Many scholars share Paul M. Joyce’s view 1 that the book of Ezekiel, in particular the first twenty-four chapters, contributes significantly to the cruel portrayal of YHWH in the Hebrew Bible (HB). 2 They argue that the motif of inevitable judgement is explicitly found in Ezek 1–24, whereas the motif of hope and restoration exists only in Ezek 33–48. To my knowledge, not many scholars have paid specific attention to the motif of hope and restoration in the first twenty-four chapters of Ezekiel. 3 Daniel I. Block has argued, correctly I think, that elements of divine grace and hope not only occur in “restoration texts that offer hope for the future,” but also underlie the entire book. 4 Through my reading of Claus Westermann’s Prophetic Oracles of Salvation in the Old Testament, I was intrigued by a few optimistic messages of hope and restoration that are present in Ezek 1–24; 5 these messages are usually considered as redactional additions. 6 Although it is widely agreed that the earliest layer of the first half of Ezekiel indeed is devoid of the concept of restoration, is it possible that later redactional layers have supplemented the texts with material that conveys restoration and hope for the future? This question calls for an in-depth investigation into the relationship between the messages of the redactional material and the motif of hope and restoration in the early chapters of Ezekiel. This study shall argue that the elements of hope and restoration are not limited to Ezek 33–48, which is usually regarded as the “restoration texts that offer hope for the future.” 7 Before moving on, it is necessary to define the texts under investigation in this book.
1.1 Defining the Basic Texts: Ezekiel’s oracle concerning his inaugural vision
One of the most distinctive features of Ezekiel is that the book lends itself to more than one structure. If we cast a quick glance at the various commentaries to Ezekiel, their descriptions of the structure of Ezekiel differ broadly from each other. The majority of contemporary scholars divide the book into three sections: Ezek 1–24 (punishment of Israel and Jerusalem); 25–32 (punishment of foreign nations); 33–48 (restoration of Israel and Jerusalem). 8 Other scholars divide the book in half: Ezek 1–33 (oracles of judgement); 34–48 (oracles of hope and possibility); 9 yet others divide the book into four sections, 10 or seven sections, 11 or even 13 sections. 12 In any case, the proposed structural models listed above are based on various criteria, including content, date of textual composition, and genre distinction; therefore a diverse mix of structural models emerges.
Among the various structural models, I was intrigued by the model that thematically structures Ezekiel as a book with the theme כבוד־יהוה (“the Glory of YHWH”) because this model can account for the cohesive literary nature of Ezekiel. The recurrence of the theme כבוד־יהוה in Ezekiel’s vision accounts (Ezek 1–3, 8–11, 37, and 40–48) 13 contributes significantly to the impression of unity of Ezekiel. The Glory of YHWH and the Jerusalem Temple are the central themes that are used to structure Ezekiel: 14 Following the appearance of YHWH’s Glory in Babylonia in Ezek 1–3 and the accusation against Israel in Ezek 6–7, the Glory of YHWH leaves the Jerusalem Temple (Ezek 8–11). Eventually, the Glory of YHWH returns to the restored Temple (Ezek 40–48) after the promises of restoration of Israel are given in Ezek 36–37. 15 From this structural model, Ezek 1–7, which is the central focus of this book, is considered as a literary unit demarcated in content from its subsequent literary unit, Ezek 8–11. 16
Recently Tyler Mayfield has given a detailed study of the surface structure of Ezekiel; in his view, Ezek 1–7 is certainly a literary unit. He has argued convincingly that the structure of Ezekiel should be determined by the text’s surface structure of the entire book, namely the chronological formulas and the prophetic word formulas. 17 I follow Mayfield’s argument for the use of the chronological formulas and the prophetic word formulas in structuring Ezekiel. This approach is not based on the conceptual, thematic, or content-related factors that everyone is able to discern on their own from the text, but is based explicitly on literary features on the text surface. 18 By identifying the chronological formulas in Ezekiel, thirteen distinct literary units for Ezekiel can be observed. The first chronological formula occurs in Ezek 1:1 and delineates the literary unit of Ezek 1–7.
I share Mayfield’s view that the chronological formulas serve as the major structural elements within Ezekiel, and that Ezek 1–7 is the literary unit. 19 However, I do not subscribe to the scepticism concerning a diachronic reading within the literary unit invoked by Mayfield. 20 Mayfield emphasises that one should connect the unique structure of the text to the meaning of the text, and read Ezekiel as a whole entity, since the structure of Ezekiel sets certain parts of texts in relation to each other. 21 He insists that the “surface structure also does not allow the redactional history of the book – a thoroughly diachronic concern – to dictate the book’s literary presentation.” 22 I find this claim difficult to accept. Michael A. Lyons has critiqued Mayfield that “[w]hile he insists that the diachronic study of the chronological formulas is not significant for a study of their function, he concludes the chapter with an excursus in which he presents his own model of their compositional development.” 23 In fact, within the literary unit Ezek 1–7, there are two chronological formulas. However, Mayfield considers only 1:1, but not 1:2, as the structural device of the text in his list of chronological formulas. In his view, Ezek 1:2 is probably a redactional explanatory remark, relating the date of the exile of King Jehoiachin to that of Ezekiel’s own exile in Ezek 1:1. 24 Here I keep following Lyons’s criticism that Mayfield’s decision of ruling out Ezek 1:2 in his lists of chronological formulas “presents a problem for the consistency of his purely synchronic model.” 25 In other words, a redactional insertion in 1:2 does influence the literary interpretation in Ezek 1–7; the diachronic study of the chronological formulas is significant for the study of Ezekiel’s literary presentation.
Mayfield’s argument concerning a synchronic reading of Ezekiel is not conclusive. His argument builds upon Sweeney’s idea that “the structure or arrangement of the book reveals the final redactor’s overall perspectives and conceptualisation of the prophet’s message in that the sequence of texts within the final form of the book points to those aspects of the prophetic message that the redactor wishes to emphasise.” 26 In my view, no one should rule out the possibility that the final redactors may have also inserted secondary expansions into the text when they were composing the final redaction of the book. In this respect, the sequence of redactional material within the literary unit and the relation among different redactional literary units in the final form of Ezekiel should also reflect the aspects of the message that the redactors wish to emphasise. 27 In my opinion, the study of the redactional material within Ezek 1–7, the literary unit created by chronological formulas, and the study of the interrelationship of the redactional material in Ezek 1–7 with that in different literary units, are all significant for the study of the literary interpretation in Ezekiel.
How, then, do the messages of the redactional material in a particular literary unit aid in interpreting the interrelatedness within that unit, and in interpreting the interrelatedness among different literary units? Ezek 1–7 serves as an exemplar for this study, and thus a thorough study of its redaction history seems a worthwhile starting point.
1.2 The Aim of this Study
Although the earliest layer in the first half of Ezekiel is characterised by remarkably vehement declarations of judgement, scholars (see footnotes 5, 6) have argued that some messages of restoration and of divine grace in the early chapters of Ezekiel are probably secondary additions. One of the aims of this study is to show that the elements of a mitigation of the divine punishment, hope, and restoration are not limited to Ezek 33–48, but occur also in later redactional material in Ezek 1–7. As such, the redactional material in Ezek 1–7 has supplemented the texts with material which conveys restoration and hope for the future.
This book decidedly favours a diachronic approach; it employs historical-critical methodology, in particular textual and redaction criticism, and inner-biblical interpretation.
There are studies that have looked into the redaction history of the vision accounts and their intertextual relationship in Ezekiel. As presumed by Anthony D. York (see section 1.3.3.2), there is an interrelation between Ezek 1 and the “restoration prophecy” in Ezek 43. Moreover, Janina M. Hiebel has shown that some of the redactional layers in Ezek 1–3 are influenced by the temple visions in Ezek 8–11 and 40–48. The ...
