본문 바로가기
  • Home

The Calls to Repentance in the Book of Ezekiel: An Exegetical Study on Ezek 3:16b-21; 14:1-11; 18:21-32; 33:10-20

DONG-HYUK KIM 1

1감리교신학대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

The Book of Ezekiel may be defined by its deterministic understanding of history. God’s redemption of history, as presented by the book, may be outlined: (1) Israel is sinful and incorrigible from the beginning; (2) since the people are incorrigible, they do not listen to God or the prophet; (3) God punishes them; (4) not because of the people’s penitence but for the sake of his name, God restores Israel graciously and forcefully; (5) then, only then, the people will repent and know that YHWH is their God. A remarkable aspect of such an understanding of history is, of course, that repentance cannot be chosen by humans but it is imposed by God as a “by-product” of his history. Given this understanding of determinism and repentance, however, passages such as Ezekiel 3:16b-21, 14:1-11, 18:21-32, and 33:10-20, in which repentance occurs significantly, present a prominent theological contradiction, since they seem to imply that repentance is available to the people of Israel and, if so, there is room for human participation. Several solutions have been presented, and Baruch J. Schwartz’s as one of the recent ones seems the most creative. In his “Repentance and Determinism in Ezekiel,” Schwartz argues on the basis of a close reading of Ezekiel 20 that “Ezekiel’s doctrine of determinism . . . is the result of, not the opposite of, his belief in the absolute efficacy of repentance.” His conclusion, however, sounds diametrically opposed to what we intuitively feel about repentance. The present study argues that the apparent contradiction may be solved by asking two related but distinct questions about the four repentance passages. Is repentance efficacious in God’s dealing with his people in principle? Were Ezekiel’s audience able to repent when they heard God’s/the prophet’s call to repentance? Through the exegesis of the four passages in which repentance significantly appears (3:16b-21; 14:1-11; 18:21-32; 33:10-20), the study argues that, although all passages answer the first question in the affirmative, all passages are not relevant with regard to the second question. Accordingly, on the basis of the passages that potentially answer our second question, the study concludes that Ezekiel’s contemporaries were not able to respond to God’s call to repentance. In other words, God did not call Israel to repentance in order to emphasize their sinfulness only. God called Israel to repentance sincerely, but Ezekiel’s contemporaries were simply unable to answer His sincere call. This situation ultimately led God to restore Israel forcefully. If successfully argued, the present study would contribute to a more holistic understanding of God and theology of the book of Ezekiel.

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.