A Closer Look at Ezekiel 16 and 23

      Perhaps two of the most troubling texts in the Old Testament are found in Ezekiel, namely, chapters 16 and 23. Feminist authors often cite these chapters as evidence that YHWH is no better than a modern-day wife abuser because of YHWH’s harsh treatment of his wife Israel. Now, it is true that the Old Testament does indeed contain many difficult texts that present God in a stern and disciplining fashion, but most of these texts must be understood contextually. Are feminists’ conclusions accurate to the text and what we know of God’s character in the Old Testament? Let’s look at these concerns and try to understand these texts from their literary, historical, and covenantal perspective of the Ancient Near East (ANE). Most importantly though, we will focus on the concept of covenant where these agreements contained stipulations that assigned blessings for proper allegiance and curses for those who broke covenant.

      I am fully aware and agree with feminist scholars that these texts are particularly harsh and explicit for our twenty-first-century sensibilities—but they were meant to be just as harsh for those who heard them 2,500 years ago. No one likes to hear, or read for that matter, about brutality visited upon females or the wife of a beloved friend. I am appalled by any act of physical aggression against a woman. But is this the full picture being presented in Ezekiel 16 and 23?

      Before discussing the interpretive intricacies of these passages, a few notes of clarification are necessary that will explain Ezekiel’s historical context and literary style. This will be followed by a brief overview of the content of chapters 16 and 23, which will enable us to appreciate Ezekiel’s context and ultimately God’s message.

      To begin with, the presentation of Israel’s history in both of these chapters is rendered in an allegorical fashion with the City of Jerusalem (the ancient capital of Israel), representative of the whole of the nation. In the ANE, cities were often presented as female, whereby the capital city of a nation was understood as being symbolically “married” to the deity of the nation. Knowing this helps us to understand the perspective of Ezekiel and the reason for his use of particular marriage language metaphorically. Furthermore, as allegories, they are not to be understood literally but rather from the perspective of literary hyperbole and figurativism.

      Because both chapters basically present the same issues, we will focus primarily on chapter 16 and its applicable content because of its clear marriage language. The allegories unfold as follows. In Ezekiel 16 the prophet lays out for the reader a selective history of Israel with a religious focus. In the first six verses of this chapter, Ezekiel uses a common ANE motif to describe the beginnings of the nation of Israel. Ezekiel 16:4–6 states,

As for your birth, on the day you were born your navel cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water for cleansing; you were not rubbed with salt or even wrapped in cloths. No eye looked with pity on you to do any of these things for you, to have compassion on you. Rather you were thrown out into the open field, for you were abhorred on the day you were born. When I passed by you and saw you squirming in your blood, I said to you while you were in your blood, “Live!”

The abandoned or exposed child motif was often used to describe the beginnings of great leaders of the past (e.g., Moses, Sargon of ancient Akkad—modern-day southern Iraq—and Romulus and Remus, the mythological founders of Rome; note also the beginnings of the modern comic hero Superman). In ancient cultures, unwanted children were often left to the elements as a means of infanticide. In rare cases, the gods would intervene and cause the child to be cared for by some extraordinary means (note the miraculous intervention in Moses’ situation). This inevitably led to the greatness of the child as a leader or military deliverer. What makes Ezekiel’s use of this motif even more extraordinary was the fact that it was normally reserved for male children. Ezekiel’s use of this literary device informs the reader that something great is planned, or expected, for this female child left abandoned in the wilderness. Indeed, the expectation for the nation of Israel was for them to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation for the purpose of leading the other nations to God (cf. Exod. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:9). We are therefore left wondering from the very beginning of chapter 16 as to what will become of this child. Verses 7–14 answer this anticipation by describing the marriage of YHWH to Israel in the wilderness (i.e., the Sinai covenant) and the lavish bride gifts given to her by her husband.

      Reading these verses no doubt reminds us of any modern wedding and the numerous gifts bestowed upon a new bride (e.g., dresses, jewelry, house gifts, etc.). This account, however, is not from the bride’s perspective but rather from the groom’s. In today’s world, this is a rarity. One need only turn on the television to be bombarded by numerous reality shows focused on the bride and her wedding day. Stories about buying the “perfect” wedding dress, planning the “perfect” wedding, and so forth, help fulfill a longing in every bride to have her day turn out as unforgettable.

      I was recently married and the above text reminds me of my desire to find the right gift for my beautiful bride; I wanted to give her the best I could afford. The pride I felt that this woman had agreed to marry me filled me with excitement and awe. You can almost feel the same emotion in YHWH as the prophet rehearses the history of YHWH’s acts of love to his beloved bride Israel. We wait with baited breath for the happy-ever-after account to unfold. Unfortunately, this does not happen. No sooner had YHWH entered into a marriage contract with Israel before we find out that his beloved bride turns her back on her husband and plays the harlot with other lovers (i.e., the nations: Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon). Israel scorns YHWH and takes her bride gifts and gives them away to her lovers (vv. 15–31). At this juncture we see that the prophet uses explicit sexual language to shock his listeners with the reality of their sin. Indeed, idolatry presented with the metaphor of harlotry and unfaithfulness dominates the central portion of chapter 16. We begin to sense the rapid change from the excitement and anticipation of the early verses of this chapter to the shock, disappointment, and anger of YHWH, the beloved husband in the story.

      In verses 32–43, YHWH’s anger is made manifest as he allows his unfaithful wife to be stripped by her lovers. They also proceed to perpetrate violent acts against her. It is these texts that have caused the most trouble for readers (especially feminists). How could YHWH behave so harshly and brutally toward his beloved bride whom he is supposed to love? The answer comes from ANE marriage contracts and the historical context. In this vein, the prophet does give us a hint in 23:24 that YHWH will judge Israel according to the “customs” of the nations. It is these customs of marriage and divorce contracts and treaties that play out in these two chapters.

      Neo-Assyrian (912–612 b.c.) and Neo-Babylonian (612–539 b.c.) marriage contracts give us a glimpse of YHWH’s actions as presented by Ezekiel. In these contracts, we find that most women who desired to get married had to enter into a contract with the husband much like our marriage covenants and prenuptial agreements today. It is important to remember that these contracts were willingly entered into (much like Israel had willingly entered into covenant with YHWH). These contracts offered a measure of protection for both the husband and the bride. Marriage gifts given by the husband could be taken back if the wife was unfaithful whereas dowries, taken into a marriage by the bride, were to remain with the wife in the event of a divorce in order for her to support herself. Along with financial and material considerations, there were also stipulations (curses) included as warnings against infidelity. It must be noted here that these warnings often predominantly focused on restrictions and warnings to the female as opposed to the male. While we may see these as being unfair today, in the patriarchal cultures of the ANE, purity of lineage was paramount. Land and estates were passed down through the male line and the bloodlines needed to remain pure and certain. These contracts included stiff and cruel penalties in order to assure fidelity through fear of painful retributive acts. These acts included mutilation of the female (e.g., cutting off of the nose, ears, breasts, etc., cf. Ezek. 23:25) and in worst case scenarios, the death penalty (by drowning, stoning, or being thrown off high places such as a cliff or tower). We can be thankful these acts are not included in today’s marriage contracts. While physical torture has been erased, anyone who has gone through the pain of divorce, infidelity, or abuse has felt the emotional and physical pain that accompany broken marriages and relationships.

      In Ezekiel and in our understanding of Israel’s covenant with YHWH, we find that this type of marriage covenant with its accompanying curses has many parallels with the stipulations of the Sinai covenant found in Deuteronomy 28 and Leviticus 26. Here we also find the blessings that are bestowed upon Israel for obeying the covenant—blessings that far outweigh the curses for potential bounty and benefits to Israel.

      As noted above, one of the curses that appears in 16:39 and 23:26, and many of the other classical prophets, is the idea of “stripping” unfaithful Israel—a concept absent from the curses of the Law. Once again, the answer to this dilemma appears to rest in ANE marriage contracts. Public stripping of the wife in the event of divorce, especially due to infidelity, was one of the main curses of these ANE marriage contracts. Stripping was allowed especially if the woman initiated the divorce or had committed adultery. In this situation, the husband would strip his wife (symbolically representing the removal of the marriage gifts) and send her away “empty,” a common ANE term in this context. The wife was entitled to only what she brought into the marriage. By rereading verses 1–6 of chapter 16, we find that Israel had absolutely nothing to bring into the metaphorical marriage. YHWH was therefore fully within his legal rights to remove everything from his bride, Jerusalem.

      Another troubling feature of this passage is the notation that YHWH allows the lovers of wayward Israel to do the stripping. While ANE marriage contracts allowed the husband to carry out the curses of the contract, in a masterful twist of irony, the prophet heightens the insult to the adulterous nation by altering the ANE marriage law and allowing the lovers to carry out the punishments. YHWH chose to enact his divorce proceedings by employing the very nations whom Israel had longed to be like and with whom she had been unfaithful. Therefore, as YHWH’s instruments of punishment (cf. Ezek. 21:19–21), it is only appropriate that these foreign “lovers” enact the curses of the broken covenants. It must be pointed out, however, that even these “lovers” of Israel would not go unpunished for their harsh treatment of Israel—YHWH would judge them as well (cf. Ezek chs. 25–32, 35, esp. 38–39).

      Let us now turn to chapter 23 to complete the picture. Chapter 23 is basically a rerun of chapter 16, but rather than solely stressing the idolatrous practices of the nation, the prophet stresses the alliances Israel forged with her neighbors. In this chapter, the perspective is again in allegorical fashion; however, it focuses more on political rather than cultic infidelity. While it is true that these two aspects cannot be separated for the religious relationship between the nation of Israel and YHWH, in the case of Israel’s interactions with the nations, this is an appropriate means of describing the political intrigues between Israel and her neighbors. She longed for these alliances as a means of “protection” and as a way to be like the nations. Unfortunately, many times Israel became a vassal state (i.e., under the rule of these stronger neighbors). Despite the numerous warnings of YHWH through the prophets, Israel rejected her husband and continued making covenants and treaties against the command of the Lord (e.g., Deut. 7:2). It was after entering into these foreign covenants that Israel realized her mistake, which many times came too late (23:17). When Israel tried to break these covenants, the nations had every right to punish their wayward vassal. It is for this reason that the punishment becomes so fitting in these two chapters. Ezekiel shows that the punishment of exile and war suffered by Israel was due to their own acts.

      Finally, the idea that YHWH later took back his unfaithful wife after his anger had been assuaged has also caused consternation and concern for modern readers. Some note the many parallels to modern-day abuse cycles. In general, this cycle has four parts within an established relationship:

1.  An act of abuse, where constant fear is felt by the innocent party
2.  A cooling off period (i.e., the abuser’s anger is abated)
3.  The abuser’s “sorrow” for the abuse and a wooing back of the abused with promises of a changed lifestyle
4.  The return of the abused to the abuser

      First, in modern abuse cycles, the innocent victim is exactly that, innocent of the abuse—Israel was not. Moreover, Israel was not fearful of YHWH—a systemic problem that highlighted Israel’s relationship with YHWH. Second, under ANE covenant law, YHWH had every right to be angry (it was not a falsified or trumped up anger or a drunken rage) and to demand the punishment of his unfaithful wife. His wife had been unfaithful numerous times, had sold herself into prostitution, had killed his children (i.e., child sacrifices, cf. 16:36), and rejected his admonitory actions. Third, as we have noted above, marriage contracts today are not the same as in Ezekiel’s day, which allowed for brutal curses, curses Israel knew would be enacted but still refused to accept. Interestingly, Israel’s ambivalence to the promised curses was due primarily to YHWH’s longsuffering, which Israel had mistaken as a sign that YHWH would not act (cf. Ezek. 20). Fourth, YHWH acted out of love for his bride by taking her back even though she had repeatedly been unfaithful to him (Hosea 1–3 is an excellent picture of this reality)—this is not the same picture as in modern abuse cycles. The abuser is rarely if ever the one who is wronged by infidelity. Fifth, these texts are only metaphors and therefore must be understood as only representative of Israel’s relationship with YHWH. Finally, once Israel rejected YHWH’s covenant and his love, she opened herself up to the hostilities of other lovers. Unfortunately, in the ANE, the only protection a woman had was that of her husband, brother, or father. If a woman had no male protectors, then she was vulnerable to the attacks and abuses of other males. Israel, being an “orphan” (cf. 16:1–6) had only YHWH as a protector. When she left this protection and played the harlot (cf. 23:25), she in effect became the same as a harlot in the ANE. They were not protected and often suffered brutalities at the hands of men.

      So where does that leave us in answering the question as to the nature of YHWH as an “abusive” husband? One cannot read these difficult chapters apart from understanding the rest of the history between Israel and her husband and the ANE context. Ezekiel is writing to a hard-hearted people who needed to be shocked out of their lethargy. They were guilty of breaking their covenant with YHWH and no matter how “innocent” they may have thought they were, they were nonetheless guilty. Therefore, using the covenant as a backdrop to his allegories of 16 and 23, Ezekiel adopted literary and legal concepts of his period (and land of exile, i.e., Babylon) and applied them to Israel’s relationship with YHWH. In the same way that women of the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian periods willingly signed and entered into marriage agreements, so too had Israel willingly entered into a covenant with YHWH, agreeing to abide by its stipulations. When Israel reneged on her end of the agreement, YHWH had been painfully longsuffering with her, hoping to woo her back to his side. When she ultimately refused these acts of patient love, YHWH allowed the curses of the covenant to take effect. Only after these curses were complete, did YHWH once again stretch forth his hand and take back his unfaithful wife to show his willingness to keep his side of the covenant.

      The picture of YHWH’s love for his bride, Israel, is strikingly similar to Jesus’ love for his bride, the church, and by extension the individual believer. Often we cry out to God in moments of trials (most often the product of our own desires and sin) wondering where he is. Many times he allows us to grow through these hardships, and yet is there ready to take us back when we reach for his loving hand. The idea of “abuse” is often misused in today’s society. The truly innocent who are abused need our love and help. But make no mistake, those of us who have willingly entered into relationship with God through our acceptance of Jesus’ completed work on the cross will experience the disciplining “hand” of a loving Father who desires us to grow and mature into his image (Heb. 12:5–11). Israel rejected the numerous attempts by YHWH to help them turn from their sin. It was only after their repeated rejection of his reproof that the curses of the Law played out. Many Israelites died in their sin, unwilling to admit their failure to love YHWH and to keep his covenant.

      If we can learn one lesson from this foregoing example, it is that we must be diligent and pray that we won’t continually reject the loving advances of our heavenly Father. For if we do, we face the fearful reality of the “curses” of the “Law” of God, namely, eternal separation from him. YHWH was not an “abusive” husband but rather the picture of a patient husband, scorned once too often!