. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1956.
Fohrer, Georg. Ezechiel. HAT 13. Tübingen: Mohr, 1955.
Greenberg, Moshe. Ezekiel 1-20. AB 22. Garden City: Doubleday, 1983.
Hurvitz, Avi. A Linguistic Study of the Relationship between the Priestly Source and
the Book of Ezekiel: A New Approach to an Old Problem. CahRB 20. Paris:
Gabalda, 1982.
Kitchen, Kenneth A. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2003.
Knohl, Israel. The Sanctuary of Silence: The Priestly Torah and the Holiness School.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995.
Levenson, Jon D. Theology of the Program of Restoration of Ezekiel 40-48. HSM 10.
Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976.
Lyons, Michael A. From Law to Prophecy: Ezekiel’s Use of the Holiness Code.
LHBOTS 507. New York: T & T Clark, 2009.
Maarsingh, Berend. Ezechiël. 2 vols. POuT. Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1985.
Odell, Margaret S. Ezekiel. SHBC. Macon: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 2005.
Peels, Eric. “The Assassination of Gedaliah (Jer 40:7-41:18).” Pages 83-104 in Exile
and Suffering. Edited by Bob Becking and David Human. OtSt 50. Leiden:
Brill, 2009.
 De Vries, “Presence of YHWH in Exile,” OTE 31/1 (2018): 264-279 279

Renz, Thomas. The Rhetorical Function of the Book of Ezekiel. VTSup 76. Leiden:
Brill, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004276017
Rooker, Mark F. Biblical Hebrew in Transition: The Language of the Book Ezechiel.
JSOTSup 90. Sheffield: Sheffield University Press, 1990.
Smith, Garry V. Isaiah 1-39. NAC 15a. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Academic,
2007.
Stevenson, Kalinda Rose. The Vision of Transformation: The Territorial Rhetoric of
Ezekiel 40-48. SBLDS 154. Atlanta: SBL Press, 1996.
Tooman, William. “Ezekiel’s Radical Challenge to Inviolability.” ZAW 121/4 (2009):
498-514. https://doi.org/10.1515/ZAW.2009.033
Wilson, Robert R. “An Interpretation of Ezekiel’s Dumbness.” VT 22/1 (1972): 91-
104.
Zimmerli, Walther. Ezechiel 1-24. BKAT 13/1. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1996.
Zimmerli, Walther. The Fiery Throne: The Prophets and Old Testament Theology.
Edited by Karl C. Hanson. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.

Dr Pieter de Vries, Theological Faculty of the Free University, De Boelelaan

1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] or
[email protected].