Lange Commentary - Ezekiel 30:1 - 30:26

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Lange Commentary - Ezekiel 30:1 - 30:26


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

CHAPTER 30

1And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 2Son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Howl! alas 3for the day! For near is the day, and [indeed] near is the day of Jehovah, a day of cloud; a time of the heathen nations shall it be. 4And the sword comes into Egypt, and there is anguish in Cush at the fall of the pierced-through in Egypt; and they take 5his tumult, and his foundations are pulled down. Cush, and Phut, and Lud, and all the strange people, and Kub, and the sons of the covenant-land, 6shall fall with them by the sword. Thus saith Jehovah, And they that uphold Egypt fall; and the pride of his strength comes down: from Migdol to Syene shall they fall in him by the sword, sentence of the Lord Jehovah. 7And they shall be desolate in the midst of the desolate lands, and his cities 8shall be in the midst of the wasted cities. And they know that I am Jehovah, when I give a fire in Egypt, and all his helpers shall be shattered. 9In that day shall messengers go forth from before Me in ships, to frighten Cush the secure, and there is anguish among them, as in the day of Egypt; for, behold, it comes. 10Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, And I make the tumult of Egypt to cease through the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. 11He and his people with him, the violent of the heathen, are brought to destroy the land, and they draw their swords upon Egypt, and fill the land with the 12pierced-through. And I give [make] the streams for drought, and sell the land into the hand of the wicked, and lay the land and its fulness waste by the hand of strangers: I, Jehovah, have spoken. 13Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, And I destroy the foul idols, and make the idols to cease out of Noph; and there shall be no more a prince out of the land of Egypt: and I give fear in the 14land of Egypt. And I make Pathros desolate, and give fire in Zoan, and do 15judgment in [on] No. And I pour out My fury upon Sin, the stronghold of 16Egypt; and cut off the tumult of No. And I give fire in Egypt: Sin shall writhe [for pain], and No shall be for conquest [broken], and Noph—besiegers 17[have] by day. The young men of Aven and Pi-beseth shall fall by the sword, 18and they [these cities] shall go into captivity. And in Tehaphnehes the day shall be dark, in that [when] I break there the yokes of Egypt, and the pride of its strength ceases in it: a cloud shall cover it, and its daughters shall go 19into captivity. And I do judgment in Egypt, and they know that I am Jehovah.

20     And it came to pass in the eleventh year, in the first [month], on the seventh of the month, the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, 21Son of man, the arm of Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, I have broken; and, behold, it is not bound up, that one might apply healings [means of healing], that one might lay on a fillet to bind it, that it may become strong, that it may take hold of the sword. 22Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I [come] on Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, and I break his arms, the strong and the broken, and make 23the sword fall out of his hand. And I scatter Egypt among the heathen, and 24disperse them in the lands. And I strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, and give My sword into his hand, and shatter the army of Pharaoh, 25and he groans the groans of the pierced-through before him. And [yea] I take firm hold of [hold strong] the arms of the king of Babylon, and the arms of Pharaoh shall fall; and they know that I am Jehovah, in that I give My sword into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he stretches it out against 26the land of Egypt. And I scatter Egypt among the heathen, and disperse them in the lands; and they know that I am Jehovah.

Eze_30:2. Sept.: ... … ὠ ὠ ἠ ἡìåñá , (3) ὁôé —Vulg.: … væ, væ diei!

Eze_30:4. … êáé ðåóïõíôáé ôï ðëçèïò áὐôçò ê . óõìðåóåéôáé ôá

Eze_30:5. Sept.: Ðåñóáé ê . Êñçôåò ê . Äõäïé ê . Äéâõåò ê . ðáíôåò ïἱ ἐôéìéêôïé ἐð ʼ áὐôçí äéáèçêò ìïõ ἐí áὐôç ìá÷áéñᾳ — Vulg.: Aethiopia et Libya et Lydi et omne reliquum vulgus(Another read: åëðåá ; Arab: Nubienses.)

Eze_30:6. Vulg.: superbia imperii ejus: a turre Syenes

Eze_30:9. ... ἀããåëïé óðåõäïíôåò ἀöáíéóáé ἐí ôῃ ἡìåñᾳ — (Another read.: áéåí , Syr., Ar., Targ., Vulg.)

Eze_30:11. áὐôïõ ê . ôïõ ëáïõ áὐôïõ . Äïéìïé ἀðï ἐèíùí —Vulg.: … fortissimi

Eze_30:13. … ê . êáôáðáõóù ìåãéóôáíáò ἀðï Ìåìöåùò ê . ἀñêïíôáò Ôáíåùò ἐê ãçò Áἰãõð . ê . ïὐê ἐóïíôáé ïὐêåôé

Eze_30:14. Sept.: ... ἐêäéêçóéí ἐí Äéïóðïëåé Vulg.: … in Alexandria.

Eze_30:15. … ἐðé Óáúí ôï ðëçèïò Ìåìöåùò … Pelusium … multitudinem Alexandriæ. (Another read: îòåï )

Eze_30:16. Óõçíç ê . ἐí Äéïóðïëåé ἐêñçãìá ê . äéá÷õèçóåôáé ὑäáôá Vulg.: … quasi parturiens dolebit Pelusium et Alexandria erit dissipata et in Memphis angustiæ quotidianæ.

Eze_30:17. … ̔ Çëéïõðïëåùò ê . áἱ ãõíáéêåò … et ipsæ captivæ

Eze_30:18. … ἐí Ôáöíáéò ôá óêçðôñá Áéã

Eze_30:21. Vulg.: … non est obvolutum ut restitueretur ei sanitas

Eze_30:22. Sept.: ... ê . ôïõò ôåôáìåíïõò ê . ô . óõíôñéâïìåíïõò

Eze_30:24. ... êáé ἐðáîåé áὐôçí ἐð ̓ Áἰã . ê . ðñïíïìåõóåé ôçí ôñïíïíçí áὐôçò ê . óêõëåõóåé ôá óêõëá áὐôðò .

Eze_30:26. ... ἐðéãíùóïíôáé ðáíôåò ïἱ Áé ̇ ãõðôéïé

EXEGETICAL REMARKS

Eze_30:1-19. The Day of Judgment.

As this section is without any chronological preface, this may be understood if it justifies its place by the fit position of its contents. Thus the day in Eze_30:2 appears as the time of the heathen nations in Eze_30:3; hence it is quite suitable as an appendix to the outline of the prophecy taken as a whole (Eze_29:1 sq.). So, too, the sword coming upon Egypt (Eze_30:4) is more definitely indicated in Eze_30:10 sq., as through the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, and so Eze_30:20 sq. is prepared for. Not that “the naked thought expressed in the introduction to the prophecy (Eze_29:17-21), of the great catastrophe hanging over Egypt, assumes flesh and blood in the main body of the prophecy (Eze_30:1-19),” as Hengst. expresses himself; but the prophecy upon Egypt in Eze_29:1-16, primarily coloured by its reference to Israel, is now again coloured by the respect had to the heathen, in particular to the Egyptian covenant-associates.

Eze_30:2. Howl, Isa_13:6 ( éìì , to sound). The sound is expressed by äָäּ ,—like àְַçַäּ (Eze_4:14), especially with ìéåí ,—in the word-sound. The day, therefore the time, when that takes place which is contained in Eze_30:4 sq., gives the reference ( ì ) of the mournful howl. The persons addressed will presently become plain.

Eze_30:3. Why they were called to howling had its ground in the nearness (Eze_7:7), which, however, has no chronological determination, except in the very near approach of the day. This is primarily designated as ìéäåäéåí , i.e. the one proper to the Lord, His day in particular, not only determined, fixed by Him; also not that alone which comes from Him; but, as the standing formula: “And they know that I am Jehovah,” readily suggests, the day of the manifestation of Jehovah. It is, as the comparison with Oba_1:15, Joe_1:15, Isa_13:6-9, Zep_1:7; Zep_1:14, shows, the becoming manifest in judgment. (Klief.: judgment, punishment, slaughter-day.) With this also agrees the designation of it as “a day of cloud;” comp. Eze_1:4. The symbolical import is obvious, since, when the clear light of day comes to be veiled, there is a threatening of storm (Eze_30:18, Eze_34:12; Joe_1:15; Joe_2:2; Zep_1:15); therefore one has to think of the wrath of God, and, in consequence thereof, a calamity which will break forth. Accordingly, òú âåéí éäéä (without article) is self-determined, as meaning the time when heathen nations—they, consequently, are the parties addressed in Eze_30:2, spoken of generally as contradistinguished merely from Israel, but more definitely indicated in what follows—shall experience their judgment; not precisely “their end” (as Hitzig), but Jehovah’s manifestation in the judgment of wrath pregnant with calamity to them. Comp. besides, Eze_22:3; Isa_2:12. [Not “identical with the day of Egypt, Eze_30:9,” as Hengst. thinks, however similar, for the heathen were not simply the Egyptians. But still less, with Vatabl., Münst., and others, are we to think of the Chaldeans as executors of the judgment.]

Eze_30:4. The way and manner of the predicted judgment is here represented: the sword comes; and the heathen peoples, who are addressed in Eze_30:2, are now named, viz. Egypt, in which war or bloody uproar so frightfully raged, that in Ethiopia the impression made by it was çìçìä , the corporeal state of convulsive writhing, for: anguish, terror, and woe. Nah_2:11 [10]; Isa_21:3.—Upon ëåù , see the Lexicons.—Hitzig: çìì alludes to çìçìä .—The subject to: and they take, is naturally: the enemies, considered indefinitely.— äîåðä , see at Eze_29:19. Hengst.: “this is here the prosperity of Egypt bringing with it active life.”— éñãåú , the foundations, figuratively of the state as a house, not to be understood literally of the Egyptian chief cities. The figure, however, must not be limited (as ùָׁúåֹú in Isa_19:10) to the higher classes, who bear immediately the state-building; nor must it (as Hitzig) be understood of the mercenaries, who only support Egypt (Eze_30:5-6), and could hardly be represented as the foundations of its existence as a state. The representation must undoubtedly be (as well remarked by Hupfeld on Psa_11:3) of that which bears the civic society and holds it up—ordinances and laws; so that, if formerly it was the well-being of Egypt which was concerned, it is now the being, the very existence of it.

Eze_30:5. Ethiopia, as already at Eze_30:4, instar omnium, named as the neighbour and political associate of Egypt, opens the array of Egypt’s supporters (Eze_30:6). Upon Phut and Lud, see at Eze_27:10.— òøá is: “joining-in,” “mixing,” “immigration,” therefore: strange people; scarcely (as the Syrian translates) could “all Arabia” be meant. Exo_12:38; 1Ki_10:15; Jer. 25:20; 24:1, 37; Neh_13:3. Häv. distinguishes these from the covenant-associates of Egypt. But what else could Cush be?—Kub, only here, is by some regarded as written instead of ìåá , which Ewald reads, though he translates Nubia; while Kliefoth thinks of the Lubim in Nah_3:9, 2Ch_16:8, the Libyægyptii of the ancients; or taken instead of ðåá , so Gesenius and the Arab. translation, “Nubians;” and Hitzig also supposes ìåá to have been the older Heb. form for Nubia (?);—by others it has been understood (Häv.) of a people Kufa frequently occurring on the monuments of Egypt—according to Wilkinson, an important Asiatic people lying farther north than Palestine, with long hair, richly clothed, and with parti-coloured sandals; the tribute which they are represented as bringing bespeaks not a little of wealth, civilisation, and skill. Hengst. combines Kub with Eze_27:10, and makes it correspond to the Persians, who had entered in consequence of the coalition into the service of Tyre, and whose appearance here cannot be thought strange; everywhere where there was a struggle against the tyrants, mercenaries were to be found of this powerful aspiring people. The name was a domestic one—“Kufa” in old Persian = mountain; the particular region, as appears to Hitzig, to be sought in Kohistan.—The sons of the covenant-land are understood by Jerome, Theodoret, the Sept., the Arab, trans., also by Hitzig, of the Jews who had taken refuge in Egypt (Jeremiah 42-44.); the covenant-land (with the article), that promised to Abraham and his seed according to God’s covenant, is Canaan. The Syriac translation, on the other hand, points to the associates in the league, which the expression certainly does not clearly justify. Hence Hengst., understanding by the covenant-land Cush, makes the beginning turn hack to the close; while Schmieder, with whom Kliefoth agrees, conjectures a tract of land unknown to us, but near to Egypt, and in a state of league with it (!).

Eze_30:6. åðôìå ñîëé× , either as Ewald: “there fall Egypt’s supporters” or, after it has been said in Eze_30:5 that the anguish in Cush shall become a falling with Egypt, there is in Eze_30:6 a more comprehensive general statement: as well as, etc. [Hengst.: “a new break, new touches to be given to the picture.”] Comp. Psa_37:17; Psa_54:6 [4]. When the one party falls, the other sees itself necessitated to go down from its self-conscious height. On pride, etc., see at Eze_24:21; comp. besides, Eze_29:10. They who shall fall in him, or it, are those who would support it. Too far removed are the idols and princes of Eze_30:13, which are brought in by Schmieder as the supporters; also the fortified cities in Eze_30:15, and the warriors in Eze_30:17.

Eze_30:7. Comp. Eze_29:12. Where Egypt is the principal subject, there can be no question of its being so also here.

Eze_30:8. The practical knowledge of experience is made in the fire, which Jehovah causes in Egypt, that is, at the breaking forth of His anger, with which also most fitly suits: and they shall be shattered, etc., so that they must know the judgment of God to be upon them. According to others, the war-fire; according to the Chald. paraph., a people violent as fire; according to Cocceius, it must mean the consuming, desolating result of the war.—All the helpers of Egypt are those who give support in Eze_30:6, both those who are named (Eze_30:5), and those who are not named.

Eze_30:9. With manifest allusion to Isaiah 18, messengers in ships are made to announce to Ethiopia the fate of Egypt. (In Isa. it is papyrus-skiffs, which people were wont to roll together when they passed the cataracts of the Nile, and then open out again. The öé here, from öåä , to set up, according to Häv. certainly with reference to the existing sea-force of Egypt: warships, which suits neither with fugitives nor with messengers.) The business-mart and commerce on the boundaries of Upper Egypt and Ethiopia readily provide the image of such messengers at command,—represented as going forth from before Jehovah sitting in judgment upon Egypt,—so that one does not need to think either of the Chaldeans, or of Egyptian messengers formally sent by the Egyptians, or of Egyptian fugitives.—Since there is çìçìä áëåù , according to Eze_30:4, so this is only explained here by ìäçøéã àúÎë× ; hence also åäéúä çìçìä is repeated; therefore not a joyful message, as in Isaiah 18. with reference to Assyria.— ëéåí , either, a definite fixing of time (Isa_23:5), as also áéåí is read, but which would plainly be a repetition of áéåí ääåà ; or, better perhaps, with Häv., pointing to that old period of punishment in the history of Egypt which filled neighbouring regions with dread of Jehovah (Exo_15:14 sq.).—Eze_7:5-6; Eze_7:10; Eze_21:12. The coming is that which had been threatened, to be supplied from the context.

Eze_30:10. Comp. Eze_26:13.—Eze_29:19.—The tumult comprehends as well the dense population characteristic of Egypt, as the moving of goods and chattels hither and thither. Kliefoth; “the turmoil of the people in the possession and enjoyment of their goods.”—The hand of the Judge. His instrument and executioner, is to be Nebuchadnezzar (comp. at Eze_26:7).

Eze_30:11. Eze_28:7.—23.42. Hengst.: “they come not of themselves, but the Almighty brings them, hence they are irresistible,” etc.—The destruction of the land by the sword is more nearly given, since it is represented as being filled with the slain. Comp. Eze_12:14; Eze_11:6.

Eze_30:12. Eze_25:5; Eze_29:10; Eze_29:3. The destruction of its prosperity, since its natural springs and the land become the property of others, like a slave that has been sold by his master. Hitzig: “God assists the instruments of His will, taking an immediate part in the work of destruction, and, at the same time, displacing a hindrance to their advance and a bulwark of the Egyptians.”—Since øòéí is parallel with æøéí , the wicked can only be interpreted from the feeling of the Egyptians, and in accordance with the hurtful action of the strangers, as øòò is to beat down, to destroy. The general wickedness of mankind (Mat_7:11) lies here as far out of the way as a special application to the Chaldeans, as being also not better than the Egyptians. Comp. however, Eze_7:24; Eze_28:7.

Eze_30:13. A carrying out of the judgment by special traits, which for Egypt especially are characteristic. Thus, as regards the âìåìéí (see at Eze_6:4), the àìéìéí (chiming with the “nothings”), Lev_19:4; Lev_26:1, and often (1Co_8:4), so that there is no need for supplying from Isa_19:1; they are neither the images of the gods, nor the worshippers of them (as the Chald. paraph.): it is simply the idol-gods.—From Noph ( îðó , sometimes also îֹó ), that is, from Memphis; to-day, unimportant ruins on the western side of the Nile. The name in Plutarch is explained as ὁñìïí ἀãáèùí , and as ôáöïí ̓ Ïóéñäïò ; in hieroglyphics, “Mam-Phtah” that is, the place of Vulcan. The lower valley of the river honoured as the highest god Phtah (fire-god), the oldest and first of the gods, according to Manetho, ruling 9000 years before the others, as he is named in the inscriptions: “the father of the fathers of the gods,” “the heavenly ruler,” “the lord of the gracious countenance,” “the king of both worlds,” “the lord (the father) of truth.” As god of the beginning, he has the form of a naked child, of a dwarf; at other times wrapped round mummy-like, standing by a rod, with a flagellum and mace and the Nilometer in his hand. As he was called Tatamen (the former), as world-creator, so he commonly has before him an egg upon a potter’s wheel (“the weaver of the beginnings moving the egg of the sun and moon”). The Egyptian scarabæus (beetle) was sacred to him, which was sometimes shown upon his shoulders in the place of a head. His great sanctuary at Memphis, which was said to have been as old as Egypt itself, was adorned and extended by the Pharaohs down to the overthrow of the kingdom. Cambyses, when admitted into this temple, exhibited his disdain toward the image of the god.—Since Memphis was at the same time the old royal city, the transition from the service of idols to the ðָùִׂéà was natural, especially as the connection of the gods and kings is genuinely Egyptian. Comp. on Ezekiel 29. The history of Egypt is that of its gods, and the names and deeds of its kings, as they are painted upon the walls of its temples.—That there was to be no more a native prince is not necessarily said, with îàø× , but only that as prince there should no more be one like the old Pharaohs and the Egyptian gods, out of Egypt, as contradistinguished from other lands, whose princely power would, as hitherto has been the case, obtain legitimation. Therewith also agrees the fear, which seems to point to a foreign ascendency that was to carry it over all.

Eze_30:14. From Lower to Upper Egypt, the description gives prominence especially to the mother-land (see on Eze_29:14), the brrth-land of the people.—Comp. Eze_30:8.—Zoan, however, is, again, in Lower Egypt, the old Tanis, on the branch of the Nile which bears that name (“Dschane,” Egyptian: low ground),—a chief city, Num_13:22; Psa_78:12; Psa_78:43.—Eze_5:10.—No ( ðà ) leads back to Upper Egypt; when fully read No-Amon, it is Thebes (Vulg., anticipating, Alexandria), the very ancient Upper Egyptian chief city, with the Greeks Diospolis. (“Noh,” Egyp.: surveyor’s chain; hence: inheritance; therefore: seat of Amon—see Gesen. Lex.) In the Upper land there reigned as divinity Amun (Amen), probably = “the concealed,” the reigning god in the height, whose colour is blue on the monuments. He was for Upper Egypt what Phtah was for Lower Egypt. He is represented as standing, or sitting enthroned, with two high feathers upon his kingly head-dress. According to Manetho, the union of Egypt under a great dominion was effected by Menes from This, below Thebes, therefore proceeding from the Upper land—although this state-life had its centre in Memphis, in the Lower land; and during its flourishing period, another dominion, the territory of which stretched beyond the cataracts of Syene, had been founded at Thebes. Princes of Thebes afterwards ruled over all Egypt, took their seat at Memphis, and the kings of Egypt were now called “Lords of both Lands” in the inscriptions. Upon the monuments the red higher crown is that of Upper Egypt, the lower white one that of Lower Egypt. So that the prophetic representation takes into view the whole of Egypt, repeats Thebes for Upper Egypt, yet knows, at the same time, to mention names mostly from the more extensive, as well as more important and more powerful, Lower country.

Eze_30:15. Eze_14:19, 21:36 [Eze_21:31], Eze_9:8, Eze_7:8.— ñִéï , the “mud-city,” Pelusium ( ðçëïò ), a border city on the east, in a swampy region, which the sea now overflows. Egypt, according to Strabo, was here difficult to be attacked, and Suidas designates Pelusium the key of Egypt for ingress and egress.— îָòåֹï , ch.Eze_24:25.— åְäִëøַúּé Eze_29:8.— àֶúÎäֵַîåֹï ðֹà (Eze_30:10), comp. Eze_30:14. An allusion undoubtedly to Amon, whence No derived its surname (Jer_46:25). Amon is incapable of preserving to the city its Hamon (tumult), Hengst. The mention of the multitude of people in No Hitzig finds to be suitable, since the population of the Thebaid crowded principally into the farextending chief city. (Comp. Iliad, ix. 381 sq.)

Eze_30:16, Eze_30:8; Eze_30:14.—Instead of: úָּçִéì , the Qeri has: úָּçåּì , from çåì , whence çַìְçָìָä in vers.4, 9.—The repeated mention of Sin, No, and Noph gives emphasis to the boundaries, Upper and Lower Egypt.— úִּáָּ÷ò = úäéä ìäá÷ò , in Eze_26:10.— öָøֵé éåֹîָí is clear so far, as öåø is plainly to be understood of a pressing, closing in siege; on the other hand, éåîí may signify by day, as in the well-known juxtaposition with åìéìä , but also what this juxtaposition paraphrastically expresses, namely: always, unceasingly, therefore: daily = ëìÎéåí , or “the day over”, also “the whole day long” = ëìÎäéåí (comp. Psa_13:3 [2]). [Michlal Zophi interprets: “and against Noph come the enemies of day,” that is, openly, not as thieves of the night. Similarly Hitzig: “enemies will be in broad daylight,” meaning that it will be filled by them. Kliefoth: of the enemy not fearing an open assault. Also Hengst., who, from Jer_15:8 and Zep_2:4, understands it of a state of deep humiliation, in which the enemy disdains, in the consciousness of his absolute superiority, to surprise by night (Oba_1:5). “Enemies (besiegers) by day, a concise expression for: such an one as has to deal with enemies by day.”]—It might be also an affecting exclamation. [Abendana (after Job_3:5) = their day will be distress (Vulg.). The Chaldee paraphrase: enemies compass her daily. Peculiar are the renderings of the Sept. and of the Arabic, which understand it of a breaking down of the Nile dams, and a rushing in of the waters; the Syriac: “will give way into fragments.” Ewald: Memphis will be for perpetual rust ( öְãִé )! Häv.: Memphis shall become a constant splitting, that is, shall be for ever shattered; it shall now be, in a manner, called öøé éåîí , in allusion to the local name of Memphis, îöåø !]

Eze_30:17. áַּçְåּøֵé , the choice young men of war (Mar_14:51); rightly Hitzig: the garrison warrior-caste), as contradistinguished from the inhabitants.—Aven ( àָåֶï ), the purpose in the change of the name àֹï , àåֹï , must, according to Hengst., point to the cause of the divine judgments which were coming on it (comp. Hos_4:15; Hos_10:5). Aven is nothingness, vanity, with respect to the worship of idols. [Hengst.: “vileness”, that people serve the creature more than the Creator.] It was the Greek Heliopolis, Jer_43:13, “House of the Sun;” Kopt. On; Egyptian, Anu,—a city in Lower Egypt on the east bank of the Nile, and was from of old the proper seat of the Egyptian sun-worship; a centre of idolatry, with a numerous learned priesthood; the principal city in this respect, and that where Plato and Herodotus received instruction; mentioned in Gen_41:45; Gen_41:50. Now there are only some ruins beside a village, with an obelisk seventy feet high of red granite. Here, in a famous temple, was Ra, the god of the solar disc, worshipped (“the father of the gods”), the second ruler of the world. His symbol was the sun’s disc borne by two wings; the beasts sacred to him were the sparrow-hawk, the light-coloured bull, and the cat. From Ra, their original and type, the Pharaohs derived their power over Egypt, as “sons of Ra”, the name given to them. See, besides, in Duncker, 1. p. 39 sq.—Pi-beseth, only here; at present existing merely as ruins; Kopt.: Poubast, “the cat,” on account of the goddess Pacht (Basht, Pascht), commonly represented with a cat’s head, who was worshipped at Bubastis, in Lower Egypt, on the Pelusian branch of the Nile. (She was also named “the Mistress of Memphis,” and also “Mother.”) To her joyous service, according to Herodotus, was devoted the most pleasant of Egyptian temples. At her festival, to which men and women came in boats from all places, amid song, playing of flutes, clapping of hands, and striking of rattles, more wine was drunk than in all the rest of the year.—If the guardians, the protectors of the sanctuaries, fall by the sword, then also by the same must the gods themselves fall. Herodotus designates the Bubastic Nome as the region where especially resided the Calastrians, that is, the young recruits of the army. Comp. also Eze_30:5-6, Eze_6:11-12. The åְäֵðָּä are not the women (Sept.), but the cities named, their inhabitants (comp. Eze_30:18); see also Eze_12:11.

Eze_30:18. Not far from Sin comes the border city (toward Syria) úְּçַôְðְçֵí , Tehaphnehes, in Jeremiah (Jer. 63:9) úַּçְôַּðְçֵí , Tahpanhes, where, as we there learn, was a royal palace, Daphnoi (Taphne); the name, according to Jablonski, Egyptian: Taphe-eneh, as much as, Land’s End.— çùê äéåí , Hengst.: “the day spares, withholds as a miser.” Therefore, from çָùַׂê , which in substance, however, is the same as: darkens itself; from çָùַׁê , to be darkened. There, for those of Israel who had fled thither (Jer_43:7 sq., Eze_44:1 sq.), the pre-intimations of the day of judgment begin (Kl.); or generally: there changes the prosperity and splendour of Egypt; according to others: there will be mourning. Häv.: “here had Jeremiah spoken his powerful word of threatening against Egypt; here, through the settling down of the Jews at that time, the idea of Egyptian oppression toward Israel springs up afresh; and hence a calling to remembrance of Lev_26:13.” Hengst. compares with “the breaking of the yokes of Egypt” Eze_29:15; Eze_30:13, “no prince,” etc.; the yoke formerly lying upon Israel, latterly also upon other nations, was now to be for ever broken.— ùָׁí refers to the border-place, with which the land opens, and with the broken land “the yokes” which Egypt had imposed, consequently its dominion (comp. Eze_30:21-22; Eze_30:24), should be broken. (Umbr.: “All order and discipline shall be dissolved in the ruled and strongly-curbed land: an end shall be made to its old renown and pride.”)— áָּäּ , like âְּàåֹï òֻåָּäּ , is to be understood of the whole land. [Cocceius thinks of the death of the king with reference to the king’s seat at Taphne (Jer. 63:9). Rosenm. reads îַèּåֹú , also Ewald and the Sept.; while Hitzig supposes to be meant, not the spears indeed (Hab_3:14; 2Sa_18:14), but the supporting staffs, Eze_30:6, which in Eze_30:8 are also represented as going to be broken.]— äéà , not Daphnai, but Egypt, on which account it precedes emphatically; as also her daughters, namely, the cities, could only be referred to Egypt; if referred to Daphnai, too much would be said for it (Eze_16:27; Eze_16:31; Eze_16:46; Eze_26:6).— òָðָï (Eze_30:3). The Chaldee Paraphrast makes the cloud mean the host of the king of Babylon.

Eze_30:19 concludes with Egypt generally.

Eze_30:14.

Eze_30:20-26. Pharaoh and the King of Babylon.

Eze_30:20. As to the time, almost a quarter of a year later than Eze_29:1 sq.; Kliefoth: “in the second year of the siege of Jerusalem,” as is clear also from Eze_30:21, after that Hophra had been defeated by the Chaldeans (Jer_37:5; Jer_37:7). (That Ezekiel 29. should contain no notice or allusion to the attempt of Pharaoh to bring help to Jerusalem, etc., may be controverted from what is said there in Eze_30:6.) Hengst.: about three months later followed the conquest of Jerusalem (Jer_39:2). As at Ezekiel 29, so also here, the look of the exiled toward Egypt is to be turned back from it.

Eze_30:21. æְøåֹòַ is certainly for the most part the forearm, as here also the expression “to hold the sword” proves, and so help, too, assistance, is expressed by it; so that, with Häv., Ewald, and others, one might think of the Egyptian attempt for the relief of Jerusalem: on the other hand, however, Hengst. is right when he explains the breaking of the arm of Pharaoh of a “great overthrow,” such as was only to be found in the well-known disaster at Carchemish, seventeen years before our prophecy, as this battle, in fact, destroyed the power of Pharaoh to make war, struck his might with a blow (comp. Jeremiah 46.); while what respects the retreat of the Egyptians from Jerusalem, which became a matter of necessity to them, is nowhere reported. So that, as Hitzig in particular recognises, from the manifest contrariety of Eze_30:22, which announces the future, ùáøúé is a full preterite, and presupposes a longer interval in connection with the indication of time in Eze_30:20 than could be the case with that retreat before Nebuchadnezzar, if this should have to be thought of generally as a thing already accomplished. Hengst. remarks: “After it (i.e., the retreat of the Egyptians from Carchemish) our prophecy would have been unnecessary; it must have been delivered at a time when, humanly speaking, there was hope from the Egyptians.”— åְäִðֵּä , having respect to the existing state of Egypt since the battle of Carchemish, introduces the following description, in which “the binding” forms the principal statement on which the infinitives are dependent. Bound up is the first, the most immediate thing which has to be done after wounding, and the intention or aim thereof is to apply the means of healing (cures); in particular, since the chief means consist in the band which holds together the broken parts, that a bandage be applied ( ìçáùä resumes çáùä again) so that the arm be strengthened, and, as the consequence, be again rendered capable of “taking hold of the sword.”

Eze_30:22. Therefore refers to the foregoing principal announcement, that Pharaoh’s might is broken without the prospect of restoration, and accordingly what is farther impending can only be a complete overthrow; and this is introduced by äððé , a parallel to Eze_30:21, and then summarily pronounced ( æøòúéå ).—The strong ( äçæ÷ä , with a reference to ìçæ÷ä in Eze_30:21) signifies: what still existed unbroken as to power in Egypt, particularly in the land itself; the broken (Eze_30:21), that which must still be broken, with allusion to the shattering at Carchemish; especially the impotent attempt to turn aside to the help of Jerusalem, which must therefore be thought of as still in immediate prospect. [Cocc. explains the two arms of Hophra, and the small Egyptian kingdom which followed. They have been also explained of the supremacy over Syria and that over Egypt.]—The might, power, and dominion of Pharaoh are to become incapable of attack and resistance.

Eze_30:23. Comp. Eze_30:26, Eze_29:12; Eze_22:15.

Eze_30:24. åְçִåַּ÷ְúִé , Piel (strengthening; anyhow, still another çæ÷ than is to be supposed in the ìçæ÷ä of Eze_30:21), for the sword also is not that which has fallen out of the hand of Pharaoh, but Jehovah’s, whence the following explains itself, and at the same time what is said in Eze_30:22.— ìְôָðָéå , before the king of Babylon, who and his arms, here and in Eze_30:25 placed in opposition to Pharaoh and his arms, are the antithesis which forms the substance of this section.

Eze_30:25. åְäַçְַæַ÷ְúִé , Hiphil, for distinction in respect to the Piel in Eze_30:24, which, on account of the failings, éָã , is explained by Hitzig, not through “seizing,” but with a reference to Exo_17:11-12, and by way of contrast to úִּôֹּìְðָä through “holding upright,” “holding above,” so that he retains the upper hand. But the slight difference between “holding strong” and “strengthening,” endowing with power, is of itself enough. Hengst. compares Gen_49:24, in respect that the arms of the king of Egypt, left to his own impotence, sank down powerless.—Since the arms of both are named, the words: and they know, etc., may easily be referred thereto, but principally to the king of Babylon; yet also to the land of Egypt, against which the sword of judgment in the hand of that king was stretched out. àåúָäּ may be referred to éã , also to çøá .

Eze_30:26. Repetition of Eze_30:23 at the close.

 
DOCTRINAL REFLECTIONS

1. Although the prophecy in Ezekiel 29 is of a general character, yet by the reference to Nebuchadnezzar, and especially from Eze_29:17 onwards, it gets a more specific character. We have therefore to hold by a fulfilment through the Chaldeans, and, indeed, in connection with what is said respecting Tyre. Apart from the circumstance that we have here to do with a prophet of God, we could not judge otherwise simply on this account, that a little reflection upon the inevitable disgrace of such a self-deception as would have been the case in respect to Tyre must alone have kept Ezekiel—instead of merely suppressing the prophecy in question while the book was still in his own hand—from wishing now to compensate for the mistake by awakening like inconsiderate and rash expectations concerning Nebuchadnezzar in regard to Egypt. For one to whom the prophet is nothing but a writer must still at least credit him with this much of worldly prudence in respect to his literary honour. And if Ezekiel must needs prophesy ex eventu (as Hitzig, for example, conceives), then prophecies like those contained in Ezekiel 26 and some following ones are purely unthinkable, so far as they remained unfulfilled; since it cannot but be supposed, that when our prophet closed his book, matters must have stood before him widely different from what they are presented in his prophecy. The “dogmatic criticism,” however, cannot once admit now that a prophecy has been fulfilled,—a limitation of the standpoint which is not improved by the circumstance that the truth of the divine word (2Pe_1:21) is made dependent on the statements or the silence of profane writers, and even of such as have given notoriously imperfect reports. The false prophet, he whose word did not come to pass, has by God’s word (Deu_18:22) been as clearly as possible excluded from the canon.

2. The reward for work, which, as Hitzig rightly enough says, had still to be given to Nebuchadnezzar, raises no question as to the conquest and, as could not fail to happen after a thirteen years’ siege, the destruction of Tyre. If the booty might have been thought of for the army, for Nebuchadnezzar it is necessary to think of Egypt. The song of triumph demanded by Hitzig for the fulfilment of the prophecy against Tyre is the double lamentation which we find in Ezekiel 27, 28. Every one has his peculiar manner. But as regards the so-called “historical witnesses,” who should speak the decisive word on the fulfilment or non-fulfilment particularly of the prophecy of Ezekiel in respect to Egypt, they are “the Greek historians, at the head of whom stands Herodotus, and they know absolutely nothing of a Chaldean invasion of Egypt—nay, their narration is opposed to anything of the kind” (Hitzig). This is imposing; let us reflect, however, that Herodotus had also learned nothing from his Egyptian informants of the defeat at Carchemish. We need only mention farther, that this Greek historian himself reproaches the priests of Egypt, and precisely in regard to this particular time, with embellishing the history of their country. Now, according to Herodotus, Pharaoh Hophra—in consequence of the defeat which his army sustained from the Cyrenians, against whom it was to have rendered help to the Libyans, and of the revolt which in consequence thereof, and of the foreign mercenary troops retained in Egypt, broke forth on the part of the Egyptian warrior-class against Amasis, who, instead of bringing back the rebels to obedience, suffered himself to be proclaimed king by them—lost freedom and his throne, and by the infuriated people was even murdered. Tholuck, who, “if the cattle with the ark of the Lord should once turn aside, would not obstinately drive forward,” remarks that as a witness Herodotus alone comes into consideration; before whom, however, the testimony of Ezekiel, himself a contemporary of the events, has no need to be abashed. “If Herodotus readily received intelligence of the prosperous battle fought by Necho at Megiddo, but none respecting the much more important defeat sustained by him on the Euphrates from the Chaldeans, should it be thought strange if the priests observed silence also regarding the irruption of the Chaldeans into their own land? yea, if the miserable end which Hophra suffered through the foreign conqueror should have been rather represented by them as the deed of his own people?” (So also Rawlinson’s Herod. B. ii. appen. c. 8.) With a fair appreciation of the historical representation of Herodotus, the cause there assigned, especially the revolution among the warrior-class of Egypt, might suffice for the overthrow of Hophra. Yet the hatred of the Egyptian people, not only expressed in Herodotus, but confirmed by monumental evidence (Rossellini points in this connection to a by-name of Hophra on the monuments: “Remesto”)—such a hatred as is described in Herodotus toward Hophra (ii. 161–169), manifested in respect to a native ruler, is scarcely to be explained from what is stated, if it did not come into some sort of connection with a Chaldean invasion of Egypt, whereby the haughtiness of Hophra might well appear all the more hateful to the Egyptian people, as the misery of the land and the inhabitants, occasioned by him, stood in sharpest contrast to the previous prosperity and splendour. The grudge of the Egyptian warrior-class against the foreign mercenaries could not be of such moment as some have supposed, since even Amasis, who thereafter held possession of the throne till his death (forty-four years), and was succeeded in it by his son, took lonians for his bodyguard, and generally granted to the Greeks still greater favour and privileges than his predecessor. Besides, as generally held, there is also the outline of the prophecy against Egypt in Ezekiel 29, which exhibits a distinction between Eze_29:6 sq. and Eze_29:4 sq.—in the one, the sword constitutes the figure (Eze_29:8); in the other, overthrow with reference to the wilderness. Especially if Hitzig’s interpretation of “the fish” (Eze_29:4) as denoting Pharaoh’s men of war is accepted, and under “the wilderness” there is couched an allusion to Libya, what is said in Eze_29:4 sq. might be explained by the narration which is reproduced by Herodotus, and Eze_29:6 sq. would, with the sword of Nebuchadnezzar, be such a supplementing as the conquest of Tyre to the siege of that city, also given elsewhere. Out of the miserable condition in which Hophra perished, Amasis would then have raised Egypt. Anyhow, as Tholuck brings out, the death of Hophra falls exactly into the time in which the occupation of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar must have occurred; and thus the position of matters approaches to that which is wont to be extracted from Josephus in confirmation of our prophecy—contr. Ap. i. 19. It is there stated that Berosus reports of the Babylonian (Nebuchadnezzar) that he “conquered Egypt, Syria, Phœnicia,” etc. Again, in Ezekiel 20, he states that Megasthenes placed Nebuchadnezzar above Hercules, since he had subjected to himself a great part of Libya and Iberia (comp. Antiq. x. 11. 1, and Strabo xv. 1. 6; see also Häv. Comm. p. 435, against Hitzig’s remarks). In the 10th book of the Antiq. Eze_9:7, Josephus expresses himself to this effect, that “in the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, he made an expedition against Cœlesyria; and when he had got possession of it, he made war against the Ammonites and Moabites; and when he had brought these nations into subjection, he fell upon Egypt in order to overthrow it, and did indeed slay the king who then reigned, but set up another; after which he took those Jews that were there captive, and brought them to Babylon,” etc. The ten years’ time, which Hitzig doubts as the period of the earlier warlike expeditions, is maintained by Tholuck. The fifth year after the taking of Jerusalem would be 581; the thirteen years’ siege of Tyre would fall into the period 586–572 or 573. For the different actions which were in part parallel as to time, we have only to suppose various divisions of the army employed, so that the whole might of Nebuchadnezzar did not at the same time lie before Tyre. The forty years of the Egyptian oppression, Tholuck, like Niebuhr, extends over the entire space that lies between the disaster at Carchemish and the overthrow of Hophra (thirty-six years), “during which Egypt, through the continued and in great part unfortunate warlike enterprises of Hophra, must have been much depopulated and extremely weakened, till at length the inroad of the Chaldeans consummated the oppression.” Tholuck thinks that, “as the prophets in the beginning of the fulfilment comprehended the future (Jer_13:18; Eze_30:24), in the last and completed fulfilment they also comprehended the earlier incomplete ones.” The symbolical explanation of the forty years is not thereby denied (see the exposition). The worth of the statements of Josephus may be questioned, as is done by Hitzig; but for the relation of profane history to our prophecy, it suffices that Hophra miserably perished (Eze_29:4 sq.; Jer_44:30 sq.), and that Egypt again revived, as took place under Amasis, although as a kingdom it was fit to be compared neither with its ancient glory nor with other great monarchies (Eze_29:13 sq.). As regards the resuscitation of Egypt, Duncker mentions that, according to a return of the priests, it then reckoned 20,000 country towns and cities (Herzog’s Realencyc. 1 p. 150), though it was “the last period of Egypt’s glory;” and Lepsius says of the same, that Egypt succumbed to the first pressure of the Persian power, and remained from 525 to 504 a Persian province; that afterwards it became again for a short time independent, until in 340 it was reconquered by the Persians, and in 332 fell under Alexander the Great, etc.

3. Upon the importance of Egypt for the revenge of Nebuchadnezzar, see the exposition of Eze_29:18. Also generally for the Chaldean policy the transition to Egypt is rendered plain to us from Eze_29:17 sq. (Häv.: “if Nebuchadnezzar would make the possession of Phœnicia once for all sure, Egypt must be completely broken.”) Of the importance of Egypt by itself, its characteristic importance, some notice has already been taken, toward the close of the introductory remarks to Ezekiel 25; as also of the distinction, indicated with correct feeling by Keil, between Egypt and the other nations mentioned by Ezekiel. But what Egypt signifies in its connection here, this must be discerned from its relation to Israel. It is quite true that the charge laid against Ammon, Moab, etc., also against Tyre, for spiteful joy, hostility, envy toward Israel, is not mentioned in respect to Pharaoh and Egypt. It may be said that Egypt’s guilt in regard to Israel was that rather of a false, treacherous friendship. If, on the other hand, the excess of proud self-sufficiency must be regarded as the characteristic of Egypt, the same sort of self-elation meets us in the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28); and in this respect Tyre formed a fitting transition-point to Egypt. The distinction between Tyre and Egypt might perhaps be found in this, that while in particular the kingdom of Tyre had had its time of sacred splendour and past greatness, as we have seen, in its former connection with the kingdom of David, Egypt on its part acquired importance on account of the sojournings of the pilgrim-fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and still more on account of the formation of their descendants into a people. Above all, the idea of redemption was associated with the land of Egypt. Here, therefore, the inverse relation holds good: Tyre has gone with Israel to school; Israel, on the other hand, was at school in Egypt, as was evidenced in manifold agreements and contrasts exhibited in their peculiarity as a people, without our needing on that account to ride off on the Spencerian principle [namely, of a servile borrowing from the institutions of Egypt]. More than from anything else, may be understood from Israel’s reminiscences as a people, and the impress of Egyptian style and manner even upon their sacred things, their abiding sympathetic turning back toward Egypt. That Israel could not let Egypt go out of sight had its root in human nature; we must learn even from the children of this world (Luk_2:6). But it had also its dangerous side. It was Israel’s worldliness, relapse, since Israel had been delivered by Jehovah from this world, and Jehovah had through Moses threatened them in connection with Egypt with the greatest evils (Deu_28:68). We have tribulation in the world, and we may have fear before the world; such fear, however, may be salutary in its o