John Calvin Commentary Ezekiel 1:1-2

"Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth [month], in the fifth [day] of the month, as I was among the captives by the river Chebar, that the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. In the fifth [day] of the month, which was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin`s captivity," — Ezekiel 1:1-2 (ASV)

We see that the Prophet was called to the office of a Teacher in the fifth year after Jehoiachin had voluntarily surrendered himself to the king of Babylon (2 Kings 24:15) and had been dragged into exile, together with his mother. For, he says, it was in the thirtieth year. Most commentators follow the Chaldee Paraphrast and understand him to date from the finding of the Book of the Law.

It is quite clear that this year was the eighteenth of King Josiah, but in my computation, I do not subscribe to the opinion of those who adopt this date. For this phrase—the thirtieth year—would then appear too obscure and forced. We nowhere read that succeeding writers adopted this date as a standard.

Besides, there is no doubt that the usual method among the Jews was to begin to reckon from a Jubilee. For this was a starting point for the future. I therefore do not doubt that this thirtieth year is reckoned from the Jubilee. Nor is my opinion a new one, for Jerome mentions it, although he altogether rejects it, being deceived by an opposing opinion.

But since it is certain that the Jews used this method of computation and made a beginning from Jobel, that is, the Jubilee, this best explains the thirtieth year. If anyone should object that we do not read that this eighteenth year of King Josiah was the usual year in which everyone returned to his own lands (Leviticus 25), liberty was given to the slaves, and the entire restoration of the whole people took place, yet the answer is easy. Although we cannot ascertain in what year the Jobel fell, it is sufficient for us to assign the Jubilee to this year because the Jews followed the custom of numbering their years from this institution.

Just as the Greeks had their Olympiads and the Romans their Consuls, and from these their computation of annals, so also the Hebrews were accustomed to begin from the year Jobel, when they counted their years leading up to the next restoration, which I have just mentioned. It is therefore probable that this was a Jubilee year—it is probable, then, that this was the Jubilee. For it is said that Josiah celebrated the Passover with such magnificent pomp and splendor that there had been nothing like it since the time of Samuel (2 Chronicles 35:18).

The conjecture that best explains this is not simply that he celebrated the Passover with such magnificence, but that he was induced to do so by the peculiar occasion when the people were restored and returned to their possessions, and the slaves were set free. Since, then, this was the Jubilee, the pious king was induced to celebrate the Passover with far greater splendor than was usual—indeed, even to surpass David and Solomon.

Again, although he reigned thirteen years afterwards, we do not read that he celebrated any Passover with remarkable splendor. We do not doubt his yearly celebration, for this was customary (2 Kings 23:23). From this we conclude that this particular celebration was extraordinary and that the year was Jobel. But though it is not expressed in Scripture, it is sufficient for us that the Prophet reckoned the years according to the accustomed manner of the people.

For he says that this was the fifth year of King Jehoiachin’s captivity (who is also called Jehoiakim); for Jehoiakim succeeded Josiah and reigned eleven years. The thirteen years that remain of Josiah’s reign and these eleven make twenty-four (2 Kings 23:36). Now, his successor, Jehoiachin, passed immediately into the hands of King Nebuchadnezzar, was taken captive at the beginning of his reign, and reigned only three or four months (2 Kings 24:8). After that, the last king, Zedekiah, was set up by the will of the king of Babylon. We see, therefore, that nine years are made up: add the duration of Jehoiachin’s reign, and so it is no longer doubtful that the thirtieth year is reckoned from the eighteenth of King Josiah. It is true that the Law of God was found during this year (2 Chronicles 34:14), but the Prophet here accommodates himself to the received rule and custom.

We must now come to God’s intention in appointing Ezekiel as His Prophet. For thirty-five years Jeremiah had not ceased to cry aloud, but to little effect. Therefore, when this Prophet Jeremiah was so occupied, God wished to give him a colleague. And it was no small relief when Jeremiah, at Jerusalem, became aware that the Holy Spirit was speaking through another mouth in harmony with him, for by this means the truth of his teaching was confirmed.

In the thirteenth year of Josiah, Jeremiah undertook the prophetic office (Jeremiah 1:2): eighteen years of Josiah’s reign remained; add the eleven years of Jehoiakim, and it will make twenty-nine; then add another year, and five more, and we shall have thirty-five years. This then was his hard task: to cry aloud continually for thirty-five years to the deaf, indeed, even to the insane.

God, therefore, so that He might help His servant, gave him an ally who would teach the same things at Babylon that Jeremiah had not ceased proclaiming at Jerusalem. He benefited not only the captives but also the rest of the people who still remained in the city and the land.

As far as the captives were concerned, this confirmation was necessary for them, for they had false prophets there, as we learn from Jeremiah 29:21. There was Ahab the son of Kolaiah, and Zedekiah the son of Maaseiah. They proudly boasted that they were endowed with the Spirit of revelation; they promised the people marvels; they derided the weakness of those who had left their country; they said that they were determined to fight to the very last and to risk their lives rather than voluntarily give up the inheritance of divine promise.

In this way they insulted the captives. After this, there was Shemaiah the Nehelamite (Jeremiah 29:24), who wrote to the high priest Zephaniah and reproached him for being careless and neglectful because he did not severely punish Jeremiah as an impostor, a fanatic, and a false intruder into the prophetic office.

Since, therefore, the Devil had his busy agents there, God stationed His Prophet there, and thus we see how useful, indeed, how necessary it was, that Ezekiel should discharge his prophetic office there. But the usefulness of his instructions extended much further, since those at Jerusalem were compelled to listen to the prophecies that Ezekiel uttered in Chaldea.

When they saw that his prophecies agreed with those of Jeremiah, they would necessarily at least inquire into the cause of this coincidence. For it is not natural that one Prophet at Jerusalem and another in Chaldea should utter their prophecies, as it were, in the same key, just as two singers unite their voices in harmony with each other.

For no melody can be devised more perfectly complete than that which appears between these two servants of God. Now we see the meaning of what our Prophet says concerning “the years.” In the thirtieth year: then in the fourth month, (the word “month” being understood) and in the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives.

Before I proceed any further, I will briefly touch on the subjects Ezekiel treats. He has all things in common with Jeremiah, as I have said, with this peculiarity: he denounces the final slaughter against the people because they did not cease to heap iniquity upon iniquity, and thereby inflamed God’s vengeance still more.

He threatens them, therefore, and not just once, because the people’s hard-heartedness was such that it was not enough to utter God’s threats three or four times unless he continually impressed them upon them. But, at the same time, he shows the reasons why God determined to treat His people so severely: namely, because they were contaminated with many superstitions; because they were treacherous, greedy, cruel, and full of plunder; given over to luxury and depraved by lust. Our Prophet unites all these things to show that God’s vengeance is not too severe, since the people had arrived at the utmost height of impiety and all wickedness.

At the same time, he gives them, here and there, some taste of God’s mercy. For all threats are useless unless some promise of favor is extended. Indeed, God’s vengeance, as soon as it is displayed, drives people to despair, and despair hurls them headlong into madness. For as soon as anyone apprehends God’s anger, he is necessarily agitated and then, like a raging beast, wages war with God Himself.

For this reason, I said, all threats are useless without a taste of God’s mercy. The Prophets always argue with people with no other intention than that of stirring them up to penitence, which they could never achieve unless God could be reconciled to those who had been alienated from Him.

This then is the reason why our Prophet, as well as Jeremiah, when they reprove the people, temper their harshness by interspersing promises. He also prophesies against pagan nations, like Jeremiah, especially against the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Tyrians, the Egyptians, and the Assyrians (Jeremiah 26-29). But from the fortieth chapter, he treats more fully and abundantly the restoration of the Temple and the city.

There he openly announces that a new state of the people would arise, in which both the royal dignity would flourish again and the priesthood would recover its ancient excellence. To the end of the book, he unfolds the remarkable benefits of God, which were to be hoped for after the close of the seventy years.

Here it is useful to remember what we observed in the case of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 28): while the false prophets were promising the people a return after three or five years, the true Prophets were predicting what would really happen, so that the people might patiently submit themselves to God, and that the length of time might not interrupt their calm submission to His just corrections.

Now that we understand what our Prophet is addressing, and the tendency as well as the substance of his teaching, I will proceed with the context.

He says: as I was among the captives. While some skillfully explain the Prophet’s words, they think that he was not actually in the midst of the exiles but that this refers to a vision. They argue that because he uses the word “among” (signifying “in the midst”), its sense could be that he was in the assembly of the whole people. But his intention is quite different, for he uses the above phrase to show that he was an exile along with the rest, and yet that the prophetic spirit was granted to him in that polluted land.

Thus, the words “among the captives,” or “in the midst of the captives,” do not mean the assembly, but simply state that, although the Prophet was far from the Sacred Land, the hand of God was extended to him there, so that he might excel in the prophetic gift. Thus, the folly of those who deny our Prophet the possession of any spirit of revelation before he went into exile is refuted.

Although they do not err so much through mistake and ignorance as through willful stupidity, for the Jews resented nothing more than the thought of God reigning beyond the sacred land. To this day, indeed, they are hardened because they are dispersed throughout the whole world and scattered through all regions, and yet they retain much of their ancient pride.

But then, when there was any hope of return, this profanation—God’s truth shining forth elsewhere than in the holy land, especially outside the Temple—seemed scarcely tolerable to them. The Prophet then shows that he was called to the office of instruction when he was in the midst of the exiles, and one of them.

God’s inestimable goodness is conspicuous in this: He called the Prophet, as it were, from the abyss, for Babylon was a profound abyss. Thus, the Spirit of God emerged with His own instrument; that is, He brought forth this man to be the minister and herald of His vengeance as well as of His favor.

We see, therefore, how wonderfully God drew light out of darkness when our Prophet was called to his office during his exile. In the meantime, although his doctrine ought to have been useful to the Jews still remaining in their homeland, God still wished them not to return to Him without some mark of their disgrace.

For, because they had despised all the prophecies that had been uttered at home—in the Temple, the Sanctuary, and on Mount Zion—these prophecies were now to issue forth from that cursed land, and from a teacher who was sunk, as I have said, in that profound abyss. We see then that God chastised their impious contempt of His instructions, not without putting them to shame.

For a long time Isaiah had discharged the prophetic office; then came Jeremiah, but the people always remained just as they had formerly been. Since, then, prophecy flowing freely from the very fountain was despised by the Jews, God raised up a Prophet in Chaldea. Now, therefore, we see the full meaning of the clause.

He says, by the river of Chebar, which many understand to mean the Euphrates. However, they assign no reason for this except that they do not find any other celebrated river in that country. For the Tigris loses its name after flowing into the Euphrates, and on this account, they think the Euphrates is called Chebar.

But we are ignorant of the region to which our Prophet was banished. Perhaps it was Mesopotamia, or else beyond Chaldea. Besides, since the Euphrates has many tributaries, it is probable that each has its own name. But since all is uncertain, I would rather leave the matter in suspense.

Because the Prophet received his vision on the banks of the river, some argue from this that the waters were, as it were, dedicated to revelations. When they assign the cause, they say that water is lighter than earth, and as a prophet must necessarily rise above the earth, so water is suitable for revelations.

Some connect this with ablution and think that baptism is prefigured. But I pass over these subtleties, which vanish of themselves, and I very willingly leave them because in this way Scripture would lose all its solidity. Conjectures of this kind are very plausible, but we ought to seek sure and firm teaching in Scripture, in which we can acquiesce.

Some, for instance, torture this passage, By the rivers of Babylon we sat down and wept (Psalms 137:1), as if the people went to their banks to pray and worship, when only the geography of that country is described, being watered by many rivers, as I have just mentioned.

He says, the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. God opens His heavens, not in the sense that they are literally opened, but when, by removing every obstacle, He allows the eye of the faithful to penetrate even to His celestial glory. For if the heavens were split a thousand times, what great brightness would be required to reach the glory of God?

The sun appears small to us, yet it far exceeds the earth in size. Then the other planets, except the moon, are all like small sparks, and so are the stars. Since, therefore, light itself grows dim before our glance penetrates that far, how can our sight ascend to the incomprehensible glory of God?

It follows, therefore, that when God opens the heavens, He also gives new eyesight to His servants to compensate for their natural inability to pierce not only the intervening space but even a tenth or a hundredth part of it. So, when Stephen saw the heavens open (Acts 7:56), his eyes were doubtless illuminated with unusual powers, enabling him to perceive far more than humans can normally behold.

So, at the baptism of Christ, the heavens were opened (Matthew 3:16); that is, God made it appear to John the Baptist as if he were carried above the clouds. In this sense, the Prophet uses the words, the heavens were opened. He adds, I saw visions of God. Some think this means most excellent visions because anything excellent is called divine in Scripture (as lofty mountains and trees are called mountains and trees of God), but this interpretation seems too weak.

I have no doubt that he calls prophetic inspiration visions of God, and thus professes that he was sent by God because he put off, as it were, his human infirmities when God entrusted him with the office of instructor. And we need not wonder that he uses this phrase, because it was thought incredible that any prophet could arise out of Chaldea.

Nathanael asked whether any good thing could come out of Nazareth, and yet Nazareth was in the Holy Land. How then could the Jews be persuaded that the light of celestial doctrine could shine in Chaldea, that any testimony to God’s grace could spring from there, and that God also exercised judgment there by the mouth of a Prophet?

This would never have been believed unless God’s calling had been marked in some striking and special manner. Since he next adds, this was the fifth year of King Jehoiachin’s captivity (or Jechoniah, or Jechaniah), it is plain that by these very words he reproves the obstinacy of the people.

For when God afflicts us severely, at first we are much agitated, but by degrees we necessarily become submissive. Since, however, the willfulness of the people was not subdued during these five years, we infer that they persevered in rebellion against God. Nor does he spare those who remained at Jerusalem, for these took credit to themselves for not going into exile with their brethren and so despised them, as we often find in Jeremiah. Since, then, those who remained at home were self-satisfied and thought their lot the best, the Prophet here marks the time because it was necessary to quell their ferocity and, since they resisted Jeremiah’s prophecies, to use a second hammer that they might be completely broken in pieces. This is the reason why he speaks of the fifth year of King Jehoiachin’s captivity.