9<\/strong>. that which I have not done<\/em> ] This is no mere rhetorical threat. It is possible that the miseries of the siege and exile were no greater than those endured by other nations in those days, but the same miseries may be felt more acutely. Israel was a nation fervidly patriotic, and patriotism was inspired by the glow of religion; it was also for that time a nation highly cultured; and moreover its calamities were felt to come from the hand of its own God. The feelings of the godly Israelite after the fall of the city corresponded to the prophet’s words here before its fall: “Ho! all ye that pass by, behold and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow which is done unto me, wherewith the Lord hath afflicted me in the day of his fierce anger” (Lam 1:12<\/span>). “See O Lord and behold, To whom hast thou done thus?” (Lam 2:20<\/span>). “For the punishment of the daughter of my people is greater than the punishment of Sodom, which was overthrown in a moment, and no hands were laid on her” (Lam 4:6<\/span>).<\/p>\n Compare Mat 24:21<\/span>. The calamities of the Babylonian were surpassed by the Roman siege, and these again were but a foreshadowing of still more terrible destruction at the last day.<\/P> <\/p>\n Verse 9<\/span>. I will do in thee that which I have not done<\/B><\/I>] The destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar<\/I> was one of the greatest calamities that ever fell on any nation or place before<\/I>; and that by the Romans under Titus exceeded all that has taken place since<\/I>. These two sackages of that city have no parallel in the history of mankind.<\/P> <\/p>\n Though the old world perished by water, and the judgment was greater in its extent, and Sodom was destroyed by fire, yet neither one or other was so lingering a death. These poor Jews were long dying, and felt themselves dying. Read the Lamentations as commentary on this text, or Josephuss Wars of the Jews. Though in the siege of Samaria women ate their children, yet the city was not taken, sacked, and burnt as Jerusalem was after a long siege. <\/P> Whereunto I will not do any more the like:<\/B> no doubt God keeps his word, though we should not be able to show how. And though the siege of Jerusalem under Vespasian was grievous, yet not in every thing equal with this, the Romans were not so cruel to the Jews. <\/P> Thine abominations; <\/B>their sins were abominations, and God delivers them into the hands of men that did hate, loathe, and abhor the Jews, so much that they thought they could not be cruel enough against them. <\/P> <\/p>\n 9.<\/B> See on Eze5:7<\/span>. <\/P> that which I have notdone<\/B>worse than any former judgments (Lam 4:6<\/span>;Dan 9:12<\/span>). The prophecy includesthe destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, and the final one byAntichrist (Zec 13:8<\/span>; Zec 13:9<\/span>;Zec 14:2<\/span>), as well as that byNebuchadnezzar. Their doom of evil was not exhausted by the Chaldeanconquest. There was to be a germinating evil in their destiny,because there would be, as the Lord foresaw, a germinating evil intheir character. As God connected Himself peculiarly with Israel, sothere was to be a peculiar manifestation of God’s wrath against sinin their case [FAIRBAIRN].The higher the privileges the greater the punishment in the case ofabuse of them. When God’s greatest favor, the gospel, was given, andwas abused by them, then “the wrath was to come on them to theuttermost” (1Th 2:16<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n And I will do in thee that which I have not done<\/strong>,…. In any other nation, or to any other people; not in the old world, when the flood was brought upon the world of the ungodly; not in Sodom and Gomorrah, when they were destroyed by fire from heaven; not in Egypt, when he inflicted his plagues on Pharaoh and his people; nor among the Canaanites, when they were drove out of their land for their abominations:<\/p>\n and whereunto I will not do any more the like<\/strong>; at least not of a long time; and, besides, this may not only refer to the siege of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, but also by the Romans:<\/p>\n because of all thine abominations<\/strong>; the wickednesses of all sorts that were committed among them, which were abominable to the Lord, and particularly their idolatries; these were the causes why he would do, or suffer to be done, things that were never seen, known or heard of before; and are as follow:<\/p>\n Now God subjoins, that their punishment should be so severe that no similar example could be found in the world — I will do what I have not done, nor intended to do, that is, I will avenge your contempt of my law in a striking and unexpected manner; for God sometimes so chastises men as not to exceed the ordinary method. But because punishments seem vile and contemptible when they are so common, God is compelled to surpass the ordinary measure, and to punish the wicked signally and portentously, as he says by Moses. (Deu 28:46<\/span>.) When therefore he now says, that he would do what he had not done before, and what he would not do again, he signifies a horrible vengeance, which has no similar example. It means nothing else than what, we have quoted from Moses, that the vengeance would be signal and portentous. Interpreters take this metaphorically, but this view cannot be admitted, because in their opinion no history has recorded its fulfillment; hence they fly to allegory and metaphor. But first of all, we know what Josephus says, that mothers were so ravenous that they slew their children and fed upon them, although here a previous siege is referred to, in which God signifies that he would cause fathers to devour their children: I confess it; but even if we receive what they wish, it was not done then; hence Jeremiah is mistaken when he says, that miserable women cooked their children for food. (Lam 4:10<\/span>.) Surely this is a sufficient witness; for to say that we never find that this actually happened is to reject the testimony of Jeremiah. Besides, God had threatened that very thing by Moses; nor can the passage be eluded, because there is weight in the words — <\/p>\n “<\/p>\n Men delicate among you, and those accustomed to luxuries,” says he, “shall eat their own children; a man shall envy the wife of his bosom, so that he shall not suffer her to enjoy that nefarious food with him. Then by stealth shall he consume and devour the flesh of his son, so that he shall distribute no part of it to another.” (Deu 28:54<\/span>.) <\/p>\n When Moses uses this language he certainly does not mean that there shall be intestine dissensions, so that disciples shall rise up against their masters, and masters oppress their disciples, as Jerome fancies. But it is necessary to take the words as they sound, namely, that God would not be content with common and customary punishments when the Jews had arrived at the very last pitch of impiety and wickedness, since he blames them so severely. Hence Ezekiel now threatens this; nor is it surprising that the Prophets took such forms of expression from Moses, since they used the language of Moses rather than a new one, that the people might not despise their prophesyings. Now, therefore, we must decide, that the Prophet uses these threatenings against the Jews literally. But if any one now object that what God says will not happen does often happen, a solution must be sought for. For we said that when the Jews were besieged by Titus, such a ravenousness attacked certain women, that they fed by stealth on their own children. But God pronounces that he never would do this again I reply that this kind of vengeance is not to be restricted to one day, so that God should not often punish the Jews in a similar manner. But we do not read that this was done, except by the Jews, for although this cruelty is related in tragedies — that children were used as food by their parents, yet this barbarity nowhere existed, that a father knowingly and willingly ate his own son; hence this was peculiar to the Jews. And that God had once executed this vengeance on them by means of the Chaldeans, is no obstacle to his again inflicting the same punishment, when he wished to take vengeance on the extreme rebellion of the people. For although in Ezekiel’s time all things were very corrupt, yet we know that when the Son of God was rejected, the Jews cut off from themselves all hope of restoration to the mercy of God. It is not surprising, then, if again he had suffered sons to be devoured by their fathers, as he now threatens that fathers should be so rabid as not even to spare their own bowels. <\/p>\n I know not why Jerome invented this difference, which is altogether futile. For he says, that when a thing is honorable and becoming it should be ascribed to God, but when the thing itself is base, God averts the infamy from himself. For when this wonder is treated of here, God does not say I will cause the people to eat their sons, but he says, fathers shall eat their sons, and sons their fathers. But there is nothing solid in this comment, because the cruelty which the Chaldeans exercised towards the Jews certainly was not either honorable or becoming, and yet God ascribes to himself whatever the Chaldeans did. Again, what was baser than the incest of Absalom, in debauching his father’s wives? and even that was not sufficient, but he wished the whole people, at the sound of a trumpet, to be witnesses of his crime; and yet what does God say? “I will do this before the sun,” says he. (2Sa 12:12<\/span>, and 2Sa 16:21<\/span>.) We see, then, that this man was not familiar with the Scriptures, and yet that he offered his comments too hastily. There was, indeed, no true religion in the man, and it is not without cause that I admonish you; for there is danger lest many be deceived, if they were not admonished that his genius was full of ostentation and arrogance. <\/p>\n (9) That which I have not done, and where-unto I will not do any more the like.<\/strong>Our Lord uses similar language (Mat. 24:21<\/span>) in foretelling the final destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. But all question whether Ezekiel here looks forward to that calamity, and all comparison between that and the destruction under Nebuchadnezzar, are out of place. What the prophet here intends is not a comparison between different judgments upon the Jews, but between Gods treatment of them and of others. As they had received at His hand higher opportunities and privileges than He had before given or would afterwards give to any other nation, so must the punishment for their sin be more severe and more conspicuous than He had inflicted or would inflict on any other. All the Divine judgments upon them through all time may therefore be considered as here coming into view. The present captivity and the impending destruction of the temple were but single features of a long series of judgments, in the course of which the terrible particulars mentioned in Eze. 5:10<\/span> should have place, ending with what is the present condition of the people before our eyes, scattered into all the winds. Such evils had been foretold by their prophets all through their history as the consequence of disobedience (see Lev. 26:29<\/span>; Deu. 28:53<\/span>the sons eating their fathers is a fearful addition here; Jer. 19:9<\/span>), and from time to time had in some degree come to pass (2Ki. 6:28-29<\/span>; Lam. 2:20<\/span>), although the culmination of the punishment, like the culmination of the sin, was still future.<\/p>\n 9<\/strong>. <\/strong> I will do that which I have not done <\/strong> “This was no mere rhetorical threat. It is possible that the miseries of the siege and exile were no greater than those endured by other nations in those days, but the same miseries may be felt more acutely.” Davidson. Israel was a “peculiar people” in its advantages and its possibilities. Sinning against light, its guilt was greater, and its former exaltation by the same Hand that struck it down made its fall unique and its degradation full of peculiar misery (Lam 1:12<\/span>; Dan 9:12<\/span>). “No other nation had a conscience so sensitive as Israel, or lost so much by its political annihilation.” Skinner.<\/p>\n Eze 5:9<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>The like<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> The national punishment of the Jews, comprehending what they suffered from Nebuchadrezzar, Titus, and Adrian, has been remarkably signal. <\/p>\n Eze 5:9 And I will do in thee that which I have not done, and whereunto I will not do any more the like, because of all thine abominations.<\/p>\n Ver. 9. And I will do in thee that which I have not done.<\/strong> ] None shall suffer so much here or sink so deep in hell, as a profane Jew, a carnal gospeller, who is therefore worse than others, because he ought to be better. Oh, the height and weight of those judgments that shall be heaped upon such! See Lam 4:6<\/span> . <\/p>\n <\/p>\n And whereunto I will not do any more the like.<\/strong> ] For where ever read we that the fathers did eat their sons in an open visible way? and the sons the Fathers?<\/p>\n that which: Lam 4:6, Lam 4:9, Dan 9:12, Amo 3:2, Mat 24:21, The sentence here passed upon Jerusalem is very dreadful, and the manner of expression makes it yet more so: the judgments are various, the threatenings of them varied, reiterated; so that one may well say, Who is able to stand in God’s sight when he is angry? <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Eze 7:5 – General<\/p>\n Eze 5:9. This means that the punishment the Lord intended to inflict on Jerusalem would be greater than had ever been put on her before.<\/p>\n The Lord would punish Jerusalem uniquely for her sins. Father’s would eat their own sons, and sons their fathers, in the siege (cf. Lev 26:29; Deu 28:53; 2Ki 6:28-29; Jer 19:9; Lam 4:10). Yahweh would scatter most of the surviving remnant from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n And I will do in thee that which I have not done, and whereunto I will not do any more the like, because of all thine abominations. 9. that which I have not done ] This is no mere rhetorical threat. It is possible that the miseries of the siege and exile were no greater … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ezekiel 5:9”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-20566","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20566","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=20566"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20566\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20566"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20566"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20566"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"