21<\/strong>. for the king stood<\/em> ] standeth.<\/strong> All the verbs had better be put in the present.<\/p>\n made<\/em> his arrows bright<\/em> ] he shaketh the arrows<\/strong>, he consulteth the teraphim<\/strong>, he looketh<\/strong> in the liver. These ceremonies explain the phrase “to use divination,” The process has several parts: a sacrifice was offered to the deity or image, the liver of the animal apparently being inspected to see what intimations it suggested. Then arrows (among the Arabs they were pointless and unfeathered), inscribed with the names or things between which a decision was sought from the god (here Rabbah and Jerusalem), were cast into a vessel or bag; these were shaken and brought before the god from whom the decision was sought; one was then drawn, and the inscription it bore was the answer of the god to the alternative propounded for his settlement; in the present case the king’s right hand drew out the arrow inscribed “Jerusalem.” This method of divination by arrows was common among the Arabs (cf. Wellhausen, Skizzen<\/em>, iii. p. 127), and apparently also in Chaldea (Lenormant, La Divination chez les Chaldens<\/em>, ch. ii. iv., Sayce, Trans. Soc. Bib. Archology<\/em>, vol. iii. 145). It is related of the poet Imru’ulais that he used this method of divination to ascertain whether he should avenge his father’s death or no, and the answer always coming out “no,” he became enraged and breaking the arrows flung them in the god’s face, telling him that if the case had been that of his own father he would not have given such a decision, and (in Arab fashion) applying many foul epithets to the god’s mother. The teraphim are the deities which Nebuchadnezzar carried with him, who gave the oracle. The plur<\/em>. does not imply the use of more than one image.<\/p>\n Eze 21:21<\/span><\/p>\n The parting of the ways.<\/em><\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n Which way<\/strong><\/p>\n When <\/em>you have been wandering in the country you have sometimes come to where two roads branched away from the one you were on–like the two arms of the letter Y–and then you stood puzzled which to take; for the one would take you where you wanted to go, and the other would take you from it. That spot, then, where you stood uncertain was the parting of the way. Now, it is much the same with your life. It is a journey; you are always going on and on, getting older, getting better, or getting worse, just as you have turned to the right or the left at the parting of the way. In America there is a house built on the very top of a great ridge of mountains, and when the rain falls it gathers for a little on the flat roof and then drips over the eaves. But what do you think? the raindrops that fall on the one side and those that fall on the other never meet again! The one trickles away to the Atlantic, and the other descends to the Pacific ocean; they take just opposite ways, and never meet any more. That house is the parting of the way. And there are circumstances which divide people from each other in much the same way–once they are parted they never come together again. How careful, then, we should be, and how prayerful we should be, at these times in choosing what we shall do! How thoughtful and watchful, too, we should be about guiding others when they are at the parting of the way! A little word can sometimes save them then. About forty years ago a little boy went into a shoe shop in Boston to have some repairs made. While he was waiting he said to the errand boy of the shop, Do you go to Sunday school? No, said he, I dont know nothing about it, and cant read. Oh, said the other, I go to Sunday school, and I have such a nice teacher! If you tell me where you live, I will call for you next Sunday and take you. And he did; and the errand boy behaved very badly, saying naughty things, and sticking pins into his neighbours, altogether behaving so badly that the teacher threatened to turn him out of the school. Still, the teacher had patience and persevered–and who do you think that little wild scholar became? Mr. Daniel Moody, the great preacher, who along with Mr. Sankey has been the means of saving many, many people by bringing them to Jesus. And yet, it was a little boy who guided him right at the parting of the way! What a deal of good that little boy did that day! And you can do the same. Whenever you try to do good to others, or speak to them about Jesus, you are helping them more than you think to take the right way at the parting. When we come to the parting of the way there are two fashions of deciding which way we shall take. One way is by trusting to chance. That is the fashion the king the text speaks about decided which way to take. People do not use arrows nowadays, but sometimes they toss up, and that is just the same thing. Is that the way we should decide? No! no! a blind man might as well toss up whether an orange was black or white,–tossing up would never make it the one or the other. Never trust to chance; the book of Chance is Satans Bible, and that is always meant to deceive. There is a surer way, namely–Go by the directions. I saw a picture once which has stuck to my memory for years and years. It was a picture of a dark, wild, stormy night, and a traveller was standing up in the stirrups of his horse at a parting of the way, trying to read the directions on the fingerpost. How eagerly he is looking! I can see him yet–holding the lighted match carefully in his hands, lest the wind should blow it out before he had read the directions! It was a good thing for him that there were directions, and it is a good thing we have them too. Where are our directions? They are–the Bible. That is Gods word to us, telling us which road to take when we come to the parting of the way. (J. R. Howatt.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n He made his arrows bright, he consulted with images. Is Christianity a delusion<\/strong><\/p>\n Two modes of divination by which the King of Babylon proposed to find out the will of God. He took a bundle of arrows, put them together, mixed them up, then pulled forth one, and by the inscription on it decided what city he should first assault. Then an animal was slain, and by the lighter or darker colour of the liver the brighter or darker prospect of success was inferred. Stupid delusion! And yet all the ages have been filled with delusions. It seems as if the world loves to be hoodwinked. In the latter part of the eighteenth century Johanna Southcote came forth pretending to have Divine power, made prophecies, had chapels built in her honour, and 100,000 disciples came forth to follow her. So late as the year 1829, a man arose in New York, pretending to be a Divine being, and played his part so well that wealthy merchants became his disciples, and threw their fortunes into his discipleship. And so in all ages there have been necromancies, incantations, witchcrafts, sorceries, magical arts, enchantments, divinations, and delusions. None of these delusions accomplished any good. They opened no hospitals, healed no wounds, wiped away no tears, emancipated no serfdom. But there are those who say that all these delusions combined are as nothing compared with the delusion now abroad in the world, the delusion of the Christian religion. That delusion has today two hundred million dupes. It has conquered England and the United States, for they are called Christian nations. This champion delusion, this hoax, this swindle of the ages, as it has been called, has gone forth to conquer the islands of the Pacific the Melanesia and Micronesia, and Malayan Polynesia have already surrendered to the delusion. Yea, it has conquered the Indian Archipelago, and Borneo, and Sumatra, and Celebes and Java have fallen under its wiles. What a delusion! This delusion of the Christian religion shows itself in the fact that it goes to those who are in trouble. Now, it is bad enough to cheat a man when he is prosperous; but this religion comes to a man when he is sick, and says: You will be well again after awhile; youre going into a land where there are no coughs, and no pleurisies, and no consumptions; take courage and bear up. Yea, this awful chimera of the Gospel comes to the poor, and it says to them You are on your way to vast estates and to dividends always declarable. This delusion of Christianity comes to the bereft, and it talks of reunion before the throne, and of the cessation of all sorrow. And then, to show that this delusion will stop at absolutely nothing, it goes to the dying bed and fills the man with anticipations. How much better it would be to have him die without any more hope than swine and rats and snakes. Annihilation, vacancy, everlasting blank, obliteration! Why not present all that beautiful doctrine to the dying, instead of coming with this hoax, this swindle of the Christian religion, and filling the dying man with anticipations of another life until some in the last hour have clapped their hands, and some have shouted, and some have sung, and some had been so overwrought with joy that they could only look ecstatic. To show the immensity of this delusion, this awful swindle of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I open a hospital, and I bring into that hospital the deathbeds of a great many Christian people, and I ask a few questions. Dying Stephen, what have you to say? Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Dying John Wesley, what have you to say? The best of all is, God is with us. Dying Edward Payson, what have you to say? I float in a sea of glory. Dying John Bradford, what have yon to say? If there be any way of going to heaven on horseback, or in a fiery chariot, it is this. Dying Neander, what have you to say? I am going to sleep now–goodnight. Dying Mrs. Florence Foster, what have you to say? A pilgrim m the valley, but the mountain tops are all agleam from peak to peak. Dying Alexander Mather, what have you to say? The Lord who has taken care of me fifty years will not cast me off now; glory be to God and to the Lamb! Amen, amen, amen, amen! Dying John Powson, after preaching the Gospel so many years, what have you to say? My deathbed is a bed of roses. Dying Doctor Thomas Scott, what have you to say? This is heaven begun. Dying soldier in the last war, what have you to say? This is heaven begun. Dying soldier in the last war, what have you to say? Boys, I am going to the front. Dying telegraph operator on the battlefield of Virginia, what have you to say? The wires are all laid, and the poles are up from Stony Point to headquarters. Dying Paul, what have you to say? I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought the good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Oh death, where is thy sting? Oh grave, where is thy victory? Thanks be unto God, who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Oh my Lord, my God, what a delusion! what a glorious delusion! Submerge me with it; fill my eyes and ears with it; put it under my dying head for a pillow–this delusion; spread it over me for a canopy; put it underneath me for an outspread wing; roll it over me in ocean surges ten thousand fathoms deep. The overwhelming conclusion is that Christianity, producing such grand results, cannot be a delusion, an hallucination; cannot launch such a glory of the centuries. Your logic and your common sense convince you that a bad cause cannot produce an illustrious result. Some of you have read everything. You are scientific and you are scholarly, and yet if I should ask you, What is the most sensible thing you ever did? you would say, The most sensible thing I ever did was to give my heart to God. But there may be others here who have not had early advantages, and if they were asked to give their experience they might rise and give such testimony as the man gave in a prayer meeting when he said: On my way here tonight, I met a man who asked me where I was going. I said, I am going to a prayer meeting. He said, There are a great many religions, and I think the most of them are delusions; as to the Christian religion, that is only a notion, that is a mere notion, the Christian religion. I said to him: Stranger, you see that tavern over there? Yes, he said, I see it. Do you see me? Yes, of course I see you. Now, the time was when, every body in this town knows, if I had a quarter of a dollar in my pocket I could not pass that tavern without going and getting a drink; all the people of Jefferson could not keep me out of that place; but God has changed my heart, and the Lord Jesus Christ has destroyed my thirst for strong drink, and there is my whole weeks wages, and I have no temptation to go in there. And, stranger, if this is a notion, I want to tell you it is a mighty powerful notion; it is a notion that has put clothes on my childrens backs, and it is a notion that has put good food on our table, and it is a notion that has filled my mouth with thanksgiving to God; and, stranger, you had better go along with me, you might get religion too; lots of people are getting religion now. Well, we will soon understand it all. We will soon come to the last bar of the music, to the last act of the tragedy, to the last page of the book–yea, to the last line and to the last word, and to you and to me it will either be midnoon or midnight. (T. De Witt Talmage.<\/em>)<\/p>\n Verse 21<\/span>. For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the<\/B><\/I> <\/B>way<\/B><\/I>] He was in doubt which way he should first take; whether to humble the Ammonites by taking their metropolis, Riblath<\/I>, or go at once against Jerusalem. In this case of uncertainty, he made use of divination<\/I>. And this was of three<\/I> kinds: 1. By arrows<\/I>. 2. By images<\/I> or talismans<\/I>. 3. By inspecting the entrails<\/I> of a sacrifice offered on the occasion.<\/P> <\/P> 1. He made bright his arrows<\/I>. This might be after the manner in which the divination is still practiced among the Arabs. These arrows were without head or wing. They took three. On one they wrote, Command me, Lord<\/I>. On the second, Forbid me, Lord<\/I>. The third was blank<\/I>. These were put in a bag, and the querist put in his hand and took one out. If it was Command me<\/I>, he set about the business immediately; if it was Forbid me<\/I>, he rested for a whole<\/I> year<\/I>; if it was the blank<\/I> one, he drew again. On all occasions the Arabs consulted futurity by such arrows. See D’Herbelot<\/I>, under the word ACDAH.<\/P> <\/P> 2. As to the images<\/I>, the Hebrew calls them teraphim<\/I>. See Clarke on Ge 31:19<\/span>.<\/P> <\/P> 3. And as to the liver<\/I>, I believe it was only inspected to see whether the animal offered in sacrifice were sound<\/I> and healthy<\/I>, of which the state of the liver<\/I> is the most especial indication. When the liver is sound, the animal is healthy; and it would have been a bad omen to any who offered sacrifice, to find that the animal they had offered to their gods was diseased<\/I>; as, in that case, they would have taken for granted that the sacrifice was not accepted.<\/P> <\/p>\n The prophet, by reason of the certainty of the thing, speaketh of what shall be as if it were already; he stood, i.e. he will make a halt, pitch his camp, and consult, on the borders of Arabia the Desert, to which one road brings travellers from Babylon, but henceforward it divides, and be comes two, one leading to Jerusalem, the other to Rabbath <\/P> To use divination; <\/B>to consult with his gods, and to cast lots; and here the prophet foretells what divination he useth. <\/P> Made his arrows bright:<\/B> this, the first kind of divination he used by arrows, (<\/span>,) either writing on then the names of the cities and countries, then putting then into a quiver, and there mixing them, and thence drawing them out, and concluding according as the names were which were on the arrows, or perhaps by shooting the arrows and judging by the flight, or casting them up in the air and divining by their fall, as beggars are said to go a their staff falls. So then if Jerusalem were on the first arrow drawn out of the quiver, or if the arrows best ties or most fell that way, toward Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar will take that way. The next way of divining was by asking counsel of his idol, or image, which being made artificially by the skill of their juggling priests and conjurers, with little help they could give answers, and the image spake aloud what the sorcerer spake more softly, somewhat like the artificial whispering places which convey the voice, from unseen persons. Or by a Divine permission the devil gave them answers from those images. The third divination is by sacrifice, and judging of future prosperous or unprosperous events by the entrails, and more especially by the liver, its position and colour. All these he used, that with greater confidence of success he might proceed. <\/P> <\/p>\n 21. parting<\/B>literally, “motherof the way.” As “head of the two ways” follows, whichseems tautology after “parting of the way,” HAVERNICKtranslates, according to Arabic<\/I> idiom, “the highway,”or principal road. English Version<\/I> is not tautology, “headof the two ways” defining more accurately “parting of theway.” <\/P> made . . . bright<\/B>rather,”shook,” from an Arabic<\/I> root. <\/P> arrows<\/B>Divination byarrows is here referred to: they were put into a quiver marked withthe names of particular places to be attacked, and then shaken<\/I>together; whichever came forth first intimated the one selected asthe first to be attacked [JEROME].The same usage existed among the Arabs, and is mentioned in theKoran. In the Nineveh sculptures the king is represented with a cupin his right hand, his left resting on a bow; also with two arrows inthe right, and the bow in the left, probably practising divination. <\/P> images<\/B>Hebrew,<\/I>“teraphim”; household gods, worshipped as family talismans,to obtain direction as to the future and other blessings. Firstmentioned in Mesopotamia, whence Rachel brought them (Gen 31:19<\/span>;Gen 31:34<\/span>); put away by Jacob (Ge35:4<\/span>); set up by Micah as his household gods (Jud17:5<\/span>); stigmatized as idolatry (1Sa15:23<\/span>, Hebrew;<\/I> Zec 10:2<\/span>,Margin<\/I>). <\/P> liver<\/B>They judged ofthe success, or failure, of an undertaking by the healthy, orunhealthy, state of the liver and entrails of a sacrifice.<\/P><\/p>\n For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways<\/strong>,…. That is, he would stand there; the prophet knew that it was certain it should be, and therefore represents it as if it was; he had, by a spirit of prophecy, seen, that when the king of Babylon was come to such a place, on the borders of the desert of Arabia, where the road from Babylon parted, where two ways met, the one leading to Jerusalem on the right, and the other to Rabbath on the left, he should make a full stop with his army, and consider which way he should take, whether that which led to Jerusalem, or that which led to Rabbath. It is very probable, when he came out of Babylon, his scheme was to make an attempt on both these important places, and take them; but be had not determined which to attack first, and was still doubtful; and now being come to the two roads, which led to the one and the other, it was necessary to make a halt, consider, and conclude, which course to steer; to determine which, he thought proper “to use divination”, which was performed in the following manner:<\/p>\n he made his arrows bright<\/strong>; being made of iron or steel; in the brightness of which diviners looked, and made their observations, and accordingly directed what was to be done; as they did by looking into the brightness of a man’s nails, as David Kimchi observes; though his father, Joseph Kimchi, was of opinion that the word has the signification of casting of arrows, or causing them to fly in the air; and supposes that Nebuchadnezzar cast up arrows into the air, and observed on which side they fell, and so judged which way to take; to this agrees the Targum,<\/p>\n “with a bow he cast out arrows;”<\/p>\n so the Syriac and Arabic versions b. Jerom says the way of divining by arrows was this: arrows, with the names of the cities inscribed upon them, were put into a quiver, and mixed together; and the city upon the arrow which came out first was first attacked. To this agrees the Vulgate Latin version, which renders the words, “mingling the arrows”; and Dr. Pocock c prefers this sense of the word, which he observes so signifies in the Arabic language; and who gives an account of the use of divination by arrows among the Arabians, who much used it; though forbidden by Mahomet, as Schultens d observes. Their custom was this; when a man was about to marry a wife, or go a journey, or do any business of importance, he put three arrows into a vessel; on one was inscribed,<\/p>\n “my lord hath commanded me;”<\/p>\n on another,<\/p>\n “my lord hath forbid me;”<\/p>\n the third had nothing on it. If the first he took out had the command upon it, then he proceeded with great alacrity: but if it had the prohibition, he desisted; and if that which had nothing inscribed on it, he laid it by, till one of the other two was taken out; and there is to this day a sort of divination by arrows used by the Turks; it is commonly for the wars, though it is also performed for all sorts of things; as to know whether a man should undertake a voyage, buy such a commodity, or the like. The manner of doing it, as Monsieur Thevenot e relates, is this; they take four arrows, and place them with their points against one another, giving them to be held by two persons; then they lay a naked sword upon a cushion before them, and read a certain chapter of the Alcoran; with that the arrows fight together for some time, and at length the one fall upon the other: if, for instance the victorious have been named Christians (for two of them they call Turks, and the other two by the name of their enemy), it is a sign that the Christians will overcome; if otherwise, it denotes the contrary. The Jews f say, that in the present case of Nebuchadnezzar, that when he or his diviner cast the arrow for Antioch, or for Tyre, or for Laodicea, it was broke; but when he cast it for Jerusalem, it was not broke; by which he knew that he should destroy it. This is that sort of divination which is called “belomancy”: he consulted with images; or “teraphim”; images in which, as Kimchi says, they saw things future; Heathen oracles, from whence responses were made; these were images for private use, such as were the “lares” and “penates” with the Romans; these Laban had in his house in which Rachel stole from him; and are supposed to be such as are made under certain constellations, and their influences capable of speaking; see Zec 10:2<\/span>, as Aben Ezra on<\/p>\n Ge 31:34<\/span> observes, with which men used to consult about things future or unknown; and this is thought to be one reason why Rachel took away these images from her father, that he might not, by consulting with them, know which way Jacob fled g with such as these the king of Babylon consulted, that he might know which way he should take:<\/p>\n he looked in the liver<\/strong>; of a beast slain, and made observations on that to direct him; as used to be done by the Aruspices among the Romans. This is that sort of divination which is called “hepatoscopy”, or inspection into the liver; for though the Aruspices or Extispices, so called from their looking into the entrails of a beast, and making their observations on them, used to view the several inward parts, yet chiefly the liver, which they called the head of the intestines; and if this was wanting, or the head in it, the chief part of it, it was an ill omen; thus, in the month that Claudius Caesar was poisoned, the head of the liver was wanting in the sacrifice; or if the liver was livid, vicious, had any pustules upon it, or any purulent matter in it; or was touched, cut and wounded with the knife of the sacrificer, it foreboded great evils and misfortunes; or if the extreme part of the liver, which is called the fibre, was so placed, that from the lowest fibre the livers were replicated, or there was a double liver, this was a token for good, and portended joy and happiness h: moreover, they used to divide the bowels or entrails into two parts, and so the liver; the one they called “familiaris”, by which they judged what would befall themselves and their friends; the other “hostilis”, what concerned their enemies; according to the habit, colour, and position they were in, they concluded what would befall the one and the other i. Lucan k and Seneca l particularly have respect to this: and the king of Babylon here having two people to deal with, the Ammonites and the Jews, he inspects the liver of a creature slain for sacrifice, that he might judge which was best and safest for him to attack; which was less threatening, and more easy to be overcome m: this divination used to be made with calves, kids, and lambs n.<\/p>\n b So R. So. Urbin. Ohel Moed, fol. 25, 2, interprets the word. c Specimen Arab. Hist. p. 327. d Animadv. in Job, p. 169, 170. e Travels, par. 1. B. 1. ch. 6. p. 36. f Midrash Tillim in Psal. lxxix. 1. g See Godwin’s Moses and Aaron, l. 4. c. 9. h Vid. Alex. ab flex. Genial. Dier. l. 5. c. 25. & Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 11. c. 37. i Vid. Valtrinum de Re Militari Roman. l. 1. c. 6. p. 27. Liv. & Ciceron. in ib. k “Cernit tabe jecur madidum, venasque minaces, Hostili de parte videt”, &c. Pharsal. l. 1. l “Hostile valido robore insurlit latus.” Oedipus, Act. 2. m Vid. Lydium de Re Militari, l. 1. c. 3. p. 9, 10. n Pausanias, l. 6. p. 345.<\/p>\n (21) To use divination.<\/strong>Various particular forms of divination are mentioned just afterwards. This is a general term to include them all. Divination was always resorted to by the heathen on occasions of important questions. In this case, while Nebuchadnezzar thought in this way to determine his action, it was already fixed for him by a higher Power.<\/p>\n Made his arrows bright.<\/strong>Rather, shook his arrows. <\/em>This was a mode of divination in use among the ancient Arabs, as well as in Mesopotamia, and something very similar is mentioned by Homer as practised among the ancient Greeks (II., <\/em>iii. 316). It continued to be used among the Arabs until the time of Mohammed, who strictly torbade it in the Koran (3:39, 5:4, 94). Several arrows, properly marked, were shaken together in a quiver or other vessel, and one drawn out. The mark upon the one drawn was supposed to indicate the will of the gods. It was thus simply one form of casting lots.<\/p>\n Consulted with images.<\/strong>The particular images here mentioned were teraphim, small idols, which are often spoken of in Scripture as used in divination by the Israelites themselves, and common also among the heathen. (See 1Sa. 15:23<\/span>, where the word idolatry is in the original teraphim.) Nothing is known of the way in which these were used in divination.<\/p>\n Looked in the liver.<\/strong>The inspection of the entrails of sacrificial victims, and especially of the liver, as a means of ascertaining the will of the gods, is familiar to every reader of classical literature. There is evidence that the same custom prevailed also in Babylonia. The king is represented as employing all these different kinds of divination to make sure of the proper path.<\/p>\n 21<\/strong>. <\/strong> Stood <\/strong> Literally, standeth. <\/em> The prophet sees what shall come to pass as if it had already happened. <\/p>\n Made his arrows bright<\/strong>, etc. Rather, he shaketh with the arrows, he inquireth of the teraphim <\/em> ( images<\/em>); he looketh in the liver. <\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n His arrows <\/strong> The Babylonians practiced five principal methods of divination: by the flight of arrows, by the flight of birds, by the livers of dogs, by divining cups, by terra cotta images. This practice of belomancy, or presaging the future with arrows, though mentioned nowhere else in the Old Testament, was the most common and simple form of martial divination in Babylon. As Professor Toy says, “Reference to this custom seems very natural in the mouth of Ezekiel, who might have seen the ceremony performed as we now have it figured on the Assyrian and Babylonian monuments.” ( See Society of Biblical Literature, <\/em> vol. 1.) Perhaps these were arrows which were about to be used in the campaign. One text says, “The arrows are lances in the town and in the country, the terror of the earth” ( W.A.I., <\/em> 3:52). The method of using the arrows is not explained on the monuments. Tacitus describes the Germans as cutting into several pieces a rod from a fruit-bearing tree, marking the different pieces according to the different plans proposed and then casting them at hazard and deciding the issue by the way in which the sticks lay. So several arrows might be thrown into the air at the junction of two roads and the way taken to which the arrows inclined in falling; or inscribed arrows might be shaken in a vessel and one selected at random (Lenormant, La Divination, <\/em> chap. ii). Doubtless, divination was practiced in Babylon by shooting the arrow (Laurent, La Magie et La Divination, <\/em> 1894, p. 83, etc.); but the mention of the king shaking the arrows would favor here some other method. These arrows or spears are often seen represented, on the cylinders, carried in the hands to the number of eight by Asshur, Marduk, and Ishtar. <\/p>\n Consulted with images <\/strong> This practice is again mentioned (Zec 10:2<\/span>). These images seem to have been figures of Mul-lil, <\/em> or Eu-lil, <\/em> the ghost-god. The habit of consulting them dates back to the most remote date of Babylonian civilization. Some of these which were brought from Khorsabad can be seen to-day in the British Museum. These images are called by the Semitic name, teraphim. <\/em> (See Gen 31:19<\/span>.) <\/p>\n He looked in the liver <\/strong> This is thoroughly Babylonian. A cuneiform text at Berlin says, “Incantation: The liver of a dog, the liver of a black dog, the utuk <\/em> of fortune, the utuk <\/em> of Mul-lil, I see.”<\/p>\n “For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination.”<\/p>\n Ezekiel slowly and deliberately depicts the king of Babylon as reaching the fork in the road and then stopping to determine by divination which route he would take. Every watcher must have had his heart in his mouth.<\/p>\n “He shook the arrows to and fro, he consulted the teraphim, he looked in the liver.”<\/p>\n These were three ways of determining the will of the gods. The shaking up of arrows in their quiver (belomancy), in this case probably with the names of the cities on, and then drawing one out with suitable ritual (this was also a common practise among Arabs); consulting the teraphim, household cult objects used for divination (see 2Ki 23:24<\/span>); and examining the marks on the liver of a sacrificed animal (hepatoscopy), for which procedures were well known which were taught to the initiated, probably firstly by the use of clay models of which we have discovered examples.<\/p>\n Ezekiel no doubt in some way mimed each of these actions as the tension grew.<\/p>\n Eze 21:21-22<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>For the king of Babylon stood, <\/em><\/strong>&c.<\/strong> For the king of Babylon stands, <\/em>&c.He casts lots by, blends <\/em>or mingles the arrows; he inquires by images, he pours upon <\/em>or pries into the liver <\/em>or entrails. <\/em>Eze 21:22<\/span>. On his right hand is the lot against Jerusalem, to appoint captains to open the mouth for slaughter. <\/em>The method of divination by arrows is still in use among the Turks and idolatrous Arabs, and is thus well described by D’Herbelot: “The idolatrous Arabs used a sort of lots, which they called lots by arrows. These arrows were without head or feather, and called in their language Achdah <\/em>or Azlam. <\/em>They were three in number, inclosed in a bag, held in the hands of one whom they called Mohaver Hobal, <\/em>or the diviner; who gave answers for Hobal, an ancient idol in the temple of Mecca before the coming of Mahomet. Upon one of these arrows was written, Command me, Lord. <\/em>Upon the second, Forbid, <\/em>or prevent, Lord: <\/em>the third arrow was blank. When any one wanted to determine upon an action, he went to the diviner with a present; who drew one of the arrows from his bag; and if the arrow of command appeared, the Arab immediately set about the affair; if that of prohibition appeared, he deferred the execution of his enterprize for a whole year: when the blank arrow came out, which was called in the Arabic Minih, <\/em>he was to draw again. The Arabs consulted these arrows upon all their affairs, and particularly their marriages, the circumcision of their children, their journeys, and expeditions in war; they also made use of them for the dividing of any thing, and particularly the parts of the victim or camel, which they sacrificed upon certain stones, or to certain idols, which were placed round the temple at Mecca. Mahomet in the chapter of the Koran intitled Maidat, <\/em>or ‘of the table,’ at the beginning, where he is speaking of things prohibited to the Mussulmen, expressly forbids this practice in these words; Make no division with the arrows of lot.” <\/em>See Bibliotheque Orientale, under the word ACDAH. The authors of the Universal History remark, that this superstitious custom of divining by arrows was used by the ancient Greeks and other nations. The Commentary of St. Jerome on the present passage strikingly agrees with what we are told of the aforesaid custom of the old Arabs; “He shall stand (says he) in the highway, and consult the oracle after the manner of his nation, that he may cast arrows into a quiver, and mix them together, being written upon or marked with the names of each people, that he may see whose arrow will come forth, and which city he ought first to attack.” See Potter’s Antiquities, vol. 1: p. 334 and Sale’s Preliminary Discourse to the Koran, p. 126. <\/p>\n Eze 21:21 For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination: he made [his] arrows bright, he consulted with images, he looked in the liver.<\/p>\n Ver. 21. For the king of Babylon stood at the parting.<\/strong> ] Heb., At the mother of the way; ubi via una in ducts bifidata est.<\/em> a<\/em> <\/p>\n <\/p>\n To use divination.<\/strong> ] Without which, and offering sacrifice, the very heathens held it not fit to fight. But this their art of divination was, as one saith of alchymy, Ars falsissima et fallacissima.<\/em> <\/p>\n <\/p>\n He made his arrows bright.<\/strong> ] Vulg., He mingled his arrows; that is, saith Jerome, he took two arrows, writing upon the one Jerusalem, and upon the other Rabbath. Then, putting them into a quiver together, he took one out, being blindfolded; upon which seeing Jerusalem written, he divined that he should go with success against Jerusalem. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n He consulted with images.<\/strong> ] In which the devil sometimes spake. See Aug., De Civitate Dei,<\/em> lib. iv. cap. 18. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n He looked into the liver.<\/strong> ] This was much practised by the Roman generals, as by Caesar, when he went against Pompey. b<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> Ubi se via findit in ambas.<\/em> – Virg.<\/em> <\/p>\n b<\/em> Lucan.<\/p>\n stood = bath come to a stand. <\/p>\n to use divination = to divine a divination. <\/p>\n made his arrows bright = hath shaken his arrows. This was one of the modes of divination by which the arrow (marked like a lot), gave the decision. <\/p>\n images = teraphim. <\/p>\n looked in, &c. = inspected the liver; another mode of divination. It healthy or double and the lobes inclined inward, the omen was favourable; but if diseased or too dry, or without a lobe or a band between the parts, the omen was unfavourable. <\/p>\n the king: Pro 16:33, Pro 21:1 <\/p>\n parting: Heb. mother <\/p>\n to use: Num 23:28, Deu 18:10, 1Sa 15:23, Pro 16:10, Act 16:16 <\/p>\n he made: Or, as the Vulgate, “he mingled his arrows:” “They wrote on several arrows,” says Jerome, “the names of the cities they intended to assault; and then putting them altogether promiscuously in a quiver, they drew then out thence as lots are drawn; and that city whose name was written on the arrow first drawn, was the city they first made war on.” <\/p>\n arrows: or, knives <\/p>\n images: Heb. teraphim, Gen 31:19, Gen 31:30, Jdg 17:5, Jdg 18:14, Jdg 18:18, Jdg 18:20, Jdg 18:24, 2Ki 23:24, Hos 3:4, Hos 4:12, Zec 10:2 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Jdg 18:5 – Ask counsel Est 3:7 – they cast Pur Joe 3:9 – Prepare Mic 5:1 – he hath<\/p>\n Eze 21:21. This verse deals with the state of uncertainty in the mind of the king of Babylon which was discussed at verse 19, Vse divination refers to the way the king was using to bring him to a decision as to which way to choose, when the Lord intervened and made the decision for him. Looking in the liver refers to an ancient superstition of consulting the interna] organs of various creatures in arriving at decisions. Myers’ Ancient History (page 344) says the following on this subject:<\/p>\n “From Etruria was introduced the art of the haruspiccs, <\/p>\n or soothsayers, which consisted in discovering the will <\/p>\n of the gods by the appearance of the entrails of victims <\/p>\n slain for the sacrifices.<\/p>\n Eze 21:21-22. For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way The prophet here expresses what was future as if it were past, according to the usual style of the prophets, when speaking of things soon to come to pass. And he explains the symbolical action spoken of in the two foregoing verses; he shows that it was designed to represent what the king of Babylon would do when he was on his march, and came to the place where the road was divided; that he would use divination to determine which of the roads he should take. He made his arrows bright The Vulgate reads, Commiscens sagittas, Mingling his arrows; which sense of the verb , agrees better with the accounts given us by ancient writers of this kind of divination, and therefore is preferred by Dr. Pocock, who confirms it by the Arabic use of the word. It is also adopted by Bishop Newcome. The way of divining by arrows is thus described by St. Jerome in his commentary on this place: They wrote on several arrows the names of the cities they intended to assault; and then, putting them all together promiscuously in a quiver, they drew them out thence as lots are drawn; and that city whose name was written on the arrow first drawn was the city they first made war upon. A method of divining by arrows is still in use, it appears, among the idolatrous Arabs. Of this we read the following description, in Sales Preliminary Discourse to the Koran, p. 126: Seven divining arrows were kept at the temple of Mecca; but generally, in divination, the idolatrous Arabs made use of three only, on one of which was written, My Lord hath commanded me; on another, My Lord hath forbidden me; and the third was blank. If the first was drawn, they looked on it as an approbation of the enterprise in question; if the second, they made a contrary conclusion; but if the third happened to be drawn, they mixed them, and drew over again, till a decisive answer was given by one of the others. He consulted with images The Hebrew word here is teraphim, the name given to the images, or gods, which Rachel stole from Laban, Gen 31:19. In what way these were consulted cannot now be said, and all conjectures about it are vain. He looked in the liver This was another way of divination used among these heathen; they determined for or against certain things, according to the state of the liver of sacrificed animals, whether mutilated or complete, sound or unsound, or from its colour, or some marks appearing in particular places of it, and this by rules laid down among them. At his right hand was the divination for Jerusalem When the king of Babylon stood at the head of the two ways, to consult which of the two he should take, the tokens that were shown him, God so ordering it, induced him to march with his army to the right, that is, toward Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar must be considered as coming from Dan, and marching along the river Jordan. Rabbath was therefore situated to the left hand, and Jerusalem to the right: see Michaelis. From this, and many other instances in the Scriptures, we may conclude, that things apparently the most fortuitous, such as the coming up of lots, and the like, are subject to the direction of Divine Providence, and, when occasion requires it, are ordered to answer its purposes; to open the mouth in the slaughter Or, to the slaughter; that is, to animate the soldiers to slay. To lift up the voice with shouting To make the military cry, in order to strike the inhabitants with terror. We find it was usual, in almost all armies, to begin the attack of their enemies with a loud cry, which served to animate their own men, and to intimidate the enemy. To cast a mount See note on Jer 22:24.<\/p>\n 21:21 For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination: he made [his] arrows bright, he consulted with images, he looked in {r} the liver.<\/p>\n (r) He used conjuring and sorcery.<\/p>\n When the king of Babylon reached the fork in the road, he used pagan methods to determine which road he should take (cf. Isa 47:8-15). Belomancy involved writing various names on several arrows, mixing them in a quiver, and then drawing or throwing them out. The arrow chosen indicated the god’s selection. Teraphim were household idols that the pagans believed had connections with the spirits of departed ancestors who could communicate with them (necromancy). Hepatoscopy involved inspecting the liver or entrails of a sacrificed animal and making a decision based on their shape, color, and markings.<\/p>\n Both Judah and Ammon had proved to be disloyal vassals; they had both rebelled against Babylon in 593 B.C. The lot fell to go against Jerusalem and to besiege it rather than Rabbah. Obviously the Lord controlled the pagan means that Nebuchadnezzar used to determine what He should do (Pro 16:33; Pro 21:1; Jer 27:6).<\/p>\n For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination: he made [his] arrows bright, he consulted with images, he looked in the liver. 21. for the king stood ] standeth. All the verbs had better be put in the present. made his … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ezekiel 21:21”<\/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-20976","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20976","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=20976"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20976\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20976"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20976"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20976"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
<\/strong><\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/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: 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 Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/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: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"