Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ezekiel 1:3
The word of the LORD came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; and the hand of the LORD was there upon him.
3. came expressly ] Omit expressly. The name Ezekiel probably means “God is strong.” Nothing further is known of Ezekiel or of his father Buzi. The designation “priest” appears to apply to Ezekiel, not to his father. As the prophet excludes all Levites from priestly office except the “sons of Zadok” (Eze 40:46, Eze 43:19, Eze 44:15-16), it may be inferred that he belonged himself to this family. It appears from Jer 29:1 seq. that among the captives carried away with Jehoiachin were both priests and prophets.
hand of the Lord ] the prophetic ecstasy.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Came expressly – The phrase marks that it was in truth a heaven-sent vision.
The hand of the Lord – A phrase in all prophecy implying a constraining power, because the spirit constrains the prophet independently of his own will.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 3. The hand of the Lord] I was filled with his power, and with the influence of the prophetic spirit.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
What was
visions, Eze 1:1, is here
the word, both as signifying and declaring the mind of God, what he would do, and as containing his commands to Ezekiel and to the people, to whom these visions spake by signs.
The word of the Lord: lest the prophet should want his warrant, or the Jews except to his advice, it is plainly told them that Jehovah the sovereign Lord and eternal God, by Ezekiel, counsels, warns, commands, and threatens.
Came expressly unto; emphatically translated as it is emphatically expressed in the Hebrew,
being with him,
it was with him; so long he might discern, so clear he might understand, so near he could not be deceived, or easily forget what he was to tell them.
Ezekiel signifies either, the strength of God, or, strengthened by God, and in a few syllables contains what is more largely set forth, Eze 3:8,9. He speaks of himself in the third person.
The priest; who therefore should be regarded as one whose interest among the priests at Jerusalem would be best promoted if better things might be hoped and shortly expected than he must now tell them; it was likely he dealt truly with them, when he must share so much in the sad things foretold. He was of the priests originally, he was a prophet by extraordinary call.
The son of Buzi; of a contemned man, so the etymology of the Hebrew, which gave the rabbins occasion to apply it to Jeremiah, and to account the prophet either son or servant to Jeremiah; but it is a proper name.
In the land of the Chaldeans, enemies to, and now masters of, poor captive Jews, the church of God: there God makes him a prophet, who was an ordinary priest in the land of Israel.
The river Chebar, though a river of Mesopotamia, yet here seems placed in Chaldea, because Mesopotamia was part of the kingdom of the Chaldeans; so Chebar or Chobar was in the land, i.e. within the kingdom, of Chaldea, but particularly in Mesopotamia, a province of that kingdom.
The hand of the Lord; the Divine impulse moving with power and efficacy on Ezekiel for the work, and clearly confirming and demonstrating to the captive Jews that he was the prophet of the Lord, and spake to them in his name; the Spirit of prophecy, as the Chaldee Paraphrase.
Was upon him there: God is not confined; though most prophets were in the land of Israel, yet here in Chaldea also appears a great prophet, and should be hearkened unto.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
The word of the Lord came expressly,…. Or, “in being was” d; which phrase denotes the reality, certainty, substantiality and evidence of the word of the Lord to him:
unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi; which Buzi, some say, was Jeremiah. Kimchi observes, that, in the Jerusalem Targum, the Prophet Ezekiel is called the son of Jeremiah the prophet: and Jeremiah was called Buzi because they despised him; this is rejected by Abarbinel; nor is there any reason to believe it, any more than what Nazianzen e says, that Ezekiel was a servant of Jeremiah:
in the land of the Chaldeans, by the river Chebar;
[See comments on Eze 1:1]. The Chaldee paraphrase makes the word of the Lord to come to him at two distinct times and places;
“the word of prophecy from before the Lord was with Ezekiel the son of Buzi the priest in the land of Israel: it returned a second time, and spoke with him in the province, the land of the Chaldeans, by the river Chebar:”
and the hand of the Lord was there upon him; by which is meant the gift and word of prophecy, which came with power and efficacy, clearness and evidence; so the Targum, and the
“spirit of prophecy from before the Lord there abode by him;”
by which he saw all later visions, and delivered out the following prophecies; see 2Pe 1:21.
d “essendo fuit”, Pagninus, Montanus. Heb. ; “existendo exstitit”, Polanus. e Orat. 47. vol. 1. p. 724.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
He does not repeat the copula which was placed at the beginning of the first verse, and we may perhaps wonder why the book should begin with a copula: for when he says, “and it came to pass,” it seems to denote something going before it, and it seems out of place when nothing precedes it. But probably an oblique antithesis or comparison is intended between those prophecies which had flourished for a long period at Jerusalem, which was their peculiar and genuine scat, and that which was arising in Chaldea; as if he would say, “even among Chaldaeans,” for the particle ו, vau, is often used in the sense of גם, gam, “even.” The sense therefore is, after God had exercised his servants even to weariness, since many prophets had discharged their duties at Jerusalem, now at length he speaks in Chaldea. He says, therefore, “the word of the Lord came unto him.” I know not why some dream that Jeremiah is here called “Buzi,” unless because it was a foolish persuasion of the Jews, that the father of a prophet is never mentioned unless he were a prophet himself. Their ignorance is proved on other occasions, and here surely their curiosity is shameful, since they decide this Buzi to be a prophet, and because they know of no one else, they fix on Jeremiah: as if it were probable, that when the father was left at Jerusalem, the son was an exile, which is entirely conjectural. But because he was a priest;, so he says, “the son of Buzi. ” Our Prophet ought to have some reputation, for if he had been of plebeian obscurity, he would scarcely have been listened to. The priestly dignity, then, availed something towards securing attention. Now he expresses what I have previously mentioned, in the land of Chaldea, as if he had said: although God has not been accustomed to raise up prophets in lands so distant and polluted, yet now his rule is changed, for even among the Chaldeans is one endued with the prophetic spirit. And the particle שם, illic, “there,” is emphatically added, “was there upon him,” says he. For otherwise the Jews would have dreaded Ezekiel, as if he were a monster, when they found that the word of God had proceeded from Chaldea. “What,” say they, “will God pollute and contaminate his doctrine, by its springing up from such a place as that? Who are the Chaldeans, that God should erect his seat there? Mount Zion is his dwelling-place: here he is worshipped and invoked. Here must his lamp burn of necessity, as he has often witnessed by his prophets.” To such taunts the Prophet; replies: God has begun to speak in Chaldea — there his power is conspicuous: “The word of the Lord is come unto me; for we know that God alone is to be heard, and that prophets are only to be attended to, as far as they utter what proceeds from him.” Hence it is required that all teachers of the Church should first have been learners, so that God alone may retain his own rights, and be the only Lord and Master. As then supreme authority resides in God alone, when prophets desire to be heard, they profess not to offer their own comments, but faithfully to deliver a message from God. Thus also our Prophet. I touch these points rather lightly now, as I have treated them more at length elsewhere. At length he adds, the hand of the Lord was upon him Some explain the word “hand” by “prophecy,” but this seems to me weak and poor: I take “hand” to mean divine power, as if Ezekiel had said that he was endued with divine power, so that it should be quite clear that he was chosen a Prophet. The hand of God, then, was a proof of new favor, so that Ezekiel might subject; to his own sway all the captives, since he carried with him the authority of God. This may also be referred to the efficacy of his doctrine. For the Lord not only suggests words to his servants, but also works by the secret influence of his Spirit, and suffers not their labors to be in vain. The passage then may be received in this sense. But since the Prophet only assumes to himself what was necessary, and so claims for himself the position and standing of a Prophet, so when he uses the word “hand,” I do not doubt his meaning to be an inward operation. There is, it is admitted, an inward efficacy of the Holy Spirit when he sheds forth his power upon hearers, that they may embrace a discourse by faith, so also if all hearers were deaf, and God’s word should evaporate as smoke, yet there is an intrinsic virtue in the prophecies themselves: Ezekiel points out this as given to him by God. Here I shall finish, because I should be compelled to break off directly, and we shall be coming to the vision, which is the most difficult of all.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(3) Came expressly.Or, came certainly, with the fullest proof of reality. In the original there is simply the ordinary form of the repetition of the verb for the sake of emphasis. The prophet mentions his own name only here and in Eze. 24:24.
The hand of the Lord was there upon him.A form of expression to indicate that special power and influence which the Spirit exercised over the prophets at times when they were called to become the means of the Divine communications. (Comp. 1Ki. 18:46, and Eze. 3:22; Eze. 37:1; see also Dan. 8:18; Dan. 10:10; Rev. 1:17.) It is noticeable that Ezekiel here speaks of himself in the third person, while in Eze. 1:1, and always after this, he uses the first person. It had been suggested that this, together with the mention of his own name, may indicate the insertion of these two verses on a revision of his work by the prophet.
In entering upon the vision of the glory of the Lord, which fills the rest of this chapter, it is to be remembered that Ezekiel is struggling to portray that which necessarily exceeds the power of human language; it is not therefore surprising that there should be something of repetition and of obscurity in the detail. All similar descriptions of Divine manifestations are marked more or less strongly by the same characteristics. (See Exo. 24:9-10; Isa. 6:1-4; Dan. 7:9-10; Rev. 1:12-20; Rev. 4:2-6, &c.) It is also to be borne in mind that what the prophet saw was not the eternal Father in His own absolute essence, who dwells in unapproachable light, and whom no man hath seen, nor can see (1Ti. 6:16); and had it been possible that Ezekiel should have been so transported out of the body as to behold this, it would then have been impossible for him to describe it. But what he saw in vision was such manifestation as man could bear, in which God hides His face, and allows to be seen only His uttermost parts (Exo. 33:22-23). In the description that follows may be recognised a mingling of the symbols of the Divine manifestation at Sinai with the patterns of heavenly things in the most holy place of the Temple, the whole modified to suit the present occasion, and possibly somewhat coloured by the now familiar symbolic art of Babylonia.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
3. Ezekiel God is strong (Kuenen). Because of this all too brief biographical sketch, and because of Ezekiel’s reticence regarding himself, many have supposed that nothing can be known of this great prophet excepting the name of his father, and the fact that he was a priest of the family of Zadok; but such visions only come to the prepared man. Only the pure in heart can see God. (See Introduction, “IV. Ezekiel’s Personality.”)
The priest This shows his training, education, environment, and natural prejudices. Buzi, Ezekiel’s father, is known to us only through his illustrious son. Did he also dream dreams and see visions? When God wants to make a great man he usually begins with his parents and grandparents.
The hand of the Lord The hand that is under the throbbing earth is upon him (Eze 8:3; Eze 10:8). The universe feels the touch of Omnipotence; why should not man? This is a strong figure to show that the prophet spoke and acted not of his own will, but because of a controlling divine power. Ezekiel, like Jeremiah and Moses (Jer 1:6; Exo 3:11), felt that he could not take up the work of a prophet, but God’s hand turned him to his duty.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Eze 1:3 The word of the LORD came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; and the hand of the LORD was there upon him.
Ver. 3. The word of the Lord came expressly. ] Heb., By being hath been, or hath altogether been – Existendo extitit. Accurate factum est it really wrought upon me and made me a prophet.
Unto Ezekiel the priest.
The son of Buzi.
In the land of the Chaldeans
By the river Chebar.
“ Credat Iudaeus Apella:
Non ego. ” – Hor.
And the hand of the Lord was there upon him. ] Not only came God’s Word expressly to him, but the power and Spirit of God came mightily upon him; so that he felt the intrinsic virtue of this hand, as one phraseth it, the Spirit of God in his own heart; it was a quick and lively word unto him, and to as many as believed.
a Sabbatian.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
the LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.
expressly = in very deed, or in reality.
Ezekiel. See the Title.
the priest: and called, as Jeremiah was, to the office of prophet as well,
the hand. Fig, Anthropopatheia. App-6.
was = became. Compare Elijah (1Ki 18:46); Elisha (2Ki 3:15); Daniel (Dan 10:10, Dan 10:18); and John (Rev 1:17).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
word: Jer 1:2, Jer 1:4, Hos 1:1, Joe 1:1, 1Ti 4:1
Ezekiel: Heb. Jehezkel
and the: Eze 3:14, Eze 3:22, Eze 8:1, Eze 33:22, Eze 37:1, Eze 40:1, 1Ki 18:46, 2Ki 3:15
Reciprocal: 1Ch 28:19 – by his hand upon me Jer 1:1 – of the priests Jer 29:15 – General Eze 1:1 – by the river Eze 11:24 – into Eze 43:3 – the river Dan 10:4 – as Zep 1:1 – word Luk 3:2 – the word
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Eze 1:3. Ezekiel speaks of himself in the third person in this verse while most of his compositions are in the first person, The word expressly has none in the original and does not add anything to the thought. However, we may note that in the first verse the Lord communicated with the prophet in a vision and in this verse it is by word. The conclusion is that he was both to see and hear in his service as an inspired prophet. Hand, of the Lord is a phrase often used in the Bible and it means here that the Lord took Ezekiel in hand; not only to control but also to assist him.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1:3 The word of the LORD came expressly to Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; and the {d} hand of the LORD was there upon him.
(d) That is, the spirit of prophecy, as in Eze 3:22; Eze 37:1 .