Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - Ezekiel 30:1 - 30:1

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - Ezekiel 30:1 - 30:1


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

Announcement of the judgment upon Egypt and its allies. - Eze 30:1. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Eze 30:2. Son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Howl ye! Woe to the day! Eze 30:3. For the day is near, the day of Jehovah near, a day of cloud, the time of the heathen will it be. Eze 30:4. And the sword will come upon Egypt, and there will be pangs in Ethiopia, when the slain fall in Egypt, and they take her possessions, and her foundations are destroyed. Eze 30:5. Ethiopians and Libyans and Lydians, and all the rabble, and Chub, and the sons of the covenant land, will fall by the sword with them. - In the announcement of the judgment in Eze 30:2 and Eze 30:3, Ezekiel rests upon Joe 1:13, Joe 1:15, and Joe 2:2, where the designation already applied to the judgment upon the heathen world by Obadiah, viz., “the day of Jehovah” (Oba 1:15), is followed by such a picture of the nearness and terrible nature of that day, that even Isaiah (Isa 13:6, Isa 13:9) and Zephaniah (Zep 1:7, Zep 1:14) appropriate the words of Joel. Ezekiel also does the same, with this exception, that he uses הָהּ instead of אֲהָהּ, and adds to the force of the expression by the repetition of קָרֹוב יֹום. In Eze 30:3, the words from יֹום עָנָן to יִהְיֶה are not to be taken together as forming one sentence, “a day of cloud will the time of the nations be” (De Wette), because the idea of a “time of the nations” has not been mentioned before, so as to prepare the way for a description of its real nature here. יֹום עָנָן and עֵת גֹּויִם contain two co-ordinate affirmations concerning the day of Jehovah. It will be a day of cloud, i.e., of great calamity (as in Joe 2:2), and a time of the heathen, i.e., when heathen (גֹּויִם without the article) are judged, when their might is to be shattered (cf. Isa 13:22). This day is coming upon Egypt, which is to succumb to the sword. Ethiopia will be so terrified at this, that it will writhe convulsively with anguish (חַלְחָלָה, as in Nah 2:11 and Isa 21:3). לָקַח הֲמֹנָהּ signifies the plundering and removal of the possessions of the land, like נָשָׂא הֲמֹנָהּ in Eze 29:19. The subject to לָקְחוּ is indefinite, “they,” i.e., the enemy. The foundations of Egypt, which are to be destroyed, are not the foundations of its buildings, but may be understood in a figurative sense as relating to persons, after the analogy of Isa 19:10; but the notion that Cush, Phut, etc. (Eze 30:9), i.e., the mercenary troops obtained from those places, which are called the props of Egypt in Eze 30:6, are intended, as Hitzig assumes, is not only extremely improbable, but decidedly erroneous. The announcement in Eze 30:6, that Cush, Phut, etc., are to fall by the sword along with the Egyptians (אִתָּם), is sufficient of itself to show that these tribes, even if they were auxiliaries or mercenaries of Egypt, did not constitute the foundations of the Egyptian state and kingdom; but that, on the contrary, Egypt possessed a military force composed of native troops, which was simply strengthened by auxiliaries and allies. We there interpret יְסֹדֹותֶיהָ, after the analogy of Psa 11:3 and Psa 82:5, as referring to the real foundations of the state, the regulations and institutions on which the stability and prosperity of the kingdom rest.

The neighbouring, friendly, and allied peoples will also be smitten by the judgment together with the Egyptians. Cush, i.e., the Ethiopians, Phut and Lud, i.e., the Libyans and African Lydians (see the comm. on Eze 27:10), are mentioned here primarily as auxiliaries of Egypt, because, according to Jer 46:9, they served in Necho's army. By כָּל־הָעֶרֶב, the whole of the mixed crowd (see the comm. on 1Ki 10:15 - πάντες οἱ ἐπίμικτοι, lxx), we are then to understand the mercenary soldiers in the Egyptian army, which were obtained from different nations (chiefly Greeks, Ionians, and Carians, οἱ επίκουροι, as they are called by Herodotus, iii. 4, etc.). In addition to these, כּוּב ,eseht (ἁπ λεγ.) is also mentioned. Hävernick connects this name with the people of Kufa, so frequently met with on the Egyptian monuments. But, according to Wilkinson (Manners, etc., I 1, pp. 361ff.), they inhabited a portion of Asia farther north even than Palestine; and he ranks them (p. 379) among the enemies of Egypt. Hitzig therefore imagines that Kufa is probably to be found in Kohistan, a district of Media, from which, however, the Egyptians can hardly have obtained mercenary troops. And so long as nothing certain can be gathered from the advancing Egyptological researches with regard to the name Cub, the conjecture that כּוּב is a mis-spelling for לוּב is not to be absolutely set aside, the more especially as this conjecture is naturally suggested by the לוּבִים of Nah 3:9 and 2Ch 16:8, and the form לוּב by the side of לוּבִים is analogous to לוּד by the side of לוּדִים in Jer 46:9, whilst the Liby-Aegyptii of the ancients, who are to be understood by the term לוּבִים (see the comm. on Gen 10:13), would be quite in keeping here. On the other hand, the conjecture offered by Gesenius (Thes. p. 664), viz., נוּב, Nubia, has but a very weak support in the Arabic translator; and the supposition that לוּב may have been the earlier Hebrew form for Nubia (Hitzig), is destitute of any solid foundation. Maurer suggests Cob, a city (municipium) of Mauretania, in the Itiner. Anton. p. 17, ed. Wessel. - The following expression, “sons of the covenant land,” is also obscure. Hitzig has correctly observed, that it cannot be synonymous with בַּעֲלֵי , their allies. But we certainly cannot admit that the covenant land (made definite by the article) is Canaan, the Holy Land (Hitzig and Kliefoth); although Jerome writes without reserve, de filiis terrae foederis, i.e., de populo Judaeorum; and the lxx in their translation, καὶ τῶν υιῶν τῆς διαθήκης μου, undoubtedly thought of the Jews, who fled to Egypt, according to Theodoret's exposition, along with Jeremiah after the destruction of Jerusalem and the murder of the governor Gedaliah, for fear of the vengeance of the Chaldeans (Jer 42-43, and 44). For the application of the expression “land of the covenant” to the Holy Land is never met with either in the Old or New Testament, and cannot be inferred, as Hitzig supposes, from Psa 74:20 and Dan 11:28, or supported in any way from either the epithet “the land of promise” in Heb 11:9, or from Act 3:25, where Peter calls the Jews “the children of the prophets and of the covenant.” We therefore agree with Schmieder in regarding אֶרֶץ as signifying a definite region, though one unknown to us, in the vicinity of Egypt, which was inhabited by a tribe that was independent of the Egyptians, yet bound to render help in time of war.