Eze 26:1 | KD | STEP | The greater portion of these three chapters is occupied with the prophecy concerning Tyre, which extends from to Eze 28:19. The prophecy against Sidon is limited to -26. The reason for this is, that the grandeur and importance of Phoenicia were concentrated at that time in the power and rule of Tyre, to which Sidon had been obliged to relinquish the hegemony, which it had formerly possessed over Phoenicia. The prophecy against Tyre consists of four words of God, of which the first (Ezekiel 26) contains the threat of destruction to the city and state of Tyre; the second (Ezekiel 27), a lamentation over this destruction; the third ( ), the threat against the king of Tyre; the fourth ( ), a lamentation over his fall. In four sections, commencing with the formula, “thus saith the Lord,” Tyre, the mistress of the sea, is threatened with destruction. In the first strophe ( ) there is a general threat of its destruction by a host of nations. In the second ( ), the enemy is mentioned by name, and designated as a powerful one; and the conquest and destruction emanating from his are circumstantially described. In the third ( ), the impression which this event would produce upon the inhabitants of the islands and coast-lands is depicted. And in the fourth ( ), the threat is repeated in an energetic manner, and the prophecy is thereby rounded off. This word of God bears in the introduction to the date of its delivery to the prophet and enunciation by him. - Eze 26:1. It came to pass in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, that the word of Jehovah came to me, saying. - The eleventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin was the year of the conquest and destruction of Jerusalem ( , ), the occurrence of which is presupposed in also. There is something striking in the omission of the number of the month both here and in , as the day of the month is given. The attempt to discover in the words בּאחד an indication of the number of the month, by understanding לחדשׁ as signifying the first month of the year: “on the first as regards the month,” equivalent to, “in the first month, on the first day of it” (lxx, Luther, Kliefoth, and others), is as forced and untenable as the notion that that particular month is intended which had peculiar significance for Ezekiel, namely, the month in which Jerusalem was conquered and destroyed. The first explanation is proved to be erroneous by , where the destruction of Jerusalem, which occurred in the fifth month of the year named, is assumed to have already happened. The second view is open to the objection that the conquest of Jerusalem happened in the fourth month, and the destruction in the fifth ( and ); and it cannot be affirmed that the conquest was of less importance to Ezekiel than the destruction. We cannot escape the conclusion, therefore, that the number of the month has been dropped through a corruption of the text, which has occurred in copying; but in that case we must give up all hope of being able to determine what the month really was. The conjecture offered by Ewald and Hitzig, that one of the last months of the year is intended, because Ezekiel could not have known before then what impression the conquest of Jerusalem had made upon Tyre, stands or falls with the naturalistic view entertained by these writers with regard to prophecy.

‏ Ezekiel 26:1

Against Tyre and Sidon - Ezekiel 26-28

The greater portion of these three chapters is occupied with the prophecy concerning Tyre, which extends from Eze 26:1 to Eze 28:19. The prophecy against Sidon is limited to Eze 28:20-26. The reason for this is, that the grandeur and importance of Phoenicia were concentrated at that time in the power and rule of Tyre, to which Sidon had been obliged to relinquish the hegemony, which it had formerly possessed over Phoenicia. The prophecy against Tyre consists of four words of God, of which the first (Ezekiel 26) contains the threat of destruction to the city and state of Tyre; the second (Ezekiel 27), a lamentation over this destruction; the third (Eze 28:1-10), the threat against the king of Tyre; the fourth (Eze 28:11-19), a lamentation over his fall.

Eze 26:1

In four sections, commencing with the formula, “thus saith the Lord,” Tyre, the mistress of the sea, is threatened with destruction. In the first strophe (Eze 26:2-6) there is a general threat of its destruction by a host of nations. In the second (Eze 26:7-14), the enemy is mentioned by name, and designated as a powerful one; and the conquest and destruction emanating from his are circumstantially described. In the third (Eze 26:15-18), the impression which this event would produce upon the inhabitants of the islands and coast-lands is depicted. And in the fourth (Eze 26:19-21), the threat is repeated in an energetic manner, and the prophecy is thereby rounded off.

This word of God bears in the introduction to the date of its delivery to the prophet and enunciation by him. - Eze 26:1. It came to pass in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, that the word of Jehovah came to me, saying. - The eleventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin was the year of the conquest and destruction of Jerusalem (Jer 52:6, Jer 52:12), the occurrence of which is presupposed in Eze 26:2 also. There is something striking in the omission of the number of the month both here and in Eze 32:17, as the day of the month is given. The attempt to discover in the words בּאחד an indication of the number of the month, by understanding לחדשׁ as signifying the first month of the year: “on the first as regards the month,” equivalent to, “in the first month, on the first day of it” (lxx, Luther, Kliefoth, and others), is as forced and untenable as the notion that that particular month is intended which had peculiar significance for Ezekiel, namely, the month in which Jerusalem was conquered and destroyed. The first explanation is proved to be erroneous by Eze 26:2, where the destruction of Jerusalem, which occurred in the fifth month of the year named, is assumed to have already happened. The second view is open to the objection that the conquest of Jerusalem happened in the fourth month, and the destruction in the fifth (Jer 52:6 and Jer 52:12); and it cannot be affirmed that the conquest was of less importance to Ezekiel than the destruction. We cannot escape the conclusion, therefore, that the number of the month has been dropped through a corruption of the text, which has occurred in copying; but in that case we must give up all hope of being able to determine what the month really was. The conjecture offered by Ewald and Hitzig, that one of the last months of the year is intended, because Ezekiel could not have known before then what impression the conquest of Jerusalem had made upon Tyre, stands or falls with the naturalistic view entertained by these writers with regard to prophecy.