EZEKIEL the prophet has recorded, or left us to infer, a few facts about himself. He had been a priest in Jerusalem, most likely a member of the clan of Zadok; while still young he was carried away to Babylonia in the First Captivity, 597 B.C.; his call to prophesy came in 593 ; after that, he lived in a house of his own, with his wife (xxiv. 18), among the Jewish exiles at Tel Abib on the Grand canal ("the river Chebar" iii. 15), some where in the neighbourhood of Babylon or Nippur. His fellow exiles evidently treated him with respect, and waited upon his words (viii. 1, xiv. 1, xxxiii. 31 f.) ; judging from xxix. 571 B.C., his ministry lasted 22 years. Some notion of the man may be gathered from his book. He possessed in a high degree the prophetic temperament, a sensitiveness to the reality of the in visible world, which made him respond at once to the touch of the Divine hand (i. 3, viii. I, etc.), a capacity for absorbed medi tation, of ten passing into the state of trance. While in this con dition he saw the moving throne (i.), performed a mimic siege of Jerusalem (iv.), felt himself transported from Babylonia to Jerusalem and back (viii.–xi.), saw the valley full of bones (xxxvii. 1-14), and the great temple of the future (xl. ff.). Often he made use of symbolic actions to enforce his message. At times these acts were performed in the presence of spectators; e.g., xii. 3-16, xxiv. 15-24, xxxvii. 16-20; but some of them must have taken place in vision, while the trance lay on him ; e.g., iii. 1-3. Such, at any rate, seems the best account to give of the weird symbolism of ch. iv. and v. 1-4. He was subject to periods of speechlessness, iii. 25f., xxiv. 27; but when the impulse seized him, he would burst into poetry: xv. 1-5 ; xvii. I-1 o ; xix.; xxi. 14– 2 2 ; xxvi. (in part) ; xxvii. (in part) ; xxxi. 2-9; xxxii. 2-16. These fine oracles stand out vividly from the monotonous background of his prose.
The element of conventionality and repetition which enters largely into the prose of Ezekiel may be in some measure due to scribes, who felt no scruple in glossing the text or altering it to suit their taste. A good instance of their methods is seen in ch. xxvii. ; the splendid dirge over Tyre has been cut in two by the insertion of a prose passage, vv. II-25a, which ruins the unity of the poem. Evidently Ezekiel's writings were studied with keen interest, as we may gather from the final section, xl.-xlviii. The first three chapters, with the additions of xliii. 1-12, xliv. 9-25, 28-30, xlvii. 1-12, are probably the work of the prophet; all that remains in xliii.-xlviii. is made up of fragments, which here and there reveal the technique of the priestly school. They are experiments in legislation. Most of them were never carried out, e.g., the re-distribution of the land, xlvii. 13-xlviii. 35; some were modified later, e.g., the two days of atonement, xlv. 18-20; in fact, what we come upon here is an early stage of the movement which in the end produced the Priestly Code. The task of re construction which Ezekiel had begun was carried on for years in priestly circles, and their tentative regulations were attached to his book, a natural place for them to find a lodging. Historically these enactments stand midway between Deuteronomy and P. Another law-book with which Ezekiel has relations is Lev. xvii.-xxvi., the law of holiness, as it is called ; and in this case the relationship is so close that it points to a common time of origin and the same circle of ideas and interests.
The affinity between Ezekiel and Jeremiah is also remarkable. Thus both prophets insist, often in similar language, upon the overthrow of Jerusalem and the temple (e.g., Jer. Ezek. iv. f., vii., xix.-xxiv.) ; both give up the people of Judah in despair, and fix their hopes upon the exiles (Jer. xxiv., xxix. io ff. ; Ezek. xi. 16-21, xxxvi. 24 ff .) ; both proclaim the responsi bility of the individual (Jer. xxxi. 29 f. ; Ezek. xviii.) . They are equally certain that the dispersed will be gathered and return to their native land (Jer. xxiii. 3, xxix. 14, xxxi. 8 ff. ; Ezek. xi, 17, xx• 34, 41 f.), and that a second David will come to rule over a united nation (Jer. xxiii. 5 f., xxxiii. 14-16; Ezek. xxxiv. 23 f., xxxvii. 24 f.) ; and while Jeremiah has not the priestly temper of Ezekiel, yet he too looks forward to the continuance of the Levitical ministry (Jer. xxxiii. 18, 21 f.; Ezek. xliv. 15 ff.) . Nevertheless, in spite of all these points of contact with other writings, Ezekiel has an impressive character of its own among the great books of prophecy; none exercised more influence upon subsequent thought and practice, and none perhaps baffles our understanding more.
A different conception from that outlined above has been worked out by Holscher (1924). Ezekiel, he maintains, was the prophet of doom and of nothing else ; he saw but two visions: the one induced him to prophesy the fall of Jerusalem, the other revealed the idolatry in the temple, and roused his fury against the city and its allies, Tyre and Egypt. Ezekiel's own oracles are few, and invariably poetical in form ; all else in the book is the work of a redactor, or of several redactors, who lived just before the time of Nehemiah (c. B.C.) . This view of the book does account for the difference, noticed by every reader, be tween the monotony of the prose and the passion of the lyrics ; but the effect of Holscher's criticism is to empty the prophecies of all serious meaning, and it is applied on a priori principles in a ruthless way which excites distrust.